Date   

Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] points to check before buying 2003 Amel SM 2000

Steven Nieman
 

Hi Mark,

I´ll keep that in mind.

I´m Dutch and looked at a 53´´ In Holland.

Thanks for your input.

regards,

Steven 


Op 17 Oct 2017, om 19:47 heeft 'Mark Erdos' mcerdos@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> het volgende geschreven:


Steven,

 

Get a good surveyor, one that knows Amels. There are plenty mentioned on this forum.

 

Call Bill Rouse and get him involved. This will be money VERY well spent. (I’m assuming you are in the USA or North America)

 

CW Bill Rouse
Admiral, Texas Navy
Commander Emeritus

Amel School  http://www.amelschool.com
720 Winnie St
Galveston Island, TX 77550

+1(832) 380-4970

 

 

 

With best regards,

 

Mark

 

Skipper

Sailing Vessel - Cream Puff - SM2K - #275

Currently cruising - Grenada

www.creampuff.us

 

From: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 11:17 AM
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] points to check before buying 2003 Amel SM 2000

 

  

Hi everyone,

 

Any weak points to check before purchasing an Amel  SM 2000 build in 2003???

 

 

Kindly regards,

 

Steven

 

 




Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Island Pearl II - 2001 - SM2000 #332 For sale

Steven Nieman
 

Dear Colin,

Thanks for your reply,

I´m happy for you that you keep on sailing.

Hopefully we´ll meet some day and thanks for letting  me know that I may contact you in the future for advice etc.

Kindest Regards,

Steve

Op 17 Oct 2017, om 19:46 heeft Sailing Island Pearl colin.d.streeter@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> het volgende geschreven:


Hi Steve

Apology for the delayed response. This has taken some serious thought this week since Lauren is now definitely not doing the Indian Ocean crossing (or Red Sea if we sail that way instead) with me, and we have therefore been wondering about selling, or me sailing on alone.

Our final decision however is that I will sail on (with crew), and Lauren will join the boat again in the Caribbean (or Greece) and hence we will not be selling the boat during 2017/8.

I see on the forum that you may possibly have found a suitable 2003 model SM, so we do wish you all the very best of luck with that one. 

These boats are absolutely fantastic, and sailing here in Indonesia and Asia, with so many other boats (previously Sail 2 Indonesia Rally with 60 other boats) I can assure you there has not been a single other boat out there which we would have preferred for this trip. The Amel 53 simply handles everything in her stride, everything works like clockwork, she is fitted with every luxury we could ever need, and we seem to be living in far better comfort than all the others, sailing faster/ covering greater daily distances, be they on cats or larger mono hulls. Captain Henry Amel certainly did a fantastic job with the Super Maramu 2000's! You will love it!

Good luck with your purchase decision. We hope to meet you on the water some time in your new Amel, and just let me know if you need any advice/ help? We will probably be in Cape Town in Nov 2018.

Cheers

Colin Streeter
SV Island Pearl II, Amel 53 #332
Currently in Singapore





 

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:26 PM, stefnieman@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Hello,


Is your Amel still on the market?
If so can I mail you?

kindest Regards,

Steve Nieman




-- 
Colin Streeter
0411 016 445



Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] points to check before buying 2003 Amel SM 2000

Mark Erdos
 

Steven,

 

Get a good surveyor, one that knows Amels. There are plenty mentioned on this forum.

 

Call Bill Rouse and get him involved. This will be money VERY well spent. (I’m assuming you are in the USA or North America)

 

CW Bill Rouse
Admiral, Texas Navy
Commander Emeritus

Amel School  http://www.amelschool.com
720 Winnie St
Galveston Island, TX 77550

+1(832) 380-4970

 

 

 

With best regards,

 

Mark

 

Skipper

Sailing Vessel - Cream Puff - SM2K - #275

Currently cruising - Grenada

www.creampuff.us

 

From: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...]
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 11:17 AM
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] points to check before buying 2003 Amel SM 2000

 

 

Hi everyone,

 

Any weak points to check before purchasing an Amel  SM 2000 build in 2003???

 

 

Kindly regards,

 

Steven

 

 


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Island Pearl II - 2001 - SM2000 #332 For sale

Colin - ex SV Island Pearl
 

Hi Steve

Apology for the delayed response. This has taken some serious thought this week since Lauren is now definitely not doing the Indian Ocean crossing (or Red Sea if we sail that way instead) with me, and we have therefore been wondering about selling, or me sailing on alone.

Our final decision however is that I will sail on (with crew), and Lauren will join the boat again in the Caribbean (or Greece) and hence we will not be selling the boat during 2017/8.

I see on the forum that you may possibly have found a suitable 2003 model SM, so we do wish you all the very best of luck with that one. 

These boats are absolutely fantastic, and sailing here in Indonesia and Asia, with so many other boats (previously Sail 2 Indonesia Rally with 60 other boats) I can assure you there has not been a single other boat out there which we would have preferred for this trip. The Amel 53 simply handles everything in her stride, everything works like clockwork, she is fitted with every luxury we could ever need, and we seem to be living in far better comfort than all the others, sailing faster/ covering greater daily distances, be they on cats or larger mono hulls. Captain Henry Amel certainly did a fantastic job with the Super Maramu 2000's! You will love it!

Good luck with your purchase decision. We hope to meet you on the water some time in your new Amel, and just let me know if you need any advice/ help? We will probably be in Cape Town in Nov 2018.

Cheers

Colin Streeter
SV Island Pearl II, Amel 53 #332
Currently in Singapore





 

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:26 PM, stefnieman@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Hello,


Is your Amel still on the market?
If so can I mail you?

kindest Regards,

Steve Nieman




--
Colin Streeter
0411 016 445


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

Mike Johnson
 

Agree entirely with Bill R’s comments.

We have never found any defect with Henri Amel’s basic concept or workmanship on the SM2K.

The only problems we have faced is where others have attempted ‘fixes’ to the original specifications.

Very best wishes 

Mike & Peta

Solitude
SM2K 461

On 17 Oct 2017, at 17:11, 'Mark Erdos' mcerdos@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

Amen Brother!!!

 

 

With best regards,

 

Mark

 

Skipper

Sailing Vessel - Cream Puff - SM2K - #275

Currently cruising - Grenada

www.creampuff.us

 

From: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...]
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 11:16 AM
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

 

 

Bill K and Pat,

 

I would never say that "I think Bill K's point is that he thinks Capt. Henri's original engineering was poorly done and left an unsafe condition with unprotected long wire runs."

 

I would not say anything like that for numerous reasons. I think you know why.

 

Since Henri Amel is not here to defend his decisions made many years ago, I will remind everyone that at the time these decisions were made they very likely conformed 100% with the regulations in force in Europe and conformed with the thinking at the time. Let's compare Henri Amel's engineering decisions to General Motors at the same time:

- Disintegrating plastic bumper parts

- 4-6-8 engines with 100% failure

- Gasoline to Diesel conversions with almost 100% failure

- Reduction of plasticides in paint which caused paint to fade in 6 years

- Plastic transmission parts which caused a new industry to emerge to repair transmissions

- Fiero & Corvair (one name says it all)

- Foam headliners which fell in 5 years

- Chrome coated plastic which lasted about 2 years

on, and on, and on.

 

Can one improve on yesterday's technology? Certainly! 

Can one not understand decisions made yesterday? Absolutely!

Should one of us criticize Henri Amel? Never!

 

Anyway, this is my sermon for the month. I hope that you enjoyed it. 

 

Best,

 

CW Bill Rouse
Admiral, Texas Navy
Commander Emeritus

Amel School  
http://www.amelschool.com
720 Winnie St
Galveston Island, TX 77550

+1(832) 380-4970

 

 

 

 

 

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 8:39 AM, sangaris@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

Hi Pat, 

Yes, that's why I thought Alan's adding the Blue Sea fuses at the batteries sounded wise. Btw, in my house the distribution panel is smack in the middle of the house which reduces the total amount of wiring. It does, of course, have a main service breaker at the external drop wire, analogous to Alan's Blue Sea fuse. Then there are separate fused disconnects adjacent to heavy loads like the A/C and hot water heater in addition to breakers for those at the distribution panel.

 

I think Bill K's point is that he thinks Capt. Henri's original engineering was poorly done and left an unsafe condition with unprotected long wire runs. Alan seems to have a good solution.  And, while the new Amel centralized panel would meet Bill K's criterion, it is (likely) not fused close to the batteries, leaving the same risk of chafe and shorting in either the wires going to the panel or the wires going to the engine & generator starting motors.

 

I do suspect that the industry will continue to modernize with Distributed electric systems and have not overlooked the risk of shorting in the long runs, although I haven't looked into it enough to know exactly how it is addressed.

 

Craig SN68



---In amelyachtowners@..., wrote :

Craig , Your original post seemed to support locating breakers far from the power source , however this post seems to acknowledge the protection offered by locating breakers as close as possible to the battery bank. You even pointed to boat that burned up cables as a result of a short . Now I must be missing something . When I build a house , I have 220v/ 200 amps coming through a  wall , I locate the distribution panel as close as possible to where it comes thru the wall. The ele ctric immediately goes thru appropriate size breakers and passes thru appropriate sized wiring on to  outlets ,  pumps ,etc . In the event of a short there is little chance of the wire being overloaded . You do not use 14g wire with a 20 amp breaker ! In a house you would not run a 220v line to a laundry room and place the breaker on the wall behind the dryer. I have never understood the difference between protecting a boat vs. a house . But , maybe I am missing something, it would not be the first time.

Pat

SM #123

-----Original Message-----
From: sangaris@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...>
To: amelyachtowners <amelyachtowners@...>
Sent: Mon, Oct 16, 2017 9:34 am
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

 

Alan,

That seems an excellent idea. I remember that in 2001 I totally redid SM Miss Lindy's wiring (don't recall the hull number) after it completely burned out for the third time. All the heavy cables in the engine room, from battery to starter to generator to main house feeds had melted solid. As I finished up I still had low volts from the engine to the battery.  Traced it to the starting cables having chaffed about 12 inches down inside the PVC pipe from the battery to the engine (that was supposedly there to prevent chafe). Your solution would have prevented much heartache and expense. 

