The perfect Passagemaker III, propulsion

Teddy- I've been wondering the same thing. In theory, it should work, as long as the engine is properly loaded in its "new" configuration.
Other than the governor, what would have to be changed to do this? Would the injectors themselves need to be adjusted in any way? What about the cam timing?

 

IMHO I would think that if the engine was really any good it would have been converted to a marine engine already so clearly the manufacturere knows it either cant do the duty cycle or they cant get it past future emission regs hence that didnt proceed with it

 

Yes of course, when the injection is set up according to the lower RPM / max. we gain these benefits.
When we just run them at idle we don´t have won too much. But almost all these engines have a industrial setting at around 1500 rpm as alternative standard. Such engine (lets assume providing some ~35 hp/1500 now), operated with a CPP, would live happily forever at 1200 max.

Regards
Richard

 

Hi Richard
For the correct injector setup, will an ECU / common rail system manage to do this well enough to gain these benefits, or are customized injectors required? If the latter, then I assume that the 3600 rpm in Teddy's example is no longer possible?
Regards - Brian

 

only problem with a common rail ecu is you wont be able to change it
EDIT >>Might not be able to<<

 

Right Brian,

when you change the mapping on a recent ECU in a way Teddy wanted, you don´t get the former max. RPM. But you get the behaviour of a heavy displacement engine up to the new max RPM. That means there is no further increase in fuel supply above the set figure (here 1200 / 1500 RPM). Hence the engine cannot revv faster than that.

In theory one could reprogram the ECU every other moment if wanted, and I am not sure if that would´nt be a sensible way. (did not think about it by now).

For the older engines one has to change the hardware instead. Injector pump, injectors, to get the same effect.

powerabout
why would one be not able? I don´t understand your comment. On all modern Diesel engines one can easily manipulate the mapping. (not the amateur of course)

Regards
Richard

 

Apex
I wouldnt think all vendors allow access to do that, ones that do only give you a range of maps that they have certified to be emission compliant etc.
you could always use one of these
http://www.bosch-motorsport.com/pdf/ecus/diesel/MS_15.1.pdf
I think you have to pick your engine to find one you can change.

 

Thanks Richard! That's about what I've assumed so far, and what I'm going to do. With an "old fasioned" diesel, no turbo no common rail, just a kind you mentioned in your last post. But is it a must to do this: "For the older engines one has to change the hardware instead. Injector pump, injectors, to get the same effect." or is enought to adjust timing and injection pressure or smth similar..

 

...the more that you "modernise" an engine, the more complicated it becomes, and with complication comes the resultant lack of reliability. (now don't go on about how we never need to touch the modern engine how we used to, tune ups basically do not exist anymore, just change the oil and filters)....the KISS principle is what I am referring to, the more partds to fail, well the more parts to fail..

Common rail engines today are very high pressure, the injectors are no longer spring operated simple valves, they are electronic, and they are VERY expensive.....go price any of them you wish to prove the point. The rails are pressurised to thousands of pounds, and not what is needed in an ocean going vessel that is designed and built to be "self sufficient" as much as possible....there is only one way to obtain reliability and that is to have as few moving parts as possible, less parts, less failures, and lowest possible speeds to operate too.

 

Depends Teddy,

when you don´t have a ECU to reprogram you most probably have the old "Bosch" type injection pump which has to be partially replaced. (other pistons and timing) And adjust the governor if not built in.
If it´s a real old design, like the Grenaa, you will probably even need a new camshaft, due to much different timing. (as Matt already feared)

But most suitable engines you might think about, are, or have been on the market at least as generator units, if not as marine engines. So getting the right parts should be not a real task.
Of course, if the engine was too weak for such application, like many car engines, they never have been sold for industrial or marine use. As powerabout assumed.
But I guess you are thinking in the "Transporter" "Sprinter" section, aka small trucks. ???

Of course, not many manufacturers agree that you "manipulate" the mapping, and not all mappings are compliant with present or future regulations. But there are many "tuners" on the market providing what you look for.
In this case, I assume we must not ask for any warranty issues, because Teddy will most likely think about a second hand engine.

 

I think as you say you need to find an engine that was happy as a gen set so it had some torque at 1500rpm.
I dont think a modern 3600rpm engine will produce much at 1500, time to check out the power graphs.

 

Perhaps I already missed it and, if so, I apologize but is an engine that is designed to run on bunker okay when bunker is not available? There is no longer any bunker fuel refined in Alaska, for example.

The remainder is on a tangent: I had coffee with the head of Petro Marine Alaska (they handle about 60% of the marine fuels in Alaska) and talked about this in the morning (and about lubricity additives, etc.) and he told me this, for those interested: there is no longer ANY bunker or #2 diesel in Alaska. At the fuel docks of Petro Marine, you are getting Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel - there can be no Jet A sold at a marine facility, which is what is sold for home heating oil (and only has maybe 2% more BTUs), there is no red die in Alaska because of an exemption, there was a Naptha-based lubricity enhancer used and it damaged thousands of home heaters, caused a couple of fires, and now all marine fuel from Petro is ULSD and has Innosol OLI-9070.x, a synthetic, ester based, non-interacting, non-acidic, sulfur compliant lubricity additive. Marine diesel is now "glow-in-the-dark" yellow/green and there is no need to add two-cycle oil, Marvel Oil, use a lubricity additive fuel filter from Fleetguard/Cummins or anything else if lubricity is your only objective. Edit: More conversations have ensued. The lubricity additive has brought the friction down to a lower level. Volvo, my manufacturer, will not void a warranty if you add some two-cycle oil or Stanadyne. Never add ATF or some other thing not designed to burn, I am told. This deserves a thread but I think I just finished it here. Sorry

 

I spent three years on small cruise ships and all of them had at least two propulsion engines, even the steam powered one. One boat i worked on even had 4, two shafts and 2 Z drives.

All of them also had at least two generators.

Every single year I was on the boats at some point we had an engine failure requiring replacement of parts. I'm also not buying the "lack of maintenance" story. We had excellent engineers, most of them retired Navy types. One year we lost both Zs due to a hydraulic failure, another is was a blown voltage regulator on one of the gensets (which also took out our bowthruster). That same year one of the other boats in our fleet ate a mooring line and lost the sacrificial gear in it's transmission.

My point here is that modern engines are a collection of many parts and sooner or later some of those parts break. Had any of the boats I worked on been single engine we would have been adrift.

Here's an example of what happens when a large commercial vessel loses it's single engine:

http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2006/MAB0601.pdf

If everything goes right a single engine can be fine, but the problem is that it doesn't always go right.

For an inland vessel I think a single engine, well maintained, is fine. For blue water cruising it just seems like too big of a risk.

On a related topic, I would also want to have an engine room fixed fire detection and suppression system. One of the things that can get you dead fastest at sea is an engine room fire and with the ability to seal the engine room and flood it with CO2, you at least have a chance. Compared to the cost of the boat, or even just the engine, these systems are cheap insurance.

Finally, I wouldn't go to sea without a separate emergency generator with it's own fuel supply that is not located in the engine room. It doesn't need to run the whole ship, just the essentials like bilge pumps, navigation and communication systems, and steering. One boat I was on had a separate engine for the bow thruster and if this was also rigged as your emergency generator then it would get run more often and stay in better shape.

 

cthippo,

By your own words from your own experiences, you have not shown of any main engine failure......a single mid speed engine, is really a very reliable little fella...sure gensets pack it in, sure some goose runs over a live, sure transmissions fail, that is why Apex is using a VPP......

 

Fair enough, but it doesn't matter if you have the most reliable main in the world if you only have one power train and everything in that train has to work or you're stuck.