When's 110a/h not 110a/h?

[WotEver]

As I off-topically mentioned in another thread recently, we are good at 'help, mystery battery fault' threads.

 

They always resolve into 'your batteries are goosed because you've not been charging them enough'.

 

This thread seems a good example!

I think the reason for this is a misconception by many boaters that a battery can be charged in an hour or so. How many times have we heard "My car wouldn't start, so I jumped it then left it ticking over for 15 minutes to charge the battery"? Or from boaters "I charged it for over 2 hours".

 

Tony

[MtB]

I think the reason for this is a misconception by many boaters that a battery can be charged in an hour or so. How many times have we heard "My car wouldn't start, so I jumped it then left it ticking over for 15 minutes to charge the battery"? Or from boaters "I charged it for over 2 hours".

 

Tony

 

 

YEs you're right about this.

 

In addition, one of the first questions that pops up on a new battery thread and seems to irk the thread-starters, is 'what do you mean by fully charged?'.

 

As you say, to a layman 'fully charged' usually means the lights come on and the engine has been run for some random length of time, so to them it sounds like a stupid, nit-picking question that avoids telling them what they really want to know.

 

To us, it means a tail current of 4%. I mean 2%. (Or is it 1%??). But even so, Yer average boater has no way of knowing the tail current, and usually struggles to even grasp the concept.

[BruceinSanity]

YEs you're right about this.

 

In addition, one of the first questions that pops up on a new battery thread and seems to irk the thread-starters, is 'what do you mean by fully charged?'.

 

As you say, to a layman 'fully charged' usually means the lights come on and the engine has been run for some random length of time, so to them it sounds like a stupid, nit-picking question that avoids telling them what they really want to know.

 

To us, it means a tail current of 4%. I mean 2%. (Or is it 1%??). But even so, Yer average boater has no way of knowing the tail current, and usually struggles to even grasp the concept.

How true. On the hopefully soon to be launched wiki, there's a page called Diagnosing a Dying Battery that discusses the symptoms we usually talk about – low voltage in the morning, excessive gassing, stubbornly high or rising tail current and so forth.

 

I consider that the batteries are fully charged when the alternator has reached full voltage and the tail current is both around 1% of the estimated capacity and hasn't declined for 30 minutes. But it's still only an approximation, only a hydrometer can really tell you the truth.

[WotEver]

To us, it means a tail current of 4%. I mean 2%. (Or is it 1%??). But even so, Yer average boater has no way of knowing the tail current, and usually struggles to even grasp the concept.

2% to be pragmatic, 1% is better. 4% is too high.

 

Tony

[MtB]

There's another battery thread cliche that could do with addressing in the wiki, in case you haven't already.

 

"I've had the boat electrics checked out by a marine engineer and he says they are fine".

 

Some questions to ask the marine engineer to write down answers to while he is on site doing the checking, would separate the competent from the charlatans.

[nicknorman]

There's another battery thread cliche that could do with addressing in the wiki, in case you haven't already.

 

"I've had the boat electrics checked out by a marine engineer and he says they are fine".

 

Some questions to ask the marine engineer to write down answers to while he is on site doing the checking, would separate the competent from the charlatans.

Do you mean there are some competent ones? Anyway if you claim to be a "marine engineer", unless you are for example a designer of ships or manufacture your own parts, you are already full of BS. And even then, if you are in fact a marine technician, it covers a wide range of disciplines and it seems unlikely that you will be expert in all of them. Usually it is electrics that is the weak point. If you claim to be a marine electrician, there is less excuse of course.

[RLWP]

"I've had the boat electrics checked out by a marine engineer and he says they are fine".

 

 

You can ask me if you want - I wouldn't though. I can tell you if stuff is wired up and if the alternator is working. I don't have a 'battery state of charge' measuring thing

 

Richard

[MtB]

Do you mean there are some competent ones?

 

 

I doubt it, but I thought it circumspect to avoid asserting all 'marine engineers' are incompetent

 

I agree with your point about peeps calling themselves marine engineers when they are actually technicians. Few real qualified engineers also have the skills and self confidence to roll their sleeves up and get the spanners out in my experience anyway!

Knowing how to design a bridge isn't the same thing at all as being able to build it. I doubt that nice Mr Brunel for example, spent a lot of his time working in his iron foundry.