Will be interested in Bill K's bounce. Perhaps the modern distributed systems do incorporate that.

Craig SN#68


---In amelyachtowners@..., wrote :

well said Bill,

BUT that's exactly what we have on our SMs....th e anchor windlass, the genoa furler etc have the breakers at the "other end" of the cables that run from the house bank...and...on the standard setup, there are NO FUSES near the battery connections. 

I've put large Blue Sea fuses in the battery compartment on each of my 3 banks of 4 6V series batteries to try to address these issues.

What have you done ?

Cheers

Alan

Elyse SM437

 

Craig,

 

I think you (and Amel in the "old days") are simply missing the point of circuit breakers.  They are most certainly NOT there to protect the anchor washdown pump, or t he thruster motor, or any other piece of equipment.  There is nothing a circuit breaker can do to "protect" the pump motor, or other device:  If it shorts, it has already died! If, in normal operation, it draws too much current for the wiring to support, then the wiring is undersized.

 

Circuit breakers are there to protect the WIRING and prevent the catastrophic results that can occur if a short occurs ANYWHERE that overloads the wiring.  This can occur from many faults, none of them likely, but all with disastrous consequences.  Wire chafe is probably the most common cause on boats, but others happen. I'd guess loose connections are a close second.  

 

Having a breaker at the far end of the wire, away from the battery, completely misses the point of why it is there in the first place. In my opinion, if you have a circuit breaker at the point of use of the power, you might as well just replace it with a switch--it is essentially useless. 

 

When I ran a service department for a large charter company, one of the annual safety meetings I ran for for my staff was to dead short circuit a 12 volt battery through 14 gauge wire.  Watching solid copper wire burst into flame and literally explode was a sobering experience for people who could easily get into the habit of thinking "its only 12 volts." It really made the point about why fuses and circuit breakers were essential.

 

There is nothing at all wrong with distributed CONTROL of an electrical system. That is just fancy electronics.  But... you can not "distribute" protection of the wiring. I have never heard a  good reason to run long lengths of un-fused wiring on a boat--or anywhere else.  It is just dangerous--and for absolutely no benefit.  Dangerous overloads rarely occur because of equipment problems.  They occur because of wiring faults.  Do they happen often?  No, not at all. But when they do, it is truly terrifying.  

 

C-zone, Ocotplex, etc, a re NOT wiring protection systems.  They are not "circuit breakers".  They are CONTROL systems.  Very different animals.

 

I have seen several boat fires at much closer quarters than I ever hope to repeat, and most of them were electrical in origin, all from things that shouldn't have happened--but did.  

 

Bill Kinney

Sm160, Harmonie

Back Creek, Annapolis, MD

 

 



---In amelyachtowners@..., wrote :

I'd always thought Amel was ahead of the curve with its Distributed Electrical System. That seems to be the direction the industry is going, now with solid state circuit breakers controlled through the NMEA2000 data network. Eliminates the large industrial style circuit breaker panels of yore and adds great flexibility. Check out CAPI2, C-Zone, Octoplex, etc. Seems Amel is going backwards technologically if they're centralizing. Let's see, your anchor washdown pump shorts and rather than it tripping an adjacent breaker it's got to overload a 15 meter long cable run back to the central circuit breaker panel. To say nothing of the excess wiring to give all equipment a "home run". Must be missing something in this discussion.

Cheers, Craig SN68 Sangaris

< br>

 


Re: points to check before buying 2003 Amel SM 2000

Chuck_Kim_Joy
 

Hi Steven,
As a recent buyer I will tell tell you one thing to watch for. Everyone will have their 'first and foremosts' but my recent experience is the bow thruster. Inspect it, know the parts and how they operate together, ask about the age of the parts. All original? Any spares. Not a show stopper but definitely plan on having a spare because this system is sooo important. Mine went out prior to my maiden voyage. I still got out for a week but forget about close quarter maneuvering or anything with strong wind or current. A new motor/actuator (the little one that moves the big one up & down) is not cheap, harder to come by as the months/years go on and a long lead time if you need one.

Chuck
s/v Joy #388


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

Mark Erdos
 

Amen Brother!!!

 

 

With best regards,

 

Mark

 

Skipper

Sailing Vessel - Cream Puff - SM2K - #275

Currently cruising - Grenada

www.creampuff.us

 

From: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...]
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 11:16 AM
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

 

 

Bill K and Pat,

 

I would never say that "I think Bill K's point is that he thinks Capt. Henri's original engineering was poorly done and left an unsafe condition with unprotected long wire runs."

 

I would not say anything like that for numerous reasons. I think you know why.

 

Since Henri Amel is not here to defend his decisions made many years ago, I will remind everyone that at the time these decisions were made they very likely conformed 100% with the regulations in force in Europe and conformed with the thinking at the time. Let's compare Henri Amel's engineering decisions to General Motors at the same time:

- Disintegrating plastic bumper parts

- 4-6-8 engines with 100% failure

- Gasoline to Diesel conversions with almost 100% failure

- Reduction of plasticides in paint which caused paint to fade in 6 years

- Plastic transmission parts which caused a new industry to emerge to repair transmissions

- Fiero & Corvair (one name says it all)

- Foam headliners which fell in 5 years

- Chrome coated plastic which lasted about 2 years

on, and on, and on.

 

Can one improve on yesterday's technology? Certainly! 

Can one not understand decisions made yesterday? Absolutely!

Should one of us criticize Henri Amel? Never!

 

Anyway, this is my sermon for the month. I hope that you enjoyed it. 

 

Best,

 

CW Bill Rouse
Admiral, Texas Navy
Commander Emeritus

Amel School  
http://www.amelschool.com
720 Winnie St
Galveston Island, TX 77550

+1(832) 380-4970

 

 

 

 

 

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 8:39 AM, sangaris@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

Hi Pat, 

Yes, that's why I thought Alan's adding the Blue Sea fuses at the batteries sounded wise. Btw, in my house the distribution panel is smack in the middle of the house which reduces the total amount of wiring. It does, of course, have a main service breaker at the external drop wire, analogous to Alan's Blue Sea fuse. Then there are separate fused disconnects adjacent to heavy loads like the A/C and hot water heater in addition to breakers for those at the distribution panel.

 

I think Bill K's point is that he thinks Capt. Henri's original engineering was poorly done and left an unsafe condition with unprotected long wire runs. Alan seems to have a good solution.  And, while the new Amel centralized panel would meet Bill K's criterion, it is (likely) not fused close to the batteries, leaving the same risk of chafe and shorting in either the wires going to the panel or the wires going to the engine & generator starting motors.

 

I do suspect that the industry will continue to modernize with Distributed electric systems and have not overlooked the risk of shorting in the long runs, although I haven't looked into it enough to know exactly how it is addressed.

 

Craig SN68



---In amelyachtowners@..., wrote :

Craig , Your original post seemed to support locating breakers far from the power source , however this post seems to acknowledge the protection offered by locating breakers as close as possible to the battery bank. You even pointed to boat that burned up cables as a result of a short . Now I must be missing something . When I build a house , I have 220v/ 200 amps coming through a  wall , I locate the distribution panel as close as possible to where it comes thru the wall. The ele ctric immediately goes thru appropriate size breakers and passes thru appropriate sized wiring on to  outlets ,  pumps ,etc . In the event of a short there is little chance of the wire being overloaded . You do not use 14g wire with a 20 amp breaker ! In a house you would not run a 220v line to a laundry room and place the breaker on the wall behind the dryer. I have never understood the difference between protecting a boat vs. a house . But , maybe I am missing something, it would not be the first time.

Pat

SM #123

-----Original Message-----
From: sangaris@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...>
To: amelyachtowners <amelyachtowners@...>
Sent: Mon, Oct 16, 2017 9:34 am
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

 

Alan,

That seems an excellent idea. I remember that in 2001 I totally redid SM Miss Lindy's wiring (don't recall the hull number) after it completely burned out for the third time. All the heavy cables in the engine room, from battery to starter to generator to main house feeds had melted solid. As I finished up I still had low volts from the engine to the battery.  Traced it to the starting cables having chaffed about 12 inches down inside the PVC pipe from the battery to the engine (that was supposedly there to prevent chafe). Your solution would have prevented much heartache and expense. 

Will be interested in Bill K's bounce. Perhaps the modern distributed systems do incorporate that.

Craig SN#68


---In amelyachtowners@..., wrote :

well said Bill,

BUT that's exactly what we have on our SMs....th e anchor windlass, the genoa furler etc have the breakers at the "other end" of the cables that run from the house bank...and...on the standard setup, there are NO FUSES near the battery connections. 

I've put large Blue Sea fuses in the battery compartment on each of my 3 banks of 4 6V series batteries to try to address these issues.

What have you done ?

Cheers

Alan

Elyse SM437

 

Craig,

 

I think you (and Amel in the "old days") are simply missing the point of circuit breakers.  They are most certainly NOT there to protect the anchor washdown pump, or t he thruster motor, or any other piece of equipment.  There is nothing a circuit breaker can do to "protect" the pump motor, or other device:  If it shorts, it has already died! If, in normal operation, it draws too much current for the wiring to support, then the wiring is undersized.

 

Circuit breakers are there to protect the WIRING and prevent the catastrophic results that can occur if a short occurs ANYWHERE that overloads the wiring.  This can occur from many faults, none of them likely, but all with disastrous consequences.  Wire chafe is probably the most common cause on boats, but others happen. I'd guess loose connections are a close second.  

 

Having a breaker at the far end of the wire, away from the battery, completely misses the point of why it is there in the first place. In my opinion, if you have a circuit breaker at the point of use of the power, you might as well just replace it with a switch--it is essentially useless. 

 

When I ran a service department for a large charter company, one of the annual safety meetings I ran for for my staff was to dead short circuit a 12 volt battery through 14 gauge wire.  Watching solid copper wire burst into flame and literally explode was a sobering experience for people who could easily get into the habit of thinking "its only 12 volts." It really made the point about why fuses and circuit breakers were essential.

 

There is nothing at all wrong with distributed CONTROL of an electrical system. That is just fancy electronics.  But... you can not "distribute" protection of the wiring. I have never heard a  good reason to run long lengths of un-fused wiring on a boat--or anywhere else.  It is just dangerous--and for absolutely no benefit.  Dangerous overloads rarely occur because of equipment problems.  They occur because of wiring faults.  Do they happen often?  No, not at all. But when they do, it is truly terrifying.  

 

C-zone, Ocotplex, etc, a re NOT wiring protection systems.  They are not "circuit breakers".  They are CONTROL systems.  Very different animals.

 

I have seen several boat fires at much closer quarters than I ever hope to repeat, and most of them were electrical in origin, all from things that shouldn't have happened--but did.  

 

Bill Kinney

Sm160, Harmonie

Back Creek, Annapolis, MD

 

 



---In amelyachtowners@..., wrote :

I'd always thought Amel was ahead of the curve with its Distributed Electrical System. That seems to be the direction the industry is going, now with solid state circuit breakers controlled through the NMEA2000 data network. Eliminates the large industrial style circuit breaker panels of yore and adds great flexibility. Check out CAPI2, C-Zone, Octoplex, etc. Seems Amel is going backwards technologically if they're centralizing. Let's see, your anchor washdown pump shorts and rather than it tripping an adjacent breaker it's got to overload a 15 meter long cable run back to the central circuit breaker panel. To say nothing of the excess wiring to give all equipment a "home run". Must be missing something in this discussion.

Cheers, Craig SN68 Sangaris

< br>

 


points to check before buying 2003 Amel SM 2000

Steven Nieman
 

Hi everyone,

Any weak points to check before purchasing an Amel  SM 2000 build in 2003???


Kindly regards,

Steven



Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

Bill & Judy Rouse <yahoogroups@...>
 

Bill K and Pat,

I would never say that "I think Bill K's point is that he thinks Capt. Henri's original engineering was poorly done and left an unsafe condition with unprotected long wire runs."

I would not say anything like that for numerous reasons. I think you know why.

Since Henri Amel is not here to defend his decisions made many years ago, I will remind everyone that at the time these decisions were made they very likely conformed 100% with the regulations in force in Europe and conformed with the thinking at the time. Let's compare Henri Amel's engineering decisions to General Motors at the same time:
- Disintegrating plastic bumper parts
- 4-6-8 engines with 100% failure
- Gasoline to Diesel conversions with almost 100% failure
- Reduction of plasticides in paint which caused paint to fade in 6 years
- Plastic transmission parts which caused a new industry to emerge to repair transmissions
- Fiero & Corvair (one name says it all)
- Foam headliners which fell in 5 years
- Chrome coated plastic which lasted about 2 years
on, and on, and on.

Can one improve on yesterday's technology? Certainly! 
Can one not understand decisions made yesterday? Absolutely!
Should one of us criticize Henri Amel? Never!

Anyway, this is my sermon for the month. I hope that you enjoyed it. 

Best,

CW Bill Rouse
Admiral, Texas Navy
Commander Emeritus

Amel School  http://www.amelschool.com
720 Winnie St
Galveston Island, TX 77550

+1(832) 380-4970





On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 8:39 AM, sangaris@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Hi Pat, 

Yes, that's why I thought Alan's adding the Blue Sea fuses at the batteries sounded wise. Btw, in my house the distribution panel is smack in the middle of the house which reduces the total amount of wiring. It does, of course, have a main service breaker at the external drop wire, analogous to Alan's Blue Sea fuse. Then there are separate fused disconnects adjacent to heavy loads like the A/C and hot water heater in addition to breakers for those at the distribution panel.

I think Bill K's point is that he thinks Capt. Henri's original engineering was poorly done and left an unsafe condition with unprotected long wire runs. Alan seems to have a good solution.  And, while the new Amel centralized panel would meet Bill K's criterion, it is (likely) not fused close to the batteries, leaving the same risk of chafe and shorting in either the wires going to the panel or the wires going to the engine & generator starting motors.

I do suspect that the industry will continue to modernize with Distributed electric systems and have not overlooked the risk of shorting in the long runs, although I haven't looked into it enough to know exactly how it is addressed.

Craig SN68


---In amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com, wrote :

Craig , Your original post seemed to support locating breakers far from the power source , however this post seems to acknowledge the protection offered by locating breakers as close as possible to the battery bank. You even pointed to boat that burned up cables as a result of a short . Now I must be missing something . When I build a house , I have 220v/ 200 amps coming through a  wall , I locate the distribution panel as close as possible to where it comes thru the wall. The ele ctric immediately goes thru appropriate size breakers and passes thru appropriate sized wiring on to  outlets ,  pumps ,etc . In the event of a short there is little chance of the wire being overloaded . You do not use 14g wire with a 20 amp breaker ! In a house you would not run a 220v line to a laundry room and place the breaker on the wall behind the dryer. I have never understood the difference between protecting a boat vs. a house . But , maybe I am missing something, it would not be the first time.
Pat
SM #123


-----Original Message-----
From: sangaris@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com>
To: amelyachtowners <amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Oct 16, 2017 9:34 am
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

 
Alan,
That seems an excellent idea. I remember that in 2001 I totally redid SM Miss Lindy's wiring (don't recall the hull number) after it completely burned out for the third time. All the heavy cables in the engine room, from battery to starter to generator to main house feeds had melted solid. As I finished up I still had low volts from the engine to the battery.  Traced it to the starting cables having chaffed about 12 inches down inside the PVC pipe from the battery to the engine (that was supposedly there to prevent chafe). Your solution would have prevented much heartache and expense. 
Will be interested in Bill K's bounce. Perhaps the modern distributed systems do incorporate that.
Craig SN#68

---In amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com, wrote :

well said Bill,
BUT that's exactly what we have on our SMs....th e anchor windlass, the genoa furler etc have the breakers at the "other end" of the cables that run from the house bank...and...on the standard setup, there are NO FUSES near the battery connections. 
I've put large Blue Sea fuses in the battery compartment on each of my 3 banks of 4 6V series batteries to try to address these issues.
What have you done ?
Cheers
Alan
Elyse SM437

Craig,

I think you (and Amel in the "old days") are simply missing the point of circuit breakers.  They are most certainly NOT there to protect the anchor washdown pump, or t he thruster motor, or any other piece of equipment.  There is nothing a circuit breaker can do to "protect" the pump motor, or other device:  If it shorts, it has already died! If, in normal operation, it draws too much current for the wiring to support, then the wiring is undersized.

Circuit breakers are there to protect the WIRING and prevent the catastrophic results that can occur if a short occurs ANYWHERE that overloads the wiring.  This can occur from many faults, none of them likely, but all with disastrous consequences.  Wire chafe is probably the most common cause on boats, but others happen. I'd guess loose connections are a close second.  

Having a breaker at the far end of the wire, away from the battery, completely misses the point of why it is there in the first place. In my opinion, if you have a circuit breaker at the point of use of the power, you might as well just replace it with a switch--it is essentially useless. 

When I ran a service department for a large charter company, one of the annual safety meetings I ran for for my staff was to dead short circuit a 12 volt battery through 14 gauge wire.  Watching solid copper wire burst into flame and literally explode was a sobering experience for people who could easily get into the habit of thinking "its only 12 volts." It really made the point about why fuses and circuit breakers were essential.

There is nothing at all wrong with distributed CONTROL of an electrical system. That is just fancy electronics.  But... you can not "distribute" protection of the wiring. I have never heard a  good reason to run long lengths of un-fused wiring on a boat--or anywhere else.  It is just dangerous--and for absolutely no benefit.  Dangerous overloads rarely occur because of equipment problems.  They occur because of wiring faults.  Do they happen often?  No, not at all. But when they do, it is truly terrifying.  

C-zone, Ocotplex, etc, a re NOT wiring protection systems.  They are not "circuit breakers".  They are CONTROL systems.  Very different animals.

I have seen several boat fires at much closer quarters than I ever hope to repeat, and most of them were electrical in origin, all from things that shouldn't have happened--but did.  

Bill Kinney
Sm160, Harmonie
Back Creek, Annapolis, MD




---In amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com, wrote :

I'd always thought Amel was ahead of the curve with its Distributed Electrical System. That seems to be the direction the industry is going, now with solid state circuit breakers controlled through the NMEA2000 data network. Eliminates the large industrial style circuit breaker panels of yore and adds great flexibility. Check out CAPI2, C-Zone, Octoplex, etc. Seems Amel is going backwards technologically if they're centralizing. Let's see, your anchor washdown pump shorts and rather than it tripping an adjacent breaker it's got to overload a 15 meter long cable run back to the central circuit breaker panel. To say nothing of the excess wiring to give all equipment a "home run". Must be missing something in this discussion.
Cheers, Craig SN68 Sangaris
< br>



Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

Craig Briggs
 

PS.  Have done some more googling on the subject and it appears the Distributed systems have each of the feeder circuits fused at a bus near the batteries, in addition to the data-controlled breakers near the loads. Just as Alan has done with Amel's "old-fashioned" Distributed system. 
fwiw, Craig


---In amelyachtowners@..., <sangaris@...> wrote :

Hi Pat, 
Yes, that's why I thought Alan's adding the Blue Sea fuses at the batteries sounded wise. Btw, in my house the distribution panel is smack in the middle of the house which reduces the total amount of wiring. It does, of course, have a main service breaker at the external drop wire, analogous to Alan's Blue Sea fuse. Then there are separate fused disconnects adjacent to heavy loads like the A/C and hot water heater in addition to breakers for those at the distribution panel.

