" I re-drew parts of it to include the alternator stator, chage light, ignition switch(both sets of contacts), ignition coil, plug
points condenser and associated wiring. "
____ I had assumed that you found the whole diagram somewhere just as it is, cuz I didn't expect you to know of the details concerning the depicted ign.switch & charging-light circuits, etc.,, but the added fact that you've correctly added everything that's depicted OUTSIDE of the black-box's internal-circuits, is of course fairly impressive (for someone not already quite-familiar with the battery-powered n-c wiring-scheme) !
" to correct the coils depiction, I was going to redraw it with all four coils in close proximiety with a common core. Hadn't figured out just how I was going to do it, "
____ I've been planning on getting to the whole thing myself, but until I get my hands back on a sample of the core (so I can make note of all coil-winding orientation),
such elaborated project-work is going to have to wait.
" but now would hate to make you re-color everything. "
____ That's of absolutely no concern at all Mike, cuz I already expected to do that coloring-job all-over again (using a different sw.program), as that coloring-work tuned-out quite sloppy (once I closed the associated program).
" for purposes of discussion could we acknowledge that they are wound on the common core and recognize that when we get to discussing their effects on one another? "
____ Well according to the way that others have explained how the core-setup works, and concerning the particular core-depiction shown on the older diagram,, your suggestion ought be well enough.
But for my own theory, the actual coil-winding orientations need to be correctly known of, before-hand/first.
" since we've gone far afield of he OP's topic, should this be moved to another thread of it's own? "
____ Yes, I think it would be better placed within the old/established thread which had already touched-on this same topic-matter.
" I suspect that the phasing of those coils are critical in the regulation as is their being wound on the common highly permiable core. I'm guessing that saturation and opposing fields both have a hand in regulation. I think when we get to trying to regulate it, that we will be able to see the effects of phasing. one way will probably regulate while the other will cause it to run away. "
____ Impressive Mike... as I believe you're the first I've ever heard of who considers the "opposing-field" aspect, and not JUST the core-saturation aspect which others have (only) expected from that core-winding set-up.
" a quick look at the charge light made me second guess it's function. when is it supposed to be on? seems like at first blush it might be a discharge light. "
____ I'll clue-you-in... When the key-switch is turned-on, the charge-light then glows-up to about 2/3rds full-on*, and as the engine revs-upward, the light dims-down, then goes out, then begins to light-up again, getting brighter & brighter until maxed-out at about 1/3rd full-brightness (* of the bulb's full-capability at 6-volts).
__ Now that clue should get you through the rest of the circuit-operation theory/guess-work !
____ I'm going to be away from my PC for at least 30-hours now, so don't expect any more reply-posts from me before then.
DUKE-Cheers,
-Bob
six coil alternator in a narrow case 250
Moderator: ajleone
-
DewCatTea-Bob
- Posts: 2897
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:53 am
- Location: Near SE side of Lake Michigan
Re: six coil alternator in a narrow case 250
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
-
MotoMike
- Posts: 487
- Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 3:40 am
Re: six coil alternator in a narrow case 250
from Bob...I'll clue-you-in... When the key-switch is turned-on, the charge-light then glows-up to about 2/3rds full-on*, and as the engine revs-upward, the light dims-down, then goes out, then begins to light-up again, getting brighter & brighter until maxed-out at about 1/3rd full-brightness (* of the bulb's full-capability at 6-volts).
__ Now that clue should get you through the rest of the circuit-operation theory/guess-work !
Thanks for the hints Bob and the kind words.
Still not finding the post where this discussion should more properly take place. Maybe a new thread?
Ok, here is what I think is going on with the charging light. When you first turn on the ignition, you provide a path from the battery negative terminal to ground through the 28-ohm resistor, through the charge light and back through the switch to the positive terminal of the battery. The light will light as you describe. It is indicating a discharge state at that time. After you get it started initially, at idle even though the alternator is producing, it probably isn't enough to forward bias the diodes D3 and D4. Or if they are it is for a small portion of the sign wave, possibly just the peaks so not much change in the brightness of the bulb. As you spin up the alternator the output voltage increases. As the full wave rectified output of D3 and D4 are going more positive, the charge light goes dimmer as the difference in potential across the bulb gets smaller. When D3 and D4 output is equal to battery voltage felt at the junction at the top of the 28ohm resistor, the bulb sees the same voltage on each side and no current will flow through it. The bulb will be extinguished. As you continue increase the revs the output of D3 and D4 will become more positive than battery voltage. You are now in a charge state where current will flow from the positive terminal (ground through the battery actually), through the charge light to the to the positive voltage seen at the output of D3 and D4. The bulb is, if I remember right a 3 watt 12 volt bulb, so will have very little current through it, and this current path's contribution to charging the battery should be negligible. It is serving an indicator function because current flow at a much greater rate is passing through L2A and L2A in the same fashion.
