 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Dodge / Dodge Trucks / August 2005Boiling a battery
OK, you guys seem to know it all (that's not intended as a slight) 91 Plymouth Laser (I know, dodge truck NG, but it is a chrysler product, and I do own a dodge truck, and well, you guys know it all). Constant clear liquid around the battery, especially around the top vents, very corrosive. No, the battery does not have a leak Battery was three years old, exchanged with another three year old battery, same thing, clear liquid around battery. Constantly adding water to the battery. Removed regulator from the car, set it up on the test bench, regulator turns on (alternator) at 13.8 volts and turns off (the alternator field winding) at 14.2 volts (at about 70 degrees F). Battery voltage measured at the alternator/regulator, is the same as the voltage measured at the battery. This vehicle uses a separate wire to measure the battery voltage for the regulator, tests OK (same voltage at either end of the wire). With the car running, the measured output voltage of the alternator is 14.2 volts. Manual says voltage should be between 13.9 and 14.9 volts Question is, why am I boiling the batteries. Car runs fine, starts OK, no other problems. are you measuring the running-charging-voltage at BOTH battery terminals, or between positive and engine ground ? > OK, you guys seem to know it all (that's not intended as a slight) > 91 Plymouth Laser (I know, dodge truck NG, but it is a chrysler product, and [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Question is, why am I boiling the batteries. Car runs fine, starts OK, no > other problems. Alright genius, how is that going to make any difference. At best, the voltage between the battery positive and the engine ground will be HIGHER than at both terminals of the battery while the alternator is working. Do you need a lesson on the current path during charging too?  SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > are you measuring the running-charging-voltage at BOTH battery terminals, or > between positive and engine ground ? [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Question is, why am I boiling the batteries. Car runs fine, starts OK, no > > other problems. piss off > Alright genius, how is that going to make any difference. At best, the > voltage between the battery positive and the engine ground will be HIGHER [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > no > > > other problems. LOL, pretty good at dishing it out but completely incapable of taking it, LOL. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > piss off > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > no > > > > other problems. just saving time, a.shole the explanation involves percentages > LOL, pretty good at dishing it out but completely incapable of taking it, > LOL. [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > > > no > > > > > other problems. IOW, you are still wrong and you know it but feel free to explain it. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > just saving time, a.shole > [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > > > > no > > > > > > other problems. > IOW, you are still wrong and you know it but feel free to explain it. Gary has you pegged, you are like a pup yipping at the master's heels. You can't resist a chance to bark at him, no matter what. Go ahead, reply. You know you want to, you cannot resist. SignatureMax Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and he is warm for the rest of his life. > IOW, you are still wrong and you know it but feel free to explain it. > [quoted text clipped - 69 lines] >> > > > no >> > > > > > other problems. > > IOW, you are still wrong and you know it but feel free to explain it. > > Gary has you pegged, you are like a pup yipping at the master's heels. You > can't resist a chance to bark at him, no matter what. LOL, not true. To use the famous Budd line, I am trying to prevent him from giving bad information to and confusing the OP, nothing more. But instead of just bashing him, I asked a question to clarify his response and as usual and much like yourself, he was unable to answer it and not man enough to admit to error or even walk away. > Go ahead, reply. You know you want to, you cannot resist. You are right for a change, I did want to and there is simply no reason for me to want to resist but now I am done with this part of the thread so if you want to respond and have the last word, knock yourself out SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Alright genius, how is that going to make any difference. And you wonder whjy people take exception to you... > At best, the > voltage between the battery positive and the engine ground will be HIGHER > than at both terminals of the battery while the alternator is working. Do > you need a lesson on the current path during charging too? Really? Unless the battery has a dead cell, voltage across the terminals has every possibility of being higher than battery positive to ground. Typically (remember that lesson you wanted to hand out?) there will be more resistance in a circuit that across the terminals themselves. Gary is simply trying to establish if that possible resistance is causing the VR to keep charging the battery when it shouldn't. Maybe you should shut up unless you have something construcive to add. SignatureMax Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and he is warm for the rest of his life. > Alright genius, how is that going to make any difference. At best, the > voltage between the battery positive and the engine ground will be HIGHER [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > no >> > other problems. > > Alright genius, how is that going to make any difference. > > And you wonder whjy people take exception to you... Yawn, not in your case Maxi. We all know that you are just desperate for attention and usually wrong, like now. > > At best, the > > voltage between the battery positive and the engine ground will be HIGHER [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Really? Unless the battery has a dead cell, voltage across the terminals has > every possibility of being higher than battery positive to ground. LOL, you really don't have a clue. If the alternator is CHARGING or OVERCHARGING, which BTW, is the entire point of this post, the voltage at the battery terminals will NEVER BE HIGHER. Measuring from the battey positive to ground or the negative terminal makes no difference in this case. 14.2V is acceptable from either location. > Typically (remember that lesson you wanted to hand out?) there will be more resistance > in a circuit that across the terminals themselves. That is correct but since we are charging, the alternator is the source of the voltage, not the battery and since the alternator grounds thru its case, the output terminals are the alt output connection (+) and the engine block (-), not the battery. BTW, we are concerned about the voltage being applied TO THE BATTERY, not the voltage of the battery itself. Pay attention for a change Maxi. > Gary is simply trying to establish if that possible resistance is causing > the VR to keep charging the battery when it shouldn't. No he isn't and that makes absolutely no sense at all. If the VR was being fooled into overcharging, the voltage would be much higher than the measured 14.2 at the alternator output which is ALWAYS the same or higher than the voltage at the battery terminals under CHARGE conditions. If the 14.2 was measured at the battery terminals themselves, it is still within accepted voltage range regardless of the possible voltage at the alternator output. BTW, his "piss off" response also proves that he was not trying to do this so you appear to be once again wrong on multiple levels, LOL. > Maybe you should shut up unless you have something construcive to add. I did have something constructive to say to the OP which is more than I can say about you and as I have said before to you in regard to this last sentence from you, PKB. Now are you going to jump thru some more hoops and falsely accuse me of name calling again, LOL SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > LOL, you really don't have a clue. If the alternator is CHARGING or > OVERCHARGING, which BTW, is the entire point of this post, the voltage at > the battery terminals will NEVER BE HIGHER. Measuring from the battey > positive to ground or the negative terminal makes no difference in this > case. 14.2V is acceptable from either location. Sure it makes a difference, in one case there is no resistance possible, in the other you open the possibility to all sorts of resistance. Certainly the voltage you list is acceptable to the system, thats not the issue. The question is whether or not the battery was designed with this in mind (likely it was), whether or not the battery is being accurately monitored by the VR, and whether the battery is big enough to sustain the draw of the starter under normal conditions and the charging of the system under normal conditions. No doubt that the battery voltage "WILL NEVER BE HIGHER" under a charging condition, however, we're still open on the issue of whether or not the VR is seeing the same voltage as what can be found across the terminals. > That is correct but since we are charging, the alternator is the source of > the voltage, not the battery and since the alternator grounds thru its > case, > the output terminals are the alt output connection (+) and the engine > block > (-), not the battery. Terrific, and since the Alternator is putting out specified voltage, it must be grounded just fine. > BTW, we are concerned about the voltage being applied > TO THE BATTERY, not the voltage of the battery itself. Pay attention for > a > change Maxi. Ahh yes, pay attention yourself. How does the charging system