Opinions wanted.

JD said:

This concept has been talked about for a while now. I had read where one of the major companies was going to actually build a boat for production using this concept. That was two or three years ago. Does anyone know if it has happened. As a reference it was about the time the Pod Drives were starting to come out.

Click to expand...

I plan on rewiring my boat with this concept...been thinking for a long time why it hasn't been done by manufacturers that I know....other than not as user friendly the way I see it...but I'm sure there's lots of ways of doing it...the easier ones must be more expensive.

Thinking of going up to 24 volts to save $ on wiring but might lose it as I would have to replace too many systems right off the bat.

psneeld said:

I plan on rewiring my boat with this concept...been thinking for a long time why it hasn't been done by manufacturers that I know....other than not as user friendly the way I see it...but I'm sure there's lots of ways of doing it...the easier ones must be more expensive.

Thinking of going up to 24 volts to save $ on wiring but might lose it as I would have to replace too many systems right off the bat.

Click to expand...

I had heard that the problems were with the wireless circuit breakers that were being used (failure to function as advertised).

I think you are correct as to costs being equal when all done. I really don't see much of an advantage to the 24V but may see a downside if trying to replace a part in BFE.

JD said:

I had heard that the problems were with the wireless circuit breakers that were being used (failure to function as advertised).

I think you are correct as to costs being equal when all done. I really don't see much of an advantage to the 24V but may see a downside if trying to replace a part in BFE.

Click to expand...

Wasn't going to use CB's..was going to have 3-4 subpanel fuse blocks...I don't trust marine CBs as they have a bad rep anyho. Most cabin circuits rarely trip so the occasional fuse replacement would not be a chore.

I'll have to look into 24v pumps, bulbs, etc...I'm not sure that they are that hard to get and with Amazon overnight and a few key spare on board...may not be that bad.

I do not think it will pass ABYC or be insureable? I had to bring the Eagle up to code by our insurance company.

Phil Fill said:

I do not think it will pass ABYC or be insureable? I had to bring the Eagle up to code by our insurance company.

Click to expand...

Sure it will...why not? As long as every wire is fuse protected and correct size and the connections meet ABYC...what's the diff?

At least my system will be visable(traceable) for a surveyor...as opposed to a bunch of hidden wire bundles that he has no idea of what's going on when he looks at them.

Greetings,
I fully agree with Mr. psneed and to add, ABYC "codes" are nothing of the sort. They are GUIDELINES or SUGGESTIONS so as to provide a comparison with voluntarily accepted practices. If they had ANY basis in law, the vast majority on board here would have to re-wire!
A good surveyor should apply a certain amount of discretion when passing judgement.
Definition for code - Oxford Dictionaries Online (US English)

RT Firefly said:

Greetings,
I fully agree with Mr. psneed and to add, ABYC "codes" are nothing of the sort. They are GUIDELINES or SUGGESTIONS so as to provide a comparison with voluntarily accepted practices. If they had ANY basis in law, the vast majority on board here would have to re-wire!
A good surveyor should apply a certain amount of discretion when passing judgement.
Definition for code - Oxford Dictionaries Online (US English)

Click to expand...

Unfortunately the insurance companies DO have some strange ideas as to whose advice they follow!

So I will be extra carefull to follow their code.

As an electrical professional, I'm not a fan of this whole ring system concept.

I also have mixed feelings as to having a direct connection from each circuit back to the main DC, or AC panel.

Its frustrating in that if I want to add a circuit in say the engine room of my boat, why should I take apart half the boat just to run a circuit back to the main panel in the pilothouse.

I understand the concept, and I suppose it is nice being able to check any breaker from the vicinity of the helm station, but in practicality we don't troubleshoot everything from the helm seat.

If I were designing the power distribution on my boat (a 47' pilothouse) I'd start with a main panel, then have sub panels feeding off of that.

At the very least a sub panel in the engine room, one at the helm, flybridge, etc...

I would not even consider electronic breaker panels or anything like that. I'd stick with old technology that has a proven track record of reliability.

What I would like to see is a fuse alarm. We have them on many of the systems I work on. If a fuse or breaker trips, then an alarm contact closes and a light illuminates.

ksanders said:

As an electrical professional, I'm not a fan of this whole ring system concept.

I also have mixed feelings as to having a direct connection from each circuit back to the main DC, or AC panel.

Its frustrating in that if I want to add a circuit in say the engine room of my boat, why should I take apart half the boat just to run a circuit back to the main panel in the pilothouse.

I understand the concept, and I suppose it is nice being able to check any breaker from the vicinity of the helm station, but in practicality we don't troubleshoot everything from the helm seat.

If I were designing the power distribution on my boat (a 47' pilothouse) I'd start with a main panel, then have sub panels feeding off of that.

At the very least a sub panel in the engine room, one at the helm, flybridge, etc...

I would not even consider electronic breaker panels or anything like that. I'd stick with old technology that has a proven track record of reliability.

What I would like to see is a fuse alarm. We have them on many of the systems I work on. If a fuse or breaker trips, then an alarm contact closes and a light illuminates.

Click to expand...

What you are describing is what I envisioned...a blue seas blade 12 or 6 position fuse panel in the fwd stateroom/head/galley, one in the main salon, one in the engine room for auto bilge pumps and other non-switched items, one aft for the master strm/head, one for lower helm/electronics and one on the flying bridge. One main running fwd to supply 4 subs, one aft to supply 2. Each fused at a main Positve post/block.

But you do give me the idea to think each sub feed from the main via a CB.

"why should I take apart half the boat just to run a circuit back to the main panel in the pilothouse."

Because the boat assembler did not feel justified in spending $5.00 you couldn't see.

This is what a ring circuit should solve with out requiring the $5.00 of initial expense.

FF

psneeld said:

What you are describing is what I envisioned...a blue seas blade 12 or 6 position fuse panel in the fwd stateroom/head/galley, one in the main salon, one in the engine room for auto bilge pumps and other non-switched items, one aft for the master strm/head, one for lower helm/electronics and one on the flying bridge. One main running fwd to supply 4 subs, one aft to supply 2. Each fused at a main Positve post/block.

But you do give me the idea to think each sub feed from the main via a CB.

Click to expand...

One of the advantages of the main panel-sub panel design is overlapping levels of overcurrent protection, and limiting the areas of an outage due to an equipment failure.

Here's an example...

Lets say that you have a main-sub panel topology in your electrical system. Lets say that you have a 50 amp breaker, feeding 6 awg wire going to a sub panel. At the sub panel you have distribution breakers feeding loads. wire sizes ranging from 10-12 awg and breakers of 15-30 amps.

You have a fault that results in a fail to operate of a distribution breaker (yes, this happens). The breaker feeding the sub panel will operate, protecting the system from a complete outage and possibly from a fire.

In a ring system, assuming the same fault, best case scenario is that you generate enough fault current to take down the entire ring, (but remember that your ring system is powering everything so its probably using something like 2/0 cable and a 200 amp breaker), this takes down everything. Worst case and in all probability you do not have enough fault current to take down the ring. In this case the ring powers the fault current and a fire results.

We haven't even started into the ease of maintaining, ease of fault isolation issues yet.

There are reasons why electrical systems are designed in a star topology, and where they are designed in a ring, they employ very sophisticated protective relay equipment to protect them.

ksanders said:

One of the advantages of the main panel-sub panel design is overlapping levels of overcurrent protection, and limiting the areas of an outage due to an equipment failure.

Here's an example...

Lets say that you have a main-sub panel topology in your electrical system. Lets say that you have a 50 amp breaker, feeding 6 awg wire going to a sub panel. At the sub panel you have distribution breakers feeding loads

You have a fault that results in a fail to operate of a distribution breaker (Yes, this happens). The breaker feeding the sub panel will operate. protecting the system from a complete outage and possibly from a fire.

In a ring system, best case scenario is that you generate enough fault current to take down the entire ring. this takes down everything. worsst case you do not have enough fault current to take down the ring. In this case the ring powers the fault current and a fire results.

We haven't even started into the ease of maintaining, ease of fault isolation issues yet.

There are reasons why electrical systems are designed in a star topology, and where they are designed in a ring, they employ very sophisticated protective relay equipment to protect them.

Click to expand...

Good points....I may do just that... but I will say that I'm leary of CBs...they work for a dead short...most of the time.. but their failure rate in high amperage situations that aren't dead shorts resulting in hot wires/fires is just to high for my liking. So I'm not sure what I'll do.

Plus, I'm not sure of your example where a fault between a fixture and the sub-panel wouldn't trip a breaker/fuse and who care about the ring circuit unless it dead shorts?

psneeld said:

Good points....I may do just that... but I will say that I'm leary of CBs...they work for a dead short...most of the time.. but their failure rate in high amperage situations that aren't dead shorts resulting in hot wires/fires is just to high for my liking. So I'm not sure what I'll do.

Plus, I'm not sure of your example where a fault between a fixture and the sub-panel wouldn't trip a breaker/fuse and who care about the ring circuit unless it dead shorts?

Click to expand...

OK, lets take your post and take an example from it.


Assume a 12 volt DC system, 12 awg wire, 20 amp breaker feeding a load.

Create a short at the equipment. For calculations assume that the short including the resistance of the 12 awg wire is .1 ohm. Assume for calculations that the panel feeding the wire has zero resistance (we call this an infinite buss in fault current studies).

Your calculated fault current will be 120 amps.

The 20 amp breaker has approx 6 times its overcurrent rating flowing through it. I do not have the time overcurrent curves for the breaker right here but a typical operate time would be in the range of say 10 miliseconds or so.

But in this case the 20 amp breaker fails to operate. It malfunctions.

Now assume that your panel with the 20 amp breaker is a sub panel off of a main panel, fed by a 50 amp breaker.

assuming no other load on the sub panel, the current through 50 amp breaker is still 120 amps. This is 2.4X the capacity of the 50 amp breaker. a typical time overcurrent curve would cause the 50 amp breaker operate in around 3 seconds.

Now take the ring system 2/0 cable, 200 amp breaker feeding the ring. its easy to see that the 200 amp breaker would never operate. I promise you thast 120 amps flowing through a 12 awg wire will quickly get hot enough to start a fire.

This concept of overlapping overcurrent protection is a industry standard in electrical equipment design for good reason.

The only way a ring system makes any electrical sense is if every tap off of the ring is to a sub panel, with the very first thing being an intermediate overcurrent protection device. Anything other than that is risking an uncontrolled overcurrent and all the hazards that come with it.

If you think about it, you have the same hazards by having a gigantic main panel on a boat, and having every load tied directly to it. A better design would be to logically divide the load on the main panel into mini sub panels for example.

ksanders said:

OK, lets take your post and take an example from it.


Assume a 12 volt DC system, 12 awg wire, 20 amp breaker feeding a load.

Create a short at the equipment. For calculations assume that the short including the resistance of the 12 awg wire is .1 ohm. Assume for calculations that the panel feeding the wire has zero resistance (we call this an infinite buss in fault current studies).

Your calculated fault current will be 120 amps.

The 20 amp breaker has approx 6 times its overcurrent rating flowing through it. I do not have the time overcurrent curves for the breaker right here but a typical operate time would be in the range of say 10 miliseconds or so.

But in this case the 20 amp breaker fails to operate. It malfunctions.

Now assume that your panel with the 20 amp breaker is a sub panel off of a main panel, fed by a 50 amp breaker.

assuming no other load on the sub panel, the current through 50 amp breaker is still 120 amps. This is 2.4X the capacity of the 50 amp breaker. a typical time overcurrent curve would cause the 50 amp breaker operate in around 3 seconds.

Now take the ring system 2/0 cable, 200 amp breaker feeding the ring. its easy to see that the 200 amp breaker would never operate. I promise you thast 120 amps flowing through a 12 awg wire will quickly get hot enough to start a fire.

This concept of overlapping overcurrent protection is a industry standard in electrical equipment design for good reason.

The only way a ring system makes any electrical sense is if every tap off of the ring is to a sub panel, with the very first thing being an intermediate overcurrent protection device. Anything other than that is risking an uncontrolled overcurrent and all the hazards that come with it.

Click to expand...

OK...I'm not sure a lot of boats are really set up to your standard...especially when it comes to high amp loads like windlasses, bow thrusters...but I see and like your pointing out the redundancy of a 50 amp panel feeding much more than it is usually tasked for.

"but I will say that I'm leary of CBs...they work for a dead short...most of the time.. but their failure rate in high amperage situations that aren't dead shorts resulting in hot wires/fires is just to high for my liking."


That's why they sell fuses. Cheap , easy to trouble shoot or replace.

Fast as you want , just pick the correct ones.

FF

It's completed now but here's a 'work in progress' pic of the BlueSea breaker panel I added. I needed some additional breakers for our add ons and did not want to replace the original AC/DC panel.
Fed off the main lugs in the original panel and located in the helm station.

RT Firefly said:

Greetings,
I fully agree with Mr. psneed and to add, ABYC "codes" are nothing of the sort. They are GUIDELINES or SUGGESTIONS so as to provide a comparison with voluntarily accepted practices. If they had ANY basis in law, the vast majority on board here would have to re-wire!
A good surveyor should apply a certain amount of discretion when passing judgement.
Definition for code - Oxford Dictionaries Online (US English)

Click to expand...

