New Boat - Engine Question

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Steve D'Antonio is a member of Trawler Forum and contributes on occasion. Perhaps he will add to this discussion...
 
Giggitoni said:
Steve D'Antonio is a member of Trawler Forum and contributes on occasion. Perhaps he will add to this discussion...
Click to expand...

What do you feel is missing? Seems like some good thoughts are springing forth. The one hope I have is that the new owner will read the manuals and prop curves for this specific engine.
 
Wave when you go by Duncan Cove, I'll look for you. Welcome to the neighbourhood!
 
Below is a timely (yesterday) quote from Steve D'Antonio copied from another forum on this very subject:


"Thu Mar 17, 2016 5:17 am (PDT) . Posted by:
stevedmarine

High revs, 75% load is often more than adequate to achieve the desired ideal temps within the engine, makes good sense for several reasons in addition to soot reduction. Most trawler engines are woefully and chronically under-loaded, which leads to excess soot formation in combustion chambers and in turbos and exhaust systems, as well as wet stacking in some cases. Light loading also leads to overly cool combustion chambers/exhaust gas temperature and "cold" oil. The former, again supports build ups on valves and rings, and the latter leads to sludge and then varnish formation. Thus, a hard, 75% or more load for 10 minutes out of every four hours will serve to stem some of the effect of light loading.

Having said all that, it's best not to do this immediately before shut down. This sort of loading does get things hot, which is good under most circumstances, but not immediately before shut down. Oil that remains on very hot surfaces like turbo shafts and exhaust valve stems after shut sown will undergo a process known as coking or carmelization, the oil essentially bakes onto these surfaces, which can impede oil flow and lubrication in the future.

If you carry out a hard run, be sure to follow it 10 or more minutes of light or no load to allow these regions within the engine to cool off. Often, but not always, that's accounted for by docking time alone.

Steve D'Antonio"
 
Thanks DD,
Don't see much if any softening.
What I like about his post is that he actually tells what will happen inside the engine and why. May of us here on TF have been saying it's not good to run light load but not known the specifics of why not. I first heard SteveD advise a 75% load about the time I started on TF .. 07. Edit: ... I just remembered his specifics at that time. It was "75% load 75% of the time". Of course at that time I like many others thought it was 75% of rpm. Soon found out that was way different. Because of the big bend in the power curve one can be at 50% rpm and the actual engine load could be as low as 20% ... or even less depending on many variables. Then it's so hard to get good burn numbers and most everybody thinks low burn numbers are "to die for" as the girls say and other trawler skippers will be envious and respectful of your numbers if they are low it's hard to resist. Then when you see someone posting numbers lower than yours ya better out do him.

So I'm glad to see SteveD post some specifics that should open some eyes and minds. I thought I was at 75% load until I ran some numbers and found I actually was at 50%. Soon w my little laser thermometer I'll get some more numbers to add to what I know and subtract from what I thought I know.
 
Last edited:
Here is another perspective from Tony Athens of Seaboard Marine


"As for life expectancy on a typical modern high speed diesel engine (probably an old one too), when run at 10-50 % of its rated hp, you’ll get longer life (substantially in many cases) when measured in engine hours, everything else being equal.."


and


"...Yes, there are many other parts of the equation that leads to the life of a diesel engine, but I know from experience that running them slow (i.e. cruising for days on end at hull speeds or less) is NOT a cause for concern. But some obvious things to watch out for (when running slow) are being sure your coolant temp stays up to spec. and watching for any signs of wet stacking or slobbering..Some Detroits seem to do this, but I think it’s more of the general condition of that particular engine and is sometimes related to the design of the exhaust system.. A few minutes a day at higher cruise HP levels should be all that is necessary to clean things up should it be needed..
In closing, I’ll mention that although this topic is brought up quite often and many people preach that you’ve got to use a diesel hard if you want it to last, I’m still waiting to find one that was rebuilt before its time due to low speed use..Just the opposite seems to be always the norm."


For the modern diesels, I'm not sure that the idea of 75% load 75% of the time still holds true.
 
dhays said:
For the modern diesels, I'm not sure that the idea of 75% load 75% of the time still holds true.
Click to expand...
And...what defines "modern diesel?"

My next post lays out my own confusion with all this.
 
Thanks Diesel Duck for that D'Antonio piece.
It helps.

I've mentioned before that I am moving from gas to diesel.

While it is coming, the curve is still fairly steep, for more than a couple of reasons; having had gassers that hit 6000 RPM WOT, it's hard to talk in terms of 1400-2000; 80% of WOT RPM was always the "don't go over" mark and more than anything else, this old brain is slower and less absorbent..

Load is the tough one and I have found almost all brokers and owners I have spoken to recently are uneducated on this as well. Most of them talk about RPM, not load, not fuel burn and few have a real grasp of over/under propping. I'm having a hard time making sense of the two terms (load, fuel burn) both in general and when trying to equate them to a specific boat on the market.
 
Last edited:
manyboats said:
So I'm glad to see SteveD post some specifics that should open some eyes and minds. I thought I was at 75% load until I ran some numbers and found I actually was at 50%. Soon w my little laser thermometer I'll get some more numbers to add to what I know and subtract from what I thought I know.
Click to expand...

Many people look at RPM and think they're running at a higher load than they really are. In your case it was an extreme difference between your actual and your perceived.
 
Janusz - FYI, I have two engines identical to yours and know them and their issues well. How the exhaust system is set up in your newer install whether angle on turbo exhaust/shower run or as compared to the WL is very important.

To complicate the load question even more - a 6bt Cummins can have a dependable HP rated range from about 210 to 370. Running the 210 version at 75% is like running the 380 at 40%. Same holds true for many other brands.

I would and do follow Tony's, Cat and Perkins Sabre (owned by Cat) guidance. It could be argued that Steve's comments are not always new century relevant as they disagree with some current engine builder's positions on load. Steve is correct, keep the EGTs and oil temps within spec, which is easily doable on many current ( this century) engines without running the "load" up.

Many Nordhavn and other blue water owners cruise their vessels for days on end at loads well below 75%, current engines again mind you.
 
manyboats; said:
I'll get some more numbers to add to what I know and subtract from what I thought I know.
Click to expand...
As confounding as I find it, I take comfort reading that comment coming from someone who has sniffed a lot more diesel than I.
 
The question of the effect of low load running is a very interesting question for me, as the boat that I have an offer on has the Cummins QSB5.9L engine configured for 380hp. This is a single rail, turbocharged engine that Cummins classes as a "High Output" engine. I anticipate running this engine at about 30% hp or about 15% fuel burn. Nor sure what %load that would be.

From what I have been able to determine, this engine handles that very well with the caveat that oil temps are maintained high enough and that the engine is run for short periods at higher loading. However, I am relying on outside advice as I have no experience or knowledge.
 
Mr. Steve D'Antonio laid out the ills from under loading , but not the internal cause.

Each firing cylinder must create enough pressure to get behind the compression rings and force them into proper contact with the cylinder walls.

Light load , the rings do not seal well and blowby contaminates the lube oil much faster.

The real hassle is the light ring contact burnishes (polishes) the cylinder wall.

This smooths the hone marks required to hold oil for the piston to slide on.

Compression is lost , and a later high load does ZERO to cure the problem , only new rings and a hone can restore the compression, and stop the slobbering.

A good heavy load may get rid of carbon buildup in the engine and long enough might free the stuck rings , but only an overhaul can repair the cylinder wall damage.

The trick is to load the engine at CRUISE RPM , heavy enough for the engine to be working hard , not loafing.

Best is a "just big enough " engine from the boat assembler , the choice in under 100HP is not large.

So over sized which is frequently cheaper is installed.

Power or sail this calls for a "cruise" prop , which will NOT reach max rated RPM .

But with the proper engine load at cruise frequently the over sized engine can be run slowly 1200-1600 RPM , nice and quiet.

An informed owner and an EGT gauge are required.
 
Last edited:
For those not totally understanding how the "load" on your engine is defined I found a comment on an automotive forum that helped me to get a better grasp on just exactly what "load" means:

"The engine load is the torque output of the engine.

An internal combustion engine is - approximately - a constant torque motor, meaning it can produce the same maximum torque at any rpm. The fact that it happens at a rpm or another, dictates how much power it produces.

Torque is proportional to the amount of force put on the piston, which is proportional to the amount of air being burnt in the combustion chamber, which is why you can relate the engine load to the quantity of air going into the engine, knowing the maximum amount of air that go in at a particular rpm, i.e. at WOT.

RPM does not really depends on throttle opening per say. When an engine is at constant speed, there is only the friction force going against the engine (from the bearings) and some others to run pumps and such, such that the engine can run. This represents the load at idle.

If you give enough heat (fuel combusted) to produce enough torque to go against this load, the engine will idle at constant speed.

If you give more heat, it will produce extra torque which will be transformed into acceleration of the moving parts (F=ma or T=Iα in rotation). Of course, if you give less heat, there will be a deceleration of the rotating components.

