Which Watermaker To Choose

[Tellie]

Nolex 77 is correct on the side loading issues. It's tempting at first to tap off the obvious power source of the main engine. Usually we are talking smaller, lighter, engines in cruising sailboats, anywhere from one to four cylinders. Engine wear is measured in micrometers. Adding a high pressure pump is different than adding an alternator because of the differences in power required at lower rpms. Shaft flex is a real occurrence with after market high pressure pumps bolted to these engines. Engines are designed to take huge loads on the crank shaft by extreme balancing and direct pressures on supported bearing journals. They are designed for the intended direction of these pressures. An instantly loading high pressure pump will actually flex a shaft. This causes the shaft to twist inside the front bearing creating opposite pressure points within the bearing. (touch your left index finger to your left thumb, insert your right index finger through the circle created and twist your right index finger side ways. This is the motion created in side loading. OK, I know there's a joke in there) Now add the fact that smaller engines, even perfectly tuned, have a certain amount of vibration. (This is why there are flexible motor mounts not solid mounts). Many DIYers will natural want a nice inexpensive Cat type three plunger pump to get that big water production, after all there are those that believe if big is good then really big is better. Now add the weight of a high pressure pump, around 20lbs, a custom built bracket, 3-5lbs, and you have a vibration amplifier bolted to your small, light, diesel. This also transfers side loading issues along with instant power demands from the pump itself each time it reverses the vibrational movement, usually thousands of times a minute. (simple math, multiply rpms by 2 to get reversing vibration number) Mostly this vibration is not taken into account when designing brackets and mounting positions. I did this myself when I built my first watermaker for one of my boats, so this is from a lot of experience building DIY watermakers. My first build was on a two cylinder Yanmar, it practically jumped out of it's motor mounts when I first started the engine. I made several attempts to build a better bracket and devise a better mounting design to reduce the added vibration but I could never totally eliminate added vibration. Yanmar is my favorite engine of choice for my boats and I've had a lot of discussions with Yanmar reps, distributors, and mechanics. The consensus I've come away with from them is that it's a bad idea. Yanmar has and will void warranties as well when they find out something not designed, tested, made, or approved by them has been bolted to their engines. Wouldn't you if you were a diesel manufacturer that had to back expensive repair warranties on your product? Like I said I don't want to discourage anybody that wants to build their own watermaker. I'm just trying to impart some hard won experience. I'm not an engineer so my advice is probably worth what you pay for it.

[svseachange]

Thanks so much for the thorough reply Tellie. I appreciate you taking the time to explain your reasoning.

I am glad I asked the question on and that you and noelex 77 were willing to provide me your experiences. I had not considered the side load or on the engine and certainly do not want to risk damage to the shaft. We just replaced the engine mounts for our Yanmar...

Looks like we will need to go back to the drawing board. Thanks again.

[carstenb]

Originally Posted by Tellie

I usually leave this subject alone because I get very long winded on why I don't like them and I'm not up for a debate on this tonight. But let me say this. You would wonder why the largest and the best watermaker companies like, Spectra, Parker Racor, Village Marine, HRO, Sea Recovery, etc., who have the best talent and the most experience with tens of thousands of watermakers made and sold, who pour huge amounts of money in R&D, don't make engine driven watermakers if they are no brainers. Ya think they missed the obvious? Not likely.

Tellie,

What do you think about Parker Racor? The reason I ask is I used to be an executive ( fairly high up in the organisation) for Parker. Beforemthey started making watermakers. I still have lots of executive contacts there..

Looking at the website, seems their smallest produces 145 gallons per day or 6 gallons pernhour. I couldn't find an electricity usage.

Do you like them? Hownaremtheybre: noise? Etc etc etc......

Thanks in advance

[CeesH]

Originally Posted by carstenb

Tellie,

What do you think about Parker Racor? The reason I ask is I used to be an executive ( fairly high up in the organisation) for Parker. Beforemthey started making watermakers. I still have lots of executive contacts there..

Looking at the website, seems their smallest produces 145 gallons per day or 6 gallons pernhour. I couldn't find an electricity usage.

Do you like them? Hownaremtheybre: noise? Etc etc etc......

Thanks in advance

Hi Carsten,

You has been an executive ( fairly high up in the organisation) for Parker, it must be a one phone call problem to achieve more information as they will ever tell us...................

Good luck, have my ideas obout this topic.

CeesH

[sea1ljs]

Originally Posted by Paul L

You say 11amps per hour. That would have to be 11amps at 120 v. Or about 110 ah out of your 12 v bank. That's about 3.6ah per gal.

Before I wrote my comments here regarding choices in watermakers I ran my system just to verify what the power consumption was. As I mentioned the equipment being used I noted the Link 2000 battery moniter. It was that display that showed I was using 11amps DC when the system was producing water running off the batteries alone.

Using this forum a few years ago I tapped off this vast knowledge base of real world applications and researched what watermakers appeared to be working the best. I found that watermakers such as Spectra with its Clark Pump is certainly efficient but at the time I was researching it had its issues with a ceramic part susceptible to breakage. I also had the opportunity to talk with a cruiser/in the field repair rep for Spectra which convinced me that this wasn’t the unit for me. Also the price of a comparable Spectra unit was substantially more expensive than the RO unit. The other factor that affected my decision is there may be more power efficient units than the RO but to get the same volume of water being produced as the RO they have to run it much longer. Meaning the amps are counting up as well. Another thought in my decision is that I don’t like to leave equipment running on the boat unattended. I didn’t want to be tied down why my energy efficient water maker takes 2 to 3 hours or more to produce what I can make in 30 to 60 minutes. And finally, the issue of automation and sensor failure rendering the unit useless. I wanted something that I could repair myself and not have the parts unavailable until another production run of specialty parts arrived at the only place to buy them. The RO unit has off the shelf parts readily available almost anywhere. As we all know even the most reliable equipment will have maintenance issues, whether it’s the engine, a genset, a plotter, your laptop or your watermaker. The value to me is how easy it will be to fix and maintain.

There’s a reason why we are not all sailing the same type of boat. People have different wants and needs. Some people feel the RO is a power hog or that a generator is needed to run it. I haven’t found that to be the case but if you feel that way than don’t buy one. If you want to just push a button to make water or noise is an issue than buy that system. I’m not trying to convince anyone that my system is better than anyone else’s. I’ve posted my experience with this product so that when someone researches this forum like I did they can make their own decision based on real world experience. I valued the knowledge you all put into this forum and it really did help me with my equipment decisions, so thank you all.

[CeesH]

As been a (naval) Diesel Engineer for over 25 years, I have my ideas about the private leisure boats. There are people with a budget that only need one tool the checkbook. There are also people with a toolbox weighting over 400 pounds..........

Here the problem starts, Tellie focus on the first group, as an antreponeur no problem, I understand. But also this mean for Tellie to stay away from low budget solutions, he so much hate.

I, former diesel engineer, love the direct driven units. Cheap, easy to mantain. But installation needs knowledge, thats the reason why the major manufactures stay far away of them. Its never an, Out of the Box, solution. Maybe thats why Tellie stays away of them, lack of knowledge.

Big Fire Feighting trucks drive their pumps from their, relative, small Diesels. Of cource they are not mounting them direct on top of the engine.............

Tellie, your lack of Diesel Engine knowledge is not the best advisor for everybody. For your direct connection to "the market" counts the same....

my 2 Centavos.

CeesH

[noelex 77]

Sea1js the website you quote lists the power consumption for the watermaker at 9.3A @ 120v (this is approximately the same as 93A @12v) plus the low pressure feed pump at
13.3A @ 12v)
Given these figures the consumption is over 100A.

I suspect your Link 2000 is reading the consumption only of the DC feed pump.

This needs to fixed, otherwise you are seriously depleting you batteries much more than your battery monitor is showing.

I think your inverter is wired directly to batteries, bypassing the Link 200 shunt. This is giving you a very false impression of the power consumption. The risk is you may drain your batteries much more than is healthy, without this being reflected on the Link 2000 battery monitor.

I am sure that your watermaker is consuming a lot more than 11A @ 12 v. Probably about 10x this amount.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by sea1ljs

Before I wrote my comments here regarding choices in watermakers I ran my system just to verify what the power consumption was. As I mentioned the equipment being used I noted the Link 2000 battery moniter. It was that display that showed I was using 11amps DC when the system was producing water running off the batteries alone.

