Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 12-21-2012, 12:39 PM   #81
Senior Member
 
jeffnick's Avatar
 
City: Spartanburg, SC
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Big Duck
Vessel Model: '72 Land-N-Sea
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 425
How about diesel - hydraulic?
__________________
Advertisement

jeffnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 12:54 PM   #82
Guru
 
Tom.B's Avatar
 
City: Cary, NC
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Skinny Dippin'
Vessel Model: Navigator 4200 Classic
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,153
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffnick View Post
How about diesel - hydraulic?
I'd rather deal with an electrical spill than an oil one.
__________________

__________________
2000 Navigator 4200 Classic
(NOT a trawler)
Tom.B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 01:17 PM   #83
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,712
One can do just about anything w hydraulics and valves. Put engines wherever you want them and the screws wherever you want them too. Perhaps a very clever triple screw boat w inline engines mounted crossways w the drive ends inbd. One could make the ctr screw with a lockable 2 blade prop that could "hide" behind the "deadwood" at the end of the keel. A gold mine of daydreaming here but of course the hydraulic losses would reduce the efficiency but if a clever enough system was drummed up overall efficiency could be reclaimed or even bettered. There are some transmission losses in a regular gearbox too but much smaller. And a given w hydraulic drive would be isolation of the vibration of the engine/s from the drive shaft/s. No need for Aqua Drive.
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 01:57 PM   #84
Art
Guru
 
Art's Avatar
 
City: SF Bay Area
Country: USA
Vessel Model: Tollycraft 34' Tri Cabin
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfloyd4445 View Post
Good morning Marin, everyone. I have yet to find any account of these experiments and am very much interesdted in trying out the Santa Ana Defever come home belt jackshaft driven electric motor come home system which is claimed will drive the boat under ideal conditions at 5knts. I would be one of the last people to ever believe advertiseing claims but the above was writen up in a 1980 edition of Sea Trials. I can email you a copy if your interested? I was fortunate to have worked with engineering staff from Ford, toyota, GM, when these companies submited prototype electric vehicles to CARB for approval. GM's EV1 in my opinion was light years ahead of all the others and i was sorely disapointed when they did not offer it for sale only on a lease. That electric car was only a two seater but it was a rocket ship with every luxury doo dad you could think of included as standard. The EV1 even had a heads up display and as far as i know she still holds the land speed record for electric cars. Her top speed was limited to 80mph and she would do that in 6 sec's. if i remember corectly
Anyway, my experiance back then got me to thinking of a system that would be applicable for pleasure craft. I did notice that west marine has in their 2012 catalouge electric propulsion systems both inboard and outboard for sale. There is no escaping the fact that electric motors have more low end torq than any other engine.

Thanks for your thoughts Marin

Best wishes
Britt
Britt

What I do not get, regarding efficiency value, is the "energy-loss-transfer" that must occur. If energy is created by petrol engine and transferred directly to electric engine, or for even more energy loss factors stored in battery first and then transferred to electric engine, the overall efficiency values as compared to energy directly from petrol engine to prop-shaft must be diminished. The only way I can see there being increased overall efficiency via marine electric motor propulsion would be if the "free" solar energy could be captured sufficiently to upset the general physics property of "energy-loss-transfer".

It seems clear to me: If it can be figured out how to get increased energy (as compared to power produced via fuel burned in petrol engine) from the electric motor to the prop shaft without including solar energy as an offset to "energy-loss-transfer" then the basics of perpetual motion has been established... wherein all "extra energy" needs should be able to be accomplished in utility scale.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! Art
Art is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 02:01 PM   #85
Art
Guru
 
Art's Avatar
 
City: SF Bay Area
Country: USA
Vessel Model: Tollycraft 34' Tri Cabin
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,979
Dupe - sorry!
Art is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 02:38 PM   #86
Guru
 
Alemao's Avatar
 
City: Fort Myers - FL
Country: Brazil
Vessel Name: ORIGINAL
Vessel Model: Hi Star 55
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 629
If I cruise 10hours in idle , I must full power at least 1minute twicw a day to clean the engines. Is it the same with gasoline engines?
Alemao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 02:46 PM   #87
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
The reviews and opinions I have read had to do with converting existing diesel-powered boats like the Grand Banks to diesel-electric. So the observations of the conversion cost not being repaid by the operating savings had to do with converting an existing diesel cruiser.

The cost benefit of creating a brand new boat with diesel-electric propulsion is another matter. How this would affect the selling price of the boat as compared to the selling price of the same new boat with conventional diesel propulsion would be the interesting thing to know.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 03:12 PM   #88
Guru
 
djmarchand's Avatar
 
City: East Greenwich, RI
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Bella
Vessel Model: Mainship Pilot 34
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,879
I am sorry but I don't see any efficiency advantages to diesel/electric or diesel/hydraulic over a prop shaft driven by an engine through a transmission.

Transmission energy losses are about 3%. There is some loss in efficiency due to the prop shaft angle (which presumably can be horizontal on an electric or hydraulic drive) but it can't be more than 10%. So the overall efficiency is 97*90 = 87%.

A hydralic pump has an efficiency of 85-90% and the drive motor has a similar efficiency. So the overall efficiency is at best 90*90 or 81%.

A 50 KW generator probably has an efficiency in the same ball park as the hydraulic pump. But you have to rectify the AC produced and that is at least a 5% loss. The DC motor has about the same efficiency as the hydraulic one.

Niether beat a direct drive prop shaft for efficiency.

The primary appeal to a diesel/electric system is to store some of that energy in a battery to use without running the diesel and supplement it with solar. But it takes real estate for solar power and lots of weight for batteries.

David
djmarchand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 03:34 PM   #89
Art
Guru
 
Art's Avatar
 
City: SF Bay Area
Country: USA
Vessel Model: Tollycraft 34' Tri Cabin
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alemao View Post
If I cruise 10hours in idle , I must full power at least 1minute twicw a day to clean the engines. Is it the same with gasoline engines?
Not exactly, I don't believe. If gas engine is in good condition and tune while burning clean, fresh gasoline its plugs should not foul and carbon should not build on valves or cylinder-piston heads because the gasser develops and maintains substantial internal heat conditions, even at idle. That said... I do not run on idle for many hours at a time (one to two at most, and seldom at that). 10 hours running on idle (considering it is 600 to 700 rpm on a gasser) would be past my experience for not fouling an engine. I will run at pretty slow speeds for long duration hours turning some 1400 to 1900 rpm and experience no problem.

What rpm do you run on idle? Many types/makes of diesel do need to be “blown out” sequentially when running “cool”, i.e. at low rpm. I never heard of “one minute” being ample “heat-up” duration before... seems more like 10 to 15 minutes are usually recommended. Your engine manufacturer recommend the one minute higher rpm each five hours or so for blowing it clear?
Art is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 05:31 PM   #90
Guru
 
City: coos bay
Country: usa
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by manyboats View Post
One can do just about anything w hydraulics and valves. Put engines wherever you want them and the screws wherever you want them too. Perhaps a very clever triple screw boat w inline engines mounted crossways w the drive ends inbd. One could make the ctr screw with a lockable 2 blade prop that could "hide" behind the "deadwood" at the end of the keel. A gold mine of daydreaming here but of course the hydraulic losses would reduce the efficiency but if a clever enough system was drummed up overall efficiency could be reclaimed or even bettered. There are some transmission losses in a regular gearbox too but much smaller. And a given w hydraulic drive would be isolation of the vibration of the engine/s from the drive shaft/s. No need for Aqua Drive.
whoaaa........i gotta thunk about this un....Ah, i got it, so simple why didnt i see the answer at first glance. The engines go in the keel and drive a system of pulleys and the mast via a system of clutches and gears controlled electronically via a computer. You boot up your pc, enter your destination and allow the computer to do the rest. A small single electric motor and electric solenoid controled switches should do the trick. Most of the energy to propell the vessel will be provided by him/her up there and the small left over can be provided by a small generator driven electric motor............................................. ............................................
Didnt someone make a schooner like this back in the early years of this century? she had three masts computer controlled i beleive
bfloyd4445 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 08:11 PM   #91
Guru
 
psneeld's Avatar
 
City: Avalon, NJ
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Freedom
Vessel Model: Albin 40
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 15,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfloyd4445 View Post
whoaaa........i gotta thunk about this un....Ah, i got it, so simple why didnt i see the answer at first glance. The engines go in the keel and drive a system of pulleys and the mast via a system of clutches and gears controlled electronically via a computer. You boot up your pc, enter your destination and allow the computer to do the rest. A small single electric motor and electric solenoid controled switches should do the trick. Most of the energy to propell the vessel will be provided by him/her up there and the small left over can be provided by a small generator driven electric motor............................................. ............................................
Didnt someone make a schooner like this back in the early years of this century? she had three masts computer controlled i beleive
At least what he said made some sense....

There are many possibilities...you just have to decide what works for you and your boat....
psneeld is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 08:15 PM   #92
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,712
march wrote;

"I am sorry but I don't see any efficiency advantages to diesel/electric or diesel/hydraulic over a prop shaft driven by an engine through a transmission."

Of course because there isn't any.

But if you had 4 or 5 propellers and 2 or 3 engines you could design a system that would cruise at 15 knots as a regular single or twin screw boat and then slow down to 7 knots burning less fuel and not under loading an engine. That would be more desirable to many and it could be a very desirable option.

And march there are numerous advantages to DE drive like the ability to run very slow in the harbor. I think there's several maneuverability advantages and more. I have an article on DE in an old PMM and there are numerous advantages that would be well worth a 10 or 15% overall loss of efficiency. But the mag is not yet unpacked. I'd go for it but probably not the installation cost.
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 08:43 PM   #93
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
I like the idea of electric propulsion. It works great for railroads, both straight electric and diesel electric. It works great in large vessels as witness the diesel electric Washington State ferries.

Although it's interesting that the large tankers, bulk carriers, and container ships built today mostly seem to be diesel powered, not diesel-electric or turbine. I'd like to know why that is.

And it works great in vehicles with some limitations.

But so far the advantages of electric drive--- quiet, smooth power--- have eluded the recreational boat market. I assume this is partly cost and partly acceptance.

I don't think converting boats like our old GB to some form of electric drive is cost-effective. But I would find it very interesting to hear from the boat manufacturers themselves why they so far have not viewed electric propulsion in some form as a viable or marketable drive system be it diesel electric, fuel cell, or some other system.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 08:54 PM   #94
Guru
 
City: coos bay
Country: usa
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by manyboats View Post
march wrote;

"I am sorry but I don't see any efficiency advantages to diesel/electric or diesel/hydraulic over a prop shaft driven by an engine through a transmission."

Of course because there isn't any.
So you are saying cause you don't see any advantage that science could never find any? Even Albert Einstien admitted that just because he couldnt go any further didnt mean that his theroys were the end. And i don't think there are many others in his class whose theroy's hsave not been superceded in a short time. Facts show electric moves heavy loads more eficiently than any other technology known at this time. Granted a good workable marine system has yet to sail the seas but that dosent mean they won't in the future. To sit around and say, Bah humbug, it cant be done, is an attitude that would have kept us in the dark ages. Isnt it great that there are people out there that say, what if, even when faced with over whelming, it cant be done, comments. Good old orville and wilbur were told it cant be done and today we have squirt powerd aircraft......hummm.....cant be done????

not to be comfortational, one thing i will agree with you about is that it takes the same amount of energy to move a given object a given distance no matter what the power source is. However, as has been proven with autos things like regenerative braking etc. can greatly cut into the out of pocket expense for purchased energy so why cant we do the same for boats? Do you wish we stay with fifties technology when in the near future diesel fuell is likely to be $10.00 per gallon. What would be wrong with a power system that stores wind, sun, water energy for use in powering the vessel? I remember back in 2000 or there abouts when people said electric cars are no good they have no range and a guy in LA got a few phone batteries and a small generator and proceeded to drive accross country in his home built DC converted car. Since then we have advanced considerably, times are changing my friend

God bless, and merry christmas to all

B
bfloyd4445 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2012, 03:41 AM   #95
Hospitality Officer
 
Andy G's Avatar
 
City: Pittwater
Country: Australia
Vessel Name: Sarawana
Vessel Model: IG 36 Quad Cabin
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marin View Post
Our engine operating manual covers three versions of the "FL 120." These engines are based on the Ford of England Dorset diesel. There are a lot of subtle cubic inch variations in these engines and they're easy to overlook.

The first one is the" FL80." It's based on Ford of England's four-cylinder version of the of the engine called the 2712-E. It is a 254 cu in engine and develops 80 hp @ 2,500 rpm.

The second version is what we have,the "FL120." It is based on the Ford of England 2715-E six cylinder, 380 cu in, naturally aspirated diesel. It develops 120 hp @ 2,500 rpm.

The third version is the turbocharged version. Ford called it the 2704-ET. It is a six-cylinder, 363 cubic inch, turbocharged engine that develops 150 hp @ 2,400 rpm.

The Lehman model numbers for the marinized versions of these engines are 4D254 for the 80 hp four cylinder, 6D380 for the 120 hp six-cylinder engine, and 6D363T for the 150 hp six-cylinder turbocharged engine.

Lehman of New Jersey marinized a lot of different engines over the years, a number of them from Ford of England. As the turbocharged engine you are describing is 160 hp, I suspect it's not one of the three I listed above.

Lehman also marinized the later Ford of England Dover engine. This is the base engine for the "Ford Lehman 135." Lehman actually called them "SP" engines for "Super Power." Ford of England made four variants of this engine.

The Ford (and Lehman) numbers are:

2722E (Lehman model SP90), four cylinder, 254 cu in, 90 hp @ 2,600 rpm.

2725E (Lehman model SP135), six cylinder, 380 cu in, 135 hp @ 2,600 rpm

2726E (Lehman model SP185), six cylinder 363 cu in turbocharged, 185 hp @ 2,500 rpm

2728E (Lehman model SP225), six cylinder 363 cu in turbocharged, 225 hp @ 2,450 rpm

2728E (Lehman model SP275) six cylinder 383 cu in, turbocharged/intercooled, 275 hp @ 2,500 rpm

Again, no 160 hp turbocharged engine in this group. So I don't know what Lehman engines are in the boat you are considering.

The above data was taken from our FL120 manual and the SP-135 manual on the GB owners forum.
That's interesting, thanks for the information.
Andy G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2012, 06:20 AM   #96
Scraping Paint
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Vessel Model: CHB 48 Zodiac YL 4.2
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfloyd4445 View Post
Facts show electric moves heavy loads more eficiently than any other technology known at this time.
Horsepucky

Quote:
Granted a good workable marine system has yet to sail the seas but that dosent mean they won't in the future.
More Horsepucky
RickB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2012, 06:57 AM   #97
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,525
If I cruise 10hours in idle , I must full power at least 1minute twicw a day to clean the engines. Is it the same with gasoline engines?

NO. And 1 min will not clean the carbon buildup behind the rings, high piston temperature and time is required.

Perhaps a half hour ,,.

The nicest engine room I was able to visit was on a 55-60 ft Motor sailor called Feng Shuay (SP?)

It had a fine setup with the engine mounted an the bow!

The boat was heavy so a 6-71 at 2500lbs was not noticed , the noisemaker was there too.

The engine was walk around standing headroom, and the hull at deck level provided huge storage at eye level.

The shafting was std truck with the tranny at the usual after position absorbing thrust .Windlass , mechanical from the 6-71 with a clutch, no blown fuses.

With todays far lighter engines , and the fact that 60 years later the fore peak still sucks as a place to be , I think this configuration would be of far more interest than a D cell powered boat.

When the decimal moves 2 places on batts , smaller .,lighter, cheaper and far far more powerful, perhaps a noisemaker free (for a week) boat could be built.
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2012, 09:34 AM   #98
Guru
 
City: Carefree, Arizona
Country: usa
Vessel Name: sunchaser V
Vessel Model: DeFever 48
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,369
Rick said:

"Horsepucky

More Horsepucky"

Having spent many decades working with electric wheel drives in off road applications, I can only but agree.

Dave Marchand is a pretty bright guy and his comments a few posts ago should be re-read bflloyd. Get off this "jus cause science caint prove it" nonsense and deal with the here and now. Oregon is green I know, but electric drives in our toy boats (at least mine is anyway) is best left out of a gas vs diesel comparison.
sunchaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2012, 09:46 AM   #99
Guru
 
Tom.B's Avatar
 
City: Cary, NC
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Skinny Dippin'
Vessel Model: Navigator 4200 Classic
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,153
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickB View Post
Horsepucky
Correct Potterism is HorseHOCKEY

Study Guide:
Stepchild of the Sun - A Guide to Colonel Potter Slang Or
__________________
2000 Navigator 4200 Classic
(NOT a trawler)
Tom.B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2012, 11:11 AM   #100
Senior Member
 
jeffnick's Avatar
 
City: Spartanburg, SC
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Big Duck
Vessel Model: '72 Land-N-Sea
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 425
Could the reason why diesel/electric is not popular in boats be because boats do not use multiple gears as do land based vehicles? Can you see clutching in and out to change locomotive gears while accelerating?. Electric eliminates the clutch and gearbox, neither of which is used in recreational boating.
__________________

jeffnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diesel electric, hybrid, perpetual motion, solar, wind power

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012