Kevlacat Ocean Trek 4100
Lloyd, There are "Kevlacat" Logo's on the port and starboard sides of
the hull near the transom with a "Ocean Trek 4100" logo on both sides of
the fly bridge. The title says the manufacture is Kevlacat with a HIN #
that starts with "KEV". I have gone to the AU Kevlacat site and they
list a 12.4 Metre Ocean Trek 4600 model with the same specs as my boat.
I have tried to contact their sales person with no response from them.
The data I have received so far is quite confusing from their web site:
Mold Length 12.4 Meters = 40.6 feet
LOA 14.2 Meters = 46.5 feet
My boat looks exactly like the 4600 on their web site measures 40' at the
water line, 42' from transom to tip of bow, and 47' overall length if
you include the pulpit and swim platform. I believe these are exactly
the same boats but I am confused as to why mine is a 4100 and theirs is a
4600 model. Did they just decide to change the model # between 1998 and
now or are there differences in the boats. There are other discrepancies
I have discovered such as the boat has several items that were built into
the boat when it was original manufactured with inspection date on them
of 6/2000. How can it be a 1998 boat built with vendor items with dates
2 years older than the boat. These were not add ons they were clearly
part of the origonal build effort. I am in the process of refurbing the
boat as it had suffered some interior abuse and would like to find out as
much as I can about its history and how many of these boat are in the US.
I have included a picture of the boat compare it with the one on the AU
web site and see what you think. I want to get as much info as possible
to the boats worth as I plan to put it up for sale when the refurb work
is finished. I think this is the only one in the US. Any information
anyone can provide will be of great help. TKS.
Regards, Rick Blake
"Private Reserve" Port Charlotte, Fl.
36' Nantucket Sedan Powered by Yanmar
[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type image/jpeg which had a name of 2005_1226Image0002.JPG]
With all the concern about keeping weight down on multi hulls, are there any
builders already considering new designs for electrical systems that reduces
the weight of wiring by 50% or more?
Teh technology is already on the shelf and available, but so far it seems
the marine industry is reluctant to adopt any of it.
regards
Arild Jensen
Arild Jensen wrote:
With all the concern about keeping weight down on multihulls, are there any
builders already considering new designs for electrical systems that reduce
the weight of wiring by 50% or more?
The technology is already on the shelf and available, but so far it seems
the marine industry is reluctant to adopt any of it.
How about elaborating on what the technology is that always saving so
much weight in wiring?
--Georgs
Georgs Kolesnikovs
Power Catamaran World
http://www.powercatamaranworld.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Georgs Kolesnikovs
Arild Jensen wrote:
With all the concern about keeping weight down on multihulls, are there any
builders already considering new designs for electrical systems that reduce
the weight of wiring by 50% or more?
Georgs replied
How about elaborating on what the technology is that allows saving so
much weight in wiring?
REPLY - by Arild
The basic idea is to have one major power bus along the lenght of the
hull(s).
At intervals local distribution nodes are created to feed only those
circuits in close proximity to that node.
Control of individual circuits and devices is achieved by using either
relays or digital switches that respond to a unique data address.
This latter approach can also be adapted to a wireless approach. The
concept can be applied to both AC and DC power circuits.
The weight saving is accomplished because branch circuits from distribution
node to load is always quite short.
Aa an example, you do not have individual branch circuits running all the
way from the helm area to each navigation light location.
Teleflex used the marketing term "Magic Bus" back in 2000 when they unveiled
their version at IBEX. More recently Nigel Calder referred to it in his
Professional Boatbuilding article as a "three wire" system. Doral also had
a demo system back in 2000 and SeaRay has been experimenting with a limited
version from Intellitec for a number of years. Automakers have switched most
if not all their vehicular production to this approach because of the
significant weight savings they get. They don't have a marketing name for
it. Its just called multiplexed switch wiring. The concept has been used
around industrial applications for three decades that I know of.
I spoke to the engineering manager of luxury RV coaches. He told me they
realized a 50% cost reduction by switching to the Intellitec system.
At the same time they were alsoable to offer some additional features that
would have been expensive to do before. Three way switching is much easier
to facilitate. Since the operating switch is essentially a low current
device you can use less expensive activation switches.
With branch circuits being l]short, you can use smaller wire gauge without
incurring unacceptable voltage drop.
FRom a design perspective you no longer need massive wire chases to
accomodate huge wire bundles. By also including a ring main, some additional
redundancy can be achieved to overcome wire damage in the event of mishaps
or water intrusion damage.
Cheers
Arild
Georgs replied
How about elaborating on what the technology is that allows saving so
much weight in wiring?
REPLY - by Arild
The basic idea is to have one major power bus along the lenght of the
hull(s).
At intervals local distribution nodes are created to feed only those
circuits in close proximity to that node.
Hi All
Example 1 http://www.moritzaero.com/Products/Octoplex/default.aspx
Example 2 http://www.lantic-yachting.com/Default.aspx?ID=470
With the exception of superyachts, we may still be waiting for this to be
implemented in another 10 years.
regards
Roger Bingham
-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Bingham
With the exception of superyachts, we may still be waiting for this to be
implemented in another 10 years.
REPLY
I would question that "conventional wisdon" statement.
I hand built such a system back in 1996 at a considerable cost saving over
the conventional system that wer are more accustomed to see.
While working for Xantrex as their Marine ApplicationsEngineer I travelled
extensively to boat shows all over and had the opportunity to see what other
companies offered. The cost saving in a 42 foot RV coach ull is
considerable sowhy would it not also apply to a 42 foot boat hull? Both RV
and boats hav emuch in common in terms of self containment, battery power ,
geneation hotelservices for water, fuel and blkack water not to mention heat
and air conditioning.
IU grant you that the autromotive world world does benefit from economies of
scale. But custom built coachews and custom orlimited production boats have
much more in common when it comes to syustem assembly.
The concept itself datesback to industrial automation developed in the
sixties and seventies. A totally non electronic system using only plain
switches and ordinary relays can still be built using nothins but ordinary
electrical devices already used on board.
Even so, there are weight, cost, and space, savings to be realized.
I suspect it is more a question of builders being reluctant to trying
something new. Strange, since they do seem to embrace new technology in
other area of boat building. Resin infusion, cored materials, carbon fiber
and so on. Why then the reluctance to also explore new innovations in
electrical fields?
cheers
Arild
REPLY - by Arild
The basic idea is to have one major power bus along the lenght of the
hull(s).
At intervals local distribution nodes are created to feed only those
circuits in close proximity to that node.
Control of individual circuits and devices is achieved by using either
relays or digital switches that respond to a unique data address.
This latter approach can also be adapted to a wireless approach. The
concept can be applied to both AC and DC power circuits.
How much weight saving are we talking about, Arild, say in a 40 foot
boat, between multiplexed switch wiring and a conventional system?
Should there be cost savings as well? Would maintenance be simpler, too?
What are the disadvantages, if any?
--Georgs
PS I don't know of any power cats that employ multiplexed switch
wiring but the system aboard the Lagoon 500 sailing catamaran is
built entirely with six electrical bus bars.
-----Original Message-----
From: Georgs Kolesnikovs
How much weight saving are we talking about, Arild, say in a 40 foot
boat, between multiplexed switch wiring and a conventional system?
REPLY
Weight saving depends on how much additional equipment above the absolute
bare minimalist things.
AS a for instance, if the main panel is located near aft end then all the
branch circuits for forward cabin runs parallel most of the way. Thsi could
amount to six, eight or more circuits.
Boats equipped with an electric bow winch already has a heavy cable runnign
all the way forward from the battery. However thsi cable is only used at
infrequent intervals and then only for maybe five or ten minutes at a time.
Why not instead use this same power cable run to feed the forward locations
and use only short branch circuits from this central cable to the fixtures.
With multiplexing it can work.
I would expect to see a 30 - 50% weight reduction with careful design.
Should there be cost savings as well? Would maintenance be simpler, too?
There would be some cost reduction in terms of labor involved in fishing
these long cable runs into the wire chases. The reduction of copper wire
sill be offset by increased cost of the switches and sub panels.
Hard numbers are difficultot come by for the simple reason many of the
builders I have asked simply do not track the exact amount of wire used.
They do track work hours but seldom break this down int pulling cable,
mounting boxes terminating wires etc.
AS I mentioned before the RV company Foretravel did say the total installed
cost was 50% compared to the previou syear model having a conventional
system. In my own hand built example, the cost of wiring was estimated to
be $5000 just for cables etc. By switching to copper bus bars I reduced
this to $500. Solid copper bus bars are not suited to use onboard a vessel.
However a product called Flex bus is suitable.
Maintenance: In a well designed and built system maintenance is at a
minimum, consisting of routine checks for water intrusion, termination and
connector fastenings remaining tight and of course periodic infra-red scans
to check for hot spots. Something rarely done in recreational boats is an
insulation integrity check. This kind of check is very time consuming owing
to the large number of circuits involved. REducing the amount of wiring now
makes this easier to accomplish.
By using the bus bar and multiplexed switch concept, the amount of chafe and
number of wear locations is greatly reduce and should result in reduced
repairs over the sewrvice lifeof th e vessel.
The biggest maintenance saving will be the reduced amount of time spent
tracing circuits looking for the cause of inexplicable mal fucntions.
What are the disadvantages, if any?
REPLY
Biggest disadvantage is the unfamiliar concept. People naturally don't trust
something they don't understand.
There is a cost associated with the additional relays or solid state control
ddevices used.
You cannot calculate cost savings by only comparing bits and pieces. For an
example, the total number of separate circuits requiring over current
protection will remain the same. Therefore no cost saving in breakers.
But instead of needing 10, 15, or even 30 amp switches for motors, wipers
and compressors you now use much smaller 5 amp switches. These switches are
often smaller, thus reducing the amount of real estate used on a console.
The full multiplexed systemwith touch screens can eliminate 90% of all
descrete switches.
Howe many switches equals the cost of such a digital control panel. If you
pay $10 per quality switch it it doesnt' take long.
It becomes much harder to quantify the labor savings since you cannot
measure the time not used to figure out how to devise cable chases hide
switches inside bulkheads and geneally reduce the clutter.
And how do you calculate the value of being able to add features when it
doesn't involve running extra wires or hardware. Adding three and four way
switching to many circuits is as simpleas programming a soft key or adding a
few relay controlwires to the same point in the master control.
Most digital multiplex systems incorportate dimming and individual current
load monitoring.
This kind of capability greatly enhances energy management options for long
distance cruisers.
For power cats which have propulsion engines going all the time it can even
mean eliminating a genset or at least reduce the amount of battery bank
capacity. But be aware some choices are mutially exclusive. <VBG>
regards
Arild
-----Original Message-----
Georgs Kolesnikovs
How much weight saving are we talking about, Arild, say in a 40 foot
boat, between multiplexed switch wiring and a conventional system?
REPLY (2)
Nigel mentions that his boat ahd something like 600-700 lbs of wire.
If you reduce that to 1/2 or 1/3 that is a 300 - 400 lb reduction.
That is equivalent to a lot of extra fuel or food storage, or slightly
better performance when weight is critical.
Copper wire is not cheap. Aside from the weight saved the cost saving is
probably more significant.
regards
Arild Jensen