n-c alternator modifications: discussion and testing

[Bevel bob]

Hi,Bob, I have always uderstood that up to 14.5 v is ok while charging ,the voltage drops back once the battery is charged , the benefit of a good modern regulator i think, as the battery is really 13.2 v ,6x 2.2 cells I have always looked for at least 14v to ensure effective charging (with a zener or electronic reg) . I have not had any problems with over gassing or short life ,the battery on my other zener system is about 15 years old and still works fine. I fully agree that an unregulated system would suffer though.Looking for a suitable bulb to work with my CEV 130 reflector which has a very poor pattern.

[DewCatTea-Bob]

Hi,Bob, I have always uderstood that up to 14.5 v is ok while charging ,the voltage drops back once the battery is charged , the benefit of a good modern regulator i think, as the battery is really 13.2 v ,6x 2.2 cells I have always looked for at least 14v to ensure effective charging (with a zener or electronic reg) . I have not had any problems with over gassing or short life ,the battery on my other zener system is about 15 years old and still works fine. I fully agree that an unregulated system would suffer though.Looking for a suitable bulb to work with my CEV 130 reflector which has a very poor pattern.

____ Well Bob, 14.5-volts may be okay for a battery with sufficient amp-hours (to better handle the resulting current), but what about light-bulb filament-life ? _ A v.regulator ought to be able to at least help a weak battery protect lights from premature burn-out.
I realize that so-called 12-volt light-bulbs are really made to handle the 13.2-volts, but anything over 14-volts is pushing-it pretty-much.
Batteries ought to be charged at a rate of about 10% of their amp-hour rating, so for instance, (during extended time-periods), a 7.5 amp-hour battery ought to be charged at 3/4ths of an amp, (although much greater rates could be handled for short periods).
__ If a v.regulator is allowing 14.5-volts to exist down at 3000-RPM, then it really ought to be checked to see how high it lets the voltage climb-up to at 6 to 8k RPM !
If system-voltage goes any higher than 15-volts, I'd then say that's a good-sign of a worthless regulator-unit.
Also, it's fairly obvious that your charging-system & load-system are not very close to being well matched, thus making life all the more difficult for your reg.unit !
A well matched system, doesn't really need a v.regulator.
____ As for fitting a modern H4-type bulb into a stock headlamp, you ought to consider getting a modern used headlight-reflector (from some common Jap.bike), and cut-down it's outer-circumference to fit your headlamp's shell/bucket-rim.
__ The greater load (than your weak 35w.headlight), will help balance-out your system.


Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob

[Bevel bob]

Hi Bob, I will charge up the battery and do a voltage check with the higher watt bulbs at different revs, you could well be right about bulb life as the tail light goes regularly, the CEV globe is new in the 130 bucket but may not be the best design, limited choice at this size,think the bucket is off an early single,175?.A 150 unit would be preferable .

[DewCatTea-Bob]

" I will charge up the battery and do a voltage check with the higher watt bulbs at different revs, "

____ A normal -(lead-acid) battery ought be considered fully-charged when it reaches & holds* 13.2-volts (* at least a few minutes after having it's terminals disconnected from any load or charging circuits).
A freshly charged-up 12v.battery that then sits (left un-recharged) for a couple days, ought to hold at (at least) 11.8-volts, or else it's likely defective.
It shall be interesting when you find whatever the associated RPM-points are when your intended testing discovers next to no voltage-change across the battery (thus the break-even point), with each load you try-out.
__ The voltage-test you should get done before-hand however, is to keep tabs on the voltage-levels across the (unloaded!) battery as you increase revs toward red-line. _ Because you ought to find-out if your (thus-far seemingly weak) v.regulator-unit actually has any beneficial effect worth having.
Cuz I think a GOOD regulator ought prevent voltages above 13.8-volts (when used along-with a std.battery).


