Date   

Re: Compensating for Additional Weight of Solar Installation

John Clark
 

Hi Mark,
    we installed the Emek arch which I believe is heavier than the Atlantic arch.  I have a similar distribution of heavy items, 80m of 10mm chain, two anchors forward, dinghy on foredeck and a 9.9 hp outboard in the lazarette.  I haven't noticed significant change in the waterline aft, in calm water the red stripe is dry.  The front does look like yours with the red strip higher above above the water.  I seem to recall that it looked the same before the arch was installed.  

We do get the slime/algae build up at the stern where the water continually slaps at the hull.  I don't know if moving the boot strip and antifouling line up will help much with that.

Is your engine exhaust port under water?  Mine sits right at the waterline, in fact I changed the exhaust hose while in the water at a marina.  Water was about 1 inch below the port. 

               John
SV Annie, SM 37
Druif Bay, Water Island USVI



SM Prop Shaft Seal direction and Bush***RESPONSE TO *** IMPORTANT RESPONSE***

Jose Venegas
 

Dear Bill,

I don't want to make this a major issue and I appreciate your comments, knowledge, and experience with our boats but I have several issues with your RESPONSE.

1) I am ONLY reporting the result of my experiment, NOT recommending anything to owners.  I would not recommend anybody without knowledge of mechanical engineering, seals, and lubrication to conduct experiments on their own but I thought that reporting my results to the group could be helpful to promote discussion about the topic. 

2) My reason to conduct the experiment was motivated by TWO  consecutive situations where water entered into the transmission before the 2 years. In both cases, I had followed carefully AMEL's recommendations and used original parts. 

3) The last incident of water ingress into the transmission happened as I was sailing back from Cartagena to the Bahamas and I was forced to run the engine for several hours during a bad storm north of Cuba with milky oil.  It was very stressfull to have to run hard the engine knowing that salt water was reducing the lubrication of the gears.

4) I agree that catastrophic loss of oil from the transmission leads to a very expensive damaged of the gears as much as catastrophic replacement of oil by saltwater would lead to the same type of damage.
However, experience tells us that seal damage is not catastrophic but gradual and shown by a change in color of the oil (with the seals in the recommended AMEL configuration), or a slow drop of a few mm per week in the oil level from the tank which can be refilled with a heavier oil as I did, totally eliminating the oil loss until the next haulout.  In contrast, watery oil cannot be replaced until the boat is haulout, potentially forcing you to do it in less than desirable places.  

5) My rationale for experimenting with the seal's direction was based on the physics of how seals work. A seal without lubrication will wear out faster than one with lubrication, and the AMEL recommended directions leave ALL seals unlubricated, THAT is a FACT.  So I  don't know how you can be so sure that the change in seal direction was not the reason for the difference in seal and bushing wear.

6) THE REAL QUESTION IS  WHETHER IT IS WORSE TO LOSE A LITTLE  OIL THAT  CAN BE REPLACED  OR RUN THE ENGINE WITH SALT  WATER IN THE TRANSMISSION WHICH KEEPS BRINGING THE LEVEL OF THE OIL TANK HIGHER AS WATER LEAKS IN.

7) THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT THE SEALS SHOULD BE REPLACED AT LEAST EVERY TWO YEARS AS recommended, but WITH THE PROPER SEAL DIRECTION it is likely that the bushing my last much longer if the seals are ALLOW proper lubrication.

Finally, let me suggest that if losing a little oil is thought to be worse that adding salt water, or EVEN WORSE fresh water with silt in rivers, to the gears, one could reverse the direction of the central seal to face away from the propeller.  That would have the two outer seals preventing oil from leaving and the inner one preventing water from entering.  Here ALL seals would still be lubricated.

AMEL has made fine cruising boats with incredible advantages for cruising and the Amel School Book is extremely helpfu to new and old owners.  However, that does not mean that their original designs cannot be improved as knowledgeable cruisers gain experience and try different approaches to improve on the few issues that remain unresolved.  Just see how many changes were done as the SM evolved over time.  AS FAR AS THE SEALS CONFIGURATION, I am now certain that the one proposed by AMEL is not ideal.  

Jose 

 




Frigoboat AV35F

John Clark
 

Hi All,

  My salon bench frig/freezer seems to have “retired.”  Luckily we where eating our way to the bottom of the freezer for cleaning when this occurred so we were able to relocate the little remaining perishable food to the other box.  I am looking at replacing the compressor unit with the Frigoboat AV 35F (part# E50025X) see at the link: http://www.penguinfrigo.co.uk/shop/product/280/

 

We are currently in St Thomas USVI.  Our next stop is St. Maarten followed by island hopping to Martinique . If anyone has any advice on replacement before I commit to the purchase, I am all ears.    

 

 

 FYI for the techies:  I am pretty sure the compressor is the part that has failed as it blows the 7.5amp fuse on the freezer control box under the seat.  The fuse does not blow if the compressor is disconnected.  The compressor windings are not shorted, reading 4.8 ohms each and open with respect to the compressor housing.  According to the manufacturer this is higher resistance than normal.    Fuse blows instantly when power is applied.  With compressor out of the circuit, the fuse does not blow and after 2 seconds the cooling fan starts.  The current unit I believe is original to the boat, and is a Frigoboat AV24.  

 

               Regards,  John

 

SV Annie, SM 37

Druif Bay , Water Island USVI 



Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Rivets for Head sail furling foil

James Alton
 

Vladimir,

   I am on the run today but will get back to this soon.  Below is part of an email from my engineering friend in Aerospace that contains suggestions on finding the oversized rivets.  I have definitely seen reference to the oversize rivets on the Cherry rivet site so they must exist.  Here is the Cherry link again,  see page 7


  Thank you for the warning about the 23mm maximum rivet length.  I ordered two sizes from Fastenal since I was unsure of the exact grip length so I think that one of those will fit.

Jim,

There are many blind fasteners made for aircraft by Cherry, Huck, etc.  Most are available "oversize" for rework.  I've seen aluminum rivets with stainless mandrels.  Most achieve good shear strength by breaking the mandrel at the head end, and retaining it.

Best,

James

SV Sueño
Maramu #220

On May 8, 2018, at 9:28 AM, Vladimir Sonsev sonsev52@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:


Jams,

Thanks for the links, but unfortunately I can't open FASTENAL link and WONKEEDO link. Those are very important for me.
Cherryaerospace I can open but I don't see oversized rivets.

Pleese keep in mind that maximum rivet length that you can put in, is 23 mm long from the bottom of the head to the very end of the mandrel. If it is longer, you have to drill a second hole in the inner tube of the foil.

Vladimir 
SM 345 "LIFE IS GOOD"

On Tue, May 8, 2018, 07:57 Kent Robertson karkauai@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Thanks James, good info.

Kent
S/V Kristy
Kent,

   I did not finish my research since it sounded like the 1/4” rivets might work for me so I did not source the oversized rivets.  I found some 1/4” (.255 OD) all Aluminum (alloy 5062 for the rivet body, the mandrel however is 7075) structural rivets at Fastenal with a higher shear strength (1300 lbs. min versus about 460) than the more common ones found at Marine stores and have those on order.  I will do some testing before using them on the boat.   I have some concerns about the 7075 mandrel. https://www.fastenal.com/content/product_specifications/RV.BH.STR.ALUM.ALUM.12.pdf

 here is what I found about the removal tool and the oversize rivets:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNq7EEAvvlA  Video of using the Rivet removal tool

http://www.cherryaerospace.com/product/blindrivets Mention of 1/64” oversize rivets


https://www.wonkeedonkeetools.co.uk/rivets/what-blind-rivet-sizes-are-available/:  Mention of 9/32” rivets but I did not follow up.

Best of luck,

James
SV Sueño
Maramu #220





Compensating for Additional Weight of Solar Installation

Mark Isaac
 

Hello All,

After adding an Atlantic Towers arch and two solar panels, our stern sits below the current waterline. The shipping weight on the arch was #190 (it was crated...perhaps the weight of the arch itself is #140) and the panels (2) weigh #40 each.  We carry 300 feet of G4 chain (#450), a #88 primary anchor, and a 29 pound secondary anchor with 15 feet of chain all on the bow or in the forward lockers.  Our #100 dinghy is stored on the foredeck and our #100 outboard on the stern rail or in the stern locker.

Aside from moving books and canned goods to the forward cabin, I think I have managed the weight distribution as best as I can.

My question to the group:  Where should I go from here?  Leave it alone and change the waterline?  Add more chain?  Move the books and canned goods forward?

My question to those that have gone before me with the solar installation:  What did you do to compensate for the additional weight on the stern?  Did things turn out well as far as balance and sailing characteristics?

I will try to upload a couple of photos to show the degree of the issue at the waterline.  (The second outboard in the photos has been removed)

Mark
Lulu SM#391
Cape Canaveral, FL



Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Volvo TMD22A specs

Alexandre Uster von Baar
 

Good morning Pat,

The specs were for the 22 P which I had, not the 22 A which you have, but they should be pretty closed.

