[NSRCA-discussion] Max volts
Chad Northeast
chad at f3acanada.org
Mon Mar 1 16:26:17 AKST 2010
This wheel should be greased on the new Schulze F3A controller :) Its
already on the big airplane ones.
Chad
On 10-03-01 6:14 PM, Dave wrote:
>
> Essentially a governor for the peak power only…with constant
> “re-mapping” of the throttle curve to keep the power the same across
> the throttle range. SOME people have been asking for this basic
> concept as an additional programming parameter for a LONG time (I
> won’t admit to when I first asked for this). It would be very nice to
> program max RPM (essentially a function of voltage available, which
> reflects power available from the lipo) and set it for something close
> to what is seen at the end of a flight on a cool day on a “middle of
> the road” lipo (assuming it is performing well enough for competition
> flights). THEN…all competition grade lipos would run essentially
> identically for the duration of the flight. If more people asked for
> this feature…the “squeaky” wheel might get greased sooner……..
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of *Ed Alt
> *Sent:* Monday, March 01, 2010 8:10 PM
> *To:* nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts
>
> Along the lines of taking advantage of better batteries, ESC's could
> compensate for packs as they flatten out. Essentially, an ESC could be
> designed to automatically de-rate the battery when it is above a
> prescribed level of charge. I don't really keep up with what the
> various ESCs have feature-wise, but I haven't heard of this being done
> yet. I don't think it would be hard either. Effectively, it's like a
> built-in ATV that simply limits the pulse width at full power when the
> battery is above a certain level, just as it already does in response
> to throttle inputs. There's an advantage to this in that the battery
> pack & wiring arrangement stays simple and that all cells in the pack
> get used simultaneously. I still like Jim's original idea, especially
> because it got some more thinking on the topic going.
>
> Ed
>
> *From:* AtwoodDon at aol.com <mailto:AtwoodDon at aol.com>
>
> *Sent:* Monday, March 01, 2010 8:01 PM
>
> *To:* nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts
>
> This approach could also function as a backup RX battery. No rules
> against having redundant RX power. The BEC could be programmed to
> 'divert' power to the flight batteries to maintain the near max
> voltage when needed.
>
> However, I agree with Jim, I don't see the need for this. Battery
> technology has/is progressing fast enough to provide us with enough
> power for our sequences. I prefer the simpler approach.
>
> Don
>
> In a message dated 3/1/2010 4:34:31 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
> ed_alt at hotmail.com writes:
>
> That's a good idea. I imagine it would take a little modification
> to the
> rule to specify how a system like this could be applied. This
> could be put
> together external to the speed controller and function
> automatically through
> active voltage sensing. Eventually the ESC mfgs could go a step
> further an
> just integrate this right into the controller. Slick, simple
> concept Jim!
>
> Ed
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "James Oddino" <joddino at socal.rr.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 7:15 PM
> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts
>
> > 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list