<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Verdana
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>Outlaw the regulators on every YS!!!<br><br><hr>From: joddino@socal.rr.com<br>Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 15:29:56 -0800<br>To: nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<br>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts<br><br>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=unicode">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft SafeHTML">What the guys are talking about is designing an ESC that compensates for varying input voltages. To make a rule against something so obviously good is crazy. It would be like prohibiting voltage regulators on our airborne RC system packs. Or prohibiting the use of circuits that compensate for temperature changes in our systems. I'm for simplifying the rules and regs. The fewer the better. Define the size of the plane and the maneuvers to be performed and anything you can do to make it fly better is okay. We want liberty not equality.<div><br></div><div>Jim</div><div><br></div><div><br><div><div>On Mar 2, 2010, at 8:15 AM, <a href="mailto:rcmaster199@aol.com">rcmaster199@aol.com</a> wrote:</div><br class=ecxApple-interchange-newline><blockquote><font color=black size=2 face=arial>
<div>I had a brief conversation with Dean Pappas on this subject recently. Dean explained that some folks have been advocates of programming the ESC to do some footwork at various stages of battery use. He explained to me just how easy this is to do physically. It seems a few have mentioned something similar in this thread.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I am not that concerned about raising the voltage of the battery as I see this as a somewhat clear violation of the FAI code. I am more concerned about what and how the ESC is "programmed" . I would like for some one with the electronic/software pedigree to explain to me how programming adjustable rates of voltage potential and making these adjustments automatically, does not constitute a programming violation within the rules as they exist today. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>When the rules were written, we were clearly dealing with RADIO pre-programmed sequences and the like, no gyros, etc. However I would argue that rate auto adjustments that are definitely possible with the ESC's of today, also qualify as a violation of said rules. Someone should sit down and think this through...I could be convinced otherwise but it needs to be a good argument</div>
<div> </div>
<div>MattK</div>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div style="clear:both"></div>
<br>
<br>
<div style="font-size:10pt;color:black;font-family:arial,helvetica">-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Anthony Romano <<a href="mailto:anthonyr105@hotmail.com">anthonyr105@hotmail.com</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
Sent: Tue, Mar 2, 2010 8:29 am<br>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts<br>
<br>
<div id="ecxAOLMsgPart_3_a1464e77-3c63-4f8d-b134-28eaec9f2cea">
<style>
.ExternalClass #ecxAOLMsgPart_3_a1464e77-3c63-4f8d-b134-28eaec9f2cea td
{color:black;}
.ExternalClass #ecxAOLMsgPart_3_a1464e77-3c63-4f8d-b134-28eaec9f2cea .ecxhmmessage P
{padding:0px;}
.ExternalClass #ecxAOLMsgPart_3_a1464e77-3c63-4f8d-b134-28eaec9f2cea body.ecxhmmessage
{font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;}
</style>
Keep this line of thinking in mind next time we talk about weight limits! Or any other rules proposal.<br>
<br>
Anthony<br>
<br>
> From: <a href="mailto:burtona@atmc.net">burtona@atmc.net</a><br>
> To: <a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 22:45:57 -0500<br>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts<br>
> <br>
> OK, So I have a question. Is knowingly and purposefully violating the intent<br>
> and letter of the rules to gain a performance advantage called cheating?<br>
> ....... Just asking!<br>
> Dave Burton<br>
> <br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: <a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> [<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org?">mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>] On Behalf Of James Oddino<br>
> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 7:16 PM<br>
> To: General pattern discussion<br>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts<br>
> <br>
> I have the functional concept that solves the rules problem. Picture a 10S<br>
> pack positive lead wired to the common of a switch with two poles, a piece<br>
> of wire connected from one pole to a pole on a second two pole switch with<br>
> its common connected to the ESC. Between the other two poles we place our<br>
> 11th cell. When the 10S pack is above 37.5 volts the 11th cell is bypassed<br>
> and when it is below, like it will be during vertical maneuvers late in<br>
> flight, the 11th cell is put in series to boost the voltage to up to 41.7<br>
> volts. At no time is the voltage over the spec.<br>
> <br>
> Having said that, I believe the 10S system provides adequate power with the<br>
> right motor at all times of flight even if the voltage drops to 35 volts.<br>
> <br>
> Jim<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> On Mar 1, 2010, at 8:59 AM, Bob Kane wrote:<br>
> <br>
> > Going higher and regulating down would be against the rules, the max volts<br>
> is still limited to 42.56. <br>
> > <br>
> > Bob Kane<br>
> > <a href="mailto:getterflash@yahoo.com">getterflash@yahoo.com</a><br>
> > <br>
> > <br>
> > --- On Mon, 3/1/10, krishlan fitzsimmons <<a href="mailto:homeremodeling2003@yahoo.com">homeremodeling2003@yahoo.com</a>><br>
> wrote:<br>
> > <br>
> >> From: krishlan fitzsimmons <<a href="mailto:homeremodeling2003@yahoo.com">homeremodeling2003@yahoo.com</a>><br>
> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts<br>
> >> To: <a href="mailto:chad@f3acanada.org">chad@f3acanada.org</a>, "General pattern discussion"<br>
> <<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>><br>
> >> Date: Monday, March 1, 2010, 9:54 AM<br>
> >> <br>
> >> Couldn't we go to a higher voltage and<br>
> >> regulate it back down? A contstant 42.56v would be nice!<br>
> >> <br>
> >> Chris <br>
> >> <br>
> >> <br>
> >> <br>
> >> <br>
> >> <br>
> >> <br>
> >> <br>
> >> <br>
> >> <br>
> >> From: Chad<br>
> >> Northeast <<a href="mailto:chad@f3acanada.org">chad@f3acanada.org</a>><br>
> >> To:<br>
> >> <a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> >> Sent: Sun,<br>
> >> February 28, 2010 8:48:48 PM<br>
> >> Subject: Re:<br>
> >> [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts<br>
> >> <br>
> >> You would be at about 50% capacity at 3.85 ish volts/cell<br>
> >> (resting open circuit), so unless you up the capacity you<br>
> >> will have a pretty restricted flight time.<br>
> >> <br>
> >> Chad<br>
> >> <br>
> >> On 10-02-28 9:25 PM, Ron Van Putte wrote:<br>
> >>> That stirs a wild thought in my brain. Fully<br>
> >> charged packs don't stay at 4.2 volts per cell very<br>
> >> long. On the other hand, once the initial charge<br>
> >> voltage is burned off by a constant load, the voltage loss<br>
> >> curve "flattens out". What if you put fully<br>
> >> charged 6S and a 5S packs in series and "burn them<br>
> >> down" to 3.869 volts per cell (a total of 42.56<br>
> >> volts for an 11-cell pack) so they were legal for<br>
> >> use. Would the voltage of this depleted 11S pack be<br>
> >> higher than a fully charged 10S pack at the end of a typical<br>
> >> flight? If the end-of-flight voltage might be<br>
> >> significantly higher for the 11S pack vice a 10S pack, it<br>
> >> would be worth investigating, even considering the extra<br>
> >> weight of the additional cell. Come on you electronic<br>
> >> gurus, show me where I'm wrong.<br>
> >>> <br>
> >>> Ron Van Putte<br>
> >>> <br>
> >>> On Feb 28, 2010, at 10:00 PM, James Oddino wrote:<br>
> >>> <br>
> >>>> What comes after ...? Does it specify a load<br>
> >> or any other conditions? Is it measured during the<br>
> >> noise test and have a minimum value?<br>
> >>>> <br>
> >>>> Just stirring the pot, Jim O<br>
> >>>> <br>
> >>>> <br>
> >>>> On Feb 28, 2010, at 5:21 PM, John Fuqua wrote:<br>
> >>>> <br>
> >>>>> No its not (assuming we are talking RC<br>
> >> Aerobatics). Try page RCA-2 para 4.1<br>
> >>>>> which<br>
> >> states "Electrically-powered model aircraft are<br>
> >> limited to a maximum<br>
> >>>>> of 42.56 volts.."<br>
> >>>>> <br>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----<br>
> >>>>> From: <a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> >>>>> [<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org?">mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>]<br>
> >> On Behalf Of Ron Van Putte<br>
> >>>>> Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 7:07 PM<br>
> >>>>> To: General pattern discussion<br>
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Max volts<br>
> >>>>> <br>
> >>>>> It's in the general rules, not in the R/C<br>
> >> section.<br>
> >>>>> <br>
> >>>>> <br>
> >>>>> On Feb 28, 2010, at 6:50 PM, Jim Quinn wrote:<br>
> >>>>> <br>
> >>>>>> Where can I find the rule<br>
> >> for max volts?<br>
> >>>>>> <br>
> >>>>>> <br>
> >> _______________________________________________<br>
> >>>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
> >>>>>> <a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> >>>>>> <br>
> >> <a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>
> >>>>> <br>
> >>>>> <br>
> >> _______________________________________________<br>
> >>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
> >>>>> <a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> >>>>> <a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>
> >>>>> <br>
> >>>>> <br>
> >> _______________________________________________<br>
> >>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing<br>
> >> list<br>
> >>>>> <a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> >>>>> <a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>
> >>>> <br>
> >>>> _______________________________________________<br>
> >>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
> >>>> <a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> >>>> <a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>
> >>> <br>
> >>> _______________________________________________<br>
> >>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
> >>> <a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> >>> <a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>
> >>> <br>
> >> _______________________________________________<br>
> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
> >> <a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> >> <a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>
> >> <br>
> >> <br>
> >> <br>
> >> <br>
> >> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----<br>
> >> <br>
> >> _______________________________________________<br>
> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
> >> <a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> >> <a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>
> > <br>
> > <br>
> > <br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> > <a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>
> <br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>
> No virus found in this incoming message.<br>
> Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com/" target="_blank">www.avg.com</a> <br>
> Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2715 - Release Date: 03/01/10<br>
> 14:34:00<br>
> <br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>
<br>
<hr>
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. <a href="http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469226/direct/01/" target="_blank">Sign up now.</a> = </div>
<div id="ecxAOLMsgPart_4_a1464e77-3c63-4f8d-b134-28eaec9f2cea" style="font-size:12px;color:#000;font-family:Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, Sans-Serif;background-color:#fff"><pre style="font-size:9pt"><tt>_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a>
</tt></pre></div>
</div>
</font>
_______________________________________________<br>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</blockquote></div><br></div> <br /><hr />Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. <a href='http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469227/direct/01/' target='_new'>Sign up now.</a></body>
</html>