[quote= ducwiz ...
" Sorry, but I disagree. I had checked this with my 350M3D. I t turned out that using the bevel twin R-R unchanged, the output of electrical power was insufficient, especially at lower revs. "
____ I'm not sure how you could justifiably disagree so outwardly, when your presented experienced example is-not quite the very-same as that which I was actually in reference-to...
__ I-myself have never tried installing the 12v.version from the old L-twins on any model of w-c.singles,, however I've heard of a couple others who've reported doing so and neither reported of any resulting insufficient charging-power, but did claim the resulting 12v.system worked okay with their older std.points-type load-systems (including 40/35-watt 12v.headlight). _ (But perhaps they never happened to run at lower-RPMs [with lights left on], long enough to significantly run-down the battery and-thusly experience any such power shortfall.)
And because of those fairly trustworthy reported results, I've never had any outright reservations with possibly suggesting that upgrade to anyone,, as I've always assumed that the two Ducati electronic-R/R.units were essentially identical except for their components which determine their voltage-regulation points. _ So are you intending to indicate that the internals of the 12v.version are actually so vastly different, that they must consequently tend to kill-off offered AC.power that's any weaker and/or of a lower frequency than that of the bevel-twins ? _ If-so, then that's news to me !
" I couldn't get the 75 Watt from the alternator, as claimed by DUCATI for the 6 V system with electronic ignition, about 30 -40 Watt was the maximum at 12V. "
____ That result leads me to suspect that your 12v.R/R-example possibly had one of it's two power-SCRs burnt-out, as that near half-power result seems to indicate that only just one of the two alt.stator power-circuits was left functional.
Otherwise, I'm left to conclude that the charging-circuits of the particular alt.stator-windings employed within such electronic-ignition models are considerably less powerful than that of the 1968~71 w-c.models, which fairly stands to logical-reason since one-pair of the six-pairs of charging-circuit coil-windings has been replaced with the power-coil dedicated for powering the electronic-ignition ! _ That alt.stator change certainly ought-to account for charging-system power-output being reduced-down from the claimed 70/75-watt level !
____ The idea of substituting a pre-1976 12v.R/R-unit from a bevel-twin is not an idea that I-myself would've ever actually recommended, as I always rather suggest using just a pair of simple power-diodes (preferably within a convenient bridge-block) instead, (along-with an On/Off-switch to switch-off one of the alt.outputs when the main-lights are left off). _ As I've suspected that the regulator-circuits can't help but somewhat curtail the otherwise available full-output of the alternator, even whenever it's needed to be 100% released (by the expected regulation-circuit).
__ So now if your-own test-experience was actually straight-forward & without any possible errors, then your found result-outcome tends to indicate that the R/R.units do indeed prevent full-power (and possibly, even severely so), from ever being accessible.
Which would explain the relatively great power-output results that others obtain when they merely substitute ordinary power-diodes (in place of the more complex counterparts within the stock regulators).
" I made a conversion to the original 6V R-R by adding 2 power diodes from a car's alternator, forming a full bridge with the R-R's SCRs, "
____ Back before the early-90s when I was an acting tech.adviser for the D.I.O.C., I then used-to supply a bridge-block & toggle/flip-switch prefabbed-setup (mainly intended for 750 L-twins with the 150w.system), that was designed for making it possible to achieve the same full bridge circuit (whenever the t/f.switch was flipped to the alternate-circuit position). _ And with that wired-setup installed & connected, then with a simple flip of the switch, the charging-system could then instantly become converted between the stock dual half-wave charging-system and a full-wave version (which was only actually advantageous just during lower engine-revs below about 5k.RPM).
__ Down-below, I've included a schematic-diagram showing an example of the switchable charging-circuit.
" and connected my special circuit ahead of the "marrone" input terminal (inside the R-R case), taking 7V from the battery's 12-14 V. "
____ I believe you covered that in more detail within a previous thread-post. _ (And it's electronic-conception such as that, which has impressed me to have hopes that at-least the likes of yourself can fully comprehend & relate most-all electrical-concepts which I've ever covered within this w.site.)
" In the new system, the red wire from the alternator stayes unused on the double post, only the yellow ones are used. "
____ The switchable bridge-circuit which I came-up with (back in late-1974, for addressing the poor charging-performance experienced with pre-76 bevel-twins [during extended low-RPM riding with main-lights left on]), also physically retained the red-wire left connected to the R/R.unit's convenience-post as stock, however it's circuit would remain useful except whenever the extra diodes were brought on-line for full-rectification !
____ Have you not ever tried-out full-wave rectification rather between the red-wire & either-one of the yellow wires ?
Cuz when that's done, then there's no interfering impedance produced (by the other intertwined dual-winding) to curtail the normal-results of the full-rectification of the chosen Yellow/Red power-circuit (when the other Y/R.circuit is left open & unused) !
" Hence, approximately the full power output is available again. "
____ I guess you must already realize the reason for why you appropriately included the word "approximately"... Because while your statement is pretty-much true at lower revs,, unfortunately due-to the induction-interaction characteristic of the unique 'dual-winding' structure of Ducati's alt.stator, the combined stator-winding power-output (from both yellow-wires full-wave rectified) becomes curtailed (due-to interfering impedance*) as RPMs increase towards the upper rev.range.
(* This natural occurrence has been confirmed with o.scope testing back in the '70s.)
__ So while at lower-revs there's indeed possibly near doubled power-output rather with the FULL-wave rectification (just as is normally always expected [with a standard-type center-tapped winding], compared to half-wave rectification),, at the upper rev.range, the resulted available power-output is actually LESS than that of Ducati's dual half-wave rectification technology !! _ Thus part of the justification for the recommended flip-switch !
The main sought advantage of Ducati's (non full-wave) charging-system,, is that not-only can it provide at-least as much available power (as full-wave rectifying) from mid-range revs & above, it also self-regulates (or rather 'auto-adjusts' upwardly) accordingly with any load-system demand-variances (such as that due-to turn-signal intermediate-demand or high-beam flashing, etc.) !
" the voltage reducer can be left off, if a 12V bevel twin R-R is used. "
____ That minor circuit-modification is pretty-much the only update-variation that I assumed was different between the 12v & 6v R/R.versions. _ But your report of the poor test-result which you produced, tends to lead me to suspect that there must be more circuitry within the 12v.version that somehow prevents a more successful outcome when connected with the five-pairs of coil-windings of the electronic-ignition alt.stator-model.
__ It seems that it would be a worthwhile endeavor to compare-test another 12v.R/R-unit connected to a more common six-coil alt.stator, to confirm whether or not your-own found disconcerting-results are really generally typical.
" But these items are very rare these days, so quiteexpensive. "
____ I realize that the 12v.version of Ducati's unique dual half-wave R/R.unit has probably become rather expensive to obtain, but still I'd expected it to be cheaper & less complicated to have installed than some so-hyped "12-volt alternator" from an aftermarket-supplier !
__ The best way to replace Ducati's unique dual half-wave R/R.unit, is to substitute it with a pair of power-diodes (along with an On/Off-switch, if the lights are ever to be left turned-off),, which works quite well enough for either 6v or 12v battery-equipped systems, (so long as the chosen battery isn't too-awfully small).
Dukaddy-DUKEs,
DCT-Bob
Electrical upgrade
Moderator: ajleone
-
DewCatTea-Bob
- Posts: 2897
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:53 am
- Location: Near SE side of Lake Michigan
Re: Electrical upgrade
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
PLEASE NOTE... If this-post is not-yet signed-off with '-Bob', then I'm still in the process of completing it,, and if not also included with 'DCT' near bottom as well, then I may edit this post's wording at a later time. - Dct.Bob
-
gmlaverda
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:32 pm
Re: Electrical upgrade
Bob-To answer your question, no, the alternator is installed in the engine. The conductors are soft and pliable all of the way up to the alternator but that is all I can tell for now. By the way, it is great to see all of this enthusiasm for Ducati electrical systems!
-
DewCatTea-Bob
- Posts: 2897
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:53 am
- Location: Near SE side of Lake Michigan
Re: Electrical upgrade
[quote= gmlaverda ...
" To answer your question, no, the alternator is installed in the engine. "
____ I asked about that because I thought you might possibly provide a picture showing it's present condition and whether it's still stock. _ And if the alt.stator was already removed,, then suggest replacing it's 3-conductor -(1-pair & a common-line) wire-cable, rather with a 4-wire -(twin-pair) version/replacement-cable.
" The conductors are soft and pliable all of the way up to the alternator but that is all I can tell for now. "
____ That seems to be a rather unusual state to find the original cable-wires' condition still remaining in.
Do the alt.stator-cable's three contained wire-leads still appear to be yellow and red colored ? _ If so,, then after the past four decades, I'd pretty-much expect them to rather have developed the common-condition of brittle & crumbly rubber-insulation !
Otherwise I'd very-much suspect that the wire-leads have been replaced (sometime within the past two or three decades).
" it is great to see all of this enthusiasm for Ducati electrical systems! "
____ Well, there's the actual Ducati-made electrical-components (which I fine no great faults with), of their concocted electrical-systems,, and-then there's also the rest of the system components made by other manufacturers, which are really what had led to Ducati having (unfairly) attained a poor reputation for their resulting marginally-functional electrical-systems.
So while I-myself am indeed pretty enthusiastic concerning Ducati's-own components, I've always been fairly content to rather replace most-all of the other junky components (which Ducati had economically employed) !
Duke-Cheers,
-Bob
" To answer your question, no, the alternator is installed in the engine. "
____ I asked about that because I thought you might possibly provide a picture showing it's present condition and whether it's still stock. _ And if the alt.stator was already removed,, then suggest replacing it's 3-conductor -(1-pair & a common-line) wire-cable, rather with a 4-wire -(twin-pair) version/replacement-cable.
" The conductors are soft and pliable all of the way up to the alternator but that is all I can tell for now. "
____ That seems to be a rather unusual state to find the original cable-wires' condition still remaining in.
Do the alt.stator-cable's three contained wire-leads still appear to be yellow and red colored ? _ If so,, then after the past four decades, I'd pretty-much expect them to rather have developed the common-condition of brittle & crumbly rubber-insulation !
Otherwise I'd very-much suspect that the wire-leads have been replaced (sometime within the past two or three decades).
" it is great to see all of this enthusiasm for Ducati electrical systems! "
____ Well, there's the actual Ducati-made electrical-components (which I fine no great faults with), of their concocted electrical-systems,, and-then there's also the rest of the system components made by other manufacturers, which are really what had led to Ducati having (unfairly) attained a poor reputation for their resulting marginally-functional electrical-systems.
So while I-myself am indeed pretty enthusiastic concerning Ducati's-own components, I've always been fairly content to rather replace most-all of the other junky components (which Ducati had economically employed) !
Duke-Cheers,
-Bob
PLEASE NOTE... If this-post is not-yet signed-off with '-Bob', then I'm still in the process of completing it,, and if not also included with 'DCT' near bottom as well, then I may edit this post's wording at a later time. - Dct.Bob
-
gmlaverda
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:32 pm
Re: Electrical upgrade
OK-So where do I stand now? It looks as though I can retain the stock alternator (assuming that the condition is good), replacing the original regulator/rectifier ( missing anyway) with the proposed full bridge rectifier and retain the original points ignition. What would be an appropriate sized battery and headlamp wattage? As I mentioned the bike will be for daylight use but I would prefer to ride with a "daylight" headlamp for safety.
-
DewCatTea-Bob
- Posts: 2897
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:53 am
- Location: Near SE side of Lake Michigan
Re: Electrical upgrade
[quote= gmlaverda ...
"OK-So where do I stand now? "
____ I sort-of had hopes that you'd know by now what colors the wires are within the alt.cable and what their condition is in regards to their individual insulation-jackets. _ But we can continue-on forward a bit further for now anyway.
__ I think it's preferable to continue first developing a charging-system that best suits your preferences, but it's not so easily done to make you aware of all the detailed possibilities which exist for you to choose from,, so I'll rather unintentionally steer you towards system details that are in compromise between what I'd choose to pick for myself and what could work best for you.
" It looks as though I can retain the stock alternator "
____ Yes, no-doubt that's quite likely,, and that's what my good-opinion recommends (regardless of what-all other electrical-components you may choose).
" replacing the original regulator/rectifier
with the proposed full bridge rectifier "
____ This particular concern requires significantly fuller detailing ! ...
To start-out with,, while I've meant to propose the use of 'bridge-blocks' (which are normally used for 'full-wave' rectification), the stock alt.stator winding-configuration is really not meant for such std.full-wave rectification. _ And-so trying to full-wave rectify the output between the two yellow-wires causes the two separate stator-windings to develop opposing-effects which are pretty abnormal ! _ However it's perfectly find to full-wave rectify just the output between the red-wire & either yellow-wire, (but that would waste the use of the alternators full capability). _ However if your chosen load-system and riding conditions are-not too demanding,, then the resulting charging-output could possibly be more than sufficient, as it would be pretty-much about equal to stock wattage (but without the self-regulating/auto-adjust feature of Ducati's unique design) ! _ And-so if your load-system is-not sufficiently demanding, then a regulator-circuit of some kind may be necessary for protecting the battery from overcharging (with the use of full-wave rectification).
This route should-not be considered as an actual "upgrade" !
__ However the (cheap & easy to mount !) 'bridge-blocks' can also be circuited to provide the rather desirable half-wave rectification, just as well ! _ And-then can also be set-up to get-by without any regulator-circuit, (so long as a suitably sized battery is included) !
__ To narrow-down where to head-forward from here at this point, it pretty-much depends on what headlight-wattage you choose to go with.
" and retain the original points ignition. "
____ That would probably be most economical route for the time-being, (as you can decide whether to install an electronic-ignition setup, later).
" What would be an appropriate sized battery "
____ The only 12v.battery I know-of that rather nicely fits within the b.tray-mount, is the battery originally made for the 1970~74 Yamaha 250/350-twins. _ Otherwise you may prefer to search for a couple of 6v.batteries that have suitable dimensions which can provide more ampere-hours.
" and headlamp wattage? "
____ The stock charging-system can easily handle a 45-watt headlight (at-least during regular motoring-RPMs) ! _ And during more spirited riding (averaging above 5k-RPM), could possibly also handle at-least a 65-watt high-beam. _ (Whereas mere ordinary 'full-wave' rectification would be hard-pressed to constantly power a 60w.light at any RPM.)
So your chosen HL.wattage is entirely up-to you. _ But if all you need it for is daytime riding,, then you could get-by with a LED.type headlight, if you happen to find such that suits you. _ (And in such case, then,, only the simplest of all the simpler charging-systems would then be required !)
Here follows a link (I-think*) referring-to a very modern LED.light that's designed to (finally legally) replace a standard 5.75" sealed-beam... http://www.jwspeaker.com/products/headl ... -headlight
(* I'm not really sure because my PC won't open the file.)
__ If you don't happen-chance upon any-O/some-odd headlight locally that's a perfect physical fit for your present headlamp, then you may wish to ask others for their opinion on what non-stock headlights can best be adapted into your shock headlamp.
In the past (back before the '90s),, most-all those I've known-of who converted-over to 12v.system sealed-beam headlights, chose the standard 12-volt equivalent of the stock 35/30w 6v.sealed-beam, which I believe was a 40/35w 12v.version, (while I-myself preferred the stronger 50/40w 12v.version). _ I'm now wondering if those old/original PAR46 sealed-beam models are still available any longer these-days, cuz a brief search I've done (intended to help me recall their model-no.designations) has only turned-up a 60/37w 12v.version (which I've never-before ever heard-of with a 60w.rating, [and has a #4000 model-no.designation]). _ And while I think I've heard-of the #4000-model back by the early-'70s,, oddly, I'm positive that if the 4000-model did indeed exist back-then, it sure didn't have any 60-watt rating !!
Anyhow,, that sealed-beam priced at just 5-bucks, is quite a standout-bargain ! _ And-so with that unbeatable find, I then quit my search (at the following link)... http://www.genesislamp.com/par46bulbs1.html
Besides being so extra economical, the model-no.4000 is also a pretty-neat headlight choice because it conveniently not-only allows the option of a very manageable wattage when set to low-beam but-yet it also allows the handy/beneficial option of a powerful high-beam for temporary use whenever really needed ! _ So it's a sealed-beam model that's quite worthy of consideration !
Enlightening-Cheers,
-Bob
"OK-So where do I stand now? "
____ I sort-of had hopes that you'd know by now what colors the wires are within the alt.cable and what their condition is in regards to their individual insulation-jackets. _ But we can continue-on forward a bit further for now anyway.
__ I think it's preferable to continue first developing a charging-system that best suits your preferences, but it's not so easily done to make you aware of all the detailed possibilities which exist for you to choose from,, so I'll rather unintentionally steer you towards system details that are in compromise between what I'd choose to pick for myself and what could work best for you.
" It looks as though I can retain the stock alternator "
____ Yes, no-doubt that's quite likely,, and that's what my good-opinion recommends (regardless of what-all other electrical-components you may choose).
" replacing the original regulator/rectifier
with the proposed full bridge rectifier "
____ This particular concern requires significantly fuller detailing ! ...
To start-out with,, while I've meant to propose the use of 'bridge-blocks' (which are normally used for 'full-wave' rectification), the stock alt.stator winding-configuration is really not meant for such std.full-wave rectification. _ And-so trying to full-wave rectify the output between the two yellow-wires causes the two separate stator-windings to develop opposing-effects which are pretty abnormal ! _ However it's perfectly find to full-wave rectify just the output between the red-wire & either yellow-wire, (but that would waste the use of the alternators full capability). _ However if your chosen load-system and riding conditions are-not too demanding,, then the resulting charging-output could possibly be more than sufficient, as it would be pretty-much about equal to stock wattage (but without the self-regulating/auto-adjust feature of Ducati's unique design) ! _ And-so if your load-system is-not sufficiently demanding, then a regulator-circuit of some kind may be necessary for protecting the battery from overcharging (with the use of full-wave rectification).
This route should-not be considered as an actual "upgrade" !
__ However the (cheap & easy to mount !) 'bridge-blocks' can also be circuited to provide the rather desirable half-wave rectification, just as well ! _ And-then can also be set-up to get-by without any regulator-circuit, (so long as a suitably sized battery is included) !
__ To narrow-down where to head-forward from here at this point, it pretty-much depends on what headlight-wattage you choose to go with.
" and retain the original points ignition. "
____ That would probably be most economical route for the time-being, (as you can decide whether to install an electronic-ignition setup, later).
" What would be an appropriate sized battery "
____ The only 12v.battery I know-of that rather nicely fits within the b.tray-mount, is the battery originally made for the 1970~74 Yamaha 250/350-twins. _ Otherwise you may prefer to search for a couple of 6v.batteries that have suitable dimensions which can provide more ampere-hours.
" and headlamp wattage? "
____ The stock charging-system can easily handle a 45-watt headlight (at-least during regular motoring-RPMs) ! _ And during more spirited riding (averaging above 5k-RPM), could possibly also handle at-least a 65-watt high-beam. _ (Whereas mere ordinary 'full-wave' rectification would be hard-pressed to constantly power a 60w.light at any RPM.)
So your chosen HL.wattage is entirely up-to you. _ But if all you need it for is daytime riding,, then you could get-by with a LED.type headlight, if you happen to find such that suits you. _ (And in such case, then,, only the simplest of all the simpler charging-systems would then be required !)
Here follows a link (I-think*) referring-to a very modern LED.light that's designed to (finally legally) replace a standard 5.75" sealed-beam... http://www.jwspeaker.com/products/headl ... -headlight
(* I'm not really sure because my PC won't open the file.)
__ If you don't happen-chance upon any-O/some-odd headlight locally that's a perfect physical fit for your present headlamp, then you may wish to ask others for their opinion on what non-stock headlights can best be adapted into your shock headlamp.
In the past (back before the '90s),, most-all those I've known-of who converted-over to 12v.system sealed-beam headlights, chose the standard 12-volt equivalent of the stock 35/30w 6v.sealed-beam, which I believe was a 40/35w 12v.version, (while I-myself preferred the stronger 50/40w 12v.version). _ I'm now wondering if those old/original PAR46 sealed-beam models are still available any longer these-days, cuz a brief search I've done (intended to help me recall their model-no.designations) has only turned-up a 60/37w 12v.version (which I've never-before ever heard-of with a 60w.rating, [and has a #4000 model-no.designation]). _ And while I think I've heard-of the #4000-model back by the early-'70s,, oddly, I'm positive that if the 4000-model did indeed exist back-then, it sure didn't have any 60-watt rating !!
Anyhow,, that sealed-beam priced at just 5-bucks, is quite a standout-bargain ! _ And-so with that unbeatable find, I then quit my search (at the following link)... http://www.genesislamp.com/par46bulbs1.html
Besides being so extra economical, the model-no.4000 is also a pretty-neat headlight choice because it conveniently not-only allows the option of a very manageable wattage when set to low-beam but-yet it also allows the handy/beneficial option of a powerful high-beam for temporary use whenever really needed ! _ So it's a sealed-beam model that's quite worthy of consideration !
Enlightening-Cheers,
-Bob
PLEASE NOTE... If this-post is not-yet signed-off with '-Bob', then I'm still in the process of completing it,, and if not also included with 'DCT' near bottom as well, then I may edit this post's wording at a later time. - Dct.Bob
-
gmlaverda
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:32 pm
Re: Electrical upgrade
Bob-yes, the alternator conductors consist of 2 yellow and one red. I have stripped back a short distance and they are in great condition. And as mentioned I am planning to use the bike for shorter distances during the day but I would like to be able to use the headlamp if even at a low wattage. I prefer headlamp use during the day for safety.
-
DewCatTea-Bob
- Posts: 2897
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:53 am
- Location: Near SE side of Lake Michigan
Re: Electrical upgrade
[quote= gmlaverda ...
" the alternator conductors consist of 2 yellow and one red. "
____ Okay, good ! _ That means if the original cable-wires were ever replaced, then they were replaced either with another stock-cable or with wire-leads of the same original insulation-colors. _ So that should be helpful when referring to them normally.
" I have stripped back a short distance and they are in great condition. "
____ That's quite an unexpected finding, as the original wire-insulation's rubbery-coating is well-known to disintegrate into crumbs after two decades of exposure (if not sooner) !
So apparently the cabled-wires have already been replaced by a previous-owner, hopefully rather with regular plastic-based insulation-coating instead of the stock-cable (which also doesn't contain copper conductor-wire). _ So if your found alt.cable-wires are copper-tinted, then we'll know they are not stock !
" I am planning to use the bike for shorter distances during the day but I would like to be able to use the headlamp if even at a low wattage. I prefer headlamp use during the day for safety. "
____ That's at-least the second time I've noted you've made those same points, so-thus I'm beginning to especially wonder exactly what you might think I'm not addressing concerning all that !? _ Do you think there's some more directly related point which I've been overlooking ?
__ Please keep in mind that I always remain quite conscious of the fact that all-this concerns your project, (and not mine),, and-so it's actually my wish that you be the one who makes all the choices while I merely-just point-out the various routes which best aim toward the direction that you seem most interested in heading for.
