Date   

Re: Holding tank riser

Mike Ondra
 

Hi Darren,

The fix you referenced we did a year ago and have had no problem since. What I like with this solution is the continuous sanitary hose all the way from the toilet to the top of the holding tank, no joints to leak.  Reaming out the deteriorated copper and fiberglass to allow for the insertion of the tube I found quite difficult until acquiring the proper tool. See the posting on 7/31/20 https://amelyachtowners.groups.io/g/main/message/53493?p=,,,20,0,0,0::Created,,aletes,20,2,40,75913168 for more details. One must also be meticulous about getting the resin completely around the pipe penetration from above so that it is fully sealed.  We did abandon the old riser inside the holding tank as we could not figure out a way to remove it without cutting an access port into the tank.

 

From: main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io <main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io> On Behalf Of Darren Moore
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 2:16 AM
To: main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io Group Moderators <main@amelyachtowners.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [AmelYachtOwners] Holding tank riser

 

Hi Tom and others on this forum,

 

Kaz and I are newby owners of our Super Maramu #171 and this is our first post to this amazing forum

 

I found a similar issue with our holding tanks this morning, it looks like there was a solid pipe through the bottom of the tank which then had a 35-40mm flexible pipe connected to it on the inside of the tank which went up to the top of the tanks and then curved over to point back down.

 

In both tanks the pipes have broken off on the inside of the tank, I'm thinking of replacing the pipe going through the bottom of the tank with a solid bronze pipe going up to near the top of the tank as in the modification suggested in this PDF

 

I like the idea of going into the side of the tank at the side as well, but do find going in the bottom neater.

 

I'd like to get the old flexible pipe out of the tanks as well, not sure if this is possible without cutting an inspection hole in the tank.

 

I'd be interested to hear about how you go about your modification.

 

Kind Regards

 

Darren and Karen

SV Tradewinds III

SM 171

Australia

 

On Thu, 20 May 2021 at 10:02, Thomas Kleman <lorient422@...> wrote:

My aft head holding tank riser has separated from the lower part of the copper fitting. So inflow to the holding tank enters at the bottom of the tank. Despite this, there is no leaking from the fitting.

I've read the various posts on fixes; replacing the fitting, mounting a smaller diameter pipe inside what remains of the original, etc.

One goal of the project would be to make it easier to maintain. If the idea is to have the black water enter at the top of the tank, I'm wondering if anyone has moved the inlet from the bottom of the tank to the upper side. This would have the benefit of allowing the hose to run outside of the tank and turn left, dramatically simplifying clearing clogs.

Anyway, I want to consider all possibilities before I open this can of worms.

Tom and Kirstin

SV L'ORIENT
SM2K 422
Tahiti


Re: solar panel

Sv Garulfo
 


I usually find that a slight overcast yields better output, but i don’t know if it’s related to the potentially lower temperature of the panels or the dispersion of the solar rays.

My skin also agrees; an slight overcast is an easy way to get sunburnt. 

I also think some manufacturers promote better guaranteed output over the life of the product, even if it means having to put forward a lower power rating to start with. So your panels may start with a better output than promised and end within the advertised  range. 

Scott,
With 900W of solar, occurrences of 35+ amps are pretty rare for me. It needs an almost vertical sun. I don’t think you’re missing out much.

Best,

Thomas
GARULFO 
A54-122
Huahine, French Polynesia 



On 20 May 2021, at 18:29, Nick Fowle SM 404 Rascal via groups.io <svrascal@...> wrote:

I have similar experience with my two LG360s on the arch. According to Victron I have benefited on a few days in excess of 900wts  peaks , and regular days in excess of 800-840wts peaks. Ironically the 900 days are not highly correlated to the highest total power days, where I can get around 4kwh out of the panels. However with the weather changing down here the overall yield has declined significantly recently, but I do continue to get some days of peak output which is slightly higher than rated, but the total yield  during the day rarely gets above 3KWh and is bound to decline further. 