__ Now that clue should get you through the rest of the circuit-operation theory/guess-work !
Thanks for the hints Bob and the kind words.
Still not finding the post where this discussion should more properly take place. Maybe a new thread?
Ok, here is what I think is going on with the charging light. When you first turn on the ignition, you provide a path from the battery negative terminal to ground through the 28-ohm resistor, through the charge light and back through the switch to the positive terminal of the battery. The light will light as you describe. It is indicating a discharge state at that time. After you get it started initially, at idle even though the alternator is producing, it probably isn't enough to forward bias the diodes D3 and D4. Or if they are it is for a small portion of the sign wave, possibly just the peaks so not much change in the brightness of the bulb. As you spin up the alternator the output voltage increases. As the full wave rectified output of D3 and D4 are going more positive, the charge light goes dimmer as the difference in potential across the bulb gets smaller. When D3 and D4 output is equal to battery voltage felt at the junction at the top of the 28ohm resistor, the bulb sees the same voltage on each side and no current will flow through it. The bulb will be extinguished. As you continue increase the revs the output of D3 and D4 will become more positive than battery voltage. You are now in a charge state where current will flow from the positive terminal (ground through the battery actually), through the charge light to the to the positive voltage seen at the output of D3 and D4. The bulb is, if I remember right a 3 watt 12 volt bulb, so will have very little current through it, and this current path's contribution to charging the battery should be negligible. It is serving an indicator function because current flow at a much greater rate is passing through L2A and L2A in the same fashion.
-
DewCatTea-Bob
- Posts: 2897
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:53 am
- Location: Near SE side of Lake Michigan
Re: six coil alternator in a narrow case 250
" Still not finding the post where this discussion should more properly take place. "
____ I'll get-around to finding & posting from it, hopefully by tomorrow.
" here is what I think is going on with the charging light. "
____ I understand what-all your wording means to say and I thus realize that you do indeed understand how the circuit works to do what it does,, however, I'd explain it a bit differently, as their are a couple of fairly minor things which aren't quite right, (as you've stated), for being presented to others. _ (If you leave all your current wording as is, I'll get-around to covering what I'm referring to.)
" As the full wave rectified output of D3 and D4 are going more positive, the charge light goes dimmer as the difference in potential across the bulb gets smaller. "
____ Well actually, none of the rectified-outputs of any of the diodes is technically "full wave", however the combined HALF-wave outputs of both of those diodes put together, will SEEM to be same as 'full-wave', though actually two SEPARATE half-waves (180-degree out-of-phase).
" The bulb is, if I remember right a 3 watt 12 volt bulb, so will have very little current through it, "
____ I'm sure it's not a "12 volt" and I think it's a 1.5-watt, 6v-bulb.
" It is serving an indicator function because current flow at a much greater rate is passing through L2A and L2A in the same fashion. "
____ When I first read this, I thought it said "L2B and L2A", however 'L2A' alone, is certainly correct.
Fun-Cheers,
-Bob
____ I'll get-around to finding & posting from it, hopefully by tomorrow.
" here is what I think is going on with the charging light. "
____ I understand what-all your wording means to say and I thus realize that you do indeed understand how the circuit works to do what it does,, however, I'd explain it a bit differently, as their are a couple of fairly minor things which aren't quite right, (as you've stated), for being presented to others. _ (If you leave all your current wording as is, I'll get-around to covering what I'm referring to.)
" As the full wave rectified output of D3 and D4 are going more positive, the charge light goes dimmer as the difference in potential across the bulb gets smaller. "
____ Well actually, none of the rectified-outputs of any of the diodes is technically "full wave", however the combined HALF-wave outputs of both of those diodes put together, will SEEM to be same as 'full-wave', though actually two SEPARATE half-waves (180-degree out-of-phase).
" The bulb is, if I remember right a 3 watt 12 volt bulb, so will have very little current through it, "
____ I'm sure it's not a "12 volt" and I think it's a 1.5-watt, 6v-bulb.
" It is serving an indicator function because current flow at a much greater rate is passing through L2A and L2A in the same fashion. "
____ When I first read this, I thought it said "L2B and L2A", however 'L2A' alone, is certainly correct.
Fun-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
-
ecurbruce
- Posts: 313
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:43 am
- Location: Hurricane mills TN
Re: six coil alternator in a narrow case 250
Bob,
I can't understand this choke coil though. Why did they run the AC current in close proxemity of the DC current? It's almost setup like a transformer...
Is this effecting the DC current when AC is flowing? I've never seen a AC\DC choke.
I can't understand this choke coil though. Why did they run the AC current in close proxemity of the DC current? It's almost setup like a transformer...
Is this effecting the DC current when AC is flowing? I've never seen a AC\DC choke.
