 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Honda Cars / November 2005Re: ignition condenser [= radio noise capacitor] - revisited
"Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote > My 1985-1995 Chilton's manual labels the capacitor Jim replaced as the > "Radio Noise Condenser." Is this the same drawing as the one in your Helm? > The UK site's ignition system schematics do not show it, for some reason. Oops; wrong. I think it was just the UK Concerto manual's site that does not show it, and maybe because the condenser was omitted a bit earlier in the UK. All other 1991 and earlier manuals show the condenser. > "Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > All other 1991 and earlier manuals show the condenser. the radio suppression thing doesn't seem to be relevant. the crx [condenserless] distributor on my civic hatch made no difference to car radio noise whatsoever - there wasn't any in either case. > Elle wrote: > > "Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > [condenserless] distributor on my civic hatch made no difference to car > radio noise whatsoever - there wasn't any in either case. I suspect the CRX distributor you used is of the "igniter-with a built-in-condenser" design. See for example the label on igniter on the schematic at http://www.honda.co.uk/owner/ConcertoManual/62sk301/16-44.pdf . So the UK site Concerto manual does show a radio noise condenser, but the design is different. My Chilton's notes that the built-in condenser commenced with 1992 and later Hondas. The external condensers were used in 1991 and earlier, roughly. The UK site schematics generally support this. I say "generally" because I'm guessing there were slight variations in the year this igniter-with-built-in-radio-noise-condenser came out, depending on the country. >>>"Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote >>> [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > igniter-with-built-in-radio-noise-condenser came out, depending on the > country. i think all recent igniters are capable of running as "condenserless". the igniter in the crx distibutor is identical to the igniter in my civic hatch. history was, 89 civic: with old condenser - performance "ho hum" with crx distributor - performance "ripping" with old dist. new cond. - performance "ripping" with new [old] dist. old cond. - performance "ho hum" all with new the new type of igniters. > Elle wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > > > i think all recent igniters are capable of running as "condenserless". I wouldn't call them "condenserless." The schematics in the manuals say they are not. > the igniter in the crx distibutor is identical to the igniter in my > civic hatch. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > all with new the new type of igniters. I'd want to investigate your igniters more closely. You said the CRX dizzy had been "reconditioned." Based on everything Terry, Tegger, and you* posted, and a few other sources I've read, I am at the point where I am convinced the presnce and proper operation of this radio noise condenser is vital to proper operation of either the igniter, ECU, or both. In other words, there's gotta be one present when your Civic is performing 'rippingly.' I think there's more to the story of why Honda started using igniters with built-in condensers starting about 1992, BTW. Maybe that was the bloody design defect that caused that recall (or TSB; can't remember)? The igniters with external condensers were too prone to failure? Tomorrow I shall take myself to beneath the hood of my 91 Civic and find this condenser. If it ain't external (as it surely originally was), then it's built-into my relatively new ignitor. I see Tegger's site http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/igniter-operation/index.html shows two different igniter designs. Could this be the difference? Maybe it's obvious to someone else. I'm still studying the matter. (This is before I really do take a hammer to my old, non-OEM igniter--#2 for my car--and whack the thing apart to see if any more secrets become revealed. Never could get it apart with a screwdriver.) *I'm not flattering anyone here. Everyone's commentary has put significant pieces of the puzzle in place with the sharing of anecdotal experience, theory, study of the electronics, etc. As for you in particular, you may have launched the beginning of a routine recommendation to posters, flailing about with the proverbial busted car, of regularly replacing this external condenser, or else face a failed igniter sooner rather than later. As the kids say, 'way cool.' >>>>>"Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > I'd want to investigate your igniters more closely. You said the CRX dizzy > had been "reconditioned." well, it was clean & shiny with all new internals. > Based on everything Terry, Tegger, and you* posted, and a few other sources > I've read, I am at the point where I am convinced the presnce and proper [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > In other words, there's gotta be one present when your Civic is performing > 'rippingly.' not so. the dist. that works well has a new condenser. the one that's ho hum has an old condenser. the crx one worked well and it had no condenser fitted at all. > I think there's more to the story of why Honda started using igniters with > built-in condensers starting about 1992, BTW. Maybe that was the bloody [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/igniter-operation/index.html shows two > different igniter designs. Could this be the difference? no. all 3 dist.s had/have identical igniters. > Maybe it's obvious to someone else. I'm still studying the matter. (This is > before I really do take a hammer to my old, non-OEM igniter--#2 for my > car--and whack the thing apart to see if any more secrets become revealed. > Never could get it apart with a screwdriver.) carve out the sealant from around the top. > *I'm not flattering anyone here. Everyone's commentary has put significant > pieces of the puzzle in place with the sharing of anecdotal experience, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > regularly replacing this external condenser, or else face a failed igniter > sooner rather than later. maybe, but probably not. it doesn't stop the car working. and most people replace the whole distributor anyway from what i've seen. i'm just posting my own observations. make of them what you will. fwiw, if you disconnect the condenser mounting post from the distributor body, you effectively now have a "condenserless" system like my crx. i guess i need to test that option on my "ho hum" dist., but i really don't have the desire to take my good dist. off again right now. the ho hum one lives with the spare tire so i can limp home if occasion demands. > As the kids say, 'way cool.' > Elle wrote: > > As for you in particular, you may have launched the beginning of a routine [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > maybe, but probably not. it doesn't stop the car working. I would have been hesitant to predict it would. Right now (that is, without further study and experimenting), I would expect increasingly degraded performance over time, though. > and most > people replace the whole distributor anyway from what i've seen. I don't think so. I think the DIYers just replace the igniter or just the coil, one at a time. The housing's too expensive. Of course, god knows what dealers and independent shops talk their customers into. I got talked into a new housing (no new ignitor; no new coil; just the housing) when the problem was actually the coil a few years ago. > i'm > just posting my own observations. make of them what you will. > > fwiw, if you disconnect the condenser mounting post from the distributor > body, you effectively now have a "condenserless" system like my crx. I guess this saga will continue. I remain baffled about how your CRX can have no condenser (not built-into the igniter nor external to the igniter) while the schematics and manuals say otherwise. The condenser is so prominent in them, too. Why even mention it being "built-in" on the igniter, for example? From my reading, the radio noise condenser is fairly sizable, similar actually to the old Kettering. Also, at this point it seems fair to say that the radio noise condenser takes care of /electronic/ problems with energy pulses in circuits, while the Kettering condenser takes care of /electrical problems/ with energy pulses in circuits. You originally said they do the same thing. I think they do different, yet analogous, thing. > guess i need to test that option on my "ho hum" dist., but i really > don't have the desire to take my good dist. off again right now. the ho > hum one lives with the spare tire so i can limp home if occasion demands. I agree this would be the next best step, but I understand. Maybe I'll do some prodding on my own 91 Civic. Thanks for posting this interesting history. >>>As for you in particular, you may have launched the beginning of a > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > I guess this saga will continue. I remain baffled about how your CRX can > have no condenser (not built-into the igniter nor external to the igniter) it's got no external condenser. if all modern igniters have one built in, then it's effectively still got one, but it's definitely /not/ present in the location of the condenser of my other two distributors! > while the schematics and manuals say otherwise. The condenser is so > prominent in them, too. Why even mention it being "built-in" on the igniter, > for example? > > From my reading, the radio noise condenser is fairly sizable, similar > actually to the old Kettering. i'm not comforable calling it a radio noise suppressor. my civic's radio was completely unaffected while running the crx's dist. and don't forget all the radio suppression stuff on the h.t. side of the sparking gear. > Also, at this point it seems fair to say that the radio noise condenser > takes care