But you can increase the load by coupling an external torque to the shaft of the engine (a pump for example or a vehicle that needs to be accelerated). In that case, if you don't increase the heat in the combustion chamber, the engine will begin to decelerate. But if you increase it enough such that the torque converted by the engine equals the torque required by the load, then the speed of the engine will stay constant."
 
Last edited:
If we all understood the content of the last 10 posts we would never need to bring this up again.

HaHa ,
Less than a minute I see there's another thread on it.
 
Last edited:
Diesel Duck said:
... The engine load is the torque output of the engine.

An internal combustion engine is - approximately - a constant torque motor, meaning it can produce the same maximum torque at any rpm. ...
Torque is proportional to the amount of force put on the piston, which is proportional to the amount of air being burnt in the combustion chamber, which is why you can relate the engine load to the quantity of air going into the engine, knowing the maximum amount of air that go in at a particular rpm, i.e. at WOT.

RPM does not really depends on throttle opening per say. ...
Click to expand...

Can't reconcile that.

My JD 4045 doesn't have a throttle. Engine speed is controlled via a governor.

Max. torque is reached at 1400 RPM, at a 30 percent engine load.

Usual cruising speed is at 1800 RPM, a 42-percent load.

100-percent load is achieved at 2400 RPM.
 
Last edited:
Lets see if it works:


There are some power and fuel consumption graphs and "prop curve" which I don't understand (page 3).

Sunchaser - what are the best and the worst characteristics of these engines in your experience? Is your boat a planning hull boat?
 

Attachments

  • P-Sabre_M225Ti.pdf
    157.1 KB · Views: 89
I'm impressed,
Very nice engine.
I like the 5" stroke.
I see they list "typical fuel consumption" as 7gph. So on the average It seems they expect one to load the engine at a 7gph burn rate. Most trawlers are twins .... wonder how many here are burning 14gph while cruising? I wonder if Perkins suspects their engines will be loaded way less than that?
Sure is a nice engine. I've seen them and that blue is beautiful.

Janusz,
The full power curve is a sequence of dots connected of wot power outputs ... loaded to specific and various rpms. Like if you were going up a hill w a big truck with your foot all the way into it at specific rpm's less that the rated rpm. All the points on the curve are at wot. They are probably throttled to maximum output .. not max fuel ..... in other words not over fueled.
The prop curve is a simulated or imagined loat that would be typical of a certian type of boat. If it's a smooth and fair curve the curve was probably generated for a FD or/and a SD hull slower than those that are close to planing.
This is a curve that will allow you to fairly accurately predict your fuel burn at various rpm's and speeds. It is assuming you're propped to your rated rpm. 2500rpm in respect to the subject Perkins. If your boat is propped correctly you can look at this curve and see fairly accurately what your boat will burn at any rpm along the prop curve.
 
Last edited:
Janusz said:
The engine is not electronically controlled. No computers.

The boat is Ocean Alexander -OA - not Marine Trader.

The oil analysis was done by my surveyor-mechanic 2 days ago using a Surrey lab. The oil change was approx. 1,5 yrs ago by previous owner.

He kept all the receipts, manuals, bills, ship's log etc and the whole documentation which takes a whole shelf and weighs at least 20 lbs, I am sure. That was one of the compelling reasons I bought this boat.
Click to expand...

I hate to get into a spitting contest with you but that does not seem to be an Ocean Alexander.

That is a Marine Trader.

What info do you have that says OA?

http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/198...899257/Belleair/FL/United-States#.VuydFfkrK70
 
menzies; said:
That is a Marine Trader. What info do you have that says OA?
Click to expand...
I wondered about the profile and that is why I asked. Bridge, side supports and railings don't say OA but I'm not taking it as far as you though. Interior doesn't look like Marine Trader either. But that was an era of great mystery in Taiwan.


Yacht World calls it an Ocean Alex, listing broker just says Ocean and it sure isn't one of those.

OA...
 

Attachments

  • O A 40.jpg
    O A 40.jpg
    59.9 KB · Views: 69
Last edited:
Janusz said:
Sunchaser - what are the best and the worst characteristics of these engines in your experience? Is your boat a planning hull boat?
Click to expand...

I am not aware of any negatives. PS has been marinizing their newer design engines for their brand and Cat for about 15 years. Cat ownership helps to insure parts will be available for a very long time. The engines are built for industrial use for tractors, gensets, fork lifts etc.

My vessel is not a planing boat. At a normal cruise RPM of about 1750 fuel burn for both engines is a bit less than 5 gph including genset use. At 1600 RPM fuel burn drops by about 20%. PM me if you want more details.
 
menzies said:
I hate to get into a spitting contest with you but that does not seem to be an Ocean Alexander.