-
DewCatTea-Bob
- Posts: 2897
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:53 am
- Location: Near SE side of Lake Michigan
Black-box's Flux-field Core-coils / AC-chokes
" I can't understand this choke coil though. "
____ First I must say, it's fairly nice to have confirmation that anyone else besides MotoMike & myself, is actually following this side-track subject -(away from the main-topic of this thread) !
" Why did they run the AC current in close proxemity of the DC current? "
____ I have at least a couple problems with responding to that question (as it's worded)...
I'm not sure exactly where you believe that to be occurring at !? _ Perhaps you're assuming that there's SIGNIFICANT alternating-current passing through the pair of outer core-coils (of the flux-field core-body, which are connected to the pair of alt.wire-leads), due to the depicted FW.bridge-rectifier shown within the FAULTY representation of the black-box's schematic-plan,, or perhaps due to the so-named "HF filter Capacitor" , (or something else ?)...
Well the diagram depicting the FW.bridge-rectifier set-up, is just plain WRONG ! - (Or else full AC would indeed enter the flux-field core-body, in that [incorrect!] case.)
And the 'capacitor', (which I believe to be a condenser), is of too small a value to allow significant AC-juice into those outer coil-windings.
__ Otherwise, there's not really any (significant) 'AC' involved (within the black-box circuits), since the two alt.circuits are HALF-wave rectified, (leaving ONLY 'Pulsating-DC').
__ If you don't think I've covered your question (however you really meant for it to have been taken), then please ask with reference to the (electrically-correct) schematic-diagram which Mike first posted (and I colorized).
" It's almost setup like a transformer... "
____ Yeah sorta, if AC were involved, it could possibly do some voltage-transforming, or mere 'isolating',, depending on turns-ratios. _ But that's of course out-of-the-picture in this case !
" Is this effecting the DC current when AC is flowing? "
____ By now I hope you understand that there is no AC actually 'flowing', ANYwhere in a stock Duke.
(If you suspect otherwise, then please give me the chance to address any doubt.)
" I've never seen a AC\DC choke. "
____ Well there shouldn't be any such thing either, as straight-line DC can't be 'choked' !
And since only AC is really CHOKE-able, those core-coils which appear as if chokes, really ought not be considered as such, in this case, (at least not as their main-function, although P.DC can also be subdued [at a far-less degree!], by coil-windings).
____ First I must say, it's fairly nice to have confirmation that anyone else besides MotoMike & myself, is actually following this side-track subject -(away from the main-topic of this thread) !
" Why did they run the AC current in close proxemity of the DC current? "
____ I have at least a couple problems with responding to that question (as it's worded)...
I'm not sure exactly where you believe that to be occurring at !? _ Perhaps you're assuming that there's SIGNIFICANT alternating-current passing through the pair of outer core-coils (of the flux-field core-body, which are connected to the pair of alt.wire-leads), due to the depicted FW.bridge-rectifier shown within the FAULTY representation of the black-box's schematic-plan,, or perhaps due to the so-named "HF filter Capacitor" , (or something else ?)...
Well the diagram depicting the FW.bridge-rectifier set-up, is just plain WRONG ! - (Or else full AC would indeed enter the flux-field core-body, in that [incorrect!] case.)
And the 'capacitor', (which I believe to be a condenser), is of too small a value to allow significant AC-juice into those outer coil-windings.
__ Otherwise, there's not really any (significant) 'AC' involved (within the black-box circuits), since the two alt.circuits are HALF-wave rectified, (leaving ONLY 'Pulsating-DC').
__ If you don't think I've covered your question (however you really meant for it to have been taken), then please ask with reference to the (electrically-correct) schematic-diagram which Mike first posted (and I colorized).
" It's almost setup like a transformer... "
____ Yeah sorta, if AC were involved, it could possibly do some voltage-transforming, or mere 'isolating',, depending on turns-ratios. _ But that's of course out-of-the-picture in this case !
" Is this effecting the DC current when AC is flowing? "
____ By now I hope you understand that there is no AC actually 'flowing', ANYwhere in a stock Duke.
(If you suspect otherwise, then please give me the chance to address any doubt.)
" I've never seen a AC\DC choke. "
____ Well there shouldn't be any such thing either, as straight-line DC can't be 'choked' !
And since only AC is really CHOKE-able, those core-coils which appear as if chokes, really ought not be considered as such, in this case, (at least not as their main-function, although P.DC can also be subdued [at a far-less degree!], by coil-windings).
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
-
MotoMike
- Posts: 487
- Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 3:40 am
Re: six coil alternator in a narrow case 250
DewCatTea-Bob wrote:By: MotoMike...
" As the full wave rectified output of D3 and D4 are going more positive, the charge light goes dimmer as the difference in potential across the bulb gets smaller. "
____ Well actually, none of the rectified-outputs of any of the diodes is technically "full wave", however the combined HALF-wave outputs of both of those diodes put together, will SEEM to be same as 'full-wave', though actually two SEPARATE half-waves (180-degree out-of-phase).
