Bestevaer 49ST

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

Wottie, that is almost exactly our thought process behind the design (apart from the day tank overflow).
Great minds etc…..
………………..
NOT QUITE: in some emergency it is useful to be able to pump fuel directly from the main tank (just involves one short line and one three way valve).
Hmm.. this is one part I don't like. While it sounds simple easy and without problem, it may introduce an engine stoping issue. The most critical fuel pipe is the one from the tank to the engine and it is compromised by this addition. Also possible loss of gravity feed advantage and potential point for fuel to drain from the day tank if "something" happens to this one short line and one three way valve. Find another way to deal with this "some emergency",



Excellent idea to keep these well apart . They will all probably go into the technical area next to the engine bay though, which is close to the tanks rather than on separate sides of the boat.
I will add yet another bit in the specs regarding this.

Yep, I get that they might have to go in one area but still keep them divided as much as possible. Maybe have three separate colours on the panel where they are mounted or have all the switches, valves, pumps filters etc colour coded.

This is only thing you have mentioned that we have specified differently. Only because there seems to be no drawback to adding an overflow. It will never be relied on. The day tank is small and will fill quickly, we won't aim to have it filled to the brim and we will watch it like hawks (it is not something you turn on then go do something else). But just in case we miss that it is nearly full, rather than spilling out fuel or introducing sensors, the fuel can briefly overflow to the top of one main tank (no siphon issues). What potential problem can you see with an overflow? It is only if our eagle eyes miss when the day tank is getting full that we would need it anyway and it is just one simple downhill line with no valves etc.
Probably no advantage in doing my way, maybe think about if the line breaks and boat is heeled well over, maybe some spillage inside but every arrangement has a drawback. You gotta be happy with your compromise and not other people's compromises

Thanks for your response. It is very valuable to have holes poked in our schemes, but it is also actually very nice to have someone confirm our ideas are reasonable.

SWL

One design point to consider (and I'm sure you have already done so) is think not what is wrong with any particular system; rather think what will happen when it finally fails. Most issues occur not from bad design, rather a failure to consider what will happen when it breaks. The great design might look foolproof while every individual component is serviceable but the best design is one that keep on working even when the "critical components" actually fail.

Use a standard risk assessment strategy: a matrix of likelihood of failure (often, occasional, rare, extremely rare etc) and consequence of the failure (minor annoyance, major annoyance, serious injury, fatal, catastrophic etc).

So things that fail occasionally and only cause minor annoyance are acceptable as might be an extremely rare event that causes a major annoyance while anything that fails often is not acceptable regardless of consequence just like anything that has a consequence of fatal injury or catastrophic is not acceptable.

WRT your fuel systems, any failure in any part of the day tank especially the output piping to the engine even though rare, can have a serious (or worse) consequence.

Anyway, my two bob's worth

Will be off line for a few days - much to CF's collective delight

[hoppy]

SWL & Noelex,
I've kept seeing this thread but never checked it until today. My cousin would be extremely jealous of your plans as he is totally committed to get a Coke can for his retirement cruising plans. I used to wonder why until he said he wanted to go to places like Alaska. I know at some point he's sent me links to this boat.

Just so I can feel comfortable about your plans, please tell me you will get a heater. I get a chill when I think of you two anchoring in winter, it's just a shame that chill does not actually cool me down in this summer heat


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by hoppy

SWL & Noelex,
I've kept seeing this thread but never checked it until today. My cousin would be extremely jealous of your plans as he is totally committed to get a Coke can for his retirement cruising plans. I used to wonder why until he said he wanted to go to places like Alaska. I know at some point he's sent me links to this boat.

Just so I can feel comfortable about your plans, please tell me you will get a heater. I get a chill when I think of you two anchoring in winter, it's just a shame that chill does not actually cool me down in this summer heat

Hi Hoppy
They grow Melbourne lassies tough, but I am thrilled to find I am being permitted a heater in this boat. We are having a diesel fed Refleks .

No plans for Alaska, but when we eventually get to New Zealand we will hit some Refleks type weather.

SWL

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by dannc

Yep a counter to see how much fuel actually went into the tank.

With the newer electric controlled engines, maybe that is not needed, but I have calculated my MPG for every tank of fuel I have bought for my vehicles and it is a habit that is hard to break. How much fuel I pumped into the day tank would be nice for me know. Not sure it is a must have.

I recently read a reference to a water/fuel separator but I can't remember where... From what I can remember, the water/fuel separator was YAF(Yet Another Filter) inline with the fuel system to remove water from the fuel. Might be worth looking into as well as a water in fuel alarm.

Later,
Dan

Dan, that is exactly what my dad did .
As soon as I was old enough to write, at every petrol station I was given the task of getting the little red book from the glove compartment with a pencil tied on (dad was super efficient), and filling in the date, mileage and amount of fuel to fill the tank. As soon as I could divide, I also had the job of calculating the litres per km (may have even been MPG initially). Guess it kept me busy and less likely to be a nuisance while travelling.

Unless hubbie wants a counter for the same reason (not impossible) we will skip it .

The day tank is rectangular and will have a sight tube to see the level filled. Given the low volume of this tank (60 litres), this should provide a means of measuring quite small amounts of fuel reasonably accurately if needed. A tank tender system will show how much fuel is left in the main tanks.

The Racor has a glass bowl at the bottom and it is very easy to see if there is water in it, so an additional water/fuel separator shouldn't be needed.

