The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: jmuchow@SPAMMENOTcamlight.com (John Muchow)
Subject: Re: Reducing contact resistance for low volt use?
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 05:40:49 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
X-Server-Date: 7 Jan 2003 05:42:40 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243
>>>>I just wanted to inform you that there are facts you don't know about
>>>>here. It is not as nutty as it sounds to begin with.
>>>>But close to :-)
>>> You may be right, I may be crazy, but others appear worse off than
I think he meant that it was me who was nutty (or my ideas at
least)...I agree. This entire sport is nutty...probably why all of us
love it so much.
>>>>> All they need to do is put more batteries in parallel with those
>>>>>already in place. More current per pack, not more voltage.
>>>>I have a feeling they have tried different possibilities.
>>> I am not so sure.
We have tried many things for many years....you can be sure of that.
>>> I guess. Hell, he'd be better off with a capacitor bank on standby
>>>in the circuit, with a switch that gets thrown if the device ever
>>>falls below a certain voltage. Surge caps can produce some amazing
>>>instantaneous currents without damage for hundreds of pulses.
>>> There has to be a way to deliver energy to this guys load (the motor
>>>not the fixture) without dropping the batteries to a nil voltage.
>>> DC to DC converter between batteries and motor.
We're building a constant-current discharger. We don't want to hold
the voltage anywhere. We don't want additional current ready to be
switched in. This isn't for our 'bots or other folks planes/cars.
Or are you talking about powering our 'bots?
If so, we don't care if the voltage drops during use. Most of these
combat robots are designed to never reach that point in the battery's
life (past the level "plateau" of a typical NiCd discharge curve).
And the extra weight of those capacitors won't help us (they're big
too). If we take the current from the batteries, or the capacitors
after coming from the batteries, it's all the same. And the
inefficiencies resulting from another step (storing in caps or DC-DC
converting) definitely won't help us.
And those caps would be juicy pickings for another bot's weapons. The
DC-DC converter would just be another layer of delicate complexity
that might fail with the huge G-loads these bots experience...even if
the other bot doesn't shred it.
This sport is a lot more evolved than you're imagining. Lots of VERY
talented folks from different engineering fields builds these things.
And they have put years of work into them.
>>> Hey! I know! Lets just put a big coil of wire in the car, and
>>>excite it inductively! Hahahaha.... Like a door pass key.
>>> Yeah... we could send a whole 500 femtowatts to the car! :-]
Well, there is an "Ant" class. They use a bit more power than that,
but not by much.
-- Remove "SPAMMENOT" to reply via e-mail --
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup