[NSRCA-discussion] IR meter

[krishlan fitzsimmons]

Interesting. Well, maybe someone will come up with a good one at some point for those that don't use a Cellpro. I can't say my Cellpro is accurate, just that it works and gives me something to base my batteries off of. 

Jim, 

Any idea why 2 and 3 cell packs have such a high resistance? Even new mine are over 20. Hard to tell when they are bad. 

Something interesting is that on my AFPD sim, I was just flying the Spark. I haven't flown it much as there are a few things I don't care for compared to others that I have on there. One was that it felt underpowered. An easy change normally, just never did it. But instead of altering the motor, I went and looked into the batteries. The resistance was set at 13.0. I changed it to 2.0 and now the plane it silly fast. Not sure that means anything, just found it interesting. 

Thanks, 

Chris          

--- On Sun, 3/29/09, AtwoodDon at aol.com <AtwoodDon at aol.com> wrote:

From: AtwoodDon at aol.com <AtwoodDon at aol.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] IR meter
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Date: Sunday, March 29, 2009, 9:27 PM



 

I agree, since I have to charge anyway, I am going to believe the 
CellPro.  I sold the IRM to someone that was unhappy they were sold out 
when he went to order......  
 
D
 

In a message dated 3/29/2009 8:31:52 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, 
joddino at socal.rr.com writes:
Don, 
  

  I would say the FMA is closer to the real value.  I'll look at some 
  inflight data but just as a test of reasonableness I looked at the data I sent 
  you recently where I was pulling about 98 Amps at 39 volts.  My pack has 
  about 3 mOhms per cell according to the FMA times 10 cells is .03 Ohms for the 
  pack.  98 x .03 = 2.94 volts  If the resistance was 7 times higher 
  the drop would be seven times higher or around 21 volts.  Something is 
  wrong with his algorithm. 
  

  Jim

  
  On Mar 27, 2009, at 5:22 PM, atwooddon at aol.com wrote:

  
    
    I have one, caught the discussion thread just as it started and jumped 
    on the initial orders.  It works as expected. Although the IR numbers 
    are substantially higher than what the FMA charger reports the relationship 
    of the IR numbers between the cells is  proportionately the same.  
    The IRM shows IR ohms about 7-8 times that of the FMA CellPro 10S.  
    Which one is right?  I dunno, but when I asked why they were so 
    different, I got a very long explanation that I did not understand.  
    All I know is the ratios seem to stay the same between them on the same 
    batteries.  
     
    It is well made tho I don't care for the small plugs for balance taps, 
    that is kinda clumsy, but it works as advertised.
     
    Don
     
    
    In a message dated 3/27/2009 11:55:58 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, homeremodeling2003 at yahoo.com 
    writes:
    
      
        
        
          Did you guys see this yet? Could be helpful if your 
            charger doesn't do it. 

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=980290


            Chris 
             
             
             


_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion 
      mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

    
    Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make 
    meals for under 
    $10._______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion 
    mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
=

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion 
  mailing 
  list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
 Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a recession.
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090330/6f0e6814/attachment.html>