Jump to content

Featured Posts

19 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Both of Alan's boats are twin engined ...

After an engine 'fire' many years ago and limping 5 miles back on a 'single', I'd be very reluctant to go out to sea in a single engines boat.

 

Once bitten, twice shy.

 

(The tender is only a single, but there are a pair of oars as a backup.

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ditchcrawler said:

I do wonder why they still hang a little alternator on there these days as it does next to nothing unless the other 2 are 24 volts

The little alternator is the standard (Kubota?) 12V engine alternator, it has little to do except recharging the starter battery but it's on the same v-belt as the water pump so easier to keep it than lose it.

 

The other two are often 24V because 200A/12V (or 100A/48V) is much more friendly than 400A/12V -- for 48V use two 24V isolated ground alternators in series, this is what the hybrid does.

21 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Both of Alan's boats are twin engined ...

Few narrowboats are though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IanD said:

My evidence is that I've actually spoken to Tim Watts at Beta about it ?

 

The list you showed (and various pictures, see the hybrid setup here) show 2 extra alternators, in the list they're 80A/24V in lieu of standard *plus* 100A/24V port side mounted, these are not exclusive, they can be fitted together (each with their own belt). And Beta don't care exactly which alternator is fitted, they're all physically the same Iskra case, 2 the same or different is no problem (12V/175A or 24V/80A or 24V/100A). Cost with the brush boxes fitted (to allow external regulator) is £670+VAT for dual 24V/100A (80A are not available with isolated ground, only 100A).

Beta43dualalt.jpg

Ok I’ll give you that, in the text of the page I showed it does say that they will custom fit whatever you want (within reason). However I still maintain that you are sacrificing redundancy to get less overall power. 175 x 12 = 2.1kw, plus 3.5kw = 5.6kw, vs 100 x 24 x 2 = 4.8kw. Cheaper? Yes. Better? No.

 

And then you have the hassle of having to source 24v equipment and or providing some step down to 12v, when the vast majority of inland boat stuff is 12v.

Edited by nicknorman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ditchcrawler said:

And if one of those breaks you can always scull over the transom 

And, if that one breaks, I'll anchor up and use the phone to call for help, and if there is no signal I'll use the portable VHF from the 'grab-bag'. If that doesnt work I'll use the PLB to notify the emergency services via satellite messaging.

 

Hopefully that should cover it.

  • Happy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

After an engine 'fire' many years ago and limping 5 miles back on a 'single', I'd be very reluctant to go out to sea in a single engines boat.

 

Once bitten, twice shy.

 

(The tender is only a single, but there are a pair of oars as a backup.

 

Have you ever considered sails? :giggles:

 

I didn't even mention that one of your boats has a spare hull for extra redundancy!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IanD said:

The little alternator is the standard (Kubota?) 12V engine alternator, it has little to do except recharging the starter battery but it's on the same v-belt as the water pump so easier to keep it than lose it.

 

The other two are often 24V because 200A/12V (or 100A/48V) is much more friendly than 400A/12V -- for 48V use two 24V isolated ground alternators in series, this is what the hybrid does.

 

I appreciate that in this case but there are still lots of engines with a standard 50A 12 volt and then a larger 12 volt where as it would be relatively easy to chang the small one for a larger one or even fit and combined two larger ones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alan de Enfield said:

And, if that one breaks, I'll anchor up and use the phone to call for help, and if there is no signal I'll use the portable VHF from the 'grab-bag'. If that doesnt work I'll use the PLB to notify the emergency services via satellite messaging.

 

Hopefully that should cover it.

 

How many anchors do you have in the tender? Just in case, you understand ... :D

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Have you ever considered sails? :giggles:

 

Nasty things (but the Cat does have a couple).

2 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

How many anchors do you have in the tender? Just in case, you understand ... :D

 

 

One 'conventional', + 1 dog + 1 SWMBO

If the engine is dead (requiring the use of an anchor) I suppose the engine would make a good kedge anchor.