I agree they are guidelines that insurance and surveyors do follow. Its up to the owner if the boat meets the guidelines, its up the insurance company if they want to insure and/or a buyer if they want to buy. Since bring the Eagle up to ABYC guidelines the Eagle is saver and I sleep better.

Phil Fill said:

I agree they are guidelines that insurance and surveyors do follow. Its up to the owner if the boat meets the guidelines, its up the insurance company if they want to insure and/or a buyer if they want to buy. Since bring the Eagle up to ABYC guidelines the Eagle is saver and I sleep better.

Click to expand...

If you think just meeting ABYC or USCG standards makes a safe boat....yeowwwwww!!!!

And meeting those standards is really no big deal for someone in or around the boating business if you open a book/web page or two...

Greetings,
Yup, they (ABYC USCG) are a minimum level BUT there has to be SOME benchmark somewhere. During a recent insurance survey I had to bite my tongue several times when the surveyor gentleman mentioned that such and such were not according to ABYC "code". Hey, I can more appreciate the fellow saying "This is not the safest" and giving his reason as opposed to "the code is...".
As it turns out, prior to the survey, I checked out every nook and cranny myself and found items that needed addressing which I will attend to that the surveyor never saw so some good DID come out of it all. But CODE....really!
Apologies to hfoster for the morph of the thread but hopefully you're absorbing some of this.

If your boat is for work, you meet the USCG (usually Subchapter T ) requirements in full, or you dont get your inspection sticker.

Then you dont work.

RTF. No apologies is needed My Friend. This is what the froum is about, kicking ideas around and everyone having a input. Some good always comes out in the end. Yes I am absorbing all the info that is being brought forth. All of it is great stuff.

Thanks!

H.Foster

psneeld said:

If you think just meeting ABYC or USCG standards makes a safe boat....yeowwwwww!!!!

And meeting those standards is really no big deal for someone in or around the boating business if you open a book/web page or two...

Click to expand...

I did not say it made the Eagle a SAFE boat. What I said it made the Eagle a safer boat. Well if I did not spell SAFER as saver. The audit had 19 recomendations which quoted the ABYC guideline not met. It took about 20 hours and 3 grand in 60 days to meet the guidlines, if I wanted insurance. So it can be a big deal.

20 hours in 60 days? Sounds like my winter work schedule...

psneeld said:

20 hours in 60 days? Sounds like my winter work schedule...

Click to expand...

Have you ever tried to schedule a marine electrician and a diesel mechanic the middle of July? It was not my 20 hours but the 3 grand for the electrician and mechanic.

Just want to say Thanks to everyone for all your input. I was very helpful

THANKS!

H Foster

H - Keep us apprised on your decissions as they come to fruition! - Cheers, Art

psneeld said:

Sure it will...why not? As long as every wire is fuse protected and correct size and the connections meet ABYC...what's the diff?

At least my system will be visable(traceable) for a surveyor...as opposed to a bunch of hidden wire bundles that he has no idea of what's going on when he looks at them.

Click to expand...

Master Volt has all of the remote switching systems. ABYC cert's and EU ISO certs. New Technology is cool ,BUT the money is it worth it? KISS is cool.

Don

Don Souza said:

Master Volt has all of the remote switching systems. ABYC cert's and EU ISO certs. New Technology is cool ,BUT the money is it worth it? KISS is cool.

Don

Click to expand...

My imagined system is way simpler than whats there now...and I never imagined remote switching systems...just sub-panels instead of long wire runs and wire bundles that you can't find do-do in.

FF said:

Dockage at $5.00 a ft in many areas is a big money pit. FF

Click to expand...

Oh, please tell me where I can find dockage at $5.00 a foot!! I last paid over $9.00 a foot and $12.00 a foot.....

I think the Flemings are really great looking boats, well built, and hold their value pretty well...if the owner decides to sell.

My only issue with these boats, as with many other makes...is that they are not American made... I know for some people this may be a non-issue, but for me it is a touchy one.... I prefer American made products, and yes I will pay more for them. Why? Quality control, warranty, service, and all the rest.

We liveaboard our Guflstar 44 MC...built in St Petersburg, Fl...and she is well built. I guess if I was going to buy a new boat, as in really NEW...I would be looking to Hatteras or Mainship...

I guess I'm just tired of the "Made in China" label.......