MM Well actually the is rectified outputs of diodes D3 and D4 are technically full wave. The output of any one diode used as a rectifier is never full wave, its very nature prevents this and is what makes them useful to us. full wave rectifiers are always made of more than one diode,(at least all I've seen or can imagine-I know always and never are risky in this context) even back when the diodes in question were vacume tubes. A full wave rectifier does not have to be a bridge rectifier. When rectification takes place through 360 degrees of the input, you have full wave rectification. Your output will be pulsing DC through the entire sign wave of the input. no reason to say that it "seems" to be full wave. it is full wave.
DewCatTea-Bob wrote:By: MotoMike...
" The bulb is, if I remember right a 3 watt 12 volt bulb, so will have very little current through it, "
____ I'm sure it's not a "12 volt" and I think it's a 1.5-watt, 6v-bulb.
MM Fair enough on my 69 the warning lights are 12/3. I think we discussed that at some point. I suspected they did it for improved ruggedness. Assumed it was the same on the 65ish system with no info to indicate it was so. The point I was making remains valid. current will still be about the same and not provide significant charging through the bulb.
incidentally, this would be a neat place to install two LED's of different colors arranged in paralell and in opposite polarity. then you could have the red led conducting discharge, and a green one when on charge.
DewCatTea-Bob wrote:By: MotoMike...
" It is serving an indicator function because current flow at a much greater rate is passing through L2A and L2A in the same fashion. "
____ When I first read this, I thought it said "L2B and L2A", however 'L2A' alone, is certainly correct.
MM What I meant to say here by "same" Is before charge, current is supplied by the battery. after charging starts, it passes from ground to the positive output of the rectifiers through associated wiring and components. Of course it is not identical on each side as there are different components in line and thought the schematic shows the differnces self evident.
If you are pointing out that current through L2b is in the same direction in both cases, I would agree. Trying to say it in the least amount of wording.
Mike
-
DewCatTea-Bob
- Posts: 2897
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:53 am
- Location: Near SE side of Lake Michigan
Rectification-type of Diode-circuits in Black-box
____ Mike, with NEW-members, I just go-ahead & straighten-out their mix-up, but I ask you for permission to properly straighten-out the shaded-areas of who posted what,, (I do not alter ANY wording in the process!),
so is it okay with you that I fix it up ? _ (If you don't like the results, then I could put it all back as it currently is.)
" Well actually the is rectified outputs of diodes D3 and D4 are technically full wave. "
____ Okay Mike,, amongst only tech-type people talking their tech-speak, I'll admit that I'M the one of us who has miss-used the term "technically", however I know you must realize that your use of "full wave" (in regards to a pair of single diodes), could certainly confuse the non-tech types (of the majority of members here).
(Besides that, I'm intending to argue-out your debatable point, with you.)
__ Rather than me stating "technically", I instead should've stated:
none of the rectified-outputs of those diodes is IN ACTUALITY "full-wave" by itself !
" When rectification takes place through 360 degrees of the input, you have full wave rectification. Your output will be pulsing DC through the entire sign wave of the input. "
____ Well that's of course true, BUT, that's only concerning the combined 'wave-form' output.
In this type of case which we're working with here, rectification (by either ONE of the two diodes ALONE), only takes place through just 180-degrees (of the 360-degree input) ! - Merely passing-onward ONLY the positive-halves of the WHOLE/complete AC-cycle, (thus ignoring all the negative-halves) !
What's needed to be kept in mind is that we have TWO AC-outputs which are SEPARATE - (as separate as the diodes they are connected to) ! _ Either one being merely just HALF-wave rectified !
And so just because their outputs happen to be 180-out-of-phase (thus providing a "full wave" WAVE-FORM), should NOT necessarily mean that their combined-output MUST therefore be concluded as being 100% fullwave-rectification of the entire AC power-source ! - (Even though it may APPEAR as so.)
I think it would be better, (for others to correctly understand), to not simply state that the alternator is being "full wave" rectified,, as doing so without including a percentage, allows the reader to assume that the rectification (of the AC power-source) is "full" (as in fully 100%).
Cuz it seems most likely that the majority of people (who're not 'trained') ought logically assume that the term 'fullwave-rectification' must mean that the rectified AC power-source is being FULLY rectified ! _ (How could they gather anything else ?)
__ Yet the rectification-case which YOU promote, is NOT 'full' ! ... Cuz in this case, (without a FW-bridge), the so-called "full wave" output, is actually only 50% rectified-output (of the entire power-source).
" no reason to say that it "seems" to be full wave. it is full wave. "
____ Okay, of course the resulting P.DC-output waveform is indeed "full wave", BUT, that waveform is not 'FULL'... as it only reflects HALF the actual amplitude of the entire power-source !