I think Bill K's point is that he thinks Capt. Henri's original engineering was poorly done and left an unsafe condition with unprotected long wire runs. Alan seems to have a good solution.  And, while the new Amel centralized panel would meet Bill K's criterion, it is (likely) not fused close to the batteries, leaving the same risk of chafe and shorting in either the wires going to the panel or the wires going to the engine & generator starting motors.

I do suspect that the industry will continue to modernize with Distributed electric systems and have not overlooked the risk of shorting in the long runs, although I haven't looked into it enough to know exactly how it is addressed.

Craig SN68


---In amelyachtowners@..., <sailw32@...> wrote :

Craig , Your original post seemed to support locating breakers far from the power source , however this post seems to acknowledge the protection offered by locating breakers as close as possible to the battery bank. You even pointed to boat that burned up cables as a result of a short . Now I must be missing something . When I build a house , I have 220v/ 200 amps coming through a  wall , I locate the distribution panel as close as possible to where it comes thru the wall. The electric immediately goes thru appropriate size breakers and passes thru appropriate sized wiring on to  outlets ,  pumps ,etc . In the event of a short there is little chance of the wire being overloaded . You do not use 14g wire with a 20 amp breaker ! In a house you would not run a 220v line to a laundry room and place the breaker on the wall behind the dryer. I have never understood the difference between protecting a boat vs. a house . But , maybe I am missing something, it would not be the first time.
Pat
SM #123


-----Original Message-----
From: sangaris@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...>
To: amelyachtowners <amelyachtowners@...>
Sent: Mon, Oct 16, 2017 9:34 am
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

 
Alan,
That seems an excellent idea. I remember that in 2001 I totally redid SM Miss Lindy's wiring (don't recall the hull number) after it completely burned out for the third time. All the heavy cables in the engine room, from battery to starter to generator to main house feeds had melted solid. As I finished up I still had low volts from the engine to the battery.  Traced it to the starting cables having chaffed about 12 inches down inside the PVC pipe from the battery to the engine (that was supposedly there to prevent chafe). Your solution would have prevented much heartache and expense. 
Will be interested in Bill K's bounce. Perhaps the modern distributed systems do incorporate that.
Craig SN#68


---In amelyachtowners@..., <divanz620@...> wrote :

well said Bill,
BUT that's exactly what we have on our SMs....th e anchor windlass, the genoa furler etc have the breakers at the "other end" of the cables that run from the house bank...and...on the standard setup, there are NO FUSES near the battery connections. 
I've put large Blue Sea fuses in the battery compartment on each of my 3 banks of 4 6V series batteries to try to address these issues.
What have you done ?
Cheers
Alan
Elyse SM437

Craig,

I think you (and Amel in the "old days") are simply missing the point of circuit breakers.  They are most certainly NOT there to protect the anchor washdown pump, or the thruster motor, or any other piece of equipment.  There is nothing a circuit breaker can do to "protect" the pump motor, or other device:  If it shorts, it has already died! If, in normal operation, it draws too much current for the wiring to support, then the wiring is undersized.

Circuit breakers are there to protect the WIRING and prevent the catastrophic results that can occur if a short occurs ANYWHERE that overloads the wiring.  This can occur from many faults, none of them likely, but all with disastrous consequences.  Wire chafe is probably the most common cause on boats, but others happen. I'd guess loose connections are a close second.  

Having a breaker at the far end of the wire, away from the battery, completely misses the point of why it is there in the first place. In my opinion, if you have a circuit breaker at the point of use of the power, you might as well just replace it with a switch--it is essentially useless. 

When I ran a service department for a large charter company, one of the annual safety meetings I ran for for my staff was to dead short circuit a 12 volt battery through 14 gauge wire.  Watching solid copper wire burst into flame and literally explode was a sobering experience for people who could easily get into the habit of thinking "its only 12 volts." It really made the point about why fuses and circuit breakers were essential.

There is nothing at all wrong with distributed CONTROL of an electrical system. That is just fancy electronics.  But... you can not "distribute" protection of the wiring. I have never heard a  good reason to run long lengths of un-fused wiring on a boat--or anywhere else.  It is just dangerous--and for absolutely no benefit.  Dangerous overloads rarely occur because of equipment problems.  They occur because of wiring faults.  Do they happen often?  No, not at all. But when they do, it is truly terrifying.  

C-zone, Ocotplex, etc, are NOT wiring protection systems.  They are not "circuit breakers".  They are CONTROL systems.  Very different animals.

I have seen several boat fires at much closer quarters than I ever hope to repeat, and most of them were electrical in origin, all from things that shouldn't have happened--but did.  

Bill Kinney
Sm160, Harmonie
Back Creek, Annapolis, MD




---In amelyachtowners@..., <sangaris@...> wrote :

I'd always thought Amel was ahead of the curve with its Distributed Electrical System. That seems to be the direction the industry is going, now with solid state circuit breakers controlled through the NMEA2000 data network. Eliminates the large industrial style circuit breaker panels of yore and adds great flexibility. Check out CAPI2, C-Zone, Octoplex, etc. Seems Amel is going backwards technologically if they're centralizing. Let's see, your anchor washdown pump shorts and rather than it tripping an adjacent breaker it's got to overload a 15 meter long cable run back to the central circuit breaker panel. To say nothing of the excess wiring to give all equipment a "home run". Must be missing something in this discussion.
Cheers, Craig SN68 Sangaris
< br>


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Main furler motor issue

Mohammad Shirloo
 

Hi Thomas;
 
I did not attempt to open our furler motor due to the poor condition observed and the amount of water that came out of it. We sent it to a mechanic familiar with Amels and the furler motor. They did open it and after review said that the motor was basically not repairable. So, I cannot be of much help in how to open up the unit. But as with everything else, you start from the obvious and move forward and try to figure out as you go.
 
One suggestion may be to request any diagrams or maintenance information Amel may have. If they don't, they can tell you the manufacturer's information and most likely more information can be found online or directly from the manufacturer.
 
I would definitely be interested in your progress and any pictures that may help us and other 54 owners. The beginning of the next season is going to be the 2 year mark for our furler as well and I will be changing the top seal.
 
Respectfully;
 
Mohammad & Aty
B&B Kokomo
Amel 54 #099
 


From: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...]
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 11:46 PM
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Main furler motor issue

 

Hi Mohammad,

Thanks for your answer

I realise, searching for pictures online, that the 54 has a different electrical furling system than Super Maramu. It is vertical. I guess that reduces the expertise on those systems. Hopefully we can contribute to building it without too much damage.

Any tips still very much appreciated

Fair winds to all

Thanks
Thomas 
Garulfo
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 


On Tue, 17 Oct 2017 at 03:10, 'Mohammad Shirloo' mshirloo@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Hi Thomas;

The seal is between the shaft and the end cap.  You can see it in your picture. This seal is constantly exposed to the sun and the elements. When the rubber dries out, water gets in. The 54s have similar issues with the top seal on the Bamar furlers.

Has any one used a good rubber conditioner/protector that extends its life? 


Respectfully;


Mohammad Shirloo
323-633-2222 Cell
310-454-3148 Fax


On Oct 16, 2017, at 11:24 AM, SV Garulfo svgarulfo@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 



Ok, 

So the gearbox is fine, we can operate the manual furling without problems. 

We removed the unit and disconnected it as per Mohammad's instructions. 

We managed to remove (pop out) the bottom black end cap (wire end). It was not easy to say the least. For the top end, we are still very much struggling with it. We must be doing it the wrong way. We found those black end caps to be sealed with what looks like white sikaflex, between the white painted aluminium case and a groove in the black end cap. 
The inside of the housing was damp, with a few drops od salt water running out and a fair amount of salt cristals. 
The "wire end" of the motor stack has the 'brake', an electromagnetic friction disk that I suppose is there to block the rotation while not energised (correct me if I'm wrong). It was a bit rusty. 

There is a gear on that end of the shaft that connects to the brake element. That gear would not rotate freely, until I shaked it a bit and it freed up. Maybe a clue as to what's going on inside. 

Next is the motor itself and the wires going into it that I guess would be connected to the brushes. 

But to access the full motor block, i think we need to remove the top back end cap too and free the motor from the housing. The top black end cap is still resisting our efforts. I don't suppose there is another solution to access the brushes or to remove that end cap?

Mohammad, 
What is the seal that Amel recommend changing every couple of years? Is it between the end cap and the aluminium housing? Or the  bit between the shaft and the black end cap? On our motor it's very rusty (see picture in previous post) and I wouldn't be surprised it's the source of our damp problem. Does Amel provide you with an how-to to change it? I would be interested in any tips at this point. 

Thanks again,

Thomas
Garulfo 
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 


On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 at 11:17, Garulfo sv <svgarulfo@...> wrote:
Peter,
"Unscrew conventional way", You mean like a jar (black against white) or pop it out once the screws on the white covers are off?
Thanks



On 16 Oct 2017, at 10:39, Peter Forbes ppsforbes@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

The black end caps unscrew the conventional way.


Peter
Peter Forbes
Carango
Amel. 54#035

Sent from my iPhone

On 16 Oct 2017, at 10:26, Garulfo sv svgarulfo@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

Hello
Thanks all for your input. 
We are onto removing the furler motor. 
Before we disconnect the electrics, any tips on how to remove the black end caps. 

Thank you
 
Fair winds

Thomas 
Garulfo 
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 

On 15 Oct 2017, at 09:36, simms@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

Hi Thomas, I agree with those who suggest checking the brushes. In my experience they are this number one culprit. You have checked the breakers. I have found if I try to furl under too much load the breaker in the port forward locker in the forward cabin pops.
The brushes can stick because of accumulated carbon dust from wear. Remove them and give the motor a blow out with an air gun if available. The contact surface can get  very glossy and when they are out I give that area a quick rub with sand paper.
Regards
Danny SM 299 Ocean Pearl

Sent from my Vodafone Smart

On 15 Oct 2017 20:42, "SV Garulfo svgarulfo@... [amelyachtowners]" <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Hi all,

The main furler motor stopped working yesterday. We wanted to unfurl the dail and it wouldn't go. The outhaul is ok. 
Battery levels are fine (and the engine alternator was still running and producing amps at the time).
The command produces a click sound in what I think is the solenoid. 
The circuit breaker marked "mast" in the forward cabin above the centre bookshelf /wardrobe is on (as are the other breakers there for "boom", etc).

Any further advice before I tinker any further? I would check the motor itself but having never done it, I'd rather be cautious with little local help at hand. 

Thanks 

Fair winds

Thomas 
Garulfo 
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

Craig Briggs
 

Hi Pat, 
Yes, that's why I thought Alan's adding the Blue Sea fuses at the batteries sounded wise. Btw, in my house the distribution panel is smack in the middle of the house which reduces the total amount of wiring. It does, of course, have a main service breaker at the external drop wire, analogous to Alan's Blue Sea fuse. Then there are separate fused disconnects adjacent to heavy loads like the A/C and hot water heater in addition to breakers for those at the distribution panel.

I think Bill K's point is that he thinks Capt. Henri's original engineering was poorly done and left an unsafe condition with unprotected long wire runs. Alan seems to have a good solution.  And, while the new Amel centralized panel would meet Bill K's criterion, it is (likely) not fused close to the batteries, leaving the same risk of chafe and shorting in either the wires going to the panel or the wires going to the engine & generator starting motors.

I do suspect that the industry will continue to modernize with Distributed electric systems and have not overlooked the risk of shorting in the long runs, although I haven't looked into it enough to know exactly how it is addressed.

Craig SN68


---In amelyachtowners@..., <sailw32@...> wrote :

Craig , Your original post seemed to support locating breakers far from the power source , however this post seems to acknowledge the protection offered by locating breakers as close as possible to the battery bank. You even pointed to boat that burned up cables as a result of a short . Now I must be missing something . When I build a house , I have 220v/ 200 amps coming through a  wall , I locate the distribution panel as close as possible to where it comes thru the wall. The electric immediately goes thru appropriate size breakers and passes thru appropriate sized wiring on to  outlets ,  pumps ,etc . In the event of a short there is little chance of the wire being overloaded . You do not use 14g wire with a 20 amp breaker ! In a house you would not run a 220v line to a laundry room and place the breaker on the wall behind the dryer. I have never understood the difference between protecting a boat vs. a house . But , maybe I am missing something, it would not be the first time.
Pat
SM #123


-----Original Message-----
From: sangaris@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...>
To: amelyachtowners <amelyachtowners@...>
Sent: Mon, Oct 16, 2017 9:34 am
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

 
Alan,
That seems an excellent idea. I remember that in 2001 I totally redid SM Miss Lindy's wiring (don't recall the hull number) after it completely burned out for the third time. All the heavy cables in the engine room, from battery to starter to generator to main house feeds had melted solid. As I finished up I still had low volts from the engine to the battery.  Traced it to the starting cables having chaffed about 12 inches down inside the PVC pipe from the battery to the engine (that was supposedly there to prevent chafe). Your solution would have prevented much heartache and expense. 
Will be interested in Bill K's bounce. Perhaps the modern distributed systems do incorporate that.
Craig SN#68


---In amelyachtowners@..., <divanz620@...> wrote :

well said Bill,
BUT that's exactly what we have on our SMs....th e anchor windlass, the genoa furler etc have the breakers at the "other end" of the cables that run from the house bank...and...on the standard setup, there are NO FUSES near the battery connections. 
I've put large Blue Sea fuses in the battery compartment on each of my 3 banks of 4 6V series batteries to try to address these issues.
What have you done ?
Cheers
Alan
Elyse SM437

Craig,

I think you (and Amel in the "old days") are simply missing the point of circuit breakers.  They are most certainly NOT there to protect the anchor washdown pump, or the thruster motor, or any other piece of equipment.  There is nothing a circuit breaker can do to "protect" the pump motor, or other device:  If it shorts, it has already died! If, in normal operation, it draws too much current for the wiring to support, then the wiring is undersized.

Circuit breakers are there to protect the WIRING and prevent the catastrophic results that can occur if a short occurs ANYWHERE that overloads the wiring.  This can occur from many faults, none of them likely, but all with disastrous consequences.  Wire chafe is probably the most common cause on boats, but others happen. I'd guess loose connections are a close second.  

Having a breaker at the far end of the wire, away from the battery, completely misses the point of why it is there in the first place. In my opinion, if you have a circuit breaker at the point of use of the power, you might as well just replace it with a switch--it is essentially useless. 

When I ran a service department for a large charter company, one of the annual safety meetings I ran for for my staff was to dead short circuit a 12 volt battery through 14 gauge wire.  Watching solid copper wire burst into flame and literally explode was a sobering experience for people who could easily get into the habit of thinking "its only 12 volts." It really made the point about why fuses and circuit breakers were essential.

There is nothing at all wrong with distributed CONTROL of an electrical system. That is just fancy electronics.  But... you can not "distribute" protection of the wiring. I have never heard a  good reason to run long lengths of un-fused wiring on a boat--or anywhere else.  It is just dangerous--and for absolutely no benefit.  Dangerous overloads rarely occur because of equipment problems.  They occur because of wiring faults.  Do they happen often?  No, not at all. But when they do, it is truly terrifying.  

C-zone, Ocotplex, etc, are NOT wiring protection systems.  They are not "circuit breakers".  They are CONTROL systems.  Very different animals.

I have seen several boat fires at much closer quarters than I ever hope to repeat, and most of them were electrical in origin, all from things that shouldn't have happened--but did.  

Bill Kinney
Sm160, Harmonie
Back Creek, Annapolis, MD




---In amelyachtowners@..., <sangaris@...> wrote :

I'd always thought Amel was ahead of the curve with its Distributed Electrical System. That seems to be the direction the industry is going, now with solid state circuit breakers controlled through the NMEA2000 data network. Eliminates the large industrial style circuit breaker panels of yore and adds great flexibility. Check out CAPI2, C-Zone, Octoplex, etc. Seems Amel is going backwards technologically if they're centralizing. Let's see, your anchor washdown pump shorts and rather than it tripping an adjacent breaker it's got to overload a 15 meter long cable run back to the central circuit breaker panel. To say nothing of the excess wiring to give all equipment a "home run". Must be missing something in this discussion.
Cheers, Craig SN68 Sangaris
< br>


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Bow locker bottoms...

James Alton
 

Dan,

   It sounds like you have a pretty good understanding of how to care for the wood in your Amel.  Application of the Timbor is quite easy actually.  The overspray or drips can be cleaned up with just plain water.   Certainly remove your cushions and put some protective plastic over the woodwork but any sealed surfaces should clean up fine with water.  You might try using a garden sprayer.  Perhaps plugging the drain hole would be good since you could strain and reuse the lost product, gravity is not going to be your friend with this job.  I have found the Borate products are quite mild on the skin. I read that the toxicity to humans is roughly equivalent to a similar amount of table salt, but I am not a doctor or chemist so make your own decision.  One tip that might help is to not make the solution too strong or you will have some clogging problems with the sprayer.  If the seam between the plywood panel is visible from the bottom,  I would suggest applying as much as you can in that area since the end grain in the wood will take up the solution more quickly.  One downside to be aware of with the Borate preservatives is that they can leach out if immersed or kept continually wet. Should not be a problem in this application.

Best of luck,

James Alton
SV Sueno,  Maramu #220


Sent from Samsung tablet.

-------- Original message --------
From: "'dancarlson367@...' dancarlson367@... [amelyachtowners]" <amelyachtowners@...>
Date: 10/16/17 15:19 (GMT+01:00)
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Bow locker bottoms...

 

Thanks again James.  Very helpful information.


When we bought BeBe last year, I inspected the underside wood above the chain locker and was satisfied with the condition.  Bill said all he did was keep the chain locker relatively clean and dry.  Put the anchor away clean.  Retrieving the chain at a rate that not only does not strain the windows, but also allows more water to drip off, washing the mud off.  And cleaning the locker periodically.   No treatment was applied as I recall.

In boat shopping I had seen an SM with rotted out floors under the sail lockers so it was on my mind.  

From the c omments earlier the rot may be due to cracks or holes allowing water to come down from above (although so far we've been able to keep these lockers dry).   And the other consolation is that with 480 of these boats out sailing for many years now this does not seem to be a hot topic.

It looks like the Timbor is a powder, so I should be able to purchase it while I'm in the US and bring it back with me when I return to the boat next month.  Then figure out how to cleanly apply it.

Thanks and regards, Dan Carlson, SM 387, sv BeBe.











 

Dan,

   I would bet that a big part of the reason that your plywood still looks good has to do with the previous care that she received.  Have you asked Bill for his advice on this matter?

   My primary line of work since 1978 has been wooden boat restorations,  so I know a little about wood and the available products.  The Wood Life was once a powerful preservative when it contained pentachlorophenol.  Unfortunately the product was also very dangerous to the environment,  the applicator and the end user.  The last time I used Wood Life it had a zinc based preservative that proved to  be completely ineffective.  The Borates (such as the product sold as Timbor) are very effective in dealing with pests such as termites because they can completely penetrate even thick pcs.  Oil based preservatives that are only applied as a surface coating can only penetrate a short distance into the wood as has been proven by testing.  Borates are an effective fungicide  (do a search), and it is a fungus that causes what is called dry rot in wood which is really misleading  because moisture must be present for the decay to progress.  Borates allow what is basically paper to be used as insulation that can last for decades and not rot or be eaten by some critter.  They penetrate because they are water bourne and wood is all about moving water around.  Also when you apply an oil based product you will seal the surface that will prevent additional coatings from soaking in.  With the Borate you can reapply anytime with no surface prep.  While a preservative can certainly extend the life of Wood,  keeping the wood dry I think is still the most effective way to preserve it.  Insure that there are no holes or cracks in the deck lockers that could admit water and do a ll that you can to keep the humidity down in the anchor locker.

   But yes, Timbor might be hard to get in Trinidad but I am pretty sure that Amazon carries it.  Perhaps they could ship it to you.

Best of luck,

James Alton
SV Sueno,  Maramu #220



Sent from Samsung tablet.

-------- Original message --------
From: "'dancarlson367@...' dancarlson367@... [amelyachtowners]" <amelyachtowners@...>
Date: 10/14/17 18:41 (GMT+01:00)
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Bow locker bottoms...

 

Thanks for the advice James,  I agree with you regarding the linseed oil.  In the US there are some penetrating products like Wood Life and Thompson's Water Seal, or perhaps deck sealants.  But I'm not sure what I can find down in Trinidad or Grenada.  


Timbor (Borate) is more for pest control.  

After 14 years, the wood did not look too bad, but I'd like to help it survive another 10 or 20?

Thanks and regards, Dan Carlson, SM #387, sv BeBe. 


 

Dan,

  Odds are that any bare wood in the chain locker area will have at least some moisture in it which makes oil based coatings problematic.  If your desire is to try and prevent the wood from rotting a good choice might be a Borate based solution such as Timbor.  Timbor comes in a powder form which you mix with plain water, it has low toxicity to humans and almost no odour.  It also kills bugs albeit slowly.   There is another mixture that uses ethelyne glycol and Borate which is more effective but I don't like the smell of glycol and it is quite poisonous to humans and pets.  Linseed oil will turn black quickly in such a humid environment and I have serious doubts about it being a preservative.  Some of the older copper based preservatives were reasonably effective for a surface treatment but the penetration is poor.  The Borate on the other hand will over time will work i t's way completely through the wood.   The best place to apply the solution is to the edge end grain of the plywood if you can get in there with a spray bottle or something.

  If you can find a way to keep the humidity down in the locker, it will certainly extend the life of the plywood with or without a treatment.

Best,

James Alton
SV Sueno,  Maramu #220



Sent from Samsung tablet.

-------- Original message --------
From: "'dancarlson367@...' dancarlson367@... [amelyachtowners]" < amelyachtowners@...>
Date: 10/12/17 15:12 (GMT+01:00)
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Bow locker bottoms...

 

Has anyone used linseed oil or other wood preservative to treat their exposed wood above the chain locker?  


I inspected my wood on BeBe, SM387, before leaving for the summer and have it on my list to apply something protective when I return.

Dan Carlson


 

Bill, I had the same problem a few years ago. I cut the floors out leaving about an inch of tabbing all the way around. Then cut another piece of plywood to fit , resting on the tabbing. I epoxied the bottom of the plywood first , then installed it and glassed it into place . I glassed the entire surface , rather than simply painting it. It was nice meeting you in Annapolis.

Pat
SM Shenanigans


-----Original Message-----
From: greatketch@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...>
To: amelyachtowners <amelyachtowners@...>
Sent: Wed, Oct 11, 2017 11:59 pm
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Bow locker bottoms...

 
The plywood soles of Harmonie's bow lockers are seriously rotten.  I was kind of surprised to see that the bottoms of these plywood sheets (i.e., the top of the chain locker) were "naked", without fiberglass sheathing.  I suspect exposure to the constant damp of the chain locker for 20 years was the start of the problem.

Replacement seems to be a fairly straight forward, fiberglass project, but if anyone else has had this problem and has any hints or "gothcha's" to watch for, I'd love to hear them!

Bill Kinney
SM160, Harmonie
Back Creek, Annapolis, MD




Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Main furler motor issue

Sv Garulfo
 

Hi Mohammad,

Thanks for your answer

I realise, searching for pictures online, that the 54 has a different electrical furling system than Super Maramu. It is vertical. I guess that reduces the expertise on those systems. Hopefully we can contribute to building it without too much damage.

Any tips still very much appreciated

Fair winds to all

Thanks
Thomas 
Garulfo
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 


On Tue, 17 Oct 2017 at 03:10, 'Mohammad Shirloo' mshirloo@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Hi Thomas;

The seal is between the shaft and the end cap.  You can see it in your picture. This seal is constantly exposed to the sun and the elements. When the rubber dries out, water gets in. The 54s have similar issues with the top seal on the Bamar furlers.

Has any one used a good rubber conditioner/protector that extends its life? 


Respectfully;


Mohammad Shirloo
323-633-2222 Cell
310-454-3148 Fax


On Oct 16, 2017, at 11:24 AM, SV Garulfo svgarulfo@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 



Ok, 

So the gearbox is fine, we can operate the manual furling without problems. 

We removed the unit and disconnected it as per Mohammad's instructions. 

We managed to remove (pop out) the bottom black end cap (wire end). It was not easy to say the least. For the top end, we are still very much struggling with it. We must be doing it the wrong way. We found those black end caps to be sealed with what looks like white sikaflex, between the white painted aluminium case and a groove in the black end cap. 
The inside of the housing was damp, with a few drops od salt water running out and a fair amount of salt cristals. 
The "wire end" of the motor stack has the 'brake', an electromagnetic friction disk that I suppose is there to block the rotation while not energised (correct me if I'm wrong). It was a bit rusty. 

There is a gear on that end of the shaft that connects to the brake element. That gear would not rotate freely, until I shaked it a bit and it freed up. Maybe a clue as to what's going on inside. 

Next is the motor itself and the wires going into it that I guess would be connected to the brushes. 

But to access the full motor block, i think we need to remove the top back end cap too and free the motor from the housing. The top black end cap is still resisting our efforts. I don't suppose there is another solution to access the brushes or to remove that end cap?

Mohammad, 
What is the seal that Amel recommend changing every couple of years? Is it between the end cap and the aluminium housing? Or the  bit between the shaft and the black end cap? On our motor it's very rusty (see picture in previous post) and I wouldn't be surprised it's the source of our damp problem. Does Amel provide you with an how-to to change it? I would be interested in any tips at this point. 

Thanks again,

Thomas
Garulfo 
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 


On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 at 11:17, Garulfo sv <svgarulfo@...> wrote:
Peter,
"Unscrew conventional way", You mean like a jar (black against white) or pop it out once the screws on the white covers are off?
Thanks



On 16 Oct 2017, at 10:39, Peter Forbes ppsforbes@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

The black end caps unscrew the conventional way.


Peter
Peter Forbes
Carango
Amel. 54#035


On 16 Oct 2017, at 10:26, Garulfo sv svgarulfo@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

Hello
Thanks all for your input. 
We are onto removing the furler motor. 
Before we disconnect the electrics, any tips on how to remove the black end caps. 

Thank you
 
Fair winds

Thomas 
Garulfo 
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 

On 15 Oct 2017, at 09:36, simms@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

Hi Thomas, I agree with those who suggest checking the brushes. In my experience they are this number one culprit. You have checked the breakers. I have found if I try to furl under too much load the breaker in the port forward locker in the forward cabin pops.
The brushes can stick because of accumulated carbon dust from wear. Remove them and give the motor a blow out with an air gun if available. The contact surface can get  very glossy and when they are out I give that area a quick rub with sand paper.
Regards
Danny SM 299 Ocean Pearl

Sent from my Vodafone Smart

On 15 Oct 2017 20:42, "SV Garulfo svgarulfo@... [amelyachtowners]" <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Hi all,

The main furler motor stopped working yesterday. We wanted to unfurl the dail and it wouldn't go. The outhaul is ok. 
Battery levels are fine (and the engine alternator was still running and producing amps at the time).
The command produces a click sound in what I think is the solenoid. 
The circuit breaker marked "mast" in the forward cabin above the centre bookshelf /wardrobe is on (as are the other breakers there for "boom", etc).

Any further advice before I tinker any further? I would check the motor itself but having never done it, I'd rather be cautious with little local help at hand. 

Thanks 

Fair winds

Thomas 
Garulfo 
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Main furler motor issue

Mohammad Shirloo
 

Hi Thomas;

The seal is between the shaft and the end cap.  You can see it in your picture. This seal is constantly exposed to the sun and the elements. When the rubber dries out, water gets in. The 54s have similar issues with the top seal on the Bamar furlers.

Has any one used a good rubber conditioner/protector that extends its life? 

Respectfully;


Mohammad Shirloo
323-633-2222 Cell
310-454-3148 Fax

On Oct 16, 2017, at 11:24 AM, SV Garulfo svgarulfo@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 



Ok, 

So the gearbox is fine, we can operate the manual furling without problems. 

We removed the unit and disconnected it as per Mohammad's instructions. 

We managed to remove (pop out) the bottom black end cap (wire end). It was not easy to say the least. For the top end, we are still very much struggling with it. We must be doing it the wrong way. We found those black end caps to be sealed with what looks like white sikaflex, between the white painted aluminium case and a groove in the black end cap. 
The inside of the housing was damp, with a few drops od salt water running out and a fair amount of salt cristals. 
The "wire end" of the motor stack has the 'brake', an electromagnetic friction disk that I suppose is there to block the rotation while not energised (correct me if I'm wrong). It was a bit rusty. 

There is a gear on that end of the shaft that connects to the brake element. That gear would not rotate freely, until I shaked it a bit and it freed up. Maybe a clue as to what's going on inside. 

Next is the motor itself and the wires going into it that I guess would be connected to the brushes. 

But to access the full motor block, i think we need to remove the top back end cap too and free the motor from the housing. The top black end cap is still resisting our efforts. I don't suppose there is another solution to access the brushes or to remove that end cap?

Mohammad, 
What is the seal that Amel recommend changing every couple of years? Is it between the end cap and the aluminium housing? Or the  bit between the shaft and the black end cap? On our motor it's very rusty (see picture in previous post) and I wouldn't be surprised it's the source of our damp problem. Does Amel provide you with an how-to to change it? I would be interested in any tips at this point. 

Thanks again,

Thomas
Garulfo 
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 


On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 at 11:17, Garulfo sv <svgarulfo@...> wrote:
Peter,
"Unscrew conventional way", You mean like a jar (black against white) or pop it out once the screws on the white covers are off?
Thanks



On 16 Oct 2017, at 10:39, Peter Forbes ppsforbes@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

The black end caps unscrew the conventional way.


Peter
Peter Forbes
Carango
Amel. 54#035


On 16 Oct 2017, at 10:26, Garulfo sv svgarulfo@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

Hello
Thanks all for your input. 
We are onto removing the furler motor. 
Before we disconnect the electrics, any tips on how to remove the black end caps. 

Thank you
 
Fair winds

Thomas 
Garulfo 
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 

On 15 Oct 2017, at 09:36, simms@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

Hi Thomas, I agree with those who suggest checking the brushes. In my experience they are this number one culprit. You have checked the breakers. I have found if I try to furl under too much load the breaker in the port forward locker in the forward cabin pops.
The brushes can stick because of accumulated carbon dust from wear. Remove them and give the motor a blow out with an air gun if available. The contact surface can get  very glossy and when they are out I give that area a quick rub with sand paper.
Regards
Danny SM 299 Ocean Pearl

Sent from my Vodafone Smart

On 15 Oct 2017 20:42, "SV Garulfo svgarulfo@... [amelyachtowners]" <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Hi all,

The main furler motor stopped working yesterday. We wanted to unfurl the dail and it wouldn't go. The outhaul is ok. 
Battery levels are fine (and the engine alternator was still running and producing amps at the time).
The command produces a click sound in what I think is the solenoid. 
The circuit breaker marked "mast" in the forward cabin above the centre bookshelf /wardrobe is on (as are the other breakers there for "boom", etc).

Any further advice before I tinker any further? I would check the motor itself but having never done it, I'd rather be cautious with little local help at hand. 

Thanks 

Fair winds

Thomas 
Garulfo 
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Which engine mount model was used on SM's with Volvo engines

Danny and Yvonne SIMMS
 

Hi Tom,

I agree with you. It is the no thrust situation in the Amel with its unique system of mounting that allows these vetus mounts to be used and that the mounts obtained as replacements are correct.

Danny

SM 299 Ocean Pearl

On 17 October 2017 at 00:23 "Thomas Peacock peacock8491@... [amelyachtowners]" <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

 

Hi Willem,

All this is ringing a bell in my head. There have been discussions about this in the past. I believe (69 year old brain) that the Vetus mounts seem undersized because they are measured as such with a standard engine with a prop shaft, which puts forward force on the entire unit. Amels, with their wonderful C-drive, don’t have that problem.

If you do a search on “Vetus” on this site, keep going back to June 2016, which is when we replaced our mounts. There is a wealth of information there from other owners.

Tom Peacock
SM 240 Aletes
Chesapeake Bay, soon (not soon enough) Antigua


On Oct 16, 2017, at 6:11 AM, 'Willem J. Kroes' kavanga@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:


Hi Mike,

 

I just contacted Vetus in the Netherlands and they told me that they specify those hydro mounts for max 60 kg weight each and for a maximum of 35 hp engines. They developed the engine mount for their 3 cylinder (Mitsubishi) boat engines.

 

Is the name ‘VETUS’ on the rubber on your mounts? What is your experience with these mounts?

 

Kind regards,

 

Willem Kroes

 

SM2k #351 “Kavanga”

 

 

Van: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...] 
Verzonden: zaterdag 14 oktober 2017 23:07
Aan: amelyachtowners@...
Onderwerp: RE: [Amel Yacht Owners] Which engine mount model was used on SM's with Volvo engines

 

  

Hello Willem,

This is a Vetus Hydraulic Dampened Engine Mount. We purchased these in 2016 from Jamestown Distributors in Bristol, RI, USA for $169 each.

Mike Ondra

ALETES   SM2000 #240

Rock Hall, MD Antigua bound November

 

From: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...] 
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 6:56 AM
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Which engine mount model was used on SM's with Volvo engines [1 Attachment]

 

 

[Attachment(s) from kavanga@... [amelyachtowners] included below]

Hi all,

 

The engine mounts between the steel cradle on which the engine and gearbox are mounted on my SM # 351 need te be replaced by new ones. After consulting Mr. Olivier Beaute it turned out that Amel used the older engine mounts, called 'Suspension hydro mounts for Perkins M80', also for a period of time after they changed from installing Volvo Penta  to Yanmar engines.

 

The importing company of Perkins in the Netherlands can't recognise these mounts from a photo that I also attach to this message.

 

Can anybody recognise this type of engine mount?

 

Thanks in advance for your reactions!

 

Willem Kroes

 

SM 2k #351 "Kavanga"

 

 

 

 

 

 
<image001.jpg><image002.jpg><~WRD000.jpg><image003.jpg>

 


 


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Main furler motor issue

Sv Garulfo
 



Ok, 

So the gearbox is fine, we can operate the manual furling without problems. 

We removed the unit and disconnected it as per Mohammad's instructions. 

We managed to remove (pop out) the bottom black end cap (wire end). It was not easy to say the least. For the top end, we are still very much struggling with it. We must be doing it the wrong way. We found those black end caps to be sealed with what looks like white sikaflex, between the white painted aluminium case and a groove in the black end cap. 
The inside of the housing was damp, with a few drops od salt water running out and a fair amount of salt cristals. 
The "wire end" of the motor stack has the 'brake', an electromagnetic friction disk that I suppose is there to block the rotation while not energised (correct me if I'm wrong). It was a bit rusty. 

There is a gear on that end of the shaft that connects to the brake element. That gear would not rotate freely, until I shaked it a bit and it freed up. Maybe a clue as to what's going on inside. 

Next is the motor itself and the wires going into it that I guess would be connected to the brushes. 

But to access the full motor block, i think we need to remove the top back end cap too and free the motor from the housing. The top black end cap is still resisting our efforts. I don't suppose there is another solution to access the brushes or to remove that end cap?

Mohammad, 
What is the seal that Amel recommend changing every couple of years? Is it between the end cap and the aluminium housing? Or the  bit between the shaft and the black end cap? On our motor it's very rusty (see picture in previous post) and I wouldn't be surprised it's the source of our damp problem. Does Amel provide you with an how-to to change it? I would be interested in any tips at this point. 

Thanks again,

Thomas
Garulfo 
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 


On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 at 11:17, Garulfo sv <svgarulfo@...> wrote:
Peter,
"Unscrew conventional way", You mean like a jar (black against white) or pop it out once the screws on the white covers are off?
Thanks



On 16 Oct 2017, at 10:39, Peter Forbes ppsforbes@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

The black end caps unscrew the conventional way.


Peter
Peter Forbes
Carango
Amel. 54#035


On 16 Oct 2017, at 10:26, Garulfo sv svgarulfo@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

Hello
Thanks all for your input. 
We are onto removing the furler motor. 
Before we disconnect the electrics, any tips on how to remove the black end caps. 

Thank you
 
Fair winds

Thomas 
Garulfo 
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 

On 15 Oct 2017, at 09:36, simms@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

Hi Thomas, I agree with those who suggest checking the brushes. In my experience they are this number one culprit. You have checked the breakers. I have found if I try to furl under too much load the breaker in the port forward locker in the forward cabin pops.
The brushes can stick because of accumulated carbon dust from wear. Remove them and give the motor a blow out with an air gun if available. The contact surface can get  very glossy and when they are out I give that area a quick rub with sand paper.
Regards
Danny SM 299 Ocean Pearl

Sent from my Vodafone Smart

On 15 Oct 2017 20:42, "SV Garulfo svgarulfo@... [amelyachtowners]" <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Hi all,

The main furler motor stopped working yesterday. We wanted to unfurl the dail and it wouldn't go. The outhaul is ok. 
Battery levels are fine (and the engine alternator was still running and producing amps at the time).
The command produces a click sound in what I think is the solenoid. 
The circuit breaker marked "mast" in the forward cabin above the centre bookshelf /wardrobe is on (as are the other breakers there for "boom", etc).

Any further advice before I tinker any further? I would check the motor itself but having never done it, I'd rather be cautious with little local help at hand. 

Thanks 

Fair winds

Thomas 
Garulfo 
Amel 54 #122
Tangier, Morocco 


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Which engine mount model was used on SM's with Volvo engines

Willem Kroes
 

Hi Tom and Mike,

 

Many thanks for your reactions. I will have a further look on ‘Vetus’ and tomorrow I will phone Amel (Maud Touillet) to get confirmation about the Vetus mounts.

 

Kind regards,

 

Willem Kroes

 

 

Van: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...]
Verzonden: maandag 16 oktober 2017 13:24
Aan: amelyachtowners@...
Onderwerp: Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Which engine mount model was used on SM's with Volvo engines

 

 

Hi Willem,

 

All this is ringing a bell in my head. There have been discussions about this in the past. I believe (69 year old brain) that the Vetus mounts seem undersized because they are measured as such with a standard engine with a prop shaft, which puts forward force on the entire unit. Amels, with their wonderful C-drive, don’t have that problem.

 

If you do a search on “Vetus” on this site, keep going back to June 2016, which is when we replaced our mounts. There is a wealth of information there from other owners.

 

Tom Peacock

SM 240 Aletes

Chesapeake Bay, soon (not soon enough) Antigua

 

 

On Oct 16, 2017, at 6:11 AM, 'Willem J. Kroes' kavanga@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

 

Hi Mike,

 

I just contacted Vetus in the Netherlands and they told me that they specify those hydro mounts for max 60 kg weight each and for a maximum of 35 hp engines. They developed the engine mount for their 3 cylinder (Mitsubishi) boat engines.

 

Is the name ‘VETUS’ on the rubber on your mounts? What is your experience with these mounts?

