Date   

Re: Specific Fuel Consumption

Mike Johnson
 

David,

A great aid to planning - thank you for compiling the data.

Regards

Mike

SM 2K 461

On 16 Mar 2019, at 01:13, Mark Erdos <mcerdos@...> wrote:

I think I figured it out. It is partial hours.

It's been a long day :)


With best regards,

Mark

Skipper
Sailing Vessel - Cream Puff - SM2K - #275
Currently cruising - Santa Marta, Colombia
www.creampuff.us


-----Original Message-----
From: main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io [mailto:main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io] On Behalf Of David Vogel
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2019 5:34 PM
To: main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io
Subject: [AmelYachtOwners] Specific Fuel Consumption

Hi all,

Just a quick contribution for the benefit of those who are operating a Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN genset.

I developed the attached look-up tables to assist me with keeping track of diesel consumption. Each time either the ONAN or YANMAR is used, I create a line-item in a hand-written fuel-log. When I significantly change revs on the YANMAR, I also create a new line-item (so, in essence record 1.5HR@1,600, 2.0HR@2,200, and so on). The figure for the fuel USED column is derived from the quick-lookup-tables attached, a laminated two-sided copy of which is held in the back-cover of the fuel log.

All figures in the table are rounded UP to the nearest whole liter. This means that, over time, I am actually over-estimating fuel usage. Which periodically I correct by dipping the tank. I never want to see less fuel in the tank than I have calculated as remaining.

The figures for the YANMAR are come from the ideal performance curves for the YANMAR engine, which were put into an excel spreadsheet and a theoretical fuel-use curve derived. This curve was then adapted/adjusted on the basis of actual fuel consumption observed, the resulting formulae being derived by EXCEL. This second formula was then used to populate the table.

The speeds were derived on the basis of an actual run in still-water over several hours in calm conditions; but with moderately dirty prop and hull - so probably in the ball park for real-world use, but not rough seas. I have not seen the need to adjust anything using these speeds in two years since initial calculation.

I am interested to hear about other's experience. In the meantime, this is about as complicated - and as simple - as I need to get and, once I take the round-up errors into account, have found these fuel figures to be remarkably consistent over 2 years.

Please note that range and endurance figures are based NOT on the full-tank 600 liters, but on 510 liters, leaving roughly 15% always as a "fixed reserve", at least for planning purposes.

I hope this helps someone else out there.

David
SV PERIGEE, SM#396
Shelter Bay Marina, Panama,
Bound for the South Pacific









Different Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and other yanmar Specific Fuel Consumption

eric freedman
 

Hi,

Here is a fuel consumption chart that I received from Yanmar for many Yanmar engines.

Fair Winds

Eric

Kimberlite Amel Super Maramu #376

 


Re: Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN Genset Specific Fuel Consumption

David Vogel
 

>> DO YOU MIND???

 

No,  not at all ….

 

Good idea.

 

Txs.

 

 

From: <main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io> on behalf of Mark McGovern <mfmcgovern@...>
Reply-To: <main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io>
Date: Friday, 15 March 2019 at 5:04 pm
To: <main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [AmelYachtOwners] Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN Genset Specific Fuel Consumption

 

David,

This is fantastic!  Thank you so much for sharing it with us.  Also, I hope you don't mind that I edited the subject line to be "Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN Genset Specific Fuel Consumption" to be a little more search friendly.

--
Mark McGovern
SM #440 Cara
Deale, MD USA


Re: New Group

Joe Nance
 

Thanks very much Bill & to all of you involved.  It is very much appreciated!

Joe
SM2K 331, CloudStreet

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 11:12 AM CW Bill Rouse <brouse@...> wrote:

February 12, 2019

To:     All existing members of the Amel Yacht Owners Group on Yahoo!

From: Bill Rouse

In 2002, “Closereach” founded the Amel Yacht Owners Group on Yahoo Groups platform with a handful of members. Our group grew in membership to the hundreds when Closereach retired from our group and turned the group’s ownership over to Jose Luis Isasi. Jose led the group to over 1000 members and in 2018 turned the ownership over to me.

In the beginning and through a number of years, the Yahoo platform worked well for most of our members. However, as technology progressed, Yahoo Groups did not, and many of the members began complaining of numerous shortcomings with the Yahoo platform. Additionally, Yahoo simply stopped supporting the groups about 2 years ago and left known bugs and problems continue to irritate all of us. Lastly, we cannot ignore the numerous rumors about Yahoo and what they may do with the Yahoo Groups, especially since they no longer support their group platform.

Groups.io is a new and different platform for groups like ours. Although they offer a “free” group platform, it is not for us because we need more features and we are larger than the small groups the free platform is intended for. Groups.io has a PREMIUM platform which is generally designed like the Yahoo platform that we are accustomed to, but Groups.io has search ability that works, and many other tools that work.

The Amel Owners Group moderators and I have been testing Groups.io for several weeks and made the decision to move the Amel Yacht Owners Group to Groups.io. Hopefully the transition will go as smooth as possible, but I am sure that there will be issues. We are moving all of our data with us. There is a minimal cost involved ($110/year), which Amel School will pay for 5 years. I believe that this will give us plenty of time to plan for the years after the first 5. For instance, the Nordhavn Group moved from Yahoo, supported by members and shortly after the move Nordhavn’s parent company agreed to pay all of the costs.

The Moderators of our Group will remain: Mark McGovern, SM CARA, Mark Erdos, SM CREAM PUFF, Danny SIMMS, SM OCEAN PEARL, and Gary Wells, SM ADAGIO

You will need to:

Use a different email address when sending an email. Use main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io

Go to the new Amel Yacht Owners website address https://amelyachtowners.groups.io/g/main/topics  and establish a log-in by clicking on “Log In” in the upper right and follow the instructions for “Forgot your password, or don't have one yet?”

 

I hope that you all will enjoy the new platform.

         

Bill Rouse


--
CW Bill Rouse
Amel School
720 Winnie Street
Galveston Island, TX 77550
+1(832) 380-4970


Re: Specific Fuel Consumption

Jose Venegas
 

FANTASTIC, data Thanks


Re: Specific Fuel Consumption

Mark Erdos
 

I think I figured it out. It is partial hours.

It's been a long day :)


With best regards,

Mark

Skipper
Sailing Vessel - Cream Puff - SM2K - #275
Currently cruising - Santa Marta, Colombia
www.creampuff.us

-----Original Message-----
From: main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io [mailto:main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io] On Behalf Of David Vogel
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2019 5:34 PM
To: main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io
Subject: [AmelYachtOwners] Specific Fuel Consumption

Hi all,

Just a quick contribution for the benefit of those who are operating a Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN genset.

I developed the attached look-up tables to assist me with keeping track of diesel consumption. Each time either the ONAN or YANMAR is used, I create a line-item in a hand-written fuel-log. When I significantly change revs on the YANMAR, I also create a new line-item (so, in essence record 1.5HR@1,600, 2.0HR@2,200, and so on). The figure for the fuel USED column is derived from the quick-lookup-tables attached, a laminated two-sided copy of which is held in the back-cover of the fuel log.

All figures in the table are rounded UP to the nearest whole liter. This means that, over time, I am actually over-estimating fuel usage. Which periodically I correct by dipping the tank. I never want to see less fuel in the tank than I have calculated as remaining.

The figures for the YANMAR are come from the ideal performance curves for the YANMAR engine, which were put into an excel spreadsheet and a theoretical fuel-use curve derived. This curve was then adapted/adjusted on the basis of actual fuel consumption observed, the resulting formulae being derived by EXCEL. This second formula was then used to populate the table.

The speeds were derived on the basis of an actual run in still-water over several hours in calm conditions; but with moderately dirty prop and hull - so probably in the ball park for real-world use, but not rough seas. I have not seen the need to adjust anything using these speeds in two years since initial calculation.

I am interested to hear about other's experience. In the meantime, this is about as complicated - and as simple - as I need to get and, once I take the round-up errors into account, have found these fuel figures to be remarkably consistent over 2 years.

Please note that range and endurance figures are based NOT on the full-tank 600 liters, but on 510 liters, leaving roughly 15% always as a "fixed reserve", at least for planning purposes.

I hope this helps someone else out there.

David
SV PERIGEE, SM#396
Shelter Bay Marina, Panama,
Bound for the South Pacific


Re: Specific Fuel Consumption

Mark Erdos
 

David,

This is great. Thanks for sharing.

I'm a little confused about the 0 to .9 on the Onan table. What does this represent? Load?


With best regards,

Mark

Skipper
Sailing Vessel - Cream Puff - SM2K - #275
Currently cruising - Santa Marta, Colombia
www.creampuff.us

-----Original Message-----
From: main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io [mailto:main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io] On Behalf Of David Vogel
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2019 5:34 PM
To: main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io
Subject: [AmelYachtOwners] Specific Fuel Consumption

Hi all,

Just a quick contribution for the benefit of those who are operating a Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN genset.

I developed the attached look-up tables to assist me with keeping track of diesel consumption. Each time either the ONAN or YANMAR is used, I create a line-item in a hand-written fuel-log. When I significantly change revs on the YANMAR, I also create a new line-item (so, in essence record 1.5HR@1,600, 2.0HR@2,200, and so on). The figure for the fuel USED column is derived from the quick-lookup-tables attached, a laminated two-sided copy of which is held in the back-cover of the fuel log.

All figures in the table are rounded UP to the nearest whole liter. This means that, over time, I am actually over-estimating fuel usage. Which periodically I correct by dipping the tank. I never want to see less fuel in the tank than I have calculated as remaining.

