Cummins 450c Fuel Flow

[jfm]

I agree, but waddumean by "from the Cat ECUs", J?
Afaik, they are totally unaware of the actual boat speed, and also of tank capacity.
Am I right in guessing that you just "read" the instantaneous lph from the Cat MPD to feed some Maretron interface, which does the math based on the boat speed to eventually show the lpm?

That aside, I for one would be interested to hear more about the Maretron components required, and possibly their ballpark costs.

Yep the cat ecus tell lph to the garmin screens, which already know SOG, and the garmin screens compute lpm and range. The engines themselves obviously don't know SOG or STW. I only mentioned "from the cat ecus" to turn the page (so to speak) from the maretron fuel flow units that I had been talking about in my post. Sorry if I caused confusion.

The maretron devices are priceable online but I think in the order of €1k per engine. I don't recall exactly. Nothing from maretron is cheap but it's all excellent quality (with a couple of exceptions). You obviously need an n2k network and screens to receive and display the data but many boats have that already

The components you need, per engine, are 2x flow meters, 1x ffm100 black box, and a drop cable + tee to your n2k network. You also need fuel hoses but perhaps only one per engine if you mount the supply side flow meter directly onto the primary fuel filter. I only use crimped hoses not jubilee clipped hoses, so these need to be custom made. I'll post some pics if I can find some

 

[MapisM]

No worries for the confusion, I did guess what you actually meant! :encouragement:
The Maretron option sounds like an Interesting alternative to Floscan, thanks, I'll investigate it further.
What sort of cable does N2K require?

 

[jfm]

N2k uses a back bone system and you are better buying ready made cable parts (like lego) unless you want to spend lots of time fitting your own connectors. Cable is 5 core. You need to run a backbone that passes within say 1 metre of every component. Then each component is connected to backbone with a c 1m long "spur" cable that connects to backbone with a T connection. One or two of the spurs supply 12v to the network (normally one, but I have two, and there are special "rules" if you have two). Once you have this infrastructure of a backbone running/snaking around the boat (from mast, to fly helm, to lower helm, to master cabin, then engine room, then crew cabin) you can just add hardware any time you want. Of course you can have a much shorter backbone if you don't want to cover all those zones. There are ratings telling you max length and max hardware items but you'll never hit them on a 24m boat. Every plotter, MFD screen, depth sounder box, GPS mushroom, wind vane, barometer, 110mm sq dashboard display, maretron box, just plugs onto the backbone.

 

[MapisM]

Fuel Flow... And beyond (Maretron tools)

Thanks jfm, very useful info.
In the meantime, while checking the Maretron website, I thought to consider their stuff also for something else.
I hope Piers doesn't mind if I extend the scope of his thread a bit - I thought to open a new one, but since fuel monitoring still is one of the items, it's interesting to keep this here, I reckon.

First, a premise:.
The existing set of gauges on my boat, even if very extensive (by analogue instruments+mechanical engines standards), still misses a few things which I'd like to have: firstly the EGT for each cylinder bank, but also boost pressure and fuel filter restrictions.
For this stuff, I already found several alternatives, for both sensors and gauges - but each of them non-integrated, i.e. using separate, specific components.
Fuel consumption is also in my "nice to have list" (though somewhat lower in terms of priority, vs. the previous examples), but a Floscan system would mean, yet again, specific cables and gauges.

Now, as I understood from Maretron website, one of their small(ish) screens, like the DSM410 and DSM250, on top of being able to show the fuel burn of both engines when connected to their FFM100 box+flow sensors, can also handle and display just about anything else imaginable.
Alternatively, their "N2KView" software can do exactly the same on any PC connected with either their USB or ethernet interface to the N2K backbone - a handy feature for anyone who always has (as I do) a PC onboard.
N2K-compatible MFDs are obviously another alternative, but I don't like the idea of replacing my existing (pre-N2K) monitors, not only because they are still more than good enough for their jobs, but also because navigation and onboard monitoring are very different things from a logical standpoint, and imho it makes sense to keep them also in physically different, dedicated areas of the dashboard.

So, I am now wondering if it would make sense to use this Maretron stuff for any additional monitoring needs, since obviously it's more efficient to have just one cable running from the e/r to the p/h, as well as one single additional screen (either a dedicated one, or a PC) instead of several different gauges, which btw would be hard to fit in the existing dashboard.

Bottom line, time being I have two basic questions for jfm or anyone else familiar with Maretron kit and N2K networks:
1) do you see any major factor which I might be missing, in my above reasoning?
2) are sensors capable to create N2K sentences widely available?
I mean, let's take EGT for instance: all pyrometer probes I came across so far are meant to feed some specific analogue gauges, and I can't remember any that can just be "plugged" into a N2K network.
Btw, I couldn't find them on Maretron website, either - though among their screenshot examples there is one showing EGT...