So by now it ought be understood that there's fairly good "reason" to state that their combined-output only SEEMS as if "full wave".
__ Since the inputs of D3 & D4 are not fed from the EXACT-same powering-source, it would be confusing to declare that the combined-output of those two diodes is genuine (FULL) full-wave output, in the true-spirit of the term 'FULL-WAVE' (such as that obtained with a FW-bridge) ! ...
__ For examples,, if the source-wattage supplied to one diode happened to be 25-watts, and the source-wattage to the other diode happened to be only 10-watts,, OR,
the two (separate!) power-sources happened to be other than exactly 180-degrees out-of phase,
would you then still maintain that the combined-output is "full wave" ?? _ I THINK NOT, as it would actually not be (FULL fullwave) !
And since the two SEPARATE alt.windings can't actually be EXACTLY the very-same in their respective power-outputs, then it's fairly misleading to claim that the combined-output of both diodes is genuine 'full-wave', in the true-spirit of the expected meaning of the term !
" The point I was making remains valid. current will still be about the same and not provide significant charging through the bulb. "
____ Indeed so !
(Although since the resistance of a bulb-filament increases with heat/current,
the 1.5w/6v bulb will not allow current-flow to the very-same degree as (an equivalent) 3w/12v bulb.
" incidentally, this would be a neat place to install two LED's of different colors arranged in paralell and in opposite polarity. "
____ This is one notion where we think alike Mike, as I've been intending to bring-up the same point (when we were all-done discussing the stock charging-light circuit).
" It is serving an indicator function because current flow at a much greater rate is passing through L2A and L2A in the same fashion. "
____ When I first read this, I thought it said 'L2B and L2A', however "L2A" alone, is certainly correct.
" What I meant to say here by "same" Is before charge, current is supplied by the battery. after charging starts, it passes from ground to the positive output of the rectifiers through associated wiring and components. Of course it is not identical on each side as there are different components in line and thought the schematic shows the differnces self evident. "
____ I believe I understood you properly on that Mike... it was my reference to your (seemingly) typo, that I was actually intending to be in reference of.
" If you are pointing out that current through L2b is in the same direction in both cases, I would agree. "
____ No, I wasn't... Been saving the more complex stuff for another (more dedicated) thread !
__ So far, I've since found only a couple old thread-posts concerning this black-box circuitry topic, (within a non-related thread). - viewtopic.php?f=3&t=23#p87
I had thought that we (here at this w.site), had a few related-posts established (within a fairly related thread), concerning the n-c black-box subject,, but if I don't find such a concentration soon, then I'll just have to start a new/DEDICATED thread (for our side-track topic).
Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob
so is it okay with you that I fix it up ? _ (If you don't like the results, then I could put it all back as it currently is.)
" Well actually the is rectified outputs of diodes D3 and D4 are technically full wave. "
____ Okay Mike,, amongst only tech-type people talking their tech-speak, I'll admit that I'M the one of us who has miss-used the term "technically", however I know you must realize that your use of "full wave" (in regards to a pair of single diodes), could certainly confuse the non-tech types (of the majority of members here).
(Besides that, I'm intending to argue-out your debatable point, with you.)
__ Rather than me stating "technically", I instead should've stated:
none of the rectified-outputs of those diodes is IN ACTUALITY "full-wave" by itself !
" When rectification takes place through 360 degrees of the input, you have full wave rectification. Your output will be pulsing DC through the entire sign wave of the input. "
____ Well that's of course true, BUT, that's only concerning the combined 'wave-form' output.
In this type of case which we're working with here, rectification (by either ONE of the two diodes ALONE), only takes place through just 180-degrees (of the 360-degree input) ! - Merely passing-onward ONLY the positive-halves of the WHOLE/complete AC-cycle, (thus ignoring all the negative-halves) !
What's needed to be kept in mind is that we have TWO AC-outputs which are SEPARATE - (as separate as the diodes they are connected to) ! _ Either one being merely just HALF-wave rectified !
And so just because their outputs happen to be 180-out-of-phase (thus providing a "full wave" WAVE-FORM), should NOT necessarily mean that their combined-output MUST therefore be concluded as being 100% fullwave-rectification of the entire AC power-source ! - (Even though it may APPEAR as so.)
I think it would be better, (for others to correctly understand), to not simply state that the alternator is being "full wave" rectified,, as doing so without including a percentage, allows the reader to assume that the rectification (of the AC power-source) is "full" (as in fully 100%).
Cuz it seems most likely that the majority of people (who're not 'trained') ought logically assume that the term 'fullwave-rectification' must mean that the rectified AC power-source is being FULLY rectified ! _ (How could they gather anything else ?)
