Jump to content

Tally-Ho Hybrid Propulsion


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, GH41 said:

All of this sounds good until start buying batteries. I can't even make the numbers work to hang a Torqueedo outboard on a 9' dingy. 

Numbers look a lot better if you stick a trolling motor on, with a car battery. 

 You can't get petrol-tank performance from a battery, so if you want the sort of speed or range we're used to taking for granted then disappointment looms.

 The difference with the hybrid setup is that it plays to the strengths of both: a modest battery bank (200Ah) can provide an hour or so maneuvering without needing to start the engine and can be replenished in a day or two, if you can live with the drag of the generator. If you need to motor in challenging conditions, however, you still have the capacity to do so. 

 It's expensive to install but needn't be stupidly so if you don't need massive electric reserves and in the long haul the engine should benefit from the reduction of abuse (fewer short runs, less sustained idling etc).

If you're planning long term,  and Leo seems to be planning longer than anyone else(!), then it makes perfect sense...

Cheers, 

               W.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw that video too, looked interesting. 

The system can be applied from any new (Beta) engine from 20HP. So not just for big engines. Needs an upgraded (PRM 150/500) gearbox. 

"Electrical propulsion range will depend on the size of the available battery bank but a 40` sailing vessel requiring 4kW to achieve 5-6kts and utilising a 48v/200Ah battery bank (4x 12v/200Ah) would be able to travel for 2hrs at 5-6kts. Increasing the battery bank Ah size will allow a higher hull speed or greater range."

Would be interesting to see some prices compared to standard options for an entire system. Certainly seems a promising option if you're repowering. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looking at the numbers with my current 420Ah (12V) battery bank I could run the 10kW electric for ~20 minutes at full power assuming 66% DoD which would be enough to leave the dock and return in ideal conditions. Obviously that doesn't factor drawing ~2C and its associated losses depending on battery chemistry. Generally even Lithium wants maximum sustained discharge of 1C and recommended charge of 0.5C which would automatically involve at least doubling an already large battery bank capacity and switching to lithium for weight savings.

With some controls tweaking you could probably setup certain modes depending on your specific circumstances:

- Electric priority which will aim to minimize diesel burn for situations like daysails or return trips where you'll be plugging in afterwards.

- Normal mode for sustained motoring/charging that cycles the diesel on/off as appropriate.

- Charge mode to maximize charging before heading into an anchorage for a few days.

- Regen mode while sailing trading drag for clean charging.

With today's battery tech this would only seem financially feasible for those who already have a need for a big lithium battery banks or looking to eliminate a generator. Until we get battery tech 2-3x as energy dense I don't think it's realistic for a typical cruiser.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LB 15 said:

So I am guessing you have never driven a Tesla then?

Hard to mount the extension lead on the sailboat.... probably fine if what you own is a marina queen that doesn't go anywhere though.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Hard to mount the extension lead on the sailboat.... probably fine if what you own is a marina queen that doesn't go anywhere though.

FKT

Exactly- it is perfect for 95% of boats.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LB 15 said:

So I am guessing you have never driven a Tesla then?

Different problem.

Cars only work out because the primary drag issue is relatively insensitive to weight (air drag) AND, when start/stop (which IS sensitive) the battery happens to be much much more efficient than dynamically loading an engine.

Boats are constant torque constant resistance and the resistance is a direct function of weight and this becomes more important the higher the speed.

Final death nell for batteries is range. Because so terrible on a weight basis, you cannot get enough and furthermore unlike fuel, they don't get any lighter as you use up charge!

Same basic issue exists in aircraft where you cannot even get enough battery to meet FAA reserve minimums!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fastyacht said:

Different problem.

Cars only work out because the primary drag issue is relatively insensitive to weight (air drag) AND, when start/stop (which IS sensitive) the battery happens to be much much more efficient than dynamically loading an engine.

Boats are constant torque constant resistance and the resistance is a direct function of weight and this becomes more important the higher the speed.

Same basic issue exists in aircraft where you cannot even get enough battery to meet FAA reserve minimums!

Will you guys fuck off? I am trying to troll WGW!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LB 15 said:

Will you guys fuck off? I am trying to troll WGW!

I was wondering why you were being so ridiculous. Cheers and all that!

But I always think it is ironic we sail around with huge lead (could be a battery bank!) keels. Add a little sulfuric acid and voila! FREE BATTERY STORAGE!!!!!!!!!!

NOBODY CAN PATENT IT I ALREADY DISCLOSED IT NANNY NANNY BOO BOO!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Having basically a clean slate like Leo is starting with, and the ability to make the engine room whatever size needed has huge advantages.  Retrofitting this will be a much larger challenge.  I know my last boat there would have been NO room for the extra space needed for the generator component.  I love the concept.  I like choices. This seems to provide a lot of options and flexibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LB 15 said:

So I am guessing you have never driven a Tesla then?

So you save the world using a battery but you have to charge it every night using fossil fuel. The only way you can save the world with batteries is if you don't drive the car. That's the part the lib green tit suckers forget to tell you. 

  • Downvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

My home solar array produces 50% more electricity than our household consumes so I thought it might be good to put it to use with an electric car. But I'm a lib green tit sucker so what do I know.

  • Like 12
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IStream said:

My home solar array produces 50% more electricity than our household consumes so I thought it might be good to put it to use with an electric car. But I'm a lib green tit sucker so what do I know.

I quite like the whole idea of electric cars, except for the price. As has been said, different use-case.

It's not like I actually enjoy working on IC engined devices though fortunately the modern ones mean I don't have to, mainly because I lack the extra-length arms with the 3 ball joints and fitted impact wrench.

