Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 20, 2012, 02:40:05 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 20, 2012, 02:40:05 PM
Ok,
looking at my ign switch both wiring and connector and switch itself, it appears i have nearly no signs of heat problems. There is an ever so slight discoloration on the Gray/yellow contact on the swtich.
It appears that the Run position also back feeds ACCY, (visa versa) and with that said,,,,,,,,
i should install one relay with yellow in and on the relay output, bond the
Gr/y - large wire
Rd/Lg-large wire
Bk/Lg-large wire
am i seeing this correct?
I shouldnt need anything for the start circuit because,, well, it already has a relay.
thoughts?
87evtm in signature below, page 24 and page 240
I do see an error or difference, I do not have a Rd/Lb and Y/Rd on one pin. i have a Rd/Lb and Br/W instead.... the conflict is the BrW ckt 376..which is called Y/Rd in the EVTM.
looking at my ign switch both wiring and connector and switch itself, it appears i have nearly no signs of heat problems. There is an ever so slight discoloration on the Gray/yellow contact on the swtich.
It appears that the Run position also back feeds ACCY, (visa versa) and with that said,,,,,,,,
i should install one relay with yellow in and on the relay output, bond the
Gr/y - large wire
Rd/Lg-large wire
Bk/Lg-large wire
am i seeing this correct?
I shouldnt need anything for the start circuit because,, well, it already has a relay.
thoughts?
87evtm in signature below, page 24 and page 240
I do see an error or difference, I do not have a Rd/Lb and Y/Rd on one pin. i have a Rd/Lb and Br/W instead.... the conflict is the BrW ckt 376..which is called Y/Rd in the EVTM.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 20, 2012, 02:52:32 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 20, 2012, 02:52:32 PM
by the way,, splice 130 is not where the evtm says it is.
FoMoCo sent one hot yellow conductor up to the steering column then split it two ways to bond two connections on the ign switch.
Someone tried to pass an inspection i think becaue the original eng prob said the input to the ign switch needed two equal size inputs.
you will find this splice within 12'' linear inches of your ignition switch.......
kinda shady if you ask me.
FoMoCo sent one hot yellow conductor up to the steering column then split it two ways to bond two connections on the ign switch.
Someone tried to pass an inspection i think becaue the original eng prob said the input to the ign switch needed two equal size inputs.
you will find this splice within 12'' linear inches of your ignition switch.......
kinda shady if you ask me.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: STANG8U on December 20, 2012, 02:52:45 PM
Post by: STANG8U on December 20, 2012, 02:52:45 PM
What is your problem?
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 20, 2012, 02:55:31 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 20, 2012, 02:55:31 PM
and another thought before i screw up my own thread topic here.......
if you ever need a "run" power source, just plug your new wire into the spare on your ign switch right next to the Gr/Y wire.
If you ever need a "accy" power source, just plug your new wire into the spare on your ign switch right next to the Bk/Lg
just sayin
if you ever need a "run" power source, just plug your new wire into the spare on your ign switch right next to the Gr/Y wire.
If you ever need a "accy" power source, just plug your new wire into the spare on your ign switch right next to the Bk/Lg
just sayin
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 20, 2012, 03:02:08 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 20, 2012, 03:02:08 PM
Quote from: STANG8U;404982
What is your problem?
There is no problem ,, everything works fine.
Im litterally fixing something before it breaks.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: STANG8U on December 20, 2012, 03:05:29 PM
Post by: STANG8U on December 20, 2012, 03:05:29 PM
I see
Good stuff
Good stuff
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 20, 2012, 03:07:59 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 20, 2012, 03:07:59 PM
take a looksee at the other relay mod thread for headlamps................
this go around im doing "post 36" invented by "thefoeyouknow", i did a mock up test of it last night and its dead nuts on and perfect in all ways!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You the man FOE!
this go around im doing "post 36" invented by "thefoeyouknow", i did a mock up test of it last night and its dead nuts on and perfect in all ways!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You the man FOE!
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: STANG8U on December 20, 2012, 03:32:38 PM
Post by: STANG8U on December 20, 2012, 03:32:38 PM
Sweet
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 20, 2012, 11:44:41 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 20, 2012, 11:44:41 PM
anyone see an issue with what i said in post 1?
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 21, 2012, 12:34:18 AM
Post by: softtouch on December 21, 2012, 12:34:18 AM
Quote from: jcassity;404978
It appears that the Run position also back feeds ACCY, (visa versa) and with that said,,,,,,,,
i should install one relay with yellow in and on the relay output, bond the
Gr/y - large wire
Rd/Lg-large wire
Bk/Lg-large wire
am i seeing this correct?
I shouldnt need anything for the start circuit because,, well, it already has a relay.
thoughts?
GY/Y is "hot run".
R/LG is "hot in start or run"
BK/LG is "hot in accy or run"
Quote
I do see an error or difference, I do not have a Rd/Lb and Y/Rd on one pin. i have a Rd/Lb and Br/W instead.... the conflict is the BrW ckt 376..which is called Y/Rd in the EVTM.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 02:09:45 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 02:09:45 AM
thats what i wanted to talk about,,,
when taking apart the switch it appears they are run common the way the internal brass is laid out as you move the switch contact along.
, i missed that red/lg being on a start contactor as well. its a large conductor as well.
when taking apart the switch it appears they are run common the way the internal brass is laid out as you move the switch contact along.
, i missed that red/lg being on a start contactor as well. its a large conductor as well.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 02:24:31 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 02:24:31 AM
Last night i was mapping out the wiring , and concluded that one option would be to pick the largest loaded conductor and move this to a relay. what i see is the GY/Y being one circuit that could be highly loaded.
if you move down to the shown fuse 17, it takes you to page 35 which powers a boat load of circuits
do you think picking this Gy/y circuit to a relay would help?
this is the connection point i see a slight discoloration.
if you move down to the shown fuse 17, it takes you to page 35 which powers a boat load of circuits
do you think picking this Gy/y circuit to a relay would help?
this is the connection point i see a slight discoloration.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: hwy73 on December 21, 2012, 08:30:33 AM
Post by: hwy73 on December 21, 2012, 08:30:33 AM
Makes sense to me. The "Hot-in-Run" powers almost everything in the car and is "on" whenever the car is being driven, far longer than the other two circuits ("accy" and "hot-in-start").
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 09:42:28 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 09:42:28 AM
will do volt and amp readngs today on all conductors "large only" to see and provide further information wtih all items powered on that i can.
another interesting fact is this,
on my son's bird, the two yellow inputs were over heated and the insulation had changed from yellow to dirty tanish color at 2 or so inches where they bond to the ignition switch.
the yellow(s) appear to be thhn wire around 8awg just by feel and if engineered to the free air rating, the wire size is ok but its not free air, the wire travels through wire mold and duct so to speak. Its saving grace is that its probably 90degC rated or better insulation.
i am wondering if i shouldnt pull in another separate yellow from source to the ign sw?
thoughts?
another interesting fact is this,
on my son's bird, the two yellow inputs were over heated and the insulation had changed from yellow to dirty tanish color at 2 or so inches where they bond to the ignition switch.
the yellow(s) appear to be thhn wire around 8awg just by feel and if engineered to the free air rating, the wire size is ok but its not free air, the wire travels through wire mold and duct so to speak. Its saving grace is that its probably 90degC rated or better insulation.
i am wondering if i shouldnt pull in another separate yellow from source to the ign sw?
thoughts?
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:55:32 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:55:32 AM
another consideration thats making me think i should only catch the Gy/y wire is the fact that the switch itself is a combination of "make before break" and "break before make" contacts.
grabbing all the high current conductors and putting them on relays would make it very complicated.
grabbing all the high current conductors and putting them on relays would make it very complicated.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 21, 2012, 01:48:28 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 21, 2012, 01:48:28 PM
Quote from: hwy73;405054
Makes sense to me. The "Hot-in-Run" powers almost everything in the car and is "on" whenever the car is being driven, far longer than the other two circuits ("accy" and "hot-in-start").
Quote from: jcassity;405058
will do volt and amp readngs today on all conductors "large only" to see and provide further information wtih all items powered on that i can.
another interesting fact is this,
on my son's bird, the two yellow inputs were over heated and the insulation had changed from yellow to dirty tanish color at 2 or so inches where they bond to the ignition switch.
the yellow(s) appear to be thhn wire around 8awg just by feel and if engineered to the free air rating, the wire size is ok but its not free air, the wire travels through wire mold and duct so to speak. Its saving grace is that its probably 90degC rated or better insulation.
i am wondering if i shouldnt pull in another separate yellow from source to the ign sw?
thoughts?
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 02:19:43 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 02:19:43 PM
are you thinking three separate relays?
warming the shop up so i can cypher the internals of the ign sw, there is one section of the internals that has a smaller "shoe" that moves separate from the larger chunk of brass.
also, i figured out why my sons ign sw went bad, the little ball bearing that rolls along the plastic part of the ign switch,, well it wears a groove out and introduces loose connections between the shoes and the contacts, the ball bearing has a rear tension spring that is suppose to keep it under steady presure but it could shrink or loose its tensil strenght.
\
hope you reply back softtouch, your kinda confussing me into my initial gut feeling they are separate "on" circuits,, your prob right though as always.
warming the shop up so i can cypher the internals of the ign sw, there is one section of the internals that has a smaller "shoe" that moves separate from the larger chunk of brass.
also, i figured out why my sons ign sw went bad, the little ball bearing that rolls along the plastic part of the ign switch,, well it wears a groove out and introduces loose connections between the shoes and the contacts, the ball bearing has a rear tension spring that is suppose to keep it under steady presure but it could shrink or loose its tensil strenght.
\
hope you reply back softtouch, your kinda confussing me into my initial gut feeling they are separate "on" circuits,, your prob right though as always.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 21, 2012, 03:12:39 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 21, 2012, 03:12:39 PM
Looking at all the wires left to right.
Run----GY/Y on, R/LB off, R/LG on, BR/PK on, BK/LG on
Start---GY/Y off, R/LB on, R/LG on, BR/PK on, BK/LG off
Accy---GY/Y off, R/LB off, R/LG off, BR/PK off BK/LG on
Hope this doesn't make it more confusing.
I'll have to think about the relay configuration a little bit.
Run----GY/Y on, R/LB off, R/LG on, BR/PK on, BK/LG on
Start---GY/Y off, R/LB on, R/LG on, BR/PK on, BK/LG off
Accy---GY/Y off, R/LB off, R/LG off, BR/PK off BK/LG on
Hope this doesn't make it more confusing.
I'll have to think about the relay configuration a little bit.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 03:35:32 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 03:35:32 PM
i did that to like a truth table,, the br/pk wire is throwing me off
be back in a while with amp loads on each
be back in a while with amp loads on each
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: hwy73 on December 21, 2012, 04:34:10 PM
Post by: hwy73 on December 21, 2012, 04:34:10 PM
Makes sense to me. The "Hot-in-Run" powers almost everything in the car and is "on" whenever the car is being driven, far longer than the other two circuits ("accy" and "hot-in-start").
softtouch : All three circuits are "on" when the car is being driven.
Not looking for a g contest......
I'm probably not saying it right. There must be some kind of isolation between these circuits. Let's face it, turn the key to "accy" and the fuel pump doesn't run, no HVAC fan, no ECM, (at least on an 88), these are probably the largest of current draws.
Likewise "hot-in-run-and-start" ,only one fuse (18 I think) is listed this way, so they may be all "on" when the car is running, they probably have differnt draws on each circuit.
softtouch : All three circuits are "on" when the car is being driven.
Not looking for a g contest......
I'm probably not saying it right. There must be some kind of isolation between these circuits. Let's face it, turn the key to "accy" and the fuel pump doesn't run, no HVAC fan, no ECM, (at least on an 88), these are probably the largest of current draws.
Likewise "hot-in-run-and-start" ,only one fuse (18 I think) is listed this way, so they may be all "on" when the car is running, they probably have differnt draws on each circuit.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: hwy73 on December 21, 2012, 04:37:01 PM
Post by: hwy73 on December 21, 2012, 04:37:01 PM
Don"t cut the BLUE wire !!! ;)
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: hwy73 on December 21, 2012, 04:42:52 PM
Post by: hwy73 on December 21, 2012, 04:42:52 PM
Guess I chased them to pm's with my rhetoric. :(
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 21, 2012, 04:43:14 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 21, 2012, 04:43:14 PM
Four relays should do it if you want to cover the whole switch.
Don't grade me on my art work.
Don't grade me on my art work.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 21, 2012, 05:00:38 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 21, 2012, 05:00:38 PM
Quote from: hwy73;405092
I'm probably not saying it right. There must be some kind of isolation between these circuits. Let's face it, turn the key to "accy" and the fuel pump doesn't run, no HVAC fan, no ECM, (at least on an 88), these are probably the largest of current draws.
Likewise "hot-in-run-and-start" ,only one fuse (18 I think) is listed this way, so they may be all "on" when the car is running, they probably have differnt draws on each circuit.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 06:17:50 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 06:17:50 PM
load readings,, did not take any of the "start readings though, didnt see any reason to.
Run conditions: KOER, HVAC HI, radio on, high beams on, turn signals on, driver door open
ACCY conditions: lights off, radio on, driver door open
yellow clamp on amp reading conditions: power windows in motion, KOER, HVAC HI, radio on, high beams on, turn signals on, driver door open
color........................."ACCY" DCA / V .................."Run" DCA / V
Yellow input............., 1.3A / 12v....................., 35A (normal 20A without window motion) / 12v > large wires
G/Y........................, .7A / 0v........................, 17.7A / 12v > large wire
Blk/Lb....................., .7A / 0v........................, .7A / 12v > small wire
Blk/Lg....................., 2.6A / 12v......................, 1.4A / 12v > large wire
Br/Pk......................, .7A / 0v .......................,, .7A / 12v > large wire
Red / Lg.................., .7A / 0v .......................,, 3.4A / 12v > large wire
Red / Lb.................,, .7A / 0v.........................,, .7A / 12v
Brn / wht................,, .7A / 0v.........................,, .7A / 12v
Run conditions: KOER, HVAC HI, radio on, high beams on, turn signals on, driver door open
ACCY conditions: lights off, radio on, driver door open
yellow clamp on amp reading conditions: power windows in motion, KOER, HVAC HI, radio on, high beams on, turn signals on, driver door open
color........................."ACCY" DCA / V .................."Run" DCA / V
Yellow input............., 1.3A / 12v....................., 35A (normal 20A without window motion) / 12v > large wires
G/Y........................, .7A / 0v........................, 17.7A / 12v > large wire
Blk/Lb....................., .7A / 0v........................, .7A / 12v > small wire
Blk/Lg....................., 2.6A / 12v......................, 1.4A / 12v > large wire
Br/Pk......................, .7A / 0v .......................,, .7A / 12v > large wire
Red / Lg.................., .7A / 0v .......................,, 3.4A / 12v > large wire
Red / Lb.................,, .7A / 0v.........................,, .7A / 12v
Brn / wht................,, .7A / 0v.........................,, .7A / 12v
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 06:18:28 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 06:18:28 PM
going to take a look inside the ign sw now.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 21, 2012, 06:49:15 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 21, 2012, 06:49:15 PM
Jay i do these all the time and what you have to do is get the highest load section out of the ignition switch. I do not have all data right now as it is down. I am in transition with a new vendor. But leave the ignition system on the Ignition switch as if the relay goes south a tow truck wont ruin your day. Basically the highest loads are accessory loads that would be the blower circuits ETC. I pick the circuits that are in excess of 30-50 AMPS Cranking circuit can remain on the switch as well as light load circuits. The ignition switch can only handle app 25 A at best. I pick the circuits with an ammeter and use those 75A relays i sent you. Dont over design the system as most do. A single relay is the ticket. So isolate the systems and you will find the discolored wires are the ones that have to be slaved. Remember do not slave the ignition system as a failed relay will leave you stranded.
Looking at soft touch setup looks like a night mare and makes no sense to me. He has cross overs on start and run circuits as i read it. Also to many relays and to complicated and i cant make heads or tails out of it.
Looking at soft touch setup looks like a night mare and makes no sense to me. He has cross overs on start and run circuits as i read it. Also to many relays and to complicated and i cant make heads or tails out of it.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 21, 2012, 07:09:22 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 21, 2012, 07:09:22 PM
Quote from: TOM Renzo;405105
Looking at soft touch setup looks like a night mare and makes no sense to me. He has cross overs on start and run circuits as i read it. Also to many relays and to complicated and i cant make heads or tails out of it.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 09:13:29 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 09:13:29 PM
here are a few ransom pictures of the ignition switch along with the internals.
you can map out the wire colors and where they go on your own using the evtm but just viewing the connector end, you can see where they go.
notice the incorrect statement i made but still stands true. the ball bearing wears too much of a groove in the aluminum housing and the contact shoes can eventually stop making good hard contact. Partial contact will increase resistance and then you have two of the three things to make watts,, or heat.~voltage and resistance.
BACK TO THE THREAD,,
here is what i found softtouch,
ignoring the start circuit completely as i dont really want to move that stuff as we had already discussed,
______________________
with key in RUN>>
power comes in on yellow
power is delivered to Run and to ACCY
*Run contactor backfeeds the ACCY contactor while in this position.
With key in ACCY>>
power comes in on yellow
power is delivered to ACCY only
Based on this information and metering out the internals,, do you all agree?
I have revised the Ignition switch drawing to reflect this.
THEFOEYOUKNOW, pls check and revise your 88, Trinom your 86 as well.
Here is what the schematic should actually be like.
the original shows the ACCY is backfeeding run, not the case at all so there is no doubt i my mind that the below is most accurate. not the first error we will find in the evtm(s)
you can map out the wire colors and where they go on your own using the evtm but just viewing the connector end, you can see where they go.
notice the incorrect statement i made but still stands true. the ball bearing wears too much of a groove in the aluminum housing and the contact shoes can eventually stop making good hard contact. Partial contact will increase resistance and then you have two of the three things to make watts,, or heat.~voltage and resistance.