It certainly sunk to the bottom when I dropped it overboard.

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nicknorman said:

Ok I’ll give you that, in the text of the page I showed it does say that they will custom fit whatever you want (within reason). However I still maintain that you are sacrificing redundancy to get less overall power. 175 x 12 = 2.1kw, plus 3.5kw = 5.6kw, vs 100 x 24 x 2 = 4.8kw. Cheaper? Yes. Better? No.

 

And then you have the hassle of having to source 24v equipment and or providing some step down to 12v, when the vast majority of inland boat stuff is 12v.

Any 12V stuff (not high-power) runs off the 12V battery, with a 24-12V or 48V-12V or 230Vac-12V charger keeping it topped up from the house bank. The 24V/48V house bank is only used as an energy reservoir for the inverter, with charging either from shoreline (via the combi) or alternators (with external regulator) or solar (via MPPT), there's no 24V equipment on the boat, only 12V (low power) and 230V (high power). It's the way the hybrid boats work, except without an electric motor.

 

If you value redundancy above all else then by all means stick to your alternator/TP combo and run the engine faster when you want to charge the batteries.

 

P.S. You were right, a TravelPower can be used as the AC mains input to a combo inverter/charger (with some added bits) -- I got my wires crossed ?

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, IanD said:

Any 12V stuff (not high-power) runs off the 12V battery, with a 24-12V or 48V-12V or 230Vac-12V changer keeping it topped up from the house bank. The 24V/48V house bank in only used as an energy reservoir for the inverter, with charging either from shoreline (via the combi) or alternators (with external regulator) or solar (via MPPT), there's no 24V equipment on the boat, only 12V (low power) and 230V (high power). It's the way the hybrid boats work, except without an electric motor.

 

If you value redundancy above all else then by all means stick to your alternator/TP combo and run the engine faster when you want to charge the batteries.

All seems a bit faffy to me. In the graphs you posted in post #13 you did not compare like with like. You had either your 2 Iskra alternators, or one 5kw TP. You did not have one Iskra alternator and one 3.5kw TP which is the configuration we have. Therefore I’m not sure that your graphs show anything useful in the context of this discussion.

 

I also notice from the graphs that the idle torque taken by the 2x alternators is much higher than with the TP, and IMO that is a bad thing. I currently have one 175A alternator which, if working hard, really loads up the engine at idle. I think it would be horrendous with 2 such loads on. These alternators can put out nearly full power at idle and whilst that might seem a good thing in theory, in practice it isn’t because it puts a very high load on the belt, make the engine labour and hunt, and according to Beta is bad for the longevity of the pulley to crankshaft connection.

 

With my home made regulator, I currently have a slow/fast charge rate switch which I have been leaving on slow. I can only put it to fast when the revs are above idle, otherwise there is the aforementioned painful issues - and that is with just the one alternator. Yes I need to add a few lines of code to decrease maximum field current when the rpm is low, and I will be doing that shortly. But I think to have 2x 100A/24v alternators without smart regulation is going to be pretty horrible at idle with low batteries, and with the boat put into in gear is going to seriously restrict acceleration rate off idle.

 

One difference between us is that I have actually played with this stuff, whereas I get the impression you haven’t. I won’t be changing to your preferred configuration and if you are thinking about getting a boat with such a configuration, I suggest you think carefully about the issues I’ve mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

All seems a bit faffy to me. In the graphs you posted in post #13 you did not compare like with like. You had either your 2 Iskra alternators, or one 5kw TP. You did not have one Iskra alternator and one 3.5kw TP which is the configuration we have. Therefore I’m not sure that your graphs show anything useful in the context of this discussion.

