S
Steve Wilson
Guest
Steve Wilson <no@spam.com> wrote:
The log on their home page shows entries going back to 2007.
The log on their home page shows entries going back to 2007.
C
Clifford Heath
Guest
On 13/11/19 6:12 am, Phil Allison wrote:
> A friend recommended "Thunderbird" which cannot access "individual.net" for some reason.
T'bird is more picky than most about SSL certificate validation, and
flatly refuses to report errors. However, you can add certificate
exceptions and make it work, like I need to with thecubenet.com
Clifford Heath.
> A friend recommended "Thunderbird" which cannot access "individual.net" for some reason.
T'bird is more picky than most about SSL certificate validation, and
flatly refuses to report errors. However, you can add certificate
exceptions and make it work, like I need to with thecubenet.com
Clifford Heath.
Guest
On Tuesday, 12 November 2019 16:04:45 UTC, anti...@math.uni.wroc.pl wrote:
well I do.
NT
well I do.
NT
J
Jasen Betts
Guest
On 2019-11-12, Chris <cbx@noreply.com> wrote:
someone who uses google groups would want to
> Seriously, is that who you post through?
no.
--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.
someone who uses google groups would want to
> Seriously, is that who you post through?
no.
--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.
J
Jasen Betts
Guest
On 2019-11-12, Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> wrote:
This is true, I had to make some shims with hooks from a tin can to get my radio
out last time, it took about half an hour, so yeah easily 10 times slower;
--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.
This is true, I had to make some shims with hooks from a tin can to get my radio
out last time, it took about half an hour, so yeah easily 10 times slower;
--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.
R
Rick C
Guest
On Monday, November 11, 2019 at 9:05:36 AM UTC-5, Winfield Hill wrote:
Not sure Phil requires any criticism to rant.
I know people like the TL431 for similar circuits, but is there really anything wrong with using a common 12 volt regulator in the way I described? Seems pretty simple and effective to me. It also produces a regulated 12 volts which can be useful for other circuitry rather than driving it off the unregulated car power.
Vin E PNP C
o--+-----------\___/-----+---o High == Vin > 13.4v
| B| |
| | |
| \ \
| /10K /10K
| \ \Add LED as indicator?
| / /
| | |
| --- |
| V |
| L7812ABV --- V
| +-----+ |
+--| |----+--------------o 12V out
+-----+ | 10K
| +--\/\/--+
| |
V V
--
Rick C.
-++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Not sure Phil requires any criticism to rant.
I know people like the TL431 for similar circuits, but is there really anything wrong with using a common 12 volt regulator in the way I described? Seems pretty simple and effective to me. It also produces a regulated 12 volts which can be useful for other circuitry rather than driving it off the unregulated car power.
Vin E PNP C
o--+-----------\___/-----+---o High == Vin > 13.4v
| B| |
| | |
| \ \
| /10K /10K
| \ \Add LED as indicator?
| / /
| | |
| --- |
| V |
| L7812ABV --- V
| +-----+ |
+--| |----+--------------o 12V out
+-----+ | 10K
| +--\/\/--+
| |
V V
--
Rick C.
-++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
R
Rick C
Guest
On Monday, November 11, 2019 at 11:39:29 AM UTC-5, Cursitor Doom wrote:
Looks ok in Google groups if you select "Show original".
--
Rick C.
+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Looks ok in Google groups if you select "Show original".
--
Rick C.
+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
W
whit3rd
Guest
On Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 10:03:03 AM UTC-8, anti...@math.uni.wroc.pl wrote:
I've found LTspice to work fine under Wine in Ubuntu, and (display
at least) the MacOS version can work with them too. If you
just want to see the schematic, it's workable.
Nasty surprise, though, if you try a Mac trackpad laptop, and need the
'right mouse button'.
I've found LTspice to work fine under Wine in Ubuntu, and (display
at least) the MacOS version can work with them too. If you
just want to see the schematic, it's workable.
Nasty surprise, though, if you try a Mac trackpad laptop, and need the
'right mouse button'.
W
Winfield Hill
Guest
tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote...
Details, please.
--
Thanks,
- Win
Details, please.
