Alternators - leave them alone and forget about them

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
It seems to me you can pick any two out of three charging sources and get on with life. If you're optimizing for liveaboard at anchor you've learned to do without alternator input. Why not give it up completely?

About three weeks ago I came to the same conclusions. Or at least similar. How the boat is used helps inform the choice and how each might be prioritized or even needed. Here in my local cruising grounds in the summer it is very hot. I will be using the generator and AC routinely and doing shorter trips. So alternator charging wont be a priority. Departing the slip fully charged and then recharging during mid day heat while operating AC for a few hours while at anchor makes more sense. Charging while cruising will be the lowest priority for my short term future. However I will add a DC to DC charger just to take advantage of that situation. I only have a 100 amp Balmar currently but you may as well get some use of the excess power during that operating scenario and the DC to DC charger isn't very expensive or hard to add.

I am still in the planning stages of the Lifepo4 house bank though. There is a new battery manufacturer that I am working with. Currently waiting on a 100AH 36 volt single battery for my golf cart. But they also have a 540 Ah 12 volt single battery coming out soon. I plan to test the golf cart battery first and if I like it I will order the house bank.
 
But assuming a decent size lithium bank you don't need a big honking generator. There is zero benefit in having the batteries fully charged by lunch time. Depending on typical house needs a dc-dc charger may be an appropriate solution.

"May be." The choice of battery chemistry has little to do with it. You have to put in as many amps as you take out, averaged over a couple of days. LFP or LA doesn't matter. Excess power is available essentially for free while the engine is running. Solar when the sun is shining but only to that extent and the area committed to it. Solar is ideal if you have the area and the sun. If you don't then the DC-DC must do the job, while the engine is running. The way LFP changes the equation is there is no tail on the charge curve, no need to charge for 6 hours. But I'm still struggling with what problem the DC-DC charger solves (vs an ACR or isolator) in a typical setup. It adds cost and complexity and limits capacity.

I don't want to use fuel consumption as an argument against running the genset. Maybe it costs $.40/kwh from the alternator vs $.50/kwh from the genset. I don't care. It's not really relevant to the debate. And I can certainly argue that those who have gensets and use them 10 hrs a year should be looking for reasonable opportunities to flash them up.

10 hours over three years. And that is not an argument for finding an excuse to listen to it, rather it is an argument for its removal. It does not pay for its maintenance with utility. An alternator is orders of magnitude cheaper to buy and maintain. I have about $800 into a very sophisticated 160A setup. How much genset does that buy?
 
"May be." The choice of battery chemistry has little to do with it. You have to put in as many amps as you take out, averaged over a couple of days. LFP or LA doesn't matter.

It matters hugely. It's part of my core argument. If you have multiple sources you can be opportunistic. If you get a boost from 30% to 50% take it and move on.

I have about $800 into a very sophisticated 160A setup. How much genset does that buy?

You have a genset but really you'd rather not have it. And you haven't acknowledged solar in the mix. For sure you should charge with that $800 setup. Make sure the BMS communicates.
 
But I'm still struggling with what problem the DC-DC charger solves (vs an ACR or isolator) in a typical setup. It adds cost and complexity and limits capacity.

I think that in practice you're going to have a dc-dc charger in any case. If you can live with start -> house it opens a broad range of consumer batteries as safe and compliant choices.

If you go with house -> start and charge house with the alternator then you really should have a smart BMS.
 
If you can set up your boat such that solar output > daily power consumption, then I agree that the engine alternator becomes much less interesting. I have heard of a number of sail boats where this is the case, and they have left their alternators in place unchanged and use a DC/DC charger to bring some of the output over to the LFP bank. But it's not a primary charging source, so the lower power of a DC/DC charger isn't a big deal. It's sounds like the OP's boat fits this model, or is very close.


For our operation, I very much depend on the alternators, not just to recharge batteries while underway after a night or two at anchor, but to provide all our underway power. I'm a bit alarmed by it, but our underway power consumption is around 100A @24V. Most of that is ER ventilation fans, with the balance for general house loads, nav electronics, continuous running steering pump, etc.. And if we are doing laundry, or making water, or running the oven, that load jumps up a lot higher. Without big alternators we would be running a generator most of the time.


