yacht-circuit-evidence-20260907T1402Z Derive distribution requirements from yacht circuit evidence

• status: implementing
• createdAt: 2026-09-07 14:15
• approvedAt: 2026-09-07 16:32 (analysis steps 1–3 and specification proposal only)
• relatedTask: yacht-circuit-evidence-20260907T1402Z

Context

The user requested collection of conventional electrical drawings for yachts up to 24 m before analyzing circuit/input quantities and rewriting distribution-module specifications. Full-tier work. Source collection was explicitly requested and has been completed as investigation; specification implementation has not begun.

Evidence package: source catalog, ten original PDFs, six core vessel samples spanning approximately 7.4–22.6 m, a 52-page drawing pack containing 45 source pages, checksums and a pilot panel schedule.

Bounded observations: Oceanis 361 has 13 DC panel entries including one spare and three AC entries; Lagoon 450S p83 has conflicting legend references; Pursuit S358's DC panel mixes 60 small breaker positions with feeders, charging, always-on circuits and reserves; Bertram 700 provides near-upper-envelope 12/24 V and AC drawings, but some appendix sheets carry other model labels and regional variants.

Existing targets in P01 are Core S 22 outputs / 13 DI, Core M 46 outputs / 48 DI plus analog/frequency/current-loop acquisition, and Core HD 200 A with heavy channels. P02 specifies 8 AI + 8 DI. These are current product targets, not conclusions from this research. RESEARCH-008 / PLAN-024 separately holds a pending 46-channel / 200 A / at-most-100 A-per-channel platform proposal. It remains pending and is not overridden.

Existing unrelated uncommitted edits to product documents and tracking files were preserved. Tracking is file-based; no task-service integration is available.

Proposal

1. Reconcile each core vessel's drawing revision, region and optional equipment. Produce one row per protected final branch and separate source/feeder rows. Verify each row against a page and drawing reference; record conflicts rather than filling them by inference.
2. Inventory physical DI, AI and frequency inputs separately for hardwired retrofit and network-keypad installations. Separate source connections from independent module supply inputs. Verify float switches, two-direction controls, local appliance controllers and network sensors against the wiring, not equipment lists.
3. Group demand by voltage, installation zone, current class, dimming/reversing capability, always-on behavior and concurrency. Show observed counts, configuration-dependent ranges and unresolved quantities separately; only then propose module variants and reserve capacity.
4. Submit a concrete replacement specification matrix for Core S/M/HD, Sense and AC interfaces, including the disposition of the pending 46-channel platform. After explicit approval, update the paired specifications/design annexes and governing product-plan summaries consistently. Existing AC sense/control-only boundaries must be respected unless a separately approved change alters them.

Steps 1–3 are complete within the documented evidence boundaries. Whole-vessel physical-input totals remain unresolved where drawings are insufficient; explicit conversion budgets replace unsupported estimates. Step 4 now has a concrete proposal in the linked demand analysis; controlled specification edits remain gated. No whole-vessel count, validated current budget or released SKU is frozen by this plan.

Risks

• Manufacturer manuals include options, shared feeds and reused drawings; summing labels inflates counts.
• Lagoon's duplicate references and Bertram's mixed drawing labels prevent a trustworthy whole-boat total without reconciliation.
• Breaker ratings do not establish running, startup, stall or concurrent current. Component data and later bench measurements are needed for electrical rating changes.
• A 22.6 m LOA sample does not prove all 23–24 m hull configurations are covered. LOA and regulatory hull length must remain distinct.
• Automatically converting every light/pump/sensor into one output/input would mis-size the product.
• A no-Hub-loss policy for critical functions may require local hardwired autonomy, not merely additional software rules.

Scope

Current investigation deliverables: source catalog, ten original documents, selected drawings, manifest, page map, pilot CSV and task/plan records. No controlled product specification was changed.

Candidate later implementation scope: P01 Core and design annexes, P02 Sense and design annexes, P04 AC interface/board documents only where affected, and paired PRODUCT-PLAN summaries. Final affected-file list follows the quantitative proposal; avoid unrelated product-line edits.

Alternatives

• Recommended: maintain distributed voltage/zone modules and derive their counts from vessel circuits; validate how existing 22/46-channel options fit.
• A single large universal module: evaluate only if documented branch counts, harness distances, independent supplies, thermal budgets and critical-circuit segregation support it.
• Preserve the current supplier-derived counts: viable only if the census shows acceptable coverage; not assumed merely because those counts already exist.

Annotations

• 2026-09-07 23:34: User adopted split main communication + functional I/O. Implement this selected architecture in the vehicle research/specification matrices, with one private CAN interface per satellite, COM-M as normal rule/communication owner and autonomous power protection. Reconcile removal of integrated DI and invalidate prior timing/traffic assumptions for the additional command hop.

• 2026-09-07 23:28: Extend the authorized module-design work to the user's vehicle PDM lineup: retain L24-125/S24-125, propose S28-200, and separate remote input capacity from load outputs. Deliver a family matrix, wiring/application contract, current/input arithmetic and explicit Sense integration gaps. Existing product and platform documents remain distinct pending adoption of the final architecture.

• 2026-09-07 23:23: The user set a 24-output / 125 A module design envelope. Refine the authorized research proposal into two primary power-module variants, with explicit continuous-current conditions, input counts, aggregate limits and qualification gaps. This selects a module design target, not a measured hardware rating or a whole-vessel allocation.

• User requested evidence collection first, then analysis. All source acquisition and review stayed within that investigation scope.

• No approval for a replacement channel architecture or controlled-specification rewrite has been recorded.

• 2026-09-07 16:32: User approved starting the next stage. Proceed with quantitative analysis and a concrete specification proposal. This does not approve controlled-product edits before reviewing that proposal.

• 2026-09-07 16:47: Completed the approved quantitative phase. Deliverables: demand analysis, 251-row circuit inventory, panel summary, input budget and power-source inventory. Reconciled DC panel counts: V01 24 positions / 17 assigned paths; V02 13 / 12; V03 20 / 17; V05 69 / 55; V06 scoped 71 / 50. V04 remains explicitly conflicted.

• 2026-09-07 16:47: Concrete proposal ready for review: S22 with 8×25 + 10×10 + 4×5 A and 16 DI; M46 with 8×30 + 16×15 + 22×10 A and 48 DI; one independent DC supply domain per S/M; Sense 8+8 retained; AC source/branch quantities parameterized; function-specific failure states. All new ratings are engineering targets. Scope and acceptance criteria are in analysis section 7. RESEARCH-008 / PLAN-024 remains pending.

• 2026-09-07 16:47: Verification passed for CSV structure/identifiers, scoped count arithmetic, protection-class capacity screens, local links, Markdown tables, original archive checksums and git diff --check. Await proposal approval for controlled specification changes; no product specification was edited in this phase.

• 2026-09-07 16:50: User requested solution optimization. Authorized deliverable: architecture proposal with per-vessel channel allocation, candidate comparison and implementation targets. Evaluate a common medium-size power/control node plus remote sensor expansion against separate S/M/HD variants; preserve source conflicts and unresolved running-current data.

• 2026-09-07 16:57: Optimization proposal delivered. Latest recommendation is the common Core 22 and Sense solution, superseding the 16:47 S22/M46 proposed mixes. Core target: 22 outputs (6×30 A + 16×15 A), 24 DI, zero external AI, one DC supply domain, 100 A aggregate subject to qualification. Same Core implements the stated 18–21 DO / 21–24 DI AC interface cases. Six candidate strategies and source-linked allocations establish the bounded tradeoff; no universal-cost or whole-vessel completeness claim. Controlled-document scope is in solution section 8; no implementation approval for this newly optimized architecture is assumed.

• 2026-09-07 20:32: Applied the user clarification that illumination uses PWM and ordinary controls use ON/OFF. Corrected the proposed Core bank split to 8 PWM-capable outputs (2×30 A + 6×15 A) and 14 switch-only outputs (4×30 A + 10×15 A), still 22 total. PWM positions may serve ordinary loads in steady mode. Added per-path mode and capability fields: 27 proposed lighting-PWM groups and 93 ON/OFF groups. Reproduced the previous failure for 20 A lighting on a low-current-only PWM bank, then verified corrected high-current PWM allocation, source conservation, reserves, links/tables and git diff --check. Actual lamp compatibility remains unverified; controlled product specifications are unchanged.

• 2026-09-07 20:37: User prefers multiple specialized modules. Interpret this as a function-based family, not redundant parallel supplies: separate lighting PWM, ordinary switching, acquisition and low-current actuator/AC interfaces. Continue the existing full-tier solution-design task and verify allocations; the prior common Core22 is now a comparison alternative rather than the preferred architecture.

• 2026-09-07 20:40: Delivered the specialized module proposal: Light8 (4×20 A + 4×10 A PWM; 8 DI), Switch16 (4×30 A + 12×15 A ON/OFF; 16 DI), Sense8+8 and optional Control24 (24 low-current DO + 24 DI). Each has one independent DC feed. Retained heavy/essential assemblies remain explicit. Source-linked allocation preserves 151 paths: 9 Light8 / 27 PWM, 9 Switch16 / 93 ON/OFF, 31 external. S358 helm has one ordinary spare; current-class reserve limits and increased 18-node / 216-position footprint are explicit. The common-Core proposal is now marked as a historical alternative; controlled specs and PLAN-024 are unchanged.

• 2026-09-07 20:47: User challenged the Light8 sizing and requested electrical evidence for yachts up to 50 m plus typical small-boat lighting circuit quantities. Expand research coverage to 50 m and reopen lighting sizing: distinguish protected feeds, independently switched/dimmed groups, fixtures and controller addresses. The eight-channel module remains an unvalidated candidate; existing derived zone allocations do not establish complete lighting demand.

• 2026-09-07 20:57: Research expansion delivered with five archived builder documents (28.69/40.05/40.99/45/50 m), 37 local-group records and a 28-page source extract. Lighting sizing and current tiers reopened; the prior Light8 recommendation no longer controls. Next sizing requires room/group/driver-interface schedules, not protected-feed counts. 16/24-channel primary nodes are evaluation candidates only. No full 45–50 m circuit schedule obtained.

• 2026-09-07 23:25: Latest design deliverable: 24-channel / 125 A power specification proposal. Includes separate lighting/switching current mixes, source versus signal-input counts, continuous qualification target, concurrency limits, protection coordination and verification boundary. Arithmetic/document checks passed; physical qualification and whole-vessel allocation remain open.

• 2026-09-07 23:33: Vehicle-family proposal delivered: model specifications and CAN input contract, with machine-readable PDM/IO matrices. S28-200 expands medium-current branch capacity; 24 DI stays independent of output count. Sense reuse requires a faster publication profile plus PDM-side subscriptions and local fail-state rules. Arithmetic/document checks passed; controlled adoption and electrical/firmware qualification remain outstanding.

• 2026-09-07 23:39: Selected split architecture documented and matrices updated. COM-M and functional I/O specification now governs the vehicle proposal; prior integrated-DI and dual-CAN-per-power-module text is explicitly historical. Verification passed for six module records, unchanged power mixes, input totals and document checks. The main controller is an ordinary-control dependency; autonomous electrical protection remains on power modules.

• 2026-09-08 01:38: Applied the user-requested COM-M communication expansion to the current vehicle architecture and CSV. Three simultaneously usable CAN interfaces separate vehicle, output and acquisition traffic; RS-485, RJ45 Ethernet and internal SPI are added while USB remains. M12 is a connector family rather than another protocol. Rates, coding/pinouts, SPI signal integrity and isolation remain engineering targets. Document/data checks passed; no extra approval was required for the requested specification refinement.

• 2026-09-08 01:46: Existing research and architecture committed as cd6e87f on user request. Subsequent attachment review recommends retaining the selected CAN product baseline and treating dedicated 8 DI / 8 DO UART hardware as an optional prototype. Reconcile S32K148 UART/RS-485/USB/pin resources before adoption; preserve the guide's ready-link electrical-output timing boundary. Review arithmetic/document checks passed; no fast-link SKU or controller-resource change adopted automatically.

• 2026-09-08 01:52: Second attachment reviewed against the current product plan. S32K314/LVDS review supports the report's feasibility caveats and identifies remaining remote-MCU, host-interface, logic-fit, return-clock and enclosure costs. Maintain current selected matrices; prototype an optional fast subsystem only against explicit timing/cable/load requirements. Arithmetic and document checks passed; no adoption or hardware proof inferred from the attachment.

• 2026-09-08 03:47: User explicitly requested incorporating the S32K314/LVDS findings into the plan. Updated the selected split architecture with optional COM-M-F (S32K314 + LAMXO2-640HC-5TG100E candidates) and FIO-D16O16, retaining the ordinary CAN family and all requested main interfaces. Added separate host/expansion SPI accounting, ten point-to-point ports, a 3 m / 50 Mbit/s target boundary, scan-versus-host/load timing, command freshness, and resource/RTL/one-node/ten-node acceptance stages. Updated controller and I/O CSV matrices and linked the review decision. Verified CSV structure, interface/channel/current counts, timing arithmetic, local links, Markdown tables and git diff --check. Remote MCU, output ratings, logic fit and physical timing remain unqualified; no controlled marine specification or new commit.