Personally I was motoring at 1600 to 1800 rpm which is way too low and I don’t recommend that as it will clog the turbo and exhaust elbow, etc, but that was enough to propulse the vessel at 5 kt at 1600 rpm and 6 kt at 1800 in calm sea.

It would only be speculation on my side… I heard: over prop, vessel too heavy, etc.
I think only Olivier can for sure tell us more in detail about that.

Sincerely, Alexandre




--------------------------------------------

On Tue, 5/8/18, Patrick Mcaneny sailw32@aol.com [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Subject: Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Volvo TMD22A specs
To: amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, May 8, 2018, 7:27 AM


 









Alexandre, It looks like at 3000 rpm I am only
getting to 67 hp. and they are correct that it is rated at
4500 rpms. If you don't get higher that 2200 rpm at full
throttle it seems there would be a problem  with the
pitch. 
Thanks,

Pat SM#123






-----Original
Message-----

From: Alexandre Uster von Baar uster@rocketmail.com
[amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com>

To: amelyachtowners
<amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Tue, May 8, 2018 8:06 am

Subject: Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Volvo TMD22A specs








 













Hello Pat,





Here are the specs for the 22 P which I had.


http://www.nikimat.com/tmd22p.pdf





Not exceeding 2200 rpm is a common issue among Volvo
equipped SM owners even with rebuilt folding prop, clean
hull, etc. was my case as well, so 2900 seems good to me.



I am sure you read about Kent repitching his prop, etc.





Sincerely, Alexandre





--------------------------------------------


On Tue, 5/8/18, sailw32@aol.com
[amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com>
wrote:





Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Volvo TMD22A specs


To: amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com


Date: Tuesday, May 8, 2018, 7:01 AM








 





























I have been given a quote from


Flexofold and they described the Volvo TMD22a as 78 hp.
at


4500 rpm. I can not find the specs anywhere on the
internet


. Can anyone tell me where I can find them. If it
correct


than I never get near 78hp. as I never get beyond 2900
rpm.


I presently have a fixed prop that came with the
boat,being


a1994 my keel was not modified to accept the Autoprop.
They


also stated my gear reduction ratio as 1:2,74 , does
that


sound right , I could not find it on the label on the


transmission ? My fixed prop is 21x16 -55 LH . and they
are


recommending a 20x12- 3R I don't know what the 55 or
3


stand for ? There recommendation seems like quite a


departure from my fixed prop in regards to size/pitch .


Maybe that is comparing apples and


oranges.Thanks,Pat


SM#123


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Rivets for Head sail furling foil

VLADIMIR SONSEV
 

Jams,

Thanks for the links, but unfortunately I can't open FASTENAL link and WONKEEDO link. Those are very important for me.
Cherryaerospace I can open but I don't see oversized rivets.

Pleese keep in mind that maximum rivet length that you can put in, is 23 mm long from the bottom of the head to the very end of the mandrel. If it is longer, you have to drill a second hole in the inner tube of the foil.

Vladimir
SM 345 "LIFE IS GOOD"


On Tue, May 8, 2018, 07:57 Kent Robertson karkauai@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Thanks James, good info.

Kent
S/V Kristy
Kent,

   I did not finish my research since it sounded like the 1/4” rivets might work for me so I did not source the oversized rivets.  I found some 1/4” (.255 OD) all Aluminum (alloy 5062 for the rivet body, the mandrel however is 7075) structural rivets at Fastenal with a higher shear strength (1300 lbs. min versus about 460) than the more common ones found at Marine stores and have those on order.  I will do some testing before using them on the boat.   I have some concerns about the 7075 mandrel. https://www.fastenal.com/content/product_specifications/RV.BH.STR.ALUM.ALUM.12.pdf

 here is what I found about the removal tool and the oversize rivets:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNq7EEAvvlA  Video of using the Rivet removal tool

http://www.cherryaerospace.com/product/blindrivets Mention of 1/64” oversize rivets



Best of luck,

James
SV Sueño
Maramu #220


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Volvo TMD22A specs

Patrick McAneny
 

Alexandre, It looks like at 3000 rpm I am only getting to 67 hp. and they are correct that it is rated at 4500 rpms. If you don't get higher that 2200 rpm at full throttle it seems there would be a problem  with the pitch. 
Thanks,
Pat SM#123


-----Original Message-----
From: Alexandre Uster von Baar uster@... [amelyachtowners]
To: amelyachtowners
Sent: Tue, May 8, 2018 8:06 am
Subject: Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Volvo TMD22A specs

 
Hello Pat,

Here are the specs for the 22 P which I had.
http://www.nikimat.com/tmd22p.pdf

Not exceeding 2200 rpm is a common issue among Volvo equipped SM owners even with rebuilt folding prop, clean hull, etc. was my case as well, so 2900 seems good to me.
I am sure you read about Kent repitching his prop, etc.