As for which is more efficient, generating power via alternators vs running a generator, I tried to figure that out a while ago and wrote about in this article https://www.mvtanglewood.com/2017/02/engine-alternator-or-generator-which-is.html


It would be nice to redo the experiment with actual metered generator fuel consumption rather than published numbers which are sparse, but the results were still interesting. Another factor is maintenance. The main is racking up hours underway one way or another. If you also run a generator, that 200hr oil change interval will show up a lot sooner than if you can generate your power from the main and leave the generator off.
 
". Excess power is available essentially for free while the engine is running.
Only if you already have the big alts and regulator in play
Here in Oz for me that's an extra $3000 + expense
And it only works while the big motor is running - it's been several days since we last started it
Today it will get 2 hours of use then probably another 4 days before we move again.

For us putting the dollars into extra battery capacity made more sense.
And with 275 watt solar panels running at $60 each I'm thinking of putting up another 4 bringing our total solar up to 3.5kw.

Yes, I know not everyone has that roof real-estate but many could do a solar shade structure in place of canvas
 
Last edited:
I'm a bit alarmed by it, but our underway power consumption is around 100A @24V.

Wow. I can see why solar isn't really in the mix for you.

So when you're anchored the generator runs as necessary to charge the house bank, and when you're underway everything runs off the alternator with redundancy provided by the generator? Or are there other times you'd use the generator?
 
My 2003 42 Nordic Tug came to me with a 100? 120? amp internally regulated alternator. Some testing revealed that I wasn’t getting much charge to my AGMs at my preferred hull speed. I had the alternator switched out to a Balmor externally regulated alternator (I think it’s 200 amp). This model gives me ample charging at all RPMs. I don’t plan to switch to Li batteries yet. My boat has 5 separate monitored battery banks, so the cost is prohibitive just now.
 
Wow. I can see why solar isn't really in the mix for you.

So when you're anchored the generator runs as necessary to charge the house bank, and when you're underway everything runs off the alternator with redundancy provided by the generator? Or are there other times you'd use the generator?


I think TT mentioned a significant amount of the underway draw being engine room cooling fans, steering pumps, nav electronics, etc. Most of that wouldn't be running if the boat isn't underway, so solar and other power sources wouldn't need to account for it.

Loads like that are where big alternators start to become important, as those loads only exist during the times when the main(s) would be running and the alternators can supply power.
 
As for which is more efficient, generating power via alternators vs running a generator, I tried to figure that out a while ago and wrote about in this article https://www.mvtanglewood.com/2017/02/engine-alternator-or-generator-which-is.html


It would be nice to redo the experiment with actual metered generator fuel consumption rather than published numbers which are sparse, but the results were still interesting. Another factor is maintenance. The main is racking up hours underway one way or another. If you also run a generator, that 200hr oil change interval will show up a lot sooner than if you can generate your power from the main and leave the generator off.

For what value it's worth, I routinely increase fuel burn by .3 GPH when the alternator is putting out around 3KW. This is based on Deere computer fuel calculations. While probably not super accurate, it's a starting point. My 9KW Onan supposedly burns 1 GPH at full load. So the alternator might be slightly more efficient, but within the margin of error. Taking generator power and running it through the battery charger may reduce efficiency, but then the inverter converting alternator power in to 120 VAC, also costs efficiency. For me, it's less generator hours which equals less maintenance.

Ted
 
Wow. I can see why solar isn't really in the mix for you.

So when you're anchored the generator runs as necessary to charge the house bank, and when you're underway everything runs off the alternator with redundancy provided by the generator? Or are there other times you'd use the generator?


Yes, that's typical. A couple hours of generator a day keeps things charged and running when we are anchored for multiple days, or at a dock without power, or where we choose to not plug in. Then on underway-days the batteries get charged and daily power comes from the alternators, and we arrive at the next anchorage fully charged. For how we use the boat, it works quite well.


Then there are various exceptions. Underway we can run any one of laundry, one water makers, or the oven. If for whatever reason we want to run more, say to make a lot of water fast using two water makers, or the oven while doing laundry, we will run the generator.


I'm not sure what I'll do when I get somewhere that requires HVAC. Once the boat is cooled, there is a good chance I can run off the alternators, but I suspect it will be pushing it and that I'd be better off running the small generator. Anyone in a hot climate and wanting HVAC is going to be running a generator anyway, and alternators again become less important in the mix.
 
For what value it's worth, I routinely increase fuel burn by .3 GPH when the alternator is putting out around 3KW. This is based on Deere computer fuel calculations. While probably not super accurate, it's a starting point. My 9KW Onan supposedly burns 1 GPH at full load. So the alternator might be slightly more efficient, but within the margin of error. Taking generator power and running it through the battery charger may reduce efficiency, but then the inverter converting alternator power in to 120 VAC, also costs efficiency. For me, it's less generator hours which equals less maintenance.

Ted


That makes perfect sense. A good rule of thumb is that is takes 1 gph to drive a 10kw load. Less load, less fuel, more load, more fuel. So your .3 gph for 3kw load is spot on. All the tradeoffs that you cite are what I was trying to quantify in my little experiment a few years back. Just considering fuel burn, and not maintenance, my basic finding was that alternators were better for light to medium loads, and a generator was better for larger loads.



Nobody should be fooled into thinking that alternator power comes for free. It absolutely drives up fuel burn. I can tell when my batteries have reached float just by looking at my fuel burn on the main engine.
 
. I'm a bit alarmed by it, but our underway power consumption is around 100A @24V. Most of that is ER ventilation fans, with the balance for general house loads, nav electronics, continuous running steering pump, etc.. .

Sweet Baby Jeebus that's a lot :eek:

We have ER extraction fans and steering pump but we dont see much more than 25 amps when underway, unless the hot water system kicks in but that's 15 minutes once a day.
 
If you can set up your boat such that solar output > daily power consumption, then I agree that the engine alternator becomes much less interesting.

I guess my original point was around choices and priorities. Maybe for someone who regularly uses their gensets the alternator becomes much less interesting as well.

I'm thinking of the model where daily house needs might be perfectly well satisfied by 50% solar, 50% genset. Or 100% genset. There's lots of flexibility.

It's especially worth considering with large lithium banks because they can happily live at low SOC. I found after 8 months cruising with a lithium house bank that getting to full charge was the last thing on my mind. Better to leave them at 40% so that you're still below 100 at the end of a sunny day.

I'm sort of working on the model where operation doesn't load up the house system, and is supported by the alternator. You've broken my model :)
 
I should also add that my next boat will have all DC loads normally associated with running - instruments, running lights, ER fan, etc - running to the start battery. So then you can view the operational side as self contained and self sufficient, and look at the house side as just the house side.

That also makes small dc-dc chargers to house beneficial rather than required, because they'll actually go to house needs.
 
My 2003 42 Nordic Tug came to me with a 100? 120? amp internally regulated alternator. Some testing revealed that I wasn’t getting much charge to my AGMs at my preferred hull speed. I had the alternator switched out to a Balmor externally regulated alternator (I think it’s 200 amp). This model gives me ample charging at all RPMs. I don’t plan to switch to Li batteries yet. My boat has 5 separate monitored battery banks, so the cost is prohibitive just now.

That's a perfect arrangement for AGMs.

If it works for you, keep it. Plugging in Li may just be aggravation...

I set my boat up like yours and could have been a happy camper. But I like to play, and have tinkered with electric cars for a while. Now I'm living on my boat trying to come up with practical ways to green my operation.
 
I guess my original point was around choices and priorities. Maybe for someone who regularly uses their gensets the alternator becomes much less interesting as well.

Sorry TT, I missed that this was your last point.

Anyway, not arguing, just trying to extend the argument for us normal folks :)
 
Were I starting again with a blank sheet I would still go for large alternators and as much solar as could reasonably be fitted

Interesting. As i mentioned earlier, going to li for me really made me reconsider the need for high charging.

Would you be willing to limit house charging from your alternators to 30a per side?

I can think of no imposition and lots of benefits. Maybe I misunderstand your use case.
 
Last edited:
Insequent, I should tell you where I'm at in the progression.

I have solar that I love and plan to extend.

I have a genset and a robust charger. DD and I are alike in our dislike for generators. I brought mine over from my last boat, hooked it up, and waited for an excuse to use it. Then winterized it, and haven't started it since.

I have a robust diesel heating system, and was trying to keep A/C options open. Having used the boat for a while I really don't have that need.

So now I have solar and high alternator charging. Fabulous. But I want to prioritize solar. I have a definite preference for solar vs diesel.

This summer I had my 170a alternator essentially turned off.

Now, I'm rarely in one place for more than a day or two. Like OC Diver I pile the miles on.

So the 1.5 solution offered by solar and reduced alternator capabilities probably wouldn't cramp my style. I'm seriously thinking of going there deliberately.
 
Further on my motivation to go there deliberately, if it's not already clear.

Lithium is perfect until it's not.

I've thought lots about the dreaded BMS shutdown and the challenges that this poses. Alternators are the tip of the iceberg.

For me, the solution is essentially clean separation of house and operational.

Operational needs to be bulletproof. You need to be able to start and operate reliably in all conditions. Alternators and LA batteries have been doing it for years.

House can shut down. The lights go out and the ice starts melting. But I'll get to where I need to in order to resolve.
 
Last edited:
I should also add that my next boat will have all DC loads normally associated with running - instruments, running lights, ER fan, etc - running to the start battery. So then you can view the operational side as self contained and self sufficient, and look at the house side as just the house side.

That also makes small dc-dc chargers to house beneficial rather than required, because they'll actually go to house needs.


That's a perfectly viable approach, and one that has been used successfully for a long time. I ended up going the other direction moving more and more gear to AC. I'm not saying it's better, just offering it as yet another way to do things. Part of the idea came from larger boats where everything is AC, and the AC system is built to be a redundant, critical system. Historically we look to DC for reliability and put critical systems on it. But with the introduction of a BMS that can itself fail and possibly take out DC power, it raises the question again. Since bigger boats have bigger loads, building AC as a critical system makes it a good power source, just like on a much bigger boat. Between inverters and two generators, I figure my AC is just as reliable as any DC source.
 
Further on my motivation to go there deliberately, if it's not already clear.

Lithium is perfect until it's not.

I've thought lots about the dreaded BMS shutdown and the challenges that this poses. Alternators are the tip of the iceberg.

For me, the solution is essentially clean separation of house and operational.

Operational needs to be bulletproof. You need to be able to start and operate reliably in all conditions. Alternators and LA batteries have been doing it for years.

House can shut down. The lights go out and the ice starts melting. But I'll get to where I need to in order to resolve.


That is indeed the big concern, and was a huge focus when I was planning our power system what is now 4 years ago. As you point out, boats are historically designed around the assumption that DC power is always there, and will always be there until the water rises above the top decks. So we use it for all critical systems.


As part of planning for the boat power system, I built an LFP bank for my home to get experience with it. One thing that became pretty clear is that the batteries themselves are VERY stable and just work. And because there is no water maintenance, and no management concerns of partial SOC operation, they are actually much MORE stable than lead.


So what's the concern over BMS disconnects? Well, a disconnect will only happen if the battery is operated out of allowed range for temp, charge voltage, etc. What's the solution? Just don't do it. In a correctly set up battery system, a BMS disconnect will NEVER happen. It's only a broken charger that tries to over-charge a battery that will lead to a BMS disconnect. And by the way, that will likely trash a lead battery as well. If chargers are set up correctly, the batteries will never even come close to a disconnect. It's like a fuse. They only blow if something is wrong.



That leaves failure of the BMS itself. Will there be software errors? Will the electronics hold up over time and various environmental conditions? This was my concern. Not the batteries, but a failed or errant BMS. To deal with this, I built in two backups, actually three.


First is that I built two LFP battery banks, each with it's own BMS. So if a BMS goes wacko, it will only take out half of my battery system, and not cast the boat into darkness and silence. Then, in case both BMSes fail, I have a parallel switch that let's me parallel the house bank with either of the two engine start banks. The start banks are obviously much smaller capacity, but they will get things running again, and I can start a generator for longer term operation. The parallel switches have also proven very useful for doing LFP maintenance. For example, I can switch house loads to a start bank, then shut down the BMSes for software updates or other work, then switch back to LFP when done.


So this is a long way of saying that although BMS disconnects need to be accounted for, they don't just happen willy nilly, and if they do, it's because something is wrong with your system. For example, my home BMS has NEVER disconnected. Not once, not in 4 years of continuous use as the houses primary power source. And in contrast, I have heard of LFP systems designed to intentionally charge the batteries until they disconnect. That's just so wrong and represents a fundamental misunderstanding of what a BMS disconnect is intended for.
 
Insequent, I should tell you where I'm at in the progression.

I have solar that I love and plan to extend.

I have a genset and a robust charger. DD and I are alike in our dislike for generators. I brought mine over from my last boat, hooked it up, and waited for an excuse to use it. Then winterized it, and haven't started it since.

