| |
DF3VI > TECHNIK 18.08.04 22:14l 33 Lines 1660 Bytes #999 (998) @ WW
BID : I8EDB0OVN00F
Read: GUEST OE7FMI
Subj: Re^2: More Battery Confusion.
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0FBB<DB0GOS<DB0OVN
Sent: 040818/2007z @:DB0OVN.#NRW.DEU.EU [BCM West<>Link-Neus] obcm1.06b23 LT:99
From: DF3VI @ DB0OVN.#NRW.DEU.EU (Patrick)
To: TECHNIK @ WW
X-Info: Sent with login password
Jeff, to help you a little bit understanding:
>I am well aware that the battery provides ALL the current necessary to
>start a car.
But are you aware WHY it is so? I somehow feel you don't...
That's not because the alternator cannot give such an high output, but because
when the engine is stopped, also the alternator is stopped, and even the
biggest alternator would give you zero Volt then :-)
>Again. Basically, once the car was started, (It was an Austin Maxi 1800cc
>as I recall) the car ran with NO problem, without any other electricals
You still did this with the battery attached, didn't you?
>running. Then I started to experiment. The side-lights were switched on
When did you disconnect the battery?
>and little difference was detected, (Perhaps an increased "humming" was
>detectable :) ). Once I switched the headlights on, the engine stopped.
>Repeating this experiment several times to ensure that it was no error,
>even with high revs, the engine would stall. It was apparent that the
>amount of current drawn by the headlights was too much for the alternator
>to provide a spark to the ignition AND the high ampage (30 Amps?)
>necessary to use the headlights. it was as I had suspected.
The alternator can of course deliver all the current needed for the
headlights, as otherwise driving with headlights on would empty the battery.
From experience we know this doesn't happen, so your conclusion is proven
wrong. Therefore we need another explanation.
GM7HUD has given one, K0CQ another one. Pick the one that pleases you...
73, Patrick
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