The Bimini ones (2*220) rarely exceed rated output, but when they do, they can exceed the combined theoretical total by around 10-15%. They are not as consistent given shading etc . As per the LG’s there appears (according to Victron) to be very little correlation between peak power days  and highest overall yield during the day so now I largely ignore peak power. 

Best days I’ve had around 5.8-6.2 KWh  from the four panels, and these were sailing days back in early April, not on anchor. Now, on a good day here in Carriacou I get around 4-4.75kwh and last week , as low as 1.5kwh across the four. The weather was pretty special in Southern parts of Grenada last week. 

Both sets are wired in parallel. I recently switched the Bimini ones from being in series (as per instructed ) to parallel but  haven’t a really seen a  material difference in performance. It’s hard to make any meaningful comparison/ analysis on the switch over mainly I think due to changes in the weather here in Grenada over the past few weeks. This week the weather in Carriacou has been pretty good but hazy (Sahara sand apparently) but the Bimini panels now in parallel have performed worse than when in series. Will continue to monitor, too many variables to make any meaningful conclusions right now. 

I have to run the genset roughly once a week at anchor, mainly for the water maker. My 3KW Quattro overheats after about 30mins if I am running the water maker off the Quattro/ battery bank alone. As the season changes further, the genset hours will obviously increase, until I move on after AZ2 jab scheduled for mid June. 

Bill , if you come up with a plan for the insulation please share. Like you the fridges and freezers are a significant portion of the overall daily consumption, even when taking into account that I cook / bake on electric. 


Nick
SV Rascal
SM 404
Tyrell bay, Carriacou 

Sent from ProtonMail for iOS


On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 9:29 PM, Bill Kinney <cruisingconsulting@...> wrote:
Scott,

Dean has given a great explanation of how solar panel manufacturing tolerances and marketing interact.  We bought our panels when they were new on the market, and we lucky enough to have gotten a pair with well above rated output, but it's a crap shoot. We will see above rated output most sunny days for about an hour either side of local noon.  But of course peak output is not REALLY what matters.  Total daily energy output is really what we care about.

Our two arch mounted, horizontal, 315W rated, panels generate between 3.25 and 3.5 kW-hrs on a typical sunny day in south Florida in the spring.  In June we will see as high as 4.0 kW-hrs.  This is on those days when our batteries are accepting a bulk charge all day.  Our normal daily power consumption at anchor is about 6 kW-hrs, so the solar panels give us a bit more than half our total usage.  We run the generator every other day to bring the batteries up to about a 93% charge in the AM, and the solar panels then bring them up to 100% full by 14:00.  It is a set up that has worked really well for us.

Most of the 6kW-hr power usage is refrigeration.  We run two freezers, and a fridge, and the Amel installed insulation is not the greatest. A serious upgrade of the insulation is on our wish list.

Bill Kinney
SM160, Harmonie
Hollywood, FL




Re: solar panel

Nick Fowle SM 404 Rascal <svrascal@...>
 

I have similar experience with my two LG360s on the arch. According to Victron I have benefited on a few days in excess of 900wts  peaks , and regular days in excess of 800-840wts peaks. Ironically the 900 days are not highly correlated to the highest total power days, where I can get around 4kwh out of the panels. However with the weather changing down here the overall yield has declined significantly recently, but I do continue to get some days of peak output which is slightly higher than rated, but the total yield  during the day rarely gets above 3KWh and is bound to decline further. 

The Bimini ones (2*220) rarely exceed rated output, but when they do, they can exceed the combined theoretical total by around 10-15%. They are not as consistent given shading etc . As per the LG’s there appears (according to Victron) to be very little correlation between peak power days  and highest overall yield during the day so now I largely ignore peak power. 

Best days I’ve had around 5.8-6.2 KWh  from the four panels, and these were sailing days back in early April, not on anchor. Now, on a good day here in Carriacou I get around 4-4.75kwh and last week , as low as 1.5kwh across the four. The weather was pretty special in Southern parts of Grenada last week. 

Both sets are wired in parallel. I recently switched the Bimini ones from being in series (as per instructed ) to parallel but  haven’t a really seen a  material difference in performance. It’s hard to make any meaningful comparison/ analysis on the switch over mainly I think due to changes in the weather here in Grenada over the past few weeks. This week the weather in Carriacou has been pretty good but hazy (Sahara sand apparently) but the Bimini panels now in parallel have performed worse than when in series. Will continue to monitor, too many variables to make any meaningful conclusions right now. 

I have to run the genset roughly once a week at anchor, mainly for the water maker. My 3KW Quattro overheats after about 30mins if I am running the water maker off the Quattro/ battery bank alone. As the season changes further, the genset hours will obviously increase, until I move on after AZ2 jab scheduled for mid June. 

Bill , if you come up with a plan for the insulation please share. Like you the fridges and freezers are a significant portion of the overall daily consumption, even when taking into account that I cook / bake on electric. 


Nick
SV Rascal
SM 404
Tyrell bay, Carriacou 

Sent from ProtonMail for iOS


On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 9:29 PM, Bill Kinney <cruisingconsulting@...> wrote:
Scott,

Dean has given a great explanation of how solar panel manufacturing tolerances and marketing interact.  We bought our panels when they were new on the market, and we lucky enough to have gotten a pair with well above rated output, but it's a crap shoot. We will see above rated output most sunny days for about an hour either side of local noon.  But of course peak output is not REALLY what matters.  Total daily energy output is really what we care about.

Our two arch mounted, horizontal, 315W rated, panels generate between 3.25 and 3.5 kW-hrs on a typical sunny day in south Florida in the spring.  In June we will see as high as 4.0 kW-hrs.  This is on those days when our batteries are accepting a bulk charge all day.  Our normal daily power consumption at anchor is about 6 kW-hrs, so the solar panels give us a bit more than half our total usage.  We run the generator every other day to bring the batteries up to about a 93% charge in the AM, and the solar panels then bring them up to 100% full by 14:00.  It is a set up that has worked really well for us.

Most of the 6kW-hr power usage is refrigeration.  We run two freezers, and a fridge, and the Amel installed insulation is not the greatest. A serious upgrade of the insulation is on our wish list.

Bill Kinney
SM160, Harmonie
Hollywood, FL




Re: solar panel

Bill Kinney
 

Scott,

Dean has given a great explanation of how solar panel manufacturing tolerances and marketing interact.  We bought our panels when they were new on the market, and we lucky enough to have gotten a pair with well above rated output, but it's a crap shoot. We will see above rated output most sunny days for about an hour either side of local noon.  But of course peak output is not REALLY what matters.  Total daily energy output is really what we care about.

Our two arch mounted, horizontal, 315W rated, panels generate between 3.25 and 3.5 kW-hrs on a typical sunny day in south Florida in the spring.  In June we will see as high as 4.0 kW-hrs.  This is on those days when our batteries are accepting a bulk charge all day.  Our normal daily power consumption at anchor is about 6 kW-hrs, so the solar panels give us a bit more than half our total usage.  We run the generator every other day to bring the batteries up to about a 93% charge in the AM, and the solar panels then bring them up to 100% full by 14:00.  It is a set up that has worked really well for us.

Most of the 6kW-hr power usage is refrigeration.  We run two freezers, and a fridge, and the Amel installed insulation is not the greatest. A serious upgrade of the insulation is on our wish list.

Bill Kinney
SM160, Harmonie
Hollywood, FL


Re: solar panel

Scott SV Tengah
 

Just curious for those of you getting more than rated output, how long does that over-rated output persist?

I have 960W of rear arch mounted LG Neon2 panels and I've seen it spike to slightly above that, but my Victron MPPT is limited to 35 amps output so charging output is usually cut off by the MPPT output limitation.

Most of the time I am sitting around 860-920 watts max output at solar noon. I believe my spikes above rated output occur around solar noon on partly cloudy days when the sun has been behind a cloud, the solar panels cool down and then get hit by strong solar insolation. At that moment, I get the output spike, but once the panels heat up again, the output drops.

Remember, solar output is highly dependent on panel temperature. That's why deck/bimini mounted panels perform so much worse than arch mounted ones. Well that and the shading issue.

If I'm wrong, the power output curve should remain above rated output for an extended period of time. If I'm losing out on amp-hours because of my "undersized" MPPT, I want to know!

--
Scott 
2007 A54 #69
SV Tengah
http://www.svtengah.com


Re: SM 2K hull, boot stripe, and rub rail colors

karkauai
 

Thanks, Paolo and Bill.
I'll let the group know what we decide to do and send pics.
Kent

--
Kent & Iris
KRISTY
SM243


Re: Display VDS 215 MDS - nav table A54

Arno Luijten
 

Hi,

If your problem is that the actual LCD panel is failing (as it was for me) then you can replace the actual LCD panel itself fairly easy. If you want I can try to find the supplier I found to order a brand new identical LCD panel. From the same supplier I ordered a touchscreen panel that replaces the glass panel in front of the LCD. That can be used in conjunction with the NAVNET 3D system however meanwhile I’ve upgraded that system to the TZ2 blackbox system from Furuno.

Regards,

Arno Luijten,
SV Luna,
A54-121


Re: House Bank vs. Engine Start

 

Mark,

SM 105 was repowered with a different main engine. I am not sure who did it, but this is probably one source of your problems. I believe that some serious wiring changes were made including the termination of Amel Bonding wires (yellow/green). Additionally, I assume that the new engine was NOT installed isolated and that there is also a crossover of 12 & 24 DC negative at the engine.

A review of your wiring needs to be done.

Bill
CW Bill Rouse Amel Owners Yacht School
Address: 720 Winnie, Galveston Island, Texas 77550 
View My Training Calendar


On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 10:29 AM Bill Kinney <cruisingconsulting@...> wrote:
Mark,

This is an odd one...  Just by way of additional information, what was the nature of the failure of the main battery bank?  You have the original Volvo engine?

Bill Kinney
sm160, Harmonie
Hollywood, FL


Re: House Bank vs. Engine Start

Bill Kinney
 

Mark,

This is an odd one...  Just by way of additional information, what was the nature of the failure of the main battery bank?  You have the original Volvo engine?

Bill Kinney
sm160, Harmonie
Hollywood, FL


Display VDS 215 MDS - nav table A54

Stefan Schaufert
 

Dear Amelians,

did any of you have to replace the display on the navigation table?  
The manufacturer doesn't seem to produce this anymore.  
Are there alternative displays or other sources of supply for this?

It needs 2 VGA connections.
The diagonal of the opening is approx. 45cm / 17,5 inch.

Thx a lot for your hints.

Best regards
Stefan
A54 #119 Lady Charlyette, currently Santa Maria - Azores




Re: Amel 54, For those who do not really like the entrance hatch locking system

Arno Luijten
 

Hi Thomas,

I did consider the intermediate position case. Apart from the fact I’m still able to add it if required the reality is that I never used it in the time we’ve owned the boat. When rain comes in from behind I typically close the hatch all the way up. When the sailing is so bad I get to the point of closing the hatch because of potential waves I will close it completely anyway.
The new lock also makes closing and opening the hatch much faster and a one hand operation.

Cheers,

Arno
SV Luna,
A54-121


Re: Holding tank riser

Peter de Groot
 

Darren an Karen,
We cut the sump (funnel part) of the tank outlet off. Then we extracted the hose, inserted and glassed in the FRP riser, through the inlet hole and glassed back in the the funnel part of the tank outlet.

Peter de Groot
SM 207 la Querida


Re: Holding tank riser

Peter de Groot
 

Tom and Kristin,
Our solution was to fiberglass in a 1-1/2”OD x 1-1/4” ID FRP tube riser through the inlet hole. The tube went almost to the top of the tank inside. Works well.