[RLWP]

 

 

I doubt that nice Mr Brunel for example, spent a lot of his time working in his iron foundry.

 

I'm not too sure about that. Brunel seems to have been very driven and involved in many of his projects. Wasn't he caught in one of the Thames tunnel floods when his father was building it?

 

Richard

[nicknorman]

I doubt it, but I thought it circumspect to avoid asserting all 'marine engineers' are incompetent

 

I agree with your point about peeps calling themselves marine engineers when they are actually technicians. Few real qualified engineers also have the skills and self confidence to roll their sleeves up and get the spanners out in my experience anyway!Knowing how to design a bridge isn't the same thing at all as being able to build it. I doubt that nice Mr Brunel for example, spent a lot of his time working in his iron foundry.

The point is that people can and do advertise themselves as "marine engineers" when they may have no qualifications, no relevant experience and no competence in the role. But yes I'm sure there are some competent ones, but they do seem hard to find!

[MtB]

 

I'm not too sure about that. Brunel seems to have been very driven and involved in many of his projects. Wasn't he caught in one of the Thames tunnel floods when his father was building it?

 

Richard

 

 

Yes but I bet he was in there supervising stuff, rather than with sleeves rolled up mixing the mortar and laying the bricks.

[boathunter]

Hmmm, well looking at the standard of anything that could be encompassed within what I would term "engineering" on most narrowboats I looked round, there isn't any to start with! Fabrication, fitting, installation yes. Engineering? possibly at it's most basic level akin to rush-job DIY without the right tools. It'll do, or it works is often the standard.

[BruceinSanity]

There's another battery thread cliche that could do with addressing in the wiki, in case you haven't already.

 

"I've had the boat electrics checked out by a marine engineer and he says they are fine".

 

Some questions to ask the marine engineer to write down answers to while he is on site doing the checking, would separate the competent from the charlatans.

Thanks, that's a good thought which could be extended to using surveyors in general. Must look at what's been said on the subject of boat buying.

[Tony Brooks]

Do you mean there are some competent ones? Anyway if you claim to be a "marine engineer", unless you are for example a designer of ships or manufacture your own parts, you are already full of BS. And even then, if you are in fact a marine technician, it covers a wide range of disciplines and it seems unlikely that you will be expert in all of them. Usually it is electrics that is the weak point. If you claim to be a marine electrician, there is less excuse of course.

 

I think that you need to clarify what you mean by your term "engineer". In the US it would be a train driver. In the UK the qualifications one holds and membership or the Engineers Registration Board may have a bearing.

 

Now when I was on the tools I held memberships of three professional bodies (by exam) and could have upgraded them to higher grades of membership - except I could not justify the extra cost with a family to care for. With the grades I had I was a registered technician engineer and if had upgraded the professional body membership there would be no question that I would have been a registered engineer.

 

I accept the general thrust of the discussion and am driven mad by the some of the problems foisted on ordinary people by so called engineers but I rather resent the implication that I was not an engineer, although I would describe myself as a boatyard engine rather than marine engineer because I understand marine engineers deal with somewhat larger engines that most of us have on the forum.

 

I would also point out that there are several on here who are exceptionally knowledgeable in certain areas and well worth listening to like yourself on electrics, but may not hold many qualifications in the subject area. The same goes for some of the professionals working in the field.

[cereal tiller]

 

I think that you need to clarify what you mean by your term "engineer". In the US it would be a train driver. In the UK the qualifications one holds and membership or the Engineers Registration Board may have a bearing.

 

Now when I was on the tools I held memberships of three professional bodies (by exam) and could have upgraded them to higher grades of membership - except I could not justify the extra cost with a family to care for. With the grades I had I was a registered technician engineer and if had upgraded the professional body membership there would be no question that I would have been a registered engineer.

 

I accept the general thrust of the discussion and am driven mad by the some of the problems foisted on ordinary people by so called engineers but I rather resent the implication that I was not an engineer, although I would describe myself as a boatyard engine rather than marine engineer because I understand marine engineers deal with somewhat larger engines that most of us have on the forum.

 

I would also point out that there are several on here who are exceptionally knowledgeable in certain areas and well worth listening to like yourself on electrics, but may not hold many qualifications in the subject area. The same goes for some of the professionals working in the field.

Could not have put it better Tony,well said

 

Have a green thing

 

CT

[MtB]

 

Because the percentage of the charging current that is converted to "charge" is a variable figure with too many variables to give anything but a best guess number. This means that for a lot of the time such meters tend to overestimate how much currant has been converted to charge so may read 100% charged when only (say) 80% charged. It is not helped by (I understand) by the fact that the tail current setting such gauges use to infer "fully charged" and then do a reset is set a bit too high so it resets to 100% charged when the batteries are less than that so the reading gradually drifts out of synch with the batteries.

 

 

Thanks Tony. I think I understand.

 

Will probably be clearer when I actually have one, with buttons to press and a manual to read!

[nicknorman]

 

I think that you need to clarify what you mean by your term "engineer". In the US it would be a train driver. In the UK the qualifications one holds and membership or the Engineers Registration Board may have a bearing.

 

Now when I was on the tools I held memberships of three professional bodies (by exam) and could have upgraded them to higher grades of membership - except I could not justify the extra cost with a family to care for. With the grades I had I was a registered technician engineer and if had upgraded the professional body membership there would be no question that I would have been a registered engineer.

 

I accept the general thrust of the discussion and am driven mad by the some of the problems foisted on ordinary people by so called engineers but I rather resent the implication that I was not an engineer, although I would describe myself as a boatyard engine rather than marine engineer because I understand marine engineers deal with somewhat larger engines that most of us have on the forum.

 

I would also point out that there are several on here who are exceptionally knowledgeable in certain areas and well worth listening to like yourself on electrics, but may not hold many qualifications in the subject area. The same goes for some of the professionals working in the field.

 

"Engineer" is just a word, I guess it can mean what you want. For me, an engineer is a design engineer, typically invents/creates/designs things. A technician is the chap who takes all that and actually makes it into something, then repairs that something etc. I have no idea what your qualifications are but I'd suspect that you don't meet my definition. However that is not to be taken as an insult, both the role of the technician and the role of the engineer are vital, and both pointless without the other one.

 

My problem is that a design engineer's job is quite different from someone who repairs boat engines or whatever. But by using the same word, confusion arises. This I suspect is one reason why nobody (especially girls) in the UK wants to be an engineer - they imagine it is all spanners and grease, when it is not.

 

The same confusion arises in aviation - my colleagues in maintenance were referred to as "engineers" and of course they held a licence from the CAA to certify the work they did etc. This terminology of course originated in the military. However by my definition they were not engineers. And I am not alone, in the rest of Europe they would be considered technicians. It always amused me that when my "Chief Engineer" colleague (who was would have killed me if I had suggested that he wasn't an engineer when we were in the UK) and I went to the helicopter manufacturer's facility in France / had meetings with them etc., he always referred to his guys as technicians because he knew that the French and Germans considered that the Engineers resided only in the design office.

 

Anyway all that aside, you must be aware that anyone with or without any qualifications, experience or ability can call themselves a "marine engineer", "marine electrical engineer" etc and thus the term is devalued to the point that it is valueless.

 

Oh and just to add that if someone who maintains and repairs cars is called a mechanic, not an engineer, why should it be different for boats?

Edited August 2, 2016 by nicknorman

[RLWP]

It is a confusing and contentious word, and has been since I was in my 20s

 

Richard (Bsc Mech Eng)

[WotEver]

Pal of mine calls himself an engineer. When I asked what kind he said he designs things. Opening lights for a London train station, squeegee design for a famous mop manufacturer...

 

I said "Oh, you are an engineer"

[David Mack]

It is a confusing and contentious word, and has been since I was in my 20s

 

Richard (Bsc Mech Eng)

Agreed.

 

David MA CEng MICE

 

From time to time I work with architects. Unlike "engineer" their title is protected and nobody in the UK can legally call themselves an architect unless professionally qualified and registered.

[nicknorman]

David MA CEng MICE

 

Do you design small holes in skirting boards?

[WotEver]

Lol !!

[David Mack]

Do you design small holes in skirting boards?

Yes, occasionally...

[MtB]

My dad used to have the letters MIC(mech)E after his name IIRC, rather than MICE.

 

He'd have liked me to be the same but I was always far more interested in being a technician.