FKT

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

11 hours ago, WGWarburton said:

 You can't get petrol-tank performance from a battery, so if you want the sort of speed or range we're used to taking for granted then disappointment looms.

11 hours ago, LB 15 said:

So I am guessing you have never driven a Tesla then?

Nope but that reinforces the point: There's no issue with electric motor performance, it's the performance of the battery compared to a refilling a petrol tank that's the problem, isn't it? A 20KW electric outboard could be a fine thing and, I daresay, relatively easy to make but without a 20KW fuel supply it's going to be sitting on the shelf with the chocolate teapots, motorbike ashtrays and waterproof teabags.

 I used to tow a dinghy trailer down to the south coast for the weekend pretty regularly. About 500 miles each way, so not quite feasible on one tank of diesel. With a 3pm departure and a good run we could be home before midnight and up in time for school & work on Monday... It's not a use-case that current EVs support; at least, not on my budget. 

8 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Will you guys fuck off? I am trying to troll WGW!

Chomp, chomp, chomp....

Cheers,

              W.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, climenuts said:

...

With some controls tweaking you could probably setup certain modes depending on your specific circumstances:

- Electric priority which will aim to minimize diesel burn for situations like daysails or return trips where you'll be plugging in afterwards.

- Normal mode for sustained motoring/charging that cycles the diesel on/off as appropriate.

- Charge mode to maximize charging before heading into an anchorage for a few days.

- Regen mode while sailing trading drag for clean charging.

With today's battery tech this would only seem financially feasible for those who already have a need for a big lithium battery banks or looking to eliminate a generator. Until we get battery tech 2-3x as energy dense I don't think it's realistic for a typical cruiser.

This is a good summary of what Leo explained in the video.

To begin with, his projected use of the boat appears to include continuing media production for the youtube channel, and he does want to include some domestic comforts in the fit out - which makes sense if you want to make the boat your home.

So faced with substantial electrical demands and a classic deck layout that does not favor a huge solar array, some form of generating electricity from internal combustion becomes inevitable.

As most larger boats do it now, they have a regular engine for propulsion and a secondary engine in a dedicated generator. That means double the maintenance, double the spares, extra filters, pumps and fuel lines.

Considering that Tally Ho may well require some form of internal ballast, it makes perfect sense to use batteries for this, and eliminate the second engine alltogether.

Budget wise I'm sure it's not the cheapest, but it would appear that he is doing quite well off the youtube views.

Finally, as said above, this solution does not make sense for 95% of all sailboats, that can just plug in at the end of the day. It might not make sense for the majority of cruisers, that spend long periods at anchor interspersed with long(ish) passages.

But it looks like Leo wants to go sail the crap out of Tally Ho once she's launched and I can see that this 'hybrid' solution gives him the most options

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, alphafb552 said:

Considering that Tally Ho may well require some form of internal ballast, it makes perfect sense to use batteries for this, and eliminate the second engine alltogether.

8 tons of internal ballast according to: https://www.yachttallyho.com/index.php/about-tally-ho/technical-data

Why would one go to lithium if there is no weight constraint? When I saw the episode, I was certain that Leo would go for lithium, but now I'm not so sure as there is a 8 ton weight to play with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, GH41 said:

So you save the world using a battery but you have to charge it every night using fossil fuel. The only way you can save the world with batteries is if you don't drive the car. That's the part the lib green tit suckers forget to tell you. 

1.  Centralized generation is far more efficient that having a generator in every car (the gasoline engine in case you're confused).  Large Natural gas powerplants, wind generation, and solar are all in use now and are much more efficient and cleaner than cars.  So charging it every night is getting increasingly green.

2.  The amount of fossil fuels it takes to make the cars themselves is constantly decreasing as alternative power sources like wind and solar increase.

3.  Eventually we're going to reach a point where most of the generation is from these alternative power sources.  At that point, you'll be using renewables to make products that run on renewables.  I.E. fossil fuels will largely be removed from the equation.

4.  Gasoline cars are only 20-30% fuel efficient.  That's a pretty low bar to pass.

There nothing 'lib' about this, unless you simply don't like science and fact.  All that unreasonable pent-up hatred isn't particularly good for you.  And from the way you jumped into this thread with both feet when it really had nothing to do with being 'green', I have a feeling you've got some unsolved issues.

A battery driven setup like this is perfect.  Generates electricity when sailing.  Can be used for short movements to set anchors in an anchorage, or to get into a marina.  Can be charged by running the engine without turning the prop shaft.  Can be topped up with solar panels.

Of course, all those cruisers with similar systems must simply be green idiots too, right?  I feel very safe saying you are not a blue water cruiser.

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Upp3 said:

8 tons of internal ballast according to: https://www.yachttallyho.com/index.php/about-tally-ho/technical-data

Why would one go to lithium if there is no weight constraint? When I saw the episode, I was certain that Leo would go for lithium, but now I'm not so sure as there is a 8 ton weight to play with.

I would be very surprised if he went Lithium.  It is considerably more complicated than good old lead-acid or gel, and Leo tends to emphasize simplicity.  You can get a new lead acid battery at just about any port in the world.  Lithium Ion and the supporting electrical systems?  Not so much.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Upp3 said:

8 tons of internal ballast according to: https://www.yachttallyho.com/index.php/about-tally-ho/technical-data

Why would one go to lithium if there is no weight constraint? When I saw the episode, I was certain that Leo would go for lithium, but now I'm not so sure as there is a 8 ton weight to play with.

Lithium is far more compact too, about 1/3 to 1/4, which matters when space is at a premium. It also has ~10X the cycle life so its higher up-front cost is offset by the fact that you don't need to replace it nearly as often. Most importantly the charge acceptance rate is a flat line until about 95% SOC. With 12KW of charging capacity available he could charge a depleted 6KWH bank in about 150 minutes. 

