Yeah, "turbulence" is probably not quite the right concept. The coanda, or adhesion idea seems to be what drives the need for sharp corners, where release is beneficial.
If your transom is immersed,
and there is some amount of water being sucked upward around that corner, then by the simple concept of opposing forces the transom is being pulled downward by the amount the water is being pulled upward. Therefore, the hull is plowing a deeper furrow through the water.
Similarly, at the chines if water bends around the corner and travels up the hull side, there is both an effective buoyancy loss as well as the parasitic (wetted surface) drag of the attached water. This applies in full planing mode, but probably not at all at displacement speeds.
These ideas were well tested by the Bethwaites as they developed their 18's and the 49er, using full sized examples for towing experiments.
(My estimation is that the sharp chine hurts upwind since we don't plane, so I radiused them as much as possible. Like LeMans, things often go better around circuits if you optimize the slower part of the course, rather than shoot for higher top speed. I imagine an i550 spends twice as long going uphill as it does down...)
ryderp wrote:.....fluid dynamics are not so simply described. Dimples are put on golfballs.....
I reckon a golfball's dimple scaled to an i550 hull ought to be about the footprint of a 4" grinder disc. I'll loan you mine (grinder, not hull!!) if you want to give it a try?