Sincerely, Alexandre

--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 5/8/18, sailw32@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Volvo TMD22A specs
To: amelyachtowners@...
Date: Tuesday, May 8, 2018, 7:01 AM


 









I have been given a quote from
Flexofold and they described the Volvo TMD22a as 78 hp. at
4500 rpm. I can not find the specs anywhere on the internet
. Can anyone tell me where I can find them. If it correct
than I never get near 78hp. as I never get beyond 2900 rpm.
I presently have a fixed prop that came with the boat,being
a1994 my keel was not modified to accept the Autoprop. They
also stated my gear reduction ratio as 1:2,74 , does that
sound right , I could not find it on the label on the
transmission ? My fixed prop is 21x16 -55 LH . and they are
recommending a 20x12- 3R I don't know what the 55 or 3
stand for ? There recommendation seems like quite a
departure from my fixed prop in regards to size/pitch .
Maybe that is comparing apples and
oranges.Thanks,Pat
SM#123





Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Volvo TMD22A specs

Alexandre Uster von Baar
 

Hello Pat,

Here are the specs for the 22 P which I had.
http://www.nikimat.com/tmd22p.pdf

Not exceeding 2200 rpm is a common issue among Volvo equipped SM owners even with rebuilt folding prop, clean hull, etc. was my case as well, so 2900 seems good to me.
I am sure you read about Kent repitching his prop, etc.

Sincerely, Alexandre



--------------------------------------------

On Tue, 5/8/18, sailw32@aol.com [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Volvo TMD22A specs
To: amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, May 8, 2018, 7:01 AM


 









I have been given a quote from
Flexofold and they described the Volvo TMD22a as 78 hp. at
4500 rpm. I can not find the specs anywhere on the internet
. Can anyone tell me where I can find them. If it correct
than I never get near 78hp. as I never get beyond 2900 rpm.
I presently have a fixed prop that came with the boat,being
a1994 my keel was not modified to accept the Autoprop. They
also stated my gear reduction ratio as 1:2,74 , does that
sound right , I could not find it on the label on the
transmission ? My fixed prop is 21x16 -55 LH . and they are
recommending a 20x12- 3R I don't know what the 55 or 3
stand for ? There recommendation seems like quite a
departure from my fixed prop in regards to size/pitch .
Maybe that is comparing apples and
oranges.Thanks,Pat
SM#123


Volvo TMD22A specs

Patrick McAneny
 

I have been given a quote from Flexofold and they described the Volvo TMD22a as 78 hp. at 4500 rpm. I can not find the specs anywhere on the internet . Can anyone tell me where I can find them. If it correct than I never get near 78hp. as I never get beyond 2900 rpm. I presently have a fixed prop that came with the boat,being a1994 my keel was not modified to accept the Autoprop. They also stated my gear reduction ratio as 1:2,74 , does that sound right , I could not find it on the label on the transmission ? My fixed prop is 21x16 -55 LH . and they are recommending a 20x12- 3R I don't know what the 55 or 3 stand for ? There recommendation seems like quite a departure from my fixed prop in regards to size/pitch . Maybe that is comparing apples and oranges.

Thanks,

Pat SM#123


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Rivets for Head sail furling foil

karkauai
 

Thanks James, good info.

Kent
S/V Kristy
Kent,

   I did not finish my research since it sounded like the 1/4” rivets might work for me so I did not source the oversized rivets.  I found some 1/4” (.255 OD) all Aluminum (alloy 5062 for the rivet body, the mandrel however is 7075) structural rivets at Fastenal with a higher shear strength (1300 lbs. min versus about 460) than the more common ones found at Marine stores and have those on order.  I will do some testing before using them on the boat.   I have some concerns about the 7075 mandrel. https://www.fastenal.com/content/product_specifications/RV.BH.STR.ALUM.ALUM.12.pdf

 here is what I found about the removal tool and the oversize rivets:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNq7EEAvvlA  Video of using the Rivet removal tool

http://www.cherryaerospace.com/product/blindrivets Mention of 1/64” oversize rivets



Best of luck,

James
SV Sueño
Maramu #220


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Rivets for Head sail furling foil

eric freedman
 

Hi Gary,

How long was it between the time that Amel installed the bolts and you had to tighten them again?

I had mine done by them in November.

Fair Winds

Eric

Kimberlite Amel Super Maramu #376

 

 

From: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...]
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2018 11:36 AM
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Rivets for Head sail furling foil

 

 

When I had my foil and forestay repaired at Amel Martinique they replaced the rivets with threaded bolts.  I want to say 10mm  They did install backing plates to reinforce the contact points. Tef-Gel and one additional tightening since then, but it has not loosened due to flex and there i no corrosion to date.  

 

Gary W

s/v Adagio sm209

Mykonos

 


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Rivets for Head sail furling foil

James Alton
 

Kent,

   I did not finish my research since it sounded like the 1/4” rivets might work for me so I did not source the oversized rivets.  I found some 1/4” (.255 OD) all Aluminum (alloy 5062 for the rivet body, the mandrel however is 7075) structural rivets at Fastenal with a higher shear strength (1300 lbs. min versus about 460) than the more common ones found at Marine stores and have those on order.  I will do some testing before using them on the boat.   I have some concerns about the 7075 mandrel. https://www.fastenal.com/content/product_specifications/RV.BH.STR.ALUM.ALUM.12.pdf

 here is what I found about the removal tool and the oversize rivets:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNq7EEAvvlA  Video of using the Rivet removal tool

http://www.cherryaerospace.com/product/blindrivets Mention of 1/64” oversize rivets



Best of luck,

James
SV Sueño
Maramu #220


On May 7, 2018, at 9:12 PM, Kent Robertson karkauai@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

Interesting, thanks.  Where did you find the oversized rivers and removal tool?


Kent
SM 243
KRISTY



Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Rivets for Head sail furling foil

karkauai
 

Interesting, thanks.  Where did you find the oversized rivers and removal tool?

Kent
SM 243
KRISTY


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Rivets for Head sail furling foil

VLADIMIR SONSEV
 

James,

Do you know where can I buy  9/32" diameter rivets?

VLADIMIR
SM 345 "LIFE IS GOOD"


On Mon, May 7, 2018, 11:31 James Alton lokiyawl2@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Kent,
   Thanks for this information.  I hope that I can put things back together just as you did.   I would like to put back the aluminum rivets since they won't be a dissimilar metal and cannot unscrew with use.  
   I am finding out by the way that oversized aluminum rivets of 17/64 and 9/32" are available for aircraft repairs where a rivet has been removed and the hole has been enlarged.  There are special rivet removal tools that center on the head of the rivet to insure that the drilled hole is centered that I am considering.  I have not used one.  Drilling just deep enough to remove the head and tapping out the rest of the rivet might be something I will try to do to prevent enlarging the hole as well.  I have not had time to fully research whether the oversized aircraft rivets would be suitable for the Marine application with regards to alloy etc. But wanted to mention this in case it is helpful to someone with oversized holes.

Best,
James
SV Sueno
Maramu #220

On May 7, 2018 9:59 AM, "Kent Robertson karkauai@... [amelyachtowners]" <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

I drilled out the old rivets using a 1/4inch bit, James.

Kent Robertson
S/V Kristy
SM243

On May 6, 2018, at 11:42 PM, James Alton lokiyawl2@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

Kent,


   Can you tell me if the 1/4” rivets fit the original holes in your furler, or did you need to drill them out some?   I will be changing my headstay this year so need to drill out the rivets and would like to bring the correct size with me to the boat.

Thanks,

James
SV Sueño
Maramu #220

On May 6, 2018, at 10:39 PM, Kent Robertson karkauai@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

I used1/4 inch rivets.  No problems with installation or in the 3 years since

Kent
SM 243
KRISTY





Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Auto Prop Bearings

Mark Erdos
 

Hi Bill K,

 

Yes I did Google the catalog and noticed the same. I did not see an option without X/Q. Hence the question to the group to see if someone could verify from a package purchased from AB-Marine or Bruntons.

 

 

 

With best regards,

 

Mark

 

Skipper

Sailing Vessel - Cream Puff - SM2K - #275

Currently cruising - Bonaire

www.creampuff.us

 

From: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...]
Sent: Sunday, May 6, 2018 6:42 PM
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: RE: [Amel Yacht Owners] Auto Prop Bearings

 

 

In the SKF catalog, the 32004 bearing is only listed with the X/Q suffix.  In the SKF numbering system a suffix like "X" or "Q" is not used as modifiers to a base part number, but rather give some information about the design standards and service loads for that model. 

 

"X" means the dimensions are ISO complient, and "Q" means "optimized contact geometry and surface finish"

 

There are no versions of this part number without the X/Q suffix in the current catalog.