I realize that my chosen wording may seem relatively over-the-top on some things, and-thus possibly lead you to suspect that I'm attempting to bias you-particularly towards something or another, (which I'm not ever actually trying to do),, but that just incidentally tends to unintentionally occur only because I realize that I'm not-only addressing merely-just you-yourself, (as this actually is part of a forum, after-all). _ So-thus my chosen-wording is most-always rather chosen to be somewhat more suitable for addressing all readers.
____ Were you able to dis-cover any details concerning the LED.par46 headlight which I had provided a link to ? _ And if so, is it to your liking ?
If that other link I had found didn't work-out for you either, here's another-one that I've since found - http://www.jwspeaker.com/products/headl ... uct=500027 , however you'll still have-to dig deeper to get that w.site to reveal it's price. _ So I suspect they're hiding their price and that their par46-LED.bulb is probably considerably over 10-times the cost of the #4000 std.sealed-beam I discovered.
__ Your particular choice of a headlight is the MAJOR fork-in-the-road to be chosen, as it greatly influences the charging-system detail-choices to be narrowed-down to ! _ So that really should be rapped-up before I can properly guide you further onward toward your final-choice for your most suitable charging-system.
Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob
" the alternator conductors consist of 2 yellow and one red. "
____ Okay, good ! _ That means if the original cable-wires were ever replaced, then they were replaced either with another stock-cable or with wire-leads of the same original insulation-colors. _ So that should be helpful when referring to them normally.
" I have stripped back a short distance and they are in great condition. "
____ That's quite an unexpected finding, as the original wire-insulation's rubbery-coating is well-known to disintegrate into crumbs after two decades of exposure (if not sooner) !
So apparently the cabled-wires have already been replaced by a previous-owner, hopefully rather with regular plastic-based insulation-coating instead of the stock-cable (which also doesn't contain copper conductor-wire). _ So if your found alt.cable-wires are copper-tinted, then we'll know they are not stock !
" I am planning to use the bike for shorter distances during the day but I would like to be able to use the headlamp if even at a low wattage. I prefer headlamp use during the day for safety. "
____ That's at-least the second time I've noted you've made those same points, so-thus I'm beginning to especially wonder exactly what you might think I'm not addressing concerning all that !? _ Do you think there's some more directly related point which I've been overlooking ?
__ Please keep in mind that I always remain quite conscious of the fact that all-this concerns your project, (and not mine),, and-so it's actually my wish that you be the one who makes all the choices while I merely-just point-out the various routes which best aim toward the direction that you seem most interested in heading for.
I realize that my chosen wording may seem relatively over-the-top on some things, and-thus possibly lead you to suspect that I'm attempting to bias you-particularly towards something or another, (which I'm not ever actually trying to do),, but that just incidentally tends to unintentionally occur only because I realize that I'm not-only addressing merely-just you-yourself, (as this actually is part of a forum, after-all). _ So-thus my chosen-wording is most-always rather chosen to be somewhat more suitable for addressing all readers.
____ Were you able to dis-cover any details concerning the LED.par46 headlight which I had provided a link to ? _ And if so, is it to your liking ?
If that other link I had found didn't work-out for you either, here's another-one that I've since found - http://www.jwspeaker.com/products/headl ... uct=500027 , however you'll still have-to dig deeper to get that w.site to reveal it's price. _ So I suspect they're hiding their price and that their par46-LED.bulb is probably considerably over 10-times the cost of the #4000 std.sealed-beam I discovered.
__ Your particular choice of a headlight is the MAJOR fork-in-the-road to be chosen, as it greatly influences the charging-system detail-choices to be narrowed-down to ! _ So that really should be rapped-up before I can properly guide you further onward toward your final-choice for your most suitable charging-system.
Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob
PLEASE NOTE... If this-post is not-yet signed-off with '-Bob', then I'm still in the process of completing it,, and if not also included with 'DCT' near bottom as well, then I may edit this post's wording at a later time. - Dct.Bob
-
gmlaverda
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:32 pm
Re: Electrical upgrade
Bob-thanks for the research you provided for headlamp selection. I think I would like to use the Genesis product. This appears adequate for my needs and the price is amazing. I did not call for pricing on the LED product as I am sure like you that it would be considerably more and the appearance on the bike would be a little odd to my mind. The Genesis 4000 is fine. And yes, I did repeat myself. I need to review my posts rather than relying on my memory to recall the information I had provided. My memory could be better, so sorry. Thanks
-
DewCatTea-Bob
- Posts: 2897
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:53 am
- Location: Near SE side of Lake Michigan
Re: Electrical upgrade
[quote= gmlaverda ...
" I think I would like to use the Genesis product. This appears adequate for my needs and the price is amazing. "
____ Okay then, perhaps you ought-to order a spare as well.
__ On the other-hand, I'm sort-of disappointed that you've not preferred to choose going-with taking the LED.headlight route, as I've come-up with quite a bit of related info of which I was looking forward to bringing-up. _ Perhaps I'll still include that now irrelevant info, anyway,, sometime later.
" I did not call for pricing on the LED product as I am sure like you that it would be considerably more and the appearance on the bike would be a little odd to my mind. "
____ I've since found-out more about that rather newly released PAR46-type LED.headlight...
Don't bother with calling on it's price !! _ Since the maker's w.site was-not forthcoming with their price, I later searched the web-net to see if it's price might be found anywhere at all. _ And indeed it was findable, and the cheapest listing was found to be listed at "$495." *,, yes, that's an incredible fiveHUNDRED-bucks ! _ So it might as well be priced at 5-million ounces of gold, just as well ! _ Cuz I suspect it will never sell until after it's price has been cut at-least 80% !
(* I guess there must be a ripoff-tariff to pay for being the first DOT.approved LED.headlight.
)
Here's another link to a dealer who retails that very-same product and also bothers to actually include more informing details concerning it's specs... http://www.ironworksspeedandkustom.com/ ... prd106.htm
Of most pertinent interest,, is it's power-consumption spec, which is a rather unimpressive 24-watts. _ Which is pretty-much the same as the stock headlight (and probably not significantly brighter either).
