CarpeDiem
-
Content Count
1,219 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
38
Content Type
Profiles
Media Demo
Forums
Gallery
Calendar
Store
Posts posted by CarpeDiem
-
-
2 hours ago, Lindsay said:
I think what Essjaywhy is asking for is actual live data, not predictions. I’d love to be able to access current live tide heights to determine if it’s safe to transit a bridge during king tides. The predicted tide height doesn’t account for variations due to air pressure.
I am not aware of any live tidal stream feeds. I believe everything we have access too is modelled from historically collected data.
If no one else comes back with an answer I would suggest writing to LINZ and asking them. They run the tidal stations and will at least be able to point you in the correct direction... please let us know what you find out.
This link may also be useful for calculating actual tide height: Unusually high or low barometric pressure, or prolonged periods of strong winds, can mean the actual sea level is higher or lower than the predicted height.
-
15 hours ago, alibaba said:
Caulerpa, like most seaweeds, can reproduce by producing eggs and sperm cells which fertilise in the water, and then, obviously, spread for kilometers by tidal currents. Although fragmentation also can spread it, once it is established, the action of a few fragments from anchoring ain't going to make much difference.
Its primary mechanism of reproduction is asexual, which is caused by fragmentation. Sexual reproduction causes the Caulerpa plant to die completely. The plant has to be already on its way out for it to initiate sexual reproduction. Our Caulerpa is young healthy vibrant...
Anchors fragment the plant. Fragments as small as 1cm can be a viable plant, carried by the currents or carried in anchor wells long distances.
If it was being spread easily by currents then the east Auckland current would spread it all the way down the east coast of the north island to the Chatham rise.
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, Guest said:
My question was as these citations were in court I assumed some one was being prosecuted and the citation produced illustrated they were breaking
I am not aware of any citations to court judgements. The only references to citations in this thread have been to secondary legislation, namely, Maritime Rule 40.
23 minutes ago, Guest said:M2CW- Over word salads, just fckn tell me if I can have a LTO start battery and stay in marina!
Unless your marina or other some other entity has some rules that you are contractually obliged to adhere too, I can't find anything preventing this - so long as if you do not have AC power - then it is much greyer
For a bit of thread drift, I got myself some Sodium-ion cells the other day. Nothing in any standard, legislation or anywhere else about Na-ion batteries
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Guest said:
If it was cited in court against a pleasure craft owner and accepted then one would assume it was ratified by legislation?Are any of those cited, pleasure craft? No lawyer would leave that stone unturned.
If Lithium chemistry (any sort) is currently not acceptable for starting an auxiliary motor, does this include in an emergency? And, essentially is the provision for same in terms of wiring legal or illegal.?
Can't find the time to visit Auckland library right now.
Standards don't get cited by the court - that's a misunderstanding. Standards get cited in legislation (or in private policies).
Two examples:
New Zealand Marinas have "cited" AS/NZS 3760 - In-service safety inspection and testing of electrical equipment and RCDs - Marinas have set a private rule, that requires users of shore power to have tested and tagged cables - this is not a legal requirement - it is a private requirement of the Marina, based on industry best practice. This standard is not "cited" in any NZ legislation.
MartimeNZ Rule 40 (link), has cited AS/NZS 3004.2:2014. Maritime NZ Rules are secondary legislation. On there own they have no legal authority. MaritimeNZ rules are cited by parliament in the Maritime Transport Act 1994. This Act of parliament gives legal authority to Rule 40 and therefore authority to the standard.
NB: Maritime NZ Rule 40, ??does not apply to pleasure craft??. It applies to New Zealand's Commercial Domestic Fleet. Happy for someone to correct me on this.
Standards Being Retrospective
Someone mentioned above that the standards are not retrospective. While that is true, an authority is able to make the standards retrospective, so it is also not true...
Eg, MaritimeNZ are currently undertaking a review of rule 40 because they made AS/NZS3004.2 a legally retrospective requirement. oops
QuoteAmendments to the electrical systems rules in 2014 required many existing ships in the fleet to comply with AS/NZS 3004.2. This was not intended. It is difficult and prohibitively expensive to achieve unless an existing ship is stripped out and re-wired.
Pleasure Craft
Pleasure craft fall under secondary legislation, which is the Electrical (Safety) Regulations 2010 (link). These regulations say what you can and cannot do, they define what is or is not prescribed work, prescribed work can only be undertaken by a certified electrician.
These regulations "cite" the standards that must be followed (link).
NB: AS/NZS3004.2:2014 is NOT cited - but AS/NZS3004.2:2008 is. I will add there's about 100 standards in here, so while 2014 isn't specifically called out, it's completely possible that another standard "cites" 2014 indirectly making it a legal requirement...
As above, secondary legislation has no legal authority on it's own. To close the loop on that, an Act of parliament is required, this is the Electricity Act 1992. This Act gives authority to the secondary legislation, the regulations and the standard.
Applicability to pleasure vessels without AC power
From the regulations:
S3 - Application: things these regulations do not apply to
Nothing in these regulations applies to any of the following, or to work done on any of the following:
[...]
(d) ships other than—
(i) pleasure vessels containing connectable installations;S7 - Connectable Installations
For the purpose of the definition of connectable installation in section 2(1) of the Act in relation to a vehicle, a relocatable building, or a pleasure vessel, a connectable installation is one that is designed or intended for, or is capable of, connection to an external power supply that operates at a nominal voltage between 90 and 250 volts AC at standard low voltage.pleasure vessel is further described - but is what we would expect - so no point delving into that...
Summary
I have tried to find out how this standard could be legally enforced on pleasure boats without AC power. As a boat owner with a DIY everything, I like to know that I am following the rules, and more importantly fully understand which rules I am breaking.
I approached this with the view that the standard was a legal requirement and set out to prove it, I legitimately thought it was. But I have not been able to find any evidence it is.
This gives credence to the statement that I see in magazine articles and NZ marine retailers, which goes something like:
Burnsco: Not suitable for boats connected to shore power and needing an Electrical Warrant of Fitness as the AUS/NZS 3004.2:2014 standard need the battery to be able to disconnect from all charging sources. (link)
Disclaimer:
Do not rely on this for legal advice - this is the summary of my findings for my own personal use - please do your own research. I would love for someone to tell me that I am wrong and show me how the standard applies
-
1
-
1
-
-
Gasket arrived early from Australia and I got everything back together today. Running exactly like it was before.
The only oddity was a sandy kind of gel on the coolant side of the heat exchanger.. (see photo)
From extensive googling, I have reached the conclusion that this is the coolant starting to gel as it deteriorates which has picked up left over sand from the casting process... But really that's just a guess... It could be a new species that lives in volvo yellow coolant...
I did notice a small amount of corrosion on the raw water pump. I have decided it's probably best just to monitor that...
-
1
-
-
40 minutes ago, Island Time said:
CD for me, the Electrical inspector I use says the 2014 version is the current one. The NZ Govt Website says it is the current one. I linked to the Govt website that shows this. Here is the screenshot.
It shows the 2008 standard as superseded. That is sufficient for me. If you wish to disagree, you of course are free to do so. Potentially, IMO, you could have to do so in court.
The "connectable installation" section is not present in this version. So ALL boats must comply, except as excluded (small boats with only Alts/Magneto's and lights, no real electrical systems)
Again, the standards are not retrospective - if your boat has non compliant systems, that's ok, but anything new must comply.
This is also the opinion of the local electrical inspector here.
Hey IT. Not disputing that it's the current standard. That is without question. It absolutely is the most current standard.
The question is, how it is legislated and mandated onto private pleasure vessels?
If it is not legislated specifically to private pleasure vessels then it does not apply to private pleasure vessels. It's really that simple.
Standards do not become a legal requirement unless there is a legislative instrument enforcing such.
I will do some more investigation
-
17 minutes ago, Guest said:
Any way to view the standard without paying? Not much point in reading if its not ratified for pleasure craft.
I stopped paying for NZS 3604 & amendments in 2019 as the MBIE probably decided that it was counter productive to make users pay for rules and sponsored them. If the amendments were actually well thought through and comprehensive I guess the industry has to pay, Paying for piecemeal, ad hoc amendments goes against the grain. Never thought to check whether they were backed by legislative process.
For Auckland, 3004:2014 is available at the library. Only at Auckland Central - they won't send it to other libraries.
I am waiting for them to get AS/NZS 3760:2022 on the shelf. I have been doing my test and tagging myself and there are some updates I need to get across before my tag expires.
That's another great example of a standard that is not legislated but is required by a private party, there is nothing in the law requiring test and tagging, but the Marina requires it - so if I want to use my e-box - I need it test and tagged...
-
48 minutes ago, Island Time said:
Nope, Sorry. The Link i provided gives the current legal citings buy the courts making the version I linked to the current legal rules. I agree that the "standards" or not law until they are citied by the courts. That's why the link also states that this is the "Current" legal version. If you wish to try to prove this in the courts, feel free.
Even if you could prove it's the older version, the new one, I understand, is only months away (2020 version I believe, currently still under review), and they there are more restrictions coming. I would point out though, that the standards ARE NOT RETROSPECTIVE, so if it was ok when installed, it's ok until modified/rebuilt.
Sorry IT.
The citations are for the Maritime Act, specifically rule 40.
Rule 40 does not apply to pleasure craft. It applies to commercial craft in survey.
If you can show me a citation that applies to pleasure craft I will get off my soap box.
-
7 hours ago, prince rupert said:
Ok, I should try and explain my self better given I may have led to some confusing. Sorry, it is obviously and area that I barelly grasp so, i ll try my best. I am trying to make do with what I have without having to change/spend too much.
After starting this thred, and reading the posts following, i settled to replace the existing LA house battery with a 200amp CL. No lifepo4 hybrid system
This would be charged by a 330watts pannel through an mppt controller.
The LA starting battery is charged by the alternator. Whith a voltage cut off controller
I would like to use the alternator as a back up to charge the house battery in case of solar panel faliaure.
OK, the voltage cutoff controller you mention is actually a pretty standard voltage cut-on controller, known as a VSR. The way you explained it that could of been an external regulator.
When you start the engine, the VSR detects the alternator and joins both batteries together so that the charge goes to both the house battery and the start battery.
This is not suitable for dedicated LiFePO4 as, even at 13.8v, you risk over charge.
While the parallel solution would work, I recommend steering well clear of it because it's not really set and forget - and is not really beginner friendly.
Because you want Solar and Alternator charging, the system becomes more complicated if you have separate components.
You could look at replacing the VSR with a DC/DC charger with solar and alternator built in like the CTEK D250SE (with or without the 120S). I have not used it for LFP so cannot comment, but have used it for AGM with great success.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, prince rupert said:
Yes sure! I think it is a vsr but, i ll need to go to the boat for part number ect...
It is not to protect the alternator.
i d be happy if the system would work just by changing the vsr part of the system. (Cabling or adifferent vsr)
I ll try to go to the boat asap. As I normally do.... then I can be more specific.
Thank you for baring with me, i feel this is really gonna work.
Cheers
OK. That makes a lot more sense. I will reply to your previous message.
-
3 hours ago, Island Time said:
Unfortunately, that is NOT the current standard. See here https://www.standards.govt.nz/search/doSearch?Search=3004 and you can see the 2014 version is the current one, and if you click on the "Cited" bit, you get a list of court citings.
And this one has modified that clause to say "1 This Standard is not intended to apply to small boats equipped with a battery supplying circuits for engine starting and navigation lighting only that is recharged from an inboard or outboard engine driven alternator."
So the "connectable" clause has gone...
Hi IT, sorry I did not explain myself clearly - my bad.
You are referring to the standard - I am referring to the legislation that gives legal force to the standard.
Without legislation, (or a private body**), that requires the standard be followed, the standard has no effect.
Per the link you provided, AS/NZS3004:2014 is only legislated by the Maritime Act and Maritime Rule 40E - this rule does not apply to private sailing vessels. It applies to commercial sailing vessels that are in survey.
The standards.govt.nz site does not list any legislation that gives force to AS/NZS3004:2014 on private sailing vessels.
There is legislation that gives force to the standards predecessor, AS/NZS3004:2008 - this is the Electricity Safety Regulations 2010. That legislation, legally requires, that ships connected to shore power, (or with self generation), must comply with the 2008 standard. But not the 2014 standard.
In 2019 there was a MBIE working group which found that the reference to the 2008 standard in the legislation should be updated to the 2014 standard - but that has not occurred yet - the legislation has not been amended.
** any private body, is of course, allowed to say that they only will accept the 2014 standard.
Eg, as an electrician in business you are perfectly entitled to say "I will only do work that meets the 2014 standard".
We have discussed many times on this forum the same thing with the gas standard. The Gas Standard says that it does not apply to installations before that standard was produced. But good luck finding a gas fitter that will sign off on your installation being compliant to the previous standard... I doubt you will find one...
As of today I cannot find any legal requirement to comply with AS/NZS3004:2014 on pleasure craft. It may become a requirement in the future if the legislation is ever amended.
Even if one were just to assume that v2014 automatically trumps the v2008 reference (which I think would be a reasonable assumption) in the regulations, the regulations still do not apply to pleasure vessels without AC.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, prince rupert said:
The LA starting battery is charged by the alternator. Whith a voltage cut off controller
Can you elaborate on what this is? Part number, model?
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, K4309 said:
Is the inference then that if you try starting the donk with a standard LiFePo house battery, say by paralleling it with the start, you could fry the FET in the BMS and be a bit buggered?
I've fried FET's in my autopilot. Didn't have to try very hard, just a fairly innocuous system malfunction and then the the whole thing was buggered.
Depends. MOSFETs limit current so if you have one rated for 10amp it will never do more than 10amp. It's not like a piece of 10amp wire that you can push 30amps through and watch it glow red. They just won't do it.
A massive inrush could destroy it. It would depend on the design of the associated circuitry...
-
6 hours ago, Guest said:
Is it thermal runaway on the inrush out of battery or BMS fets crapping them selves that they are worried about?
Manufacturer Specs on my batteries cells is 1C = 230A In parallel then would be ~ 460A
Inrush for Yanmar 3GM30 say 6xrun A ~700A (50ms)
So 700/2 = 350A . So 200A FETS in BMS maynot tolerate? Rated 350A for 1sec?
Emergency only or jumper and bypass the bms?
Not really expecting an answer on such how long is a piece of string drift.
Your cells are designed for energy storage. They meet a different design profile. Just like some Lead AGMs are designed for starting and some are designed for deep cycle.
There are LFP cells that will discharge at 180C pulse, 90C for 2 seconds and 45C continuous... A 10Ah battery made with those cells would start a 3GM30
Instead of FETs a starter battery bms would use an automotive grade relay found in electric vehicles.
-
Hmm.. yeah OK, - I don't think that is the best table
Back to my heat exchanger ...
-
2 hours ago, K4309 said:
I'm sorry but isn't this comparison chart a nonsense?
For life cycles, they are assessing FLA, AGM and Gel to 80% DoD, but for Li they say "70% capacity remaining", which is 30%DOD, isn't it?
Then they use those numbers to present the 'Real Cost per cycle @80% DoD' as more than half as much for Li.
Accept it's not 80% DoD, its 30%. If you run any of those other battery technologies to 30% DoD they will last for ages as well. It makes the comparison a complete nonsense.
No.
It says that after 7100 cycles to 70% DOD - the battery will be good for 70% of it's original capacity.
So if you had a 100Ah LFP battery and you pulled 70Ah out of it every single day for 19 years then after 19 years you would have a 70Ah battery.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, harrytom said:
simple answer NO there is a risk to battery supplying high amps in a short burst,just asked the boy,his field.
BMW have had Li-ion start batteries in their production vehicles since 2014.
That's about the same time that the AS/NZS standard came out saying we couldn't have Li-ion start batteries on our boats...
Hmmm...
-
18 hours ago, prince rupert said:
Thank you for your observations, very pertinent!
My boat has what I believe is a fairly common set up. I mean N 1 switch for starting battery. N 2 switch for house and N 3 switch for both together, in case the starting battery goes flat ( i suppose).
Would this mean that if I have switch N3 on I could take alternator charge for starting and house battery at the same time?
I have a simple cut off aparatus on the starting battery that shuts off when it reaches 14.5v (?)
Would this a good enough redundancy to charge a house battery in case of low light or say solar pannel faliure???
This doesn't sound right... Can you maybe post a photo of the "aparatus"?
What do you want to achieve? What's the outcome you are looking for?
-
The day started with a plan to clean up some really minor corrosion on my heat exchanger, corrosion that wasn't causing any problems whatsoever and that my mechanic friend told me to "monitor"
I found a suspect hx end cap - OK that's an easy fix... It has two o-rings in it.
Might as well do both ends, 4 "gold-plated" o-rings from ovlov is all that's needed to fix that... Job will be over in a hour.
Needed to drain the coolant, it's a year early but not a big deal might as well do it now. Performed some yoga moves getting to the petcocks. Trying to put tubes on them and twist them at the same time... What an absolutely stupid design... One is hiding behind the dipstick the other is right above the electrics... And you cannot twist them or even put a spanner on them with a tube attached!
Decided I should remove the vp black box and get it out of the way.
Had the foresight to wrap the alternator in a plastic bag which was just as well cause the bilge got cleaned with coolant...
2 hrs later and I have only managed to dump the coolant... Got 99% of it in the bucket, so marked that up as an achievement...
Pulled the raw water pipe off the front of the heat exchanger completely expecting it to be empty...turns out it was full of water... Now I am really really happy I wrapped the alternator as salt water pours all over the plastic bag...
To get the rest of the water out I needed to remove the impellor - that wasn't due for another 6 months - oh well, deal with that now... Oh sh*t forgot to close the main sea cock...
3 hrs in, time for a clean up... and I still have not gotten the HX end cap off...
Prise off the hx end caps, copper insert is in mint condition my barnacle buster protocol is working...
Find the rear o-rings, which sits directly above the exhaust mixer is melted in place, it just will not budge.... Found some picks to get it out. Stabbed myself in my thumb, not once but twice. Cut myself on a hose clip...
Bits of o-ring are out. Can't get to the bottom, need to remove the exhaust mixer... Four nuts, a gasket and an unamed yoga pose later the exhaust mixer is off...
Still can't get the o-ring out. Just can't get to the back of the engine.. Can't get the appropriate angle on the pick...
Well maybe if I remove the copper insert the o ring will fall off. The copper insert will not budge... No amount of pulling or twisting is working. A quick visit to ovlov and the very helpful team tell me they use a piece of wood and hit it with a hammer... (ps that's not sarcasm... Ovlov are exceptionally good to deal with)
There is no way I can swing a hammer in my engine bay... But I find a wooden carving board and make some half arse attempts at hitting it, all I achieve is denting a perfectly good carving board and I mange to hit my finger in the process...
F it! Need to take off the heat exchanger/exhaust manifold now. A quick look at the manual and it only has 10 nuts holding it on this should be easy...
First I have to remove the expansion tank... Well I have been thinking about relocating that above the engine... Now can look at the bracket and find a spot for it... It comes away easily..
Hmm, two of those nuts are holding the alternator in place... Loosen the alternator but I don't remove it.
The 10 nuts come away really easily... No issue at all. Can I get it off without ripping the gasket... Nope of course not...
New volvo gasket, ex-australia for $190 or £7 from marine parts UK... No stock in NZ
Oh and it turns out that the petcocks for draining the coolant don't actually drain it... They are too high in the system... Ffs! Coolant everywhere... Turns out my 99% was closer to 85%
Now the heat exchanger is completely removed I can get the rest of the o ring out... Stab myself one last time but I get the last bits of o-ring out...
A little bit of crc and the copper insert moves freely without the use of a hammer. But there's a bit corrosion on the end of the copper insert so I can't get it out without going back to the hammer, need a scotch brite to fix that up - can't find one...
Hmmm 6pm - time to go home...
Boats!
-
6
-
-
I am a strong advocate of Li-ion over LA.
The Regs are stopping progress and adoption because they can't keep up with the technology.
Eg, Li-ion would be perfect as a starter battery. But the regs indirectly (or maybe directly) prevent it. There's absolutely no reason what so ever for low voltage disconnect on LTO batteries. One can take them 0v at and then recharge them to full capacity. A Japanese company produces LFP cells that are designed to deliver 1200a for 10 seconds and are able to peak inrush currents of 2400a - perfect to replace a marine starter battery of 700cca
Winston, a top LFP manufacturer, sell 12v lfp batteries that do not have a BMS. The cells are precision matched at the factory and no bms is required. They will not drift. It's an absolute true drop-in lfp replacement for lead. There's no electronics, there's no app, it's just a battery... Hook it up and off you go. But the Regs prevent adoption because they require a bms...
The Regs should create an interesting conundrum for inspectors, how will they sign off when there's a factory Li-ion battery under the hood hooked into the starter battery of that brand new Mercedes campervan? I suspect they will turn a blind eye.
-
1
-
-
35 minutes ago, K4309 said:
Especially since AGM's can only handle 0.1C.
That's an over generalization. Some AGMs made with lower grade materials may have that limit.
A good marine grade AGM will be rated to accept unlimited alternator current. The current is limited by the internal characteristics of the battery.
Eg, Optima Yellowtop AGMs state "no amperage limit" when charging from alternator.
My 75Ah Optima D31 accepts ~65Amps when charging from empty.
Many quality AGM batteries are rated at 0.5C or above by the manufacturer.
But you pay for the privilege...
-
19 hours ago, K4309 said:
How many people actually charge or have alternators big enough to charge LiFePo at 1C?
1C is generally the upper limit for what's on the lfp market. Most manufacturers will tell you 0.5C recommended with fast charge at 1C. That said there's a few starting to offer 3C... but these are generally cylindrical cells.
My stock Volvo Penta alternator does 115A... continually... So my design requires me to either have a minimum of 230AH of Lithium-ion or limit my alternator...
But then I have exactly the same problem with Lead CARBON - if I want to do it properly... I still have to limit the alternator OR have 345AH of weight!! If I want to stay in the manufacturers recommended range of 0.2C I need even more lead carbon (or limit the alternator).
Lead Carbon, unlike AGM, is not designed for unregulated alternator charging. You need to match the system components, if you want to do it properly...
I have seen my 100Ah Kijo Lead Carbon accept 76amps... Over double what it's rated for. I cannot do anything about it except wait and hope it doesn't burst into flames...
The key takeaway is that the problem happens with both chemistries if the system components aren't matched.
LC is not better than LFP.
LFP is not better than LC.
What's best/better is a solution that meets your requirements.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Island Time said:
My understanding from the local electrical inspector is that this version has been sighted by the court,
Thanks. I find it strange that 2008 is the only version referenced in the regulations.
1 hour ago, Island Time said:There is nothing in the reg that says a boat is only covered if it is connected to shorepower.
Section 3 of the Electrical Safety Regulations 2010, which is the legal instrument that gives authority to the as/nzs standard states that:
the regulations do not apply to pleasure vessels unless they have connectable installations.
connectable installation is one that is designed or intended for, or is capable of, connection to an external power supply that operates at a nominal voltage between 90 and 250 volts AC at standard low voltage.
The above clauses in the regulations indicate to me, that if you don't have AC, (or AC self generation including inverters), then the regulations do not apply to a pleasure vessel.
-
1 hour ago, Island Time said:
That's fine, but consideration should be given to the NZ electrical regs. Lithium - LiFePo4 (really the bets for marine, and very safe) MUST have audio and visual alarms fitted to warn of an impending disconnect, BEFORE it happens (for whatever reason). This is the stumbling block for most "drop in" solutions.
Hey IT,
I have a couple of questions, which you may be able to answer regarding the standard AS/NZS 3004.2:2014. (which is where the audio and visual alarm requirement comes from)
This standard does not appear to be legislated. The latest version of the standard that is legislated in the Electricity Act is 3004.2:2008 (ref: https://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2010/0036/latest/DLM2763782.html?search=sw_096be8ed81c5a64a_3004_25_se&p=1&sr=3)
MBIE had a working document in mid 2021, one of the recommendation of which was to update the NZ electricity legislation to change the legislation from the 2008 reference to 2014 reference. This has clearly not happened.
I have asked two electricians how this standard is a requirement and neither have been able to tell me - they just say "it's the latest" so it's what we use. While I can accept that, it's not the same as it being a legal requirement.
Can you please advise what leads you to the conclusion that this standard is the requirement?
Secondly, it appears that 3004.2 is only applicable if, and only if, the installation is mains connected. Mains connections includes self generation, not just shore power connection.
Eg, the statement on many NZ websites selling Li-ion drop-in batteries says something like:
Not suitable for boats connected to shore power and needing an Electrical Warrant of Fitness as the AUS/NZS 3004.2:2014 standard need the battery to be able to disconnect from all charging sources.When I asked an inspector about this, he said that he thought this was because the only way that the standard can apply in the first place is if it comes through the legislation and for this to happen one has to have mains power (or hv DC) in the first place as that's the only way the Act comes into force. And without mains power the standard doesn't become applicable to the installation. But he didn't know for sure... and he wasn't a EWOF inspector...
Do you think that the standard would only apply if the boat has mains power?
live NZ Tidal currents
in MarineTalk
Posted
That was by Tidetech. They came here and did some recording at various locations and then did some hi-res modelling based on that data.
Even the AC data wasn't real time.
Tidetech made the data free.
https://www.tidetechmarinedata.com/news/americas-cup-practice-day-2-auckland-tidal-currents