[NSRCA-discussion] Max volts

Atwood, Mark atwoodm at paragon-inc.com
Tue Mar 2 10:16:04 AKST 2010


That explains more than the hair ...
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld


----- Original Message -----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Tue Mar 02 14:12:23 2010
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts

And to the person that stuck a screwdriver in a light socket in the sixth grade. Wow that may explain why my hair is still so wild

--- On Tue, 3/2/10, Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com> wrote:



        From: Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
        Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts
        To: "'nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
        Date: Tuesday, March 2, 2010, 2:03 PM


        The difference with the wall outlet is the 15amp breaker in the fuse box. Not to mention you're typically not soldering connectors to a live outlet like we do partially charged batteries.

        My understanding is that F3C Heli has changed the rules to allow 12S packs, so maybe its not a concern.


        --------------------------
        Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org>  <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org> >
        To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org> >
        Sent: Tue Mar 02 12:27:58 2010
        Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts

        Yes I saw that. I also remember seeing that less voltage could also be lethal. We've been exposed to higher voltages since we could crawl to a wall outlet. Higher voltages could probably be used safely. If the maximum voltage is originating in Europe I withdraw my original questions.
        Thanks
        Jim

        -----Original Message-----
        From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org>  [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org> ]On Behalf Of Bob Kane
        Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 9:05 AM
        To: General pattern discussion
        Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts

        Mark Atwood touched on this earlier, it is likely tied to what is considered a potentially lethal voltage level of 42 volts.


        Bob Kane
        getterflash at yahoo.com <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=getterflash@yahoo.com>


        --- On Tue, 3/2/10, J N Hiller <jnhiller at earthlink.net <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=jnhiller@earthlink.net> > wrote:

        > From: J N Hiller <jnhiller at earthlink.net <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=jnhiller@earthlink.net> >
        > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts
        > To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org> >
        > Date: Tuesday, March 2, 2010, 11:07 AM
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > I've been
        > following this discussion and have some
        > questions.
        >
        > Why was a
        > voltage limit written into the rules? Is it international
        > or AMA only? What was
        > the thinking behind it?
        >
        > Thanks
        >
        >
        > Jim
        > Hiller
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > -----Original
        > Message-----
        >
        > From:
        > nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org>
        > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org> ]On Behalf Of Anthony Romano
        >
        > Sent:
        > Tuesday, March 02, 2010 5:30
        > AM
        >
        > To:
        > nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        >
        > Subject: Re:
        > [NSRCA-discussion]
        > Max volts
        >
        >
        >
        > Keep
        > this line of
        > thinking in mind next time we talk about weight limits! Or
        > any other rules
        > proposal.
        >
        >
        >
        > Anthony
        >
        >
        >
        > > From: burtona at atmc.net <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=burtona@atmc.net>
        >
        > > To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        >
        > > Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 22:45:57 -0500
        >
        > > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts
        >
        > >
        >
        > > OK, So I have a question. Is knowingly and
        > purposefully violating the
        > intent
        >
        > > and letter of the rules to gain a performance
        > advantage called cheating?
        >
        > > ....... Just asking!
        >
        > > Dave Burton
        >
        > >
        >
        > > -----Original Message-----
        >
        > > From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org>
        >
        > > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org> ] On
        > Behalf Of James
        > Oddino
        >
        > > Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 7:16 PM
        >
        > > To: General pattern discussion
        >
        > > 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 <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=getterflash@yahoo.com>
        >
        > > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > > > --- On Mon, 3/1/10, krishlan fitzsimmons
        > <homeremodeling2003 at yahoo.com <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=homeremodeling2003@yahoo.com> >
        >
        > > wrote:
        >
        > > >
        >
        > > >> From: krishlan fitzsimmons
        > <homeremodeling2003 at yahoo.com <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=homeremodeling2003@yahoo.com> >
        >
        > > >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts
        >
        > > >> To: chad at f3acanada.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=chad@f3acanada.org> , "General pattern
        > discussion"
        >
        > > <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion@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 <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=chad@f3acanada.org> >
        >
        > > >> To:
        >
        > > >> nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion@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 <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org>
        >
        > > >>>>>
        > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@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://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        >
        > > >>>>>>
        >
        > > >>
        > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
        >
        > > >>>>>
        >
        > > >>>>>
        >
        > > >>
        > _______________________________________________
        >
        > > >>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
        >
        > > >>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        >
        > > >>>>>
        > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
        >
        > > >>>>>
        >
        > > >>>>>
        >
        > > >>
        > _______________________________________________
        >
        > > >>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing
        >
        > > >> list
        >
        > > >>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        >
        > > >>>>>
        > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
        >
        > > >>>>
        >
        > > >>>>
        > _______________________________________________
        >
        > > >>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
        >
        > > >>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        >
        > > >>>>
        > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
        >
        > > >>>
        >
        > > >>>
        > _______________________________________________
        >
        > > >>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
        >
        > > >>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        >
        > > >>>
        > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
        >
        > > >>>
        >
        > > >>
        > _______________________________________________
        >
        > > >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
        >
        > > >> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@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://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        >
        > > >>
        > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
        >
        > > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > > > _______________________________________________
        >
        > > > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
        >
        > > > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        >
        > > >
        > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
        >
        > >
        >
        > > _______________________________________________
        >
        > > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
        >
        > > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        >
        > >
        > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
        >
        > > No virus found in this incoming message.
        >
        > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        >
        > > Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2715 -
        > Release Date: 03/01/10
        >
        > > 14:34:00
        >
        > >
        >
        > > _______________________________________________
        >
        > > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
        >
        > > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        >
        > >
        > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Hotmail:
        > Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection.
        > Sign
        > up
        > now.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
        >
        > _______________________________________________
        > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
        > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion



        _______________________________________________
        NSRCA-discussion mailing list
        NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

        _______________________________________________
        NSRCA-discussion mailing list
        NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
        _______________________________________________
        NSRCA-discussion mailing list
        NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc564.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
        http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion






More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list