" you could well be right about bulb life as the tail light goes regularly, "

____ It's quite understandable that a tail-light would burn-out more easily, cuz it's filament has a much harder time handling the additional current-flow (& heat) which the higher voltage causes,, although I believe also an accumulative-toll is taken by the much heftier headlight-filament and eventually will burn-out as well, (no-doubt sometime shortly after a time when the tail-light goes again).


" the CEV globe is new in the 130 bucket but may not be the best design, limited choice at this size,think the bucket is off an early single,175?. "

____ I always thought that ALL the Mks-models should've came stock with that smaller headlamp (like the scr.models), your Duke ought to look good with it.
Even though you have the smaller headlamp, I still think a modified H4-type headlight-reflector could be fitted well enough in your stock HL.rim... Does that idea not appeal to you for some reason ?


" A 150 unit would be preferable . "

____ From a functional (& more stock/original appearance) standpoint, I agree.
If you don't care to cut-down a H4-reflector to fit your headlamp, then perhaps you might consider replacing your current headlamp with a more modern one from a L-twin (or BMW, or whatever), which is made to accept a H4-type 12v.bulb.


Hopeful-Cheers,
-Bob

[wcorey]

Back to having a bit of free time...

" with the caps and no battery, used a typical newer type Shindengen 12v reg/rec instead of the plain rec and added a 5ohm single Dyna coil. "

____ It would be interesting to check for any effect the regulator has on power output & consumption. _ That could be done by letting the rect.block do the rectification and taking the regulator in & out of the circuit.

But it's a combination reg/rec, no way to use just the reg, you'd have to be running the two rec's.

" Not sure how to simulate how the coil would behave (what current it would draw) while operating without making something to trigger an ignition at the appropriate rpm, "

____ I'd determine what the maximum current-draw it's capable of, then find another load that's equivalent to about 20% of that maximum figure, and leave it constantly connected to simulate ign.system power-consumption. _ (As there's only about a 1 in 5 chance at any frozen-point in time, that max.power-consumption [by the ign.system] is occurring.)

I still don't trust 'simulated' loads to provide exactly the same effect, at this point would prefer to use 'the real thing'.

" I assume it would draw less at lower rpm. "

____ I can see where more sparks per second would seem to equate to more energy-consumption, however regardless of RPM, (in a points-system), the 'off' & 'on' percentage-ratio remains the same,, so average current-draw ought remain unchanging & fairly constant despite RPM.

I don't understand this, I thought the coil saturates then the field collapses for each spark. Wouldn't twice as many 'saturation's/collapse's' in a given time frame use twice as much power (just like if you were turning a light on and off)? Unless the coil ceases to fully saturate at the higher rpm's...?

____ Wondering how you got the "4300 rpm", exactly !?

Remember the step pulley on the other motor? Actually calculates to 4310 rpm, I rounded off. I can get any of 3450, 4310, 4830, 5450 or 6000 rpm...

" So that's pretty close to a functional system that would operate a bike and it will fully charge a 12v battery at somewhere around 4krpm... "

____ So that help's to prove what I've been claiming about 'power' being all that really matters with alternators, and that 'voltage' is relatively an irrelevant aspect. _ Cuz all an alternator can offer is just 'power', regardless of whether it's coils are in series or parallel.
__ (This in turn relates to a reply-post I had posted but has possibly been overlooked because I had responded to a new-post of Bill's before I later responded his very-previous post, [which had been posted on the previous/older page]. _ So if ya think ya may have missed it, here's a link back to it... viewtopic.php?f=3&t=556&start=280#p4544 .)

I'm glad you pointed out that additional explanation you added, I would have missed it. I guess with that I now more or less get where you're coming from. In light of this, you could translate where I refer to insufficient voltage output to equate to insufficient power, as the way I now see it is that if the system provides enough power, the voltage is then enabled to go higher. So I'm still partially correct in saying that there isn't enough voltage output, it's just that power is actually the root cause (I'm just sorta putting the cart before the horse). The end result of what I'm implying is the same, needs more 'capacity' to be acceptable.