BACK TO THE THREAD,,
here is what i found softtouch,
ignoring the start circuit completely as i dont really want to move that stuff as we had already discussed,
______________________
with key in RUN>>
power comes in on yellow
power is delivered to Run and to ACCY
*Run contactor backfeeds the ACCY contactor while in this position.
With key in ACCY>>
power comes in on yellow
power is delivered to ACCY only
Based on this information and metering out the internals,, do you all agree?
I have revised the Ignition switch drawing to reflect this.
THEFOEYOUKNOW, pls check and revise your 88, Trinom your 86 as well.
Here is what the schematic should actually be like.
the original shows the ACCY is backfeeding run, not the case at all so there is no doubt i my mind that the below is most accurate. not the first error we will find in the evtm(s)
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 09:23:14 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 09:23:14 PM
ok, here are a few shots of the ignition swtich itself for anyone curious of whats going on in there.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 09:24:44 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 09:24:44 PM
here are a few more
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 09:32:19 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 09:32:19 PM
so, what i am thinking is that i can slave the GY/Y and the Rd/Lg together on one relay.
when run is selected, the GY/Y and the Rd/LG will get power and the internals of the ign switch will backfeed the ACCY.
granted the accy circuit will still be on the switch, its load isnt as high (under normal cirspoogestances) as the yellows or the GY/Y.
thoughts...?
the reason im pushing this hard is that i want to use the metal bracket under the sterring column to hold all the pieces parts as i did for the headlamp mod.,, the added parts and where to put them depend on the qty of relays,, i can see how doing at least 3 would be ok but if i just move the high loads, i could live with that as well.
I honestly dont think i gain much heat reduction by even touching the Rd/LG,, kinda torn becaues at best my thoughts are that a man should move the GY/Y and the Bk/Lg at best.... and this would call for two relays...............????????.................????????
with every relay theres always the associated over current protection.
when run is selected, the GY/Y and the Rd/LG will get power and the internals of the ign switch will backfeed the ACCY.
granted the accy circuit will still be on the switch, its load isnt as high (under normal cirspoogestances) as the yellows or the GY/Y.
thoughts...?
the reason im pushing this hard is that i want to use the metal bracket under the sterring column to hold all the pieces parts as i did for the headlamp mod.,, the added parts and where to put them depend on the qty of relays,, i can see how doing at least 3 would be ok but if i just move the high loads, i could live with that as well.
I honestly dont think i gain much heat reduction by even touching the Rd/LG,, kinda torn becaues at best my thoughts are that a man should move the GY/Y and the Bk/Lg at best.... and this would call for two relays...............????????.................????????
with every relay theres always the associated over current protection.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 21, 2012, 09:46:13 PM
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 21, 2012, 09:46:13 PM
I don't like it. You've got 3 high current outputs from the switch (ckt's 16, 687, and 297). 16 and 687 combined is a highly questionable decision. There's easily over 50A there at max rated draw. As far as I can see there are not any backfeeds in or to the switch, so I'm not sure what you're talking about there. I also can't see any reason to change any of my diagrams, as far as I can tell, they're correct.
If you're going to slave the ignition switch, use 3 relays, one for each major current path, other wise I fear you're moving the fire hazard from the column to the dash. I like the idea of slaving the switch, but from the sound of it, I'm not sure I like your plan for executing it.
Edit:
Examined your diagram more closely, and moving the run/acc bridge from one gate to the other is going to leave you without wipers, radio, and power windows among others when in the run position even with 16 and 687 on the same relay, at the same time, you'll have acc power on fuse 18 where it's not necessary to have it.
If you're going to slave the ignition switch, use 3 relays, one for each major current path, other wise I fear you're moving the fire hazard from the column to the dash. I like the idea of slaving the switch, but from the sound of it, I'm not sure I like your plan for executing it.
Edit:
Examined your diagram more closely, and moving the run/acc bridge from one gate to the other is going to leave you without wipers, radio, and power windows among others when in the run position even with 16 and 687 on the same relay, at the same time, you'll have acc power on fuse 18 where it's not necessary to have it.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 09:59:41 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 09:59:41 PM
Quote from: TOM Renzo;405105
what you have to do is get the highest load section out of the ignition switch. I do not have all data right now as it is down. I am in transition with a new vendor. But leave the ignition system on the Ignition switch as if the relay goes south a tow truck wont ruin your day. Basically the highest loads are accessory loads that would be the blower circuits ETC. I pick the circuits that are in excess of 30-50 AMPS Cranking circuit can remain on the switch as well as light load circuits. The ignition switch can only handle app 25 A at best. I pick the circuits with an ammeter and use those 75A relays i sent you. Dont over design the system as most do. A single relay is the ticket. So isolate the systems and you will find the discolored wires are the ones that have to be slaved. Remember do not slave the ignition system as a failed relay will leave you stranded.
Looking at soft touch setup looks like a night mare and makes no sense to me. He has cross overs on start and run circuits as i read it. Also to many relays and to complicated and i cant make heads or tails out of it.
Quote from: TOM Renzo;405105
what you have to do is get the highest load section out of the ignition switch.
thats what im trying to do here, just flipping around ideas.
Quote from: TOM Renzo;405105
I do not have all data right now as it is down. I am in transition with a new vendor.
use my evtm below, pages 24 and 240, easy to do , just click and save.
Quote from: TOM Renzo;405105
Cranking circuit can remain
Yup, i have that planned in, cant see any senes in adding complications to things, as i had said earlier, theres already a slave circuit built into this part.
Quote from: TOM Renzo;405105
I pick the circuits with an ammeter and use those 75A relays i sent you
thinking that part through, even at low voltage, i cant see using those for this appication because the load isnt really there, a couple you sent are actually 40A, you may not have known that, i looked them up. The larger relays take up a vast amount of room for the area am populating but i can fit one and maybe two, but not with the associated circuit breaker i would want to use.
Quote from: TOM Renzo;405105
Looking at soft touch setup looks like a night mare and makes no sense to me. He has cross overs on start and run circuits as i read it. Also to many relays and to complicated and i cant make heads or tails out of it.
the thread is early, kinda burned page 1, we are just brain storming now to do something , got a drawing on your mods from the past that are known working designs? I dont wanna post something that will cause another use an issue, im doing this to the ign switch for the very first time and dont have an issue doing it, its just my wanting to make sure that the other conductors that are in play with the switch in various postions isnt going to cause a failure on the installed features on the car. again, softtouch was just laying out a starting point, where is the issue on his layout electrically?
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:25:29 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:25:29 PM
Quote from: TheFoeYouKnow;405115
I don't like it. You've got 3 high current outputs from the switch (ckt's 16, 687, and 297). 16 and 687 combined is a highly questionable decision. There's easily over 50A there at max rated draw. As far as I can see there are not any backfeeds in or to the switch, so I'm not sure what you're talking about there. I also can't see any reason to change any of my diagrams, as far as I can tell, they're correct.
If you're going to slave the ignition switch, use 3 relays, one for each major current path, other wise I fear you're moving the fire hazard from the column to the dash. I like the idea of slaving the switch, but from the sound of it, I'm not sure I like your plan for executing it.
Edit:
Examined your diagram more closely, and moving the run/acc bridge from one gate to the other is going to leave you without wipers, radio, and power windows among others when in the run position even with 16 and 687 on the same relay, at the same time, you'll have acc power on fuse 18 where it's not necessary to have it.
Foe,b i was just passing the message, if you look at the 88evtm, the ign switch start circuit is just that, it does not integrate as much information as the 87 on down.
your missing the message, or perhaps i am......... quicker to go over on the phone briefly (304 772 3411) but its your choice to check the 88 evtm out in detail.
PHYSICALLY, ohm out the switch if you have one.
with the ign switch in "RUN" tone out the "run Rd/Lg" to to accy as well as to the GY/Y and the input Yellow.
you have continuity everywhere across all 4 of these circuits no matter what,, now matter what you jump where even standign on your head.
now,,
move the ign switch shoe all the way back,,,
you have continuity from the yellow to blk/lg only.
its an error on the 87evtm.
i have to think about what all you said above and stew on it more,, thanks
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:27:13 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:27:13 PM
foe, there is not plan yet,, no plans have been drawn, just thoughts.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:32:57 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:32:57 PM
foe,
yes there is an internal back feed circuit within the ignition switch just as i described , theres no questioning the fact that this evtm has an error on thier jumper they show on the neighboring illustration, you seeing what i am seeing now?
compare the first page24 with the second page 24.
the reason i looked at this real close is because of soemthing softtouch said and it bugged me so i had to see just which way this break before make happened.
yes there is an internal back feed circuit within the ignition switch just as i described , theres no questioning the fact that this evtm has an error on thier jumper they show on the neighboring illustration, you seeing what i am seeing now?
compare the first page24 with the second page 24.
the reason i looked at this real close is because of soemthing softtouch said and it bugged me so i had to see just which way this break before make happened.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:36:51 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:36:51 PM
Quote from: TheFoeYouKnow;405115
Edit:
Examined your diagram more closely, and moving the run/acc bridge from one gate to the other is going to leave you without wipers, radio, and power windows among others when in the run position even with 16 and 687 on the same relay, at the same time, you'll have acc power on fuse 18 where it's not necessary to have it.
not from what i see.
you rotate the switch and in the third group left to right, you have power delivery right down ckt 297 directly out to the devices you called out.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 21, 2012, 10:50:13 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 21, 2012, 10:50:13 PM
If memory serves me the Yellow wires are the highest current draw. I wouls concentrate on those. And leave the rest stock. If memory serves me that distribution bundle does not effect the ignition system and running the car. It basically is all the high current draw circuits that burns the switch and harness connector. So wirh that do not go nuts with this and anything under 15-18A can remain on the stock switch. Jay those relays should be 75A. I have constant duty relays all the way up to 200A. But that is getting nuts. I use them on ambulances and police cars. Once again dont over build this as it is not necessary.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:51:08 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:51:08 PM
foe, whats wrong with combining ckts 16 and 687? i dont see the issue based on my amp loads i posted , yes i could use the 70A relay for this application and if so, does this mean to you that it would then be ok? your statement confussed me as in was this possible or not. i dont see how its not possible, i just dont see the gain in moving ckt 16 at all, its a very very low load. you said something about a huge risk in move these two circuits, i dont understand the risk you mean. im trying to cure the issue of heat on the switch,
i pointed out id rather do dual relays to demo out ckts 687 and 294 and slave them separatly.
i pointed out id rather do dual relays to demo out ckts 687 and 294 and slave them separatly.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:58:30 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 10:58:30 PM
tom,
yes i wlll end up moving only one yellow over to feed said relay(s) leaving one yellow on the input to keep the ign sw start ckt and other low loads powered up.
yes i wlll end up moving only one yellow over to feed said relay(s) leaving one yellow on the input to keep the ign sw start ckt and other low loads powered up.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 11:02:38 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 21, 2012, 11:02:38 PM
tom, the yellows are the input, total current , with that said, pls refer to my load readings posted prior,
im sure youve seen higher loads but i worked my ass off to get 35 (ish) amps to show up at the ign switch.
the actual load side of this application is the GY/Y(run) and Blk/Lg(accy)
ive seen 47 at my alt with a low battery and all devices on that i could turn on , not sure if i would see that much at the ign switch with a stock alternator... maybe but if it ever went over 50, it would be because of some motor inrush.
hey foe! i forgot to turn on the heated seats!!!!!! maybe thats worth 5A,,
either way, this is going in tomorrow , will do a drawing and post before hand though.
im sure youve seen higher loads but i worked my ass off to get 35 (ish) amps to show up at the ign switch.
the actual load side of this application is the GY/Y(run) and Blk/Lg(accy)
ive seen 47 at my alt with a low battery and all devices on that i could turn on , not sure if i would see that much at the ign switch with a stock alternator... maybe but if it ever went over 50, it would be because of some motor inrush.
hey foe! i forgot to turn on the heated seats!!!!!! maybe thats worth 5A,,
either way, this is going in tomorrow , will do a drawing and post before hand though.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 22, 2012, 01:06:13 AM
Post by: softtouch on December 22, 2012, 01:06:13 AM
Quote from: jcassity;405110
______________________
with key in RUN>>
power comes in on yellow
power is delivered to Run and to ACCY
*Run contactor backfeeds the ACCY contactor while in this position.
This would not happen with the change you made to the diagram.
The original diagram is correct.
As foe pointed out, your accessories would not work in Run with the change you made.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 22, 2012, 01:22:25 AM
Post by: softtouch on December 22, 2012, 01:22:25 AM
Quote from: jcassity;405114
so, what i am thinking is that i can slave the GY/Y and the Rd/Lg together on one relay.
The R/LG is the "Hot in Start or Run" circuit. Tieing it to GY/Y will make it hot in Start or Run instead of only hot in Run.
The R/LG circuits 16 and 262 are required to start the car.
Having GY/Y ckt 687 and BK/LG ckt 297 NOT HOT in Start, removes all other electrical loads while cranking
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 22, 2012, 01:45:09 AM
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 22, 2012, 01:45:09 AM
Since you're going off your measurements of the switch, the only thing I can think of is maybe you have one of the post-recall switches. My 88 was not included in that from what I gather, but this is all only a guess.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 22, 2012, 04:04:04 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 22, 2012, 04:04:04 AM
viewing the ign sw diagram, lets call it 5 groups, left to right group 1-5
im missing what you both are saying now,, i can over look the obvious sometimes but as i have the internal jumper moved is how it tones out.
As i have it drawing now also, when run is picked **IN GROUP 2** internally power is delivered to the ACCY of group 3 !
This should be shown in the load readings i supplied earlier.
i sure hope i am not missing something.
in the evtm they have an internal jumper from ACCY to RUN on group 3. THIS IS FALSE for a truth table.
While i moved the switch to ACCY, i should have had continuity from group 3 ACCY to group 2 RUN,, I DID NOT!!
While i moved the switch to Run i had continuity in any combination from the yellow, the GR/Y the Rd/Lg and BLk/Lg.
This means that group 2run is feeding group 3 accy
your thoughts?
im missing what you both are saying now,, i can over look the obvious sometimes but as i have the internal jumper moved is how it tones out.
As i have it drawing now also, when run is picked **IN GROUP 2** internally power is delivered to the ACCY of group 3 !
This should be shown in the load readings i supplied earlier.
i sure hope i am not missing something.
in the evtm they have an internal jumper from ACCY to RUN on group 3. THIS IS FALSE for a truth table.
While i moved the switch to ACCY, i should have had continuity from group 3 ACCY to group 2 RUN,, I DID NOT!!
While i moved the switch to Run i had continuity in any combination from the yellow, the GR/Y the Rd/Lg and BLk/Lg.
This means that group 2run is feeding group 3 accy
your thoughts?
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 22, 2012, 04:09:02 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 22, 2012, 04:09:02 AM
so there is some abitration remainging but here is the first plan.
I could not figure out how to get this down to one relay and be satisfied.
I finally think i have it nailed to where i can demo out groups 1-3 and leave all things "start" related in place as well as group 4 and 5 in place.
see below........
key is turned forward to run moving all arrows shown to run
There are 5 groups of switches, this is for illustration purpose only for ease of wiring layout as ford designed the schematic, it helped break out the different topography.
In this drill, we are pulling high current loads off the ignition switch and moving the loads to relays sourced by a separate power run leaving the existing two yellow inputs in place.
A switch isnt really a device, its an activity, we just happen to call them switches cause thats what they are doing, important to grasp when staring at this darn drawing as long as i have.
It is true to the letter that there are actually 5 activities going on or 5 different combination of "switching" happening. In this case, I am moving 3 of them off the ignition switch to reduce heat and moving them to a better ampacity design.
(left to right group 1>5)
RUN MODE
all groups are in "run"
80A CB OCP installed hot at all times sourced to starter relay
Both yellow wires remain in place as designed which are fuse linked battery power.
group 1 Gray/white energizes K1, K1 closes and sends CB power out as normal.
Group 2 Red/Lg also energizes k1, K1 closes and sends CB power out as normal.
>>>The Gy/Y wire and the Red/Lg follow eachother when Run is selected!
Group 2 "run" via internal contacts also sends power out to Group 3 ACCY
>>>Group 3 ACCY energizes K2 and delivers CB power out as normal.
ACCY MODE
All groups are in "ACCY"
Group 3 arrow is picking ACCY so Group3 energizes K2, K2 closes and sends CB power out as normal.
in this "ACCY" state, group 1 & 2 are not energizing k1 so K1 circuits are off. The only thing on is what K2 is powering.
I could not figure out how to get this down to one relay and be satisfied.
I finally think i have it nailed to where i can demo out groups 1-3 and leave all things "start" related in place as well as group 4 and 5 in place.
see below........
key is turned forward to run moving all arrows shown to run
There are 5 groups of switches, this is for illustration purpose only for ease of wiring layout as ford designed the schematic, it helped break out the different topography.
In this drill, we are pulling high current loads off the ignition switch and moving the loads to relays sourced by a separate power run leaving the existing two yellow inputs in place.
A switch isnt really a device, its an activity, we just happen to call them switches cause thats what they are doing, important to grasp when staring at this darn drawing as long as i have.
It is true to the letter that there are actually 5 activities going on or 5 different combination of "switching" happening. In this case, I am moving 3 of them off the ignition switch to reduce heat and moving them to a better ampacity design.
(left to right group 1>5)
RUN MODE
all groups are in "run"
80A CB OCP installed hot at all times sourced to starter relay
Both yellow wires remain in place as designed which are fuse linked battery power.
group 1 Gray/white energizes K1, K1 closes and sends CB power out as normal.
Group 2 Red/Lg also energizes k1, K1 closes and sends CB power out as normal.
>>>The Gy/Y wire and the Red/Lg follow eachother when Run is selected!
Group 2 "run" via internal contacts also sends power out to Group 3 ACCY
>>>Group 3 ACCY energizes K2 and delivers CB power out as normal.
ACCY MODE
All groups are in "ACCY"
Group 3 arrow is picking ACCY so Group3 energizes K2, K2 closes and sends CB power out as normal.
in this "ACCY" state, group 1 & 2 are not energizing k1 so K1 circuits are off. The only thing on is what K2 is powering.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 22, 2012, 12:59:23 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 22, 2012, 12:59:23 PM
You are powering the GY/Y circuit while cranking. You don't want that.
You are still confusing yourself about the internal jumper between Run and Accy in switch position 3.
Don't know why you need two wires to pick K1. One or the other should do.
If you make K1 a double pole relay to seperate the GY/Y and R/LG circuits when the relay is not energized, I think it will work.
You are still confusing yourself about the internal jumper between Run and Accy in switch position 3.
Don't know why you need two wires to pick K1. One or the other should do.
If you make K1 a double pole relay to seperate the GY/Y and R/LG circuits when the relay is not energized, I think it will work.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 22, 2012, 04:19:34 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 22, 2012, 04:19:34 PM
dang it,, its that stupid brown pink wire again,,,, i see what your saying.
I will pull ckt 16 off the plan and keep it on the ign sw.
PLS REVIEW,, all eyes appreciated and advise. I will put this off a day or so more until i get someone else to confirm my insisting the schematic for the internal shoe "jumper" was in the wrong spot and that it needs to be where i have it.
In the original page24, the jumper from accy to run is in group 3. This is saying that when you place your ign sw in accy, you are also powering up **all RUN and ACCY** and this is false. What i have shown below in the revised drawing says, "when you place your ign sw in run and within group 2 there is a jumper from run to accy, you are power up all run plus accy ckts and this is TRUE. Further what my revision says is that when you place your ign sw to accy, at group 3 you are powering only accy ckts which is TRUE.
someone pls advise
softtouch, see what im sayin?
theory of operation:
(left to right group 1>5)
RUN MODE
all groups are in "run"
80A CB OCP installed hot at all times sourced to starter relay
Both yellow wires remain in place as designed which are fuse linked battery power.
group 1 Gray/white energizes K1, K1 closes and sends CB power out as normal.
>>>group1 Gy/Y wire and group2 Red/Lg follow eachother when Run is selected!
Group 2 "run" via internal contacts sends power out to Group 3 ACCY
>>>Group 3 ACCY energizes K2 and delivers CB power out as normal.
ACCY MODE
All groups are in "ACCY"
Group 3 arrow is picking ACCY so Group3 energizes K2, K2 closes and sends CB power out as normal.
in this "ACCY" state, group 1 is not energizing k1 so K1 circuit is off. The only thing on is what K2 is powering.
I will pull ckt 16 off the plan and keep it on the ign sw.
PLS REVIEW,, all eyes appreciated and advise. I will put this off a day or so more until i get someone else to confirm my insisting the schematic for the internal shoe "jumper" was in the wrong spot and that it needs to be where i have it.
In the original page24, the jumper from accy to run is in group 3. This is saying that when you place your ign sw in accy, you are also powering up **all RUN and ACCY** and this is false. What i have shown below in the revised drawing says, "when you place your ign sw in run and within group 2 there is a jumper from run to accy, you are power up all run plus accy ckts and this is TRUE. Further what my revision says is that when you place your ign sw to accy, at group 3 you are powering only accy ckts which is TRUE.
someone pls advise
softtouch, see what im sayin?
theory of operation:
(left to right group 1>5)
RUN MODE
all groups are in "run"
80A CB OCP installed hot at all times sourced to starter relay
Both yellow wires remain in place as designed which are fuse linked battery power.
group 1 Gray/white energizes K1, K1 closes and sends CB power out as normal.
>>>group1 Gy/Y wire and group2 Red/Lg follow eachother when Run is selected!
Group 2 "run" via internal contacts sends power out to Group 3 ACCY
>>>Group 3 ACCY energizes K2 and delivers CB power out as normal.
ACCY MODE
All groups are in "ACCY"
Group 3 arrow is picking ACCY so Group3 energizes K2, K2 closes and sends CB power out as normal.
in this "ACCY" state, group 1 is not energizing k1 so K1 circuit is off. The only thing on is what K2 is powering.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 22, 2012, 05:31:30 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 22, 2012, 05:31:30 PM
Quote from: jcassity;405170
dang it,, its that stupid brown pink wire again,,,, i see what your saying.
I will pull ckt 16 off the plan and keep it on the ign sw.
Quote
In the original page24, the jumper from accy to run is in group 3. This is saying that when you place your ign sw in accy, you are also powering up **all RUN and ACCY** and this is false.
However with the switch in Run position there is a connection between all of the sections RUN positions and section 3's ACCY. Because of the jumper in section 3.
The way you have the jumper in section 2, it will power the R/LG in the ACCY position.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: Trinom on December 22, 2012, 06:42:56 PM
Post by: Trinom on December 22, 2012, 06:42:56 PM
Oh my...
Three long pages in one day? Are you joking? I'm going to read it tomorrow. Now I'm going to sleep (it's 40 minutes past midnight here).
Three long pages in one day? Are you joking? I'm going to read it tomorrow. Now I'm going to sleep (it's 40 minutes past midnight here).
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 22, 2012, 06:50:27 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 22, 2012, 06:50:27 PM
Ok this is getting way beyond sanity. First off any circuit that is a low draw can stay as is!!! Second if you have a heavy load from the Power windows why not take it off the ignition switch all together I do this all the time on the chevys as they burn the contacts out and cause all kinds of problems. Once again you are getting way to far in to this and over engineering this. Just get the heavy ACC loads out of the switch and leave the light load ones on. One relay is all that is necessary as i have been doing this for many many years. Ever since the first ignition switch melted in a ford i bypassed them with one relay and all is good in the world. Monday i will have my new system and print out the details.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 22, 2012, 09:44:30 PM
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 22, 2012, 09:44:30 PM
What softtouch said
I went out to the car.
With the key in RUN, I have power at fuses:
2 5 6 9 11 14 17 18
the rest are either hot at all times, or only when activated, like lights.
With the key in acc, I have power at fuses:
2 6 11 14
as before some are hot at all times, and they match up with my power distribution pages.
The lack of power at 5 9 17 and 18 in acc suggests to me that my 88 diagram (pages 26-27) is correct on my vehicle.
You seem to be suggesting that though there are no connecting lines in the diagram, the ignition switch buses all the run outputs together, and that this causes the group 3 acc to backfeed from the group 2 run, per my testing and observation, this is not the case. At least not in MY ign switch. Perhaps this is a "your mileage may vary" situation.
I went out to the car.
With the key in RUN, I have power at fuses:
2 5 6 9 11 14 17 18
the rest are either hot at all times, or only when activated, like lights.
With the key in acc, I have power at fuses:
2 6 11 14
as before some are hot at all times, and they match up with my power distribution pages.
The lack of power at 5 9 17 and 18 in acc suggests to me that my 88 diagram (pages 26-27) is correct on my vehicle.
You seem to be suggesting that though there are no connecting lines in the diagram, the ignition switch buses all the run outputs together, and that this causes the group 3 acc to backfeed from the group 2 run, per my testing and observation, this is not the case. At least not in MY ign switch. Perhaps this is a "your mileage may vary" situation.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 22, 2012, 10:23:30 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 22, 2012, 10:23:30 PM
I am puzzled as to what you are trying to accomplish here. First the stock wiring is adequate to the ignition switch battery feeds. The switch is the weak link. Second a relay slaving the run contacts that feed the blower circuits and related functions is all i do. And the ignition functions 100% stock with this mod. So installing an avx battery feed is ok i guess but not necessary. other than that start your soldering irons and fascinate me as toi over build a system that is not necessary. This is what i see all the time when mods are dun and over engineered. just me could be wrong AGAIN!!
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 01:10:25 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 01:10:25 AM
tom, pls stop accusing me of a crime i didnt commit!, LOL >joke
I'll say this for the last time i am doing what you suggested, i am only picking two conductors off the ign switch and putting them on relays because the two loads i chose were the high loads.
there really isnt a way to pick the GY/Y and Blk/LG and put them both on one relay.
I'll say this for the last time i am doing what you suggested, i am only picking two conductors off the ign switch and putting them on relays because the two loads i chose were the high loads.
there really isnt a way to pick the GY/Y and Blk/LG and put them both on one relay.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 03:14:35 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 03:14:35 AM
Quote from: Trinom;405176
Oh my...
Three long pages in one day? Are you joking? I'm going to read it tomorrow. Now I'm going to sleep (it's 40 minutes past midnight here).
we dont piss around here in the states,we collaborate and get stuff done : )
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 03:30:13 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 03:30:13 AM
Guys,
I made an interesting discovery today but we can put this internal jumper thing to rest ,, sorta
Group2 run does in fact backfeed over to group 3 ACCY, no question about it and it makes prefect sense. I believe there needs to be a jumper inside group2 to show this.
Now here is the odd part,,,,, The jumper they show illustrated in group3 from "RUN" to "ACCY" needs to stay!!!!!!!!!!!!
YUP, Ford was trying to illustrate a momentary "make before break" contactor and figured what they drew up was good enough. ,, yet again that stupid Br/Pk wire F'ign with me.
Another error i found is that the ign switch schematic differs for GROUP3 on page 240 & 24. Its a layout issue with respect to text orientation and makes it difficult to understand until you start toning things out.
Foe
I dont think that is an apples to apples comparrison.
I am not making any suggestions, i am stating the facts as tested. I did not say your evtm was wrong, just was giving you heads up to check because when i looked at your 88evtm, it is not as high level detail as the 87evtm.
The "run" ckts are bonded across the line, there is no questioning that.
thanks for looking at your switch but i think your findings are impossible. Tone them out and you can see below my continuity checks balance out.
Group4 & 5 obviously are not even in the discussion, these are two separatly derived switches which provide grounds only during "start" for downstream devices
this all proof checks per below.
this whole internal jumper thing is moot anyway, we will wait to see what tom renzo has for a single relay solution.
see below for future reference the combinations of ckts and what has continuity when.
Its hard to see that jumper that they show in group 3 is actually a momentary continuity as you cross over from "run" to "start", caused me to think it was something else but its real.
a quick ohm meter check of a spare switch will tell all, again compare apples to apples because my tests were done on a 16 year old switch and a 3day old switch and on a 1990 ford bronco switch, all yielding the same continuity results.
lets build something useful for eveyone and get back to the drawing.
Do either of you Softtouch, Foe or Tom see any issue with the REV1 layout? (REV1 ~initiated due to good catch by softtouch)
see below for further info supporting this simple two relay mod that will ultimatly pull the "run" and "accy" loads off the switch and put them on relays.
Foe! one more thing........ The gr/y wire is getting hot based on the magnitude of loads i introduced and provided earlier. I am thinking its best to upsize the GY/Y wire so i kill two brids at once. Even if i move the run and accy ckts off the ign switch, that does not cure the fact that this conductor is getting warm.
thoughts?
I made an interesting discovery today but we can put this internal jumper thing to rest ,, sorta
Group2 run does in fact backfeed over to group 3 ACCY, no question about it and it makes prefect sense. I believe there needs to be a jumper inside group2 to show this.
Now here is the odd part,,,,, The jumper they show illustrated in group3 from "RUN" to "ACCY" needs to stay!!!!!!!!!!!!
YUP, Ford was trying to illustrate a momentary "make before break" contactor and figured what they drew up was good enough. ,, yet again that stupid Br/Pk wire F'ign with me.
Another error i found is that the ign switch schematic differs for GROUP3 on page 240 & 24. Its a layout issue with respect to text orientation and makes it difficult to understand until you start toning things out.
Foe
I dont think that is an apples to apples comparrison.
I am not making any suggestions, i am stating the facts as tested. I did not say your evtm was wrong, just was giving you heads up to check because when i looked at your 88evtm, it is not as high level detail as the 87evtm.
The "run" ckts are bonded across the line, there is no questioning that.
thanks for looking at your switch but i think your findings are impossible. Tone them out and you can see below my continuity checks balance out.
Group4 & 5 obviously are not even in the discussion, these are two separatly derived switches which provide grounds only during "start" for downstream devices
this all proof checks per below.
this whole internal jumper thing is moot anyway, we will wait to see what tom renzo has for a single relay solution.
see below for future reference the combinations of ckts and what has continuity when.
Its hard to see that jumper that they show in group 3 is actually a momentary continuity as you cross over from "run" to "start", caused me to think it was something else but its real.
a quick ohm meter check of a spare switch will tell all, again compare apples to apples because my tests were done on a 16 year old switch and a 3day old switch and on a 1990 ford bronco switch, all yielding the same continuity results.
lets build something useful for eveyone and get back to the drawing.
Do either of you Softtouch, Foe or Tom see any issue with the REV1 layout? (REV1 ~initiated due to good catch by softtouch)
see below for further info supporting this simple two relay mod that will ultimatly pull the "run" and "accy" loads off the switch and put them on relays.
Foe! one more thing........ The gr/y wire is getting hot based on the magnitude of loads i introduced and provided earlier. I am thinking its best to upsize the GY/Y wire so i kill two brids at once. Even if i move the run and accy ckts off the ign switch, that does not cure the fact that this conductor is getting warm.
thoughts?
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 05:16:55 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 05:16:55 AM
and just so everyone is clear on this mod......... I am only moving two wires off the ignition switch.
this would be the
Gray/Yellow
and
Black/Light green
that simple, these two conductors would likely in my best guestimate represent 90% of any and all loads on the igntion switch and in my book, that sounds like progress to me.
since one is RUN (group1) and one is ACCY (group3), I will wait for Tom Renzo to chime in on the single relay solution.
softtouch,
yes i see how a double pole relay would work for that earlier discussion but at this time, i think the brown pink wire will kick our ass again so I will leave ckt 16 alone and keep it on the ignition switch,, OK? Especially now that i find the group3 internal jumper is actually a make before break contact bonding the accy side as the switch is moved to keep power on things during the transition to Start. Even doing a DPDT relay would still introduce the complications of thinking that through so there is no smoke. Its best to leave it alone.
I get cofussed thining about it. basically i think group 3 internal jumper is just handing off power from one point to the other during the start event and its done as quick as the flip of the switch.
I had no idea this set of points were in there until i paid real close attention. I actually ran out and bought an new ign sw because both my spares were doing this intermittant beep across this zone and the new one did it as well so , after futher digging, i illustrated it in the continuity check out above.
this would be the
Gray/Yellow
and
Black/Light green
that simple, these two conductors would likely in my best guestimate represent 90% of any and all loads on the igntion switch and in my book, that sounds like progress to me.
since one is RUN (group1) and one is ACCY (group3), I will wait for Tom Renzo to chime in on the single relay solution.
softtouch,
yes i see how a double pole relay would work for that earlier discussion but at this time, i think the brown pink wire will kick our ass again so I will leave ckt 16 alone and keep it on the ignition switch,, OK? Especially now that i find the group3 internal jumper is actually a make before break contact bonding the accy side as the switch is moved to keep power on things during the transition to Start. Even doing a DPDT relay would still introduce the complications of thinking that through so there is no smoke. Its best to leave it alone.
I get cofussed thining about it. basically i think group 3 internal jumper is just handing off power from one point to the other during the start event and its done as quick as the flip of the switch.
I had no idea this set of points were in there until i paid real close attention. I actually ran out and bought an new ign sw because both my spares were doing this intermittant beep across this zone and the new one did it as well so , after futher digging, i illustrated it in the continuity check out above.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 23, 2012, 09:35:05 AM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 23, 2012, 09:35:05 AM
Jay i think you are on the right track but are paying to much attention to the ACC feature. Without my all data i wont comment on which section to slave out. But from memory i think i slaved the battery feed wires closest to the front of the switch. This is accomplished as you posted. You should just slave out the heavy ACC load of the system and breaking in to that portion will leave the system totally stock. On the midnighter i removed the window circuit off the ignition switch completely and wired it to constant battery. Naturally the windows will work void of the key. I personally like them that way. This reduces a very high demand load on the switch. Also remember the switch the other circuits are not high loads. Remember in your crank position you have your LAMP TEST. So as i always slave the highest load circuits i ignore the cars running circuits as i explained if the relay fails you are on the HOOK!!!. It is ok as i read you post and print to use 2 relays. But you are once again controlling your power train equipment through a relay. Unless you want to completely rewire the system void of the powertrain circuits and i see no need for that at all. Also you are correct in your statement about the crank circuit. It is a very low current draw one because of course it has an external relay for the starter. Well i will check the prints more thoroughly when my new MOTOR system is installed on MONDAY. Happy Holidays Folks. Peace Be with you and yours!!
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 23, 2012, 09:55:16 AM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 23, 2012, 09:55:16 AM
You dont want the G/Y powered up while cranking. And that is the circuit that needs to be slaved. That has the high current draw group. Once again this is from your current numbers and from memory i think you are correct. Your numbers do not lie. 17A i think you said. Bottom line if you subtract the heater circuits you are golden as the other circuits are easily handled by the switch. Also do not forget sometimes to low a current draw over a set of contacts can make them intermittent???? Contacts need burn off. I wrestled with this many times. Years back electronic ignition systems fired by points used to dirty up the points because of gthe low current draw. That is why you should never power up the Power train circuits through a relay. JUST SAYING!!!
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 10:46:44 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 10:46:44 AM
humm,, now that you put it that way, let me think out loud here for a moment.
In order to insure we "keep" power train circuits on the igntion switch which is good advice, then moving the GY/Y is not advised.
look at page 24 of my EVTM so i dont have to wait for your new vendor data.
You can also look at page 24 of the evtm on here by going to page 1, post 1. RIght click on the image and save as a jpeg on your pc. Open up the file on your machine then you can zoom in and around ect.
The GY/Y wire (group1) is hot in run and it also powers up all the BLK/Lg ACCY (group3) circuits as you would expect.
The Accy circuits are the only real "non-power train" loads
If i follow your advice, then the best thing to do is move only the ACCY circuits to a slave relay.
additionally i should move the heater over to accy as well in my opinion so its not on the GY/Y "run" anymore and anything else "non" power train related.
at the end of the day if i move just the accy ckts to a slave relay, i can keep the GY/Y on the ign switch because of the fact that non essential ckts are slaved to the accy relay.
The blulk if not all "essential power train ckts are on the group1 Gy/y conductor.
this may require me to work on the wirng after the fuse box like as an example the blower motor is is on fuse 9 (30A). I may have to move this ckt onto the slaved relay with a new fuse 30a fuse.
following your buttstuffogy, moving only the accy ckts to a slaved relay, then moving all non essential ckts to the slaved relay will equally lighten the load on the GY/Y wire and the whole ign switch~therefore= the gy/y group 1 wire can stay on the ign sw.
this is kind a game changer , it really does add a lot more tasks to the job.
the way i was doing it, i was taking the risk that i may be on the hook by moving only two conductors. since i own the car, i am probably willing to risk that.
thoughts?
because i totally get what your saying..... just thinking out loud here, thats all.
In order to insure we "keep" power train circuits on the igntion switch which is good advice, then moving the GY/Y is not advised.
look at page 24 of my EVTM so i dont have to wait for your new vendor data.
You can also look at page 24 of the evtm on here by going to page 1, post 1. RIght click on the image and save as a jpeg on your pc. Open up the file on your machine then you can zoom in and around ect.
The GY/Y wire (group1) is hot in run and it also powers up all the BLK/Lg ACCY (group3) circuits as you would expect.
The Accy circuits are the only real "non-power train" loads
If i follow your advice, then the best thing to do is move only the ACCY circuits to a slave relay.
additionally i should move the heater over to accy as well in my opinion so its not on the GY/Y "run" anymore and anything else "non" power train related.
at the end of the day if i move just the accy ckts to a slave relay, i can keep the GY/Y on the ign switch because of the fact that non essential ckts are slaved to the accy relay.
The blulk if not all "essential power train ckts are on the group1 Gy/y conductor.
this may require me to work on the wirng after the fuse box like as an example the blower motor is is on fuse 9 (30A). I may have to move this ckt onto the slaved relay with a new fuse 30a fuse.
following your buttstuffogy, moving only the accy ckts to a slaved relay, then moving all non essential ckts to the slaved relay will equally lighten the load on the GY/Y wire and the whole ign switch~therefore= the gy/y group 1 wire can stay on the ign sw.
this is kind a game changer , it really does add a lot more tasks to the job.
the way i was doing it, i was taking the risk that i may be on the hook by moving only two conductors. since i own the car, i am probably willing to risk that.
thoughts?
because i totally get what your saying..... just thinking out loud here, thats all.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 11:01:59 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 11:01:59 AM
by the way TOM
i know you said im looking too deep at group3 ACCY and your also saying in so many words, my switch is bad.
It is not a bad switch when all three do the same thing. When i found this momentary contact, it changed a lot. You should go get an ign sw and tone it out just as i show on the diagram , you will also find a momentary contact being made on the Blk/lg and the BR/Pk. No the switchs are not defective, two are spares and one is just hours old, all three act the same.
you will also find that when you slide to accy, you have continuity over to the terminal that is reserved for accy.
I believe that slaving the ckts upstream of the fuse panel requires us to look at this deep , and at the end of the day, i am in no uncertain terms ready to tamper with group 2 ckt 16.. its just too tricky and not enough load to risk the consequences.
i know you said im looking too deep at group3 ACCY and your also saying in so many words, my switch is bad.
It is not a bad switch when all three do the same thing. When i found this momentary contact, it changed a lot. You should go get an ign sw and tone it out just as i show on the diagram , you will also find a momentary contact being made on the Blk/lg and the BR/Pk. No the switchs are not defective, two are spares and one is just hours old, all three act the same.
you will also find that when you slide to accy, you have continuity over to the terminal that is reserved for accy.
I believe that slaving the ckts upstream of the fuse panel requires us to look at this deep , and at the end of the day, i am in no uncertain terms ready to tamper with group 2 ckt 16.. its just too tricky and not enough load to risk the consequences.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 23, 2012, 12:07:06 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 23, 2012, 12:07:06 PM
Actually Jay i have many slave relays on the Midnighter. I fond a voltage drop on the injector bank and wired them with a slave. Also i slave the Fuel pumps with a relay in the trunk. As i have found stock wiring is lets say marginal at best in some cirspoogestances. But when you slave out the ignition switch you will find the heat drops like a ROCK. Also remember i totally gut the wiring harnesses on my own cars from soup to nuts. This way i can break down the ircuits with little heat going to the ignition switches. Other than that those 75A relays are Pretty reliable. In fact if you use a double throw relay you can wire it in as redundant. Now i have you totally confused. But you are sharp and i bet you will figure that out in a couple of seconds after reading this. So wire a double throw 80A relay in redundancy and call it a day.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 01:32:11 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 01:32:11 PM
a single doube pole relay wont work because ACCY and RUN do not follow eachother half the time, and the other half they do
a double pole would work for RUN but when you go to accy, you do not want run to energize.,, since the DPDT relay has a common coil, you wont be able to control and separate ACCY differntly from RUN.
IM not going any deeper into the ign sw than on the primary side of the fuse box.
im not going to custom wire things which will cause me to dive into this too deep. I am not going to revamp my harness for this mod, its not the point, the pont is to keep it simple, i hoped you had that layout drawing for a single relay.
I tried to do a single spst and a dpdt , neither check out on the truth table. ACCY acts opposite and the same as RUN...depending on where your key is.
Maybe i need a DPDT NAND relay,, joking.
a double pole would work for RUN but when you go to accy, you do not want run to energize.,, since the DPDT relay has a common coil, you wont be able to control and separate ACCY differntly from RUN.
IM not going any deeper into the ign sw than on the primary side of the fuse box.
im not going to custom wire things which will cause me to dive into this too deep. I am not going to revamp my harness for this mod, its not the point, the pont is to keep it simple, i hoped you had that layout drawing for a single relay.
I tried to do a single spst and a dpdt , neither check out on the truth table. ACCY acts opposite and the same as RUN...depending on where your key is.
Maybe i need a DPDT NAND relay,, joking.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 05:41:39 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 05:41:39 PM
ok,
i tested the temperature on the GY/Y wire and the Bk/Lg, neither exceeded 100deg
I was unable to make more than 22A appear on either conductor in any conditon both while KOER or KOEO,
I dont see a reason to install dual 75A relays, My TYCO icecube 40A x 2 should be plenty sufficient.
thoughts>?
i tested the temperature on the GY/Y wire and the Bk/Lg, neither exceeded 100deg
I was unable to make more than 22A appear on either conductor in any conditon both while KOER or KOEO,
I dont see a reason to install dual 75A relays, My TYCO icecube 40A x 2 should be plenty sufficient.
thoughts>?
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 23, 2012, 05:56:06 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 23, 2012, 05:56:06 PM
RELAY fails no tow truck!!!
(http://i740.photobucket.com/albums/xx46/proguns/001-154.jpg)
(http://i740.photobucket.com/albums/xx46/proguns/001-154.jpg)
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 23, 2012, 07:58:30 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 23, 2012, 07:58:30 PM
The GY/Y on swt position 1 and the BK/LG on swt position 3 have no power while cranking. If anything there was needed for the engine to run it would not start.
By the way, your "toning out" of the switch confirms that the page 24 diagram is correct. The two A1 terminals are the two ends of the ACCY-RUN jumper in swt position 3.
By the way, your "toning out" of the switch confirms that the page 24 diagram is correct. The two A1 terminals are the two ends of the ACCY-RUN jumper in swt position 3.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 07:59:52 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 07:59:52 PM
wrong circuits tom,
need to move:
ckt 687 (group1 GY/Y "RUN")
and
Ckt 287 (group3 BK/Lg "ACCY")
and put them both on one relay
need to move:
ckt 687 (group1 GY/Y "RUN")
and
Ckt 287 (group3 BK/Lg "ACCY")
and put them both on one relay
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 23, 2012, 08:18:29 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 23, 2012, 08:18:29 PM
The make before break between Start and Run makes sense. The R/LG and BR/PK wires are powered by the Start position of swt 3 while cranking and the Run position of swt 2. (The stuff needed for the engine to run)
So to not have a power dropout between Start and Run makes sense.
So to not have a power dropout between Start and Run makes sense.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 09:45:31 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 09:45:31 PM
exactly, thats what i traced out and concluded.
your gonna have to get your magnifying glass out to see the error(s) i find on the page 240 schematic and compare to page 24 for group 3.
they show an addiitional bonding jumper between ACCY and LOCK on group3 on page 240.
they also show I2 (eye2) bonded to "run" in group3 on page 240, this is very differnt from page 24.
Its my belief that the jumper we see in group 3 is the make before break contactor to keep power on during transition to start.
this also makes me believe that there should be a schematic illustration showing group2 Run is connected to group3 ACCY while in Run.
Enough on this bonding jumper stuff though guys, its moot ,,, ive learned more than enough to understand that i have a lot of respect for the ign sw and they were successful in cramming 20lbs of in a 5lb sack.
so , dual relays for this and,, lower amperage ok ?
im thinking of dual 40A relays with the single 80cb over current protection.
your gonna have to get your magnifying glass out to see the error(s) i find on the page 240 schematic and compare to page 24 for group 3.
they show an addiitional bonding jumper between ACCY and LOCK on group3 on page 240.
they also show I2 (eye2) bonded to "run" in group3 on page 240, this is very differnt from page 24.
Its my belief that the jumper we see in group 3 is the make before break contactor to keep power on during transition to start.
this also makes me believe that there should be a schematic illustration showing group2 Run is connected to group3 ACCY while in Run.
Enough on this bonding jumper stuff though guys, its moot ,,, ive learned more than enough to understand that i have a lot of respect for the ign sw and they were successful in cramming 20lbs of in a 5lb sack.
so , dual relays for this and,, lower amperage ok ?
im thinking of dual 40A relays with the single 80cb over current protection.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 23, 2012, 10:25:07 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 23, 2012, 10:25:07 PM
Just wrote that up quick as an example. Once again without my prints i am shooting from the hip. Either way a 5 pr0ng relay can be used as redundancy. Just saying. Kick this around for another day or two but the bottom line is slaving out the one circuit that draws the most current is the bottom line. Carry on men!!
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 10:28:42 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 23, 2012, 10:28:42 PM
will do,, should be able to do this tomorrow, looks all settled then.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 23, 2012, 10:35:24 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 23, 2012, 10:35:24 PM
Relay fails no tow truck!!
(http://i740.photobucket.com/albums/xx46/proguns/002-102.jpg)
(http://i740.photobucket.com/albums/xx46/proguns/002-102.jpg)
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 24, 2012, 05:00:52 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 24, 2012, 05:00:52 PM
ok race fans,
here is what i consider the final version of the ignition swtich mod we all contributed to.
pls advise if its ok to bless, and call it good.
I am now building my mounting plate to hold all the goodies to mod headlamps, marker lamps and ignition switch complete with a new fuse bank.
this design offers a little bit more detail, it also explains how if the mod fails, you can always revert back to the original ign sw design so you can stay "off the hook" , thanks tom for getting me to think about that and build it into the design!!!!!!!
here is what i consider the final version of the ignition swtich mod we all contributed to.
pls advise if its ok to bless, and call it good.
I am now building my mounting plate to hold all the goodies to mod headlamps, marker lamps and ignition switch complete with a new fuse bank.
this design offers a little bit more detail, it also explains how if the mod fails, you can always revert back to the original ign sw design so you can stay "off the hook" , thanks tom for getting me to think about that and build it into the design!!!!!!!
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 24, 2012, 10:36:25 PM
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 24, 2012, 10:36:25 PM
I approve.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 24, 2012, 11:21:30 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 24, 2012, 11:21:30 PM
Hey Foe,
If i were designing this for work, first thing that stands out is the 80CB, i think its too high and will allow the wire to suffer before the breaker trips.
Seems more reasonable to be a 60A ,, especially since my actual loads with a lot of encouragement yielded worse case around 35A for the RUN or ACCY ckt.
With low battery voltage, current would go up but i wouldnt want to expect more than 60A even at those conditions,,
thoughts?
If i were designing this for work, first thing that stands out is the 80CB, i think its too high and will allow the wire to suffer before the breaker trips.
Seems more reasonable to be a 60A ,, especially since my actual loads with a lot of encouragement yielded worse case around 35A for the RUN or ACCY ckt.
With low battery voltage, current would go up but i wouldnt want to expect more than 60A even at those conditions,,
thoughts?
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 24, 2012, 11:25:14 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 24, 2012, 11:25:14 PM
Another tid bit,
apparently the highest amount of load coupled with inrush is the following activities........
Power trunk solenoid spiked a hell of a lot of current, i will call it approx 15A
power windows are approx 10A each, doing them both at the same time yields about 22A.
just throwing this out there for more info.
apparently the highest amount of load coupled with inrush is the following activities........
Power trunk solenoid spiked a hell of a lot of current, i will call it approx 15A
power windows are approx 10A each, doing them both at the same time yields about 22A.
just throwing this out there for more info.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 25, 2012, 08:20:38 AM
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 25, 2012, 08:20:38 AM
Maybe you could give them each their own 30A breaker. Those are easy to come by and they fit in an inline fuse holder.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 25, 2012, 11:50:22 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 25, 2012, 11:50:22 AM
i think 30's are a little light,, considering low voltage, thats the conundrum, max size of the fuse before you change to a breaker. i was doing
if the gray wire can see about 20A, then 20A x 12.5v in run condition is 250w.
in a low voltage condition, lets say 10v, thats 250w / 10v is 25A.
to size the fuse / cb, that would be 25A x 1.2= 30A required ocp.
30A is on the cuff per relay... just my toughts,, would you do 30's?
i think the real issue is the voltage drop from the starter relay up to the yellow wires.
id be interested to see what my voltage is up to the gray Run wire now that im gonna feed it with a totally new feeder. Id like to see 13.5 to 14, that would get my current down.
if the gray wire can see about 20A, then 20A x 12.5v in run condition is 250w.
in a low voltage condition, lets say 10v, thats 250w / 10v is 25A.
to size the fuse / cb, that would be 25A x 1.2= 30A required ocp.
30A is on the cuff per relay... just my toughts,, would you do 30's?
i think the real issue is the voltage drop from the starter relay up to the yellow wires.
id be interested to see what my voltage is up to the gray Run wire now that im gonna feed it with a totally new feeder. Id like to see 13.5 to 14, that would get my current down.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 26, 2012, 02:29:53 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 26, 2012, 02:29:53 PM
Quote from: jcassity;405345
With low battery voltage, current would go up
Quote from: jcassity;405363
if the gray wire can see about 20A, then 20A x 12.5v in run condition is 250w.
in a low voltage condition, lets say 10v, thats 250w / 10v is 25A.
I think you are breaking the law.
OHM's law
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 26, 2012, 03:04:12 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 26, 2012, 03:04:12 PM
Doing the math Voltage X current =Watts
So 20X10=200 WATTS
And 20X14=280 WATTS
Jay please explain your self as you keep saying as voltage decreases current rises. Not true
Soft touch is correct you are breaking the LAW!!
So 20X10=200 WATTS
And 20X14=280 WATTS
Jay please explain your self as you keep saying as voltage decreases current rises. Not true
Soft touch is correct you are breaking the LAW!!
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 26, 2012, 04:11:51 PM
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 26, 2012, 04:11:51 PM
I think what j is getting at is that @ 14v you'll need less current than @ 10v, but he typed the same current for both voltages which is, I hope, a simple error from typing too fast.
The example should have been 20A @ 14v, but 28A @ 10v which would support his assertion that in low V conditions, 30A might not be enough circuit breaker. Ohm can sleep soundly.
The example should have been 20A @ 14v, but 28A @ 10v which would support his assertion that in low V conditions, 30A might not be enough circuit breaker. Ohm can sleep soundly.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 26, 2012, 04:55:09 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 26, 2012, 04:55:09 PM
Quote from: TheFoeYouKnow;405447
I think what j is getting at is that @ 14v you'll need less current than @ 10v, but he typed the same current for both voltages which is, I hope, a simple error from typing too fast.
The example should have been 20A @ 14v, but 28A @ 10v which would support his assertion that in low V conditions, 30A might not be enough circuit breaker. Ohm can sleep soundly.
If the voltage drops, the current will drop if the resistance(load) is the same.
I=E/R
Looks like I better get myself out of the stone age. They are now using V (Volts) instead of E (Electro-magnetic force). But they still use I for current.
So lets make it I=V/R
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 26, 2012, 05:47:36 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 26, 2012, 05:47:36 PM
Time to eat some crow.
When motors are involved the rules change. I=V/R applies to a resistive load. Motors are an inductive load.
Voltage drop on motors will cause current to increase. I am pretty sure this applies to AC motors, not sure about DC motors.
When motors are involved the rules change. I=V/R applies to a resistive load. Motors are an inductive load.
Voltage drop on motors will cause current to increase. I am pretty sure this applies to AC motors, not sure about DC motors.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: Thunder Chicken on December 26, 2012, 05:52:50 PM
Post by: Thunder Chicken on December 26, 2012, 05:52:50 PM
I know Tom will have kittens when he sees how I did mine, because it is different from how he'd do it, so it can't be right (kidding, Tom, although I'm almost certain you'll pick it apart anyway)...
When I did mine I was also adding a few options/features that the car never had, so I integrated these additions into the setup. I had a small 6-position fuse panel from a cop car (it was a factory Ford part), so I used that to feed the new circuits. My goals were these:
1) Remove the single largest draw from the RUN circuit (the blower motor). I used two relays to split circuit 687 into two circuits: Heater/blower motor and everything else. I also re-pinned the factory fuse panel so the blower motor still used the factory fuse, it was just fed from a relay instead of via the ignition switch.
2) Integrate a remote starter into the system. This was actually the catalyst for doing this whole mod. When wired the normal way (IE by the remote start kit's instructions) I would have to make sure the blower was on "LO" when I shut the car off, otherwise one of the the remote starter's two 30A fuses would blow after the car ran for a few minutes if I started the car with it. This was because circuit 687 draws more than the 30 amps the remote starter could provide it.
3) Integrate the driving lights that were added when the TC front bumper was added. Make them operate when the key is in "RUN" because Nova Scotia came up with a law that cars either have to have daytime running lights (standard on all Canadian market vehicles since 1990) or if it doesn't have them, the headlights would have to be used, and I'd never remember to use them and didn't want to risk a $270 ticket.
4) Integrate the power lumbar bladders that were added with the TC front seat swap.
Here's a simplified drawing, showing only the parts of the circuit that matter (for example only the part of the ignition switch that switches circuit 687 is shown, only the related fuses are shown in the factory fuse box, and only the part of the remote starter that feeds the new "split" circuit 687 is shown):
I didn't worry about any of the other circuits (power windows, locks, trunk, etc) because they are not long-term draws so they would not have much effect on the ignition switch's longevity. They also draw off the ACCY circuit, not the run circuit. The wipers also draw off the accessory circuit, and the rear defog has a built-in relay, so these aren't really big issues either. The worst-case scenario for the ACCY circuit would be to have the wipers on high while also putting both windows up or down and pressing the power truck button at the same time, an unlikely scenario. Even the windows/wipers scenario, which could happen, would only be a momentary draw as the windows will only be pulling current for a few seconds.
Which brings up another point: Don't waste time trying to figure out the maximum current of each load. You'd never be able to build a system that could handle it. The alternator, even with a 130A upgrade, could never feed all loads at maximum draw. Just like your house's main electrical panel could never feed all the branch circuits at full draw. Your car, and your house, are both designed to support their electrical systems with the knowledge that they will never have all loads puling maximum current simultaneously. Just add up the values for all the fuses in your fuse box and they'll add up to way more than what your alternator can put out, and this isn't even counting things that aren't fused in the fuse box, such as the headlights, fuel pump, ECM, etc. Same goes for your house - if you add up all the fuses/breakers they will add up to a much higher number than the main breaker/fuse is rated at.
One more thing: Tom, in your "relay fails no tow truck" drawing you show the load getting power whether the relay is turned on or off. Using typical Bosch relay terminal numbers I'm assuming the "load" to be on terminal 30, the aux batt to be on terminal 87A, and the "Batt" feed to be on terminal 87. It also appears that terminal 86 would be ground and terminal 85 would be "Batt". I see a few problems with this setup:
1) With "Batt" connected to terminal 85 and "ground" on 86, the relay is always on. There is no way of turning it off aside from disconnecting the battery. I'm thinking you probably meant to have terminal 85 fed from the ignition switch so that the relay would turn on when the key is on, but this still wouldn't work because:
2) With the load on terminal 30 and both terminals 87 and 87A being fed power (one from "BATT", one from "Aux BATT") it wouldn't matter whether you turned the relay on or off, the load always has power. I don't know what you mean by "Aux BATT" - do you mean a second battery, or a second feed from the main battery? Either way there would be no way to turn the load off except to pull the relay out of its socket. If the relay is off the load (terminal 30) is fed via terminal 87A (Aux BATT), if the relay is on, the load is fed via terminal 87 (BATT). With no way of turning it off, why have the relay at all?
Also, generally speaking, if somebody knows enough to install the relays in the first place, they would know how to get it working should that relay fail. A bit of wire or a cotter pin in the relay socket jumping terminals 87 and 30 would be all that would be required...
When I did mine I was also adding a few options/features that the car never had, so I integrated these additions into the setup. I had a small 6-position fuse panel from a cop car (it was a factory Ford part), so I used that to feed the new circuits. My goals were these:
1) Remove the single largest draw from the RUN circuit (the blower motor). I used two relays to split circuit 687 into two circuits: Heater/blower motor and everything else. I also re-pinned the factory fuse panel so the blower motor still used the factory fuse, it was just fed from a relay instead of via the ignition switch.
2) Integrate a remote starter into the system. This was actually the catalyst for doing this whole mod. When wired the normal way (IE by the remote start kit's instructions) I would have to make sure the blower was on "LO" when I shut the car off, otherwise one of the the remote starter's two 30A fuses would blow after the car ran for a few minutes if I started the car with it. This was because circuit 687 draws more than the 30 amps the remote starter could provide it.
3) Integrate the driving lights that were added when the TC front bumper was added. Make them operate when the key is in "RUN" because Nova Scotia came up with a law that cars either have to have daytime running lights (standard on all Canadian market vehicles since 1990) or if it doesn't have them, the headlights would have to be used, and I'd never remember to use them and didn't want to risk a $270 ticket.
4) Integrate the power lumbar bladders that were added with the TC front seat swap.
Here's a simplified drawing, showing only the parts of the circuit that matter (for example only the part of the ignition switch that switches circuit 687 is shown, only the related fuses are shown in the factory fuse box, and only the part of the remote starter that feeds the new "split" circuit 687 is shown):
I didn't worry about any of the other circuits (power windows, locks, trunk, etc) because they are not long-term draws so they would not have much effect on the ignition switch's longevity. They also draw off the ACCY circuit, not the run circuit. The wipers also draw off the accessory circuit, and the rear defog has a built-in relay, so these aren't really big issues either. The worst-case scenario for the ACCY circuit would be to have the wipers on high while also putting both windows up or down and pressing the power truck button at the same time, an unlikely scenario. Even the windows/wipers scenario, which could happen, would only be a momentary draw as the windows will only be pulling current for a few seconds.
Which brings up another point: Don't waste time trying to figure out the maximum current of each load. You'd never be able to build a system that could handle it. The alternator, even with a 130A upgrade, could never feed all loads at maximum draw. Just like your house's main electrical panel could never feed all the branch circuits at full draw. Your car, and your house, are both designed to support their electrical systems with the knowledge that they will never have all loads puling maximum current simultaneously. Just add up the values for all the fuses in your fuse box and they'll add up to way more than what your alternator can put out, and this isn't even counting things that aren't fused in the fuse box, such as the headlights, fuel pump, ECM, etc. Same goes for your house - if you add up all the fuses/breakers they will add up to a much higher number than the main breaker/fuse is rated at.
One more thing: Tom, in your "relay fails no tow truck" drawing you show the load getting power whether the relay is turned on or off. Using typical Bosch relay terminal numbers I'm assuming the "load" to be on terminal 30, the aux batt to be on terminal 87A, and the "Batt" feed to be on terminal 87. It also appears that terminal 86 would be ground and terminal 85 would be "Batt". I see a few problems with this setup:
1) With "Batt" connected to terminal 85 and "ground" on 86, the relay is always on. There is no way of turning it off aside from disconnecting the battery. I'm thinking you probably meant to have terminal 85 fed from the ignition switch so that the relay would turn on when the key is on, but this still wouldn't work because:
2) With the load on terminal 30 and both terminals 87 and 87A being fed power (one from "BATT", one from "Aux BATT") it wouldn't matter whether you turned the relay on or off, the load always has power. I don't know what you mean by "Aux BATT" - do you mean a second battery, or a second feed from the main battery? Either way there would be no way to turn the load off except to pull the relay out of its socket. If the relay is off the load (terminal 30) is fed via terminal 87A (Aux BATT), if the relay is on, the load is fed via terminal 87 (BATT). With no way of turning it off, why have the relay at all?
Also, generally speaking, if somebody knows enough to install the relays in the first place, they would know how to get it working should that relay fail. A bit of wire or a cotter pin in the relay socket jumping terminals 87 and 30 would be all that would be required...
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: Thunder Chicken on December 26, 2012, 05:56:06 PM
Post by: Thunder Chicken on December 26, 2012, 05:56:06 PM
Quote from: softtouch;405454
Time to eat some crow.
When motors are involved the rules change. I=V/R applies to a resistive load. Motors are an inductive load.
Voltage drop on motors will cause current to increase. I am pretty sure this applies to AC motors, not sure about DC motors.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: Beau on December 26, 2012, 06:07:32 PM
Post by: Beau on December 26, 2012, 06:07:32 PM
I did that to my Jeep J10 in high school. Was the basis for learning how to rebuild a starter.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 26, 2012, 07:26:42 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 26, 2012, 07:26:42 PM
Well i am lost for words as to why when a blower motor is set to high it is bypassed by a relay and not fed through it's original power source. If current increases when voltage drops. This is the opposite of my belief as the blower motor slows down and current drops as it is slowed down. I will post current draws for blower motors at different speeds. just saying!!
Basically when a load is constant lowering the voltage lowers the current. Years back during the brown outs the power companies lowered the voltage to homes to decrease power drain from the utilities. I dont know if this is true but CL&P told us this was the issue. With that i am willing to bet the blower currents are the highest on high fan. Reason being it is slaved from the factory. Either way Thunder as i always said over building circuits is something i will never understand. And basically i have no idea how and why you did it the way you did. But that is none of my business. And i am getting a headache following this. Reducing the current draw through the switch is necessary. Reducing it to the point of non existant current going through it is a waste of time and energy. The switch can handle high currents just not the amount the Ford engineers designed it to do. With that will post current draws of blower motors tomorrow when i read them in the MIDNIGHTER. Thanks
Basically when a load is constant lowering the voltage lowers the current. Years back during the brown outs the power companies lowered the voltage to homes to decrease power drain from the utilities. I dont know if this is true but CL&P told us this was the issue. With that i am willing to bet the blower currents are the highest on high fan. Reason being it is slaved from the factory. Either way Thunder as i always said over building circuits is something i will never understand. And basically i have no idea how and why you did it the way you did. But that is none of my business. And i am getting a headache following this. Reducing the current draw through the switch is necessary. Reducing it to the point of non existant current going through it is a waste of time and energy. The switch can handle high currents just not the amount the Ford engineers designed it to do. With that will post current draws of blower motors tomorrow when i read them in the MIDNIGHTER. Thanks
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 26, 2012, 07:36:27 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 26, 2012, 07:36:27 PM
Also, generally speaking, if somebody knows enough to install the relays in the first place, they would know how to get it working should that relay fail. A bit of wire or a cotter pin in the relay socket jumping terminals 87 and 30 would be all that would be required...
Well i find this post a little disturbing. As i posted a redundant relay system that i use i find this statement very ODD. As to have a relay fail at highway speeds and have an engine flame out. I would think one would design a system a little better than this. Being as you designed a system that i am getting a headache trying to figure it out. You should have built the run section void of relay control or use relay redundancy with a set of double throw contacts. Once again it is only my opinion Thunder and being in the car business can you actually tell me that a relay never fails or gets intermittent. With that i stand corrected beaten and will bow out. Just me could be wrong. Thanks!
Also better think again why a starter melts on low voltage. With that a blower load graph is in the works with reduced voltage to control speeds. A starter is totally different than a blower motor. The loads are dramatically different. And yes a sluggish starter draws a hell of a lot of current. And its load increases as it cranks against a dead load such as an engine. not to mention it's design and how it is polled.
Just another thing Thunder does your rear defroster stay on when you shut the car down. I DONT THINK SO!!! It has a latching relay setup. Not argue with you as i once again am tired and i wont argue with you. Look at my print very carefully and by the way the long rectangular battery feed is the ignition switch. So i thought you would understand that. Do you think i fell out of a turnip truck!!!
By the way looking at your print i am very happy you are using the original factory wiring to the relays for power source YELLOW I AM ASSUMING IS THE FACTORY FEED TO THE IGNITION SWITCH FEEDING YOUR RELAYS ??.. At least you understand it is quite adequate. And to run battery cables all over a car to slave out circuits is over kill. But as i said it is your car and that is the bottom line. So tomorrow i will post blower current draws at various speeds. Any one want to tell me what those numbers will be??? Any guesses!! With that i bet you have a giant stack of relays Thunder. Thanks Tom and you will get no arguments from me!!
Thunder jay clearly said he did not want to rip in to the wiring harnesses or fuse panels. That is why a slave relay on the highest draw circuits was all that is necessary. If you want you car wired like a Saturn 5 rocket be my guest. Other than that if you left the window motors through the switch why waste your time with all the other relays and stuff. I explained to you that i remove the windows out of the switch and wire them directly to battery through a circuit breaker. You went through all this stuff and left the windows in . makes no sense to me. But as i said no arguments . By the way better look over my no tow relay setup as you are clearly mistaken as to how it woks.
By the way your print does not show your run circuits ETC. It is a basic print that i can understand but do not know the total loads you slaved out. just saying
Well i find this post a little disturbing. As i posted a redundant relay system that i use i find this statement very ODD. As to have a relay fail at highway speeds and have an engine flame out. I would think one would design a system a little better than this. Being as you designed a system that i am getting a headache trying to figure it out. You should have built the run section void of relay control or use relay redundancy with a set of double throw contacts. Once again it is only my opinion Thunder and being in the car business can you actually tell me that a relay never fails or gets intermittent. With that i stand corrected beaten and will bow out. Just me could be wrong. Thanks!
Also better think again why a starter melts on low voltage. With that a blower load graph is in the works with reduced voltage to control speeds. A starter is totally different than a blower motor. The loads are dramatically different. And yes a sluggish starter draws a hell of a lot of current. And its load increases as it cranks against a dead load such as an engine. not to mention it's design and how it is polled.
Just another thing Thunder does your rear defroster stay on when you shut the car down. I DONT THINK SO!!! It has a latching relay setup. Not argue with you as i once again am tired and i wont argue with you. Look at my print very carefully and by the way the long rectangular battery feed is the ignition switch. So i thought you would understand that. Do you think i fell out of a turnip truck!!!
By the way looking at your print i am very happy you are using the original factory wiring to the relays for power source YELLOW I AM ASSUMING IS THE FACTORY FEED TO THE IGNITION SWITCH FEEDING YOUR RELAYS ??.. At least you understand it is quite adequate. And to run battery cables all over a car to slave out circuits is over kill. But as i said it is your car and that is the bottom line. So tomorrow i will post blower current draws at various speeds. Any one want to tell me what those numbers will be??? Any guesses!! With that i bet you have a giant stack of relays Thunder. Thanks Tom and you will get no arguments from me!!
Thunder jay clearly said he did not want to rip in to the wiring harnesses or fuse panels. That is why a slave relay on the highest draw circuits was all that is necessary. If you want you car wired like a Saturn 5 rocket be my guest. Other than that if you left the window motors through the switch why waste your time with all the other relays and stuff. I explained to you that i remove the windows out of the switch and wire them directly to battery through a circuit breaker. You went through all this stuff and left the windows in . makes no sense to me. But as i said no arguments . By the way better look over my no tow relay setup as you are clearly mistaken as to how it woks.
By the way your print does not show your run circuits ETC. It is a basic print that i can understand but do not know the total loads you slaved out. just saying
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 01:05:48 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 01:05:48 AM
what i mean is that when the potential goes down on a device,, said device will draw more current to compensate,, that is ohms law.
softtouch was explaining EYE SQUARED R loss which is in respect the same but kinda different animal.
yes i was typing too fast but watts is watts, you cant really manipulate that.
in dc power,, where im pretty much an expert, if your voltage goes down while you are connected to devices,,,,, the current WILL go up.
in an instance we have a -48v power plant which floats at 54vdc.,, and lets say you have 10,000Amps,,
that same amount of equipment while running on "BATTERY BACKUP" instead of rectifier will draw the same amount of watts and the first thing that will go down is voltage,, the next thing that gives in is AMPS which goes up.
I usually explain things in "on demand",, and not the "flight of the arrows" so to speak like i think softtouch was doing. I totally understand where he is coming from but when you have a dc load and you reduce the voltage, such as a blower motor in the car, well, the blower motor will still try to stay as high as possible but yes eventually it will either reach its ISC or SCCR, or it will blow a fuse or it will absorb all that heat without a fault and eventually slow down and stop.
softtouch was explaining EYE SQUARED R loss which is in respect the same but kinda different animal.
yes i was typing too fast but watts is watts, you cant really manipulate that.
in dc power,, where im pretty much an expert, if your voltage goes down while you are connected to devices,,,,, the current WILL go up.
in an instance we have a -48v power plant which floats at 54vdc.,, and lets say you have 10,000Amps,,
that same amount of equipment while running on "BATTERY BACKUP" instead of rectifier will draw the same amount of watts and the first thing that will go down is voltage,, the next thing that gives in is AMPS which goes up.
I usually explain things in "on demand",, and not the "flight of the arrows" so to speak like i think softtouch was doing. I totally understand where he is coming from but when you have a dc load and you reduce the voltage, such as a blower motor in the car, well, the blower motor will still try to stay as high as possible but yes eventually it will either reach its ISC or SCCR, or it will blow a fuse or it will absorb all that heat without a fault and eventually slow down and stop.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 01:08:37 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 01:08:37 AM
I knew i should not have discussed non linear loads.......... sorry........... ill try to avoid linear and non linear loads and I2R loss.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 04:28:10 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 04:28:10 AM
Quote from: jcassity;405363
i think 30's are a little light,, considering low voltage, thats the conundrum, max size of the fuse before you change to a breaker. i was doing
if the gray wire can see about 20A, then 20A x 12.5v in run condition is 250w.
in a low voltage condition, lets say 10v, thats 250w / 10v is 25A.
to size the fuse / cb, that would be 25A x 1.2= 30A required ocp.