 

Bill Kinney

SM160, Harmonie

Spanish Wells, Bahamas

 


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] SM Prop Shaft Seal direction and Bush*** IMPORTANT RESPONSE***

Mark Erdos
 

Bill,

 

Well said. We have followed the guidelines posted by you and have never had an issue with any intrusion of water or leakage of oil. It is an easy process to follow. We have always purchased parts for this from Amel. As you say, to replace the drive would be costly. Why risk it.

 

 

With best regards,

 

Mark

 

Skipper

Sailing Vessel - Cream Puff - SM2K - #275

Currently cruising - Bonaire

www.creampuff.us

 

From: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...]
Sent: Monday, May 7, 2018 3:59 PM
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] SM Prop Shaft Seal direction and Bush*** IMPORTANT RESPONSE***

 

 

Jose, I really appreciate all of your participation in this Group. Thank you very much.

 

My following response is not intended to be an argument to you, but, it is intended to give those people in the Group who are "new-to-Amel" the reasons NOT to follow your advice. Remember there are a number of things that can go wrong with the installation of the wear bushing and seals. I am absolutely positive that changing the seal orientation from what Amel recommends was NOT the reason for your changing results.

 

Let's make this simple:

What is more important? Oil leaking out, or water leaking in? The answer to the question is obviously oil leaking out, and that is probably the reason Amel recommends a redundancy of seals (2 instead of 1 to hold oil in) to protect your 35,000 euro C-Drive from melt down because of no oil.

 

To not service a 35,000 euro C-Drive for 8 years (4 times the manufacturers recommended service interval) is not a RISK that I would take and is one that I do not recommend any of my clients taking. Afterall, you are going to haulout every 2 years anyway, why try to save a few hundred euro and risk 35,000 euro?

 

Let me share with you a summary of a page in my Amel School Book:

 

There are 7 very important things that, if not done precisely correct, will result in water seeping into the C Drive.

 

Some of the things that commonly cause water seepage are:

1.) Seals and/or wear bushings NOT purchased from Amel.

2.) The wall of the seal cavity NOT completely cleaned with emery cloth.

3.) The seals NOT oriented according to Amel specs.

4..) The seals NOT inserted the the correct depth.

5.) The seals NOT completely greased with waterproof grease

6.) The wear bushing O ring NOT greased and/or not the correct size

7.) The propeller shaft NOT completely cleaned where the wear bushing O ring meets the shaft.

 

Are you 100% positive that all of the above was performed correctly?

Amel has stuck with the same C Drive Bushing, seals and procedures for over 25 years and today recommends the same procedures in new 55s and 64s, which have the same wear bushing and seals. The only change Amel has recommended is the change to 80/90 gear oil. I know for a fact that Amel has experimented with several options and may be close to making a change to the wear bushing which may give it a longer life. But, I assume rather than busing wear with a harder bushing the seal will wear. This may be an insurmountable issue because with a very hard bushing good seals will eventually leak because they wear rather than the bushing.

 

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 Mon, May 7, 2018 at 11:47 AM, jvenegas@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

I want to report my experience with the shaft seals and bushing.  

When I bought my SM2000 278,  It had its seal and bushing replaced and the seals oriented as recommended by AMEL.  In less than 2 seasons it was leaking water into the oil and I replaced it again in that spring finding substantial wear in the bushing, as you will see in the pix I have uploaded in face book.  After trying again the same scheme and less than two years later, as we were returning from Cartagena to Florida, just before reaching the windward passage between Cuba and Española, the transmission oil showed again the dreaded white color and I had to sail with no wind around the eastern tip of Cuba.   In Fort Lauderdale, I decided to experiment with the shaft seals direction based on my Mechanical Engineering background:  single lip seals are designed to prevent fluid from crossing the seal in only one direction; Fluid from the side facing the lip apply a pressure on the lip and it that prevents it from crossing to the other side.  Fluid coming from the other side can expand the lip and move across.  This motion of the fluid is helpful as it serves to lubricate the surface of contact between the seal and the shaft.

Based on this idea I realized that having the two inner seals facing in prevented oil leaving and to outer seal facing out prevented water coming in. As a result, none of the seals is lubricated and as the grease is worn out the outer seal will start leaking water in, which is not prevented to get into the transmission by the two inner seals.  The heavy wear and corrosion can be seen in the bushing surface of the outer seal.  So, even if the two inner seals are still viable they will not prevent water entry into the transmission.

My solution was to have the outer seal lip face into the transmission, preventing oil from leaving but allowing water to lubricate it.  Also, the two inner seals were oriented with the lip facing the shaft, preventing water from entering the transmission but allowing oil to move and lubricate them.

After 5 years of use, I noticed a small amount of oil loss ( < 2 cm drop in the tank) which I replaced with a heavier gear oil that completely stopped the oil loss. 