The figures for the YANMAR are come from the ideal performance curves for the YANMAR engine, which were put into an excel spreadsheet and a theoretical fuel-use curve derived. This curve was then adapted/adjusted on the basis of actual fuel consumption observed, the resulting formulae being derived by EXCEL. This second formula was then used to populate the table.

The speeds were derived on the basis of an actual run in still-water over several hours in calm conditions; but with moderately dirty prop and hull - so probably in the ball park for real-world use, but not rough seas. I have not seen the need to adjust anything using these speeds in two years since initial calculation.

I am interested to hear about other's experience. In the meantime, this is about as complicated - and as simple - as I need to get and, once I take the round-up errors into account, have found these fuel figures to be remarkably consistent over 2 years.

Please note that range and endurance figures are based NOT on the full-tank 600 liters, but on 510 liters, leaving roughly 15% always as a "fixed reserve", at least for planning purposes.

I hope this helps someone else out there.

David
SV PERIGEE, SM#396
Shelter Bay Marina, Panama,
Bound for the South Pacific


Re: Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN Genset Specific Fuel Consumption

Mark McGovern
 

David,

This is fantastic!  Thank you so much for sharing it with us.  Also, I hope you don't mind that I edited the subject line to be "Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN Genset Specific Fuel Consumption" to be a little more search friendly.

--
Mark McGovern
SM #440 Cara
Deale, MD USA


Re: Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN Genset Specific Fuel Consumption

 

David,

Circumnavigation fuel consumed average for 11 years.
Yanmar  4JH3-HTE    3.5 l/h
Onan MDKAV            1.5 l/h
Most Yanmar hours were between 1600 and 2200

Best,

Bill Rouse
720 Winnie St.
Galveston, Texas 77550
832-380-4970



On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 4:33 PM David Vogel <david.vogel@...> wrote:
Hi all,

Just a quick contribution for the benefit of those who are operating a Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN genset.

I developed the attached look-up tables to assist me with keeping track of diesel consumption.  Each time either the ONAN or YANMAR is used, I create a line-item in a hand-written fuel-log.  When I significantly change revs on the YANMAR, I also create a new line-item (so, in essence record 1.5HR@1,600, 2.0HR@2,200, and so on).  The figure for the fuel USED column is derived from the quick-lookup-tables attached, a laminated two-sided copy of which is held in the back-cover of the fuel log.

All figures in the table are rounded UP to the nearest whole liter.  This means that, over time, I am actually over-estimating fuel usage.  Which periodically I correct by dipping the tank. I never want to see less fuel in the tank than I have calculated as remaining.

The figures for the YANMAR are come from the ideal performance curves for the YANMAR engine, which were put into an excel spreadsheet and a theoretical fuel-use curve derived.  This curve was then adapted/adjusted on the basis of actual fuel consumption observed, the resulting formulae being derived by EXCEL.  This second formula was then used to populate the table.

The speeds were derived on the basis of an actual run in still-water over several hours in calm conditions; but with moderately dirty prop and hull - so probably in the ball park for real-world use, but not rough seas.  I have not seen the need to adjust anything using these speeds in two years since initial calculation.

I am interested to hear about other's experience.  In the meantime, this is about as complicated - and as simple - as I need to get and, once I take the round-up errors into account, have found these fuel figures to be remarkably consistent over 2 years.

Please note that range and endurance figures are based NOT on the full-tank 600 liters, but on 510 liters, leaving roughly 15% always as a "fixed reserve", at least for planning purposes.

I hope this helps someone else out there.

David
SV PERIGEE, SM#396
Shelter Bay Marina, Panama,
Bound for the South Pacific






Re: Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN Genset Specific Fuel Consumption

James Cromie
 

David - This is brilliant - something I have been wanting to develop myself, but haven’t been able to do yet!
Thank you for this.


James
Soteria SM2k 347
Culebra

On Mar 15, 2019, at 5:33 PM, David Vogel <david.vogel@...> wrote:

Hi all,

Just a quick contribution for the benefit of those who are operating a Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN genset.

I developed the attached look-up tables to assist me with keeping track of diesel consumption. Each time either the ONAN or YANMAR is used, I create a line-item in a hand-written fuel-log. When I significantly change revs on the YANMAR, I also create a new line-item (so, in essence record 1.5HR@1,600, 2.0HR@2,200, and so on). The figure for the fuel USED column is derived from the quick-lookup-tables attached, a laminated two-sided copy of which is held in the back-cover of the fuel log.

All figures in the table are rounded UP to the nearest whole liter. This means that, over time, I am actually over-estimating fuel usage. Which periodically I correct by dipping the tank. I never want to see less fuel in the tank than I have calculated as remaining.

The figures for the YANMAR are come from the ideal performance curves for the YANMAR engine, which were put into an excel spreadsheet and a theoretical fuel-use curve derived. This curve was then adapted/adjusted on the basis of actual fuel consumption observed, the resulting formulae being derived by EXCEL. This second formula was then used to populate the table.