Peter de Groot
SM 207 la Querida


Re: Holding tank riser

Paul Osterberg
 

Darren and Karen
I made s video on how I sorted out  problems with and also filmed inside the holding tank
https://youtu.be/b62ZtpxCPnE
Paul SY Kerpa SM#259


Re: House Bank vs. Engine Start

Ian Park
 

Mark
I have a switch in the cabinet where the steering rack is located

I don’t know if it was original. I left the switch in place, but disconnected the relay that did the remote connection. I would just connect with jump leads if needed.

Maybe there is something like this in your setup that has failed?

Ian ‘Ocean Hobo’ SN 96


Re: House Bank vs. Engine Start

Dean Gillies
 

On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 01:02 PM, Mark Garver wrote:
Once I replaced the house bank everything worked fine,
Mark,
Can you reproduce the fault by attempting to start the engine while the house bank is turned off?
As Thomas mentioned, maybe you have a PO mod where something in the start/run circuits for the engine depend upon the 24V house circuit being online.
Dean
SV Stella
A54-154


Re: Amel 54 Secondary Saltwater Manifold made by SOFOMARIN of welded polypropylene pipe

Martin Birkhoff
 

Hello Bill, hello Arno,

we are just leaving La Rochelle, I will respond tonight.

Nicolas took measures and pics of the first manifold too. He should be able to create a design of this too.

Martin
Mago del Sur - 54#40


Re: Holding tank riser

Darren Moore
 

Hi Tom and others on this forum,

Kaz and I are newby owners of our Super Maramu #171 and this is our first post to this amazing forum

I found a similar issue with our holding tanks this morning, it looks like there was a solid pipe through the bottom of the tank which then had a 35-40mm flexible pipe connected to it on the inside of the tank which went up to the top of the tanks and then curved over to point back down.

In both tanks the pipes have broken off on the inside of the tank, I'm thinking of replacing the pipe going through the bottom of the tank with a solid bronze pipe going up to near the top of the tank as in the modification suggested in this PDF

I like the idea of going into the side of the tank at the side as well, but do find going in the bottom neater.

I'd like to get the old flexible pipe out of the tanks as well, not sure if this is possible without cutting an inspection hole in the tank.

I'd be interested to hear about how you go about your modification.

Kind Regards

Darren and Karen
SV Tradewinds III
SM 171
Australia

On Thu, 20 May 2021 at 10:02, Thomas Kleman <lorient422@...> wrote:
My aft head holding tank riser has separated from the lower part of the copper fitting. So inflow to the holding tank enters at the bottom of the tank. Despite this, there is no leaking from the fitting.

I've read the various posts on fixes; replacing the fitting, mounting a smaller diameter pipe inside what remains of the original, etc.

One goal of the project would be to make it easier to maintain. If the idea is to have the black water enter at the top of the tank, I'm wondering if anyone has moved the inlet from the bottom of the tank to the upper side. This would have the benefit of allowing the hose to run outside of the tank and turn left, dramatically simplifying clearing clogs.

Anyway, I want to consider all possibilities before I open this can of worms.

Tom and Kirstin
SV L'ORIENT
SM2K 422
Tahiti


Re: Introduction and a question

Roy Zakheym
 

Thank you Mark !


Re: Amel 54, For those who do not really like the entrance hatch locking system

Sv Garulfo
 



I would venture to think the idea was to be able to have intermediate positions. Not that we have made use of it much, but maybe one day...

One handed operation sounds great, though 

Best,

Thomas
GARULFO 
A54-122
Huahine, FrenchPolynesia 


On 19 May 2021, at 16:02, Dean Gillies <stella@...> wrote:

Hi Arno,
I know what you mean!   Anyone who needs to enter my boat without me present is always amused by the plethora of instructions I give them about entering.  Contractors look at you askance .. "do you think I don't know how to enter a boat?" lol

Personally, the only thing I don't like about the Amel system is that the door can free-fall all the way.  It would have been great to have some kind of piston in the design which supported the weight of the door, and either lowered it in a controlled way, or required a little downward pressure to open. As if our boats are not complex enough, right!

I think most people looking at your mechanism for the first time would find it obvious to operate, and probably not let the door drop.

Cheers
Dean
SV Stella A54-154

   

 

2141 - 2160 of 60144