__ Yet the rectification-case which YOU promote, is NOT 'full' ! ... Cuz in this case, (without a FW-bridge), the so-called "full wave" output, is actually only 50% rectified-output (of the entire power-source).
" no reason to say that it "seems" to be full wave. it is full wave. "
____ Okay, of course the resulting P.DC-output waveform is indeed "full wave", BUT, that waveform is not 'FULL'... as it only reflects HALF the actual amplitude of the entire power-source !
So by now it ought be understood that there's fairly good "reason" to state that their combined-output only SEEMS as if "full wave".
__ Since the inputs of D3 & D4 are not fed from the EXACT-same powering-source, it would be confusing to declare that the combined-output of those two diodes is genuine (FULL) full-wave output, in the true-spirit of the term 'FULL-WAVE' (such as that obtained with a FW-bridge) ! ...
__ For examples,, if the source-wattage supplied to one diode happened to be 25-watts, and the source-wattage to the other diode happened to be only 10-watts,, OR,
the two (separate!) power-sources happened to be other than exactly 180-degrees out-of phase,
would you then still maintain that the combined-output is "full wave" ?? _ I THINK NOT, as it would actually not be (FULL fullwave) !
And since the two SEPARATE alt.windings can't actually be EXACTLY the very-same in their respective power-outputs, then it's fairly misleading to claim that the combined-output of both diodes is genuine 'full-wave', in the true-spirit of the expected meaning of the term !
" The point I was making remains valid. current will still be about the same and not provide significant charging through the bulb. "
____ Indeed so !
(Although since the resistance of a bulb-filament increases with heat/current,
the 1.5w/6v bulb will not allow current-flow to the very-same degree as (an equivalent) 3w/12v bulb.
" incidentally, this would be a neat place to install two LED's of different colors arranged in paralell and in opposite polarity. "
____ This is one notion where we think alike Mike, as I've been intending to bring-up the same point (when we were all-done discussing the stock charging-light circuit).
" It is serving an indicator function because current flow at a much greater rate is passing through L2A and L2A in the same fashion. "
____ When I first read this, I thought it said 'L2B and L2A', however "L2A" alone, is certainly correct.
" What I meant to say here by "same" Is before charge, current is supplied by the battery. after charging starts, it passes from ground to the positive output of the rectifiers through associated wiring and components. Of course it is not identical on each side as there are different components in line and thought the schematic shows the differnces self evident. "
____ I believe I understood you properly on that Mike... it was my reference to your (seemingly) typo, that I was actually intending to be in reference of.
" If you are pointing out that current through L2b is in the same direction in both cases, I would agree. "
____ No, I wasn't... Been saving the more complex stuff for another (more dedicated) thread !
__ So far, I've since found only a couple old thread-posts concerning this black-box circuitry topic, (within a non-related thread). - viewtopic.php?f=3&t=23#p87
I had thought that we (here at this w.site), had a few related-posts established (within a fairly related thread), concerning the n-c black-box subject,, but if I don't find such a concentration soon, then I'll just have to start a new/DEDICATED thread (for our side-track topic).
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
-
ecurbruce
- Posts: 313
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:43 am
- Location: Hurricane mills TN
Re: six coil alternator in a narrow case 250
Bob said "First I must say, it's fairly nice to have confirmation..."
Of course, I'm on every word, and learning a lot, but I know there are others following along who are not active participants, one of which is my father. Just do the math on the views numbers, it's more than you , Mike and me logging in.
"...assuming that there's significant alternating current passing through the pair of outter core-coils..."
In the diagram I have from this thread which is the one that you colored showes the L1 & L3 of these coils before rectification, which would still be AC? If that's the case, the the AC would affect the DC as an interupt to the DC coil saturation? If not, what do you see as the function of the L1 &L3, and L2A & L2B coils?
" By now I hope you understand that there's no AC actually "flowing" ANYwhere..."
I was thinking my alternator was putting out AC until rectification to half wave DC at D3 & D4.(which is on the other side of L1 & L3).
A DC choke coil is a pretty common component in a modern regulator, to even out the pulsating DC flow after a rectifier, to purify it a little by storing some energy in the coil windings.
I can't figure out just what the intended use is in this application?
I hope I'm not just muddying up the water with these questions... just trying to figure out what I'm seeing.
I'm OK with a separate dedicated thread for our side-track topic.
Bruce
Of course, I'm on every word, and learning a lot, but I know there are others following along who are not active participants, one of which is my father. Just do the math on the views numbers, it's more than you , Mike and me logging in.
"...assuming that there's significant alternating current passing through the pair of outter core-coils..."
In the diagram I have from this thread which is the one that you colored showes the L1 & L3 of these coils before rectification, which would still be AC? If that's the case, the the AC would affect the DC as an interupt to the DC coil saturation? If not, what do you see as the function of the L1 &L3, and L2A & L2B coils?