determine output voltage? Thats right, it monitors battery voltage. So while we are concerned with the voltage being "applied" (charging voltage) we also need to figure out how that voltage was determined. As such, since the VR seems to behave properly on a bench test, we must then look at the switching voltage it sees and determine if that accurately reflects the actual voltage of the battery. (Funny, if you read it, the OP did EXACTLY this test!!) THUS.... Gary asks the question, "Are you measuring battery voltage between the terminals, or from positive to ground?" A perfectly valid question, since we want to know how accurate the info regarding the battery voltage is. It matters not what the output voltage of the alternator is, so long as its in spec, and is switched properly. If the alternator is putting out 14.2v but the VR isn't getting a proper reading of battery voltage and sees it as too low, then we have a great place to find overcharging. > No he isn't and that makes absolutely no sense at all. If the VR was > being [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > measured at the battery terminals themselves, it is still within accepted > voltage range regardless of the possible voltage at the alternator output. Unless of course, that little "intermittant" word (you do remember bringing it up?) creeps in and blows your whole theory. But lets assume its a constant..... if the VR never sees 14.2, but does see a constant lower voltage, say... 14.0v, it'll keep charging that battery at a rate designed to bring it up just a bit, but never sees it come up. You can sputter away all you like, the big variables here are the condition of the wiring, how much voltage the VR sees, and how accurate the readings taken have been. 1) Having checked the VR sensing wire, I'd check connections and other details of how it sees battery voltage. 2) I'd also check to be sure battery size is matched to maximum draw, just to cover your theory on too high a draw by the starter. 3) Anything else that was drawing enough current to heat up the battery has to be more than a glove box lamp etc. Generally that size draw will drain the battery long before boiling it. 4) The OP has determined that the VR swiotches properly, but I'd test installed voltage on the VR to see if its performing the same while in the vehicle. 5) Given that battery and charging ALT voltage should be the same, I'd check both the battery (terminal to terminal) and alternator output terminal to CASE, not block etc. If they are th same, and not over spec, I'd look at the VR for problems in switching. I'm betting this is a deal where something in the wiring is giving a false reading. Which was where Gary was going, and I'll bet you are too. > I did have something constructive to say to the OP which is more than I > can > say about you and as I have said before to you in regard to this last > sentence from you, PKB. Now are you going to jump thru some more hoops > and > falsely accuse me of name calling again, LOL You took the time to bash Gary prior to just posting what you know. Thats the problem. I've mentioned this before. BTW, nice job on resisting more posts on that other thread. Got you to shut up nicely, and yes, the reverse psych worked well. Sure would be nice if you'd just post what you know, and quit being so lame and insulting all the time. SignatureMax Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and he is warm for the rest of his life. >> > Alright genius, how is that going to make any difference. >> [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > and > falsely accuse me of name calling again, LOL > > LOL, you really don't have a clue. If the alternator is CHARGING or > > OVERCHARGING, which BTW, is the entire point of this post, the voltage at [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > starter under normal conditions and the charging of the system under normal > conditions. LOL, it is fun to watch you spin. Resistance is not only possible, it is a guarantee unless you have invented the perfect material to make your connections and wires out of. As for the battery being accuratly monitored, LOL. If the voltage is within spec, that is all that matters. > No doubt that the battery voltage "WILL NEVER BE HIGHER" under > a charging condition, however, we're still open on the issue of whether or > not the VR is seeing the same voltage as what can be found across the > terminals. Who cares what the VR sees across the terminals. The only thing that matters is what the voltage actually is. If it is sitting at 14.2, then the VR is function properly, despite your spin. > > That is correct but since we are charging, the alternator is the source of > > the voltage, not the battery and since the alternator grounds thru its [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Terrific, and since the Alternator is putting out specified voltage, it must > be grounded just fine. Never said otherwise. Is this more spin??? If so, then you just spun yourself. > > BTW, we are concerned about the voltage being applied > > TO THE BATTERY, not the voltage of the battery itself. Pay attention for [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Ahh yes, pay attention yourself. How does the charging system determine > output voltage? Thats right, it monitors battery voltage. Actually, no it doesn't. It monitors system voltage and could give a rats a.s about the battery. Once running, the battery does little more than to act like a giant filter cap to smooth out the mess of crap comming out of the alternator and to serve as a reserve if and when the current requirements exceed the alternators capability at a given time, especially in an older vehicle. > So while we are > concerned with the voltage being "applied" (charging voltage) we also need > to figure out how that voltage was determined. LOL, we need do no such thing, at least not as far as what the OP said he is concerned with. 14.2V is 14.2V regardless of where the measurment is taken, especially with regard to ground. > As such, since the VR seems > to behave properly on a bench test, we must then look at the switching [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > 14.2v but the VR isn't getting a proper reading of battery voltage and sees > it as too low, then we have a great place to find overcharging. Hahahahahahahahaha, you really don't have a clue. The voltage is 14.2V BECAUSE the VR set it there. > > No he isn't and that makes absolutely no sense at all. If the VR was > > being [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Unless of course, that little "intermittant" word (you do remember bringing > it up?) creeps in and blows your whole theory. How does intermittence blow out my theory, oh, that's right, it doesn't. > But lets assume its a > constant..... if the VR never sees 14.2, but does see a constant lower > voltage, say... 14.0v, it'll keep charging that battery at a rate designed > to bring it up just a bit, but never sees it come up. LOL, you really are kidding, right?!?!? The purpose of the VR is not now nor has it ever been to precisely monitor or control the charging of the battery. Perhaps you should look up the real purpose of the VR before responding. Here is a hint. Although the action of the VR is in its name, perhaps you should look into why it is really needed. > You can sputter away all you like, the big variables here are the condition > of the wiring, how much voltage the VR sees, and how accurate the readings > taken have been. Partially right (sense wire), wrong, and mostly wrong. > 1) Having checked the VR sensing wire, I'd check connections and other > details of how it sees battery voltage. With the exception of the VR sensing wire, the rest of what you said means nothing, especially since the VR sensing wire IS how it sees the voltage. > 2) I'd also check to be sure battery size is matched to maximum draw, just > to cover your theory on too high a draw by the starter. While that is not a bad idea, a bad starter will have the same effect as too small of a battery and even in a defective state, may still have enough umph to start the car. > 3) Anything else that was drawing enough current to heat up the battery has > to be more than a glove box lamp etc. Generally that size draw will drain > the battery long before boiling it. Once again, you prove your ignorance. It is not the current draw from the battery that boils the fluid or more likely causes venting. It is the significantly increased current draw by the battery itself trying to recharge from a significant discharge state due to that small current draw over a long time that causes venting and venting can cause it to spit fluid, especially if the battery is being jostled while it is venting. This is how a defective starter can also cause venting beyond the short duration of the start. > 4) The OP has determined that the VR swiotches properly, but I'd test > installed voltage on the VR to see if its performing the same while in the > vehicle. That is why I suggested he drive with an operational volt meter. Everything is operating normally when the vehicle is sitting still or the voltage would be much higher. > 5) Given that battery and charging ALT voltage should be the same, I'd check > both the battery (terminal to terminal) and alternator output terminal to > CASE, not block etc. If they are th same, and not over spec, I'd look at the > VR for problems in switching. You are daydreaming, talking way over your head, and full of sh.t. If the voltage is not over spec, then it is what it is and the VR is functioning normally at the time of measurment. There is no rocket science here and we are not talking about percision regulation of voltage or frequency (switching) here. The average voltage is all that matters and if it is in spec, then it is working. > I'm betting this is a deal where something in the wiring is giving a false > reading. Which was where Gary was going, and I'll bet you are too. Gary was going nowhere or he would have said so. He got it backwards again like his TC flow and it is as simple as that. As for the wiring giving a false reading, I am not going that way at all since it is complete BS. With the possible exception of an intermittant bad connection to the VR or the alt field winding itself, the wiring has nothing to do with it > > I did have something constructive to say to the OP which is more than I > > can [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You took the time to bash Gary prior to just posting what you know. Thats > the problem. I've mentioned this before. He does the same to me as do you and what goes around, comes around. Actually, I questioned his reasoning which is far more than he does with his childish header changes and no text and he could have simply answered my question and proved his reasoning valid but instead just told me to piss off which translates into him being both childish and wrong. > BTW, nice job on resisting more posts on that other thread. Got you to shut > up nicely, and yes, the reverse psych worked well. LOL, actually it was your lame attempt at baiting that failed because there simply was nothing else to say there. > Sure would be nice if you'd just post what you know, and quit being so lame > and insulting all the time. PKB! SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > LOL, it is fun to watch you spin. Resistance is not only possible, it is > a > guarantee unless you have invented the perfect material to make your > connections and wires out of. As for the battery being accuratly > monitored, > LOL. If the voltage is within spec, that is all that matters. If I'm correct, I'm obviously not spinning anything. How do you know the voltage is within spec, if you aren't measuring the voltage across the terminals? And if we are both correct that resistance exists in a circuit, how is it possible for your claim to be true, that battery voltage across the terminals will match output voltage, or be the same from positive terminal to ground as it is from terminal to terminal? > Who cares what the VR sees across the terminals. Anyone who wants to know if the VR is working properly. Perhaps the OP, in this case. > The only thing that > matters is what the voltage actually is. If it is sitting at 14.2, then > the > VR is function properly, despite your spin. And you've determined this how? I don't recall any specs being published, let alone a make and model. All we know is that the VR switches on and off at known voltages, and that 14.2 is between those voltages. We don't know what voltages it is supposed to operate between, nor do we know what the system voltage is while its not charging. >> Ahh yes, pay attention yourself. How does the charging system determine >> output voltage? Thats right, it monitors battery voltage. > > Actually, no it doesn't. It monitors system voltage and could give a rats > a.s about the battery. But didn't you just say that output voltage and battery voltage are the same? Or are you backing away from that now that you've confirmed my remarks about resistance and properly checking battery voltage? > LOL, we need do no such thing, at least not as far as what the OP said he > is > concerned with. 14.2V is 14.2V regardless of where the measurment is > taken, > especially with regard to ground. The OP is concerned with his battery being cooked. Thus we DO need to know how the VR is determining system voltage, and what that system voltage is relative to the battery. Remember, you first claimed that battery voltage and output voltage had to be the same, then you claimed resistance existed in any circuit. So, we're back to my original claim, better check ALL circuits in the charging system and make sure all are intact and functioning properly. > Hahahahahahahahaha, you really don't have a clue. The voltage is 14.2V > BECAUSE the VR set it there. I do have a clue. I'll repeat myself so you can figure it out. Yes, the VR sets the voltage, BUT, how it determines the output of the alternator relies on a circuit that reads system voltage, so..... if that circuit is not functioning properly, and the output exceeds demand, it'll cook the battery. I'm not sure whats so hard for you to grasp here. I've repeatedly said that the VR has to have a good reference voltage, if it does not, it'll call for more output than is needed. It doesn't get any easier than this. Despite the OP having checked the reference voltage circuit, I'd bet something is wrong in that or the VR. >> Unless of course, that little "intermittant" word (you do remember > bringing >> it up?) creeps in and blows your whole theory. > > How does intermittence blow out my theory, oh, that's right, it doesn't. Oh thats right, it means that the VR could jack up the output while no one was looking at it. So we don't know if its a constant 14.2, or just a random reading. > LOL, you really are kidding, right?!?!? The purpose of the VR is not now > nor has it ever been to precisely monitor or control the charging of the > battery. Perhaps you should look up the real purpose of the VR before > responding. Here is a hint. Although the action of the VR is in its > name, > perhaps you should look into why it is really needed. As you previously said, the battery acts as a filter. Thus, if that filter is below its normal level, it will lower system voltage, unless the VR jacks it up. Careful, you are starting to flip flop pretty badly here. >> 1) Having checked the VR sensing wire, I'd check connections and other >> details of how it sees battery voltage. > > With the exception of the VR sensing wire, the rest of what you said means > nothing, especially since the VR sensing wire IS how it sees the voltage. So now it DOES see battery voltage? And I'm sure that you somehow KNOW that this VR is not connected in any way to an ECM? Better check those details...... >> 2) I'd also check to be sure battery size is matched to maximum draw, >> just [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > umph > to start the car. Right, but will it draw current long enough to boil the battery? Seriously unlikely, unless there are details we weren't given. > Once again, you prove your ignorance. Or is it once again you spin? First it was starter draw, now its.... > It is not the current draw from the > battery that boils the fluid or more likely causes venting. It is the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > the > start. So now, after seeing that the system voltage was sitting at 14.2, you are willing to claim that the battery is drawing down on the system enough to boil the battery, but not enough to lower system voltage? Ok sure.... whatever. Smells of a merrygoround type spin...... >> 4) The OP has determined that the VR swiotches properly, but I'd test >> installed voltage on the VR to see if its performing the same while in [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > would > be much higher. Jeez, so I do have a clue, eh? >> 5) Given that battery and charging ALT voltage should be the same, I'd > check [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > You are daydreaming, talking way over your head, and full of sh.t. Oh no, not again, but you just agreed with me, damn, so short lived..... > If the > voltage is not over spec, QUICK!! whats spec for the system??? Ever see it yet? Know what kind of vehicle it is yet? > then it is what it is and the VR is functioning > normally at the time of measurment. There is no rocket science here and > we > are not talking about percision regulation of voltage or frequency > (switching) here. The average voltage is all that matters and if it is in > spec, then it is working. Is it in spec? Is it ALWAYS in spec? what IS that spec? > Gary was going nowhere or he would have said so. I don't recall Gary getting an answer, nor a chance to reply, before you decided you know more than anyone else on the planet. > He got it backwards again > like his TC flow and it is as simple as that. In a circuit, ya can't get it backwards, one thing affects all others on the circuit. You have to start checking somewhere. > As for the wiring giving a > false reading, I am not going that way at all since it is complete BS. Except your claim that resistance exists and perfect circuits do not. Which will it be? > With > the possible exception of an intermittant bad connection to the VR or the > alt field winding itself, the wiring has nothing to do with it Oh, you mean the intermittant that I mentioned before, and you claimed had no way of affecting the situation? > He does the same to me as do you and what goes around, comes around. More whining. You get it because you give it. > Actually, I questioned his reasoning which is far more than he does with > his > childish header changes and no text and he could have simply answered my > question and proved his reasoning valid but instead just told me to piss > off > which translates into him being both childish and wrong. Or bored with your inane bullshit. > LOL, actually it was your lame attempt at baiting that failed because > there > simply was nothing else to say there. YOu just don't get it do you? You claimed in the side bar to this that you were done talking about this sort of thing on this thread, yet here you are. Further, my "lame attempt at baiting" got done exactly what I wanted. You shut the hell up. Finally. >> Sure would be nice if you'd just post what you know, and quit being so > lame >> and insulting all the time. > > PKB! LOL, Please, find one place in this thread or any others where I've insulted you. Or perhaps you are jsu too thin skinned and feel that anything I call you on is an insult? Whatever. I'm sure you'll have an answer. I'm done here, I explained where I thought the