Last week I decided to replace the seals and bushings.  I noticed that the oil was perfectly clean and the two inner seals and corresponding bushing surfaces were intact but, as expected some wear was present in the outer bushing surface.  My guess is that with the heavier oil the outer lip began to work again, this time allowing a small amount of oil lubricating it.



Since after the outer lip function deteriorates the oil loss is very gradual and can be easily replaced with heavier oil, my recommendation is that the two inner seal lips should face the prop and the outer seal face the transmission.  Based on the wear pattern and total lack of wear in the inner seal I estimate that the seal/bushing system would have worked preventing water entrance into the transmission for another two or 3 years.  So my next experiment is to only replace the seals  8 years from now unless I begin to see a drop in oil level which is not fixed with heavier oil which I will report immediately.



Jose Venegas

Ipanema SM2k 278







 


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] SM Prop Shaft Seal direction and Bush*** IMPORTANT RESPONSE***

pjn.mccallin@...
 

I have to agree absolutely with Bill Rouse.
The drawings that were supplied by AMEL when I bought CARAMELLE new show quite clearly the two innermost lip seals with their stainless steel springs facing the oil, the third seal faces the propeller.

Interestingly enough AMEL also show an alternative of just two seals 45x65x12 rather than 45x65x8, this could perhaps prolong the life of the bearing as the wear groove will be in a different location. Just a thought.

Food for thought? Patrick #385.



Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] SM Prop Shaft Seal direction and Bush*** IMPORTANT RESPONSE***

 

Jose, I really appreciate all of your participation in this Group. Thank you very much.

My following response is not intended to be an argument to you, but, it is intended to give those people in the Group who are "new-to-Amel" the reasons NOT to follow your advice. Remember there are a number of things that can go wrong with the installation of the wear bushing and seals. I am absolutely positive that changing the seal orientation from what Amel recommends was NOT the reason for your changing results.

Let's make this simple:
What is more important? Oil leaking out, or water leaking in? The answer to the question is obviously oil leaking out, and that is probably the reason Amel recommends a redundancy of seals (2 instead of 1 to hold oil in) to protect your 35,000 euro C-Drive from melt down because of no oil.

To not service a 35,000 euro C-Drive for 8 years (4 times the manufacturers recommended service interval) is not a RISK that I would take and is one that I do not recommend any of my clients taking. Afterall, you are going to haulout every 2 years anyway, why try to save a few hundred euro and risk 35,000 euro?

Let me share with you a summary of a page in my Amel School Book:

There are 7 very important things that, if not done precisely correct, will result in water seeping into the C Drive.

Some of the things that commonly cause water seepage are:
1.) Seals and/or wear bushings NOT purchased from Amel.
2.) The wall of the seal cavity NOT completely cleaned with emery cloth.
3.) The seals NOT oriented according to Amel specs.
4.) The seals NOT inserted the the correct depth.
5.) The seals NOT completely greased with waterproof grease
6.) The wear bushing O ring NOT greased and/or not the correct size
7.) The propeller shaft NOT completely cleaned where the wear bushing O ring meets the shaft.

Are you 100% positive that all of the above was performed correctly?


Amel has stuck with the same C Drive Bushing, seals and procedures for over 25 years and today recommends the same procedures in new 55s and 64s, which have the same wear bushing and seals. The only change Amel has recommended is the change to 80/90 gear oil. I know for a fact that Amel has experimented with several options and may be close to making a change to the wear bushing which may give it a longer life. But, I assume rather than busing wear with a harder bushing the seal will wear. This may be an insurmountable issue because with a very hard bushing good seals will eventually leak because they wear rather than the bushing.

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 Mon, May 7, 2018 at 11:47 AM, jvenegas@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

I want to report my experience with the shaft seals and bushing.  