If you've got the money, a properly engineered lithium system is far superior to lead in every way. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

I would be very surprised if he went Lithium.  It is considerably more complicated than good old lead-acid or gel, and Leo tends to emphasize simplicity.  You can get a new lead acid battery at just about any port in the world.  Lithium Ion and the supporting electrical systems?  Not so much.

We'll have to see but if he goes with lead, he might as well go with a conventional high output alternator. That hybrid system will be wasted on anything less than a 20KWh AGM bank. And AGM will be necessary if he goes with lead for its charge acceptance rate, which makes it almost as difficult to source as lithium at any port in the world. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, IStream said:

We'll have to see but if he goes with lead, he might as well go with a conventional high output alternator. That hybrid system will be wasted on anything less than a 20KWh AGM bank. And AGM will be necessary if he goes with lead for its charge acceptance rate, which makes it almost as difficult to source as lithium at any port in the world. 

You can always get around that by simply using more batteries, and he's certainly got the weight to play with.  It doesn't seem to me like space is at critical an issue as it is with our plastic toys.  Maybe I'm wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, electric cars don't so much reduce pollution as re-distribute it. At least until our power sources are renewable and non polluting. (As mentioned above with surplus solar being used.) Considering EV's non-polluting is a fallacy when you only measure on-site. Such calculations rarely if ever factor in the pollution cost of power generation, not least of which is the cost of producing the fuel source (whether coal or gas or oil), and distributing it to the power plant from the source.

On top of that, I haven't even mentioned the incredible sunk pollution cost of producing the batteries themselves, and their replacements. You do know they don't last forever right? In any case, take a look at the pollution cost of the supply chain to produce lithium-ion batteries sometime and then call them non-polluting? Not me.

That said, I've always thought that a diesel electric hybrid type solution was an interesting concept. After all, there's a reason that diesel electric powers all modern freight trains. Though granted that's not a hybrid-type solution. The idea of being able to generate in situ (in a car or a boat) eliminates most if not all of the range and re-charging issues related to fully electric vehicles. Though a hydrogen based fuel-cell type tech might be the best end-game for fully electric vehicles.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bacchus66 said:

For the record, electric cars don't so much reduce pollution as re-distribute it. At least until our power sources are renewable and non polluting. (As mentioned above with surplus solar being used.) Considering EV's non-polluting is a fallacy when you only measure on-site. Such calculations rarely if ever factor in the pollution cost of power generation, not least of which is the cost of producing the fuel source (whether coal or gas or oil), and distributing it to the power plant from the source.

It's not clear where you are writing from. My country claims 90% renewables in 2020, below target but getting there. Maybe you should be putting more pressure on your government to fix that (assuming you live in a democracy).

7 minutes ago, Bacchus66 said:

On top of that, I haven't even mentioned the incredible sunk pollution cost of producing the batteries themselves, and their replacements. You do know they don't last forever right? In any case, take a look at the pollution cost of the supply chain to produce lithium-ion batteries sometime and then call them non-polluting? Not me.

 Indeed, can't argue that batteries are pollution free... still, moving in the right direction, perhaps?

Cheers,

              W.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, h20man said:

LB. A Tesla DOES NOT GIVE petrol-tank performance from a battery....

not even close....

It is BETTER!

You seem confused.

 How much energy does the battery hold compared to a conventional petrol tank and how long does it take to refuel? You can ignore the performance of the vehicle, it's largely irrelevant to this discussion. 

 Cheers, 

               W.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, h20man said:

LB. A Tesla DOES NOT GIVE petrol-tank performance from a battery....

not even close....

It is BETTER!

Only for a short time, if you use the performance, your range drops tremendously..

 

Meanwhile I have a 27ft serial diesel electric motor boat, the generator charges batteries, which power the electric motor. For short trips solar panels charge it up by the next week. Longer trips, say over an hour, starting the generator first saves battery cycles.

When fully fitted out, the generator will also power an all electric cooking system , microwave, hob, and kettle.

Heating will remain diesel..

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, WGWarburton said:

You seem confused.

 How much energy does the battery hold compared to a conventional petrol tank and how long does it take to refuel? You can ignore the performance of the vehicle, it's largely irrelevant to this discussion. 

 Cheers, 

               W.

 

When I heard petrol-tank performance I was not ignoring the performance of the vehicle....    I guess if I had understood better (leading to my confusion..... ;) ) I would have understood that the phrase would have been better to say...

A Tesla battery does not have the same energy density as petrol....  That I can agree with... As the Tesla battery density is not even close to petrol. (Actually Diesel is higher in terms of energy density)..  Even with the inefficiencies of a petrol engine more power can be transmitted to move a vehicle then with the same density of current batteries.

 

Some interesting slides from US department of Energy:604372425_Screenshot2020-12-15at18_19.04GMT.thumb.png.26264be5366523dffb5babe96340ea48.png251121401_Screenshot2020-12-15at18_15.25GMT.thumb.png.56e7247a03cca094e9a0937593457816.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an Battery powered outboard that came with a dingy I bought second hand. Ironically it is called a trolling motor. The Battery weighs more than my dog, takes all night to charge, runs out after about 30 mins and it wouldn’t pull a chinaman off your sister.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, The Q said:

Only for a short time, if you use the performance, your range drops tremendously..

 

M<snip>

I am aware.. and I just saw the term performance.. not range, not energy density....  and thought of 0-60.. and since all the battery weight is down low the damn Tesla hugs roads like a vacuum cleaner... Driving in a Tesla is an amazing experience.

I've also ridden a Zero motorbike..   Very wild...  just... not like a real motorbike in terms of range and sustained speed.

 

I did the 50CC in 46 hours.. And that include 6 hours of sleep.. From San Diego (dipped my boot in the waters of the pacific in San Diego Bay  at shelter island) and ended in West Palm Beach (dipped my boot in the atlantic ocean).  That was on a BMW K1200GT with rest stops just to fill up and go.. No way a battery could touch the energy density and refill ability of petrol...  It was an awesome adventure...

..... 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, in_TO said:

I wonder what kind of regen you can get when the prop is in an aperture.

He says it's going to be a 3-blade feathering one, running in reverse for regen.  I'd think that would be pretty substantial.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2020 at 2:48 PM, WGWarburton said:

a modest battery bank (200Ah) can provide an hour or so maneuvering

Really? Going on the assumption it's Li-Ion and you can discharge it to 80% without harm, that's effectively 160 A.hr useful capacity

160A x 12V = 1920 W = 1.9 kW x 0.85 (for losses in cabling, motor efficiency of 90%, small losses in controller/inverter) = 1.63 kW = 2.2 HP

Eh, 2.2 HP for an hour is probably not quite as much as you were thinking, and certainly not enough to move anything bigger than 35' at 3 knots.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, GH41 said:

you have to charge it every night using fossil fuel

FInd the fossil fuel in the graph. (British Columbia)

bc-fg02-eng.png

Ontario - fuck I had no idea we had so much nuclear power there. The people doing the graphs should have used the same colours throughout.

on-fg02-eng.png

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, h20man said:

I am aware.. and I just saw the term performance.. not range, not energy density....  and thought of 0-60.. and since all the battery weight is down low the damn Tesla hugs roads like a vacuum cleaner... Driving in a Tesla is an amazing experience.

I've also ridden a Zero motorbike..   Very wild...  just... not like a real motorbike in terms of range and sustained speed.

 

I did the 50CC in 46 hours.. And that include 6 hours of sleep.. From San Diego (dipped my boot in the waters of the pacific in San Diego Bay  at shelter island) and ended in West Palm Beach (dipped my boot in the atlantic ocean).  That was on a BMW K1200GT with rest stops just to fill up and go.. No way a battery could touch the energy density and refill ability of petrol...  It was an awesome adventure...

..... 

 

actually, yes, it could, with hot swap batteries.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Zonker said:

Really? Going on the assumption it's Li-Ion and you can discharge it to 80% without harm, that's effectively 160 A.hr useful capacity

160A x 12V = 1920 W = 1.9 kW x 0.85 (for losses in cabling, motor efficiency of 90%, small losses in controller/inverter) = 1.63 kW = 2.2 HP

Eh, 2.2 HP for an hour is probably not quite as much as you were thinking, and certainly not enough to move anything bigger than 35' at 3 knots.

Beta's numbers quote 200AH at 48v, so bit more reasonable. Say 8hp for an hour - that would push my 34'er at 5+ knots based on my experience strapping an outboard to the back.

Not much, but enough for a daysail.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/15/2020 at 2:17 PM, fastyacht said:

Same basic issue exists in aircraft where you cannot even get enough battery to meet FAA reserve minimums!

Times are a changing... check this commercial passenger plane out (it's electric!)

https://www.eviation.co/

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Bacchus66 said:

For the record, electric cars don't so much reduce pollution as re-distribute it. At least until our power sources are renewable and non polluting. (As mentioned above with surplus solar being used.) Considering EV's non-polluting is a fallacy when you only measure on-site.....

And the times they are a changing....

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/renewable-energy-hits-record-high-growth/?ftag=CNM-00-10aac3a  CBS News; "About 90% of all new energy generated this year has been renewable...."

 

https://www.unilad.co.uk/science/solar-is-officially-the-cheapest-electricity-in-history/  IEEE "According to a new report from the International Energy Agency (IEA), solar has become the cheapest source of electricity for utility companies to build..."

 

Or if you prefer; a graphical representation from "Our World in Data" https://singularityhub.com/2020/12/13/why-the-price-of-new-solar-electricity-fell-an-incredible-89-in-the-last-decade/our-world-in-data-price-solar-electricity-10-years/

... sorry for the thread drift but I just felt the need to point out that all of the metrics for power generation, sourcing, embedded carbon and rapidly changing. Projects like this hybrid and pure electric boats are edging their way towards reality and long distance cruisers are taking notice. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the specs on the aircraft battery above are achievable, you could run a 44 HP electric engine for 25 hours or so on a 920 kWh battery - assuming that is useful energy, most batteries can only be discharged to 1/2, so maybe 12 hours.  Now all we have to do is figure out how to use that 3600 kg battery as ballast and we have a good solution for going cruising in a 40' boat.

OTOH, if you are trying to charge it back up again off of, say, 400W of solar panels, it will take 96 days, or half that if it is only a 50% charge.  If you want to charge it off your marina 30A supply it would take 10 days, or 5 days from 50%.

I would be surprised if the infrastructure to fast charge a battery like that will be around our marinas any time in the next 15 years.  Hopefully I am wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Zonker said:

Really? Going on the assumption it's Li-Ion and you can discharge it to 80% without harm, that's effectively 160 A.hr useful capacity

160A x 12V = 1920 W = 1.9 kW x 0.85 (for losses in cabling, motor efficiency of 90%, small losses in controller/inverter) = 1.63 kW = 2.2 HP

Eh, 2.2 HP for an hour is probably not quite as much as you were thinking, and certainly not enough to move anything bigger than 35' at 3 knots.

