[NSRCA-discussion] Main battery redundant lead for receiver

John Gayer jgghome at comcast.net
Tue Jan 24 11:10:18 AKST 2012 

My 350 mah 2s battery with some velcro is 30 grams. A tech-aero 
regulator with switch wired with a jst connector for the battery and no 
charge cable weighs 25 grams.
This is not the standard configuration but Ed will wire it this way if 
you ask. I use a jst as most batteries in this size (250-500 mah 2s) 
come pre-wired with a jst connector, therefore no rewiring or splices.

John


On 1/24/2012 10:48 AM, Wayne Galligan wrote:
> How much does a redundant LiPo and regulator weight?
> I guess I have been away from this stuff too long... these electrons 
> are heavy things.
> Wayne Galligan
> *From:* Anthony Romano <mailto:anthonyr105 at hotmail.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 24, 2012 10:38 AM
> *To:* nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
> <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Main battery redundant lead for receiver
> Because an 1100mah A123 is 39g for the cell alone!
>
> Anthony
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: wcgalligan at att.net
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:30:08 -0600
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Main battery redundant lead for receiver
>
> After all this discussion about extra wire connectors and regulators, 
> etc., etc.   Interesting as it seems.
> Why not use an 1100 mil A123 pack for the receiver without the 
> regulator.//I haven't weighed the difference but it couldn't be that much.
> Sounds like your going for a lot extra work to save a few "Grams".
> Simplicity rules.
> Wayne Galligan
> *From:* Keith Hoard <mailto:khoard at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 24, 2012 10:01 AM
> *To:* General pattern discussion 
> <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Main battery redundant lead for receiver
> Anthony,
>
>    On a typical flight, I'm guessing the radio only uses around 
> 100-150Mah of power, while the motor is using 4000Mah, so that's about 
> 4% more draw on those two cells.  In practice, I haven't been able to 
> see any difference in the radio cells when I hook them up to my 
> charger at the end of a flight.  Sometimes cells #1 & #2 are the high 
> cells after a flight, so I think the power draw of the radio is 
> negligible to our motor packs.
>
> The problem with two regulators plugged into the same 10S (or 5S) pack 
> is that you are creating a dead short between the cells thru the 
> ground wires (typically a straight wire thru the regulator).
>
> Say you plug Regulator #1 into cells #1&2, and Regulator #2 into cells 
> #6&7.  The regulator's */ground /*wires now have 5 cells of voltage 
> potential (5 X 4.2V = 21Volts) between them since they are plugged 
> into cells # 1 and #6.  When those two ground wires are then plugged 
> into your receiver either thru a switch or direct connection the magic 
> smoke will escape and your retailer will rejoice.
>
> Also, if you have both of your regulators plugged into your motor pack 
> and the packs eject like Goose in Top Gun, you've lost both of your 
> redundant power sources.  However, if you use a tiny 2S LiPo that is 
> physically separated and secured inside your plane, you have both 
> electrical and physical redundancy.
>
> Hmmm, just thought of something . . . maybe we should tie down the 
> receiver so the main regulator can't take the receiver out with it. . 
> . so many contingencies, so little weight . . .
>
> Keith Hoard
> Collierville, TN
> khoard at gmail.com <mailto:khoard at gmail.com>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Anthony Romano 
> <anthonyr105 at hotmail.com <mailto:anthonyr105 at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Seems like a great idea but I have two questions. Do the packs
>     come down out of balance since two cells are serving extra load?
>     Is there a problem with parallel operation of two regulators?
>
>     Thanks,
>
>     Anthony
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     From: joddino at socal.rr.com <mailto:joddino at socal.rr.com>
>     Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 15:25:00 -0800
>     To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>     <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>     Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Main battery redundant lead for
>     receiver
>
>     I've been using this setup for sometime and it is working great. 
>     I have my two cell LiPo charged to 7.5 volts and it is connected
>     to a 6.0 volt regulator into the receiver.  The cable connected to
>     the balance connector on the "bottom" 5S is connected to a 6.3
>     volt regulator so it supplies all the current to the system and
>     the 2S pack never needs charging.  I'm using an 800 mAh pack but
>     it could be even smaller.
>     Jim O
>     On Jan 23, 2012, at 2:09 PM, Scott McHarg wrote:
>
>         Guys,
>            Chris Moon just e-mailed me about some leads that were done
>         at the factory.  These leads run off your balance leads to a
>         voltage regulator and allow your main battery pack to be
>         utilized as a redundant receiver battery.  It is NOT meant to
>         be a primary but it will save 20+ grams if you're running 2 rx
>         batteries.  You still have to run the 2nd regulator for true
>         redundancy but you eliminate the 2nd battery.  These leads are
>         factory made and eliminate the need to make them yourself with
>         the concern about plugging in to the wrong cell.  I know in my
>         article, I was pretty much against doing this as a backup but,
>         with Chris having this made at the factory, he has all but
>         eliminated making a mistake by tying to the wrong cell.  I
>         have the link that I'll e-mail you off-list or you can just go
>         to his website.  I don't want to break the NSRCA list rules by
>         advertising for him even though he advertises with the NSRCA. 
>         The leads are only $3.99 each and are found under the
>         Connectors/Adapters listing.
>
>         Thank,
>         Scott
>
>         -- 
>         *Scott A. McHarg*
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>         NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>         <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>         http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>     _______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion
>     mailing list NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>     <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>     http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>     NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>     <mailto: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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20120124/4da4386c/attachment.html>

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list