30A is on the cuff per relay... just my toughts,, would you do 30's?
i think the real issue is the voltage drop from the starter relay up to the yellow wires.
id be interested to see what my voltage is up to the gray Run wire now that im gonna feed it with a totally new feeder. Id like to see 13.5 to 14, that would get my current down.
that is correct scott, when battery source voltage is low, the current demand for an online device will increase.
what tom is saying is that he has changed the resistive value to adjust the wattage and that is not the correct condition we are in because we cant go around changing the internal resistance of our radio, EATC, our lighting ect at a whim so the wattage demand is a constant... thats why they rate things they way they do at the engineering level.
having said that, your math you posted was correct simulating a low battery condition. taking into account the power rating of the items are constant,, and also taking into account the actual voltage you measured at the ign sw was much lower than what you had at the beginning of the yellow wire,,,=ie= voltage drop.
so using 12.5v as the estblished source potential was prudent to guage the OCP you chose.
a quick google on battery state of heath and "coupe de fouet" as shown by a random white paper you found was a good resource.
as for the power comany example, it holds water for a bit but with power factor correcting transformers and capacitor banks, these little ajustments in the grid allow the power co to efficiently shed load in hard times or peak times and has very little to do with your homes actual current carrying consumption< this part becomes very tricky to think through.
if the other examples were true, then there would be no need for the varios voltages out there we can buy like 120v, 120/240, 120/208 1p, 120/208 3ph, 277/480v 3ph ect ect.
what was said above meant that taking i device that use to run on one leg of 120v has no gain to move it to 240v 2pole circuit because what is beind said is that if you do so, then your going to draw more current.
oh well, DC power is a specialized industry for a reason.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 04:41:33 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 04:41:33 AM
oh yeah, the battey itself is infact dropping in current carrying capacity or its C/x rating as well as the voltage lowering. its storage capacity in both voltage potential and current storage DOES in fact go down but not exactly in a linear manner.
so yes, the current does go down (((***INSIDE***))) the battery
but......
this has nothing to do with the loads connected to the battery. the effect on the battery is invisible to the load ,, it does not care.
the load is going to draw what it can draw up until such point low voltage input for operation has been reached or something shorts or nothing shorts out and things just shut off. But, during the condiiton of a "LOAD" demanding "WATTS" which are established values that really cant be changed, we see now that in order to operated the load, since the voltage is lower, the "LOAD" will obviously demand slightly more current.
We are just trying to establish if the 80A cb is too much or not, since we dont want to allow the source 80cb to remain on if there is in fact the possibility of high current that could melt the wires thats all.
we're way off course i guess but does the last drawing look ok for sheading load off the ign sw in this manner?
again, im concerned about the 80A breaker being too big.
so yes, the current does go down (((***INSIDE***))) the battery
but......
this has nothing to do with the loads connected to the battery. the effect on the battery is invisible to the load ,, it does not care.
the load is going to draw what it can draw up until such point low voltage input for operation has been reached or something shorts or nothing shorts out and things just shut off. But, during the condiiton of a "LOAD" demanding "WATTS" which are established values that really cant be changed, we see now that in order to operated the load, since the voltage is lower, the "LOAD" will obviously demand slightly more current.
We are just trying to establish if the 80A cb is too much or not, since we dont want to allow the source 80cb to remain on if there is in fact the possibility of high current that could melt the wires thats all.
we're way off course i guess but does the last drawing look ok for sheading load off the ign sw in this manner?
again, im concerned about the 80A breaker being too big.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 06:59:38 AM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 06:59:38 AM
Ok them why does my headlights get brighter when i start my car. Reason the voltage goes up and the headlights get brighter. Their fore the wattage goes up. SIMPLE
When the headlights are on with the car not running it is running on 12V when the car starts the headlights are running on 14V So the wattage goes up due to increased voltage
Voltage X Current = WATTS You cant change this JAY. When the voltage or current is increased the wattage goes up not down. I cant follow what you are saying. It makes no sense to me. If the current goes down when voltage goes up why then does the high speed portion of the blower circuit have a slave relay. Simple because the faster it goes the current rises. I will prove this this morning I think!!!
:bowdown::bowdown:
When the headlights are on with the car not running it is running on 12V when the car starts the headlights are running on 14V So the wattage goes up due to increased voltage
Voltage X Current = WATTS You cant change this JAY. When the voltage or current is increased the wattage goes up not down. I cant follow what you are saying. It makes no sense to me. If the current goes down when voltage goes up why then does the high speed portion of the blower circuit have a slave relay. Simple because the faster it goes the current rises. I will prove this this morning I think!!!
:bowdown::bowdown:
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: Beau on December 27, 2012, 12:00:52 PM
Post by: Beau on December 27, 2012, 12:00:52 PM
Of course the lights get brighter with the engine running...been that way for a couple days now. Load...probably has not so much to do with it as simply a step up from from a flat 12v to somewhere around 13.8, add a load such as a heater fan, or twin e fans on the radiator....do you lights get brighter then? Mine sure as hell don't...they dim down for a second, but come back up.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 12:22:46 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 12:22:46 PM
LOL,, its a good converstation to have either way,
im waiting for your current readings , its a neat thing to just be aware of thats all.
by the way, with your examples your posting, then why would a screwdriver self distruct if you put it across the batt posts....
seems odd that a load like a screwdriver would break the Law~~!!!
the screw driver is that load,, and its not a motor so whats the load demanding? its demanding voltage and current but the voltage goes down as the current goes up.
in your example, we should be able to lay a screwdriver __or a load bank__ across the battery posts and see the voltage drop with current until the battery is dead.
if thats the case then there would have never been any white papers drafted on coupe de fout or on thermal run away.
also,
when the voltage is higher, you dont need as much current to support the same amount of watts.,, plain and simple.
do it like this....
250kw gen running 120/208 3phase... thats 250000 / 208 / 1.73= approx 690A
250kw gen running 277/480v 3phase ... thats 250000 / 480 / 1.73= approx 300A
now it appears the 208 3ph service above gets you more amps and it does but the cost of running 208 3phase is very different.
Actually to get the most efficiencey and lower amperage, you want 480v 3ph so all your devices will draw less current.
same for batteries in that during its C/x discharge rating (capacity divided by time), as the voltage drops, the current will go up ***and what is meant is that the devices hooked up to teh battery will demand more current to compensate.
i thought for sure posting a random coup de foute chart would make you think for a moment but to your example, your headlamps are getting brigher because of your alternator maxing out voltage rating and current rating.
sorry but no law broke here, take a few minutes or days and ask around, you will be very hard pressed to find anyone who knows what i am saying because these are things people dont really think about or even know , not to thier fault either because its **WATTS.
trust me, you take everyting back to watts and your math will always be correct.,, thats the only way i can properly size hvac (btu), generators, rectifiers, inverters, converters or battery plants.
again, this is just a shootin the breeze converstation but i hope i got you curious, as smart as you are, your probably going to take this and stew on it then realize whats happening more than ever when loads are dispursed across a very small circular millimeter of copper,, and then see how voltage drop really is messing with you.
the whole reason for this side track is because im saying ((( I think the 80 ocp is too large))) and would like that to be the topic based on things i know but im willing to bend to others thoughts as well. For this little piece though, current **DEMAND** on a battery goes up as its battery voltage goes down, and thats not my words,,
check out C&D, Deka, Marathon, GNB and all the big battery makers out there... then i would expect you to come back and say,, hey j, this is purdy interesting stuff becausue you are actually right.
im waiting for your current readings , its a neat thing to just be aware of thats all.
by the way, with your examples your posting, then why would a screwdriver self distruct if you put it across the batt posts....
seems odd that a load like a screwdriver would break the Law~~!!!
the screw driver is that load,, and its not a motor so whats the load demanding? its demanding voltage and current but the voltage goes down as the current goes up.
in your example, we should be able to lay a screwdriver __or a load bank__ across the battery posts and see the voltage drop with current until the battery is dead.
if thats the case then there would have never been any white papers drafted on coupe de fout or on thermal run away.
also,
when the voltage is higher, you dont need as much current to support the same amount of watts.,, plain and simple.
do it like this....
250kw gen running 120/208 3phase... thats 250000 / 208 / 1.73= approx 690A
250kw gen running 277/480v 3phase ... thats 250000 / 480 / 1.73= approx 300A
now it appears the 208 3ph service above gets you more amps and it does but the cost of running 208 3phase is very different.
Actually to get the most efficiencey and lower amperage, you want 480v 3ph so all your devices will draw less current.
same for batteries in that during its C/x discharge rating (capacity divided by time), as the voltage drops, the current will go up ***and what is meant is that the devices hooked up to teh battery will demand more current to compensate.
i thought for sure posting a random coup de foute chart would make you think for a moment but to your example, your headlamps are getting brigher because of your alternator maxing out voltage rating and current rating.
sorry but no law broke here, take a few minutes or days and ask around, you will be very hard pressed to find anyone who knows what i am saying because these are things people dont really think about or even know , not to thier fault either because its **WATTS.
trust me, you take everyting back to watts and your math will always be correct.,, thats the only way i can properly size hvac (btu), generators, rectifiers, inverters, converters or battery plants.
again, this is just a shootin the breeze converstation but i hope i got you curious, as smart as you are, your probably going to take this and stew on it then realize whats happening more than ever when loads are dispursed across a very small circular millimeter of copper,, and then see how voltage drop really is messing with you.
the whole reason for this side track is because im saying ((( I think the 80 ocp is too large))) and would like that to be the topic based on things i know but im willing to bend to others thoughts as well. For this little piece though, current **DEMAND** on a battery goes up as its battery voltage goes down, and thats not my words,,
check out C&D, Deka, Marathon, GNB and all the big battery makers out there... then i would expect you to come back and say,, hey j, this is purdy interesting stuff becausue you are actually right.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 12:50:32 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 12:50:32 PM
another thought, and i forgot to push your button on this one but i was kinda hoping you'd ask why 6awg was my call out to feed the 80A breaker.
actually to be correct per nec , we exceed table 310.17 free air at 90degC because 8awg is sufficient.
to keep the 80A ocp, the wire is going to be exposed to heat off the engine, and its likely the wire feeding the 80A ocp is going to be in a wire loom (defined as raceway or conduits ect per the nec) so we must use table 310.16 instead.
The max ampacity of a 6awg conductor at 90degC from table 310.16 is 75A for copper if the insulation meets the qualifiers for this column.
there are two things to consider.....
you size your wire to the nec or you size your wire to the voltage drop method.
the formula to calculate the wire requried for a specified ocp using the voltage drop method is
11.1 x LL x amps / VD
11.1= a constant for copper
LL= total circuit loop distance for the hot and ground leg
amps= yeah thats amps
VD= desired or "allowable" voltage drop you are going to control
so in my case, im saying that im powering an 80A ocp and to do so, my wire footage for the hot and ground i will assume to be approx 10feet total (this allows for turns and bends ect), i want to allow only 1v loss across the circuit which also keeps the math simple.
11.1 x 10 x 80A / 1v= 8880 circular milimeters of copper required
so there are two things,,
does the circuit meet the voltage drop method more or does it meet the nec table 310.16? which one has the most strengent standard or requirement?
with the voltage drop method we require 8880cmil of copper and this number can be converted to wire size by refering to the NEC chapter 9, table 8.
8880cmil = a min #10 wire.
with the ampacity method, using the nec table 310.16, we find that to properly bond an 80A ocp to a wire,said wire must be equal to or greater than #4awg.
so....even my illustration is lean and is the reason i asked if the ocp can come down based on real loads and the almost word for word event Thunderchicken described by doing both windows down at once along with power trunk and blower ect.. unlikely events.
so if the ocp comes down to like 40A, it seems more appropriate but its more like 60 for safety.
my point again is i believe putting in the 80A ocp is going to "allow" the wire to burn before the breaker to open hence why even though i am lean on the 6awg feeder, its still helping but if i can get this ocp down some then things start making more sense.
actually to be correct per nec , we exceed table 310.17 free air at 90degC because 8awg is sufficient.
to keep the 80A ocp, the wire is going to be exposed to heat off the engine, and its likely the wire feeding the 80A ocp is going to be in a wire loom (defined as raceway or conduits ect per the nec) so we must use table 310.16 instead.
The max ampacity of a 6awg conductor at 90degC from table 310.16 is 75A for copper if the insulation meets the qualifiers for this column.
there are two things to consider.....
you size your wire to the nec or you size your wire to the voltage drop method.
the formula to calculate the wire requried for a specified ocp using the voltage drop method is
11.1 x LL x amps / VD
11.1= a constant for copper
LL= total circuit loop distance for the hot and ground leg
amps= yeah thats amps
VD= desired or "allowable" voltage drop you are going to control
so in my case, im saying that im powering an 80A ocp and to do so, my wire footage for the hot and ground i will assume to be approx 10feet total (this allows for turns and bends ect), i want to allow only 1v loss across the circuit which also keeps the math simple.
11.1 x 10 x 80A / 1v= 8880 circular milimeters of copper required
so there are two things,,
does the circuit meet the voltage drop method more or does it meet the nec table 310.16? which one has the most strengent standard or requirement?
with the voltage drop method we require 8880cmil of copper and this number can be converted to wire size by refering to the NEC chapter 9, table 8.
8880cmil = a min #10 wire.
with the ampacity method, using the nec table 310.16, we find that to properly bond an 80A ocp to a wire,said wire must be equal to or greater than #4awg.
so....even my illustration is lean and is the reason i asked if the ocp can come down based on real loads and the almost word for word event Thunderchicken described by doing both windows down at once along with power trunk and blower ect.. unlikely events.
so if the ocp comes down to like 40A, it seems more appropriate but its more like 60 for safety.
my point again is i believe putting in the 80A ocp is going to "allow" the wire to burn before the breaker to open hence why even though i am lean on the 6awg feeder, its still helping but if i can get this ocp down some then things start making more sense.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 27, 2012, 01:41:48 PM
Post by: TheFoeYouKnow on December 27, 2012, 01:41:48 PM
Quote from: TOM Renzo;405495
Ok them why does my headlights get brighter when i start my car. Reason the voltage goes up and the headlights get brighter. Their fore the wattage goes up. SIMPLE
When the headlights are on with the car not running it is running on 12V when the car starts the headlights are running on 14V So the wattage goes up due to increased voltage
Voltage X Current = WATTS You cant change this JAY. When the voltage or current is increased the wattage goes up not down. I cant follow what you are saying. It makes no sense to me. If the current goes down when voltage goes up why then does the high speed portion of the blower circuit have a slave relay. Simple because the faster it goes the current rises. I will prove this this morning I think!!!
:bowdown::bowdown:
Tested on vehicle. 9007 on high: 4.8A at 12.2v for 58.56W, 5.25A at 14.4v for 75.6W. Tom, I yield to you. I was thinking in terms of wattage as a constant which, clearly, it is not.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 27, 2012, 01:50:49 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 27, 2012, 01:50:49 PM
In your screwdriver across the battery example, the current goes up because the resistance (load) goes down to almost zero.
I=E/R Current = 12.5 รท 0 = infinity, or in reality the max the battery can supply.
I=E/R Current = 12.5 รท 0 = infinity, or in reality the max the battery can supply.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 27, 2012, 02:04:14 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 27, 2012, 02:04:14 PM
The notation you circled on the battery back-up diagram does not agree with the diagram. The diagram shows the voltage and current to the load dropping together until the ac comes back on.
You believe the notation.
I believe the diagram.
If a battery is the sole power source in a circuit, the internal battery current is equal to the load current.
For every electron that leaves the negative battery post one enters the positive battery post.
You believe the notation.
I believe the diagram.
If a battery is the sole power source in a circuit, the internal battery current is equal to the load current.
For every electron that leaves the negative battery post one enters the positive battery post.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 03:06:46 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 03:06:46 PM
OK BOYS AND GIRLS HERE WE GO!!!
H3 Lamp full 12 volts 5 Amps
H3 lamp 8 Volts 3 Amps
Chevy silverado blower motor
Full 12 volts 6 Amps Full speed
Full 10 volts 5 Amps Medium speed
Full 8 Volts 4 Amps Low Speed
Locked rotor blew a 20A fuse.
So as i thought and knew when the voltage goes down the current does also.
Now i did this this morning with a fully charged battery and on my Silverado
H3 Lamp full 12 volts 5 Amps
H3 lamp 8 Volts 3 Amps
Chevy silverado blower motor
Full 12 volts 6 Amps Full speed
Full 10 volts 5 Amps Medium speed
Full 8 Volts 4 Amps Low Speed
Locked rotor blew a 20A fuse.
So as i thought and knew when the voltage goes down the current does also.
Now i did this this morning with a fully charged battery and on my Silverado
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 03:38:20 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 03:38:20 PM
Jay if i may you always revert back to AC on your calculations. DC ids different. From memory DC uses the entire circular mill on the wire capacity. AC uses only the outer portion of the wire. So basically speaking AC does not use the entire CM only the outer portion of said wire. Where as DC uses the entire CM for capacity and amp loads. Just saying.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 03:48:58 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 03:48:58 PM
Jay Cars are DC, So wire can be thinner. Just a fact!!!
DC does not experience 'skin effect' that is inherent in AC (in AC, the current runs predominantly on the outside - or 'skin' - of the wire and not in the interior), meaning that for the same sized wire and same voltage, DC loses less energy per distance than AC does.
Stranded wire has more CM than solid further making it a smaller wire to carry bigger loads. Just saying!!!
DC does not experience 'skin effect' that is inherent in AC (in AC, the current runs predominantly on the outside - or 'skin' - of the wire and not in the interior), meaning that for the same sized wire and same voltage, DC loses less energy per distance than AC does.
Stranded wire has more CM than solid further making it a smaller wire to carry bigger loads. Just saying!!!
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 03:58:48 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 03:58:48 PM
AWG AC DC
22 5a 5a
20 7.5a 8a
18 10a 10a
16 13a 20a
14 17a 40a
12 23a 60a
10 33a 100a
8 46a 150a
22 5a 5a
20 7.5a 8a
18 10a 10a
16 13a 20a
14 17a 40a
12 23a 60a
10 33a 100a
8 46a 150a
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 27, 2012, 04:31:43 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 27, 2012, 04:31:43 PM
Quote from: TOM Renzo;405517
Locked rotor blew a 20A fuse.
When voltage is first applied to a coil it resists current flow. This is called inductive reactance. The reactance lasts until the magnetic flux field finishes building up around the coil. Then it goes away.