 

Kind regards,

 

Willem Kroes

 

SM2k #351 “Kavanga”

 

 

Van: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...] 
Verzonden: zaterdag 14 oktober 2017 23:07
Aan: amelyachtowners@...
Onderwerp: RE: [Amel Yacht Owners] Which engine mount model was used on SM's with Volvo engines

 

  

Hello Willem,

This is a Vetus Hydraulic Dampened Engine Mount. We purchased these in 2016 from Jamestown Distributors in Bristol, RI, USA for $169 each.

Mike Ondra

ALETES   SM2000 #240

Rock Hall, MD Antigua bound November

 

From: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...] 
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 6:56 AM
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Which engine mount model was used on SM's with Volvo engines [1 Attachment]

 

 

[Attachment(s) from kavanga@... [amelyachtowners] included below]

Hi all,

 

The engine mounts between the steel cradle on which the engine and gearbox are mounted on my SM # 351 need te be replaced by new ones. After consulting Mr. Olivier Beaute it turned out that Amel used the older engine mounts, called 'Suspension hydro mounts for Perkins M80', also for a period of time after they changed from installing Volvo Penta  to Yanmar engines.

 

The importing company of Perkins in the Netherlands can't recognise these mounts from a photo that I also attach to this message.

 

Can anybody recognise this type of engine mount?

 

Thanks in advance for your reactions!

 

Willem Kroes

 

SM 2k #351 "Kavanga"

 

 

 

 

 

<image001.jpg><image002.jpg><~WRD000.jpg><image003.jpg>

 


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

Patrick McAneny
 

Craig , Your original post seemed to support locating breakers far from the power source , however this post seems to acknowledge the protection offered by locating breakers as close as possible to the battery bank. You even pointed to boat that burned up cables as a result of a short . Now I must be missing something . When I build a house , I have 220v/ 200 amps coming through a  wall , I locate the distribution panel as close as possible to where it comes thru the wall. The electric immediately goes thru appropriate size breakers and passes thru appropriate sized wiring on to  outlets ,  pumps ,etc . In the event of a short there is little chance of the wire being overloaded . You do not use 14g wire with a 20 amp breaker ! In a house you would not run a 220v line to a laundry room and place the breaker on the wall behind the dryer. I have never understood the difference between protecting a boat vs. a house . But , maybe I am missing something, it would not be the first time.
Pat
SM #123


-----Original Message-----
From: sangaris@... [amelyachtowners]
To: amelyachtowners
Sent: Mon, Oct 16, 2017 9:34 am
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

 
Alan,
That seems an excellent idea. I remember that in 2001 I totally redid SM Miss Lindy's wiring (don't recall the hull number) after it completely burned out for the third time. All the heavy cables in the engine room, from battery to starter to generator to main house feeds had melted solid. As I finished up I still had low volts from the engine to the battery.  Traced it to the starting cables having chaffed about 12 inches down inside the PVC pipe from the battery to the engine (that was supposedly there to prevent chafe). Your solution would have prevented much heartache and expense. 
Will be interested in Bill K's bounce. Perhaps the modern distributed systems do incorporate that.
Craig SN#68


---In amelyachtowners@..., wrote :

well said Bill,
BUT that's exactly what we have on our SMs....th e anchor windlass, the genoa furler etc have the breakers at the "other end" of the cables that run from the house bank...and...on the standard setup, there are NO FUSES near the battery connections. 
I've put large Blue Sea fuses in the battery compartment on each of my 3 banks of 4 6V series batteries to try to address these issues.
What have you done ?
Cheers
Alan
Elyse SM437

Craig,

I think you (and Amel in the "old days") are simply missing the point of circuit breakers.  They are most certainly NOT there to protect the anchor washdown pump, or the thruster motor, or any other piece of equipment.  There is nothing a circuit breaker can do to "protect" the pump motor, or other device:  If it shorts, it has already died! If, in normal operation, it draws too much current for the wiring to support, then the wiring is undersized.

Circuit breakers are there to protect the WIRING and prevent the catastrophic results that can occur if a short occurs ANYWHERE that overloads the wiring.  This can occur from many faults, none of them likely, but all with disastrous consequences.  Wire chafe is probably the most common cause on boats, but others happen. I'd guess loose connections are a close second.  

Having a breaker at the far end of the wire, away from the battery, completely misses the point of why it is there in the first place. In my opinion, if you have a circuit breaker at the point of use of the power, you might as well just replace it with a switch--it is essentially useless. 

When I ran a service department for a large charter company, one of the annual safety meetings I ran for for my staff was to dead short circuit a 12 volt battery through 14 gauge wire.  Watching solid copper wire burst into flame and literally explode was a sobering experience for people who could easily get into the habit of thinking "its only 12 volts." It really made the point about why fuses and circuit breakers were essential.

There is nothing at all wrong with distributed CONTROL of an electrical system. That is just fancy electronics.  But... you can not "distribute" protection of the wiring. I have never heard a  good reason to run long lengths of un-fused wiring on a boat--or anywhere else.  It is just dangerous--and for absolutely no benefit.  Dangerous overloads rarely occur because of equipment problems.  They occur because of wiring faults.  Do they happen often?  No, not at all. But when they do, it is truly terrifying.  

C-zone, Ocotplex, etc, are NOT wiring protection systems.  They are not "circuit breakers".  They are CONTROL systems.  Very different animals.

I have seen several boat fires at much closer quarters than I ever hope to repeat, and most of them were electrical in origin, all from things that shouldn't have happened--but did.  

Bill Kinney
Sm160, Harmonie
Back Creek, Annapolis, MD




---In amelyachtowners@..., wrote :

I'd always thought Amel was ahead of the curve with its Distributed Electrical System. That seems to be the direction the industry is going, now with solid state circuit breakers controlled through the NMEA2000 data network. Eliminates the large industrial style circuit breaker panels of yore and adds great flexibility. Check out CAPI2, C-Zone, Octoplex, etc. Seems Amel is going backwards technologically if they're centralizing. Let's see, your anchor washdown pump shorts and rather than it tripping an adjacent breaker it's got to overload a 15 meter long cable run back to the central circuit breaker panel. To say nothing of the excess wiring to give all equipment a "home run". Must be missing something in this discussion.
Cheers, Craig SN68 Sangaris
< br>


Re: Distributed vs. Conventional Electrical Systems

Craig Briggs
 

Alan,
That seems an excellent idea. I remember that in 2001 I totally redid SM Miss Lindy's wiring (don't recall the hull number) after it completely burned out for the third time. All the heavy cables in the engine room, from battery to starter to generator to main house feeds had melted solid. As I finished up I still had low volts from the engine to the battery.  Traced it to the starting cables having chaffed about 12 inches down inside the PVC pipe from the battery to the engine (that was supposedly there to prevent chafe). Your solution would have prevented much heartache and expense. 
Will be interested in Bill K's bounce. Perhaps the modern distributed systems do incorporate that.
Craig SN#68


---In amelyachtowners@..., <divanz620@...> wrote :

well said Bill,
BUT that's exactly what we have on our SMs....the anchor windlass, the genoa furler etc have the breakers at the "other end" of the cables that run from the house bank...and...on the standard setup, there are NO FUSES near the battery connections. 
I've put large Blue Sea fuses in the battery compartment on each of my 3 banks of 4 6V series batteries to try to address these issues.
What have you done ?
Cheers
Alan
Elyse SM437

Craig,

I think you (and Amel in the "old days") are simply missing the point of circuit breakers.  They are most certainly NOT there to protect the anchor washdown pump, or the thruster motor, or any other piece of equipment.  There is nothing a circuit breaker can do to "protect" the pump motor, or other device:  If it shorts, it has already died! If, in normal operation, it draws too much current for the wiring to support, then the wiring is undersized.

Circuit breakers are there to protect the WIRING and prevent the catastrophic results that can occur if a short occurs ANYWHERE that overloads the wiring.  This can occur from many faults, none of them likely, but all with disastrous consequences.  Wire chafe is probably the most common cause on boats, but others happen. I'd guess loose connections are a close second.  

Having a breaker at the far end of the wire, away from the battery, completely misses the point of why it is there in the first place. In my opinion, if you have a circuit breaker at the point of use of the power, you might as well just replace it with a switch--it is essentially useless. 

When I ran a service department for a large charter company, one of the annual safety meetings I ran for for my staff was to dead short circuit a 12 volt battery through 14 gauge wire.  Watching solid copper wire burst into flame and literally explode was a sobering experience for people who could easily get into the habit of thinking "its only 12 volts." It really made the point about why fuses and circuit breakers were essential.

There is nothing at all wrong with distributed CONTROL of an electrical system. That is just fancy electronics.  But... you can not "distribute" protection of the wiring. I have never heard a  good reason to run long lengths of un-fused wiring on a boat--or anywhere else.  It is just dangerous--and for absolutely no benefit.  Dangerous overloads rarely occur because of equipment problems.  They occur because of wiring faults.  Do they happen often?  No, not at all. But when they do, it is truly terrifying.  

C-zone, Ocotplex, etc, are NOT wiring protection systems.  They are not "circuit breakers".  They are CONTROL systems.  Very different animals.

I have seen several boat fires at much closer quarters than I ever hope to repeat, and most of them were electrical in origin, all from things that shouldn't have happened--but did.  

Bill Kinney
Sm160, Harmonie
Back Creek, Annapolis, MD




---In amelyachtowners@..., <sangaris@...> wrote :

I'd always thought Amel was ahead of the curve with its Distributed Electrical System. That seems to be the direction the industry is going, now with solid state circuit breakers controlled through the NMEA2000 data network. Eliminates the large industrial style circuit breaker panels of yore and adds great flexibility. Check out CAPI2, C-Zone, Octoplex, etc. Seems Amel is going backwards technologically if they're centralizing. Let's see, your anchor washdown pump shorts and rather than it tripping an adjacent breaker it's got to overload a 15 meter long cable run back to the central circuit breaker panel. To say nothing of the excess wiring to give all equipment a "home run". Must be missing something in this discussion.
Cheers, Craig SN68 Sangaris