problem is, you flip flopped a bit in trying to prove me wrong, then said exactly what I did using a different method. Then, you did what I figured you would, and tried to argue about your insulting manner, despite claiming you wouldn't continue. As before, the last word is yours. You cannot resist. SignatureMax Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and he is warm for the rest of his life. >> > LOL, you really don't have a clue. If the alternator is CHARGING or >> > OVERCHARGING, which BTW, is the entire point of this post, the voltage [quoted text clipped - 237 lines] > > PKB! > > LOL, it is fun to watch you spin. Resistance is not only possible, it is > > a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > If I'm correct, I'm obviously not spinning anything. And that is the point, you are not. > How do you know the > voltage is within spec, if you aren't measuring the voltage across the > terminals? Because the voltage spec is between 13.9 and 14.9 according to the OP and 14.2 is well within that range. > And if we are both correct that resistance exists in a circuit, > how is it possible for your claim to be true, that battery voltage across > the terminals will match output voltage, or be the same from positive > terminal to ground as it is from terminal to terminal? I never said that it was. You really need to stop spinning. I said that the voltage between the terminals cannot be higher than the voltage between the positive terminal and the block because the batteries ground connection is made at the block by one of those wire that has resistance and the voltage he measured was 14.2V, within spec. > > Who cares what the VR sees across the terminals. > > Anyone who wants to know if the VR is working properly. Perhaps the OP, in > this case. If it wasn't working, the voltage would either be battery voltage (no output) OR somewhere above 15 volts (excessive output). > > The only thing that > > matters is what the voltage actually is. If it is sitting at 14.2, then > > the > > VR is function properly, despite your spin. > > And you've determined this how? Because an unregulated alternator is capable of putting out MUCH HIGHER voltages. > I don't recall any specs being published, > let alone a make and model. Because you didn't bother to read it. He posted them. > All we know is that the VR switches on and off > at known voltages, and that 14.2 is between those voltages. We don't know > what voltages it is supposed to operate between, nor do we know what the > system voltage is while its not charging. By not charging, I hope that you mean not running or you really are clueless. He said between 13.9 and 14.9 volts according to the service manual. > >> Ahh yes, pay attention yourself. How does the charging system determine > >> output voltage? Thats right, it monitors battery voltage. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > same? Or are you backing away from that now that you've confirmed my remarks > about resistance and properly checking battery voltage? Actually, the measured voltage at the batteries terminals is the same as the system voltage, while the actual battery voltage is lower, you do know that, right???? If the system and battery voltage were the same, the battery would never charge. Your comment about properly checking battery voltage is just another example of you not knowing WTF you are talking about. > > LOL, we need do no such thing, at least not as far as what the OP said he > > is [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > how the VR is determining system voltage, and what that system voltage is > relative to the battery. We need do no such thing. The required voltage needs to be between 13.9 and 14.9 and it was measured to be 14.2, well within spec. If the battery is being cooked at that voltage, the problem lies elsewhere. > Remember, you first claimed that battery voltage > and output voltage had to be the same, then you claimed resistance existed > in any circuit. So, we're back to my original claim, better check ALL > circuits in the charging system and make sure all are intact and functioning > properly. You just don't get it. How many circuits do you think exist in the charging system? As for resistance, while it does exsist, it could and many times is so low as to have no measurable effect. If the voltage is within spec, it HAS TO BE functioning properly. > > Hahahahahahahahaha, you really don't have a clue. The voltage is 14.2V > > BECAUSE the VR set it there. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > on a circuit that reads system voltage, so..... if that circuit is not > functioning properly, and the output exceeds demand, it'll cook the battery. LOL, if the output exceeded the demand for whatever reason, then the voltage would be high, much higher than the 14.2 that he measured. Like I said, you really don't have a clue. You really need to do a little reading and understanding of simple DC circuits. > I'm not sure whats so hard for you to grasp here. I've repeatedly said that > the VR has to have a good reference voltage, if it does not, it'll call for > more output than is needed. It doesn't get any easier than this. Despite the > OP having checked the reference voltage circuit, I'd bet something is wrong > in that or the VR. I have to say Max that you really make me laugh. I really hope that you have a much better understanding of transmissions. If the VR called for more output than is needed, the voltage would rise and rise above the maximum spec as that is the only way the alternator can put out more power than is required. Since the voltage measured is well within the expected range, the VR is working properly at the time of measure. > >> Unless of course, that little "intermittant" word (you do remember > > bringing [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > was looking at it. So we don't know if its a constant 14.2, or just a random > reading. Yea, it could happen and possibly might. A bad or temperature sensitive connection on the voltage sense wire could cause this very thing and has nothing to do with the 14.2 being a random reading, LOL. > > LOL, you really are kidding, right?!?!? The purpose of the VR is not now > > nor has it ever been to precisely monitor or control the charging of the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > is below its normal level, it will lower system voltage, unless the VR jacks > it up. Careful, you are starting to flip flop pretty badly here. There is no flip flopping except for either your imagination, complete lack of understanding, or a lame attempt at deception. Since the voltage is steady ar 14.2 during his test, I would think that the VR did bump the alt output to bring the system voltage to expected levels. This is the real purpose of the VR, to control the output of the alt to deal with a changing load and output of the alt, not to baby or specifically charge the battery. The battery is just another load that the alt has to deal with. BTW, what exactly are you trying to get at here??? > >> 1) Having checked the VR sensing wire, I'd check connections and other > >> details of how it sees battery voltage. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > this VR is not connected in any way to an ECM? Better check those > details...... It see's battery voltage until the engine starts, then it sees system voltage as does the battery. Since this is a 91 Laser, I doubt that the ECM has a whole lot to do with it. > >> 2) I'd also check to be sure battery size is matched to maximum draw, > >> just [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Right, but will it draw current long enough to boil the battery? Seriously > unlikely, unless there are details we weren't given. No, but it could hammer the battery down far enough that it will require added current to recover and the two combined could cause venting. I didn't say that is the problem, only that it is a possibility. > > Once again, you prove your ignorance. > > Or is it once again you spin? First it was starter draw, now its.... Now the only one spinning is you. These are just possibilities. > > It is not the current draw from the > > battery that boils the fluid or more likely causes venting. It is the [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > boil the battery, but not enough to lower system voltage? Ok sure.... > whatever. Smells of a merrygoround type spin...... No, smells like stupidity and ignorance on your part. You do remember that thing called a regulator or VR, right? You do know what it actually does, right??? It is the purpose of the VR to detect a heavy current draw from something like a depleted battery (voltage drop) or high beams and boost the output of the alt to compensate for it and to reduce it when the load backs off like when the battery recovers (voltage jump). > >> 4) The OP has determined that the VR swiotches properly, but I'd test > >> installed voltage on the VR to see if its performing the same while in [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Jeez, so I do have a clue, eh? No, not really. He did test it in the vehicle but the problem could be intermittent. > >> 5) Given that battery and charging ALT voltage should be the same, I'd > > check [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Oh no, not again, but you just agreed with me, damn, so short lived..... No, you just think that I did but I did notice your custome editing by deletion again. > > If the > > voltage is not over spec, > > QUICK!! whats spec for the system??? Ever see it yet? Know what kind of > vehicle it is yet? From the initial post: 91 Plymouth Laser - Manual says voltage should be between 13.9 and 14.9 volts With the car running, the measured output voltage of the alternator is 14.2 volts Perhaps if you actually read the OP's initial post instead of jumoing in blindly and over yuor head to defend you buddy, you would have a little more information to work with, not that it would help you. > > then it is what it is and the VR is functioning > > normally at the time of measurment. There is no rocket science here and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Is it in spec? Is it ALWAYS in spec? what IS that spec? Read above and I don't know if it is always in spec. That is why I gave him some suggestions on testing. > > Gary was going nowhere or he would have said so. > > I don't recall Gary getting an answer, nor a chance to reply, before you > decided you know more than anyone else on the planet. I asked him the question and he could have replied to me with a valid answer but chose not to as usual. While I don't know more than anyone on the panet, I know far more about this than the two of you. > > He got it backwards again > > like his TC flow and it is as simple as that. > > In a circuit, ya can't get it backwards, one thing affects all others on the > circuit. You have to start checking somewhere. He did get it backwards. He thought that the OP was measuring at a point that would have a lower voltage, not the highest like it was. > > As for the wiring giving a > > false reading, I am not going that way at all since it is complete BS. > > Except your claim that resistance exists and perfect circuits do not. Which > will it be? The resistance is in many cases negligible and in any case, the resistance will lower the voltage, not increase it and it takes a higher voltage to boil a battery. > > With > > the possible exception of an intermittant bad connection to the VR or the > > alt field winding itself, the wiring has nothing to do with it > > Oh, you mean the intermittant that I mentioned before, and you claimed had > no way of affecting the situation? Sorry Max, I was the one in my first post to the OP that the problem could be intermittent and as stated above, with the exception of the sense and field wiring, no other wiring problem will cause the battery to cook. Care to try again? > > He does the same to me as do you and what goes around, comes around. > > More whining. You get it because you give it. That is once again incorrect but why should you break a near perfect record of error. > > Actually, I questioned his reasoning which is far more than he does with > > his [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Or bored with your inane bullshit. I would believe that if it wern't for his childish jumps into posts with his lame and unprovoked attempts to insult me. > > LOL, actually it was your lame attempt at baiting that failed because > > there > > simply was nothing else to say there. > > YOu just don't get it do you? You claimed in the side bar to this that you > were done talking about this sort of thing on this thread, yet here you are. Actually, here you are. You were the one who brought it up, not me. I said that I was done with the silly side bar, not the main thread where you really don't have a clue as to what you are saying. > Further, my "lame attempt at baiting" got done exactly what I wanted. You > shut the hell up. Finally. More BS. If I responded to it, you would have said that you knew that I couldn't resist and if I don't, you take credit for nothing. The sad thing is that anyone with the I Q greater than a grain of sand knows that lame spin that you try and pull so it really means nothing. > >> Sure would be nice if you'd just post what you know, and quit being so > > lame [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > you. Or perhaps you are jsu too thin skinned and feel that anything I call > you on is an insult? Whatever. I'm sure you'll have an answer. Where did I insult you here? Oh, that's right, I didn't. You could also just post what you know but you rarely if ever do that. > I'm done here, I explained where I thought the problem is, you flip flopped > a bit in trying to prove me wrong, then said exactly what I did using a > different method. Then, you did what I figured you would, and tried to argue > about your insulting manner, despite claiming you wouldn't continue. You are done here because even you know how thin and transparrent your spin is getting. That and your false accusations about me flip flopping to distract others and cover your complete lack of understanding in this subject is quite entertaining .Sorry Max, but anyone with an ounce of sense knows that I didn't flip flop just because you said that I did. I had no reason to because quite frankly, you really don't know WTF you are talking about. It is clear that you don't understand the simplicity of an older automotive charging system with your BS about the VR needing to specifically monitor the rate and state of charge of the battery, like in your example of the VR applying 14.2 when the battery needs 14.0 and that cooking the battery, LOL. > As before, the last word is yours. As it should be because once again, you don't have a clue. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving the BoneHead is just TOO easy > > LOL, it is fun to watch you spin. Resistance is not only possible, it is > > a [quoted text clipped - 471 lines] > > > > PKB! What a retard. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > the BoneHead is just TOO easy > What a retard. > > > the BoneHead is just TOO easy Since it is you who keeps responding to what I say with these childish actions, the one who is actually jumping through the hoops here is you, LOL, and what makes it funnier yet is that you don't even know it. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving you haven't figured it out yet, have you ? Max and I derive great pleasure from watching you make an a.s of yourself for instance, there's a bet on whether you have the restraint NOT to reply to this post > Since it is you who keeps responding to what I say with these childish > actions, the one who is actually jumping through the hoops here is you, LOL, > and what makes it funnier yet is that you don't even know it. > you haven't figured it out yet, have you ? Sorry Gary, but you seem to be the one having a hard time figuring it out. I thought that the header may have tipped you off but here you are again, LOL. > Max and I derive great pleasure from watching you make an a.s of yourself Well if that were true, it really shows the level of intelligence that you and Maxi have and the fact that the two of you keep dancing (like in the gravity thread) more than proves how low it really is. > for instance, there's a bet on whether you have the restraint NOT to reply > to this post Why would you make such an idiotic bet? What would be the purpose of me wanting to restrain myself. It is obvious that you can't do it but as usual, this is boring so fell free to have the last word in this lame takeoff thread but at least make the dance more entertaining for me next time. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Well if that were true, it really shows the level of intelligence that you > and Maxi have and the fact that the two of you keep dancing (like in the > gravity thread) more than proves how low it really is. LOL, the gravity thread? You mean the helium thread, where you proposed that helium had no weight? As to our intelligence, we intrigued by betting on something with hard to figure odds. For instance, I've got a bet going with a friend locally that a certain person will dump her boyfriend by a certain date. So far, I've lost twice, and won twice. We swap sides and pick new dates for the end of the bet each time. So far, the boyfriend has lost four times, although I don't know if he knows it yet..... > Why would you make such an idiotic bet? Why indeed, its almost a sure thing that you'll leap up and hit the button. But we do it for fun. > What would be the purpose of me > wanting to restrain myself. Dignity, class, intellect, manners, proper conduct, respect, just to name a few. > It is obvious that you can't do it but as > usual, this is boring so fell free to have the last word in this lame > takeoff thread but at least make the dance more entertaining for me next > time. Double or nothing, Gary? C'mon Tbone, you can do it........ SignatureMax Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and he is warm for the rest of his life. >> you haven't figured it out yet, have you ? > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > takeoff thread but at least make the dance more entertaining for me next > time. Let's forget all the little biy squabling and answer the OP's question. The voltage MUST be checked across the battery posts - pos to neg. If the voltage is within spec (under 14.6 with a fully charged battery) and the battery still boils, the battery is shot. Checking from pos to engine or body ground will GENERALLY give a higher voltage if the ground is bad. If the wire from the alternator output has high resistance, measuring from the alt output t0 ground will give a higher reading than across the battery. > Let's forget all the little biy squabling and answer the OP's > question. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > output has high resistance, measuring from the alt output t0 ground > will give a higher reading than across the battery. No sh.t, and this is what I was saying all along. The voltage however, DOES NOT have to be measured across the terminals in this case because as your examples have clearly demonstrated, the voltage will not be higher at the battery than at these other measurement points and we are looking for an OVER VOLTAGE condition at the battery. As for the battery being shot, that possibility has been substantially reduced as the OP indicated that this condition is occurring with more than one battery so unless both of them are shot (although still a possibility), the problem seems to lie elsewhere. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > > Let's forget all the little biy squabling and answer the OP's > > question. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > battery than at these other measurement points and we are looking for an > OVER VOLTAGE condition at the battery. no, numb nuts we are searching for the cause of over CURRENT thru the battery > > > Let's forget all the little biy squabling and answer the OP's > > > question. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > we are searching for the cause of over CURRENT thru the battery What do you think could cause that Gary? The only thing that can cause over current thru a good battery at full charge when the alt is operating is excess VOLTAGE and if you don't know that then you have some studying to do. Where he took the measurements will have the highest voltage and since it is within spec, over voltage is not the problem at the time of measurement because there is no way that the voltage at the battery could be higher than where he took the measurement. Now a bad connection in the VR sensing wire could cause it to spike up the voltage for periods of time while driving which would cause excessive battery current or it could also be something sucking power during non-use periods causing the battery to deep cycle which would also cause excessive current flow during normal charging for a standard automotive battery but neither one of these conditions are going to be found by where you take the measurement. Sorry, but you are still wrong. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > no, numb nuts > > we are searching for the cause of over CURRENT thru the battery What kills me is that he knows that, because he suggested it, but he keeps going back to how much voltage the VR is putting out via the alternator. I keep telling him its not the voltage, but if the voltage is continued beyond when its needed, i.e. current pushed in when no demand is present. But hey, its Tbone. SignatureMax Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and he is warm for the rest of his life. >> > Let's forget all the little biy squabling and answer the OP's >> > question. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > we are searching for the cause of over CURRENT thru the battery > > no, numb nuts > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > But hey, its Tbone. maybe if we expressed it in % ????? > > > no, numb nuts > > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > maybe if we expressed it in % ????? Express it any way you want to, you still got it wrong, LOL! SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > > no, numb nuts > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > keep telling him its not the voltage, but if the voltage is continued beyond > when its needed, i.e. current pushed in when no demand is present. LOL, every time I read this from you, it just makes me laugh harder. How exactly is the VR going to know if the battery needs charging or that the headlights and or wipers happen to be on in an older vehicle???? The point Maxi, is that it can't and fortunately, it doesn't have to. All it needs to do is keep the voltage with a given set of parameters and the system will take care of itself, including the battery. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > LOL, every time I read this from you, it just makes me laugh harder. How > exactly is the VR going to know if the battery needs charging or that the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > do is keep the voltage with a given set of parameters and the system will > take care of itself, including the battery. Thats terrific. Unless it doesn't work, like the OP's vehicle. So while you are busy trying to show off how much you know about how it works, I'm telling you to find the problem that makes it not work. And its obviously not working, because its boiling the battery. Let us know when you come to a conclusion as to what the problem is, because at least three of us have said to do a better and more thorough check of the wiring and componants before going any further. Meanwhile, you've "taught" us how the system works about five times. Thats great, but this particular system is NOT working properly. So instead of jabbering about how it SHOULD work, develop a troubleshooting procedure, and FIX the goddamnned thing. We'll wait. SignatureMax Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and he is warm for the rest of his life. >> > no, numb nuts >> > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > do is keep the voltage with a given set of parameters and the system will > take care of itself, including the battery. > > LOL, every time I read this from you, it just makes me laugh harder. How > > exactly is the VR going to know if the battery needs charging or that the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > telling you to find the problem that makes it not work. And its obviously > not working, because its boiling the battery. No sh.t Sherlock, I gave him some possible reasons and how to check for them which is more than you did with your crap about measuring across the terminals, LOL. > Let us know when you come to a conclusion as to what the problem is, because > at least three of us have said to do a better and more thorough check of the > wiring and componants before going any further. Really, what three? Gary said no such thing and come to think of it, neither did nospam. The only one toting this load of crap is you. As for wiring, I did suggest that he check the sense wire and field wiring because they are the only thing that could cause THIS condition. As for what exactly is wrong, I don't know and neither do you but at least I gave him some tests to help find out which is much more than your measure across the damn terminals BS. > Meanwhile, you've "taught" us how the system works about five times. Yea, 5 times and you still don't get it. > Thats great, but this particular system is NOT working properly. So instead of > jabbering about how it SHOULD work, develop a troubleshooting procedure, and > FIX the goddamnned thing. I did that MANY posts ago and sent it to him already. You really need to pay attention. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving >> > Let's forget all the little biy squabling and answer the OP's >> > question. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >we are searching for the cause of over CURRENT thru the battery And the ONLY two things that can cause overcurrent through the battery with the engine running and the battery being charged (which it obviously is at 14.2 volts) are too high a charging voltage (which it is not, at 14.2 volts) or a defective battery. If the voltage was below 12.6, I'd agree you might POSSIBLY have a load problem - but it would, in my opinion, have to be significantly lower - like 11 or so. > >> > Let's forget all the little biy squabling and answer the OP's > >> > question. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > obviously is at 14.2 volts) are too high a charging voltage (which it > is not, at 14.2 volts) or a defective battery. Wrong! If something is pulling a reasonable current from the battery constantly (like 150 to 500 mills), between that and the huge draw from the starter followed by a 14.2 voltage being applied to it, it can send a reasonably high current into the battery for a fairly long period of time. Perhaps you should learn a little something about batteries. > If the voltage was below 12.6, I'd agree you might POSSIBLY have a > load problem - but it would, in my opinion, have to be significantly > lower - like 11 or so. What are you talking about here? A battery voltage of 12.6 or a system voltage of 12.6? SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Wrong! If something is pulling a reasonable current from the battery > constantly (like 150 to 500 mills), between that and the huge draw from > the > starter followed by a 14.2 voltage being applied to it, it can send a > reasonably high current into the battery for a fairly long period of time. > Perhaps you should learn a little something about batteries. Maybe you should as well. "Reasonably high" isn't a technical term anyone here recognizes as something specific. I'd say you are waffling, and had. A battery charging voltage of 14.2 has little or nothing to do with the actual current flowing in the battery, as you've so eloquently stated time after time. Thus, I'm not sure why you bothered to use it as a reason for the battery getting a "reasonably high current". The "huge draw from the starter" is likewise unmeasured. You have no idea what the particular starter is drawing, and it seems like you don't know what an actual starter draws period. Most starters do not draw near what the battery is rated for on a constant draw. Initial spike might exceed battery rating, but in a well designed and maintained system, this too is unlikely. Further, unless the vehicle is particularly hard starting, starter draw is for short period of time, and will not induce battery boiling. Even your claim that recharging after a long draw and then a short "huge draw" (WTFIT??) is suspect, as the system design takes into account the battery in that system, and is designed NOT to cook the battery. So once again, you've discussed things that are irrelevant. >> If the voltage was below 12.6, I'd agree you might POSSIBLY have a >> load problem - but it would, in my opinion, have to be significantly >> lower - like 11 or so. > > What are you talking about here? A battery voltage of 12.6 or a system > voltage of 12.6? If you don't know, then you shouldn't be part of this discussion. BTW, he was talking battery voltage. SignatureMax Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and he is warm for the rest of his life. >> >> > Let's forget all the little biy squabling and answer the OP's >> >> > question. [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > What are you talking about here? A battery voltage of 12.6 or a system > voltage of 12.6? > > Wrong! If something is pulling a reasonable current from the battery > > constantly (like 150 to 500 mills), between that and the huge draw from [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Maybe you should as well. "Reasonably high" isn't a technical term anyone > here recognizes as something specific. I'd say you are waffling, and had. That is because you are trying to hide from being wrong, as usual. I am using relative terms because I don't know the specific values and neither do you. > A battery charging voltage of 14.2 has little or nothing to do with the actual > current flowing in the battery, as you've so eloquently stated time after > time. I said no such thing and 14.2 volts has EVERYTHING to do with how much current is flowing into the battery along with the batteries state of charge. > Thus, I'm not sure why you bothered to use it as a reason for the > battery getting a "reasonably high current". The state of charge determins how much current will flow into the battery at a given voltage and if the battery is already weakened by an unintended prolonged current draw from something like an illuminated glove compartment light, the added pull from the starter will make it worse > The "huge draw from the starter" is likewise unmeasured. LOL, there is no need to specifically measure it as it is only compounding the problem in this possible cause of the problem. > You have no idea what the particular starter is drawing, and it seems like > you don't know what an actual starter draws period. LOL, I don't see any numbers comming from you. > Most starters do not > draw near what the battery is rated for on a constant draw. Initial spike > might exceed battery rating, but in a well designed and maintained system, > this too is unlikely. Gee Max, near ratings and might exceed ratings are not exactly technical terms anyone here recognizes as something specific either so as is said many times to you, PKB! > Further, unless the vehicle is particularly hard > starting, starter draw is for short period of time, and will not induce > battery boiling. LOL, no matter how low I think your knowlege is, you jump in and prove me wrong by showing it to be MUCH lower. > Even your claim that recharging after a long draw and then a short "huge > draw" (WTFIT??) is suspect, as the system design takes into account the > battery in that system, and is designed NOT to cook the battery. Yea Max, under normal conditions you would be right but that constant draw is not a normal condition and unless the person is using a deep cycle battery, the battery is not designed for that either. > So once again, you've discussed things that are irrelevant. Just because you don't understand it does not make it irrevelant. > >> If the voltage was below 12.6, I'd agree you might POSSIBLY have a > >> load problem - but it would, in my opinion, have to be significantly [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > If you don't know, then you shouldn't be part of this discussion. You should be the last person to say this when it is obvious that you don't have a clue about the function of the charging system with your voltage means nothing BS and yet, here you are. > BTW, he was talking battery voltage. Are you so sure about that? Depending on the battery type, 12.6 (static measure) would be from fully charged to 3/4 charged and 11 would be stone cold dead (again, static measure) in all types so if the battery was a low maintenance or a cheep battery, 12.6 would be fully charged. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > That is because you are trying to hide from being wrong, as usual. I am > using relative terms because I don't know the specific values and neither > do > you. Uhoh.... yer wrong there. I can go outside, and get a specific amp draw reading on any one of my vehicles. Do you even HAVE an ammeter that will do that? > I said no such thing and 14.2 volts has EVERYTHING to do with how much > current is flowing into the battery along with the batteries state of > charge. Um, no. Current is measured in amps not volts. So the voltage at which the system is operating doesn't tell a doggone thing about what the battery is taking in, or putting out. Thats why a check across the terminals is needed, it eliminates the system, and checks only the battery. Thats also why you do a load test FIRST, because that draws a load on ONLY the battery. > The state of charge determins how much current will flow into the battery > at > a given voltage and if the battery is already weakened by an unintended > prolonged current draw from something like an illuminated glove > compartment > light, the added pull from the starter will make it worse Wrong again. State of charge AND age of the battery make a huge difference. Your theory about a glove box light and a starter is hogwash. You should be looking at the battery condition and age. Feel free to post again, we're betting on it. SignatureMax Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and he is warm for the rest of his life. >> > Wrong! If something is pulling a reasonable current from the battery >> > constantly (like 150 to 500 mills), between that and the huge draw from [quoted text clipped - 92 lines] > cold dead (again, static measure) in all types so if the battery was a low > maintenance or a cheep battery, 12.6 would be fully charged. > > That is because you are trying to hide from being wrong, as usual. I am > > using relative terms because I don't know the specific values and neither [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > reading on any one of my vehicles. Do you even HAVE an ammeter that will do > that? LOL, while you can measure the current draw from the starter in YOUR vehicle (actually, I doubt that you really have the ability), if you think that every starter pulls the same current you are even dumber than I thought and now you are reaching all new levels of ignorance. With that in mind, NO, you do not have the specific values for his vehicle or even yours for that matter so once again, you are wrong and full of sh.t as well. Oh, and BTW, I do have an inductive amp meter that can read current levels that high. > > I said no such thing and 14.2 volts has EVERYTHING to do with how much > > current is flowing into the battery along with the batteries state of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > system is operating doesn't tell a doggone thing about what the battery is > taking in, or putting out. Hahahahahahaha, you really are funny. While current may be measured in amps, voltage is the force that causes current flow and current is simply how much is flowing. The higher the system voltage is above the battery voltage (state of charge), the more current is going to flow into it so as I said, both the 14.2 AND the batteries state of charge has everything to do with it. Once again, you demonstrate your complete ignorance of even simple DC circuits. > Thats why a check across the terminals is needed, > it eliminates the system, and checks only the battery. Thats also why you do > a load test FIRST, because that draws a load on ONLY the battery. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, oh, please, stop, you are killing me. Can you really be this dumb? First of all, if you are talking about current, you cannot measure that across the terminals of the battery, LOL. Second, unless you disconnect at least one of the terminals of the battery from the system to isolate it, the system is still connected and will still influence your readings. Third, only an idiot would attempt to load test the battery with the engine running and again, unless you disconnect the battery, the system will still be there. BTW, if the engine is not running, the battery is the only source of power and will be the only thing load tested regardless of where you connect the ground wire, LOL. > > The state of charge determins how much current will flow into the battery > > at [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Wrong again. State of charge AND age of the battery make a huge difference. Really??? Got proof on the battery age thing??? It is more the condition of the battery than it's age and BTW, an old and / or abused battery builds resistance due to sulfation and takes LESS current and a lesser chance of "boiling" at a given voltage. How many times can you be wrong before you just give up? As you seem to be demonstrating, an infinite number of times, LOL. > Your theory about a glove box light and a starter is hogwash. You should be > looking at the battery condition and age. LOL, the "glove box light" and starter both have a direct effect on the condition of the battery as in its state of charge so my theory as a possible cause of his problem is valid, even by your idiotic standards. > Feel free to post again, we're betting on it. As long as you make it this easy to make you look foolish, you CAN bet on it. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Hahahahahahaha, you really are funny. While current may be measured in > amps, voltage is the force that causes current flow and current is simply [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > simple > DC circuits. So now the state of charge is part of it? Well duh, no kidding. But I'm still talking about the condition of the battery, not just the state of charge. And its interesting that you've argued in the past that volts had nothing to do with current, now you claim it has everything to do with it. Does that merry go round yer on have a colliape? > Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, oh, please, stop, > you are killing me. Can you really be this dumb? First of all, if you > are > talking about current, you cannot measure that across the terminals of the > battery, LOL. Um, yeah, ya can. See, load testers have this neat little resistance bank in them, makes a bunch of heat, but generally does a good job of checking current output of a battery. Available at any good auto parts place. > Second, unless you disconnect at least one of the terminals > of the battery from the system to isolate it, the system is still > connected > and will still influence your readings. Right, but I figured that was so elementary, that if you actually knew what you were doing, you'd know to pull the negative terminal. > Third, only an idiot would attempt > to load test the battery with the engine running I never said to load test it with the engine running. Indeed, I never gave any specific instructions or conditions under which to test it. You are reaching pretty hard there. > and again, unless you > disconnect the battery, the system will still be there. Correct, so pull a terminal clamp and do it right. You know how to pull a terminal clamp, right? You've got the right tools? > BTW, if the engine > is not running, the battery is the only source of power and will be the > only > thing load tested regardless of where you connect the ground wire, LOL. Um, yeah, thats the idea. Load testing a battery is best done by load testing the battery. You act as though this is a new discovery of yours, been doing some reading in order to catch up? > Really??? Got proof on the battery age thing??? It is more the condition > of the battery than it's age and BTW, an old and / or abused battery [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > times, > LOL. Actually, yes, I do. Let me dig a bit here...... > an old and / or abused battery builds resistance due to sulfation Sound familiar? As to the current, yup, an older battery will take less current, since less of its plates are able to be used in the chemical reaction. What this means is directly the opposite of what you claim. It takes less current to charge, but at the same time, it takes less current to exceed its ability to charge, thus, it heats up faster, and boils more easily. Thats why some large battery chargers have timers with age increments on them. >> Feel free to post again, we're betting on it. > > As long as you make it this easy to make you look foolish, you CAN bet on > it. You might want to check your facts on who is looking foolish, Mr. "Helium has no weight" SignatureMax Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and he is warm for the rest of his life. >> > That is because you are trying to hide from being wrong, as usual. I >> > am [quoted text clipped - 92 lines] > As long as you make it this easy to make you look foolish, you CAN bet on > it. OK guys here's what's current. Step 1 1. Old battery was a Delco, bought it 2002 2. Second battery, had a Mopar label, but suspect it was Exide, about three years of life. Both batteries spewing liquid, much corrosion on car. Just replaced battery with brand new Exide battery, over rated for this vehicle, more CCA (525, car requires 430). What I found on the drive home. Install of new battery, before cranking engine, voltage is 12.6 volts. After cranking engine with, engine running, 14.36 volts 2 minutes after starting, battery voltage is 14.19 volts. With a Fluke DVM connected to the battery, for 27 Km, battery voltage varied between 14.09 (at a stop light) to 14.21 at 70Km per hour, no load beyond engine draw. At idle with full current draw (rear window defog, head lights and blower) battery voltage was 13.86. Idle voltage with no current draw (beyond engine and driving lights) was a battery voltage of 14.09 volts. Time to recovery from a full load idle was about 1 min. Air temp was about 25 degrees C. It should be noted that I was also monitoring the "sense" voltage (on a second meter) at the alternator (voltage reg input), and that voltage was about .5 volts lower, but followed the battery voltage, and never changed beyond always being about ,5 volts less than the battery. For 27 Km the monitored battery voltage never exceeded 14.35 volts. Step 2 Attached a third DVM, to monitor the current output of the alternator (250 amp shunt installed in series with the output). With the day time running lights and, always on, side markers, disabled (removed fuses), the current from the alternator was 15 amps (seems high to me). Moved the shunt to the battery, current into the battery was 5 amps at start but was decreasing to 4.16 after about 15 minutes (idle speed). Battery voltage was now about 13.70 volts. Manual says when the regulator operates above 60 degrees C that the reg voltage is 13.4 to 14.6. The alternator housing containing the regulator was to hot to hold your hand on. At no time during any of this testing did the battery voltage exceed 14.5 volts. And for the record, the "key out of the ignition" current draw was, 125 milliamps. So, unless I can find some other problem, my best guess for an answer is, "two bad batteries, with the same fault". Test instruments tell me that the system is operating normal, the only variable was the battery. After about 50Km of driving there is no sign of fluid leakage from the battery. At no time did any of the three batteries feel warm to the touch. The second battery (Mopar) had a specific gravity reading in the "white " zone between green and red, but this could have been because we had added water. The first battery was sealed and un testable. I hope I haven't caused to much grief in this news group, and thank you Tbone and all the others for your recommendations and suggestions. I now know more about batteries and charge systems than I ever wanted to know. Now I just need to know how to stop all the battery acid corrosion. I have washed everything with baking soda and water, but it still seems to be corroding. > > Hahahahahahaha, you really are funny. While current may be measured in > > amps, voltage is the force that causes current flow and current is simply [quoted text clipped - 188 lines] > > -- > > If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving looks like Max hit it...........two defective batteries > OK guys here's what's current. > Step 1 [quoted text clipped - 283 lines] > > > -- > > > If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > I hope I haven't caused to much grief in this news group, and thank you > Tbone and all the others for your recommendations and suggestions. > I now know more about batteries and charge systems than I ever wanted to > know. Hopefully you've gotten the correct info. Tbone tends to muddy the water, even when he's got it right. > Now I just need to know how to stop all the battery acid corrosion. I > have > washed everything with baking soda and water, but it still seems to be > corroding. First step is neutralize acid in the area, which you've done. Next, there is a product that appears under names such as "Extend", a pinkish fluid that turns black upon application. This will neutralize the rust, as it chemically binds (so the label says) to the iron oxide. The metal will then be black. Spray the box with rubberized undercoating. This should help keep it free from rust for some time, and is easily reapplied. SignatureMax Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and he is warm for the rest of his life. >Hahahahahahaha, you really are funny. While current may be measured in >amps, voltage is the force that causes current flow and current is simply [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >with it. Once again, you demonstrate your complete ignorance of even simple >DC circuits. The only thing other than voltage that controls the current flow into a battery is RESISTANCE. Resistance is affected by state of charge, but on a longterm basis, more by battery condition. >> Thats why a check across the terminals is needed, >> it eliminates the system, and checks only the battery. Thats also why you [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >of the battery from the system to isolate it, the system is still connected >and will still influence your readings. You are WRONG. If the ignition switch is turned off, and the doors closed etc, the only load on the battery from the SYSTEM would be ECU keepalive current of several miliamps - which is TOTALLY off the scale of relevancy when doing a load test. Also, the ONLY dependable test of battery condition is a battery transconductance test - the most common unit in use being the "midtronics" analyzer. It WILL accurately test a battery with as little as 9 volts open circuit voltage (and possibly less) and tell you if it is good or bad. > Third, only an idiot would attempt >to load test the battery with the engine running and again, unless you >disconnect the battery, the system will still be there. An AVR test is simply a load test with the engine running and is used to check the performance of the charging system on a daily basis by thousands of mechanics around the world. However, the BATTERY load test is generally the first test performed on a starting/charging system if a transconductance tester is not available. If the load test (or transconductance test if available) passes and the battery is up to proper charge (in case of passing a transconductance test) the starter draw test is usually next. If starter current is within range, and the battery cranking voltage does not drop below spec (usually 9.6 volts on older vehicles) the battery voltage recovery is checked (if transconductance test was not done) to see how quickly the unloaded battery returns to 12 volts.(usually after leaving headlamps on high beam for a few minutes) Then the engine is started and the charging system tests performed. If the battery has failed it's tests, the results of the charging system tests will be inconclusive. Then the engine is started and the |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message