--
Thanks,
- Win
C
Cursitor Doom
Guest
On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 19:37:01 -0800, tabbypurr wrote:
I find LTS runs totally fine in Linux under WINE.
--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
I find LTS runs totally fine in Linux under WINE.
--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
Guest
On Monday, November 11, 2019 at 9:00:25 AM UTC-5, Winfield Hill wrote:
Hi Win,
Your drawing was fine. Just for fun, I've added your R4
for hysteresis. Only viewable with club membership and our
secret decoder rings
Cheers,
James Arthur
Hi Win,
Your drawing was fine. Just for fun, I've added your R4
for hysteresis. Only viewable with club membership and our
secret decoder rings
Cheers,
James Arthur
R
Rick C
Guest
On Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 7:52:02 PM UTC-5, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
It took me a bit to figure out what this circuit is doing. This is the comparator circuit, fig 25 on page 22 of the TI data sheet with the FET and a resistor added for hysteresis.
I'm not sure why a FET is used in place of a bipolar device. The threshold of the FET becomes part of the accuracy/precision budget and they tend to not be so accurate or precise. A bipolar device has a much more defined turn on voltage and so will not impact the accuracy/precision nearly as much.
I would also suggest that hysteresis will also detract from this budget by definition. The desired threshold must be within a window of voltage set by the state of charge of the battery, the temperature and potentially the loads that are on at any given time. So the actual window for the threshold is not going to be very wide. Add in some lack of accuracy of the threshold setting and a window of precision as the parts range in temperature and you may find your circuit not working in some situations. Add hysteresis on top of that and in one situation the circuit may turn on, but then fail to turn off and vice versa in other situations.
So in lieu of having good data to know where your threshold needs to be, I would suggest you skip the hysteresis which actually accomplishes nothing (either your threshold is good or it's not and noise in a car won't be filterable by hysteresis) and makes it harder to fit the accuracy/precision of your circuit to the threshold window requirement of your battery charging.
Actually, as I write this, I'm pretty sure you won't find a reliable approach by a circuit with a hard threshold. It is going to be hard to filter the noise from this circuit and it is going to be hard make it work in all seasons. I'm thinking it would be better to use a small MCU to measure the voltage and handle all the issues in software. Filtering can be done very easily and a great deal of intelligence can be used to decide when the ignition is on or not. It can also add features like keeping the dashcam on for some time after leaving the car.
--
Rick C.
+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On Monday, November 11, 2019 at 9:00:25 AM UTC-5, Winfield Hill wrote:
Cursitor Doom wrote...
On Mon, 11 Nov 2019, Jasen Betts wrote:
TL341 seems rated for automotive use.
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tl431.pdf
This is what Win suggested earlier and since these are
simple to configure and cheap as chips, I intend to go
down that route for the sake of expediency. The cig
lighter sockets on this car are 'always on' ...
Jasen Betts also wrote...
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tl431.pdf figure 25
No, sorry, not Figure 25. Although this is a perfect
application for a TL431, none of the figures in any of
the datasheets show it. Here's the circuit I had in
mind, time for an ASCII drawing:
. turn-on output, if Vin > Vp
.
. P-MOSFET
. --+----+-. .------+--- switched Vout
. | | | | |
. | - ^ - |
. | ----. R4
. | | |
. | | |
. +-- R3 --+ | pass voltage Vp:
. | .----|------' Vp = 2.5 (1 + R2/R1)
. R2 | | R1 = 2.49k
. | | ---- R2 = R1 ( Vp/2.5 - 1 )
. +---+--->/\ e.g. R2 = 11.0k for 13.5V
. | | TL431
. R1 | R3 = 3.3k pullup
. | ---
. --- R2 could include a trimpot
--
Thanks,
- Win
Hi Win,
Your drawing was fine. Just for fun, I've added your R4
for hysteresis. Only viewable with club membership and our
secret decoder rings
It took me a bit to figure out what this circuit is doing. This is the comparator circuit, fig 25 on page 22 of the TI data sheet with the FET and a resistor added for hysteresis.
