Ballast Fill Level Monitoring

[IDBoating]

True. But what the point of installing all of that if you wont sell us the sensors!

We're not opposed to selling our sensors direct to end users. But connecting to, or adding, a CAN network can take a bit of hand holding. Which wires in the harness? Where to connect? We don't have the staff to provide that level of customer support. That's why I said if someone else wanted to be the sort-of "integrator", who takes our sensors and compiles the wiring data for a range of boats or is willing to answer the phone calls, we'd be thrilled to work with them.

Not to put ideas in his head, but if Chpthrl wanted to do this, we'd be on board instantly. He has killer customer service, a ton of industry experience, and it's a perfect fit with his existing products and services.

Meanwhile, our direct emphasis is on OEM manufacturers - solving problems for boat manufacturers. I didn't want to leave anyone with the impression that we don't want to work with end users, we just know we can't do it RIGHT but would be thrilled to work with someone who can.

As for adding a CAN network to a boat that doesn't have one: You're really just talking about one twisted pair of wires (four wires total if you want to run +12VDC and Ground with them instead of picking them up along the way). It's actually very simple.

As for boats that already have a CAN network, you could tie into the existing network OR you could simply run a second, ballast-specific CAN network. Nothing prevents you from having a separate CAN network, in fact many automobiles have one CAN for engine systems, a second one for body systems, yet another for the sound system, and so forth. It's just a way to connect components, all you're doing is running wires. It's like adding speakers.

[IDBoating]

ID, Thanks for dropping the knowledge. Going to have to sit down and read it in detail tonight. Always great when I get more info on SC function and operation on the TO forum that I do from those guys (in all fairness bossman didnt send me to recert last year)

To be honest, I don't know how much the factory support guys really know. The Engineering folks know EVERYTHING but I'm not sure how much of that knowledge makes it to the support crew. Everybody is always really busy, they may just not get the chance to exchange data very often.

You've got my cell number... don't be afraid to call me with questions. And I'll keep an eye on this thread and answer any questions that come up here, too.

Thanks!

[freeheel4life]

Thanks Richard. So far I've only needed to find out if bypassing the sensors would affect autowake. The claim was pitch and roll are still the important data for autowake decisions. Had a few customers want larger bags but noone has done the homework to find a 3 port bag (2 ports for the fill/drain dual pumps and 3rd port as the vent) so I've been having to bypass the sensor for bag vent out the top on upgrades....so far.

[IDBoating]

Thanks Richard. So far I've only needed to find out if bypassing the sensors would affect autowake. The claim was pitch and roll are still the important data for autowake decisions.

The hose sensors do not play a role in AutoWake. They are tied into the ballast fill pump system, they override the timers. If the timers say "not full" but the hose sensors say "full", the pumps are shut off to protect the fat sacs. Otherwise the pressure from two powerful pumps can literally blow the fittings off the bags (!!!). This is another advantage of our true ballast sensing... when the sensors say 100% you know you're really at 100%, whereas with timers you don't really know where the water level is.

If you're talking about bypassing our BALLAST sensors, then what should happen is you'll go back to a pure timer-based system with all of its errors and guesswork. And you'll be susceptible to blown fittings again since the system won't know where the water really is. But the big problem is AutoWake does depend upon ballast readings because a large part of AutoWake is managing the hull orientation using ballast. Plus, Moomba/Supra have their amplitude display in the dash which, again, needs to know ballast amounts so it can report accurately. Not sure what happens to that if you disable the ballast sensors (or add ballast on top that the sensors don't know about).

One of the things we've discussed with them and others is making our ballast sensors the full height of the compartment. They can be calibrated for factory ballast compartments (essentially being told to treat only a portion of their total height as "100%"), but if the owner adds more ballast on top they can be recalibrated for that new capacity by the user. There is a hidden menu with the recalibration command on it, and we also have an auto-calibration feature where the sensors self-calibrate when you install/remove/change ballast. So there are lots of options. But the key is to install sensors tall enough to accommodate anything, because you can't "stretch" the sensors later.

Had a few customers want larger bags but noone has done the homework to find a 3 port bag (2 ports for the fill/drain dual pumps and 3rd port as the vent) so I've been having to bypass the sensor for bag vent out the top on upgrades....so far.

We might support shipping taller sensors to end users at some point to support that. But I'm trying to convince boat makers to just install taller sensors from the start. The cost is literally like a couple of dollars more... the length really doesn't impact the price, it costs about the same to build a shorter sensor as a longer one. My personal feeling is install the full-length sensors at the factory so the boat is ready to do anything later. Everyone knows owners like to customize these boats... let's make it easy on them!

[freeheel4life]

We might support shipping taller sensors to end users at some point to support that. But I'm trying to convince boat makers to just install taller sensors from the start. The cost is literally like a couple of dollars more... the length really doesn't impact the price, it costs about the same to build a shorter sensor as a longer one. My personal feeling is install the full-length sensors at the factory so the boat is ready to do anything later. Everyone knows owners like to customize these boats... let's make it easy on them!

Or Wakemakers steps up their game and starts building a bag with the 3 ports on the bottom so its plug and play. It would be even easier if sales guys didnt open their fat mouths and tell customers "we can upgrade you to 1100s" without knowing what they are talking about. I just cut the vent line at the top of the tube and moved it to the top of the bag to vent. Left sensors in so they can always get put back in the mix later. The height hasnt been my issue(though obviously would be an issue with larger bavgs that I hadnt rreally thought about). Its the lack of ports on the bottom of the bag. Factory bags have 3 ports on bottom of bag at stern. Could have used the 2 in the rear at bottom and ran a hose at the front underneath the bag to the sensor. Just dont like running hoses under bags and the only way I could see it working would have potentially kinked the vent line. Then bags really want to blow.

[IDBoating]

I just cut the vent line at the top of the tube and moved it to the top of the bag to vent. Left sensors in so they can always get put back in the mix later.

Then what happens when the fill level goes above the top of the (now open) tube? It will overflow into the bilge.

Factory bags have 3 ports on bottom of bag at stern. Could have used the 2 in the rear at bottom and ran a hose at the front underneath the bag to the sensor.

You can't run the sensor off a front port. The stern is always lower than the bow, which means the rear of the bag is always lower than the front. If you run the sensor off the front of the bag, there can be substantial ballast in the bag before the level rises far enough to even reach a front port and the sensor can start seeing it. Even worse, if I'm understanding you correctly and you're talking about running a hose from a front port, under the bag, to a sensor mounted at the rear, that will create a high spot that can hold an air pocket such that water will never flow up out of the back, back downhill to the rear of the bag, and then up into the sensor tube. The only proper place to mount a ballast sensor (of any kind, really) is at the rear of the compartment, and it must sense at (e.g. connect to) the rear of the compartment to be able to measure the bottom several percent of ballast.

[chpthril]

Or Wakemakers steps up their game

https://www.fatsac.com/ Im sure will build them for you

[freeheel4life]

https://www.fatsac.com/ Im sure will build them for you

I will have to look into it. Curious what your cost experience has been?? Part of the thing with gutting the factory and upgrading is doing it on the cheap for the sale...

Oldwakedoc, sorry for the derail man. IDboating is onto some sweet stuff and I have to extract as much knowledge as I can

[NICKYPOO]

https://www.fatsac.com/ Im sure will build them for you

...or do what I did, get customs through you.

[IDBoating]

https://www.fatsac.com/ Im sure will build them for you

When I had FlyHigh build my custom fat sacs (before I knew ChpThril), adding more ports was super cheap... like a couple dollars each. There's no sane reason not to add them anywhere you think you might someday perhaps maybe possibly need them. I have them all over my fat sacs and still wish I had a couple more here and there.

[Dandy]

Hi All. I am jumping in the middle a bit on this.

It sounds as if there is some potential to have someone or a company partner with IDBoating to create an aftermarket ballast control/monitor system. There is a chance that I might know some people that would be willing to take this on if the market is there. Their company happens to do a ton of work with CAN systems and controllers in mobile applications. The big question that always comes up when developing a new product is what the market for the product is. This leads to the question that is often the "elephant in the room". What would you pay?

Ballast bags and pumps NOT included, what would you be willing to pay for:
A system that would have a stand alone display that would allow you to calibrate your ballast. Save favorite settings (Surf Left, Surf Right, Skim Left, Skim Right). All of the sensors for ballast - front left, front right, rear left, rear right. Switch the pumps on and make adjustments if needed to adjust for crew size. All wiring.... again, no pumps/bags just the control system, wiring and sensors.

What would you pay?

[UNSTUCK]

Dandy, that's my issue. I have a big beautiful touch screen that I'd want to be able to integrate this kind of a system into. I plan on running my music and Gopro off a second screen (cheap tablet) because this one wont do it. So now would I be looking at a third screen to run my ballast and fight against the factory system? That's not going to happen. Sure would be nice to have the Tige Clear built in a way that would allow expansion. I see no reason not to. It's not like Tige is going to put out a new screen in 5 years that they'll want me to upgrade to. So they wont lose any sales by not doing that.

On the bright side, there's still a ton of older boats that really could run this kind of system. If I was installing a ballast system and could purchase an add on system to monitor the bags I'd easily pay a few hundred for it. I'd have to think hard about spending any more.

[IDBoating]

I have a big beautiful touch screen that I'd want to be able to integrate this kind of a system into. Sure would be nice to have the Tige Clear built in a way that would allow expansion. I see no reason not to.

I can comfortably guarantee that Murphy is not going to go "open source" on their helm systems. They have a lot of proprietary hardware and software in their systems and they aren't going to just expose that for no compensation. Perhaps more importantly, they also don't want the support overhead of helping folks integrate "new features" into their systems. What happens when something doesn't work? Whose fault is it? Murphy is the "big company" so folks would call them about "I can't get my Acme Ballast3000 system to work with your screen". They would just LOVE to get calls like that.

The only way this would work for aftermarket installs, in my opinion, is a complete packaged system that is separate from whatever is already on the boat. Frankly, that's the proper way to package it too... it would be a nightmare to have to create and support a different version for everything that is out there. "What did you have again? Is that Tige PRE-2007 or POST-2007? Medallion or Murphy? You don't know? Oh wait, you actually have a Centurion? How many screens? OK, ship everything back and we'll send you the correct package now that we know what you think you have this week. Nah, of course we'll be DELIGHTED to cover shipping both ways for your mistake."

I think Dandy is on the right path. A single system, sold to everyone regardless of boat make or model or year, that doesn't make any presumptions about what might or might not be on a given boat. Totally standalone, works on everything. That would make customer support far more manageable and realistic.

[UNSTUCK]

What you’re saying is exactly right. I totally get it. If I still had my old 21v this is exactly the kind I project I would take on. Much harder to do on a newer boat though. Just because it’s a new boat.

[oldwakedoc]

I do not feel that there was a hijack of the thread. This is exactly the type of discussion I was trying to get a focus on. My current project plan is a touch screen to automate my ballasts using the pressure transducer design, but I hope I might be able to get the specs output for ID's sensors to make a testing model to use with my design. I'm a little discouraged, since ID's. research showed this type of system did not work well. I will try to keep an update on any progress. It seems hard to believe that there has not been an aftermarket setup yet.