Bill

[wcorey]

3 sections with outputs combined, then into Shindengen FH008ee mosfet reg/rec (using only two of the three inputs).
FH008 pos output through current meter to capacitors, neg output straight to caps, vdc taken at caps, 55w (or maybe 60w) light to caps pos/neg. (Where noted as an addition to the light, coil and 3ohm res off caps same as light).

3450rpm---4.22a---13.97vdc---58.95w
4310rpm---4.24a---14.16vdc---60.73w

Same as first test with the addition of 5 ohm coil at full draw.
3450rpm---6.77a---13.87vdc---93.89w
4310rpm---6.69a---13.98vdc---93.52w

Same as first test but with addition of 3ohm res instead of coil
4310rpm---8.56a---13.55vdc---115.98w

Same as first test but with addition of 3ohm res and 5ohm coil
4310rpm---9.95a---11.96vdc---119w



Same as first test but with only 2 sections (sec 1-3 unless otherwise noted)
3450rpm---4.19a---13.89vdc---58.19w
4310rpm---4.26a---14.07vdc---59.93w

Same but with addition of 5 ohm coil
3450rpm---6.08a---12.01vdc---73.02w (sec 1-3)
3450rpm---5.91a---11.69vdc---69.08w (sec 2-3)
4310rpm---6.55a----13.7vdc---89.73w

Same but with addition of 3ohm res instead of coil
4310rpm---7.60a----11.60vdc---88.16w

Same but with addition of 3ohm res and 5ohm coil
4310rpm---8.25a----11.52vdc---95.04w

Bill

[MotoMike]

Bill
Well done. seems like your efforts have really paid off.

Mike

[DewCatTea-Bob]

By: wcorey...

____ It would be interesting to check for any effect the regulator has on power output & consumption. _ That could be done by letting the rect.block do the rectification and taking the regulator in & out of the circuit.

"But it's a combination reg/rec, no way to use just the reg, you'd have to be running the two rec's. "

____ The 'rectifier' within your R.R-unit should not cause any notable effect when being taken in & out of the circuit, while it's 'regulator' is likely to cause a notable change.
While connecting-up a R.R-unit & the rect.block in parallel might possibly allow the rect.block to effectively leave it's regulator-circuit as if bypassed,
connecting your R.R-unit in series with the rect.block, should allow the regulator to still do it's job just as normally.
__ To run such a test, the alt.output-leads would first need to be connected to the rect.block, then the rect.block's (DC)- outputs connected to your R.R-unit's inputs (with the unit's outputs to the test-circuit). _ (The R.R-unit should not care if it's inputs are fed AC or DC.)
And to bypass the regulator-circuit (for performing the intended testing), a bypassing short-circuit (around the R.R-unit), is all that's needed !
(If really interested in testing your regulator's effectiveness, I'll then draw-up the test-circuit for you, if need be.)

____ I'd determine what the maximum current-draw it's capable of, then find another load that's equivalent to about 20% of that maximum figure, and leave it constantly connected to simulate ign.system power-consumption. _ (As there's only about a 1 in 5 chance at any frozen-point in time, that max.power-consumption [by the ign.system] is occurring.)

" I still don't trust 'simulated' loads to provide exactly the same effect, at this point would prefer to use 'the real thing'. "

____ There might possibly be up to a 5% difference (between real-world & simulated), but that's no good-reason to abandon the notion for related testing.
__ Perhaps you (or someone) could run a comparison-test to prove there's no real/big difference.

____ I can see where more sparks per second would seem to equate to more energy-consumption, however regardless of RPM, (in a points-system), the 'off' & 'on' percentage-ratio remains the same,, so average current-draw ought remain unchanging & fairly constant despite RPM.

" I don't understand this, I thought the coil saturates then the field collapses for each spark. Wouldn't twice as many 'saturation's/collapse's' in a given time frame use twice as much power (just like if you were turning a light on and off)? "

____ It shouldn't matter afterwords how what is being done with the power that's already been spent.
Thinking of a light-switch setup... in a 1-minute time-span, power-consumption would be equal regardless if the light was ON for 20-seconds straight & OFF 40-seconds straight, as opposed to being ON for 1-second & OFF for 2-seconds, for the duration of the 1-minute (in either case) !


" I can get any of 3450, 4310, 4830, 5450 or 6000 rpm... "

____ I think we should be most concerned with whatever RPM is closest to 'break-even'. _ (Hoping it's lower than the 4310 !)

____ So that help's to prove what I've been claiming about 'power' being all that really matters with alternators, and that 'voltage' is relatively an irrelevant aspect.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=556&start=280#p4544 .)

" I guess with that I now more or less get where you're coming from. "

____ I guess I can now be glad that I've finally used wording which makes my intended concept more comprehendable.
It is indeed a fairly difficult notion to get a proper grasp of.


" In light of this, you could translate where I refer to insufficient voltage output to equate to insufficient power, as the way I now see it is that if the system provides enough power, the voltage is then enabled to go higher. So I'm still partially correct in saying that there isn't enough voltage output, it's just that power is actually the root cause (I'm just sorta putting the cart before the horse). The end result of what I'm implying is the same, needs more 'capacity' to be acceptable. "

____ You are quite right.
__ I just wanted to pass-along a concept which is most always dumbed-down - (that alternators make A 'voltage' [along with power], without any connected circuit).
It's just-fine to speak of an alternator's 'voltage-output' once a 'circuit' is involved,
however before that point, it's just 'assumed'. _ (And I merely wanted it known that it's just an 'assumption'.)


Content-Cheers,
-Bob

[DewCatTea-Bob]

By: wcorey...
" 3 sections with outputs combined, then into Shindengen FH008ee mosfet reg/rec (using only two of the three inputs). "

____ Need clarification concerning the R.R-unit's "inputs"...
It should have one master-type 'common' input, which I don't know if you're actually taking into account as being one of the "three inputs".
If the unit has three separate standard-type inputs (intended for a 3-phase alt), as well as the common-input,, then instead of directly combining the outputs of the three stator-sections (prior to connecting to the R.R-unit), you ought to connect each of the three sections to a dedicated input on the R.R-unit, (as expected for a 3-phase type unit, [even though being fed a single phase]).


" FH008 pos output through current meter to capacitors, neg output straight to caps, vdc taken at caps, 55w (or maybe 60w) light to caps pos/neg , coil and 3ohm res off caps same as light. "

____ Okay, I understand this to mean that you have three loads, (a high-power light; an ign.coil; & a 3-ohm resistor), all in parallel, (bringing the 'total-load' down to what ought to be about 1.25-ohms). _ Correct ?
What is the 3-ohm resistor intended/meant to represent, (a real-hungry battery?) ?


" 3450rpm---4.22a---13.97vdc---58.95w
4310rpm---4.24a---14.16vdc---60.73w "

____ First, it seems to me that due to the low current-draw, the 'light' must be the only connected load !?
__ Second, the small differences between the two RPMs, indicates that the regulator is doing it's job.
To be more certain of that, higher RPM tests are called for.


" Same as first test with the addition of 5 ohm coil at full draw.
3450rpm---6.77a---13.87vdc---93.89w
4310rpm---6.69a---13.98vdc---93.52w "

____ This seems more reasonable, if for the light & the ign.coil.
What's the exact difference (load wise) between this-test and the "first test" ?


" Same as first test but with addition of 3ohm res instead of coil
4310rpm---8.56a---13.55vdc---115.98w "

____ Okay, I gather that this test is with just the resistor & the light (for loads, in parallel) !?
__ A 3450 test-version of this, would've been more telling.


" Same as first test but with addition of 3ohm res and 5ohm coil
4310rpm---9.95a---11.96vdc---119w "

____ Okay, now THIS test must be with ALL three mentioned loads.
__ It seems that it's just below the break-even point, at this test-RPM.
It would be of interest to do this test with the 3-ohm resistor replaced by your battery.