__ Still remaining an alternative, are the vast choices of H4-type LED.light-bulbs which could be mounted within an adapted reflector-dish & lens setup,, if you may still care to try going-with such a LED.headlight route.
" The Genesis 4000 is fine. "
____ Indeed so. _ As I think your headlamp was probably stock with a #4020 6v.sealed-beam of the same PAR46-dimentions. _ (I think the 4020 s-b.model was either a 30/25w or a 35/30w,, I'm not for-sure anymore, as I've now come to discover that it may be possible that that model-no.designation might've actually been available with either rating, over decades past. _ However I more certainly recall that the #4031 was a 6-volt 45/40w s-b.version, as I always preferred it !)
__ I believe that back before the mid-'70s, it was either the #4000 or #4040 s-b.model which was then available with the 50/40w.specs that I had been looking for during my net-search,, but now it seems that both of those models have since been updated to have the same 60/37w.specs, (at-least at the Genesis-w.site).
It seems to me that such wattage-changes alone, are certainly quite significant enough all on their-own, to well warrant a different/alternate model-no.designation ! _ So I really wonder what the actual story is for when & why the wattage-changes took-place for those two long established model-numbers and how it was justifiable that their no.designations were able to remain unchanged !?
__ Anyhow, I find the increased wattage spread between high & low filament-circuits to be a rather welcome improvement (for the reasons I've already covered and will probably go-over again later).
____ Next, now that you've chosen to go-with a rather powerful headlight,, you'll thus-then rather need a fairly strong (but not necessarily complex) charging-system to go-with (for whenever powering the 60-watt high-beam during more extended distance/times). _ Otherwise without that 60w.load, a more moderate middle-of-the-road charging-system would do well enough, (such as with std.full-wave rectification).
If you were ever to-be stuck with the high-beam left on,, then a full-wave R/R.unit wouldn't be able to maintain the battery's std.voltage-level for much longer than about 1.5-hours, nearly regardless of whatever the RPM.operating-range. _ And while the dual half-wave rectification-method would be even-more worse-off during low-RPM, at-least it can possibly charge the battery whilst also powering that extra demanding load, during the higher engine-revs above mid-range (where both rectification methods are pretty-much equally capable [within the upper mid-range revs]).
__ Now it's already been contested before by some of those within the common-majority of others (who think they know better) that full-wave rectification always provides double the power-output of that which mere half-wave rectification is only capable of,, and in-fact that rather common conception would indeed certainly of-course be absolutely positively factually-true, IF Ducati's stator-windings really were actually wound same-as a standard-type center-tapped single coil-winding (as most-all others have incorrectly ASSUMED !).
However, (as I always keep trying to convince those-others of),, Ducati's 6-pole alt.stators actually consist of two separate (but combined) individual windings which have been purposely arranged so as to induce their resulted current-flows into each-other, (pretty-much like any transformer must do, [except rather at a 1:1 ratio] !)
So cooperatively, the flux-fields produced by the resulted*current-flow alternately running-through the two opposite stator-windings (* as the connected loads are drawing), combine together alternately* along-with the mag.fields provided from the mag.rotor-itself. _ So-therefore the alternator's available power-output varies upward along-with any increases in power-consumption,, and so thus, the self-regulation/auto-adjusting effect is then realized !
This intended effect is naturally actually beneficially effective ONLY just for the dual half-wave rectification, whereas full-wave rectification conversely confounds the otherwise CONCERTED flux-fields & resulted current flows ! _ So-thus with full-wave rectification of both stator-windings in series, any desirable cross-induction is then consequently canceled-out by opposing current-fields, which can't help but lead to a real mess of uncorrelated excessive induction-fields which naturally leads to excess impedance that curtails otherwise non-dampened power-flow, especially more-so as alt.rotor-revs increase to higher RPMs !
If the mag.rotors were rather geared-up 2 ~ 4 times (instead of being left directly driven 1-to-1 by the crankshaft), then the superior effect of Ducati's dual half-wave rectification-method (compared to std.full-wave) would be very much more apparent (and everyone would then more readily realize it) !
(* Because of the designed orientation-arrangement between the two stator-windings,, their individual perspective output polarities (caused by the mag.rotor) are opposite of one another, so that when one is negative, the other is then positive. _ However the (w-c.type grounded dual half-wave rectifier) output-circuits won't allow any positive-outflow (to ground),, so if there was no load drawing current, then of the two charging-outputs, only one-at-a-time would be offering neg.power (to ground), while the other is then effectively dead & offering nothing. _ But when there is a load drawing current,, then while one output is sending-out the usual mag.rotor influenced power-flow, the other output then becomes capable of having stator-winding influenced power-flow potentially drawn from it. _ So-thus this of-course means that when a load is drawing power, both outputs are then simultaneously live with neg.power, with the otherwise dead output varying in power availability accordingly with load power-consumption & demand.
__ Most anyone who's been able to understand how an ignition-coil can work as it does, shouldn't have much trouble going the two-steps further to also comprehend how Ducati's mutual-induction alt.stator-setup must naturally work, [along-with half-wave rectification], as well.
Also, anyone who rather doubts the validity of the inevitable mutual-induction effect, must then correspondingly also have likewise doubts that the primary-winding of an ignition-coil can actually be expected to exert it's induction-effect over-onto the coil's secondary-winding. _ [And who could possibly question the validity of that more established fact ?])
__ Now with all the above points having been made,, the dual half-wave rectification-method ought-not be left discarded in favor of the commonly-preferred full-wave rectification alternative, (even-though the later method is easier to obtain common regulation-circuits for).
If the dual h-w rect.method is left without regular/std.type downward-regulation, and if the main-lights happen to be left off during constant high-RPM for over two hours,, then any excessively high system-voltage may take it's toll on the battery and 'overcharge' -(rather overheat) it. _ So rather than employ a power-bleeding/voltage-limiting Zener-diode circuit to address that possible situation, it would be preferable to rather switch-off part of the alternator's output (at-least whenever the headlight is off).
