Ultrasonic antifouling, myth or fact?

[harvey38]

Has anyone installed or had first hand experience of ultrasonic antifouling systems?

I can't find any independent reviews or further information outside of those marketing the systems so given the financial savings on materials alone, let alone labour and lifting costs, I can only assume they are nowhere near as good as we are led to believe.

 

[Elessar]

Has anyone installed or had first hand experience of ultrasonic antifouling systems?

I can't find any independent reviews or further information outside of those marketing the systems so given the financial savings on materials alone, let alone labour and lifting costs, I can only assume they are nowhere near as good as we are led to believe.

Yes I’ve had it.
It went faulty and the manufacturer sent me a new one no quibble.
I sold it brand new in box.
I’ve friends who have it and have bought another for their new boat because they swear it works.
But that wasn’t my experience.

 

[Beneteau381]

Yes I’ve had it.
It went faulty and the manufacturer sent me a new one no quibble.
I sold it brand new in box.
I’ve friends who have it and have bought another for their new boat because they swear it works.
But that wasn’t my experience.

Delos fitted them, I note that they antifouled again a few months ago in the States

 

[jwfrary]

Seen one on a hardy, owner said it keeps the barnacles off. But the weed still grows!

 

[AntarcticPilot]

Several threads on here; Search for Jaycar! Consensus seems to be that it can work, especially on hard fouling, but that it doesn't deter all types of fouling; some have reported large buildups of sea squirts. It doesn't remove the need for antifouling, but may increase its effectiveness.

I'd like to see a test of Coppercoat with ultrasonics; I suspect they could boost each other.

 

[Elessar]

Several threads on here; Search for Jaycar! Consensus seems to be that it can work, especially on hard fouling, but that it doesn't deter all types of fouling; some have reported large buildups of sea squirts. It doesn't remove the need for antifouling, but may increase its effectiveness.

I'd like to see a test of Coppercoat with ultrasonics; I suspect they could boost each other.

I had Coppercoat and utrasonics.

Ultrasonics don’t claim to eliminate the need for antifoul.

 

[Neeves]

If it was SO effective you would not be asking the question! AF companies would be closing down, there would not be the brouhaha over the demise of toxic AF (because there was a suitable alternative) etc etc

The lack of marketing hype has a good reason.

Jonathan

 

[Elessar]

If it was SO effective you would not be asking the question! AF companies would be closing down, there would not be the brouhaha over the demise of toxic AF (because there was a suitable alternative) etc etc

The lack of marketing hype has a good reason.

Jonathan

That’s silly. If any anchor was SO effective no other anchors would exist.

 

[rotrax]

Seen one on a hardy, owner said it keeps the barnacles off. But the weed still grows!

That is EXACTLY what it does, and EXACTLY what it says it does.

Keeps Critturs away, not weed.

Weed is the problem for most of us in the UK.

Which is why I would not buy another.

 

[Neeves]

That’s silly. If any anchor was SO effective no other anchors would exist.

Not so silly,

Just find me a few, any few, who actually use ultrasonics, to the exclusion of all else, and rave about them (or it).

Most anchors do work, some are better than others - but they work. I've yet to find someone 100% converted to ultra-sonics - but I am sure you will provide a list

and prove me SO silly.

Waiting

Jonathan

 

[harvey38]

If it was SO effective you would not be asking the question! AF companies would be closing down, there would not be the brouhaha over the demise of toxic AF (because there was a suitable alternative) etc etc

The lack of marketing hype has a good reason.

Jonathan

All right mate, climb off ya didgeridoo!

I only asked if anyone had installed it or had first hand experience, I don't need confirmation of what I already thought, your comment doesn't answer my question and not helpful!

 

[SailingDog]

They do work, not a silver bullet for all fouling though, some guests could here the ping from the hull units when all else was quiet not a problem under normal circumstances.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

They do work, not a silver bullet for all fouling though, some guests could here the ping from the hull units when all else was quiet not a problem under normal circumstances.

There's also the issue of needing a power supply. May be a problem for a boat kept on a mooring. You'd need to figure in solar panels.

 

[JumbleDuck]

There was a spectacularly long thread about

If it was SO effective you would not be asking the question! AF companies would be closing down, there would not be the brouhaha over the demise of toxic AF (because there was a suitable alternative) etc etc

The lack of marketing hype has a good reason.