 

I also notice from the graphs that the idle torque taken by the 2x alternators is much higher than with the TP, and IMO that is a bad thing. I currently have one 175A alternator which, if working hard, really loads up the engine at idle. I think it would be horrendous with 2 such loads on. These alternators can put out nearly full power at idle and whilst that might seem a good thing in theory, in practice it isn’t because it puts a very high load on the belt, make the engine labour and hunt, and according to Beta is bad for the longevity of the pulley to crankshaft connection.

 

With my home made regulator, I currently have a slow/fast charge rate switch which I have been leaving on slow. I can only put it to fast when the revs are above idle, otherwise there is the aforementioned painful issues - and that is with just the one alternator. Yes I need to add a few lines of code to decrease maximum field current when the rpm is low, and I will be doing that shortly. But I think to have 2x 100A/24v alternators without smart regulation is going to be pretty horrible at idle with low batteries, and with the boat put into in gear is going to seriously restrict acceleration rate off idle.

 

One difference between us is that I have actually played with this stuff, whereas I get the impression you haven’t. I won’t be changing to your preferred configuration and if you are thinking about getting a boat with such a configuration, I suggest you think carefully about the issues I’ve mentioned.

I didn't have your configuration because I was comparing charging systems I was considering at the time, not yours. I'm not suggesting you should change a system you're happy with, I was answering the OPs question about a system for his boat which - as it turns out -- is very similar to what I've been looking at for some time.

 

The engine load at idle is indeed an issue, and can be dealt with automatically using an external alternator regulator (backing off field drive at low rpm) which is exactly what the hybrid system does -- this is a well-known problem, you're not the first to point it out or to come up with a solution. No way would I use a system like this with internal alternator regulators especially with LiFePO4 (which is what the OP asked about IIRC), a smart regulator is essential to both maximise charging speed and prevent reduction in battery life at best or destruction at worst.

 

And for sure the OP isn't going to build a home-brewed solution like yours -- nothing whatsoever wrong with this if you have the requisite skills.

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

I didn't have your configuration because I was comparing charging systems I was considering at the time, not yours. I'm not suggesting you should change a system you're happy with, I was answering the OPs question about a system for his boat which - as it turns out -- is very similar to what I've been looking at for some time.

 

The engine load at idle is indeed an issue, and can be dealt with automatically using an external alternator regulator (backing off filed drive at low rpm) which is exactly what the hybrid system does. No way would I use a system like this with internal alternator regulators especially with LiFePO4 (which is what the OP asked about IIRC), a smart regulator is essential to both maximise charging speed and prevent reduction in battery life at best or destruction at worst.

Which external alternator regulator is available with backed-off max field current at low rpm? (Genuine question, not some attempt at point scoring!)

Edited by nicknorman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

Which external alternator regulator is available with backed-off max field current at low rpm?

Wakespeed WS-500 or American Power Systems APS-500. Hybrid Marine have used both suppliers (maybe not this exact part?) in non-narrowboat applications. They also said the Iskra 24V/100A alternators have proved very reliable when charging large battery banks -- presumably controlled from their hybrid box, I wouldn't be surprised if this also uses battery/alternator temperature sensors like the Wakepeed (and Balmar) regulators do. Wakespeed told me they have hundreds of WS-500 systems installed (not in narrowboats!) using high-power alternators to charge big battery banks, mostly LiFePO4 in yachts -- we're talking single large-frame alternators up to 24V/400A here...

 

This whole system is pretty much the Hybrid Marine one but without the hybrid drive and with the external alternator regulator instead, this has all been proved in the field -- or on the water, to be more precise... ?

 

This is very much what is becoming common nowadays in new-build lumpy-water boats (where decent AC power is needed) instead of a TravelPower, like LiFePO4 there's a lot of info on various cruising forums (and RV forums) but this hasn't trickled down into the famously conservative (and often skinflint!) narrowboat world yet...

