[NSRCA-discussion] Max volts

[James Oddino]

I have the functional concept that solves the rules problem.  Picture a 10S pack positive lead wired to the common of a switch with two poles, a piece of wire connected from one pole to a pole on a second two pole switch with its common connected to the ESC.  Between the other two poles we place our 11th cell.  When the 10S pack is above 37.5 volts the 11th cell is bypassed and when it is below, like it will be during vertical maneuvers late in flight, the 11th cell is put in series to boost the voltage to up to 41.7 volts.  At no time is the voltage over the spec.

Having said that, I believe the 10S system provides adequate power with the right motor at all times of flight even if the voltage drops to 35 volts.

Jim


On Mar 1, 2010, at 8:59 AM, Bob Kane wrote:

> Going higher and regulating down would be against the rules, the max volts is still limited to 42.56. 
> 
> Bob Kane
> getterflash at yahoo.com
> 
> 
> --- On Mon, 3/1/10, krishlan fitzsimmons <homeremodeling2003 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> From: krishlan fitzsimmons <homeremodeling2003 at yahoo.com>
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts
>> To: chad at f3acanada.org, "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Date: Monday, March 1, 2010, 9:54 AM
>> 
>> Couldn't we go to a higher voltage and
>> regulate it back down? A contstant 42.56v would be nice!
>>  
>> Chris 
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: Chad
>> Northeast <chad at f3acanada.org>
>> To:
>> nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> Sent: Sun,
>> February 28, 2010 8:48:48 PM
>> Subject: Re:
>> [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts
>> 
>> You would be at about 50% capacity at 3.85 ish volts/cell
>> (resting open circuit), so unless you up the capacity you
>> will have a pretty restricted flight time.
>> 
>> Chad
>> 
>> On 10-02-28 9:25 PM, Ron Van Putte wrote:
>>> That stirs a wild thought in my brain.  Fully
>> charged packs don't stay at 4.2 volts per cell very
>> long.  On the other hand, once the initial charge
>> voltage is burned off by a constant load, the voltage loss
>> curve "flattens out".  What if you put fully
>> charged 6S and a 5S packs in series and "burn them
>> down" to 3.869 volts per cell (a total of 42.56
>> volts for an 11-cell pack) so they were legal for
>> use.  Would the voltage of this depleted 11S pack be
>> higher than a fully charged 10S pack at the end of a typical
>> flight?  If the end-of-flight voltage might be
>> significantly higher for the 11S pack vice a 10S pack, it
>> would be worth investigating, even considering the extra
>> weight of the additional cell.  Come on you electronic
>> gurus, show me where I'm wrong.
>>> 
>>> Ron Van Putte
>>> 
>>> On Feb 28, 2010, at 10:00 PM, James Oddino wrote:
>>> 
>>>> What comes after ...?  Does it specify a load
>> or any other conditions?  Is it measured during the
>> noise test and have a minimum value?
>>>> 
>>>> Just stirring the pot, Jim O
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Feb 28, 2010, at 5:21 PM, John Fuqua wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> No its not (assuming we are talking RC
>> Aerobatics).  Try page RCA-2 para 4.1
>>>>> which
>> states "Electrically-powered model aircraft are
>> limited to a maximum
>>>>> of 42.56 volts.."
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>>>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]
>> On Behalf Of Ron Van Putte
>>>>> Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 7:07 PM
>>>>> To: General pattern discussion
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts
>>>>> 
>>>>> It's in the general rules, not in the R/C
>> section.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 28, 2010, at 6:50 PM, Jim Quinn wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Where can I find the rule
>> for max volts?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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