I'm not sure why a FET is used in place of a bipolar device. The threshold of the FET becomes part of the accuracy/precision budget and they tend to not be so accurate or precise. A bipolar device has a much more defined turn on voltage and so will not impact the accuracy/precision nearly as much.
I would also suggest that hysteresis will also detract from this budget by definition. The desired threshold must be within a window of voltage set by the state of charge of the battery, the temperature and potentially the loads that are on at any given time. So the actual window for the threshold is not going to be very wide. Add in some lack of accuracy of the threshold setting and a window of precision as the parts range in temperature and you may find your circuit not working in some situations. Add hysteresis on top of that and in one situation the circuit may turn on, but then fail to turn off and vice versa in other situations.
So in lieu of having good data to know where your threshold needs to be, I would suggest you skip the hysteresis which actually accomplishes nothing (either your threshold is good or it's not and noise in a car won't be filterable by hysteresis) and makes it harder to fit the accuracy/precision of your circuit to the threshold window requirement of your battery charging.
Actually, as I write this, I'm pretty sure you won't find a reliable approach by a circuit with a hard threshold. It is going to be hard to filter the noise from this circuit and it is going to be hard make it work in all seasons. I'm thinking it would be better to use a small MCU to measure the voltage and handle all the issues in software. Filtering can be done very easily and a great deal of intelligence can be used to decide when the ignition is on or not. It can also add features like keeping the dashcam on for some time after leaving the car.
--
Rick C.
+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
W
Winfield Hill
Guest
Rick C wrote...
??? Figure 25 is a crowbar, with very different operation.
The gain for the TL431 is very high. Acting as a comparator,
the change in the R2 R1 threshold voltage, dealing with the
MOSFET's Vth variation, is very small. Using a BJT would
require knowledge of the maximum load, which was not known.
Maybe, I'm not sure. My observations of battery voltage,
once the engine is running, show the charging regulator
in full control, setting the voltage above 14 volts. So
whether a 13.5 or 13.7 or whatever voltage setting isn't
critical. Some real-world testing will reveal the answer.
--
Thanks,
- Win
On November 14, 2019 , dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On November 11, 2019, Winfield Hill wrote:
Cursitor Doom wrote...
Jasen Betts wrote:
TL341 seems rated for automotive use.
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tl431.pdf
This is what Win suggested earlier and since these are
simple to configure and cheap as chips, I intend to go
down that route for the sake of expediency. The cig
lighter sockets on this car are 'always on' ...
Jasen Betts also wrote...
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tl431.pdf figure 25
No, sorry, not Figure 25. Although this is a perfect
application for a TL431, none of the figures in any of
the datasheets show it. Here's the circuit I had in
mind, time for an ASCII drawing:
. turn-on output, if Vin > Vp
.
. P-MOSFET
. --+----+-. .------+--- switched Vout
. | | | | |
. | - ^ - |
. | ----. R4
. | | |
. | | |
. +-- R3 --+ | pass voltage Vp:
. | .----|------' Vp =3D 2.5 (1 + R2/R1)
. R2 | | R1 =3D 2.49k
. | | ---- R2 =3D R1 ( Vp/2.5 - 1 )=20
. +---+--->/\ e.g. R2 =3D 11.0k for 13.5V
. | | TL431
. R1 | R3 =3D 3.3k pullup
. | ---
. --- R2 could include a trimpot
Hi Win,
Your drawing was fine. Just for fun, I've added your R4
for hysteresis. Only viewable with club membership and our
secret decoder rings
It took me a bit to figure out what this circuit is doing.
This is the comparator circuit, fig 25 on page 22 of the
TI data sheet with the FET and a resistor added for hysteresis.
??? Figure 25 is a crowbar, with very different operation.
The gain for the TL431 is very high. Acting as a comparator,
the change in the R2 R1 threshold voltage, dealing with the
MOSFET's Vth variation, is very small. Using a BJT would
require knowledge of the maximum load, which was not known.
Maybe, I'm not sure. My observations of battery voltage,
once the engine is running, show the charging regulator
in full control, setting the voltage above 14 volts. So
whether a 13.5 or 13.7 or whatever voltage setting isn't
critical. Some real-world testing will reveal the answer.
--
Thanks,
- Win
R
Rick C
Guest
On Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 10:13:46 PM UTC-5, Winfield Hill wrote:
We must be looking at different data sheets. Fig 25 is a simple comparator which is what you are using it for. I just realized that means I was wrong about my comment that the threshold of the FET factors into the accuracy and precision of the circuit.
I think you will find that set point varies widely. While it does not require the battery to be fully charged, there will be a load on the alternator when providing a heavy charge but more importantly there will be a large difference in voltage with temperature. This is the nature of batteries and regulators are built to sense the temperature and adjust the charging voltage.
The point is the expected voltage on the car power in all conditions won't be a single value, it will be a range depending on several factors and making sure your circuit has accuracy and precision good enough to work properly in all conditions will be a problem.
Maybe the OP lives some place like southern California where the temps don't vary so much. But most places will have to deal with a lot. Both the battery and the circuit will have variations and I'm not sure it is possible to make this work for all conditions without a lot more work or a simple digital solution.
--
Rick C.
++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Rick C wrote...
On November 14, 2019 , dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On November 11, 2019, Winfield Hill wrote:
Cursitor Doom wrote...
Jasen Betts wrote:
TL341 seems rated for automotive use.
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tl431.pdf
This is what Win suggested earlier and since these are
simple to configure and cheap as chips, I intend to go
down that route for the sake of expediency. The cig
lighter sockets on this car are 'always on' ...
Jasen Betts also wrote...
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tl431.pdf figure 25
No, sorry, not Figure 25. Although this is a perfect
application for a TL431, none of the figures in any of
the datasheets show it. Here's the circuit I had in
mind, time for an ASCII drawing:
. turn-on output, if Vin > Vp
.
. P-MOSFET
. --+----+-. .------+--- switched Vout
. | | | | |
. | - ^ - |
. | ----. R4
. | | |
. | | |
. +-- R3 --+ | pass voltage Vp:
. | .----|------' Vp =3D 2.5 (1 + R2/R1)
. R2 | | R1 =3D 2.49k
. | | ---- R2 =3D R1 ( Vp/2.5 - 1 )=20
. +---+--->/\ e.g. R2 =3D 11.0k for 13.5V
. | | TL431
. R1 | R3 =3D 3.3k pullup
. | ---
. --- R2 could include a trimpot
Hi Win,
Your drawing was fine. Just for fun, I've added your R4
for hysteresis. Only viewable with club membership and our
secret decoder rings
It took me a bit to figure out what this circuit is doing.
This is the comparator circuit, fig 25 on page 22 of the
TI data sheet with the FET and a resistor added for hysteresis.
??? Figure 25 is a crowbar, with very different operation.
We must be looking at different data sheets. Fig 25 is a simple comparator which is what you are using it for. I just realized that means I was wrong about my comment that the threshold of the FET factors into the accuracy and precision of the circuit.
I think you will find that set point varies widely. While it does not require the battery to be fully charged, there will be a load on the alternator when providing a heavy charge but more importantly there will be a large difference in voltage with temperature. This is the nature of batteries and regulators are built to sense the temperature and adjust the charging voltage.
The point is the expected voltage on the car power in all conditions won't be a single value, it will be a range depending on several factors and making sure your circuit has accuracy and precision good enough to work properly in all conditions will be a problem.
Maybe the OP lives some place like southern California where the temps don't vary so much. But most places will have to deal with a lot. Both the battery and the circuit will have variations and I'm not sure it is possible to make this work for all conditions without a lot more work or a simple digital solution.
--
Rick C.
++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
C
Chris
Guest
On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 20:25:00 -0800, Rick C wrote:
Win has already explicitly ruled that out:
Message-ID: <qqbph30hsr@drn.newsguy.com>
Win has already explicitly ruled that out:
Message-ID: <qqbph30hsr@drn.newsguy.com>
C
Cursitor Doom
Guest
On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 20:25:00 -0800, Rick C wrote:
"Going digital" is against my religion and so can only be a very last
resort.
There *is* a considerable temp range to contend with here: zero celcius
in winter to 140F in summer. However (I don't have Win's schematic to
hand right at this moment so am guessing) there should be a way to
introduce a simple 'summer/winter' switch into the design to cope with
this. I don't mind doing this manually; tweaking a pot twice a year I can
live with.