 

[jfm]

Re: Fuel Flow... And beyond (Maretron tools)

You've got it right. A few comments:
1. Maretron have analogue (obviously) sensors wired to a nearby little black box which converts to N2k format. That black box connects to n2k network. All ok, just saying.
2. They do have an egt monitor. TMP100 black box, and TP EGT 1 for EGT. Once you've bought the black box TMP100 you might as well buy some more sensors to use up the channels. For V engine like yours, you need to buy everything x 2 unfortunately
3. The DSM250 is necessary unless you use a laptop, but it disappointing. Over 7 years I have lost 2 to water/damp ingress, and physical failure of the plastic case. Really annoying that they cannot get a better screen in this size, given how good their other gear is. The functionality is fine, and it even has nice displays like moon phase, but physical build, resolution and waterproofing are disappointments. I basically tolerate it but don't love it. It's also REALLY expensive - I wouldn't hate it so much if it were €150 or so. The laptop idea is therefore good. You plug a little blackbox onto n2k network and then connect to that and PC via USB cable
4. It's worthwhile studying maretron website. Tech info is good. I use the SIM, RIM stuff so my fly dash display tells me which genset is running, black tanks full, watermaker on, aft crew cabin airco left on, and when I get round to it some other status items like transom door open etc. Apart from DSM250 it is high quality gear. DSM410 might be better but I already have a dashboard hole for DSM250, dang!

Warning: getting into maretron systems is an expensive hobby

DSM250 is to left of steering wheel in this shot. It's colour and reversible ie you can have black on white or white on black, and ditto red green or blue. At night I have black background with red numbers/graphics. On the analogue dial pages you can set red/amber/green zones on each dial

 

[MapisM]

Re: Fuel Flow... And beyond (Maretron tools)

Warning: getting into maretron systems is an expensive hobby

LOL, why am I not surprised to hear that?

I'll dig into their website in more detail, and if I'll decide to go ahead with a Maretron installation, I'll follow up with a specific thread.
Time being, thanks again for your inputs! :encouragement:

 

[burgundyben]

Re: Fuel Flow... And beyond (Maretron tools)

LOL, why am I not surprised to hear that?

I'll dig into their website in more detail, and if I'll decide to go ahead with a Maretron installation, I'll follow up with a specific thread.
Time being, thanks again for your inputs! :encouragement:

Surely, all this is even better reasoning to upgrade to modern engines that can do all this. Especially if existing engines are still saleable.

 

[vas]

Re: Fuel Flow... And beyond (Maretron tools)

Now you're getting into the things I've been trying to do on the cheap over the last couple of winters...

Of course +1K on what JFM says!

A warning that many MFDs N2K may not present all the info you want (doesn't mean a N2K MFD has a way to show whatever you throw at it!), so a dedicated solution like this DSM250 is unfortunately a must (or a PC)
on the sensor front, yes you get into the black box with a bit of wizzardry + cables to (typically but not always) analogue sensor with a N2K socket (or cable stuck to) the black box.
So you built your N2K backbone and stick (rather tee off) things to it at will, really easy and foolproof.
I'm currently prototyping the E/R black box with an arduino teensy which will take a few pyrometers and other temp sensors. Doubt you're going to rush and spend 4-5K on Maretron, so wait for my report of success (as always ) on that in a few months.

As I said, MAIN problem is where to present that info!
My Garmin GPSMAP4008 and 751 as well as the small square displays (GMI10s) don't do EGT and dont do gbox oil pressure over 200psi which is silly. Further they wont do CAC temp (will do boost okay!) and wont do other odd ones you may have for engine safety purposes (seawater flow/temp, etc)
Wrote them all in this thread but I still haven't posted a request to Garmin, dead easy for them to upgrade their firmware and add it in, hope they do!

So, screen/display wise, we are completely stuck. You either go completely custom, do your graphs, setup the whole lot and be done with (in which case, why bother integrating it with N2K, plus for the f/b you have to find a decent sun visible and waterproof display) or buy a dedicated display that supports a wide range of PGN sentences (think types of data).
For the former good luck, for the latter you go to Maretron.

I do hope that s/w running on android/ipad and a wifi hub would sort this problem, but I'm not aware of anything, interested to learn of any new developments though!

Read a lot and thread carefully. A non N2K boat means that you don't get all the advantages of say having an anemometer running on the upper helm, as well as on a small 4in square screen on the master cabin with different alarms setup on each to keep you alert on wind picking up at night, or depth change (dragging) or anchor dragging. All that possible with just data moving about the bus from various sensors (mushroom, depth, wind, you name it) This I find brilliant. Not mixing this up with normal nav equipment not something I'd do tbh.

cheers

V.

 

[MapisM]

Re: Fuel Flow... And beyond (Maretron tools)

Surely, all this is even better reasoning to upgrade to modern engines that can do all this.
Especially if existing engines are still saleable.

No way. Leaving aside the old adage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", the reason why they are still saleable is that many folks still prefer mechanical engines, particularly among commercial operators - they just can't buy them new anymore when they need a replacement, due to emission regulations.
And whatever works for them, is good enough for me. Besides, I just love separate levers for gear and throttle!

Otoh, monitoring more than the usual cooling liquid temp and oil pressure does make sense also on mechanical engines.
In fact, I'm aware of some patrol boats powered by MAN mechanical engines and originally equipped with additional instruments similar to those I'm now considering for mine...

 

[MapisM]

Re: Fuel Flow... And beyond (Maretron tools)

Doubt you're going to rush and spend 4-5K on Maretron, so wait for my report of success (as always ) on that in a few months.

I'll surely look fwd to hearing about your progress, V - thanks in advance!
And thanks also for your other inputs, of course. :encouragement:

 

[Piers]

Re: Fuel Flow... And beyond (Maretron tools)

No way. Leaving aside the old adage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", the reason why they are still saleable is that many folks still prefer mechanical engines, particularly among commercial operators - they just can't buy them new anymore when they need a replacement, due to emission regulations. And whatever works for them, is good enough for me. Besides, I just love separate levers for gear and throttle!

+ 1 from me. Separate gear and throttle levers - perfection. Not being reliant on software to make Play d'eau's engine respond - halcyon days. It will take a great deal of persuasion to make us change. Now where's that Nodhavn...?

 

[MapisM]

Re: Fuel Flow... And beyond (Maretron tools)

+ 1 from me. Separate gear and throttle levers - perfection. Not being reliant on software to make Play d'eau's engine respond - halcyon days. It will take a great deal of persuasion to make us change. Now where's that Nodhavn...?

Amen to all that.
But as a matter of fact, nowadays the engine governors and the gearboxes are not driven by levers anymore, just by electrical commands. So, there's simply nowhere to attach mechanical cables to control them. :ambivalence:
In fact, I'm sorry to spoil your hope, but I'm afraid that most (possibly all?) Nordies built since 10 years ago or so are also equipped with electronic throttles... Otoh, whenever you will spec your new N64, you might ask them to install this stuff, rather than any other cheapish single levers.
Still electronic, so by definition without the real time feeling of gear engagement on your hand, which you can only get with mechanical cables connected to lever actuated gearboxes, but at least you can get separate control of gear and throttle.
If the fact that someone like Buzzi thought to design and build such levers after all engines became electronically controlled isn't enough to instill a doubt to single lever fans, I don't know what else could...
But each to their own, of course!

 

[vas]

Re: Fuel Flow... And beyond (Maretron tools)

Amen to all that.
But as a matter of fact, nowadays the engine governors and the gearboxes are not driven by levers anymore, just by electrical commands. So, there's simply nowhere to attach mechanical cables to control them. :ambivalence:
In fact, I'm sorry to spoil your hope, but I'm afraid that most (possibly all?) Nordies built since 10 years ago or so are also equipped with electronic throttles... Otoh, whenever you will spec your new N64, you might ask them to install this stuff, rather than any other cheapish single levers.
Still electronic, so by definition without the real time feeling of gear engagement on your hand, which you can only get with mechanical cables connected to lever actuated gearboxes, but at least you can get separate control of gear and throttle.
If the fact that someone like Buzzi thought to design and build such levers after all engines became electronically controlled isn't enough to instill a doubt to single lever fans, I don't know what else could...
But each to their own, of course!

judging from the cost of the Buzzi wastegates for my IVECOs I'm afraid that these controls probably cost more than MiToS!

V

 

[jfm]

Re: Fuel Flow... And beyond (Maretron tools)

Amen to all that.
But as a matter of fact, nowadays the engine governors and the gearboxes are not driven by levers anymore, just by electrical commands. So, there's simply nowhere to attach mechanical cables to control them. :ambivalence:
In fact, I'm sorry to spoil your hope, but I'm afraid that most (possibly all?) Nordies built since 10 years ago or so are also equipped with electronic throttles... Otoh, whenever you will spec your new N64, you might ask them to install this stuff, rather than any other cheapish single levers.
Still electronic, so by definition without the real time feeling of gear engagement on your hand, which you can only get with mechanical cables connected to lever actuated gearboxes, but at least you can get separate control of gear and throttle.
If the fact that someone like Buzzi thought to design and build such levers after all engines became electronically controlled isn't enough to instill a doubt to single lever fans, I don't know what else could...
But each to their own, of course!

Interesting. FB is not saying he likes separate sticks; he's saying he is worried about accidental strike down of a stick putting the engine at WOT in gear.

I'm encouraged by that because when manoeuvring in difficult conditions (say, awkward cross wind and tight space to get into) I much prefer single levers and cannot see how 2 levers could ever be better. But as FB says the worry of singles is accidental strike down,, and I worry about that a lot, though actually I worry more about a child doing it than an adult falling onto the sticks, and FB's units don't stop a child fiddling with the toggle switches. They improve things because a child is unlikely to both do the toggle switch and move the throttle lever, I suppose.

I'd prefer it to be able to disengage a control unit when leaving it to go to another. Normally you can't do that - you can only disengage the previous station AFTER you have walked to the new station, thereby leaving the previous station exposed to a child knocking the lever. If you could disengage a station (allowable only when in neutral of course), FB's units wouldn't be needed, and it appears he would agree.

 

[jfm]

WIW here are pics of my maretron units installed, on genset. The white wall is the bulkhead across front of e/room. White box at bottom of pic is port genset. The maretron turbine unit on the fuel feed side is attached directly (with catalogue NPT fuel fittings) on the racor filter so no extra hose was needed. The maretron turbine sensor in the return fuel line has on its bottom side the fuel hose that used to return straight to tank, and I fitted a new hose (about 30 cm long) from the top of this maretron sensor to the fuel tank port. The black electrical cables (not in their final position, in that picture) go to the maretron black box (out of sight) that in turns speaks into the n2k backbone. I use a dedicated n2k backbone just for the gensets as it is too hard to get off-shelf hardware like garmin to receive 4 engine inputs but compute lph by reading just the engines and ignoring the gensets. The 2nds and third pics show the Garmin GMI20 display set between the two Onan control panels for the two gensets. The close up pic shows the fuel burn of each genset separately, and the trip data at the bottom is aggregate for both gensets, but obviously you can configure the 4 windows in this GMI20 unit however you want eg in graph format like the bottom pic. These are pictures from day 1 and actually I just now use numerical data in each of the 4 windows. All works well and I'd do it again on next boat. Only downside of this is the punchy pricing

 

[vas]

The maretron turbine unit on the fuel feed side is attached directly (with catalogue NPT fuel fittings) on the racor filter so no extra hose was needed.

that's very smart J., sorts out the new pipe issue I was thinking of and do it carefully means that if something fails in that, you can remove the sensor and reconnect the fuel feed to the primary

V.

 

[MapisM]

Re: Fuel Flow... And beyond (Maretron tools)

Interesting. FB is not saying he likes separate sticks; he's saying he is worried about accidental strike down of a stick putting the engine at WOT in gear.

It's not just interesting what that webpage says J, it's also interesting how differently it can be interpreted.
Pity that I only met FB (and also his chief mechanic, btw) once many years ago, when I used to spend most of my free time in Lake Como, but I didn't have any other opportunities to keep in touch later. It would have been nice to give him a call and cross-check!

Anyway, far from pretending to know for sure what's in his mind, but knowing from which heritage he comes from, and also that the webpage was more than likely written by someone whose mother tongue is IT (no matter whether himself or someone working with him), the way I read that statement is slightly different - i.e., I believe that the original sentence:
"...throttle levers do not engage the gear, in order to avoid gear shifting in case of accidental full down-stroke of the throttles"
was actually meant to tell:
"...the throttle levers do not engage the gear, to avoid accidental gear shifting in case of full down-stroke of the throttles"
And I'm sure I don't need to explain you the not so subtle difference.
But just in case someone is not familiar with how very fast boats must be helmed, the need to fully (and suddenly!) down-stroke the throttles is a regular occurrence, whenever the boat takes off, in order to avoid destroying transmissions and/or engines.
So, for someone like FB, I'm fairly sure that the need of separate levers is taken as a given, because it's simply impossible to helm a very fast boat with single levers.
In fact, to be fair, also Livorsi produces separate levers specifically designed for electronic engines (though I'm afraid that also Livorsi stuff ain't exactly cheap, Vas! ).

Anyway, back to "normal" helming needs with civilized boats, I'm intrigued by your preference for single levers in cross wind/tight spaces. Do you mean that you ever had to use ALSO the throttle while maneuvering, on top of putting gear on/off at idle?
I'm asking because with my old lady I did that, albeit rarely, whenever mooring in some crosswind with no thrusters, and I'll concede that putting gear in and out while needing to use also a bit of throttle can be somewhat tricky with separate levers, unless you are familiar with them.
But I can't imagine needing to use also the throttles with my DP (or any P boat for that matter), considering how fast she (they) reacts just by engaging gear at idle.
And assuming to use gear only, separate levers are imho more straightforward.
In terms of motion, I mean - without even considering the immediate response of mechanical vs. electronics...!

 

[MapisM]

WIW here are pics of my maretron units installed, on genset.

Impressive setup indeed, very well done! :encouragement:
I don't think I'll ever install such equipment in my genset, also regardless of cost considerations (just not worth, for my typical usage).
But that's surely inspiring for anyone with mechanical engines and no other means of real-time fuel burn control.
Thanks a bunch!

 

[jfm]

Re: Fuel Flow... And beyond (Maretron tools)

It's not just interesting what that webpage says J, it's also interesting how differently it can be interpreted.
Pity that I only met FB (and also his chief mechanic, btw) once many years ago, when I used to spend most of my free time in Lake Como, but I didn't have any other opportunities to keep in touch later. It would have been nice to give him a call and cross-check!

Anyway, far from pretending to know for sure what's in his mind, but knowing from which heritage he comes from, and also that the webpage was more than likely written by someone whose mother tongue is IT (no matter whether himself or someone working with him), the way I read that statement is slightly different - i.e., I believe that the original sentence:
"...throttle levers do not engage the gear, in order to avoid gear shifting in case of accidental full down-stroke of the throttles"
was actually meant to tell:
"...the throttle levers do not engage the gear, to avoid accidental gear shifting in case of full down-stroke of the throttles"
And I'm sure I don't need to explain you the not so subtle difference.
But just in case someone is not familiar with how very fast boats must be helmed, the need to fully (and suddenly!) down-stroke the throttles is a regular occurrence, whenever the boat takes off, in order to avoid destroying transmissions and/or engines.
So, for someone like FB, I'm fairly sure that the need of separate levers is taken as a given, because it's simply impossible to helm a very fast boat with single levers.
In fact, to be fair, also Livorsi produces separate levers specifically designed for electronic engines (though I'm afraid that also Livorsi stuff ain't exactly cheap, Vas! ).

Anyway, back to "normal" helming needs with civilized boats, I'm intrigued by your preference for single levers in cross wind/tight spaces. Do you mean that you ever had to use ALSO the throttle while maneuvering, on top of putting gear on/off at idle?
I'm asking because with my old lady I did that, albeit rarely, whenever mooring in some crosswind with no thrusters, and I'll concede that putting gear in and out while needing to use also a bit of throttle can be somewhat tricky with separate levers, unless you are familiar with them.
But I can't imagine needing to use also the throttles with my DP (or any P boat for that matter), considering how fast she (they) reacts just by engaging gear at idle.
And assuming to use gear only, separate levers are imho more straightforward.
In terms of motion, I mean - without even considering the immediate response of mechanical vs. electronics...!

OK with that correction of the meaning it does change things a lot. I see your point and thanks for the analysis! I still worry about accidental child knock down of the control levers though!

In my boat with 50P props I hardly ever use throttle when manoeuvring, but just occasionally I do when I want to kick it hard. Very rare though, I admit. But in contrast on my brother's Aquastar 74 with finer props (maybe 27-30 inch P) I definitely use some throttle when manoeuvring in a wind, because without throttle the back of the boat just doesn't kick sideways hard enough in a windy mooring scenario.

The time delay with electronics isn't a problem in real life. You watch the boat move and you know what you're going to want, gears-wise, a few seconds before you actually want it. IMHO

 

[jfm]

Impressive setup indeed, very well done! :encouragement:
I don't think I'll ever install such equipment in my genset, also regardless of cost considerations (just not worth, for my typical usage).
But that's surely inspiring for anyone with mechanical engines and no other means of real-time fuel burn control.
Thanks a bunch!

EN lesson to your good self who is becoming mother tongue expert and better than many natives: "thanks a bunch" is actually sarcasm or a snub, and it can be friendly or hostile but you could only tell from context or tone of voice. In friendly sense, if say your co-worker says "I've arranged for you to sit next to the boss's wife at dinner", and assuming she isn't Nicole Kidman, you might say "thanks a bunch!". More aggressively, if the airline bump you off a flight and say "Don't worry sir; we put you on another flight tomorrow," you might say "Thanks a bunch" meaning "Thanks a bunch, scumbags".

Maybe that's what you meant