|
Depth Sounder on the blink
The depth sounder on our 1978 San Juan 28 dates from around 1983. It's
a Standard Communications DS-1. I suspect that company no longer exists. We get crazy readings or blanks in both deep and shallow water whatever adjustments we make. The alarm works only too well so it thinks it's detecting something. The electric connections all look good and clean and the PO has always painted around the transducer, not over it. I'm happy enough to buy a new unit but would rather not mess with the through-hull transducer (which looks fine from the inside). Does anyone know whether a 2008 depth sounder is compatible with a 1983 transducer, or how to check? Thanks in advance Richard |
Depth Sounder on the blink
wrote in message
... The depth sounder on our 1978 San Juan 28 dates from around 1983. It's a Standard Communications DS-1. I suspect that company no longer exists. We get crazy readings or blanks in both deep and shallow water whatever adjustments we make. The alarm works only too well so it thinks it's detecting something. The electric connections all look good and clean and the PO has always painted around the transducer, not over it. I'm happy enough to buy a new unit but would rather not mess with the through-hull transducer (which looks fine from the inside). Does anyone know whether a 2008 depth sounder is compatible with a 1983 transducer, or how to check? Thanks in advance Richard Don't know, but a quick google of "Standard Communications" company marine returns StandardHorizon.com, which seems to have some archived manuals call DS. They've been in business since 1969. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Depth Sounder on the blink
I would first check if it is the depth sounder or the transducer giving the
problem. Get a hold of another transducer and just hang it over the side to see if the readings improve. Sherwin " wrote: The depth sounder on our 1978 San Juan 28 dates from around 1983. It's a Standard Communications DS-1. I suspect that company no longer exists. We get crazy readings or blanks in both deep and shallow water whatever adjustments we make. The alarm works only too well so it thinks it's detecting something. The electric connections all look good and clean and the PO has always painted around the transducer, not over it. I'm happy enough to buy a new unit but would rather not mess with the through-hull transducer (which looks fine from the inside). Does anyone know whether a 2008 depth sounder is compatible with a 1983 transducer, or how to check? Thanks in advance Richard |
Depth Sounder on the blink
In article
, " wrote: It's a Standard Communications DS-1. I suspect that company no longer exists. Seems like you, suspected , WRONG..... Look up Standard/Horizon Communications, in your favorite Search Engine. They are still a Big Player in the non-commercial Marine Electronics Business, and doing quite well..... |
Depth Sounder on the blink
On Feb 27, 12:10 pm, wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 20:00:00 GMT, You wrote: In article , " wrote: It's a Standard Communications DS-1. I suspect that company no longer exists. Seems like you, suspected , WRONG..... Look up Standard/Horizon Communications, in your favorite Search Engine. They are still a Big Player in the non-commercial Marine Electronics Business, and doing quite well..... Bought by Vertex, and still in operation http://www.standardhorizon.com/ They are out of the instrument biz, but still have "some" old parts laying around. The tech department is very helpful if you CALL them and ask nicely. Yes,you're right, their tech dept is very helpful but they have nothing left that fits my need. If I can't get the old DS-1 working I may try a cheap inside the hull depth sounder, eg Uniden QT 206 which you can get for under $100 and doesn't need a hole in the hull. Some say they work fine. Thanks for the help Richard |
Depth Sounder on the blink
wrote in message
... On Feb 27, 12:10 pm, wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 20:00:00 GMT, You wrote: In article , " wrote: It's a Standard Communications DS-1. I suspect that company no longer exists. Seems like you, suspected , WRONG..... Look up Standard/Horizon Communications, in your favorite Search Engine. They are still a Big Player in the non-commercial Marine Electronics Business, and doing quite well..... Bought by Vertex, and still in operation http://www.standardhorizon.com/ They are out of the instrument biz, but still have "some" old parts laying around. The tech department is very helpful if you CALL them and ask nicely. Yes,you're right, their tech dept is very helpful but they have nothing left that fits my need. If I can't get the old DS-1 working I may try a cheap inside the hull depth sounder, eg Uniden QT 206 which you can get for under $100 and doesn't need a hole in the hull. Some say they work fine. Thanks for the help Richard I used one of those... different manufacturer... it worked great (on a Cal 20). I glued a piece of PVC pipe to a centrally location spot, filled it with mineral oil, then put the transducer in. I fitted a piece of PVC in the top of the pipe with enough room for the wire to come out. It was enough to preserve the oil level even with fairly extreme heel. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Depth Sounder on the blink
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:31:42 -0800 (PST), "
wrote: On Feb 27, 12:10 pm, wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 20:00:00 GMT, You wrote: In article , " wrote: It's a Standard Communications DS-1. I suspect that company no longer exists. Seems like you, suspected , WRONG..... Look up Standard/Horizon Communications, in your favorite Search Engine. They are still a Big Player in the non-commercial Marine Electronics Business, and doing quite well..... Bought by Vertex, and still in operation http://www.standardhorizon.com/ They are out of the instrument biz, but still have "some" old parts laying around. The tech department is very helpful if you CALL them and ask nicely. Yes,you're right, their tech dept is very helpful but they have nothing left that fits my need. If I can't get the old DS-1 working I may try a cheap inside the hull depth sounder, eg Uniden QT 206 which you can get for under $100 and doesn't need a hole in the hull. Some say they work fine. Thanks for the help Richard Generally recent depth sounders work on one of two different frequencies. you might try to determine what frequency your instrument works at and try a new transponder of the same frequency. You can but standard transponder heads designed to epoxy inside a fiberglass hull. I have been using one for ten years with no problems. I believe with a 'Standard" display. Bruce-in-Bangkok (Note:remove underscores from address for reply) |
Depth Sounder on the blink
Transducers will work throught the hull from the inside if properly mounted
in a bed of epoxy. Here's one example: http://www.starmarinedepot.com/Rayma...ransducer.html I've mounted a thru-hull inside the hull bedding in epoxy (make sure no air bubbles in epoxy) and it works great. Make sure the mechanical connection of your current transducer is good. If loose from the hull you will get erratic readings. Also, did you put anything new/different mounted to the hull (on the inside) and then the problems came about? wrote in message ... The depth sounder on our 1978 San Juan 28 dates from around 1983. It's a Standard Communications DS-1. I suspect that company no longer exists. We get crazy readings or blanks in both deep and shallow water whatever adjustments we make. The alarm works only too well so it thinks it's detecting something. The electric connections all look good and clean and the PO has always painted around the transducer, not over it. I'm happy enough to buy a new unit but would rather not mess with the through-hull transducer (which looks fine from the inside). Does anyone know whether a 2008 depth sounder is compatible with a 1983 transducer, or how to check? Thanks in advance Richard |
Depth Sounder on the blink
"Phil Abuster" wrote in message
... Transducers will work throught the hull from the inside if properly mounted in a bed of epoxy. Here's one example: http://www.starmarinedepot.com/Rayma...ransducer.html I've mounted a thru-hull inside the hull bedding in epoxy (make sure no air bubbles in epoxy) and it works great. They don't need to be mounted in epoxy (those not going through the hull) to work properly. They do need to not shoot through air. If you mount them in epoxy, you'll find it difficult to remove them if they fail. In the method I mentioned elsewhere, you don't have to be concerned with bubbles in the epoxy because the transducer sits in mineral oil in a stable container (one that is epoxied to the hull in the appropriate spot). The main issue is finding a spot via testing (as another suggested) before placing the transducer holder. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Depth Sounder on the blink
wrote in message
... On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 09:39:45 -0800, "Capt. JG" wrote: "Phil Abuster" wrote in message ... Transducers will work throught the hull from the inside if properly mounted in a bed of epoxy. Here's one example: http://www.starmarinedepot.com/Rayma...ransducer.html I've mounted a thru-hull inside the hull bedding in epoxy (make sure no air bubbles in epoxy) and it works great. They don't need to be mounted in epoxy (those not going through the hull) to work properly. They do need to not shoot through air. If you mount them in epoxy, you'll find it difficult to remove them if they fail. Not difficult at all. Well, it's not impossible, but it certainly easier if you don't have to do it at all. In the method I mentioned elsewhere, you don't have to be concerned with bubbles in the epoxy because the transducer sits in mineral oil in a stable container (one that is epoxied to the hull in the appropriate spot). The epoxy may not have bubbles in it to begin with, and if it does, it is a very simple matter to remedy. I'd really like to know how... how can you be sure one doesn't develop after it hardens? I thought you said that it happened to you? Maybe I mis-read that... a friend is contemplating the exact same type of installation. The main issue is finding a spot via testing (as another suggested) before placing the transducer holder. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Depth Sounder on the blink
Silicon attenuates too much (
http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/serv...cvips&gifs=yes ) , epoxy is much better. Mineral oil is very good, but it can be messy/complicated. Ideally you want to match the speed of sound in the materials to water to avoid high power reflections at the transducer-epoxy-hull-water interfaces. To bleed air bubbles from the epoxy, take an orbital sander put on a felt pad and place it on the other side of the hull opposite the epoxy. The vibration will bleed out the bubbles, do this before applying the transducer and the epoxy must still be unhardened. Epoxy does sheer off in one nice big chunk when removing. Also be sure to fill in the air bubbles in the fiberglass mat of the hull if there are any. Make sure you get a license before doing this! wrote in message ... On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 10:28:20 -0800, "Capt. JG" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 09:39:45 -0800, "Capt. JG" wrote: "Phil Abuster" wrote in message ... Transducers will work throught the hull from the inside if properly mounted in a bed of epoxy. Here's one example: http://www.starmarinedepot.com/Rayma...ransducer.html I've mounted a thru-hull inside the hull bedding in epoxy (make sure no air bubbles in epoxy) and it works great. They don't need to be mounted in epoxy (those not going through the hull) to work properly. They do need to not shoot through air. If you mount them in epoxy, you'll find it difficult to remove them if they fail. Not difficult at all. Well, it's not impossible, but it certainly easier if you don't have to do it at all. Actually, it's easier to remove one that is epoxied than it is to remove all traces of silicone from one that is set in Silicone. I removed one for a friend using a hammetr and a chisel. Took a lot less time than when I had to deal with silicone residue n my own boat to replace the install using epoxy. For that matter, if I was to do it again, I wouldn't even worry about the existing puck, and would just mount the new one in a different spot, like an inch away from the old one. No removal is really needed. In the method I mentioned elsewhere, you don't have to be concerned with bubbles in the epoxy because the transducer sits in mineral oil in a stable container (one that is epoxied to the hull in the appropriate spot). The epoxy may not have bubbles in it to begin with, and if it does, it is a very simple matter to remedy. I'd really like to know how... a sewing needle works very well. how can you be sure one doesn't develop after it hardens? I thought you said that it happened to you? Maybe I mis-read that... a friend is contemplating the exact same type of installation. No. The problem I had was after a few years, my silicone installation apparently started to separate from the hull slightly (clear silicone is NOT a good adhesive) and formed a gap that caused intermitant loss of readings. I redid the install with epoxy and everything is fine. The "possibility" of air bubbles is slight if you pour carefully, and as I said, easy to remedy if there is a bubble or two. I've done the old "tube full of oil" method, but its a lot more work, and requires a spot with more space. It's also more vulnerable to something knocking into it and causing it to leak. BTDT. That's why I stopped doing them that way. The main issue is finding a spot via testing (as another suggested) before placing the transducer holder. |
Depth Sounder on the blink
"Phil Abuster" wrote in message
... Silicon attenuates too much ( http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/serv...cvips&gifs=yes ) , epoxy is much better. Mineral oil is very good, but it can be messy/complicated. Ideally you want to match the speed of sound in the materials to water to avoid high power reflections at the transducer-epoxy-hull-water interfaces. To bleed air bubbles from the epoxy, take an orbital sander put on a felt pad and place it on the other side of the hull opposite the epoxy. The vibration will bleed out the bubbles, do this before applying the transducer and the epoxy must still be unhardened. Epoxy does sheer off in one nice big chunk when removing. Also be sure to fill in the air bubbles in the fiberglass mat of the hull if there are any. Make sure you get a license before doing this! Huh? How do you do that with the boat in the water... without electrocuting yourself or the nearby diver? And, how do you do it after the epoxy has hardened? License?? -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Depth Sounder on the blink
"Capt. JG" wrote in message ... "Phil Abuster" wrote in message ... Silicon attenuates too much ( http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/serv...cvips&gifs=yes ) , epoxy is much better. Mineral oil is very good, but it can be messy/complicated. Ideally you want to match the speed of sound in the materials to water to avoid high power reflections at the transducer-epoxy-hull-water interfaces. To bleed air bubbles from the epoxy, take an orbital sander put on a felt pad and place it on the other side of the hull opposite the epoxy. The vibration will bleed out the bubbles, do this before applying the transducer and the epoxy must still be unhardened. Epoxy does sheer off in one nice big chunk when removing. Also be sure to fill in the air bubbles in the fiberglass mat of the hull if there are any. Make sure you get a license before doing this! Huh? How do you do that with the boat in the water... without electrocuting yourself or the nearby diver? And, how do you do it after the epoxy has hardened? License?? -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com You wouldn't install a thru hull with the boat in the water would you? The most interesting use I've found for the display type depth finder is to press it against your belly or head and use it as an ultrasound scanner. It's really neat to see body parts moving (such as your heart, lungs) or check bladder fullness with it. Much cheaper than a doctor! The license is so you don't electrocute yourself. Salty has the whole process down pat. He must have a license. |
Depth Sounder on the blink
"Phil Abuster" wrote in message
... "Capt. JG" wrote in message ... "Phil Abuster" wrote in message ... Silicon attenuates too much ( http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/serv...cvips&gifs=yes ) , epoxy is much better. Mineral oil is very good, but it can be messy/complicated. Ideally you want to match the speed of sound in the materials to water to avoid high power reflections at the transducer-epoxy-hull-water interfaces. To bleed air bubbles from the epoxy, take an orbital sander put on a felt pad and place it on the other side of the hull opposite the epoxy. The vibration will bleed out the bubbles, do this before applying the transducer and the epoxy must still be unhardened. Epoxy does sheer off in one nice big chunk when removing. Also be sure to fill in the air bubbles in the fiberglass mat of the hull if there are any. Make sure you get a license before doing this! Huh? How do you do that with the boat in the water... without electrocuting yourself or the nearby diver? And, how do you do it after the epoxy has hardened? License?? -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com You wouldn't install a thru hull with the boat in the water would you? No, but it sounds like you would. We were talking about sounders that shoot through the hulls. The most interesting use I've found for the display type depth finder is to press it against your belly or head and use it as an ultrasound scanner. It's really neat to see body parts moving (such as your heart, lungs) or check bladder fullness with it. Much cheaper than a doctor! Sounds like you wouldn't find much if you point it at your head! LOL The license is so I don't electrocute myself. I agree! Salty has the whole process down pat. He must have a brain. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Depth Sounder on the blink
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 19:07:31 -0500, WaIIy wrote:
It's a fantastic adhesive. You just need to know how to apply it. Please do tell us. |
Depth Sounder on the blink
Wally stated:
Final cleaning with isopropyl (rubbing) alcohol works well. Isopropyl alcohol leaves quite a lot of residue unless rubbed dry with a clean cloth. You can dip your finger in IPA to work it if you want to smooth a seam, wipe a drip, etc. Also good for cleanup before initial set. Why on earth would you want to waste a good India Pale Ale that way??? Red |
Depth Sounder on the blink
"Capt. JG" wrote in message ... Sounds like you wouldn't find much if you point it at your head! LOL If it were pointed toward your rectum we would find an assortment of interesting objects, including your head! LOL |
Depth Sounder on the blink
"Jakob Krutzfeld" wrote in message ... "Capt. JG" wrote in message ... Sounds like you wouldn't find much if you point it at your head! LOL If it were pointed toward your rectum we would find an assortment of interesting objects, including your head! LOL It sure doesn't take long for people to realize Jon Boy is gay. Har har har! |
Depth Sounder on the blink
WaIIy wrote:
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:01:20 -0500, wrote: clear silicone is NOT a good adhesive) It's a fantastic adhesive. You just need to know how to apply it. Ps - Silicone is not gas and oil friendly. NASA spent a bazillion bucks trying to find a suitable adhesive for the heat shield tiles on the shuttle, ended up using good ol' silicone, (RTV if you want to sound tech savvy). Cheers Marty |
Depth Sounder on the blink
|
Depth Sounder on the blink
wrote in message ... How well did your heat shield hold up during the streeses of supersonic re-entry from space? There is controversy: http://pointfiveblog.com/index.php/2005/07/39 |
Depth Sounder on the blink
wrote in message
... How well did your heat shield hold up during the streeses of supersonic re-entry from space? Houston, we have a problem.... -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Depth Sounder on the blink
WaIIy wrote:
On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 09:40:17 -0500, Martin Baxter wrote: WaIIy wrote: On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:01:20 -0500, wrote: clear silicone is NOT a good adhesive) It's a fantastic adhesive. You just need to know how to apply it. Ps - Silicone is not gas and oil friendly. NASA spent a bazillion bucks trying to find a suitable adhesive for the heat shield tiles on the shuttle, ended up using good ol' silicone, (RTV if you want to sound tech savvy). Cheers Marty Nice try, but no. You could perhaps cite a source for your cynicism? "To prevent damage to the tiles, Strain Isolation Pads - a layer of nylon felt Nomex (flame-retardant material)- are used between the tiles and the orbiter's surface. The pads are bonded to the tiles, as well as to the skin of the Shuttle, with RTV, a room-temperature vulcanizing silicone adhesive. The tile surface bonded to the pads is densified with silica-type solutions for added tensile strength." Even the grout uses RTV "The gap fillers are envelopes of ceramic fiber cloth stuffed with a resilient ceramic filler batt, and sometimes with a metal foil. The filler bar consists of strips of Nomex felt coated with RTV, and is part of the assembly method used for tiles." See http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/nasafact/tps.htm. Now your were saying? Cheers Marty See |
Depth Sounder on the blink
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:58 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com