| Author |
Message |
    
Timebandit
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2012 - 04:30 pm: | 
|
I don't think that conclusions can be made based on this photo.
I do. I conclude that the voltages displayed in the photo *SUCK*.
If you're going to fake a voltage readout, at least fake a number that will reliably charge the battery.
(Message edited by timebandit on January 27, 2012) |
Zac4mac
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2012 - 10:15 pm: |
|
It's a Photochop TB.
No key in the switch - can't be anything on the display...
Very possible to see that voltage when motor is cold and idling...
I'll check Loretta, but that looks like what I normally see while suiting up.
Z
Oh yeah nothing mysterious about my curiosity about the date codes on the stators.
Just seemed odd to me. |
Timebandit
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2012 - 11:32 pm: |
|
> It's a Photochop
> I know. I was just pointing out that to this very day, there is no optimal charging system for an 1125 based bike.
The real problem isn't that the photo might be faked. The real problem is the perception that those voltages are OK.
(Message edited by timebandit on January 27, 2012) |
Zac4mac
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2012 - 09:46 am: |
|
Back story - Loretta was delivered to me 18DEC07, so she is a little over 4 years old.
She is(obviously) an 08 1125R and has the original battery, rotor/stator and R/R.
She does have a 2009 IC with the 6.1 rev firmware, I saw a spurious LF light yesterday, tho no CEL.
Yesterday evening as I was getting ready for a short trip into town, I started Loretta and let her warm up as I got ready.
She idled for ~10 minutes before I took off. Ambient was 38dF.
in the first pic, she was cold, so no fans running.
The next two are with fans.
I have zero electrical issues from day one.
Z |
Bextreme04
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2012 - 12:18 pm: |
|
my big diesel truck with two alternators and two 850cca batteries charges at 13.4v most of the time... no issues. Not sure why 13.6v is horrible voltage, seems to me if the system is producing sufficient amperage at that 13.6 volts then it should charge and run everything great. In fact now that i think about it my srt-4 neon charged at about 13.6v too |
Timebandit
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2012 - 02:04 pm: |
|
You guys have selective hearing. I never said the voltage wasn't adequate to charge the battery -- I said it was marginally adequate, and that it would result in SLOW charging:
That's a marginally adequate output that will take a long time to charge a battery. Most 12-volt vehicle systems charge in the range of 13.8 - 14.4 VDC. > 14VDC is what it takes to rapidly charge the battery.
Rate of charge is dependent upon the electromotive force gradient between the charging system and the cell. Decreased gradient = slower charging. This is basic Chemistry 101, Introductory Chemisty for non-Majors.
Zac, your photos exemplify why the 2008 charging system is bad at idle. At those RPM you're not charging the battery, you're draining it. You need more RPM to get the 2008 stator to produce enough voltage to give you a charge. The reason that you don't have problems is that you don't leave the bike in that condition where it's constantly draining the battery. You go out and ride it and you get a slow charge. If you have doubts about this, let it sit and run through a tank while idling, then re-start it. |
Timebandit
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2012 - 03:46 pm: |
|
BX, you're missing a few important points - First, both of those caged vehicles have ALTERNATORS that can vary the output of the charging system. Our bike has a stator/rotor and a shunt regulator, and can't do that. It operates full-duty all the time. Second, you can't necessarily directly compare voltages from one vehicle system to another. The bike has an AGM battery and the car/truck may have PB-acid batteries. Charging paradigms/voltages are different, and direct comparison of voltages observed on your car/truck isn't necessarily a meaningful comparison. Third, modern automobile voltage regulators are microprocessor controlled to change charging system voltage depending upon the state of the battery. We don't know whether the Ducati shunt regulator does this. Fourth, your observations regarding "most of the time" aren't relevant to bulk charging performance. Those voltages you cited are not adequate for bulk charging -- either for a Pb-Acid battery or an AGM battery. They are only adequate for float charging of a fully charged battery. There's no point in observing a float charge voltage and commenting that that's how your car/truck look "most of the time", because most of the time your battery is not being bulk charged. That renders the "most of the time" observation inapplicable to assessment of charging system performance. When you look at charging system voltage, it's important to know whether you're looking at a voltage in a bulk charging state of a float/maintenance state. Knowing the peak charging voltage would be more helpful.
It appears that the voltage displayed in that IC photo was a floating charge voltage output, not a bulk charge voltage output.
For reference, here's a graph that depicts the different charge paradigms in a battery charger / tending type of device. (Not a vehicle regulator.) Notice that 13.6V is inadequate for both bulk charging and absorption charging. It's only adequate for float charging, a paradigm in which the battery only absorbs minimal energy.
It would be very interesting to know how intelligent the Ducati regulator on our bikes really is. I'd be particularly interested in knowing if it's ISO IUoU compliant. The peak voltages that we see of about 14.0 are pathetically low for a bulk charging operation. The lower voltages of 13.5 are even more pathetic, unless their objective is for the charging system to always be trickle charging the bike. That would explain why some guys have battery problems. |
Timebandit
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2012 - 05:40 pm: |
|
seems to me if the system is producing sufficient amperage at that 13.6 volts then it should charge and run everything great.
No. There's a fundamental difference between amperage and voltage and it seems that you're using them interchangably.
Whether or not a charging system transfers power to the battery is dependent dependent upon charging system voltage relative to battery voltage. The difference in voltage defines the amount of electromotive force that's available to charge the cell. The amount of current flowing into the battery reflects the amount of change in it's charge state.
The total observed current output of the alternator doesn't tell you much about the amount of current flowing into the battery, as the total amount of current provided by the alternator is an artifact of total electrical system power demand, including accessories.
13.6 volts is a weak, trickle/float charging voltage. It's a very anemic voltage for charging a battery. Voltages that low are designed for maintenance of a charged battery, not for charging of a discharged battery. If your alternator is supplying lots of current at 13.6 volts, that current is not being used to charge your battery. It's being used to power accessories in your car/truck. |
Bextreme04
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2012 - 07:11 pm: |
|
sigh... once again there is no possible answer except for timebandits... it is all a matter of opinion and your's is obviously the only one with any knowledge and experience behind it. As for AGM batteries if you put too much constant charge to them you will overheat them and boil the acid out of the mats. I know this because we had a big problem with hawker military AGM batteries doing this when they were charging full time at 28.7V instead of pulse charging. Pulsetech looked at the system and re-flashed the VR's to change their program to pulse and we stopped burning out batteries. I am aware of the difference between voltage and amperage and everything else you have decided to post because you obviously think you are the only smart person on the planet but none of it applies to what we are talking about here and you have floated right over. 13.6V sucks for bulk charging... <80% charge or for absorption charge <=80% but is exactly what you need if you have a fully charged battery and are just maintaining. As everyone has said there is nothing wrong with that voltage unless the battery is dead or very low.
Now if the battery was dead and you jumped it to start the bike and it was only charging at 13.6V then yes... the voltage sucks. |
Timebandit
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2012 - 11:25 pm: |
|
once again there is no possible answer except for timebandits...
There are plenty of possible answers -- some right and some wrong. When I find opinions that are refuted by facts, I'll call them out. If you have an opinion that's in disagreement, please feel free to do the same. This kind of exchange of ideas helps to weed out the wrong answers and helps people who are not experts in the field to better understand the problem.
Setting aside opinions, the facts are that that 13.5V is a trickle-charging EMF that is intended to prevent discharge in a battery that's already been charged. That magnitude of EMF is designed to prevent a battery that's already charged from discharging, it's not intended to charge it.
Keeping this conversation on-topic -- EMF matters in charging a battery. If EMF is sufficient, the battery will charge. If it is insufficient, the battery will not charge. Given sufficient EMF, there are many charging paradigms that can be employed to vary the duty cycle of the charging system to control the rate of charge in a battery. They all have in common that they will work if and only if EMF is adequate; they will not work if EMF is inadequate. As you pointed out, pulse charging can be used to vary the duty cycle so that a battery is not over charged. Unfortunately, that example from anecdotal experience in one in which EMF was adequate and the duty cycle had to be limited; it has nothing whatsoever to do with the case in point where EMF is inadequate and charging will not occur. The example only serves to confuse people with irrelevant information. When EMF is inadequate, varying the charger's duty cycle in an effort to protect the battery from overcharging serves no purpose. The example is irrelevant to the discussion. Pulse charging and duty-cycle variation can not change anything if EMF is inadequate to charge the battery. It's important that the issue of inadequate EMF isn't obfuscated by irrelevant tales of anecdotal experience. |
Zac4mac
| | Posted on Monday, January 30, 2012 - 12:33 am: |
|
Bob
I have quite a bit of experience with shallow AND deep cycle lead acid, NiCd, NiMH and several variants of Lithium cells.
I worked on mobile robots(AGVs) for several years.
I agree that at the voltages I showed, the battery would not charge, since 12.8 is nominal full charge for a 12 volt AGM or liquid lead-acid battery and no delta V - no chargee.
I also know that saying "run a tank at idle" is like the lab rats diet, in the 70s, that equaled a human drinking 50 gallons of cyclamate sweetened kool-aid to get cancer.
The longest Loretta sees idle speeds is while I suit up. Anything over 3krpm and she charges fine and that's where I play 98% of the time.
I DO use a tender, but very sporadically. It's usually plugged into one of my car's batteries since they don't get driven often.
Suffice to say, if there was a serious problem with the 08 charging system, I would at least, be on my 2nd or 3rd battery by now.
I am still on the one Loretta shipped with.
Enough FUD OK?
Unless you want to run a full electric suit and Christmas tree lights, the 08 system functions just fine.
I run my heated grips almost full time, the HID lows are on all the time and the fans run practically all the time too. Even when it's 20 dF outside.
Bitching about the 08 system being inadequate is EXACTLY why HD had a knee-jerk reaction and upped the wattage for 09.
We all know how well THAT turned out...
Take what works and walk away happy, I have.
Zack |
Timebandit
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - 03:06 pm: |
|
Zac, in the big scheme of things, I'm with you on all of this -- I agree that the 2008 system works great as long as you don't maintain the bike at idle and as long as you don't overload it.
My point has never been to spread FUD -- exactly the opposite! Every post that I've made in this forum has been an effort to clarify/ameliorate FUD by explaining electronic principles with facts.
On the subject of FUD, this forum has been a major disseminator of FUD regarding the electrical systems. This site has an entire forum filled with disinformation that's come from people who have strong opinions about the 1125 charging systems, without having a real in-depth understanding of how charging systems are actually designed.
The 2009 charging system and the harness update is a good example of this. The amount of disinformation about the harness update being spread on this site was incredible. Until a week or two ago, nobody had accurately explained how the 3-phase/single-phase charging harness update actually worked, and the perceptions about it's functions were ass-backwards. People on this forum gave advice that the bike should be ridden below 5000 RPM to protect the stator. That advice turned out to be 100% wrong. Spreading facts helped to eliminate that misconception. Overall the result was good for everyone, although a few peoples' opinions and advice had to be proven wrong in the process.
http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/messages/290 431/665120.html
This tangent we've gone on about the charging voltage displayed in the dashboard photo has gotten completely out of hand. It was just a simple comment from me to AC to mention that the voltage displayed was marginally adequate. That's all I said. Unfortunately, those factual comments weren't liked by people whose opinions are based on emotion rather than solid facts. It's those emotional reactions that spread the FUD, not the facts. |
Hildstrom
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2012 - 04:55 pm: |
|
I updated my project page with new (to me) information about the FH012AA. I initially thought it was a series switching regulator that would reduce stator current, I was definitely mistaken. There is a great link at the bottom to an experiment that compares the FH012AA to Compufire.
http://hildstrom.com/projects/buellregulator/index .html |
Timebandit
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2012 - 07:15 pm: |
|
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38765620/SSR-vs-FH012AA |
|