I was assuming 48V, and also used "maneuvering" in place of motoring, as I had intermittent/low speed use in mind, rather than an hour flat out.

 Zonker (or anyone else with relevant experience!), I think you know more about this than I do: is there a voltage above which marine systems need a significantly higher level of protection and care?

 In my head 12V is generally safe, 48V (widely used in telecoms racks) warrants respect but probably won't kill you; however, I wonder if that changes when there's potentially (pun intended :-) lots of salt water about... 96V seems generally hazardous, and then you're into mains territory with 192V needing the same treatment 220. (This occurred to me when I was thinking about the 20KW outboard, which would need a 400A supply at 48V. Even at 96 the cabling would be pretty hefty, and not something you'd want to be careless with around salt water.

Cheers, 

               W.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, h20man said:

 

 

I did the 50CC in 46 hours.. And that include 6 hours of sleep.. From San Diego (dipped my boot in the waters of the pacific in San Diego Bay  at shelter island) and ended in West Palm Beach (dipped my boot in the atlantic ocean).  That was on a BMW K1200GT with rest stops just to fill up and go.. No way a battery could touch the energy density and refill ability of petrol...  It was an awesome adventure...

..... 

 

To a European that reads as a 50 Cubic Centimetre motorcycle the only motorised vehicle a 16 year old can ride (or any car driver without passing a separate Bike test).. Top speed limited to 30mph .. 45 years ago a fellow student used to ride home and back on that  almost every weekend... 145miles each way..

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, WGWarburton said:

I was assuming 48V, and also used "maneuvering" in place of motoring, as I had intermittent/low speed use in mind, rather than an hour flat out.

 Zonker (or anyone else with relevant experience!), I think you know more about this than I do: is there a voltage above which marine systems need a significantly higher level of protection and care?

 In my head 12V is generally safe, 48V (widely used in telecoms racks) warrants respect but probably won't kill you; however, I wonder if that changes when there's potentially (pun intended :-) lots of salt water about... 96V seems generally hazardous, and then you're into mains territory with 192V needing the same treatment 220. (This occurred to me when I was thinking about the 20KW outboard, which would need a 400A supply at 48V. Even at 96 the cabling would be pretty hefty, and not something you'd want to be careless with around salt water.

Cheers, 

               W.

48V was used in telephony because it minimizes power transmission losses while still falling below the 60V "extra low voltage" safety threshold, even with voltage fluctuations. It's been adopted as the standard voltage for mild hybrid vehicles and is moving in on 12V as the standard accessory voltage. It's also being used as the internal DC voltage is large-scale data center servers. Expect to see a lot more 48V infrastructure in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Rain Man said:

If the specs on the aircraft battery above are achievable, you could run a 44 HP electric engine for 25 hours or so on a 920 kWh battery - assuming that is useful energy, most batteries can only be discharged to 1/2, so maybe 12 hours.  Now all we have to do is figure out how to use that 3600 kg battery as ballast and we have a good solution for going cruising in a 40' boat.

OTOH, if you are trying to charge it back up again off of, say, 400W of solar panels, it will take 96 days, or half that if it is only a 50% charge.  If you want to charge it off your marina 30A supply it would take 10 days, or 5 days from 50%.

I would be surprised if the infrastructure to fast charge a battery like that will be around our marinas any time in the next 15 years.  Hopefully I am wrong.

 

15 hours ago, Rain Man said:

If the specs on the aircraft battery above are achievable, you could run a 44 HP electric engine for 25 hours or so on a 920 kWh battery - assuming that is useful energy, most batteries can only be discharged to 1/2, so maybe 12 hours.  Now all we have to do is figure out how to use that 3600 kg battery as ballast and we have a good solution for going cruising in a 40' boat.

OTOH, if you are trying to charge it back up again off of, say, 400W of solar panels, it will take 96 days, or half that if it is only a 50% charge.  If you want to charge it off your marina 30A supply it would take 10 days, or 5 days from 50%.

I would be surprised if the infrastructure to fast charge a battery like that will be around our marinas any time in the next 15 years.  Hopefully I am wrong.

Not that I would ever choose that battery for a marine install... let's re-run your numbers.  The statement (from the manufacturer) was that there is a full 920 kWh of "available" energy from that battery (this still leaves a 45 minute 'reserve' capacity). So you need to calculate on that basis. Our 40 foot boat (47 feet LOA) uses a 24 hp engine. This would be replaced with a 20kW electric. So our time at FULL THROTTLE is.... 61.6 hours of motoring at a ridiculously high throttle.  Let's throttle back to an appropriate cruising rpm at 2/3 throttle and we have a bit over 92 hours (close to three days time).  It's obvious that we don't need a battery this big, nor the overly long charge times.... Our boat has all the solar on the main hull (just as a mono-hull) We are a Tri and we can only carry 800 watts of PV (most of the catamarans that we see carry over 1,200 watts of PV) and we figure we need only a 50 mile range from our engine.  We have a Watt&Sea to charge while sailing.... But lets look at recharge time for our 'normal 2  mile range of motoring that's 1.46 KwHrs or 2.8 hours of charging in full sun. That is   less than 1/2 a full sun day of PV charging.... but we have the watt&Sea which routinely does 25 amps up to 40 amps.... so when sailing it would (in ideal conditions) take about 1-1/2 hours time to recharge the days usage for our 'normal' needs. Let's double that for 'less than ideal' conditions and call it less than three hours of charging time while sailing at our normal sailing speeds.

As a side note; Let's assume a 23% loss from engine to prop on "brake-hp' for the 24hp diesel and 12% for the electric and a 8% loss for the re-charge on Lithium/C/C &Wiring.... sort of a wash in my mind here. 

Plus our engine compartment could go from this > To > This....  see picture 

Electric Drive.png

Edited by 2flit
efficiency issues added
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Raz'r said:

actually, yes, it could, with hot swap batteries.

Was not aware of that little twist... thanks...

14 hours ago, The Q said:

To a European that reads as a 50 Cubic Centimetre motorcycle the only motorised vehicle a 16 year old can ride (or any car driver without passing a separate Bike test).. Top speed limited to 30mph .. 45 years ago a fellow student used to ride home and back on that  almost every weekend... 145miles each way..

The first time I heard it I was also confused.. The term comes from 50 hours Coast to Coast....  Top speed a bit faster then 30mph.... :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Zonker said:

50V is the ABYC / CG limit I think.

Curious,... For ABYC.... 'Nominal voltage' or 'peak/max voltage' ?

I think that the normal (read accepted) dielectric potential of skin breaks down at 60 vdc?  The NEC uses nominal voltage and at 60 VDC I think the DC rules all changes

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 2flit said:

Curious,... For ABYC.... 'Nominal voltage' or 'peak/max voltage' ?

I think that the normal (read accepted) dielectric potential of skin breaks down at 60 vdc?  The NEC uses nominal voltage and at 60 VDC I think the DC rules all changes

A sweaty guy in the tropics bent over the engine or batteries would argue that 12 V is plenty annoying going thru the arms.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.asc.ohio-state.edu/physics/p616/safety/more_current.html

The dangers of AC which for given voltage tend to be worse than DC.

Worst shock I've ever felt painwise though was the 90 volts (I think) of the ringer on an army field telephone. Fingers on the terminals rigging it up as a kid, someone cranked the distant station,
OUCH! That's pulsing I don't think actually A/C but can't remember.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, fastyacht said:

https://www.asc.ohio-state.edu/physics/p616/safety/more_current.html

The dangers of AC which for given voltage tend to be worse than DC.

Worst shock I've ever felt painwise though was the 90 volts (I think) of the ringer on an army field telephone. Fingers on the terminals rigging it up as a kid, someone cranked the distant station,
OUCH! That's pulsing I don't think actually A/C but can't remember.

Generic landlines ring at up to 105 V ac at 20 Hz. Can be hilarious.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sat here with 1000v coming out of a calibrator next to me.. But the current is negligible. It has woken me up a few time over the years when I change connections.. Even the three 8.5 digit Multimeters on the desk put out 200V when measuring high Ohms.  I also measure 120Amp current shunts... You don't touch those connectors 'cos they get hot after a while..

Highest voltage I've worked on 50,000V+, not unusual on Mega Watt radar transmitters. Highest current... Effectively unlimited on 400V a incomer, changing the contactors live... You are somewhat careful doing that..

As for my Diesel Electric motor Boat it's 48V 500 AMP hours of batteries at the moment, eventually I'll replace this set of batteries and up the amp hours . I got the generator and battery set at a very good price, hence that set up. Of choice I'd have probably gone for a higher voltage probably 72V or 96V which are commonly available systems, and they require less hefty cabling..

Anyway back to measuring I've switched to measuring a current shunt, it's a huge 100ma at 1VDC.. The equipment has zero'd and the shunt has warmed up during this typing.. it's a huge 100ma at 1VDC I'll work my way up this shunt set, to the 100A later..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Beta is less than similar power Yanmar, so you save a bit there, and I would guess that the generating setup would be cheaper than a standalone generator since you don't have to duplicate the engine.

 

I also get the feeling there is a sponsorship deal or at least a lower entry cost for the publicity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, 2flit said:

 

Not that I would ever choose that battery for a marine install... let's re-run your numbers.  The statement (from the manufacturer) was that there is a full 920 kWh of "available" energy from that battery (this still leaves a 45 minute 'reserve' capacity). So you need to calculate on that basis. Our 40 foot boat (47 feet LOA) uses a 24 hp engine. This would be replaced with a 20kW electric. So our time at FULL THROTTLE is.... 61.6 hours of motoring at a ridiculously high throttle.  Let's throttle back to an appropriate cruising rpm at 2/3 throttle and we have a bit over 92 hours (close to three days time).  It's obvious that we don't need a battery this big, nor the overly long charge times.... Our boat has all the solar on the main hull (just as a mono-hull) We are a Tri and we can only carry 800 watts of PV (most of the catamarans that we see carry over 1,200 watts of PV) and we figure we need only a 50 mile range from our engine.  We have a Watt&Sea to charge while sailing.... But lets look at recharge time for our 'normal 2  mile range of motoring that's 1.46 KwHrs or 2.8 hours of charging in full sun. That is   less than 1/2 a full sun day of PV charging.... but we have the watt&Sea which routinely does 25 amps up to 40 amps.... so when sailing it would (in ideal conditions) take about 1-1/2 hours time to recharge the days usage for our 'normal' needs. Let's double that for 'less than ideal' conditions and call it less than three hours of charging time while sailing at our normal sailing speeds.

As a side note; Let's assume a 23% loss from engine to prop on "brake-hp' for the 24hp diesel and 12% for the electric and a 8% loss for the re-charge on Lithium/C/C &Wiring.... sort of a wash in my mind here. 

Plus our engine compartment could go from this > To > This....  see picture 

Electric Drive.png

Seems very attractive at a glance, but the fly in the ointment is the occasional need to power for long periods.  If you are sailing somewhere where there is always wind, and you really only need a 2 mile range, this will work.  Up here in the PNW, there are places we go where occasionally it is necessary to power for 5-6 hours eg. coming out of a long fjord where there is normally wind, but sometimes not, and you have to go anyway to make a tide at a current pass.  Also, being a tri, you have a lower HP requirement, and the ability to carry much more PV.  This wouldn't be as workable on a 40' monohull.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2020 at 12:24 PM, climenuts said:

Leo's latest video explaining his power choice for Tally-Ho showcased a pretty interesting package from Beta:

https://betamarine.co.uk/he-hybrid-propulsion/

Would seem like a no-brainer to me on any boat where this could get rid of a generator.

Does anyone on here have experience with these?

Anytime I hear someone use the term "no brainer", I stop listening to what they are saying and walk fast in the other direction.  

If you ever hear a banker or broker use "no brainer", grab your wallet and any paper work within reach and leave the room.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2020 at 4:53 PM, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Hard to mount the extension lead on the sailboat.... probably fine if what you own is a marina queen that doesn't go anywhere though.

FKT

All of the electric motor enthusiasts use their "normal" use of getting out of the marina and back in their slip as the design point for their system selection.  The whole point of an auxiliary engine on board a sailboat is for the "abnormal" condition:   Emergencies, long deliveries, tidal currents, glassed off conditions, tight schedules, etc.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

Well, Beta is less than similar power Yanmar, so you save a bit there, and I would guess that the generating setup would be cheaper than a standalone generator since you don't have to duplicate the engine.

 

I also get the feeling there is a sponsorship deal or at least a lower entry cost for the publicity.

Much as I enjoy Leo and his construction of a 100' long sailing Steinway, I'm starting to suspect that he is getting a mite spoiled by his success.  Certainly he is not being driven by the bottom line in his decision-making.  Which is fine.  His goal is to construct a 100-year boat from 100-year-old plans. 

The world has plenty of room for romantics and occasionally even supports them for the shear pleasure of watching something wonderfully eccentric.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leo's primary goal, with this system is redundancy. 

2) types of propulsion: Diesel and electric.

3) types of charging: Diesel, H2O, and plug in at dock.

Could also add solar, but not the same time/benefit, without a huge array.

Limitation on speed/time with electric propulsion makes the diesel the primary propulsion system.

Diesel also primary charging system.

The big benefit is ability to use the propeller to charge while sailing. A shaft brake, that is easily operated from the cockpit is a must. Controlling the prop, feathering, and stopping rotation very important.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Rain Man said:

Seems very attractive at a glance, but the fly in the ointment is the occasional need to power for long periods.  If you are sailing somewhere where there is always wind, and you really only need a 2 mile range, this will work.  Up here in the PNW, there are places we go where occasionally it is necessary to power for 5-6 hours eg. coming out of a long fjord where there is normally wind, but sometimes not, and you have to go anyway to make a tide at a current pass.  Also, being a tri, you have a lower HP requirement, and the ability to carry much more PV.  This wouldn't be as workable on a 40' monohull.

Just to add to this:  I can see having a hydrodynamic generator if you are sailing offshore, but it would be a pain for coastal cruising.  For one, listening to it all the time when out for a sail would be annoying - we put a folding prop on our boat just so we didn't have to listen to the prop turning.  Second, the impact on light air sailing would be considerable unless you have a very powered up sailplan.

I think that until we have much higher energy-density batteries, and the charging infrastructure to support them, these kind of electric installations will not be mainstream.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Rain Man said:

Seems very attractive at a glance, but the fly in the ointment is the occasional need to power for long periods.  If you are sailing somewhere where there is always wind, and you really only need a 2 mile range, this will work.  Up here in the PNW, there are places we go where occasionally it is necessary to power for 5-6 hours eg. coming out of a long fjord where there is normally wind, but sometimes not, and you have to go anyway to make a tide at a current pass.  Also, being a tri, you have a lower HP requirement, and the ability to carry much more PV.  This wouldn't be as workable on a 40' monohull.

I actually can-not carry more PV (as a Trimaran), I do not want to step/walk on modules so I don't take advantage of the extra area....all my PV is mounted off-deck on the main hull; which is much smaller/narrower than any modern 40 foot mono. We do have a good radar arch and it holds allot of PV on our VERY narrow stern area. I think this has more to do with light an efficient sailing boats. A Trimaran can SAIL where some cruising mono's are saddled with more weight in just their keel than an equivalent light weight cruising trimaran has for it's entire laden displacement.

As to the PNW....We did a 45 day trip in the Pacific Northwet from Vancouver island up the inside of Vancouver Island with all the passes/rapids you refer to, in 45 days we burned just 4 gallons of fuel. On our present trip... we are three years and some months into it. In those 3+ years we have used a total of 204 gallons, this trip had allot of atoll passes,  some mostly winless passages (Nuku-Hiva- Fakarava), and the ITZ to deal with. As you point out...A boat that sails well has more to do with this.

There is no reason that a 40' mono can't have a 25 HP engine and do just fine, I had an old heavy 40' OSTAR boat converted to cruising that had a Volvo MD11c - which is a smaller engine, - that boat made three circumnavigations, two of which were cruising trips... she did just fine, But I agree, if you have a 22+ ton 40 footer that you are probably stuck with diesel as your only option.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 2flit said:

I actually can-not carry more PV (as a Trimaran), I do not want to step/walk on modules so I don't take advantage of the extra area....all my PV is mounted off-deck on the main hull; which is much smaller/narrower than any modern 40 foot mono. We do have a good radar arch and it holds allot of PV on our VERY narrow stern area. I think this has more to do with light an efficient sailing boats. A Trimaran can SAIL where some cruising mono's are saddled with more weight in just their keel than an equivalent light weight cruising trimaran has for it's entire laden displacement.