There are other methods to do this,, but since you've implied that you don't yet have a light-switch, you could acquire a Jap.bike handlebar-switch that includes a double-switch that's specifically made to not-only control the lighting-circuit but-also it's associated alt.winding-circuit as well, (as it's switching control-action works both circuits at once).
Is that method of power-management acceptable to you ? _ Or would you prefer to use a simple toggle-switch for controlling the lights and the alt.power output-supply ?
Or would you perhaps prefer to keep your system as simplified as it can possibly be, and rather keep the headlight's low-beam left on for a resulted constantly balanced system that doesn't really require any power-limiting management methods ?
Or if you're fairly sure that you'll never run the 60-watt high-beam for over 30-minutes straight, during each 2-hour period of riding,, then you could rather employ a regular full-wave Rect/Reg.unit, (as most others choose to do). _ However such f-w.R/R.units cost between 12 ~ 25 times the cost of the 3-buck bridge-block that you'd otherwise need to use in place of such a R/R.unit.
__ Also, another possibly desired option to consider before continuing further towards your finalized electrical-system scheme-plan, is the possible separation of the ignition-system from the battery-system circuitry. _ That way your ign.system then wouldn't be dependent on any battery, and rather independently powered by it's own separate power-source (instead of the battery as stock).
" And yes, I did repeat myself. "
____ I had thought that perhaps you had done-so because you preferred to curtail being led-down a road that'd possibly be more complex & expensive than you felt your project really needed to go-down, or something of the like, or maybe not,, I just wasn't sure.
____ Sorry about all the overly-extensive excess info that's not really importantly relevant to your particular project-goal. _ It's just that at some rare times every now-&-then-and-again, I feel the desire to reattempt to elaborate an explanation concerning that which others may still not yet have fully realized.
DUCATIly,
Dct-Bob
" I think I would like to use the Genesis product. This appears adequate for my needs and the price is amazing. "
____ Okay then, perhaps you ought-to order a spare as well.
__ On the other-hand, I'm sort-of disappointed that you've not preferred to choose going-with taking the LED.headlight route, as I've come-up with quite a bit of related info of which I was looking forward to bringing-up. _ Perhaps I'll still include that now irrelevant info, anyway,, sometime later.
" I did not call for pricing on the LED product as I am sure like you that it would be considerably more and the appearance on the bike would be a little odd to my mind. "
____ I've since found-out more about that rather newly released PAR46-type LED.headlight...
Don't bother with calling on it's price !! _ Since the maker's w.site was-not forthcoming with their price, I later searched the web-net to see if it's price might be found anywhere at all. _ And indeed it was findable, and the cheapest listing was found to be listed at "$495." *,, yes, that's an incredible fiveHUNDRED-bucks ! _ So it might as well be priced at 5-million ounces of gold, just as well ! _ Cuz I suspect it will never sell until after it's price has been cut at-least 80% !
(* I guess there must be a ripoff-tariff to pay for being the first DOT.approved LED.headlight.
) Here's another link to a dealer who retails that very-same product and also bothers to actually include more informing details concerning it's specs... http://www.ironworksspeedandkustom.com/ ... prd106.htm
Of most pertinent interest,, is it's power-consumption spec, which is a rather unimpressive 24-watts. _ Which is pretty-much the same as the stock headlight (and probably not significantly brighter either).
__ Still remaining an alternative, are the vast choices of H4-type LED.light-bulbs which could be mounted within an adapted reflector-dish & lens setup,, if you may still care to try going-with such a LED.headlight route.
" The Genesis 4000 is fine. "
____ Indeed so. _ As I think your headlamp was probably stock with a #4020 6v.sealed-beam of the same PAR46-dimentions. _ (I think the 4020 s-b.model was either a 30/25w or a 35/30w,, I'm not for-sure anymore, as I've now come to discover that it may be possible that that model-no.designation might've actually been available with either rating, over decades past. _ However I more certainly recall that the #4031 was a 6-volt 45/40w s-b.version, as I always preferred it !)
__ I believe that back before the mid-'70s, it was either the #4000 or #4040 s-b.model which was then available with the 50/40w.specs that I had been looking for during my net-search,, but now it seems that both of those models have since been updated to have the same 60/37w.specs, (at-least at the Genesis-w.site).
It seems to me that such wattage-changes alone, are certainly quite significant enough all on their-own, to well warrant a different/alternate model-no.designation ! _ So I really wonder what the actual story is for when & why the wattage-changes took-place for those two long established model-numbers and how it was justifiable that their no.designations were able to remain unchanged !?
__ Anyhow, I find the increased wattage spread between high & low filament-circuits to be a rather welcome improvement (for the reasons I've already covered and will probably go-over again later).
____ Next, now that you've chosen to go-with a rather powerful headlight,, you'll thus-then rather need a fairly strong (but not necessarily complex) charging-system to go-with (for whenever powering the 60-watt high-beam during more extended distance/times). _ Otherwise without that 60w.load, a more moderate middle-of-the-road charging-system would do well enough, (such as with std.full-wave rectification).
If you were ever to-be stuck with the high-beam left on,, then a full-wave R/R.unit wouldn't be able to maintain the battery's std.voltage-level for much longer than about 1.5-hours, nearly regardless of whatever the RPM.operating-range. _ And while the dual half-wave rectification-method would be even-more worse-off during low-RPM, at-least it can possibly charge the battery whilst also powering that extra demanding load, during the higher engine-revs above mid-range (where both rectification methods are pretty-much equally capable [within the upper mid-range revs]).
__ Now it's already been contested before by some of those within the common-majority of others (who think they know better) that full-wave rectification always provides double the power-output of that which mere half-wave rectification is only capable of,, and in-fact that rather common conception would indeed certainly of-course be absolutely positively factually-true, IF Ducati's stator-windings really were actually wound same-as a standard-type center-tapped single coil-winding (as most-all others have incorrectly ASSUMED !).