" By now I hope you understand that there's no AC actually "flowing" ANYwhere..."
I was thinking my alternator was putting out AC until rectification to half wave DC at D3 & D4.(which is on the other side of L1 & L3).
A DC choke coil is a pretty common component in a modern regulator, to even out the pulsating DC flow after a rectifier, to purify it a little by storing some energy in the coil windings.
I can't figure out just what the intended use is in this application?
I hope I'm not just muddying up the water with these questions... just trying to figure out what I'm seeing.
I'm OK with a separate dedicated thread for our side-track topic.
Bruce
-
MotoMike
- Posts: 487
- Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 3:40 am
Re: six coil alternator in a narrow case 250
[quote="DewCatTea-Bob"]____
MM, Bob go ahead and reword if you want, but I think we have a basic disagreement here.
" Well actually the rectified outputs of diodes D3 and D4 are technically full wave. "
____ Okay Mike,, amongst only tech-type people talking their tech-speak, I'll admit that I'M the one of us who has miss-used the term "technically", however I know you must realize that your use of "full wave" (in regards to a pair of single diodes), could certainly confuse the non-tech types (of the majority of members here).
(Besides that, I'm intending to argue your debatable point out with you.)
__ Rather than me stating "technically", I instead should've stated:
none of the rectified-outputs of those diodes is IN ACTUALITY "full-wave" by itself !
" When rectification takes place through 360 degrees of the input, you have full wave rectification. Your output will be pulsing DC through the entire sign wave of the input. "
____ Well that's of course true (in OTHER cases!), BUT, that's not what's actually going-on in the case we're discussing ! - In our particular case (which we're working with here), rectification only takes place through just 180-degrees of the input ! ...
What's needed to be kept in mind is that (here) we have TWO / SEPARATE inputs ! _ Both merely HALF-wave rectified !
And just because their outputs happen to be 180-out-of-phase, should not mean that their combined-output MUST then be thought-of as only "full wave" !! - (Even though it may APPEAR so.)
I think a better / more logical term for the virtual-type "full wave" -(which you claim as being just the same), should be: 'DUAL half-wave',, so as to not become confused with genuine 'FULL-wave'.
" no reason to say that it "seems" to be full wave. it is full wave. "
____ Now with THAT statement Mike, I can fully argue against ! ...
There is indeed (very-good!) "reason" to state that their combined-output SEEMS as if 'full-wave' ! ...
Since the inputs of D3 & D4 are not fed from the EXACT-same source, it would be confusing to declare that the combined-output of those two diodes is genuine full-wave output in the true-spirit of the term 'FULL-WAVE' ! ...
__ For examples,, if the source-wattage to one diode happened to be 25-watts, and the source-wattage to the other diode happened to be only 10-watts,, OR,
the two (separate!) power-sources happened to be 178-degrees out-of phase,
would you then still maintain that the combined-output is "full wave" ?? _ I THINK NOT, as it would not be !
And since the two SEPARATE alt.windings can't actually be EXACTLY the very-same in output-power, then it's of course misleading to claim that the combined-output of both diodes is genuine 'full-wave', in the true-spirit of the real-meaning of the established term !
MM--Bob I don't know how much you've been around full wave rectifiers other than bridge, the the circuit is from what I can see identical to a center tapped transformer secondary connected to a classic extremely common full wave rectifier. A pair of diodes(two not four) are often the heart of a full wave rectifier. It is wired just this way so that you get 360 degree rectification. The output of the alternator is indeed the same source, just opposite ends of it. If you connect an o-scope to each of the stator outputs the sign waves will be equal in amplitude and opposite in polarity. the stator winding acts exactly like the secondary of a transfomer. It doesn't matter if the voltage accross it is induced by a magnetic rotating field or a changing field from a primary winding. To state that differing demands on the circuit could in theory place a 25 watt load during one diodes 180 degree shift and migh reduce to 10 watt demand on the other diodes shift, doesn't change the circuit design from being what it is. the same could be said of the loading of any center non bridge full wave rectifier. But keep in mind that the loads could be instantaniously different in one half of the the stator coils at an instant of time. This will be an important point when we get to discussing the increased wattage potential of the alternator when reconfigured. Still standing by it being a full wave rectifier circuit.
____ When I first read this, I thought it said 'L2B and L2A', however "L2A" alone, is certainly correct.
" What I meant to say here by "same" Is before charge, current is supplied by the battery. after charging starts, it passes from ground to the positive output of the rectifiers through associated wiring and components. Of course it is not identical on each side as there are different components in line and thought the schematic shows the differnces self evident. "
MM I didn't get it bob, and did not catch the typo til now. Now I get what you were saying.
Mike
MM, Bob go ahead and reword if you want, but I think we have a basic disagreement here.
" Well actually the rectified outputs of diodes D3 and D4 are technically full wave. "
____ Okay Mike,, amongst only tech-type people talking their tech-speak, I'll admit that I'M the one of us who has miss-used the term "technically", however I know you must realize that your use of "full wave" (in regards to a pair of single diodes), could certainly confuse the non-tech types (of the majority of members here).
(Besides that, I'm intending to argue your debatable point out with you.)
__ Rather than me stating "technically", I instead should've stated:
none of the rectified-outputs of those diodes is IN ACTUALITY "full-wave" by itself !
" When rectification takes place through 360 degrees of the input, you have full wave rectification. Your output will be pulsing DC through the entire sign wave of the input. "
____ Well that's of course true (in OTHER cases!), BUT, that's not what's actually going-on in the case we're discussing ! - In our particular case (which we're working with here), rectification only takes place through just 180-degrees of the input ! ...
What's needed to be kept in mind is that (here) we have TWO / SEPARATE inputs ! _ Both merely HALF-wave rectified !
And just because their outputs happen to be 180-out-of-phase, should not mean that their combined-output MUST then be thought-of as only "full wave" !! - (Even though it may APPEAR so.)
I think a better / more logical term for the virtual-type "full wave" -(which you claim as being just the same), should be: 'DUAL half-wave',, so as to not become confused with genuine 'FULL-wave'.
" no reason to say that it "seems" to be full wave. it is full wave. "
____ Now with THAT statement Mike, I can fully argue against ! ...
There is indeed (very-good!) "reason" to state that their combined-output SEEMS as if 'full-wave' ! ...
Since the inputs of D3 & D4 are not fed from the EXACT-same source, it would be confusing to declare that the combined-output of those two diodes is genuine full-wave output in the true-spirit of the term 'FULL-WAVE' ! ...
__ For examples,, if the source-wattage to one diode happened to be 25-watts, and the source-wattage to the other diode happened to be only 10-watts,, OR,
the two (separate!) power-sources happened to be 178-degrees out-of phase,
would you then still maintain that the combined-output is "full wave" ?? _ I THINK NOT, as it would not be !
And since the two SEPARATE alt.windings can't actually be EXACTLY the very-same in output-power, then it's of course misleading to claim that the combined-output of both diodes is genuine 'full-wave', in the true-spirit of the real-meaning of the established term !
MM--Bob I don't know how much you've been around full wave rectifiers other than bridge, the the circuit is from what I can see identical to a center tapped transformer secondary connected to a classic extremely common full wave rectifier. A pair of diodes(two not four) are often the heart of a full wave rectifier. It is wired just this way so that you get 360 degree rectification. The output of the alternator is indeed the same source, just opposite ends of it. If you connect an o-scope to each of the stator outputs the sign waves will be equal in amplitude and opposite in polarity. the stator winding acts exactly like the secondary of a transfomer. It doesn't matter if the voltage accross it is induced by a magnetic rotating field or a changing field from a primary winding. To state that differing demands on the circuit could in theory place a 25 watt load during one diodes 180 degree shift and migh reduce to 10 watt demand on the other diodes shift, doesn't change the circuit design from being what it is. the same could be said of the loading of any center non bridge full wave rectifier. But keep in mind that the loads could be instantaniously different in one half of the the stator coils at an instant of time. This will be an important point when we get to discussing the increased wattage potential of the alternator when reconfigured. Still standing by it being a full wave rectifier circuit.
____ When I first read this, I thought it said 'L2B and L2A', however "L2A" alone, is certainly correct.
" What I meant to say here by "same" Is before charge, current is supplied by the battery. after charging starts, it passes from ground to the positive output of the rectifiers through associated wiring and components. Of course it is not identical on each side as there are different components in line and thought the schematic shows the differnces self evident. "
MM I didn't get it bob, and did not catch the typo til now. Now I get what you were saying.
Mike
-
DewCatTea-Bob
- Posts: 2897
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:53 am
- Location: Near SE side of Lake Michigan
Conventional "full wave" vs. True 'FULL-wave'
" Bob go ahead and reword if you want, "
____ I took this to be your reply (to my inquiry), granting my request for permission to fix-up/straighten-out your previous post's shaded areas, so as to properly help indicate who had posted which wording.
NO wording was altered in the process ! _ But as for the now altered shaded-area (that's expected thru this w.site), I hope you approve how my post-alteration work turned-out.
__ Now how about I do same for this next one of yours?
Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob
____ I took this to be your reply (to my inquiry), granting my request for permission to fix-up/straighten-out your previous post's shaded areas, so as to properly help indicate who had posted which wording.
NO wording was altered in the process ! _ But as for the now altered shaded-area (that's expected thru this w.site), I hope you approve how my post-alteration work turned-out.
__ Now how about I do same for this next one of yours?
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
Return to “Ducati Singles Main Discussions (& How to Join)”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guests