As to the PNW....We did a 45 day trip in the Pacific Northwet from Vancouver island up the inside of Vancouver Island with all the passes/rapids you refer to, in 45 days we burned just 4 gallons of fuel. On our present trip... we are three years and some months into it. In those 3+ years we have used a total of 204 gallons, this trip had allot of atoll passes,  some mostly winless passages (Nuku-Hiva- Fakarava), and the ITZ to deal with. As you point out...A boat that sails well has more to do with this.

There is no reason that a 40' mono can't have a 25 HP engine and do just fine, I had an old heavy 40' OSTAR boat converted to cruising that had a Volvo MD11c - which is a smaller engine, - that boat made three circumnavigations, two of which were cruising trips... she did just fine, But I agree, if you have a 22+ ton 40 footer that you are probably stuck with diesel as your only option.

If you take 45 days to go up the inside of Vancouver Island, you can get almost anywhere you want just by bobbing along in the current. 

In fact it's quite easy to make very good time.1129185750_4.087knotcurrentinstrument.thumb.jpg.8f9b3f8a7f07253d6d9e92c24d0e55d6.jpg

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

If you take 45 days to go up the inside of Vancouver Island, you can get almost anywhere you want just by bobbing along in the current. 

In fact it's quite easy to make very good time.

 

Gunkholing in the Broken Group and Broughton Islands.... I could spend 20X that amount of time and be someplace new every few days. It was cruising heaven

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been skeptical about ALL electric propulsion, but watching "Sailing Uma" has me thinking its a very doable option.  The hybrid is probably the safer option over all, but, Uma seems to have the electric thing wired (pun intended).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/16/2020 at 1:49 PM, 2flit said:

23% loss from engine to prop on "brake-hp' for the 24hp diesel

With a conventional stuffing box about 2%, about 1%  cutless bearing in P bracket. Maybe 5% for the gearbox.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2020 at 10:35 PM, GH41 said:

So you save the world using a battery but you have to charge it every night using fossil fuel. The only way you can save the world with batteries is if you don't drive the car. That's the part the lib green tit suckers forget to tell you. 

You charge a battery with electricity and electricity is increasingly generated by wind and solar. It has the advantage of being much cheaper than fossil fuel generation. However the challenge is storage. Fossil fuel is easy to store. Electricity has two options:

1. Battery

2. Hydrogen (Electricity can be converted to Hydrogen)

Boats are hard to store electricity in a battery so they will probably end up using Hydrogen but many mountains to climb before we get there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 2flit said:

Gunkholing in the Broken Group and Broughton Islands.... I could spend 20X that amount of time and be someplace new every few days. It was cruising heaven

Been there 10 times over the last 20 years.  There are a lot of choices for discovering "cruising heaven" in that area.  Finding a good pub may be the hardest part, although the one in Kelsey Bay, with the goats in the barroom was pretty interesting.  

For the near term, since they are 300 nm from down here on the Salish Sea, I'm going to stick with my diesel to help get up there .  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Left Shift said:

All of the electric motor enthusiasts use their "normal" use of getting out of the marina and back in their slip as the design point for their system selection.  The whole point of an auxiliary engine on board a sailboat is for the "abnormal" condition:   Emergencies, long deliveries, tidal currents, glassed off conditions, tight schedules, etc.  

The ultimate auxiliary, haha...(because of rules--no "good" reason!)
sznaPz3trEV-SLEp2hG9qedozUMPhg73ukVZkW-i

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EYESAILOR said:

You charge a battery with electricity and electricity is increasingly generated by wind and solar. It has the advantage of being much cheaper than fossil fuel generation. However the challenge is storage. Fossil fuel is easy to store. Electricity has two options:

1. Battery

2. Hydrogen (Electricity can be converted to Hydrogen)

Boats are hard to store electricity in a battery so they will probably end up using Hydrogen but many mountains to climb before we get there.

What is the loss in the conversion between Hydrogen => Electricity (usage) and Electricity => Hydrogen (storage).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fastyacht said:

I don't like carrying bombs on a boat.

You don't have to anymore. There's a brilliant Consulting Engineer on this site who's figured out how to tow the hydrogen behind you.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, MauiPunter said:

What is the loss in the conversion between Hydrogen => Electricity (usage) and Electricity => Hydrogen (storage).

Battery is about 70% efficient'

Hydrogen is currently highly inefficient down to maybe 40% But that will improve.

There are all kinds of studies. VW did a big study.

Renewable electricity is coming down in price (already well below fossil fuel generation). The key to cost will be storage and the conversion back to electric power . The marginal cost of renewable (running it for storage because no demand and wind turbine still turning) is of course 0 but you need to be able to store it.

So if you generate 1 MW at the wind turbine, store it as hydrogen (using electricity to convert water to hydrogen via electrolysis)  , then release the energy again via a hydrogen fuel cell , you end up with approx .4 . But that is coming down fast.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/green-hydrogen-could-it-be-key-to-a-carbon-free-economy

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IStream said:

You don't have to anymore. There's a brilliant Consulting Engineer on this site who's figured out how to tow the hydrogen behind you.

What happened to him? Did he and Mikey bore each other to death?

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

What happened to him? Did he and Mikey bore each other to death?

Who can say? Mikey's got enough socks that they're starting to collide and annihilate like matter and anti-matter.

Having said that, I've just guaranteed he'll come back to Mikesplain why that's a poor analogy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, IStream said:

Who can say? Mikey's got enough socks that they're starting to collide and annihilate like matter and anti-matter.

Having said that, I've just guaranteed he'll come back to Mikesplain why that's a poor analogy.

Mikey told me he was going to be less condescending. He then told me condescending meant taking down to people.

  • Like 2