" Same as first test but with only 2 sections (sec 1-3 unless otherwise noted)
3450rpm---4.19a---13.89vdc---58.19w
4310rpm---4.26a---14.07vdc---59.93w "

____ That these figures are so very similar, with only 2/3rds of the power (of the first-test), indicates that the regulator was REALLY performing it's job when it was controlling all 3 sections.


" Same but with addition of 5 ohm coil
3450rpm---6.08a---12.01vdc---73.02w (sec 1-3)
3450rpm---5.91a---11.69vdc---69.08w (sec 2-3)
4310rpm---6.55a----13.7vdc---89.73w "

____ The break-even point (for the testing) seems to be somewhere near 3600-RPM.
But (in working reality), the ign.coil will only be drawing about 1/5th as much current, (so to represent that, a 25-ohm resister ought to be substituted in it's place).
__ Concerning the noted difference between the paired sections, it's fairly clear that section-II is indeed a bit weaker. _ (I believe that se.I & se.III are more the same.) _ So in addition to se.II not putting-out as much, it also slightly leaches a tad of power away-from the section(s) which it's 'directly' mated with. - (So for example, if se.III is producing 36.5w, then se.II is producing 34.5w while at the same time it draws 2w away from se.III.)


" Same but with addition of 3ohm res instead of coil
4310rpm---7.60a----11.60vdc---88.16w "

____ Seems to be below 'break-even' at that RPM but, that ought to be expected since the 3-ohm resistor is pretty-much acting as a SECOND high-power head-light ! _ (With the two loads combining to create about a 1.6-ohm total-load.)


" Same but with addition of 3ohm res and 5ohm coil
4310rpm---8.25a----11.52vdc---78.54w "

____ Now back to all three loads (and only about a 1.3-ohm total-load), powered by just two stator-sections, this time...
This combined load-system must be getting nearer to the resulted optimum working-impedance, as the wattage has (seemingly) not dropped off yet ! - (Note it ought be indicated as 95w, [not "78.54w"].)


____ The testing with the higher power indicates that the employed regulator is working well. _ However it would be good to test the regulator at max.RPM with NO connected load, so as to see that it can indeed handle it's job when not given any help by the loads. _ I'd say that any resulted voltage higher than 14.6v, is failing (especially when a battery is added to the circuit).


Fun-Cheers,
-Bob

[wcorey]

____ Need clarification concerning the R.R-unit's "inputs"...
It should have one master-type 'common' input, which I don't know if you're actually taking into account as being one of the "three inputs".

It's a three phase reg, has three inputs like all the other three phase reg's I have, never seen or heard of a 'master-type 'common' input' on one. Even single phase alt's have <edit> just the two input leads. What is the function/use of a 'master-type 'common' input'?

...you ought to connect each of the three sections to a dedicated input on the R.R-unit, (as expected for a 3-phase type unit, [even though being fed a single phase]).

Tried it already but got very low output, like a couple volts.

____ Okay, I understand this to mean that you have three loads, (a high-power light; an ign.coil; & a 3-ohm resistor), all in parallel, (bringing the 'total-load' down to what ought to be about 1.25-ohms). _ Correct ?

No, my bad for not being more clear. The 'first test' is with just the light.

What is the 3-ohm resistor intended/meant to represent, (a real-hungry battery?) ?

Just wanted to see where it would go with some additional load.

it's fairly clear that section-II is indeed a bit weaker. _ (I believe that se.I & se.III are more the same.)

Which is why I usually test with the more closely matched pair and why I throw in a random 'reference' test with 1-2 here and there.

But (in working reality), the ign.coil will only be drawing about 1/5th as much current, (so to represent that, a 25-ohm resister ought to be substituted in it's place).

Wouldn't that result in a different working impedance than the coil?

- (Note it ought be indicated as 95w, [not "78.54w"].)

Oops, fixed...


Bill