of /electronic/ problems with energy pulses in circuits, while > the Kettering condenser takes care of /electrical problems/ with energy > pulses in circuits. You originally said they do the same thing. I think they > do different, yet analogous, thing. i think this condenser does the same thing as kettering. and i found this good explanation: "A condenser or capacitor is used to promote a faster collapse of the magnetic field. Neither component will allow direct current to pass through it to ground; however, alternating current is able to pass through. A direct current that pulses veiy fast becomes alternating current and can pass through the condenser or capacitor. This allows the current in the primary coil circuit to pass through either of these components to ground. The condenser is connected to the primary winding (Fig. 6). Once the current stops, the magnetic field falls back into the primary winding to stabilize the current within the winding. The faster the current in the primary winding dissipates through the condenser, the faster the magnetic field will collapse. The rapid movement of the magnetic field increases the induction within the secondary winding and the current, being pushed by a high voltage of up to 50kV, will look for a pathway or circuit." http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3828/is_200505/ai_n13640862/pg_2 so, if i understand correctly, a condenser in good working order will promote a strong healthy spark - which corresponds with good engine performance. now all we need to do is figure out how an igniter with a built-in condenser works well with an external condenser, works well with no condenser, but doesn't work as well with an aged condenser. terry? >>guess i need to test that option on my "ho hum" dist., but i really >>don't have the desire to take my good dist. off again right now. the ho [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Thanks for posting this interesting history. > Elle wrote: > > I guess this saga will continue. I remain baffled about how your CRX can [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > in, then it's effectively still got one, but it's definitely /not/ > present in the location of the condenser of my other two distributors! I want to make sure we're talking about the same thing. For your 1989 Civic, you replaced the part identified as "noise suppressor" (#8) at the following site, right? http://www.hondaautomotiveparts.com/auto/jsp/mws/prddisplay.jsp?inputstate=5 &catcgry1=Civic&catcgry2=1989&catcgry3=4DR+LX&catcgry4=KA5MT&catcgry5=DISTRI BUTOR (The exact same noise suppressor and igniter appears on all the 1991 CRX distributor drawings at Majestic, too.) > > while the schematics and manuals say otherwise. The condenser is so > > prominent in them, too. Why even mention it being "built-in" on the igniter, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > i'm not comforable calling it a radio noise suppressor. my civic's > radio was completely unaffected while running the crx's dist. My take is it's called a radio noise suppressor not so much because of concerns about interfering with the car radio, but because the energy pulses that result from the igniter action definitionally are radio frequency interference (or "RFI"), meaning they're at frequencies capable of interfering with any connected electronics systems, such as the ECU and I believe the igniter's NPN base input voltage. > and don't > forget all the radio suppression stuff on the h.t. side of the sparking > gear. What stuff is that? I don't see anything on the schematics, but nor have I gone looking for more detailed wiring diagrams. > > Also, at this point it seems fair to say that the radio noise condenser > > takes care of /electronic/ problems with energy pulses in circuits, while [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > i think this condenser does the same thing as kettering. The condenser described below (excerpted from the May 2005 Motor Magazine) attaches to the negative side of the ignition coil. I think it's supposed to be one of the capacitors internal to all igniters (regardless of year). Graham's site shows four such capacitors in a photo of the internals of an actual igniter, for example. This article's capacitor is not, from what I can tell, the radio noise condenser shown in manual schematic's. The schematic taken from Chilton's (and posted at my site http://home.earthlink.net/~honda.lioness/id5.html) shows the radio noise condenser attached to the + side of the coil. This distinction is remarked on elsewhere on the net. Which side of the ignition coil a capacitor attaches says a lot about the capacitor's function... > and i found > this good explanation: snip see http://www.motor.com/MAGAZINE/Pdf/052005_04.pdf , especially page 34 and Figure 6 > so, if i understand correctly, a condenser in good working order will > promote a strong healthy spark - which corresponds with good engine > performance. now all we need to do is figure out how an igniter with a > built-in condenser works well with an external condenser, Are you now assuming the three igniters you've been using all are some new design (compared to the original ones installed in 1991 and earlier Hondas?) and so have the built-in radio noise condensers?? I don't know if they have the built-in condenser or not. It was just a guess on my part. > so, if i understand correctly, a condenser in good working order will > promote a strong healthy spark - which corresponds with good engine > performance. now all we need to do is figure out how an igniter with a > built-in condenser works well with an external condenser, works well > with no condenser, but doesn't work as well with an aged condenser. terry? ++++++++++++++++++++++++ I did some simple test Sunday afternoon. I got my scope back and nmade several "Speed" runs. Run#1 stock Run#2 capacitor disconnected With the cap out of circuit I noticed some "flutter" in the ignition drive from the ECU. I used a 100Meg to sneak a look at teh HV out and it too had the flutter. The primary FI had over a 10% reduction in n width. And accleration was sluggish. I expected to experience back fires but other then a very slight "stumble" no gross effects. It did wipe out my radio reception, both AM and FM. And The Kenwwod had ignition pulses while playing MP3s from a Rio self powered MP3 player. When we got back home I pulled the floor cover from the ECU and was able to "see" farily high amplitude ingitno spikes that are not there when the cap is in place. With effects like this I expected to see some effect on the dwell time at hihger RPM , but noe was observed. So the capacitor is important, and should be checked for capacitance, and ESR. I wish I had a bad one, but all the ones I have checked within ~10%. A none issue for non tunned circuit cpacitors. As I expected adding more capacitance, IE paralleling several caps, made no difference. Terry Terry > jim beam wrote: > > so, if i understand correctly, a condenser in good working order will [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > As I expected adding more capacitance, IE paralleling several caps, > made no difference. Really interesting read. >>so, if i understand correctly, a condenser in good working order will >>promote a strong healthy spark - which corresponds with good engine [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > Terry excellent! thanks. >>so, if i understand correctly, a condenser in good working order will >>promote a strong healthy spark - which corresponds with good engine [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > ignition drive from the ECU. I used a 100Meg to sneak a look > at teh HV out and it too had the flutter. interesting. i checked, and with the good condenser in place, and the timing service connector shorted, timing light pulses are stready. with the sub-spec condenser, ignition timing does indeed fluctuate a little. > The primary FI had > over a 10% reduction in n width. And accleration was sluggish. very interesting. > I expected to experience back fires but other then a very > slight "stumble" no gross effects. stumble i expect - similar to slightly clogged injectors in effect. > It did wipe out my radio reception, both AM and FM. And The Kenwwod > had ignition pulses while playing MP3s from a Rio self powered MP3 [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > and ESR. I wish I had a bad one, but all the ones I have checked within > ~10%. A none issue for non tunned circuit cpacitors. i have a capacitance function on my dvm. any convenient way i can stress test my distributor? the old condenser reads good on the dvm but functions bad in service. > As I expected adding more capacitance, IE paralleling several caps, > made no difference. > > Terry thanks again for your investigation terry. that's awesome. if you have any scope outputs, it would be great to post them and maybe have a small reference section on tegger's web site. this is just the kind of info i love to see and am sure it'll be helpful to many others. > >>so, if i understand correctly, a condenser in good working order will > >>promote a strong healthy spark - which corresponds with good engine [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > have a small reference section on tegger's web site. this is just the > kind of info i love to see and am sure it'll be helpful to many others. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ A DVM does good, but basic, capacitance tests. To measure ESR and DA more espensive and complex gear is needed. As to positng pix, sadly my little scope did come with a camera adaptor option. I have tried to take pix with my Toshiba digital camera with very >POOR< results. I hope to borrow a storage scope that records traces as JPGs. If/when I get it I will redo the tests and send Teggar the results. I tried some low end PC based oscilloscopes with bad results. Images blured to the point you couldn't tell what was what. Terry |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.