Jonathan

And I note that despite the existence of Coppercoat, antifouling paint is still made.

 

[Elessar]

Not so silly,

Just find me a few, any few, who actually use ultrasonics, to the exclusion of all else, and rave about them (or it).

Most anchors do work, some are better than others - but they work. I've yet to find someone 100% converted to ultra-sonics - but I am sure you will provide a list

and prove me SO silly.

Waiting

Jonathan

100% conversion to untrasonics is like reading the hype about the best chain and not putting an anchor on the end of it.
The manufacturers do not claim that you don't need to antifoul.

 

[Neeves]

There was a spectacularly long thread about

And I note that despite the existence of Coppercoat, antifouling paint is still made.

And I think they (purveyors of CC) imply, or suggest, you will not need antifouling - ever again

Jonathan

 

[awol]

Then there are other more effective ways ......

 

[Norman_E]

I refer you to this thread. There are both users and nay-sayers, the latter mostly people who have not tried it. My own experience is that it has a reasonable effect, in my case allowing antifouling every other year in place of yearly. A commercial system will probably be more powerful than my kit built ones, so expect a reasonable performance but not an ability to do away with antifouling altogether.
Building the Ultrasonic Antifouling Kit from Jaycar

 

[Venus1]

Has anyone installed or had first hand experience of ultrasonic antifouling systems?

I can't find any independent reviews or further information outside of those marketing the systems so given the financial savings on materials alone, let alone labour and lifting costs, I can only assume they are nowhere near as good as we are led to believe.

Firstly, I sympathise with your comment that you are asking for experience, not general opinions

I installed my system 7 years ago. I also changed from old copper coat to conventional anti foul at the same time - so I can’t give a definitive “before and after” result for ultrasonic. However I am convinced that it works.
As other posters have said: you still need anti foul, and it’s mainly effective against critters, less so for weed. But having no crusty worms or little shellfish is great. Weed can be easily washed off.. All I get is slime.
Someone here (I thought it was Neeves, but apparently not - may have been Norman E) alerted me to the importance of leaving it on all the time when the boat is at rest. Doing this has improved the performance.

 

[Neeves]

I refer you to this thread. There are both users and nay-sayers, the latter mostly people who have not tried it. My own experience is that it has a reasonable effect, in my case allowing antifouling every other year in place of yearly. A commercial system will probably be more powerful than my kit built ones, so expect a reasonable performance but not an ability to do away with antifouling altogether.
Building the Ultrasonic Antifouling Kit from Jaycar

I don't think the OP had bothered to make a search as there are a number of threads since then as well - which all say the same thing.

If you buy a decent AF, think at the expensive end of the range, and you apply it as the manufacturer recommends (think generously) then you should get a decent 2 years life from an antifouling. If you use the vessel frequently and you applied an ablative product you will not get much build up of old paint long term and its ablative nature and your regular use will keep the hull clean.

There are 2 major costs to AF, slipping and actually applying the, expensive AF. From the user comments for ultrasonics you will still need to slip to wipe of the weed and slime, you will still need to service your anodes and apparently you will still need to re-coat with AF (every 2 years). Finally ultrasonics may keep the hull clear of barnacles etc - but no-one has commented on utrasonics effectiveness on props/saildrives - and if they continue to become fouled you will need to slip to re-coat them - and you may need to do this annually as we don't find any prop AF effective (and we've tried Velox, Prop Speed, Prop Gold) - or they are effective for 1 year.

There is an undercurrent in this thread offering a positive effect of ultrasonics but if you still need to antifloul every 2 years (which all users mention), there is the unresolved question of how effective it is for keeping props clean, how often you need to wipe down to remove the weed and how often you need to service your anodes.

As I said, to receive sarcastic, smart a+r+ comment from the OP, - if ultrasonic worked we would all be beating a path to the manufacturers door - what other evidence would you need?


I conducted a major survey of AF for Practical Sailor and the best AF are Hempels Globic, Jotuns Sea Quantume Ultra, both of which are professional use only) and International's Micron xxxxxx (it seems to have different names in different countries). Professional only, not entirely sure why - but you can find retailers willing to sell it. Each of these offer in the warm, high nutrient waters of Oz a decent 2 years. I think International have a professional only AF but I have not tested it (its more recent than my test - and I forget its name.

Jonathan