--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
"Going digital" is against my religion and so can only be a very last
resort.
There *is* a considerable temp range to contend with here: zero celcius
in winter to 140F in summer. However (I don't have Win's schematic to
hand right at this moment so am guessing) there should be a way to
introduce a simple 'summer/winter' switch into the design to cope with
this. I don't mind doing this manually; tweaking a pot twice a year I can
live with.
--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
W
Winfield Hill
Guest
Cursitor Doom wrote...
With a little extra information, an ambient temp rule
could be had, and it'd be relatively easy to modify
the circuit to automatically adjust its setpoint.
--
Thanks,
- Win
On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 20:25:00 -0800, Rick C wrote:
Maybe the OP lives some place like southern California where the temps
don't vary so much. But most places will have to deal with a lot. Both
the battery and the circuit will have variations and I'm not sure it is
possible to make this work for all conditions without a lot more work or
a simple digital solution.
"Going digital" is against my religion and so can only be a
very last resort.
There *is* a considerable temp range to contend with here:
zero celcius in winter to 140F in summer. However (I don't
have Win's schematic to hand right at this moment so am
guessing) there should be a way to introduce a simple
'summer/winter' switch into the design to cope with this.
I don't mind doing this manually; tweaking a pot twice a
year I can live with.
With a little extra information, an ambient temp rule
could be had, and it'd be relatively easy to modify
the circuit to automatically adjust its setpoint.
--
Thanks,
- Win
W
Winfield Hill
Guest
Chris wrote...
A comp would be fine, but the TL431 has a built-in precision
voltage ref, comes in a 3-pin TO-92, what's not to like?
--
Thanks,
- Win
A comp would be fine, but the TL431 has a built-in precision
voltage ref, comes in a 3-pin TO-92, what's not to like?
--
Thanks,
- Win
R
Rick C
Guest
On Friday, November 15, 2019 at 9:00:04 AM UTC-5, Cursitor Doom wrote:
Periodically "tweaking a pot" is exactly the reason why digital is so much better than analog for a host of problems. People who can't hack digital may be loath to use it, but this is the sort of problem that can be addressed with a $0.50 MCU on a $4 board off the shelf and a few lines of code. No need to order many different parts although you will need a couple of resistors to reduce the voltage being measured to an acceptable value, so it still has an analog component. lol
In all seriousness, for either solution you will need to ruggedize against the voltage excursions seen in a car. So there's more analog for the digital solution.
--
Rick C.
+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 20:25:00 -0800, Rick C wrote:
Maybe the OP lives some place like southern California where the temps
don't vary so much. But most places will have to deal with a lot. Both
the battery and the circuit will have variations and I'm not sure it is
possible to make this work for all conditions without a lot more work or
a simple digital solution.
"Going digital" is against my religion and so can only be a very last
resort.
There *is* a considerable temp range to contend with here: zero celcius
in winter to 140F in summer. However (I don't have Win's schematic to
hand right at this moment so am guessing) there should be a way to
introduce a simple 'summer/winter' switch into the design to cope with
this. I don't mind doing this manually; tweaking a pot twice a year I can
live with.
Periodically "tweaking a pot" is exactly the reason why digital is so much better than analog for a host of problems. People who can't hack digital may be loath to use it, but this is the sort of problem that can be addressed with a $0.50 MCU on a $4 board off the shelf and a few lines of code. No need to order many different parts although you will need a couple of resistors to reduce the voltage being measured to an acceptable value, so it still has an analog component. lol
In all seriousness, for either solution you will need to ruggedize against the voltage excursions seen in a car. So there's more analog for the digital solution.
--
Rick C.
+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
R
Rick C
Guest
On Friday, November 15, 2019 at 9:21:24 AM UTC-5, Chris wrote:
Ruled what out, using a comparator? That's what his circuit is, a comparator with added hysteresis.
--
Rick C.
---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Ruled what out, using a comparator? That's what his circuit is, a comparator with added hysteresis.
--
Rick C.
---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209