Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hi Chuck,
It is definitely a 424. I'll see if I can get the name of it.
Bob
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 6:06 PM, Chuck Ruble < ([email][/email])> wrote:
I'm pretty certain this is a 424. Is it possibly somebody on the list here?
This was included in a message forwarded to me in a power point presentation of Ike images.Chuck
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ()
For additional commands, e-mail: ()—
Bob Fine
Fine Software LLC
Your data on the web your way. No kiddingPost generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
Er, ehm, I'm not sure what prop I have but my W58 runs 5.8-6.5 kts at 1900 rpm at about 1 gal/hr. It will run 6.8-7.2 kts at 2100 rpm, but burns nearly 2 gal/hr. It's a 3 bladed prop and will run up to about 2800 rpm total.
Does that mean I need to change the prop?
Bob
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
I'm going throw in my two cents here. I've seen too many Max Props with problems caused by shifting at high rpms – which happens more often than you'd think. If you have a transmission that will survive rotation I recommend a fixed prop for the following reasons:
1. Full power ahead and astern.
2. Like a BB, it's nearly impossible to break
3. Complex mechanisms out of reach make me nervous
4. They're 1/4 the price.
That all said, I know many people won't agree who have had great success with MaxProps. I plan to use the prop rotation to generate electricity.
Bob
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
Hi Chuck,
That sounds a whole lot easier than the copper and rubber….
Bob
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 6:57 AM, Chuck Ruble < ([email][/email])> wrote:
I replaced my solid lines with 1/4″ USCG rated rubber fuel line.
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 8:46 AM, alan P < ([email][/email])> wrote:
I am redoing my fuel system to add a fuel pump and a second racor filter.
I have the W58. Do you think 1/4″ line is ok or should I use 5/16?
Any experience out there?
alan
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ()
For additional commands, e-mail: ()—
Bob Fine
Fine Software LLC
Your data on the web your way. No kiddingPost generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
Hi Alan,
I'd have to measure but I think my copper fuel lines are 3/8″. So the hose is probably the same. I haven't gotten around to changing it but probably will this winter. As Rich says, this is one time you don't want to look for an alternative material for hoses. Marine grade fuel hose is the only way to go.
Bob
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 5:59 AM, < ([email][/email])> wrote:
Quote:Alan
Given the low volume required by these engines and the short run, I don't think it matters. I suggest matching the ID of the existing fuel lines. 5/16 might be hard to find though. There are quality requirements regarding the ability of the hose to resist heat and fire. Don't just get what's sold at the auto parts store.http://www.defender.com/product.jsp?path=-1|311|302335|315125&id=199463
—
Rich Carter
Original message
<.. snip>Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
Hi Tor,
Emotion and other opinions aside, let's look at the system requirements.
1. You need to distribute salt water (corrosive) to several points at a pressure of 1.5 pounds static.
2. Falling off a 50 foot wave will induce a pressure spike of 25 pounds or so, giving a dynamic and static pressure total of 27-30 psi.
3. PVC (Schedule 40) will withstand 120 psi 140 degrees.
4. You will die at sustained temperatures of 140 degrees.
5. PVC doesn't corrode.
6. You and anyone on your boat will not be walking, stepping, jumping, chewing, drilling, sawing, jackhammering or any other destructive processing on the PVC.
7. Occasionally, you'll be having a look at the PVC. Maybe even operating the valves.
8. You will live less than 100,000 years (the estimated life of PVC in seawater). The boat will survive less than 100,000 years. You will sell the boat before 100,000 years pass. You get the idea.
9. PVC is easy to construct and install
10. PVC is cheap and is not subject to galvanic or other metallic corrosions.
11. PVC is a well understood and tested material.
That's about it. Admittedly, my investment into my home is less than yours, but I trust what works for a bazillion homes and industries to work in the relatively benign environment I've put it to work. I've used PVC in nuclear applications. Not irradiated but in water treatment.
What it boils down to is new materials in new uses – tradition, which is all important in marine applications – is subject to new tests and new applications. I really believe it's ready for prime time in underwater applications. When ships were of wood and men of iron then valves of bronze were de rigeur. New times, new materials, new processes.
When all is said and done, an engineered material is useful within it's design parameters. PVC falls well within those parameters.
And now, I've said all I'm going to. You can spend 100 or 200 dollars on bronze. You can bond you boat everything to everything. Or for around 60 dollars you can have a manifold that will last of 100,000 years. Maybe more.
But, that said, I'm not a licensed engineer. So your results may vary. As I said before, in 30 years we can compare manifolds. I'll bring the wine and beer. And Yukon Jack, the official drink of Pelican. 🙂
Bob
2008/9/16 Silver Heels < ([email][/email])>
Quote:This is sounding more and more like a B horror movie – scary and funny at the same time. Maybe PVC is the way to go after all, at least for us tropical sailors.Tor
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Silver Heels, P-424 #17
http://www.SilverHeels.us
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Original Message
<.. snip>Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
Hi John,
That's really what it all boils down to. Experience and results. Bronze and SS should be good as long as the valves are operated. Bronze and bronze is also good, but needs to be operated AND greased. Bronze/SS and plastic is totally fine. I wouldn't replace a thru-hull with plastic under any circumstances, and wouldn't put a SS fitting that was continuously under water.
The fact is that as long as you keep up on maintenance and minimally inspecting your gear, you should be good. This group falls well inside of that category. Also, the fact that we even consider the best solution says a lot.
In 30 years, we'll all get together for a beer and a check of our manifolds.
Bob
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 7:20 AM, John Stevenson < ([email][/email])> wrote:
Quote:Well you all forced me to go dig out my old Calder (actually it is a new one, my old one wore out).
Calder recommends against bonding bronze thru-hulls and other bronze plumbing so long as they are isolated from other metal components or not immersed in seawater that could contain stray electrical current (e.g., the bottom of the bilge). His reasoning is that bronze is so much more noble that most other metals that may be bonded to the zinc that the bronze will only accelerate the destruction of the zinc then the destruction of the bonded metals that the zinc was supposed to protect.
That seems to let me off the hook for my manifold, except he goes on to recommend against bronze ball valves with SS balls (my Grocos).
I've decided to exercise my right to selectively accept the advice of experts. So I'll stay with my unbonded manifold with SS ball valves. I'm pretty comfortable with the latter position as it appears all of the original valves on my 424, with the exception of one, are bronze ball valves with SS balls. The one exception is the valve for the deck scupper under the aft berth. That is a true bronze seacock. Having lived on board for nearly 5 years and cruised for 3 years I got out of the habit of closing and opening the valves on a regular basis. This year before my haulout I found nearly all were frozen so during the haulout I worked on all of the valves. Power washing the hull freed up most of them – just a few barnacles on the ball. Others only required a light tap with a hammer to open. I checked the balls in all of these valves and could see no deterioration. If they have lasted with about zero maintenance for 30 years I'm not worried about the valves I just installed.
Anyway that's my rationale and I'm sticking to it :).On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Silver Heels < ([email][/email])> wrote:
Quote:Thanks, Rich. I guess you saw Bob's comment that bronze valves in seawater are electrically connected by the
seawater so no strapping is necessary. The plot thickens.I'd be surprised if a home sprinkler system was made of bronze or stainless steel. Seems like an unnecessary
extravagance, but would be delighted to learn otherwise.Tor
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Silver Heels, P-424 #17
http://www.SilverHeels.us
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Quote:
Original Message
<.. snip>Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
Hi Tor,
I still stand by plastic – none of us are going to live long enough to see it degrade. Bronze thru-hull fittings are a MUST because of the resistance to lateral loading. Bronze and plastic will work but I don't really see a tremendous improvement in either reliability or longevity.
The whole bonding thing is up for discussion still. Do you bond? Do you bond to ground? Many new boat manufacturers don't bond at all because they feel that electrically connecting all the fittings will create a situation in badly grounded marinas where all the fittings will corrode.
Who knows? You could argue both ways and it's a little like politics or religion. I may not agree with you but I'll defend your right to build your manifold out of whatever you want…
Anyway, mine's plastic and hose. If you don't hear from me one day, it's because it wasn't the right choice. Oh, well. 🙂
Bob
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 6:26 AM, Silver Heels < ([email][/email])> wrote:
Quote:Thanks, Rich. I guess you saw Bob's comment that bronze valves in seawater are electrically connected by the
seawater so no strapping is necessary. The plot thickens.I'd be surprised if a home sprinkler system was made of bronze or stainless steel. Seems like an unnecessary
extravagance, but would be delighted to learn otherwise.Tor
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Silver Heels, P-424 #17
http://www.SilverHeels.us
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Quote:
Original Message
<.. snip>Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
Wow, John, that's probably the absolute best way to go and also the most expensive.
Bronze valves in seawater are electrically connected by the seawater so no strapping is necessary.
Bob
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 4:42 PM, John Stevenson < ([email][/email])> wrote:
Tor,
Yes, I used Groco valves (bronze bodies, SS ball valves) for each of the seawater users (frig, AC, galley). I left an additional valve (plugged) for future needs (water maker, etc.).
I think the grounding issue to prevent electrolysis of the metal parts by keeping all seawater immersed metal at the same electric potential. I didn't do that so maybe I'll have another project in a few years.On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Silver Heels < ([email][/email])> wrote:
Rich,
Why would you need to ground each piece of metal?
Tor
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Silver Heels, P-424 #17
http://www.SilverHeels.us
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Original MessageQuote:<.. snip>Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
The ABYC standards you're talking about are about through hull fittings. Bronze through hull fittings to hose to PVC is perfectly acceptable – there is no lateral loading on the manifold. PVC meets all the specifications for piping in boats except for through hull fittings. It is resistant to corrosion (actually immune), it has a temperature rating of 140 degrees continuous use at 120 psi. True, it's not the 300 or 600 WOG that bronze is, but if you can depend on the hose below the water line, you can depend on the PVC as it's ratings are the same or higher than the hose.