The speeds were derived on the basis of an actual run in still-water over several hours in calm conditions; but with moderately dirty prop and hull - so probably in the ball park for real-world use, but not rough seas. I have not seen the need to adjust anything using these speeds in two years since initial calculation.

I am interested to hear about other's experience. In the meantime, this is about as complicated - and as simple - as I need to get and, once I take the round-up errors into account, have found these fuel figures to be remarkably consistent over 2 years.

Please note that range and endurance figures are based NOT on the full-tank 600 liters, but on 510 liters, leaving roughly 15% always as a "fixed reserve", at least for planning purposes.

I hope this helps someone else out there.

David
SV PERIGEE, SM#396
Shelter Bay Marina, Panama,
Bound for the South Pacific





<SFC-Yanmar_OnanLPH.pdf>


Re: New Group

David Vogel
 

Bill, Mark McG, Mark E, Danny, and Gary.

Just trawling through a backlog of over 3,000 unread messages, and found out about this. Great work.

And thank you.

David
SV Perigee, SM#396
Panama, for the S-PAC


Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN Genset Specific Fuel Consumption

David Vogel
 

Hi all,

Just a quick contribution for the benefit of those who are operating a Yanmar 4JH3-HTE and ONAN genset.

I developed the attached look-up tables to assist me with keeping track of diesel consumption. Each time either the ONAN or YANMAR is used, I create a line-item in a hand-written fuel-log. When I significantly change revs on the YANMAR, I also create a new line-item (so, in essence record 1.5HR@1,600, 2.0HR@2,200, and so on). The figure for the fuel USED column is derived from the quick-lookup-tables attached, a laminated two-sided copy of which is held in the back-cover of the fuel log.

All figures in the table are rounded UP to the nearest whole liter. This means that, over time, I am actually over-estimating fuel usage. Which periodically I correct by dipping the tank. I never want to see less fuel in the tank than I have calculated as remaining.

The figures for the YANMAR are come from the ideal performance curves for the YANMAR engine, which were put into an excel spreadsheet and a theoretical fuel-use curve derived. This curve was then adapted/adjusted on the basis of actual fuel consumption observed, the resulting formulae being derived by EXCEL. This second formula was then used to populate the table.

The speeds were derived on the basis of an actual run in still-water over several hours in calm conditions; but with moderately dirty prop and hull - so probably in the ball park for real-world use, but not rough seas. I have not seen the need to adjust anything using these speeds in two years since initial calculation.

I am interested to hear about other's experience. In the meantime, this is about as complicated - and as simple - as I need to get and, once I take the round-up errors into account, have found these fuel figures to be remarkably consistent over 2 years.

Please note that range and endurance figures are based NOT on the full-tank 600 liters, but on 510 liters, leaving roughly 15% always as a "fixed reserve", at least for planning purposes.

I hope this helps someone else out there.

David
SV PERIGEE, SM#396
Shelter Bay Marina, Panama,
Bound for the South Pacific


UPDATE: Amel Eastern Caribbean Rally Rendezvous Location: Martinique

 

I have some good news for those attending the Amel Rally in Martinique.

la Marina du Marin has offered the following to anyone attending the Rally:
la Marina du Marin is offering a berth package at 170€ per boat for 6 days :
Berth from Sunday 7th April PM to Friday 12th April PM
   Electricity included
   Wifi 40Go (1 ticket of 40Go per boat)
   Water is not included. The price water is 9€ per cubic meter.
To take advantage of this offer, you must reserve with the marina before 22 March. Email : contact"at"marina-martinique.fr Phone: +596 596 74 83 83

Sponsors Caraibe Marin and Caribbean Yacht Sales are offering you a dinner and drinks on 10 April:
Wednesday 10 April - 1930 dinner at Mango Bay with a drawing for a haulout at Carenantilies Yard. Dinner sponsored by Caraibe Marine, Wine or Beer by Caribbean Yacht Sales.

Saturday 13 April - St. Anne anchorage pot luck lunch/dinner

Sponsor Frangipani Hotel is offering welcome drinks at Bequia:
Tuesday April 23rd Bequia - Welcome drinks at the Frangipani Hotel (time to be announced)

All of the above information can be view on the Amel Rally Web Page Here.

There is still time and space for a few more boats. Contact me soon brouse"at"gmail.com.

Bill



Re: Solar Panel Arches

ngtnewington Newington
 

Mine is by TechNick in Grenada
No wobbles
No extra bracing required
Weight unknown
Cost  US$7000

Nick
SY Amelia Aml 54 -019
One more picture attached from side on

On 15 Mar 2019, at 17:04, Arlo <svplanb@...> wrote:

I used thickwall stainless tubing with lateral supports at the bottom. 400 lb dink and engine and no wobble in any direction. I worked on the solar from inside the dink and I weigh 200 lbs...