However, (as I always keep trying to convince those-others of),, Ducati's 6-pole alt.stators actually consist of two separate (but combined) individual windings which have been purposely arranged so as to induce their resulted current-flows into each-other, (pretty-much like any transformer must do, [except rather at a 1:1 ratio] !)
So cooperatively, the flux-fields produced by the resulted*current-flow alternately running-through the two opposite stator-windings (* as the connected loads are drawing), combine together alternately* along-with the mag.fields provided from the mag.rotor-itself. _ So-therefore the alternator's available power-output varies upward along-with any increases in power-consumption,, and so thus, the self-regulation/auto-adjusting effect is then realized !
This intended effect is naturally actually beneficially effective ONLY just for the dual half-wave rectification, whereas full-wave rectification conversely confounds the otherwise CONCERTED flux-fields & resulted current flows ! _ So-thus with full-wave rectification of both stator-windings in series, any desirable cross-induction is then consequently canceled-out by opposing current-fields, which can't help but lead to a real mess of uncorrelated excessive induction-fields which naturally leads to excess impedance that curtails otherwise non-dampened power-flow, especially more-so as alt.rotor-revs increase to higher RPMs !
If the mag.rotors were rather geared-up 2 ~ 4 times (instead of being left directly driven 1-to-1 by the crankshaft), then the superior effect of Ducati's dual half-wave rectification-method (compared to std.full-wave) would be very much more apparent (and everyone would then more readily realize it) !
(* Because of the designed orientation-arrangement between the two stator-windings,, their individual perspective output polarities (caused by the mag.rotor) are opposite of one another, so that when one is negative, the other is then positive. _ However the (w-c.type grounded dual half-wave rectifier) output-circuits won't allow any positive-outflow (to ground),, so if there was no load drawing current, then of the two charging-outputs, only one-at-a-time would be offering neg.power (to ground), while the other is then effectively dead & offering nothing. _ But when there is a load drawing current,, then while one output is sending-out the usual mag.rotor influenced power-flow, the other output then becomes capable of having stator-winding influenced power-flow potentially drawn from it. _ So-thus this of-course means that when a load is drawing power, both outputs are then simultaneously live with neg.power, with the otherwise dead output varying in power availability accordingly with load power-consumption & demand.
__ Most anyone who's been able to understand how an ignition-coil can work as it does, shouldn't have much trouble going the two-steps further to also comprehend how Ducati's mutual-induction alt.stator-setup must naturally work, [along-with half-wave rectification], as well.
Also, anyone who rather doubts the validity of the inevitable mutual-induction effect, must then correspondingly also have likewise doubts that the primary-winding of an ignition-coil can actually be expected to exert it's induction-effect over-onto the coil's secondary-winding. _ [And who could possibly question the validity of that more established fact ?])
__ Now with all the above points having been made,, the dual half-wave rectification-method ought-not be left discarded in favor of the commonly-preferred full-wave rectification alternative, (even-though the later method is easier to obtain common regulation-circuits for).
If the dual h-w rect.method is left without regular/std.type downward-regulation, and if the main-lights happen to be left off during constant high-RPM for over two hours,, then any excessively high system-voltage may take it's toll on the battery and 'overcharge' -(rather overheat) it. _ So rather than employ a power-bleeding/voltage-limiting Zener-diode circuit to address that possible situation, it would be preferable to rather switch-off part of the alternator's output (at-least whenever the headlight is off).
There are other methods to do this,, but since you've implied that you don't yet have a light-switch, you could acquire a Jap.bike handlebar-switch that includes a double-switch that's specifically made to not-only control the lighting-circuit but-also it's associated alt.winding-circuit as well, (as it's switching control-action works both circuits at once).
Is that method of power-management acceptable to you ? _ Or would you prefer to use a simple toggle-switch for controlling the lights and the alt.power output-supply ?
Or would you perhaps prefer to keep your system as simplified as it can possibly be, and rather keep the headlight's low-beam left on for a resulted constantly balanced system that doesn't really require any power-limiting management methods ?
Or if you're fairly sure that you'll never run the 60-watt high-beam for over 30-minutes straight, during each 2-hour period of riding,, then you could rather employ a regular full-wave Rect/Reg.unit, (as most others choose to do). _ However such f-w.R/R.units cost between 12 ~ 25 times the cost of the 3-buck bridge-block that you'd otherwise need to use in place of such a R/R.unit.
__ Also, another possibly desired option to consider before continuing further towards your finalized electrical-system scheme-plan, is the possible separation of the ignition-system from the battery-system circuitry. _ That way your ign.system then wouldn't be dependent on any battery, and rather independently powered by it's own separate power-source (instead of the battery as stock).
" And yes, I did repeat myself. "
____ I had thought that perhaps you had done-so because you preferred to curtail being led-down a road that'd possibly be more complex & expensive than you felt your project really needed to go-down, or something of the like, or maybe not,, I just wasn't sure.
____ Sorry about all the overly-extensive excess info that's not really importantly relevant to your particular project-goal. _ It's just that at some rare times every now-&-then-and-again, I feel the desire to reattempt to elaborate an explanation concerning that which others may still not yet have fully realized.
DUCATIly,
Dct-Bob
PLEASE NOTE... If this-post is not-yet signed-off with '-Bob', then I'm still in the process of completing it,, and if not also included with 'DCT' near bottom as well, then I may edit this post's wording at a later time. - Dct.Bob
-
gmlaverda
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:32 pm
Re: Electrical upgrade
Bob- I think that I would prefer to use a toggle-switch to control the lights and alternator power supply. This would suit my needs. And not to introduce any confusion into this conversation, but in the future I would be enjoy hearing how you would design a system around the LED headlamp. Thank you.
Return to “Ducati Singles Main Discussions (& How to Join)”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 81 guests