Using this forum a few years ago I tapped off this vast knowledge base of real world applications and researched what watermakers appeared to be working the best. I found that watermakers such as Spectra with its Clark Pump is certainly efficient but at the time I was researching it had its issues with a ceramic part susceptible to breakage. I also had the opportunity to talk with a cruiser/in the field repair rep for Spectra which convinced me that this wasn’t the unit for me. Also the price of a comparable Spectra unit was substantially more expensive than the RO unit. The other factor that affected my decision is there may be more power efficient units than the RO but to get the same volume of water being produced as the RO they have to run it much longer. Meaning the amps are counting up as well. Another thought in my decision is that I don’t like to leave equipment running on the boat unattended. I didn’t want to be tied down why my energy efficient water maker takes 2 to 3 hours or more to produce what I can make in 30 to 60 minutes. And finally, the issue of automation and sensor failure rendering the unit useless. I wanted something that I could repair myself and not have the parts unavailable until another production run of specialty parts arrived at the only place to buy them. The RO unit has off the shelf parts readily available almost anywhere. As we all know even the most reliable equipment will have maintenance issues, whether it’s the engine, a genset, a plotter, your laptop or your watermaker. The value to me is how easy it will be to fix and maintain.

There’s a reason why we are not all sailing the same type of boat. People have different wants and needs. Some people feel the RO is a power hog or that a generator is needed to run it. I haven’t found that to be the case but if you feel that way than don’t buy one. If you want to just push a button to make water or noise is an issue than buy that system. I’m not trying to convince anyone that my system is better than anyone else’s. I’ve posted my experience with this product so that when someone researches this forum like I did they can make their own decision based on real world experience. I valued the knowledge you all put into this forum and it really did help me with my equipment decisions, so thank you all.

Sea1
I already have a WM and it runs fine, thanks. There is no way the Cruise RO 120v AC system runs off of 11amps@12v. That would be 132watts. They spec a minimum 2000watt Honda genset to run it. You are miss reading the Link or the Link is not correctly setup to measure all that goes in and out of the bat bank.

[CeesH]

Originally Posted by Paul L

Sea1
I already have a WM and it runs fine, thanks. There is no way the Cruise RO 120v AC system runs off of 11amps@12v. That would be 132watts. They spec a minimum 2000watt Honda genset to run it. You are miss reading the Link or the Link is not correctly setup to measure all that goes in and out of the bat bank.

Again, Apples and Pears......

My 2 Centavos

CeesH

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by CeesH

Again, Apples and Pears......

My 2 Centavos

CeesH

Can you explain what is Apples and what is Pears? A watt of energy is a watt.

[CeesH]

Originally Posted by Paul L

Can you explain what is Apples and what is Pears? A watt of energy is a watt, for initial investment

Paul, because the approach is completely diffirent. High Tech (expensive) vs Low Tech (cheap).

High Tech, + Low energy consumpution.
- High Price,
- Expensive to install.
- Expensive in case of repairs.

Low Tech, + DIY Install.
+ Low price
+ Cheap to Repair
+ Much higher output of potable water
- Per Litre, Higher Energy consomption

My 2 Centavos,

CeesH

Sorry for editing this comment over 3 times.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by CeesH

Paul, because the approach is completely diffirent. High Tech (expensive) vs Low Tech (cheap).

High Tech, + Low energy consumpution.
- High Price,
- Expensive to install.
- Expensive in case of repairs.

Low Tech, + DIY Install.
+ Low price
+ Cheap to Repair
+ Much higher output of potable water
- Per Litre, Higher Energy consomption

My 2 Centavos,

CeesH

CeesH
I'm not arguing about low tech vs high tech. I just was pointing out that your statement that you run the CruiseRO at 11amp@12v could not possibly be correct for the Cruise RO AC system. On the DC side it will take more like 125amps. Ask Rich at CruiseRO if you can run off 11amps 12vDC through an inverter. He will tell you it isn't possible.

[CeesH]

Its maybe a hole in the market to start producing recuperation high pressure pumps......

They are not that HIGH TECH.

My 2 centavos,

CeesH

[CeesH]

Originally Posted by Paul L

CeesH
I'm not arguing about low tech vs high tech. I just was pointing out that your statement that you run the CruiseRO at 11amp@12v could not possibly be correct for the Cruise RO AC system. On the DC side it will take more like 125amps. Ask Rich at CruiseRO if you can run off 11amps 12vDC through an inverter. He will tell you it isn't possible.

Sorry Paul, you pointed your arrows at the wrong one. Read back the posts that wasn't me, I'm a "Direct Driven" man.

CeesH
My 1000 Real (R$)

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by CeesH

Sorry Paul, you pointed your arrows at the wrong one. Read back the posts that wasn't me, I'm a "Direct Driven" man.

CeesH
My 1000 Real (R$)

OK, confusion in the threads. I always thought the way some of the Deerfoots are setup with a separate small diesel that runs WM, genset, and hydraulics direct drive made a lot of sense.