When a DC commutator motor is running it is constantly energizing different coils as it moves over the commutator segments.
When the motor stalls, the inductive reactance goes away once it finishes building the flux field for that segment.
Then all you have left is the resistance of the coil wire.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 04:43:30 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 04:43:30 PM
Yes this is also the reason i believe the motor draws lots of current when starting. The starting current was app 14-15 Amps then leveled off to 6 Amps. I believe magnetic flux density is measured in OERSTED'S ???
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 27, 2012, 04:49:41 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 27, 2012, 04:49:41 PM
If you google the effect of low voltage on electric motors, you will find lots of sites saying current increases.
They treat it as common knowledge that everybody knows.
They show diagrams of readings showing it happening. But it always seems to be in an AC environment.
They don't say if it is a specific kind of motor, 1 phase, 2 phase 3 phase, inductive, synchronous, shaded pole or what have you.
And I can't find any explanation of why it happens.
They treat it as common knowledge that everybody knows.
They show diagrams of readings showing it happening. But it always seems to be in an AC environment.
They don't say if it is a specific kind of motor, 1 phase, 2 phase 3 phase, inductive, synchronous, shaded pole or what have you.
And I can't find any explanation of why it happens.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: softtouch on December 27, 2012, 04:56:01 PM
Post by: softtouch on December 27, 2012, 04:56:01 PM
Oersted. Uh let me google that.
Yep unit of magnetic field strength.
Yep unit of magnetic field strength.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 05:19:59 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 05:19:59 PM
Today's test with my blower motor confirmed a decrease in current when the motor slowed down. I knew this before i took readings as i know many cars have an alternate battery supply normally slaved out with a relay for high fan. This was a no brainer. I for the life of me cant understand why Jay insists the current increased with a lower speed. Even in the ambulances we service the blower motors are slaved with relays for high FAN. Well just another day in Paradise!!
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 10:00:26 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 10:00:26 PM
heres a couple more charts but im not here to change the world, its your job to tell the rest of the communications industry that what they see on every outtage is a figment of thier imagination,, LOL, im just the operations guy and engineer who has to think this stuff through worse case so that the hospital down the road has power or the 911 center, or basically the whole usa can continue communicating for as long as those darn batts will last.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 10:16:43 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 27, 2012, 10:16:43 PM
Jay clearly you are doing something wrong. I dont know what it is but get your amprobe and check the current draws. I did this this morning and proved i was correct. With that i am tired and signing off.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 10:21:13 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 10:21:13 PM
Quote from: TOM Renzo;405523
Jay Cars are DC, So wire can be thinner. Just a fact!!!
DC does not experience 'skin effect' that is inherent in AC (in AC, the current runs predominantly on the outside - or 'skin' - of the wire and not in the interior), meaning that for the same sized wire and same voltage, DC loses less energy per distance than AC does.
Stranded wire has more CM than solid further making it a smaller wire to carry bigger loads. Just saying!!!
yep, thats a load of horse doo doo.
seriously? wtf> if htat were the case then all our outside plants like your own CWP power co would be using dc power to your house,,LOL,
and why on earth is it such a hard concept to grasp,,
we all widely accept the fact that we "EXPECT" to see that when a battery charger is hooked to a low battery, the charger will show low battery voltage and fairly high current and then at some point the voltage will be high while the current eventually becomes low to open circuit conditoin.
the reverse happens during discharge and the reverse needs engineered into the wire size...
no tom, you cant carry carry more dc current on a smaller wire than AC. thats rediculous man even at the same voltage. that battle was over with a 100 years ago.
either way,,,
what is the answer to my question?
what is the right size ocp for the ign sw mod and why, im being serious ,, i dont just toss in a cb without knowing why im doing it and what its expectations are.
if we cant explain our design, its rather fruitless of an exercise.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 10:24:47 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 27, 2012, 10:24:47 PM
softtouch,
that small area you spoke to in the coup de foute represents just a couple or three minutes and is a mysterious event that occures in a lot of batteries.
you pointed out that the voltage and current were not leading to what i am saying but you are not seeing the duration of discharge or constant current discharge im speaking to.
id just suggest you call around to some people who work around batteries especially telecom or back up power and ask them....
"when the batteries go on discharge and take on the full facility load, we know the voltage drops but what happens to the current?"
that small area you spoke to in the coup de foute represents just a couple or three minutes and is a mysterious event that occures in a lot of batteries.
you pointed out that the voltage and current were not leading to what i am saying but you are not seeing the duration of discharge or constant current discharge im speaking to.
id just suggest you call around to some people who work around batteries especially telecom or back up power and ask them....
"when the batteries go on discharge and take on the full facility load, we know the voltage drops but what happens to the current?"
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 28, 2012, 07:36:27 AM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 28, 2012, 07:36:27 AM
Jay a dead battery shows less resistance then when it is charged. Another words as the battery charges the voltage comes up as the current goes down to replenish the battery.
SO the charger is looking for battery internal resistance in a sense. Just a tip their is no current regulation in an alternator only voltage regulation. So as the alternator sees less loads on the battery and or electrical system it reduces the charge rate. LOAD is the KEY. Not current regulation. That is why they call it a VOLTAGE REGULATOR. Once again i have researched stranded V solid AC V DC and it all says the same thing. The higher the frequancy in an AC system the more of the outside of the wire is used. DC uses all the CM and their fore can have a circuit fed with thinner wire. It is not me saying this i looked it up on a SOLAR CELL plant design web site. They infatically use thinner wire with DC. So the only thing i am aware of that uses -48V is the telephone systems. Battery on the TIP and Ground on the ring. Ans 20 cycle ring generator @105 Volts !!! Are you a phone designer
SO the charger is looking for battery internal resistance in a sense. Just a tip their is no current regulation in an alternator only voltage regulation. So as the alternator sees less loads on the battery and or electrical system it reduces the charge rate. LOAD is the KEY. Not current regulation. That is why they call it a VOLTAGE REGULATOR. Once again i have researched stranded V solid AC V DC and it all says the same thing. The higher the frequancy in an AC system the more of the outside of the wire is used. DC uses all the CM and their fore can have a circuit fed with thinner wire. It is not me saying this i looked it up on a SOLAR CELL plant design web site. They infatically use thinner wire with DC. So the only thing i am aware of that uses -48V is the telephone systems. Battery on the TIP and Ground on the ring. Ans 20 cycle ring generator @105 Volts !!! Are you a phone designer
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 28, 2012, 11:22:18 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 28, 2012, 11:22:18 AM
Quote from: TOM Renzo;405605
Are you a phone designer
I design engineer the infrustructure your using now to make this post possible and that means everything from each brick to each electron (excluding the routers, switches).
aviation electronics NEC from 86-95 active, 96-2001 reserves with sescondary EOD NEC.
Telecom industry from 95-to present with DSC communications, Alcatel, Marconi & Alpha.
Quote from: TOM Renzo;405605
Jay a dead battery shows less resistance then when it is charged. Another words as the battery charges the voltage comes up as the current goes down to replenish the battery.
you are clearly saying as voltage goes up, the current goes down in a battery as its charged............ ponder that for a min,, gets you thinking doesnt it?
What size ocp needs to be placed in the ign switch mod this thread is about or is the 80A ocp you said was ok , still ok?
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 28, 2012, 05:54:53 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 28, 2012, 05:54:53 PM
OK here goes first what is an OCP??? Just want to be clear on this
Second Ford recalled these vehicles not for wire ampacity because the stock wiring is completely adequate feeding the Ignition switch. Ford replaced the connector or Ignition switch. As far as running a #6 cable to feed the relays that is OK but beyond the size needed. No question about that as ford did not increase the wire size as i explained in the original recall. So if i may post a wire size that is ASE certified by Automotive electrical engineers is as follows.
A 10Gauge wire in a length of 20 Feet can be used up to and including a load of 50 Amps. This is fact it is DC and the wire must be stranded. All automotive wiring is stranded for increased CM. With that i have never personally seen an ignition switch fed with heavier wire. Not 100% as i have not researched every car on this planet. So here is what we know. The recall did not include heavier wire only a heavy duty switch with better contacts to reduce heat. And a connector if the one is melted on said vehicle. So slaving out ONE circuit that i would think would be the blower circuits ETC. Once this load is off the switch it is FIXED. So be it as it may Ford did not issue a wire change as far as i know. Now feeding your relays with a #6 is fine as i said more copper better?? But in reality we are arguing about something that we all agree on. Their is to much shiznit running threw the ignition switch and that has to be addressed. If anyone wants to eliminate every load or a portion of the load that's good. But doing this accomplishes nothing once the initial high draw circuits are bypassed and slaved. I have dun many in my day and ZERO come backs using existing wiring and one 75A relay In redundant hook up for fail safe. (relay ping out while on the road and no tow truck) Thanks.
Second Ford recalled these vehicles not for wire ampacity because the stock wiring is completely adequate feeding the Ignition switch. Ford replaced the connector or Ignition switch. As far as running a #6 cable to feed the relays that is OK but beyond the size needed. No question about that as ford did not increase the wire size as i explained in the original recall. So if i may post a wire size that is ASE certified by Automotive electrical engineers is as follows.
A 10Gauge wire in a length of 20 Feet can be used up to and including a load of 50 Amps. This is fact it is DC and the wire must be stranded. All automotive wiring is stranded for increased CM. With that i have never personally seen an ignition switch fed with heavier wire. Not 100% as i have not researched every car on this planet. So here is what we know. The recall did not include heavier wire only a heavy duty switch with better contacts to reduce heat. And a connector if the one is melted on said vehicle. So slaving out ONE circuit that i would think would be the blower circuits ETC. Once this load is off the switch it is FIXED. So be it as it may Ford did not issue a wire change as far as i know. Now feeding your relays with a #6 is fine as i said more copper better?? But in reality we are arguing about something that we all agree on. Their is to much shiznit running threw the ignition switch and that has to be addressed. If anyone wants to eliminate every load or a portion of the load that's good. But doing this accomplishes nothing once the initial high draw circuits are bypassed and slaved. I have dun many in my day and ZERO come backs using existing wiring and one 75A relay In redundant hook up for fail safe. (relay ping out while on the road and no tow truck) Thanks.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 28, 2012, 09:57:14 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 28, 2012, 09:57:14 PM
yes, the automotive engineers are partially retarded, in strict violation of wiring codes because table 310.17 at 75degC allows them to use #10, but that is a ***FREE AIR*** application. once you clearly understand what the "intent" was of the use of the intentional term "free air" you will see the problem.
DC wiring does apply to the NEC per the NEC2007 on forward, stupid s didnt know shiznit about DC Power for any reasonable means until as of late the NEC2011 and they still dont know shiznit ,, these are my words and i can back em up.
so your statement to "stranded" isnt actually the better wire, pls just hear me out.
"SOL"#10 ~solid is just a single copper conductor thhn/thwn ect as you already know.
"STR" #10~ stranded is typically a bundle of a few stiff single conductors in a single insulation ,, again you know this. THese are the wires you speak of such as the types found being the yellow wires going into our ign sw.
"FX"~ flex is typically a bundle of many tiny hairs of copper , example is 350mcm STR is vastly different from 350mcm Flex being the flex has litterally thousands of copper conductors while the STR has maybe 100 "sol" conductors all within an insulation.
I endorse "Flex" because of its natual ability to exceed it the current carrying capacity of Sol or Str. The NEC is just catching up to this concept but you can find it generally in one place on our cars,,,, it resides on the battery hot cable or in a set of good quality jumper cables,, typically refered to as DLO, (diesel locomotive cable) or another would be "COPFLEX" brand by cobra wire.
No electrical wiring in a vehicle shall qualify as "FREE AIR" if in any portion of the wire travels in wire loom (considered conduit) or a bundle taped ect.. so yes, the ASE mechs are still behind the power curve.
to your point one 20Feet,, allowed for a #10wire for 50A load...............to my earlier point and proof testing the concept / application engineering......
there is another constant used for copper that is rather old school but its 10.1 kfactor instead of 11.1kfactor.
so using my previously described voltage drop formula,
10.1 x 20feet x 50A / 1vd = 10100 circular milimeters of copper required.
NEC chapter9 table 8 (conductor properties) state clearly that #10 consists of 10380 circular milimeters of copper.
This is why your ASE engineers say that #10 statisfies the 50A capacity,, they feel they are right,,, but they are wrong becaue a car is not a "FREE AIR" "application engineering"
the appropriate sized wire for this application would rightfully be #8awg ~shown in table 310.16 "in raceway" (or conduit). Again, What is the application is always the million dollar question, and since auto manuf make cars, they prob get away with things you and i would not be allowed to do.
worse of all , they being the ASE enginnering you refer to probably dont even know they are doing sub par engineerng... either that or the cost of the product would suffer greatly. Per the NEC, the only people not required to comply with the electrical wiring stardards are the Power Companies themselves.
you need to start endorsing table !! 310.16 !! and toss the generically refered to "cheap ass case scenerio" table 310.17 out the window.
If you cant explain to me why the ASE engineers bless #10 as a 50A rated conductor based on application engineering,, yes that your job to do so if your day came to court, then you might want to start asking "why" more often if not for the sake of liability. You owe your customer base an explaination and certainly each customer has his or her own intelegence level, the day you run up against someone who asks you "why" and you can only say,, "thats what the ASE engineers say is ok, sorry your car wiring caught on fire".
oh well, atleast my stuff isnt wrong.
OCP is over current protection device.
btw,, our cars do not have a relay for high speed blower ,, thought you said they did earlier, forgive me if i misunderstood you.
ok,,
so the main reason i keep dragin this out is because you had agreed and mentioned that you also confirm that you agree there is approx 20A worse case on the GY/Y wire on the ign Run circuit.
following your rule that as voltage goes down, so does current , then there is no need to go above a 30A ocp for this bypass setup as my main breaker because we would never see loads higher than that and there would never be an instance where we should worry any further than the "real load" ?? im confussed as to why you would ever consider an 80A ocp on the ign sw, it seems to me the wire would go to smoke before the breaker would trip??
In the explaination FOE presented way early in this post which i tend to agree with , you should find his point of view to be fairly impossible in that "these circuits circuits could be as high as 55A of current". im lost here, i just want to be able to explain what is being done before i do it,, thats the way i tend to roll and i know you do to.
so why is it ok to use the 80A CB? knowing the wire isnt sufficent to cause the breaker to trip first?
another question,, to your diagram,
is your N+1 redundunt relay set up applicable to my dual relay drawing such that i only need one relay instead of two and if so, i dont understand how you are doing this "RUN" and "ACCY" ckt on one relay.... i think that was what thunderchicken was saying also.
sorry so much to type here, i hate long posts but it is what it is.
DC wiring does apply to the NEC per the NEC2007 on forward, stupid s didnt know shiznit about DC Power for any reasonable means until as of late the NEC2011 and they still dont know shiznit ,, these are my words and i can back em up.
so your statement to "stranded" isnt actually the better wire, pls just hear me out.
"SOL"#10 ~solid is just a single copper conductor thhn/thwn ect as you already know.
"STR" #10~ stranded is typically a bundle of a few stiff single conductors in a single insulation ,, again you know this. THese are the wires you speak of such as the types found being the yellow wires going into our ign sw.
"FX"~ flex is typically a bundle of many tiny hairs of copper , example is 350mcm STR is vastly different from 350mcm Flex being the flex has litterally thousands of copper conductors while the STR has maybe 100 "sol" conductors all within an insulation.
I endorse "Flex" because of its natual ability to exceed it the current carrying capacity of Sol or Str. The NEC is just catching up to this concept but you can find it generally in one place on our cars,,,, it resides on the battery hot cable or in a set of good quality jumper cables,, typically refered to as DLO, (diesel locomotive cable) or another would be "COPFLEX" brand by cobra wire.
No electrical wiring in a vehicle shall qualify as "FREE AIR" if in any portion of the wire travels in wire loom (considered conduit) or a bundle taped ect.. so yes, the ASE mechs are still behind the power curve.
to your point one 20Feet,, allowed for a #10wire for 50A load...............to my earlier point and proof testing the concept / application engineering......
there is another constant used for copper that is rather old school but its 10.1 kfactor instead of 11.1kfactor.
so using my previously described voltage drop formula,
10.1 x 20feet x 50A / 1vd = 10100 circular milimeters of copper required.
NEC chapter9 table 8 (conductor properties) state clearly that #10 consists of 10380 circular milimeters of copper.
This is why your ASE engineers say that #10 statisfies the 50A capacity,, they feel they are right,,, but they are wrong becaue a car is not a "FREE AIR" "application engineering"
the appropriate sized wire for this application would rightfully be #8awg ~shown in table 310.16 "in raceway" (or conduit). Again, What is the application is always the million dollar question, and since auto manuf make cars, they prob get away with things you and i would not be allowed to do.
worse of all , they being the ASE enginnering you refer to probably dont even know they are doing sub par engineerng... either that or the cost of the product would suffer greatly. Per the NEC, the only people not required to comply with the electrical wiring stardards are the Power Companies themselves.
you need to start endorsing table !! 310.16 !! and toss the generically refered to "cheap ass case scenerio" table 310.17 out the window.
If you cant explain to me why the ASE engineers bless #10 as a 50A rated conductor based on application engineering,, yes that your job to do so if your day came to court, then you might want to start asking "why" more often if not for the sake of liability. You owe your customer base an explaination and certainly each customer has his or her own intelegence level, the day you run up against someone who asks you "why" and you can only say,, "thats what the ASE engineers say is ok, sorry your car wiring caught on fire".
oh well, atleast my stuff isnt wrong.
OCP is over current protection device.
btw,, our cars do not have a relay for high speed blower ,, thought you said they did earlier, forgive me if i misunderstood you.
ok,,
so the main reason i keep dragin this out is because you had agreed and mentioned that you also confirm that you agree there is approx 20A worse case on the GY/Y wire on the ign Run circuit.
following your rule that as voltage goes down, so does current , then there is no need to go above a 30A ocp for this bypass setup as my main breaker because we would never see loads higher than that and there would never be an instance where we should worry any further than the "real load" ?? im confussed as to why you would ever consider an 80A ocp on the ign sw, it seems to me the wire would go to smoke before the breaker would trip??