That's all I have to say about that.
Bob
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 8:43 AM, John Stevenson < ([email][/email])> wrote:
Quote:Tor,
I built my manifold pretty much as you have done. When I discovered the problem with the brass parts I rebuilt it mostly in bronze. The only non-bronze components are the close nipples that connect the T fittings. These are nylon. Since they are short and thick and are mostly inside the bronze T's I think it is more than strong enough. I haven't looked the ABYC standards nor have I had a marine surveyor approve it. Of course two surveyors approved my old manifold that nearly disintegrated in less than 5 years.
So maybe you don't need to completely start over.On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Silver Heels < ([email][/email])> wrote:
Quote:Quent,Using PVC below the waterline is not my personal preference. Also, I may need to get this past an insurance
surveyor. I'm still looking at options. Nobody seems to make seawater manifolds in any form & size I can use.
Stainless steel pipe fittings become awfully expensive for this, bronze is worse, and I don't think there are
ball valves available in either material. You could probably stand on schedule 80 PVC pipe and not break it,
but I'm not clear on what is meant by “stand on it sideways against the hull.”Later today I'll get a quote from my welder to custom-fabricate something in stainless for me.
Tor
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Silver Heels, P-424 #17
http://www.SilverHeels.us
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Original Message
<.. snip>
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
Hi
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Silver Heels < ([email][/email])> wrote:
Quote:Engineer Bob,Is the problem with brass in seawater an issue of electrolysis, of the zinc being robbed from the zinc/copper alloy? And if so, would a simple pencil zinc incorporated into the brass manifold solve the problem?
Tor
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Silver Heels, P-424 #17
http://www.SilverHeels.us
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Original Message
<.. snip>Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
Hi Tor,
Without knowing the exact alloy of the valving and the zinc, I couldn't tell you. You'd have to calculate the valence of both and determine which is higher. But you'd have to check the zinc pretty often. Brass and seawater is just a bad idea. Bronze is better. Plastic, as far as I'm concerned is best. No corrosion, no electrolysis, no chipping, cracking, crazing. Lasts, conservatively, 1, 000,000 years. Can't beat that. The problem with brass, as Rich indicated, is that the zinc in it is the same as a zinc. Even with a zinc, it will still dissolve at the same rate as the zinc given similar zinc alloys.
The pressure side should be as short as possible as you've done, and I was thinking of connecting the washdown pump to the breaker for the windlass so that it's only on when the windlass is. I never leave the windlass breaker energized to prevent inadvertent anchor motion.
Bob
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
Yes, but it would be VERY expensive. Marelon is a trade name for FRP or fiberglass reinforced plastic, in this case, nylon. Very strong. Very resistant to splitting. Very expensive because it's only used in the marine environment.
Bob
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Silver Heels < ([email][/email])> wrote:
Quote:Rich,Marelon would be an ideal material, but do they make the fittings – T's, coupling nipples, various size barbs, etc – that you'd need to put together a manifold similar to the one I made out of brass?
Tor
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Silver Heels, P-424 #17
http://www.SilverHeels.us
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Quote:
Original Message
<.. snip>Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
You must need a manifold in your house for something, eh? Or, you could replace the manifold for the cold/hot water with this so you can isolate either the cold water or hot water source for whatever reason. Or, you could go back to Home Depot – I think my whole set up cost about $64, but since you're using less taps and less valves, you'll save 12 or 15 dollars. I have plenty of pipe left over (6 feet out of 10 because you can only buy a ten foot section). You're welcome to it, but that's only 3.65 or so. Costs more to mail it.
Get fresh PVC glue, too.
Bob
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 4:48 PM, Silver Heels < ([email][/email])> wrote:
Quote:Sonofabitch! I didn't know that (obviously). Glad to find out now, though, rather than during an offshore passage. Thank you all – Rich, Bob & John – for straightening me out. Looks like I'll be returning a bunch of brass fittings to Home Depot.Just this morning I happened to come across a bronze Groco raw water manifold that will feed 3 users from one source (http://www.groco.net/07-ftgs/07-sb-4-fs.htm and click on the manifold image). A pair of them might do the trick, but they don't seem to make the size(s) I need.
I guess I'm back to Plan A, which is what you did, Bob. I'm not worried about freezing, either.
Tor
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Silver Heels, P-424 #17
http://www.SilverHeels.us
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Original Message
<.. snip>Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
That's what I'm talkin' about. Whatever you do, if you haul or stay in the water up north in the winter, you'll have to make sure the lines are empty. I use a compressor to clear them. But since I live on the boat, the bilge stays warm enough to not freeze.
Bob
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Rich Carter < ([email][/email])> wrote:
Quote:Be careful with brass fittings in saltwater applications. They can suffer from what is called dezincification. After a few years they will become brittle and may snap off. I had this happen to the engine seawater strainer.Bronze fittings are becoming increasingly difficult to find. PVC can split open if it freezes. I think nylon or marilon may be the only viable choice these days. The stuff they use for home sprinkler systems might work.
Rich
BlackSheep #47Quote:<.. snip>Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