I have a robust diesel heating system, and was trying to keep A/C options open. Having used the boat for a while I really don't have that need.

So now I have solar and high alternator charging. Fabulous. But I want to prioritize solar. I have a definite preference for solar vs diesel.

This summer I had my 170a alternator essentially turned off.

Now, I'm rarely in one place for more than a day or two. Like OC Diver I pile the miles on.

So the 1.5 solution offered by solar and reduced alternator capabilities probably wouldn't cramp my style. I'm seriously thinking of going there deliberately.


It will take a little fussing to get it right, but if you set the solar charge voltages a touch higher than the alternator charge voltages, the solar will take priority. You can turn the solar up a bit, or turn the alternator down a bit, or do a little of each. Just keep in mind when doing this that little things like different meter calibration between the devices, different voltage sense points, and voltage drops when charging and under loads will become significant when making fine adjustments. So experimentation will be required, followed by careful monitoring to be sure things are working as you desire.
 
I should also add that my next boat will have all DC loads normally associated with running - instruments, running lights, ER fan, etc - running to the start battery. So then you can view the operational side as self contained and self sufficient, and look at the house side as just the house side.

That also makes small dc-dc chargers to house beneficial rather than required, because they'll actually go to house needs.


I've thought about doing things that way, but I haven't, as my nav and anchor lights run off the same circuit, for example (although that could be changed). And there are things like the chartplotter, VHFs, etc. that are underway loads, but also frequently left on at anchor (where I wouldn't want them drawing down the start battery). ER fans would be fine on the start batteries (although it would break the philosophy my boat has of starting power being sacred, so once the keys are off, nothing is drawing from the start batteries).
 
It will take a little fussing to get it right, but if you set the solar charge voltages a touch higher than the alternator charge voltages, the solar will take priority. You can turn the solar up a bit, or turn the alternator down a bit, or do a little of each. Just keep in mind when doing this that little things like different meter calibration between the devices, different voltage sense points, and voltage drops when charging and under loads will become significant when making fine adjustments. So experimentation will be required, followed by careful monitoring to be sure things are working as you desire.

I'm not really seeking full automation. I think in my normal case of traveling every day I'd rely 100% on solar. If I felt I needed a boost - say on a rainy day - I'd turn on the dc-dc charger and leave it on until I got to say 90% then turn it off. Keep in mind that I've got 3x daily use in capacity. The cycles can be slow.

The big downside is the drop in max charge to house. My current arrangement allows about 115a charging to house. Rewiring will cut that to 30a. But the more I think about it, the more I think that really doesn't bother me.
 
I've thought about doing things that way, but I haven't, as my nav and anchor lights run off the same circuit, for example (although that could be changed). And there are things like the chartplotter, VHFs, etc. that are underway loads, but also frequently left on at anchor (where I wouldn't want them drawing down the start battery). ER fans would be fine on the start batteries (although it would break the philosophy my boat has of starting power being sacred, so once the keys are off, nothing is drawing from the start batteries).
Yup. I get the concerns. But you can easily bulk up the start battery (relabel it as an operations battery).

You could have dc-dc chargers going both ways. Then house can act as a failover if the alternator blows up or you have an unusual case.

Edit to add: it's also worth looking at shore power. The house -> operations charger fits nicely in that model. Use the big charger for lithium and keep operations on maintenance charge.
 
Last edited:
I'm currently charging thruster/windless banks from house. But can happily do without thrusters and have lots of reserve for windlass. So that stays the same.
 
Just got a special email offer from Ampere Time. Same battery, same price as I paid in June.

Not to go off topic, but their communications have been top notch.
 
A couple of years ago, I installed a 200 amp alternator and external Balmar programable regulator on my current vessel and could not be happier. I keeps the house bank "topped off" while we motor for hours on end. The 15K genny would top off the house bank too, but then it would be woefully underloaded and would just be adding generator hours and wasting fuel. I have Floscan fuel monitors and have not noticed a difference in fuel consumption on that motor (CAT 3306's) since I installed it (I'm sure it consumes some, but it appears to be very minor). The 15 KW Genny consumes about a gallon an hour plus all the wear and tear on it AND then the unloading issue. I am very pleased with the set up (AGM batteries by the way). Just my experience:)
 
Back
Top Bottom