In the explaination FOE presented way early in this post which i tend to agree with , you should find his point of view to be fairly impossible in that "these circuits circuits could be as high as 55A of current". im lost here, i just want to be able to explain what is being done before i do it,, thats the way i tend to roll and i know you do to.
so why is it ok to use the 80A CB? knowing the wire isnt sufficent to cause the breaker to trip first?
another question,, to your diagram,
is your N+1 redundunt relay set up applicable to my dual relay drawing such that i only need one relay instead of two and if so, i dont understand how you are doing this "RUN" and "ACCY" ckt on one relay.... i think that was what thunderchicken was saying also.
sorry so much to type here, i hate long posts but it is what it is.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 28, 2012, 10:17:05 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 28, 2012, 10:17:05 PM
also,
what insulation is on the wire that the ASE engineers say this #10 can handle 50A?
i will stand corrected if you come back and say a type that is 150, 200 and 250degC rated insulation but i cant see how its possible yet.
such as type Z, fep, fepb, pfa, pfah or tfe
i have never seen the above wire types on any auto wiring except the fuel pump leads.
what insulation is on the wire that the ASE engineers say this #10 can handle 50A?
i will stand corrected if you come back and say a type that is 150, 200 and 250degC rated insulation but i cant see how its possible yet.
such as type Z, fep, fepb, pfa, pfah or tfe
i have never seen the above wire types on any auto wiring except the fuel pump leads.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 29, 2012, 09:57:30 AM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 29, 2012, 09:57:30 AM
Well it is a dead issue and i must tell you once again Ford only replaced the ignition switch in the recall. NOT THE WIRING. Weather the wiring is considered FREE AIR OR NOT. That is the way the midnighter was built and is still running today. Now please get you ammeter out and do some current readinga on blower motors. I did it already and posted my findings. As the blower motor slowed down it drew less current. By the way i know the blower motor is not slaved in the fords we are working on!!!! Why do you think the ignition switches MELT!!!! TO MUCH CURRENT. With that have a great day and i will discuss this with Jim Wilson on monday. He is a ford design engineer that i speak to quite often Thanks and have a good weekend. One more thing. I know you know your shiznit. But for some reason the car companies undersize wiring all the time according to your figures. Why i do not know. But we use the 12V tables with DC ratings for automotive grade wire and according to the tables a 20' length of #10 gauge wire can handle 50 Amps. Who am i to say they are wrong. Cheers Thanks Tom
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 29, 2012, 10:16:08 AM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 29, 2012, 10:16:08 AM
SAE wiring tables. According to ASE automotive wiring is not considered RACEWAY OR ENCLOSED BECAUSE IT IS DC!!! Dont kill me i am only the messenger
Wire Gauge Selection Table 12 Volt Circuit
AMPS 3' 5' 7' 10' 15' 20' 25'
0 to 5 18 18 18 18 18 18 18
6 18 18 18 18 18 18 18
7 18 18 18 18 18 18 18
8 18 18 18 18 18 16 16
10 18 18 18 18 16 16 16
11 18 18 18 18 16 16 14
12 18 18 18 18 16 16 14
15 18 18 18 18 14 14 12
18 18 18 16 16 14 14 12
20 18 18 16 16 14 12 10
22 18 18 16 16 12 12 10
24 18 18 16 16 12 12 10
30 18 16 16 14 10 10 10
40 18 16 14 12 10 10 8
50 16 14 12 12 10 10 8
100 12 12 10 10 6 6 4
150 10 10 8 8 4 4
Wire Gauge Selection Table 12 Volt Circuit
AMPS 3' 5' 7' 10' 15' 20' 25'
0 to 5 18 18 18 18 18 18 18
6 18 18 18 18 18 18 18
7 18 18 18 18 18 18 18
8 18 18 18 18 18 16 16
10 18 18 18 18 16 16 16
11 18 18 18 18 16 16 14
12 18 18 18 18 16 16 14
15 18 18 18 18 14 14 12
18 18 18 16 16 14 14 12
20 18 18 16 16 14 12 10
22 18 18 16 16 12 12 10
24 18 18 16 16 12 12 10
30 18 16 16 14 10 10 10
40 18 16 14 12 10 10 8
50 16 14 12 12 10 10 8
100 12 12 10 10 6 6 4
150 10 10 8 8 4 4
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 29, 2012, 01:18:17 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 29, 2012, 01:18:17 PM
your fine tom, im learning new stuff all the time,, just make sure to ask what the insulation type is please, that info you may already have handy.
btw, dc or ac , it does not matter because it all applies to the NEC and in this instance subject to low voltage. either way the question i had is still there,
why is this design ok to source with an 80A cb? just wondering.....seems kinda heavy to me for the actual loads.
I may be wrong, but i have not seen any statements in the NEC that waives the auto makers from being compliant, therefore when you have conductors in a wire loom, it no longer qualifies as free air.
perhaps the auto makers dont have to comply.
I would bet the the answer you get is that the engineering is based on a huge / vast amount of derating which is understandable.
the motor your testing is non-linear loads,,
btw, dc or ac , it does not matter because it all applies to the NEC and in this instance subject to low voltage. either way the question i had is still there,
why is this design ok to source with an 80A cb? just wondering.....seems kinda heavy to me for the actual loads.
I may be wrong, but i have not seen any statements in the NEC that waives the auto makers from being compliant, therefore when you have conductors in a wire loom, it no longer qualifies as free air.
perhaps the auto makers dont have to comply.
I would bet the the answer you get is that the engineering is based on a huge / vast amount of derating which is understandable.
the motor your testing is non-linear loads,,
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 29, 2012, 01:21:15 PM
Post by: jcassity on December 29, 2012, 01:21:15 PM
hey,, sometimes figuring out what the right question is,,, is part of my problem,,
here goes...
hey tom, what standard is applicable to automotive wiring?
here goes...
hey tom, what standard is applicable to automotive wiring?
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 29, 2012, 02:58:28 PM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 29, 2012, 02:58:28 PM
From what i understand about electrical issues is this. If the voltage is below 50Volts it is not under any electrical codes. Example the low voltage lights my daughter installed on her walkway clearly stated they can be installed by the home owner. No electrical codes are required. Just saying. Their has to be a cutoff of codes and i think the number is 50V or under!!
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: Trinom on December 29, 2012, 05:05:43 PM
Post by: Trinom on December 29, 2012, 05:05:43 PM
Oh, guys, you are still fighting about the current draw?
Here is the volt - amp characteristics of the resistor (red) and a light bulb (blue). The blower motor will be similar to the light bulb.
(http://www.gymstr.cz/fyzikalni_pokusy/obrazky/61.jpg)
You can clearly see, that the current rises with voltage. The only thing where the current rises when the voltage is dropping is the switching supply, which WE DON'T HAVE in our cars.
Other thing is the load characteristics of the battery
(http://www.spsemoh.cz/vyuka/zel/obrazky/linzdrzch.gif)
U0 - no load (I = 0A)
Ik - short (U = 0V)
In other words, voltage drops with rising current draw.
PS: The inner resistance (Ri) of the battery rises with dropping voltage (that's the reason, why you can't start your car, if your battery is dead). That causes dropping current under the load.
Here is the volt - amp characteristics of the resistor (red) and a light bulb (blue). The blower motor will be similar to the light bulb.
(http://www.gymstr.cz/fyzikalni_pokusy/obrazky/61.jpg)
You can clearly see, that the current rises with voltage. The only thing where the current rises when the voltage is dropping is the switching supply, which WE DON'T HAVE in our cars.
Other thing is the load characteristics of the battery
(http://www.spsemoh.cz/vyuka/zel/obrazky/linzdrzch.gif)
U0 - no load (I = 0A)
Ik - short (U = 0V)
In other words, voltage drops with rising current draw.
PS: The inner resistance (Ri) of the battery rises with dropping voltage (that's the reason, why you can't start your car, if your battery is dead). That causes dropping current under the load.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 30, 2012, 09:44:12 AM
Post by: TOM Renzo on December 30, 2012, 09:44:12 AM
Well whatever that language is i cant read it. But i definitely know that a blower motor on less voltage draws less current. That is unless my Extremely expensive FLUKE meter went BONKERS and i doubt that!!!
I guess you are talking about a starter motor and a battery. But a fixed load the voltage drops the current drops. If you like i will make a video but i dont see any point in that as all you have to do is hook an ammeter to your blower motor and flick the speed switch on the dash. With that i dont care any more untill someone actually does this test. So do the test and see for yourself. Once again i dont think i fell off a turnip truck last night????
I guess you are talking about a starter motor and a battery. But a fixed load the voltage drops the current drops. If you like i will make a video but i dont see any point in that as all you have to do is hook an ammeter to your blower motor and flick the speed switch on the dash. With that i dont care any more untill someone actually does this test. So do the test and see for yourself. Once again i dont think i fell off a turnip truck last night????
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 31, 2012, 12:16:04 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 31, 2012, 12:16:04 AM
tom,
this only becomes important when sizing your fuses or cb,,, thats all. its another ingredient in the design.
i did your test and i also did a test on headlamps just for my own entertainment,, took a lot of pictures to but concluded its a pointless thing to explain because i dont think its important anymore. I probably have more tools than you to see this stuff like my midtronics tester, Biddle tester and plus the fact that "my" typical battery string i deal with weighs about 7900lbs consiting of 24) 2v cells.
Here is the deal just so you know that your meter wasnt bonkers........but your qty of stored battery is so small that a digital meter cant really catch what im talking about.
When i tested the headlamps, the voltage droppped and i was able to see coupe de fout, but just barely.
what i saw happen in first 30seconds was a quick drop in voltage that lasted for i suspect approx 3 seconds during which time the current spiked but i missed the opportunity to catch it.
next the voltage went back up to about 11.97v thus dropping the current to about 4.1A (one headlamp bulb on high)
next the voltage started to drop and the current rose slightly to around 4.3 and held that point before it started to fall with the falling of voltage.
all batteries do this,, there is a moment in time in which the current will rise slightly (hard to see with basic tools) and this differential will be more visible to out typical tools directly proportinal to the stored ah rating of the battery itself.
as a result, im just simply stating that these events that take place and its wise to size things accordingly
ok, so lets let it go, its just a little thing that i happen to "prefer" to factor in. with respect to switched power supplies, its more visual to a meter.
ok, recap
upon initial discharge within the first few seconds depending on your battery type, coupe de foute will be experience where voltage drops **HUGE** while current spikes huge and then ......... the batt voltage recovers by going back up and levels off.
battery starts to discharge but the voltage recovers to around 12v bringing down the current. all this happens in just a couple three or 4 seconds in a car battery.
current demands on the battery will seem to appear to be steady to a tad high (or even rise slightly) during the 12v to 11.5 v range.
the voltage drops but the loads will still demand the same amount of current until eventually the current starts to fall with voltage.
these considerations are what effects your wires ability to carry the demand.
i should have never brought this up.......but,,,,,,,, my next post may brighten the subject back on track
this only becomes important when sizing your fuses or cb,,, thats all. its another ingredient in the design.
i did your test and i also did a test on headlamps just for my own entertainment,, took a lot of pictures to but concluded its a pointless thing to explain because i dont think its important anymore. I probably have more tools than you to see this stuff like my midtronics tester, Biddle tester and plus the fact that "my" typical battery string i deal with weighs about 7900lbs consiting of 24) 2v cells.
Here is the deal just so you know that your meter wasnt bonkers........but your qty of stored battery is so small that a digital meter cant really catch what im talking about.
When i tested the headlamps, the voltage droppped and i was able to see coupe de fout, but just barely.
what i saw happen in first 30seconds was a quick drop in voltage that lasted for i suspect approx 3 seconds during which time the current spiked but i missed the opportunity to catch it.
next the voltage went back up to about 11.97v thus dropping the current to about 4.1A (one headlamp bulb on high)
next the voltage started to drop and the current rose slightly to around 4.3 and held that point before it started to fall with the falling of voltage.
all batteries do this,, there is a moment in time in which the current will rise slightly (hard to see with basic tools) and this differential will be more visible to out typical tools directly proportinal to the stored ah rating of the battery itself.
as a result, im just simply stating that these events that take place and its wise to size things accordingly
ok, so lets let it go, its just a little thing that i happen to "prefer" to factor in. with respect to switched power supplies, its more visual to a meter.
ok, recap
upon initial discharge within the first few seconds depending on your battery type, coupe de foute will be experience where voltage drops **HUGE** while current spikes huge and then ......... the batt voltage recovers by going back up and levels off.
battery starts to discharge but the voltage recovers to around 12v bringing down the current. all this happens in just a couple three or 4 seconds in a car battery.
current demands on the battery will seem to appear to be steady to a tad high (or even rise slightly) during the 12v to 11.5 v range.
the voltage drops but the loads will still demand the same amount of current until eventually the current starts to fall with voltage.
these considerations are what effects your wires ability to carry the demand.
i should have never brought this up.......but,,,,,,,, my next post may brighten the subject back on track
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 31, 2012, 12:24:45 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 31, 2012, 12:24:45 AM
ok,,
got the relay bank built...
A few things im doing a little different.
I am using the 80A cb to feed a 100A rated buss fuse block
IGN sw RUN will e managed by a 30A fuse / 40A relay(I hope this is enough)
IGN sw ACCY will be managed by a 30A fuse / 40A relay (i hope this is enough)
Marker lamps will be managed by a 15A fuse / 30A relay
Headlamp Hi & Low will be managed by a 30A fuse / 40A relay x 2
**i forgot to jumper out the headlamp stuff to do "thefoeyouknow" opiton and will fix my screw up tomorrow.
I have some overhead in this design so i can power my remote power strip for things we use in the car, as well a spare realy , maybe two depending on how i go about it.
so , here is the build, in this condition each relay has its own dedicated fuse and relay but that will change tomorrow slightly.
This mod is going to be really nice.
i need to talk to you **TOM** about the redundunt layout,, i tried like hell to figure out what you mean,,, sorry,,, i just dont get it.
so here it is,,,, comments welcome.
got the relay bank built...
A few things im doing a little different.
I am using the 80A cb to feed a 100A rated buss fuse block
IGN sw RUN will e managed by a 30A fuse / 40A relay(I hope this is enough)
IGN sw ACCY will be managed by a 30A fuse / 40A relay (i hope this is enough)
Marker lamps will be managed by a 15A fuse / 30A relay
Headlamp Hi & Low will be managed by a 30A fuse / 40A relay x 2
**i forgot to jumper out the headlamp stuff to do "thefoeyouknow" opiton and will fix my screw up tomorrow.
I have some overhead in this design so i can power my remote power strip for things we use in the car, as well a spare realy , maybe two depending on how i go about it.
so , here is the build, in this condition each relay has its own dedicated fuse and relay but that will change tomorrow slightly.
This mod is going to be really nice.
i need to talk to you **TOM** about the redundunt layout,, i tried like hell to figure out what you mean,,, sorry,,, i just dont get it.
so here it is,,,, comments welcome.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 31, 2012, 12:31:25 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 31, 2012, 12:31:25 AM
and this is how we protect the copper buss work that bridges the 80A CB tom sent me to the 100A fuse block..........
going in the car tomorrow
going in the car tomorrow
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: Trinom on December 31, 2012, 09:36:22 AM
Post by: Trinom on December 31, 2012, 09:36:22 AM
Quote from: TOM Renzo;405771
Well whatever that language is i cant read it. But i definitely know that a blower motor on less voltage draws less current. That is unless my Extremely expensive FLUKE meter went BONKERS and i doubt that!!!
It corresponds to info you wrote earlier. The first graph shows, that the current drops (Y axis) with the dropping voltage (X axis) on the load (resistor, light bulb). The motor will be the same.
The second graph shows that the voltage OF THE BATTERY drops with the rising current. In other words, you will measure higher voltage on the battery without load, than with load.
Jay thought that the load current rises, when the battery voltage drops (the wattage is constant). That's a mistake. If this would be true, then you won't need to care about the battery voltage and the load would work on it's designed power. That's not true. Only thing which can do this is the switching power supply. But we don't have any in the car (maybe except your mobil phone charger). That's the reason why we can ignore it now.
I hope you understand this.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 31, 2012, 09:57:47 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 31, 2012, 09:57:47 AM
Quote from: Trinom;405853
That's the reason why we can ignore it now.
exactly,
130 posts later and finally someone who knows this is a possibility.
however , your not quoting me totally correct per my description of desicharge wtih time. ALL batteries go through a coup de foute event for a very short duration where voltage drops but the current stays high or rises slightly before recovering. additionally , during discharage the current will attempt to stay steady and slightly rise while voltage drops before**current finally follows the voltage, this second event depends on the ah battery type you have.
these two events in a short period of time factor into how an over current protection device needs sized.
coup de foute for approx 3-5seconds = long enough for a fuse to react (can last for several minutes on a larger 2100ah battery system)
discharge from 12 to 11.x V= approx 1 min depending on your battery ah.
when voltage drops but the current is steady and / or up by .2 or so means your approaching AIC or SCCR,, if these are not considerations to sizing a fuse, the so be it.
to say generically that it just doesnt happen is not the case.
Title: Relay modification for ign sw discussion
Post by: jcassity on December 31, 2012, 10:24:45 AM
Post by: jcassity on December 31, 2012, 10:24:45 AM
question:
on my connectors, i tried to heat shrink them and they did not shrink.
the brand is burndy,, pretty much the best money can buy (along with thomas and betts, 3m ect) but was wondering if anyone else has seen this happen.
on my connectors, i tried to heat shrink them and they did not shrink.
the brand is burndy,, pretty much the best money can buy (along with thomas and betts, 3m ect) but was wondering if anyone else has seen this happen.