On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 08:29 PM, Jose Venegas wrote:

I am in the process of ordering an arch for Ipanema.  After personally seeing the aluminum arch made by Atlantic Towers, from Lulu and Creamy Puff I was very impressed with the quality,  how light they were, and more importantly by the very affordable price.   However,  both owners (Marc and Mark)  mentioned that the arches were somewhat wobbly, but that was corrected to their satisfaction by adding cables or an extra-strut in a corner.  Although I have seen some very nice arches made to order, their cost , I think, is typically 3 to 4 times that of an Atlantic Tower and they seem to be much heavier.
My questions are for those who have installed arches:
0) if they were from Atlantic Towers, were they wobbly?
For this who installed stainless arches: 
1) do you have an idea of their weight? 
2) how wobbly are they when underway both with and without dink?, 
3) did you have to add extra struts or cables to make them stiffer?
4) What was the cost of manufacture and installation?
5) Can you provide a pix of your system?

Greatly appreciate your feedback
Jose
Ipanema SM2K 278
Still freezing in Boston Harbor but hopefully not for too long.

 <20181230_114342.jpg>


Re: Engine room lining on Amel 54

Courtney Gorman
 

One thing not to do is to try and cover it up with either black duct tape or black gorilla tape this is what was done in my boat before I bought it to make it look nice however the weight of the tape and the fact that much of it is applied to thin blackFilm on the soundproofing causes it to fall off in big chunks and make a big mess I think the best idea is to remove it all has been stated before with the vacuum cleaner and then possibly there’s some type of material we could then paint or seal it with maybe something on the lines of rhino liner

On Mar 15, 2019, at 12:00 PM, Arno Luijten <arno.luijten@...> wrote:

The black film deteriorates much faster in the tropics. Mine is almost completely gone but that is because I used a vacuum cleaner to get it off. I hated to be covered in black flakes everytime I entered the engine bay.

I’m thinking about using some dinghy-paint to redcoat the foam, using a paint roller. Let me know what you think.

Arno Luijten
SV Luna,
A54-121


Re: Solar Panel Arches

Arlo
 
Edited

I used thickwall stainless tubing with lateral supports at the bottom. 400 lb dink and engine and no wobble in any direction. I worked on the solar from inside the dink and I weigh 200 lbs... I uploaded some pics of the arch in the album section - Do a search on the word Seaduction and it will show up.



 


Re: Engine room lining on Amel 54

ngtnewington Newington
 

Hi Arno,

I would be interested to know how you get on with the paint. When you say dinghy paint. What paint exactly?
Also in your other post you said you bought membranes for the water maker for 160 euro. Could you send a link for them. My membranes are fine at the moment but at that price it might be worth changing them anyway.

Nick

Amelia A54-019

On 15 Mar 2019, at 16:00, Arno Luijten <arno.luijten@...> wrote:

The black film deteriorates much faster in the tropics. Mine is almost completely gone but that is because I used a vacuum cleaner to get it off. I hated to be covered in black flakes everytime I entered the engine bay.

I’m thinking about using some dinghy-paint to redcoat the foam, using a paint roller. Let me know what you think.

Arno Luijten
SV Luna,
A54-121


Re: Solar Panel Arches

Jose Venegas
 

Pat and Ian:
Thank you both for your input reassuring that everyone that has installed the Atlantic arch seems to be happy with it.  Also from what I hear, everyone has added some lateral support of the arch, whether or not you are carrying the dink. 

I don't plan to carry the dink on the arch during passages but believe that even without it, the greater its stiffness the better it will be in the case on faces very bad weather along the way.  

Perhaps when we meet along the way we can test if, and by how much, the lateral stiffness is increased by the prestressing the arch pulling the legs apart compared with that bringing them closer. 
Thanks for everyone's comments
Jose
SV IPANEMA SM178
Boston 


Re: Earth bonding and watermaker

eric freedman
 

James,

Do you have an Autoprop?

Fair Winds

Eric

Kimberlite Amel Super Maramu #376

 

 

From: main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io [mailto:main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Alton via Groups.Io
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2019 12:38 PM
To: main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io
Subject: Re: [AmelYachtOwners] Earth bonding and watermaker

 

Bill,

 

   Thanks, I will order a 30mm to take with me.  If this doesn’t fit I will post an update on the correct size.

 

James

SV Sueno

Maramu #200

 

On Mar 15, 2019, at 9:03 AM, CW Bill Rouse <brouse@...> wrote:

 

I am guessing it is the same size as the SN, SM, & 54 which is 30mm.

 

Best,

 

Bill Rouse

720 Winnie St.

Galveston, Texas 77550

832-380-4970

 

 

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM James Alton via Groups.Io <lokiyawl2=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

To All,

 

   Can anyone tell me the socket size for the nut holding the copper strap on the keel bolt in the sump on a 1987 Maramu?  I need to replace the copper bonding strap on my boat and would like to have the tools on hand for the job when we arrive at the boat.  

 

    If replacing any of the original Amel bonding wire, is there any downside to using tinned wire?  The tinned wire by Ancor that I am familiar with does have some pretty fine wires that might be easily damaged by hose clamps so perhaps it would be best to solder those areas.  Any thoughts? 

 

Thanks,

 

James

 

SV Sueno

Maramu #220

 

On Mar 14, 2019, at 11:05 PM, eric freedman <kimberlite@...> wrote:

 

Bill,

You are absolutely correct.

Additionally , if you want to be totally paranoid, tinning the bonding wires at the connections will greatly increase the life of the connection. It will also prevent water from wicking down the wire. I have checked all my connections back to the rudder and they are 100 %.  I think I will take my own advice and tin a lot of the bonding. As you know Kimberlite 1s 16 years old with original wiring and I have only lost the bonding strap to the bilge connection.

Fair Winds

Eric

Kimberlite Amel Super Maramu #376

 

From: main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io [mailto:main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io] On Behalf Of CW Bill Rouse
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2019 1:59 PM
To: main@amelyachtowners.groups.io
Subject: Re: [AmelYachtOwners] Earth bonding and watermaker

 

Nick, 

 

I think that most of your questions were directed to me and I already stated that I am not an electrical engineer. Maybe some should be directed to SAV at Amel.

 

I will answer from my experience. 

  • The connections between the yellow/green bonding wire and devices will get corroded even if the wire is not soldered.
  • The resistance between the propellor and the anode should be zero or almost zero
  • I believe that the connections should be clean and free of paint and corrosion. 
  • I believe that you should check on each 2-year haulout the resistance between the rudder anodes and the propellor. This check will verify, engine, transmission, and C-Drive.
  • I think the Amel Bonding System is more than adequate. Keep in mind that there are many builders that bond nothing! Amel bonds most water connections, even when it is saltwater that is the most common culprit.
  • Some of the connections are more important than others, but at least one owner experienced significant C-Drive damage and the propellor is vulnerable if the bonding connection to the C-Drive fails
  • If you suspect something is going on, connect a wire to the rudder post quadrant and test resistance between it and the C-Drive. You are looking for good continuity and almost zero resistance.
  • Once you have verified engine, transmission & C-Drive, checking resistance between the C-Drive and various other bonding connections should ensure that the various other bonding connections are adequate, if the resistance is near zero.
  • On SN, SM, & 54, visually inspect the bonding strap inside the grey water bilge to ensure that the copper strap is OK beginning at the stainless steel nut at the bottom up to the yellow/green wire(s) junction at the top. You will have to pump 100% of the water out using a wet vac or similar. The most common place for a break is within about 3" of the stainless steel nut and even 1/2" of water will hide a break. If it is broken, replace it because this protects your cast iron ballast from electrolysis. Use 1/8" X 2" copper bar...don't use stainless steel for many reasons.

<image001.png>

 

I hope that this helps.

 

Best,

 

Bill Rouse

720 Winnie St.

Galveston, Texas 77550

832-380-4970

 

 

On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 11:58 AM ngtnewington Newington via Groups.Io <ngtnewington=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

Hi Bill,

 

I meant to say well done to all those involved with setting up the new owners site. Thanks.

 

Good bonding connections????

 

How good can we expect the connections on the bonding circuits to be? I note that on my boat and from pictures in the owners manuals that the yellow/green wires that are used for the bonding circuit are not tinned (I think) and very often are connected to say a metal object with a hose clamp and some of the plastic insulation removed from the wire, linking one fitting to the next in a ring.  These connections will invariably become oxidised and green. Given the very low voltages, the connection will be poor. I have made an effort to improve the connections where practical, by changing some hose clamps for new and cleaning up the surfaces, but I wonder how far to go. I was always taught that one should use a dedicated insulated lug with a soldered connector and a copper bolted on lug for all bonding connections, and to avoid clamping uninsulated wire with a hose clamp to, say, a through hull fitting or a saltwater manifold, for example.

 

Do you think the original connection system is adequate? How important are these connections? Do you think it a good idea to measure the resistance between the Zincs on the rudder and various connected fittings around the boat? If so what might be an acceptable reading?

 

Kind regards

 

Nick 

 

 

S/Y Amelia hull 019  Aml 54

On 14 Mar 2019, at 15:06, CW Bill Rouse <brouse@...> wrote:

 

Arno,

 

Of course I do not know exactly the cause of the corrosion, but it may be saltwater caused corrosion and was not caused by a missing or poor bonding connection. 

 

I am not an electrical engineer. Let me attempt to give you a Bill Rouse explanation and answer to your question. Be sure to read all of the Electrical Warnings in your Amel 54 User and Owners manual (You may want to ask SAV at Amel, afterall, that is what they are there for):

 

Bonding Connections on your Amel 54 were designed to electrically connect devices in contact with water to the anodes on the rudder. There is micro voltage in this pathway and the least amount of corrosion between the bonding wire and the device will cause issues similar to no bonding connection. The metal where the yellow/green wire connects should be free of paint and very clean. The same thing for the bare end of the wire.