When I bought my SM2000 278,  It had its seal and bushing replaced and the seals oriented as recommended by AMEL.  In less than 2 seasons it was leaking water into the oil and I replaced it again in that spring finding substantial wear in the bushing, as you will see in the pix I have uploaded in face book.  After trying again the same scheme and less than two years later, as we were returning from Cartagena to Florida, just before reaching the windward passage between Cuba and Española, the transmission oil showed again the dreaded white color and I had to sail with no wind around the eastern tip of Cuba.   In Fort Lauderdale, I decided to experiment with the shaft seals direction based on my Mechanical Engineering background:  single lip seals are designed to prevent fluid from crossing the seal in only one direction; Fluid from the side facing the lip apply a pressure on the lip and it that prevents it from crossing to the other side.  Fluid coming from the other side can expand the lip and move across.  This motion of the fluid is helpful as it serves to lubricate the surface of contact between the seal and the shaft.
Based on this idea I realized that having the two inner seals facing in prevented oil leaving and to outer seal facing out prevented water coming in. As a result, none of the seals is lubricated and as the grease is worn out the outer seal will start leaking water in, which is not prevented to get into the transmission by the two inner seals.  The heavy wear and corrosion can be seen in the bushing surface of the outer seal.  So, even if the two inner seals are still viable they will not prevent water entry into the transmission.
My solution was to have the outer seal lip face into the transmission, preventing oil from leaving but allowing water to lubricate it.  Also, the two inner seals were oriented with the lip facing the shaft, preventing water from entering the transmission but allowing oil to move and lubricate them.
After 5 years of use, I noticed a small amount of oil loss ( < 2 cm drop in the tank) which I replaced with a heavier gear oil that completely stopped the oil loss. 
Last week I decided to replace the seals and bushings.  I noticed that the oil was perfectly clean and the two inner seals and corresponding bushing surfaces were intact but, as expected some wear was present in the outer bushing surface.  My guess is that with the heavier oil the outer lip began to work again, this time allowing a small amount of oil lubricating it.

Since after the outer lip function deteriorates the oil loss is very gradual and can be easily replaced with heavier oil, my recommendation is that the two inner seal lips should face the prop and the outer seal face the transmission.  Based on the wear pattern and total lack of wear in the inner seal I estimate that the seal/bushing system would have worked preventing water entrance into the transmission for another two or 3 years.  So my next experiment is to only replace the seals  8 years from now unless I begin to see a drop in oil level which is not fixed with heavier oil which I will report immediately.

Jose Venegas
Ipanema SM2k 278





Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Charging / Discharging issue

Ryan Meador
 

Hi Olaf,

How were you measuring the battery capacity?  Are you using a built-in battery monitor?  I wonder if there could be something wrong with that.  What did it show for the charge current when you were running the 100A charger?  What about the charge current when the solar and wind were going?  What was the current draw from your electronics?

Are you sure all of the batteries are connected?  Check the connections, and also check any battery terminal fuses that may be installed.

It would be worth a sanity check with a multimeter to verify the voltage at the battery bank is what the monitor claims (and you can also use this voltage with some tables you'll find online to estimate the state of charge, if there is no load/charger on the bank when you took the measurement).  You can also use your multimeter to measure the voltage across the shunt resistor used by the battery monitor; with the shunt's resistance (should be printed on it) and Ohm's law you can verify the current flow.

Ryan
SM 233 Iteration
Boston, MA, USA


On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 10:59 PM, Kent Robertson karkauai@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

You definitely have a problem, Olaf.  I have 90AHr batteries, and they last 10-12 hrs at anchor, an hour or so of charging with the Onan gets them back to 90+% of capacity.


I have lead acid batteries, and can’t comment on how to check AGMs.  With lead acid batteries, a cold cranking amps test and specific gravity of the electrolyte can help figure out what is wrong.

Do AGMs need equalizing???
Kent
SM243
Kristy

Kent Robertson
S/V Kristy
Panama cell: +507-61171896
USA cell: 828-234-6819

On May 6, 2018, at 8:46 PM, olaf_renos@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

Hello AMELians,

 

On Friday I was first time out on anchorage with my SM2K and wondered about the discharging of the batteries. The discharging was around 20% within 6 hours! Only the fridge, refrigerator (on level 2) and the VHF were turned on. No more.

 

Furthermore, the wind generator was running all the time and the solar panel filled at that time as-well.

 

I my opinion this isn’t normal and I guess as minimum one battery isn’t working properly.

 

I also wondered about the charging of the Onan Generator. I run it with 100Amp charger and it could only fill up the batteries by ca. 2% in 1,5 hours!

 

What is the best way to find out what is wrong? Checking the batteries? How to check them if they don’t work properly?

 

My questions are now:

·        Is that the normal charging rate of the Onan generator by using the 100Amp charge controller with those kinds of batteries?

·        How is the normal charging rate of the Onan generator with those kind of battery setup?

·        Or do I have an issue with the Onan generator? When that seems to be how could I find out / what I have to check?

·        How could I find out or what is the best way to find out if the batteries are working properly or not?

 

Batteries

AGM batteries Vision EV-27-AM and the capacity of each one is 100 Ah = 600Ah.

 

Solar Panel 245W

 

Wind Generator Silent Wind 400

 

 

Any help is highly appreciated.

 

Fair Winds

 

Olaf Bauer

 

S/V Sayonara II, SM2K 392

currently in St. Anne, Martinique

 


16601 - 16620 of 56050