 

https://www.tradeonlytoday.com/post-type-feature/power-play

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, IanD said:

Wakespeed WS-500 or American Power Systems APS-500. Hybrid Marine have used both suppliers (maybe not this exact part?) in non-narrowboat applications. They also said the Iskra 24V/100A alternators have proved very reliable when charging large battery banks -- presumably controlled from their hybrid box, I wouldn't be surprised if this also uses battery/alternator temperature sensors like the Wakepeed (and Balmar) regulators do. Wakespeed told me they have hundreds of WS-500 systems installed (not in narrowboats!) using high-power alternators to charge big battery banks, mostly LiFePO4 in yachts -- we're talking single large-frame alternators up to 24V/400A here...

 

This whole system is pretty much the Hybrid Marine one but without the hybrid drive and with the external alternator regulator instead, this has all been proved in the field -- or on the water, to be more precise... ?

 

This is very much what is becoming common nowadays in new-build lumpy-water boats (where decent AC power is needed) instead of a TravelPower, like LiFePO4 there's a lot of info on various cruising forums but this hasn't trickled down into the famously conservative (and often skinflint!) narrowboat world yet...

The wakespeed 500 is a good alternator controller but costs about £500 per alternator once you’ve got it into this country. Can’t find a price for the other one but it is presumably similar and in fact the spec and the -500 remarkably similar. Are they in fact the same product under the skin?

 

Anyway, in your pricing you therefore have to add about £1k for alternator controllers. Which by the way I agree is necessary with Li batteries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

The wakespeed 500 is a good alternator controller but costs about £500 per alternator once you’ve got it into this country. Can’t find a price for the other one but it is presumably similar and in fact the spec and the -500 remarkably similar. Are they in fact the same product under the skin?

 

Anyway, in your pricing you therefore have to add about £1k for alternator controllers. Which by the way I agree is necessary with Li batteries.

They are the same under the skin. You only need 1 to control 2 identical alternators on the same engine, as you say this costs around £500. But this isn't an extra cost, you need it anyway with lithiums -- or lead-acids like gel/AGM/lead-carbon if you want to charge quickly and get anywhere remotely close to the quoted cycle lifetime, internal alternator regulators are terrible for this.

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh and by the way, whilst the wakespeed is a good regulator, it is in fact a home made circuit very much built from scratch using software for the nitty gritty of the regulation. Used to be open-source but unfortunately the chap sold it out to be commercially produced. Whereas my reg uses an automotive standard chip (and therefore subject to a lot of testing)  which carries out the basic regulation so even if my bit wonks out, it will still carry out the basic regulation with a lot of built-in safeguards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IanD said:

They are the same under the skin. You only need 1 to control 2 identical alternators on the same engine, as you say this costs around £500. But this isn't an extra cost, you need it anyway with lithiums -- or lead-acids like gel/AGM/lead-carbon if you want to get anywhere remotely close to the quoted cycle lifetime.

Yes I suppose there is no reason not to parallel the field currents provided the reg can take the max, which it can with a more than generous 30A. The Iskra 12v175A takes a max of about 4.2A.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

Oh and by the way, whilst the wakespeed is a good regulator, it is in fact a home made circuit very much built from scratch using software for the nitty gritty of the regulation. Used to be open-source but unfortunately the chap sold it out to be commercially produced. Whereas my reg uses an automotive standard chip (and therefore subject to a lot of testing)  which carries out the basic regulation so even if my bit wonks out, it will still carry out the basic regulation with a lot of built-in safeguards.

I know the history of the Wakespeed regulator very well, it's no different to many commercial products ?

 

If you think your single example of a home-brewed regulator is better designed and more reliable than theirs then feel free, of course you might be right. But they have evidence from hundreds out there for some time, you have one... ?

 

(it's not just the basic chip that sets reliability/failures, it's the software/error handling/hardware/components/assembly quality/connectors together with bug fixes from any field failures -- yes I've been involved in stuff like this for a long time, the things that actually go wrong are rarely the things you expect, and there's no substitute for getting lots of kit out there in the hands of multiple users who didn't design it)

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IanD said:

I know the history of the Wakespeed regulator very well, it's no different to many commercial products ?

 

If you think your singlee xample of a home-brewed regulator is better designed and more reliable than theirs then feel free, of course you might be right. But they have evidence from hundreds out there for some time, you have one... ?

 

Surely if Nick is using a standard automotive regulator chip there will be tens of thousands of them in use?

 

Yes he has built a custom circuit to control the chip functions, but it's the commercial regulator doing the heavy lifting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

I know the history of the Wakespeed regulator very well, it's no different to many commercial products ?

 

If you think your single example of a home-brewed regulator is better designed and more reliable than theirs then feel free, of course you might be right. But they have evidence from hundreds out there for some time, you have one... ?

No idea whether it is more or less reliable, its just than when I looked at how he’d done it, I did cringe a bit. Which is why I didn’t copy it! Yes it works well, but is it elegant inside? No! 

 

Mine is not intended as a commercial product, its tailored to our boat. And by that very fact it is of course simpler than the WS.

1 minute ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Surely if Nick is using a standard automotive regulator chip there will be tens of thousands of them in use?

 

Yes he has built a custom circuit to control the chip functions, but it's the commercial regulator doing the heavy lifting. 

Yes I missed scoring that point!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Surely if Nick is using a standard automotive regulator chip there will be tens of thousands of them in use?

 

Yes he has built a custom circuit to control the chip functions, but it's the commercial regulator doing the heavy lifting. 

Read my comment. Chips are *extremely* reliable in themselves, it's usually the things around them that go wrong, or if the chip fails it's due to abuse like overvoltage or overcurrent or ESD. We had some unexplained chip field failures which we couldn't reproduce which turned out to be caused by (the customer's) voltage regulators misbehaving when the power was turned off and putting a short 10V spike on the 1.8V supply -- but only sometimes, and only on some units.

 

If it's not the hardware, it's often an unexpected condition getting the software/firmware into a state that was never anticipated or tested -- so as soon as you say "custom firmware" the warning light should light up.

 

Or it's a manufacture/assembly problem in a factory that maybe doesn't know every last in and out -- one aerospace yield problem (SpaceX?) was traced to be caused by cleaning a part by wiping it vertically instead of horizontally...

 

One user (who designed it) not having problems with one self-built unit doesn't prove anything -- been there, done that, got the T-shirt with burns on it. Get lots of them out there in the hands of idiots, if it's still bombproof *then* you can claim it's robust ?

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

Yes I suppose there is no reason not to parallel the field currents provided the reg can take the max, which it can with a more than generous 30A. The Iskra 12v175A takes a max of about 4.2A.

Correct, if you want 24V you put both windings (field and output) in parallel, if you want 48V you put them both in series (needs isolated-ground alternators). Beta will fit the brush boxes on request which replace the internal alternator regulator and bring out both ends of the field winding to allow an external regulator to be used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nicknorman said:

All seems a bit faffy to me. In the graphs you posted in post #13 you did not compare like with like. You had either your 2 Iskra alternators, or one 5kw TP. You did not have one Iskra alternator and one 3.5kw TP which is the configuration we have. Therefore I’m not sure that your graphs show anything useful in the context of this discussion.

 

 

I found it interesting they gave engine speed, it would be interesting to know the pulley ratios.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

I found it interesting they gave engine speed, it would be interesting to know the pulley ratios.

2.7:1 for alternators (180mm crank/65mm alternator -- info from Beta), 3.3:1 for Travelpower (guesstimate based on pulley sizes in photos, look ~20% bigger ratio)

 

All the kind of stuff that's not easy to find out, neither are the current vs. rpm curves, for some reason manufacturers seem to want to hide this. Maybe because it looks better to say just "100A" or "5kW" without saying that you don't get this until a noisy 2000rpm which is far more than most people charge at...

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.