 

EARTH Connections on your Amel 54 are designed to protect you from electrical shock. These connections should cause either the Main breaker to open or the device breaker to open when a 220VAC load line connects to the yellow/green EARTH. An example would be your 220VAC dessalator pump motor has a EARTH connection. If possibly saltwater was spilled on the pump creating a connection between the 220VAC load line and EARTH, breakers will open cutting OFF the 220VAC load line to the electric motor. If in this example if the EARTH connection to the motor was broken, the possibility of electric shock will exist when you touch the motor or anything connected to the motor.

 

EARTH and Bonding are separate systems, but sometimes EARTH meets Bonding on your Amel 54. A good example of this is the original Calpeda A/C pump. It is connected to Bonding at the output pipe. The 220VAC EARTH is connected to the metal case inside the wiring box. And, of course, the metal case is connected to the output pipe, thus EARTH and Bonding are connected. I believe that the same thing is true on your Dessalator Duo.

 

I hope this explanation helps. 

 

Best,

 

Bill Rouse

720 Winnie St.

Galveston, Texas 77550

832-380-4970

 

 

On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 7:50 AM Arno Luijten <arno.luijten@...> wrote:

Hi All,

I'm wondering about a thing after removing my Duo watermaker. I noticed quite some galvanic corrosion despite the fact that the green/yellow bonding wire was attached at several points to the watermaker.
I was actually just in time taking the thing apart as I'm still able to salvage all the important bits.
From traces I could see I'm guessing one of the endcaps on the pump has been leaking also given the amount of salt build-up at the chassis and pump-base.

What I'm wondering about is the bonding sytem. Is it also connected to the shore power earth lead? From earlier conversations I vaguely remember it was not connected.  If not then why is the earth connection of the 230 Volt pump connected to the mains earth?

Any advise appreciated.

Arno Luijten
SV Luna,
A54-121

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Re: Earth bonding and watermaker

James Alton
 

Bill,

   Thanks, I will order a 30mm to take with me.  If this doesn’t fit I will post an update on the correct size.

James
SV Sueno
Maramu #200

On Mar 15, 2019, at 9:03 AM, CW Bill Rouse <brouse@...> wrote:

I am guessing it is the same size as the SN, SM, & 54 which is 30mm.

Best,

Bill Rouse
720 Winnie St.
Galveston, Texas 77550
832-380-4970



On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM James Alton via Groups.Io <lokiyawl2=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
To All,

   Can anyone tell me the socket size for the nut holding the copper strap on the keel bolt in the sump on a 1987 Maramu?  I need to replace the copper bonding strap on my boat and would like to have the tools on hand for the job when we arrive at the boat.  

    If replacing any of the original Amel bonding wire, is there any downside to using tinned wire?  The tinned wire by Ancor that I am familiar with does have some pretty fine wires that might be easily damaged by hose clamps so perhaps it would be best to solder those areas.  Any thoughts? 

Thanks,

James

SV Sueno
Maramu #220

On Mar 14, 2019, at 11:05 PM, eric freedman <kimberlite@...> wrote:

Bill,
You are absolutely correct.
Additionally , if you want to be totally paranoid, tinning the bonding wires at the connections will greatly increase the life of the connection. It will also prevent water from wicking down the wire. I have checked all my connections back to the rudder and they are 100 %.  I think I will take my own advice and tin a lot of the bonding. As you know Kimberlite 1s 16 years old with original wiring and I have only lost the bonding strap to the bilge connection.
Fair Winds
Eric
Kimberlite Amel Super Maramu #376
 
From: main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io [mailto:main@AmelYachtOwners.groups.io] On Behalf Of CW Bill Rouse
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2019 1:59 PM
To: main@amelyachtowners.groups.io
Subject: Re: [AmelYachtOwners] Earth bonding and watermaker
 
Nick, 
 
I think that most of your questions were directed to me and I already stated that I am not an electrical engineer. Maybe some should be directed to SAV at Amel.
 
I will answer from my experience. 
  • The connections between the yellow/green bonding wire and devices will get corroded even if the wire is not soldered.
  • The resistance between the propellor and the anode should be zero or almost zero
  • I believe that the connections should be clean and free of paint and corrosion. 
  • I believe that you should check on each 2-year haulout the resistance between the rudder anodes and the propellor. This check will verify, engine, transmission, and C-Drive.
  • I think the Amel Bonding System is more than adequate. Keep in mind that there are many builders that bond nothing! Amel bonds most water connections, even when it is saltwater that is the most common culprit.
  • Some of the connections are more important than others, but at least one owner experienced significant C-Drive damage and the propellor is vulnerable if the bonding connection to the C-Drive fails
  • If you suspect something is going on, connect a wire to the rudder post quadrant and test resistance between it and the C-Drive. You are looking for good continuity and almost zero resistance.
  • Once you have verified engine, transmission & C-Drive, checking resistance between the C-Drive and various other bonding connections should ensure that the various other bonding connections are adequate, if the resistance is near zero.
  • On SN, SM, & 54, visually inspect the bonding strap inside the grey water bilge to ensure that the copper strap is OK beginning at the stainless steel nut at the bottom up to the yellow/green wire(s) junction at the top. You will have to pump 100% of the water out using a wet vac or similar. The most common place for a break is within about 3" of the stainless steel nut and even 1/2" of water will hide a break. If it is broken, replace it because this protects your cast iron ballast from electrolysis. Use 1/8" X 2" copper bar...don't use stainless steel for many reasons.
<image001.png>
 
I hope that this helps.
 
Best,
 
Bill Rouse
720 Winnie St.
Galveston, Texas 77550
832-380-4970
 
 
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 11:58 AM ngtnewington Newington via Groups.Io <ngtnewington=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
Hi Bill,
 
I meant to say well done to all those involved with setting up the new owners site. Thanks.
 
Good bonding connections????
 
How good can we expect the connections on the bonding circuits to be? I note that on my boat and from pictures in the owners manuals that the yellow/green wires that are used for the bonding circuit are not tinned (I think) and very often are connected to say a metal object with a hose clamp and some of the plastic insulation removed from the wire, linking one fitting to the next in a ring.  These connections will invariably become oxidised and green. Given the very low voltages, the connection will be poor. I have made an effort to improve the connections where practical, by changing some hose clamps for new and cleaning up the surfaces, but I wonder how far to go. I was always taught that one should use a dedicated insulated lug with a soldered connector and a copper bolted on lug for all bonding connections, and to avoid clamping uninsulated wire with a hose clamp to, say, a through hull fitting or a saltwater manifold, for example.
 
Do you think the original connection system is adequate? How important are these connections? Do you think it a good idea to measure the resistance between the Zincs on the rudder and various connected fittings around the boat? If so what might be an acceptable reading?
 
Kind regards
 
Nick 
 
 
S/Y Amelia hull 019  Aml 54
On 14 Mar 2019, at 15:06, CW Bill Rouse <brouse@...> wrote:
 
Arno,
 
Of course I do not know exactly the cause of the corrosion, but it may be saltwater caused corrosion and was not caused by a missing or poor bonding connection. 
 
I am not an electrical engineer. Let me attempt to give you a Bill Rouse explanation and answer to your question. Be sure to read all of the Electrical Warnings in your Amel 54 User and Owners manual (You may want to ask SAV at Amel, afterall, that is what they are there for):
 
Bonding Connections on your Amel 54 were designed to electrically connect devices in contact with water to the anodes on the rudder. There is micro voltage in this pathway and the least amount of corrosion between the bonding wire and the device will cause issues similar to no bonding connection. The metal where the yellow/green wire connects should be free of paint and very clean. The same thing for the bare end of the wire.
 
EARTH Connections on your Amel 54 are designed to protect you from electrical shock. These connections should cause either the Main breaker to open or the device breaker to open when a 220VAC load line connects to the yellow/green EARTH. An example would be your 220VAC dessalator pump motor has a EARTH connection. If possibly saltwater was spilled on the pump creating a connection between the 220VAC load line and EARTH, breakers will open cutting OFF the 220VAC load line to the electric motor. If in this example if the EARTH connection to the motor was broken, the possibility of electric shock will exist when you touch the motor or anything connected to the motor.
 
EARTH and Bonding are separate systems, but sometimes EARTH meets Bonding on your Amel 54. A good example of this is the original Calpeda A/C pump. It is connected to Bonding at the output pipe. The 220VAC EARTH is connected to the metal case inside the wiring box. And, of course, the metal case is connected to the output pipe, thus EARTH and Bonding are connected. I believe that the same thing is true on your Dessalator Duo.
 
I hope this explanation helps. 
 
Best,
 
Bill Rouse
720 Winnie St.
Galveston, Texas 77550
832-380-4970
 
 
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 7:50 AM Arno Luijten <arno.luijten@...> wrote:
Hi All,

I'm wondering about a thing after removing my Duo watermaker. I noticed quite some galvanic corrosion despite the fact that the green/yellow bonding wire was attached at several points to the watermaker.
I was actually just in time taking the thing apart as I'm still able to salvage all the important bits.
From traces I could see I'm guessing one of the endcaps on the pump has been leaking also given the amount of salt build-up at the chassis and pump-base.

What I'm wondering about is the bonding sytem. Is it also connected to the shore power earth lead? From earlier conversations I vaguely remember it was not connected.  If not then why is the earth connection of the 230 Volt pump connected to the mains earth?

Any advise appreciated.

Arno Luijten
SV Luna,
A54-121