SWL

[hoppy]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

Hi Hoppy

They grow Melbourne lassies tough, but I am thrilled to find I am being permitted a heater in this boat. We are having a diesel fed Refleks .



No plans for Alaska, but when we eventually get to New Zealand we will hit some Refleks type weather.



SWL

You must be the exception rather than the rule. My sisters and their friends, all from Melbourne, are bitching and moaning on Facebook about how cold it is and when I check the weather it sounds like Swedish Spring to me and conditions I would drop the roof on my cab. Admittedly Swedish homes are well heated in winter so I am used to a toasty indoors.

I'm sure I'll sleep better at night knowing you will have the potential to warm up.

So the long term plan is that you will eventually get closer to home?




Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by hoppy

So the long term plan is that you will eventually get closer to home?

We will probably eventually spend summers cruising NZ and winters in Fiji, Tonga, etc.

SWL

[hoppy]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

We will probably eventually spend summers cruising NZ and winters in Fiji, Tonga, etc.

SWL

So no Aussie waters to avoid GST?

I'm in a sail to Melbourne mood at the moment.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

Both filling problems can also be temporarily solved by simply manually filling the day tank with the 20 odd litres of emergency fuel kept in a jerry can. An easy fill, as it is is done in the sheltered dry conditions of the huge cockpit lazarette.

The many-splendoured beauty of the day tank system . . .

[DeepFrz]

Here is a link to Jedi's fuel polishing system. The only thing I find fault with is that the return lines don't go to the bottom, although in the thread on CF I believe we discussed that. When the return lines go to near the bottom of the fuel there is no splashing and oxidization of the fuel and the fuel flow will "help" to keep the bottom of the tank clean.
A new fuel system for Jedi (English) - s/v Jedi

And the thread. http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ing-79548.html
goto post 21.

noelex contributed quite a bit to that thread.

[Seaworthy Lass]

The fuel diagram has been sent in now with a deletion of one on/off valve after the filter from the day tank following Wotname's advice to keep this line as simple as possible.

The emergency use bypassing the day tank has been left in, as this only entails one connection post day tank (minimal risk of problems), but gives us an alternative filtered fuel supply from the main tank in an emergency.

Thanks everyone for your feedback .

SWL

[estarzinger]

Just as a small detail, we used SS armored fuel hose from the day tank to the engine (I think it was http://www.summitracing.com/parts/spe-29410/overview/). May be overkill, but you don't want that bit to fail because it will gravity dump fuel if it does, and the hose is easy to get (race car shops) and not that expensive. This stuff will not ever be accidentally chafed or cut.

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Just as a small detail, we used SS armored fuel hose from the day tank to the engine (I think it was http://www.summitracing.com/parts/spe-29410/overview/). May be overkill, but you don't want that bit to fail because it will gravity dump fuel if it does, and the hose is easy to get (race car shops) and not that expensive. This stuff will not ever be accidentally chafed or cut.

Excellent suggestion. Thank you.

SWL

[TwoLegged]

Lovely boat, and a fascinating thread. Thanks for sharing the decision-making process.

One thing that struck me was the pilothouse. I like the idea of a longer one, but have you considered raking its front windows forwards? This has been standard practice for decades on fishing boats and other commercial craft.

It has several advantages, such as keeping rain off the glass and reduvcing glare.

Yves-Marie Tanton has done this on some of his latest pilot cutter-styled vessels, and it looks great. Here are some photos of his 2013-launched Ilgaz (more on Ilgaz at TANTON YACHT DESIGN: Launching. and at TANTON YACHT DESIGN: Puzzle.)

[estarzinger]

Before we built Hawk, I had a couple designers attempt the 'reverse window pilot house", exactly because as you say it is common in serious work boats. But I found all the attempts to be ugly.

That's obviously a matter of personal esthetic opinion. And others may disagree or just think esthetics are not important for a "work boat".

But even thou I was specifically looking for a "work boat look" I just did not think any of the design attempts made reverse windows fit on a sail boat. (And unfortunately I think the one you posted is ugly also).

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by TwoLegged

Lovely boat, and a fascinating thread. Thanks for sharing the decision-making process.

One thing that struck me was the pilothouse. I like the idea of a longer one, but have you considered raking its front windows forwards? This has been standard practice for decades on fishing boats and other commercial craft.

It has several advantages, such as keeping rain off the glass and reduvcing glare.

Hi TwoLegged
Glad you are enjoying the thread. We have been enjoying the discussions and as well have received some very valuable feedback, so thanks everyone.

I agree a raked back window is immensely practical, particularly with an "eyebrow" added. It has not been something we considered doing though.

On our current boat we have forward sloping windows in a raised central area that accommodates the nav station and galley with 270 degree views when standing.

We have lived with this for eight years now without experiencing any significant problems. It helps tremendously that our current windows are almost permanently shaded by a boom tent in summer (it slides onto tracks on the boom and can be unrolled by one person in a couple of minutes), and we will be reproducing this. So seeking to alter the rake of the windows was not on the agenda.

One huge drawback of raking the windows back is that without extending the pilothouse even further, I would lose a big chunk of the metre long "void" at the front end of the pilothouse. The ceiling height in part of the galley and salon is about half a metre higher in part of this area and it also allows a clear view down from the pilothouse settees on both sides, creating a very open feel. I would hate to lose any of this.

Below I have sketched in how a rake back would look on a Bestevaer's pilothouse (already extended 750mm over their standard size). Personally, although it has a purposeful look, it does not appeal much on this boat. I think it needs a big pilothouse in relation to the boat length to start looking good: