Forums

Car battery matching with alternator

Started by cameo October 28, 2014
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:18:37 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 10/30/2014 2:13 PM, cameo wrote: >> On 10/29/2014 1:27 PM, rickman wrote: >>> On 10/29/2014 2:49 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 14:38:36 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 10/29/2014 12:03 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 02:50:37 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Would that temperature compensation be the battery temperature? >>>>>>> How is >>>>>>> that measured? Is it assumed that the battery temperature is the >>>>>>> same >>>>>>> as the air in the engine compartment? >>>>>> >>>>>> Yep, that is the assumption... a bad one. Back in the '60's, when I >>>>>> was designing alternator regulators for _all_ of the American car >>>>>> companies, I tried to get the sensing portion put at the battery, but >>>>>> the companies were too cheap... takes an extra wire :-( >>>>>> >>>>>> I did come up with an interesting scheme that could do remote sense >>>>>> _without_ an extra wire, but it was also deemed too expensive. >>>>> >>>>> There is also the rule, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" The >>>>> current >>>>> method seems to work pretty well. What would the consumer get from a >>>>> more accurate battery temperature measurement? >>>> >>>> Because of temperature mis-match most charging systems over- or >>>> under-charge the battery. >>>> >>>> Over-charging shortens battery life by overheating and >>>> water/electrolyte loss. >>>> >>>> "The current method" is still what I designed almost 50 years ago ;-) >>> >>> I think that is the point. It works plenty well enough so that I can't >>> remember the last time I bought a battery. I just know my 17 year old >>> truck is on its third battery.. well, fourth if you count the one that >>> was replaced under warranty after just 3.5 years. There is no problem >>> to solve, so don't try to fix it. >>> >> What's wrong with incremental improvements over time? That's what the >> whole car industry has been doing ever since Henry Ford. > >Nothing is wrong with incremental improvements. But what improvement >is needed? Will this make the batter last longer? I've yet to read >anything saying that.
You missed my post ?>:-} ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
On 10/30/2014 2:28 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:18:37 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 10/30/2014 2:13 PM, cameo wrote: >>> On 10/29/2014 1:27 PM, rickman wrote: >>>> On 10/29/2014 2:49 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 14:38:36 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 10/29/2014 12:03 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>>>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 02:50:37 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Would that temperature compensation be the battery temperature? >>>>>>>> How is >>>>>>>> that measured? Is it assumed that the battery temperature is the >>>>>>>> same >>>>>>>> as the air in the engine compartment? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yep, that is the assumption... a bad one. Back in the '60's, when I >>>>>>> was designing alternator regulators for _all_ of the American car >>>>>>> companies, I tried to get the sensing portion put at the battery, but >>>>>>> the companies were too cheap... takes an extra wire :-( >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I did come up with an interesting scheme that could do remote sense >>>>>>> _without_ an extra wire, but it was also deemed too expensive. >>>>>> >>>>>> There is also the rule, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" The >>>>>> current >>>>>> method seems to work pretty well. What would the consumer get from a >>>>>> more accurate battery temperature measurement? >>>>> >>>>> Because of temperature mis-match most charging systems over- or >>>>> under-charge the battery. >>>>> >>>>> Over-charging shortens battery life by overheating and >>>>> water/electrolyte loss. >>>>> >>>>> "The current method" is still what I designed almost 50 years ago ;-) >>>> >>>> I think that is the point. It works plenty well enough so that I can't >>>> remember the last time I bought a battery. I just know my 17 year old >>>> truck is on its third battery.. well, fourth if you count the one that >>>> was replaced under warranty after just 3.5 years. There is no problem >>>> to solve, so don't try to fix it. >>>> >>> What's wrong with incremental improvements over time? That's what the >>> whole car industry has been doing ever since Henry Ford. >> >> Nothing is wrong with incremental improvements. But what improvement >> is needed? Will this make the batter last longer? I've yet to read >> anything saying that. > > You missed my post ?>:-}
No, I read it. Didn't see anything to reply to. -- Rick
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:18:37 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> Gave us:

>On 10/30/2014 2:13 PM, cameo wrote: >> On 10/29/2014 1:27 PM, rickman wrote: >>> On 10/29/2014 2:49 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 14:38:36 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 10/29/2014 12:03 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 02:50:37 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Would that temperature compensation be the battery temperature? >>>>>>> How is >>>>>>> that measured? Is it assumed that the battery temperature is the >>>>>>> same >>>>>>> as the air in the engine compartment? >>>>>> >>>>>> Yep, that is the assumption... a bad one. Back in the '60's, when I >>>>>> was designing alternator regulators for _all_ of the American car >>>>>> companies, I tried to get the sensing portion put at the battery, but >>>>>> the companies were too cheap... takes an extra wire :-( >>>>>> >>>>>> I did come up with an interesting scheme that could do remote sense >>>>>> _without_ an extra wire, but it was also deemed too expensive. >>>>> >>>>> There is also the rule, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" The >>>>> current >>>>> method seems to work pretty well. What would the consumer get from a >>>>> more accurate battery temperature measurement? >>>> >>>> Because of temperature mis-match most charging systems over- or >>>> under-charge the battery. >>>> >>>> Over-charging shortens battery life by overheating and >>>> water/electrolyte loss. >>>> >>>> "The current method" is still what I designed almost 50 years ago ;-) >>> >>> I think that is the point. It works plenty well enough so that I can't >>> remember the last time I bought a battery. I just know my 17 year old >>> truck is on its third battery.. well, fourth if you count the one that >>> was replaced under warranty after just 3.5 years. There is no problem >>> to solve, so don't try to fix it. >>> >> What's wrong with incremental improvements over time? That's what the >> whole car industry has been doing ever since Henry Ford. > >Nothing is wrong with incremental improvements. But what improvement >is needed? Will this make the batter last longer? I've yet to read >anything saying that.
What about the alternator? They fry too. Decades ago, lead acid batteries were dirt cheap, and slapping in another of those was cheaper and easier than a new alternator. Now, both the task complexity, and the price are closer together, so longevity needs to be engineered in to both in a more focussed manner. One does not see '73 Cadillac batteries in a '15 Chevy Monte Carlo. The charging gear differ too, and the watchdog charge manager on that alternator did not previously exist.
On 10/30/2014 1:40 PM, rickman wrote:
> On 10/30/2014 2:28 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >> On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:18:37 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On 10/30/2014 2:13 PM, cameo wrote: >>>> On 10/29/2014 1:27 PM, rickman wrote: >>>>> On 10/29/2014 2:49 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 14:38:36 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 10/29/2014 12:03 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>>>>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 02:50:37 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Would that temperature compensation be the battery temperature? >>>>>>>>> How is >>>>>>>>> that measured? Is it assumed that the battery temperature is the >>>>>>>>> same >>>>>>>>> as the air in the engine compartment? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yep, that is the assumption... a bad one. Back in the '60's, >>>>>>>> when I >>>>>>>> was designing alternator regulators for _all_ of the American car >>>>>>>> companies, I tried to get the sensing portion put at the >>>>>>>> battery, but >>>>>>>> the companies were too cheap... takes an extra wire :-( >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I did come up with an interesting scheme that could do remote sense >>>>>>>> _without_ an extra wire, but it was also deemed too expensive. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is also the rule, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" The >>>>>>> current >>>>>>> method seems to work pretty well. What would the consumer get >>>>>>> from a >>>>>>> more accurate battery temperature measurement? >>>>>> >>>>>> Because of temperature mis-match most charging systems over- or >>>>>> under-charge the battery. >>>>>> >>>>>> Over-charging shortens battery life by overheating and >>>>>> water/electrolyte loss. >>>>>> >>>>>> "The current method" is still what I designed almost 50 years ago ;-) >>>>> >>>>> I think that is the point. It works plenty well enough so that I >>>>> can't >>>>> remember the last time I bought a battery. I just know my 17 year old >>>>> truck is on its third battery.. well, fourth if you count the one that >>>>> was replaced under warranty after just 3.5 years. There is no problem >>>>> to solve, so don't try to fix it. >>>>> >>>> What's wrong with incremental improvements over time? That's what the >>>> whole car industry has been doing ever since Henry Ford. >>> >>> Nothing is wrong with incremental improvements. But what improvement >>> is needed? Will this make the batter last longer? I've yet to read >>> anything saying that. >> >> You missed my post ?>:-} > > No, I read it. Didn't see anything to reply to. >
Damn! And I thought the horse was dead.
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:40:25 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 10/30/2014 2:28 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >> On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:18:37 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On 10/30/2014 2:13 PM, cameo wrote: >>>> On 10/29/2014 1:27 PM, rickman wrote: >>>>> On 10/29/2014 2:49 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 14:38:36 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 10/29/2014 12:03 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>>>>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 02:50:37 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Would that temperature compensation be the battery temperature? >>>>>>>>> How is >>>>>>>>> that measured? Is it assumed that the battery temperature is the >>>>>>>>> same >>>>>>>>> as the air in the engine compartment? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yep, that is the assumption... a bad one. Back in the '60's, when I >>>>>>>> was designing alternator regulators for _all_ of the American car >>>>>>>> companies, I tried to get the sensing portion put at the battery, but >>>>>>>> the companies were too cheap... takes an extra wire :-( >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I did come up with an interesting scheme that could do remote sense >>>>>>>> _without_ an extra wire, but it was also deemed too expensive. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is also the rule, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" The >>>>>>> current >>>>>>> method seems to work pretty well. What would the consumer get from a >>>>>>> more accurate battery temperature measurement? >>>>>> >>>>>> Because of temperature mis-match most charging systems over- or >>>>>> under-charge the battery. >>>>>> >>>>>> Over-charging shortens battery life by overheating and >>>>>> water/electrolyte loss. >>>>>> >>>>>> "The current method" is still what I designed almost 50 years ago ;-) >>>>> >>>>> I think that is the point. It works plenty well enough so that I can't >>>>> remember the last time I bought a battery. I just know my 17 year old >>>>> truck is on its third battery.. well, fourth if you count the one that >>>>> was replaced under warranty after just 3.5 years. There is no problem >>>>> to solve, so don't try to fix it. >>>>> >>>> What's wrong with incremental improvements over time? That's what the >>>> whole car industry has been doing ever since Henry Ford. >>> >>> Nothing is wrong with incremental improvements. But what improvement >>> is needed? Will this make the batter last longer? I've yet to read >>> anything saying that. >> >> You missed my post ?>:-} > >No, I read it. Didn't see anything to reply to.
Cretin. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:40:25 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> Gave us:

>No, I read it. Didn't see anything to reply to.
A simple face mashing would not be enough bludgeoning to lesson up an immature, hard wired, retarded asswipe like you. Your fucktarded mother and zero effect father should be in prison for the piece of shit result you are. Now, analyst (sic... NO SICK!)... Tell me the difference between what I said to you here, and the horseshit you spewed, to which I gave this reply? You pathetic, cringing little milksop! ... no... WORM!
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 11:57:07 -0700, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
<DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

>On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:40:25 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> Gave us: > >>No, I read it. Didn't see anything to reply to. > > A simple face mashing would not be enough bludgeoning to lesson up an >immature, hard wired, retarded asswipe like you. > > Your fucktarded mother and zero effect father should be in prison for >the piece of shit result you are. > > Now, analyst (sic... NO SICK!)... Tell me the difference between what >I said to you here, and the horseshit you spewed, to which I gave this >reply? > > You pathetic, cringing little milksop! ... no... WORM!
rickman is your typical smug ignoramus. I had been giving him some slack, but I decided to put him back into the do-not-retrieve gmail cretins folder. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
On 10/30/2014 2:51 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:40:25 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 10/30/2014 2:28 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>> On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:18:37 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 10/30/2014 2:13 PM, cameo wrote: >>>>> On 10/29/2014 1:27 PM, rickman wrote: >>>>>> On 10/29/2014 2:49 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>>>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 14:38:36 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 10/29/2014 12:03 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 02:50:37 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Would that temperature compensation be the battery temperature? >>>>>>>>>> How is >>>>>>>>>> that measured? Is it assumed that the battery temperature is the >>>>>>>>>> same >>>>>>>>>> as the air in the engine compartment? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yep, that is the assumption... a bad one. Back in the '60's, when I >>>>>>>>> was designing alternator regulators for _all_ of the American car >>>>>>>>> companies, I tried to get the sensing portion put at the battery, but >>>>>>>>> the companies were too cheap... takes an extra wire :-( >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I did come up with an interesting scheme that could do remote sense >>>>>>>>> _without_ an extra wire, but it was also deemed too expensive. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is also the rule, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" The >>>>>>>> current >>>>>>>> method seems to work pretty well. What would the consumer get from a >>>>>>>> more accurate battery temperature measurement? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Because of temperature mis-match most charging systems over- or >>>>>>> under-charge the battery. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Over-charging shortens battery life by overheating and >>>>>>> water/electrolyte loss. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "The current method" is still what I designed almost 50 years ago ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>> I think that is the point. It works plenty well enough so that I can't >>>>>> remember the last time I bought a battery. I just know my 17 year old >>>>>> truck is on its third battery.. well, fourth if you count the one that >>>>>> was replaced under warranty after just 3.5 years. There is no problem >>>>>> to solve, so don't try to fix it. >>>>>> >>>>> What's wrong with incremental improvements over time? That's what the >>>>> whole car industry has been doing ever since Henry Ford. >>>> >>>> Nothing is wrong with incremental improvements. But what improvement >>>> is needed? Will this make the batter last longer? I've yet to read >>>> anything saying that. >>> >>> You missed my post ?>:-} >> >> No, I read it. Didn't see anything to reply to. > > Cretin.
That is your way of explaining why you are asking where I live? -- Rick
On 10/30/2014 1:57 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:40:25 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> Gave us: > >> No, I read it. Didn't see anything to reply to. > > A simple face mashing would not be enough bludgeoning to lesson up an > immature, hard wired, retarded asswipe like you.
You do seem to use the asswipe and -tard sub-fix a lot. Probably something you grew up hearing from your progenitors (not to mean that you had actual father and mother in the usual sense).
> Your fucktarded mother and zero effect father should be in prison for > the piece of shit result you are.
And you are an angel, you think.
> Now, analyst (sic... NO SICK!)... Tell me the difference between what > I said to you here, and the horseshit you spewed, to which I gave this > reply? > > You pathetic, cringing little milksop! ... no... WORM!
Why aren't you busy backing up your little brother, Big Jamie, as usual? Not enough challenge for your vile look-up vocabulary? Your nose is not brown enough yet?
On 10/30/2014 3:05 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 11:57:07 -0700, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno > <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:40:25 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> Gave us: >> >>> No, I read it. Didn't see anything to reply to. >> >> A simple face mashing would not be enough bludgeoning to lesson up an >> immature, hard wired, retarded asswipe like you. >> >> Your fucktarded mother and zero effect father should be in prison for >> the piece of shit result you are. >> >> Now, analyst (sic... NO SICK!)... Tell me the difference between what >> I said to you here, and the horseshit you spewed, to which I gave this >> reply? >> >> You pathetic, cringing little milksop! ... no... WORM! > > rickman is your typical smug ignoramus. I had been giving him some > slack, but I decided to put him back into the do-not-retrieve gmail > cretins folder.
Lol. Dude, all you needed to do what explain what the heck you were talking about. -- Rick