Induction vs Gas Cooking

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Yikes. That's not encouraging. I had a failure in mine years ago, a real PITA.


But it has been completely reliable since then so I've slowly regained confidence.


Letting it manage shore power is one of its best features. Why wouldn't you do that? It's true that if it goes down, you then lose shore power, but it is a 2 minutes job to wire around the failed inverter.


If you let it manage shore power, then you gain the current limiting function, and Power Boost. Terrifically useful with limited shore power connections, and a great way to protect your generator from being overloaded.


I derate my generator from 31 amps to 25 amps, using this function of the Multiplus. I am sure this will add life to the genset.

In the Philippines, power voltage fluctuates wildly, especially in their very few marinas and yacht repair yards.

I have seen voltage as low as 178VAC at the shore side during high demand periods.
I'm not smart enough electrically to say for sure that it would create heat, but I'm guessing that low voltage is not good for the Multiplus.

As Spec sheet on VAC input range states 187-265 VAC. 45-65Hz, I didn't think it was designed to operate happily at 178V, so never took the chance.

My method (before solar) if on shore power was to run AC appliances, tools and aircon off of shore power, during the day. Then turn charger on at night to get back up to float
Invertor for the frequent "brown outs" during the rainy monsoon season.

Still weighing the pros and cons of buying a new 5000w Multi rather than a 2nd 3000 model that is 12 years newer than my original.

Keep them independent with a transfer switch to select which one goes on line


"Its more fun in the Philippines"

[Chotu]

I had serious considered this on a new build, but sometimes, traditional is just better and more simple (not to mention way less expensive).

I want to adjust temperature across an infinite analog spectrum by looking a flame, not be stuck into 10 discrete heat settings.

[seandepagnier]

Indeed. I think it's well established that alcohol cooking is by far the most fire hazardous.

All the boats blow up from propane, burn down from gasoline, it's not correct to say alcohol is the most fire hazardous: it isn't.

You can put out alcohol fire with water!

And least effective. What a combination! The worst possible way to cook on board.

If you are going to use a liquid fuel at all alcohol is the only sensible one. The other fuels can be difficult/expensive to find. Alcohol doesn't have bad fumes, it can be stored in any container, the stove is made from a can and fuel doubles as cleaning agent. You can make it from sugar and yeast, and so for various reasons it is the cheapest and safest fuel for cooking besides wood.

The part that confuses me is why the price of denatured alcohol is so high (1 gallon lasts more than a year so I don't care that much) if they also mix it with gasoline. This doesn't make any sense, it should cost the same as gasoline maybe less, so some prices should change: I blame corrupt government.

[Van Der Beek]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

Keep in mind, most of those chefs are using far better gas stoves than typically found on a boat or even in most houses. A really good gas stove is great, but once you step down to a lower powered boat sized version, often with annoyingly imprecise controls where it's hard to make smooth, small adjustments to the flame, those advantages get a lot smaller.

Yes there's always compromises with the smaller units for sailboats for sure.

I thought I'd share something I came across when researching for my refit..

It's well worth a read for those doing a refit or for those simply fixing to replace their current cooker.

Funnily enough it's a Force 10 cooker I've been looking at to replace my current one with, looks like I will have to do some modifications.

https://www.morganscloud.com/2009/11...more-problems/

https://www.morganscloud.com/2009/05...oker-problems/

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by boat_alexandra

All the boats blow up from propane, burn down from gasoline, it's not correct to say alcohol is the most fire hazardous: it isn't.

You can put out alcohol fire with water!



If you are going to use a liquid fuel at all alcohol is the only sensible one. The other fuels can be difficult/expensive to find. Alcohol doesn't have bad fumes, it can be stored in any container, the stove is made from a can and fuel doubles as cleaning agent. You can make it from sugar and yeast, and so for various reasons it is the cheapest and safest fuel for cooking besides wood.

The part that confuses me is why the price of denatured alcohol is so high (1 gallon lasts more than a year so I don't care that much) if they also mix it with gasoline. This doesn't make any sense, it should cost the same as gasoline maybe less, so some prices should change: I blame corrupt government.

Insurance studies indicate alcohol is not safer than gas. I suspect folks are more careful with gas knowing it could blow up.

[CatNewBee]

Originally Posted by Adelie

Insurance studies indicate alcohol is not safer than gas. I suspect folks are more careful with gas knowing it could blow up.

Both can kill you, but alcohol tastes better... [emoji12]

[Auspicious]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Gas has to pass through the liquid. So you instantly see if there's even a tiny leak. It means you can check daily whether there is any leak anywhere in the system.

/snip/

What concerns power boost - this is incredibly useful, the only way to hard limit current on your gennie or shore power connection.

Got it. I see how the leak detector works. Very simple, and simple is good.

I don't have power boost on my own boat. I do have and use current limiting to manage battery charging when I'm running the generator for air conditioning.

I fully get the value of power boost.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Auspicious

Got it. I see how the leak detector works. Very simple, and simple is good. . . .

I can send you one from the UK if you can't get them over there.

In my opinion this device is a game-changer for gas safety. Instant verification that your system is leak-free. Otherwise you are only hoping it is, between times when you do a complete work-over of the whole system with soap solution -- how often do you do that?

As I've said -- I think gas on boats is dangerous. I have never been entirely comfortable having it on board. I think everyone underestimates the risk, because it's a relatively small risk of something really horrible -- so once you've gone 20 years without an explosion you don't imagine that it could ever happen to you. But since putting the bubbler in, I sleep a lot better. I can verify on an almost daily basis, and certainly not less than weekly, that there is no leak anywhere in the system, even in parts of it which are invisible or inaccessible. Not just the piping, joints, valves, and hoses, but inside the stove itself - something which is practically impossible to check otherwise, and which does happen from time to time.

[noelex 77]

I have never used a bubble tester, but my understanding is that it can take several minutes for a bubble to show. The bubble tester has to be monitored and the test button held down during this period.

Perhaps I am missing something, but a regulator with a pressure gauge seems like an easier method of detecting a leak.

[Auspicious]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I can send you one from the UK if you can't get them over there.

Thank you. I’ll check for US sources and measure my hose size.

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I think everyone underestimates the risk, because it's a relatively small risk of something really horrible -- so once you've gone 20 years without an explosion you don't imagine that it could ever happen to you.

Agree. Risk management is about both probability of occurrence and impact of occurrence.

Originally Posted by noelex 77

I have never used a bubble tester, but my understanding is that it can take several minutes for a bubble to show. The bubble tester has to be monitored and the test button held down during this period.
Perhaps I am missing something, but a regulator with a pressure gauge seems like an easier method of detecting a leak.

Also agree. I usually burn off the contents of my gas line before flipping off the solenoid, but periodically leaving the line charged and watching the pressure gauge is also a clear leak detector.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

I have never used a bubble tester, but my understanding is that it can take several minutes for a bubble to show. The bubble tester has to be monitored and the test button held down during this period.

Perhaps I am missing something, but a regulator with a pressure gauge seems like an easier method of detecting a leak.

You can do it with a pressure gauge plumbed in AFTER the solenoid. You shut the gas off and watch the pressure. That's what we had on our U.S. boat. But depending on the configuration of the system and hence, the volume of gas held in the system after the solenoid, it may take a long time to see a pressure drop from a pinhole leak. We would typically test using the pressure gauge observed over an hour. Interesting, does Auspicious have such a gauge, does he do such tests? Our procedure on the old boat was -- since it takes an hour -- to do this once a month or so.

The bubble tester on the contrary will show bubbles within 2 seconds (according to the instructions) if there is the slightest leak. The recommended test period is 10 seconds. I usually hold it for 30 seconds for good measure. It is much more sensitive than a pressure gauge and much faster. I do a test like this anytime I'm near the gas locker; it just takes 30 seconds.

These things are so good that they are required by the UK Boat Safety Scheme.


The difference in sensitivity is obvious if you think about it -- how many bubbles -- that volume/total volume contained in your gas system downstream of the solenoid -- does it take, to produce a measurable drop in pressure? I guess a whole bunch. I guess 10 seconds with the bubble tester is more sensitive than an hour and a pressure gauge, in the average system.

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by Adelie

Insurance studies indicate alcohol is not safer than gas. I suspect folks are more careful with gas knowing it could blow up.

In fairness this probably reflects pressurized alcohol stoves which can be unsafe due to operator error and the need to preheat

Origo stoves are probably the safest imaginable flame type cooktop. I took out my CNG system and replaced with origo stove and microwave/induction oven due to difficulty sourcing CNG

[Adelie]

According to Auspicious’ link above alcohol accounts for more than half of stove fires and I beloved less than 10% of alcohol stoves are pressurized, they went out of production decades ago.

https://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/mag...boat-fires.asp

I believe most of the alcohol stoves are now non-pressurized Origo type.

I also believe that the increased safety of alcohol is more than trumped by user complacency.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Adelie

According to Auspicious’ link above alcohol accounts for more than half of stove fires and I beloved less than 10% of alcohol stoves are pressurized, they went out of production decades ago.

https://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/mag...boat-fires.asp

I believe most of the alcohol stoves are now non-pressurized Origo type.

I also believe that the increased safety of alcohol is more than trumped by user complacency.

I think the issues are spills, and invisible flames.


Accidents are much more frequent than with gas, but much less catastrophic, so it may be hard to say that on the balance it's more dangerous.


I personally find in my subjective personal opinion that alcohol is the worst way to cook, weak flames, a faff to start, smell and fumes, water vapor, fire risk. I would not choose alcohol over gas despite my dislike of gas risks. Others will make different choices, of course -- YMMV.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

The bubble tester on the contrary will show bubbles within 2 seconds (according to the instructions) if there is the slightest leak. The recommended test period is 10 seconds. I usually hold it for 30 seconds for good measure.

30 seconds should be fine for most boats, but if you have a long propane pipe run you may be better to observe the bubble tester longer, at least according to this article:

https://narrowboatworld.com/10753-do...-bubble-tester

It suggests testing from 30 seconds is fine for the short run on a typical RV, with up to 8 mins needed for the long pipe run on a narrowboat.

A pressure gauge does require a longer test, but unlike a bubble tester there is no need to observe continuously while holding down a button, just compare the before and after pressure readings. So longer, but easier. My gas regulator advises a leak test should be conducted over 10 mins.

It is intriguing how different regulatory bodies mandate or prohibit different equipment. Our old boat had a “gas fuse” which is apparently mandatory for French commercial vessels, but is quite rare on private boats. There is an argument for fitting all the safety equipment possible on the gas system, but on the other hand you create a lot of connections and separate devices that are often the source of leaks. However, I think a device to test the system, either a bubble tester or pressure gauge is valuable.