That is a Marine Trader.

What info do you have that says OA?


- The boat is listed at Yachtworld as OA;

- My Bill of Sale calls it OA

- All the receipts and documents call it OA, back all the way to 1983;

- Two current and one 2013 survey call it OA

- My initial post shows the picture I have taken myself. There is an "Ocean Alexander" plate on top of first strut visible (you have to zoom in to read).

- On the dash at lower helm there is plate "Ocean 40";

- I have the copy of current Certificate of Registry issued by Transport Canada which in the box "Builder's name and place of build" says:
OCEAN ALEXANDER
KAOHSIUNG, TAIWAN

But, if you still prefer to call it Marine Trader that is fine; I have no problem with that. Whatever it is called its quality, beauty and functionality will remain unchanged.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Hawgwash said:
I wondered about the profile and that is why I asked. Bridge, side supports and railings don't say OA but I'm not taking it as far as you though. Interior doesn't look like Marine Trader either. But that was an era of great mystery in Taiwan.


Yacht World calls it an Ocean Alex, listing broker just says Ocean and it sure isn't one of those.

OA...
Click to expand...



Yacht World calls my boat Ocean Alexander, and

The listing broker always said Ocean Alexander as I recall. He is vacationing now in Honduras (with my money).:)


The picture you attached is OA Europa built from 1983 on. It was always twin engine.
My boat is 1982 OA Europa designed by Ed Monk. Single screw, different hull profile.
 
Last edited:
menzies said:
I hate to get into a spitting contest with you but that does not seem to be an Ocean Alexander.

That is a Marine Trader.

What info do you have that says OA?

1982 Marine Trader Europa Power Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com
Click to expand...

I thought the same thing. In addition to the 3 deck supports it is the first OA 40 Europa I have seen with 3 front windows. I did some searching and found this 1977 OA 40 Europa that looks just like the OP's boat.

http://www.yachtsinternational.us/en_boat_galery.php?id=11949

I guess OA must have made some changes to the design in the early to mid 80's.

Nice boat BTW and congrats on the purchase!
 
Last edited:
Janusz, As usual they sent you nothing bit advertising nonsense.

Ask for a FUEL MAP and see how responsive they are.

The fuel map, should they actually send one, will allow the easy setup of the vessel for economical cruising.

What they sent , a theoretical prop curve is fine if you are setting up to water ski.
 
Janusz; said:
But, if you still prefer to call it Marine Trader that is fine; I have no problem with that. Whatever it is called its quality, beauty and functionality will remain unchanged.
Click to expand...
:thumb::thumb:Enjoy your new hobby.
 
Some corrections to comments above:


The only curve relevant to a boat is the prop curve. Props load engines and fuel is determined by load. A loaded diesel runs at the rpm allowed by the amount of fuel to produce the torque to spin the load. Add more fuel and the engine rpm increases because it can create more torque. An unloaded diesel at any rpm uses little fuel and produced only the torque to overcome losses.


max torque is measured at full load. The makers curve does not provide any clue as to where max torque may be at less than full load as set up in a boat.


Diesels are unthrottled. Only gas engines control air flow. diesels are fuel controlled.


You can't run an engine at some different percent of fuel and load. Load and fuel percent will necessarily be equal. see the prop curve as above.
 
bayview said:
Some corrections to comments above:


The only curve relevant to a boat is the prop curve. Props load engines and fuel is determined by load. A loaded diesel runs at the rpm allowed by the amount of fuel to produce the torque to spin the load. Add more fuel and the engine rpm increases because it can create more torque. An unloaded diesel at any rpm uses little fuel and produced only the torque to overcome losses.


max torque is measured at full load. The makers curve does not provide any clue as to where max torque may be at less than full load as set up in a boat.


Diesels are unthrottled. Only gas engines control air flow. diesels are fuel controlled.


You can't run an engine at some different percent of fuel and load. Load and fuel percent will necessarily be equal. see the prop curve as above.
Click to expand...

Tony Athens wrote a piece on this and I just looked for it and can't find it. THe title of it was something like "Props push boats....not engines".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Taras
Lehman 120 Turbo Delete
Replies
7
Views
975
DDW
D
PhilPB
Fuel Filters
Replies
15
Views
2K
jleonard
jleonard
S
Tensioner Pulley Seized
Replies
14
Views
1K
twistedtree
twistedtree
E
Engine cooling through hull question
Replies
13
Views
1K
rgano
rgano
Insequent
JD fuel consumption over 10 years
Replies
1
Views
624
Taras
Taras

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom