 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 11:39 pm |
 |
|
dipsticks  |
|
 |
| |
| Joined: Aug 02, 2007 |
| Posts: 22 |
|
| MH: Auto Sleepers Duetto |
| Location: Devon |
Medals: None
|
|

|
Status: Offline |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
| CliveMott wrote:
|
|
Er sorry mercman, not quite right. Nickel Cadmium batteries should be fully discharged before recharge because of memory effects. The same does not apply to Lead Acid. There is no point in discharging a lead acid battery any more than the application requires as it shortens its life.
|
I'm glad this thread is still going, it is very interesting. I can't seem to get a clear answer as to the suitability of my Plug-in-systems three stage charger from anyone including Ford.
The Duetto has two batteries a Varta Semi-Traction (presume lead acid) and a Ford (brand) Calcium Silver both of which I would like to charge in three stage mode.
Ford say that their Smart charging System can charge at up to 16volts if the system requires, so would I be correct in thinking that the three stage charge as follows:
3-stage position
Bulk Mode - Constant Current @ 12A or 18A
(Zone A) - Variable Voltage
Absorption Mode - Constant Voltage @ 14.5 volts
(Zone B) - Variable Current
Float Mode - Constant Voltage @ 13.6 volts
(Zone C) - Variable Current
should be OK suitable for both batteries?
I am simply concerned that since the vehicle has CAN BUS wiring, that, as the batteries remain in circuit to the vehicle whilst being charged that the voltage of 14.5 may be applied to parts of circuitry that would be isolated by the CAN BUS if the ignition was switched on.
I could be looking too deeply into this !
Any opinions/knowledge gratefully received. The most knowledgeable and helpful Clive Mott seems a likely contender.
Kind regards
Dipsticks |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
The following members of MHF thanked dipsticks for this posting
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:09 pm |
 |
|
DABurleigh  |
|
 |
| |
| Joined: May 09, 2005 |
| Posts: 6801 |
|
| MH: Murvi Morello |
| Location: Basingstoke |
Medals: None
|
|

|
Status: Offline |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Dipsticks,
Clive's thinking about this.
"should be OK suitable for both batteries?"
Yes, but not in parallel (is one the vehicle battery and the other a leisure?).
As to silver calcium, see my post back in November:
Only registered users can see links on our Forum Join Now or Login |
Dave |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
The following members of MHF thanked DABurleigh for this posting
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 7:59 am |
 |
|
dipsticks  |
|
 |
| |
| Joined: Aug 02, 2007 |
| Posts: 22 |
|
| MH: Auto Sleepers Duetto |
| Location: Devon |
Medals: None
|
|

|
Status: Offline |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Dave
Thanks for your reply
Yes the Calcium Silver battery is the what Ford call the starter Battery and the Varta is what they (Ford) call an Additional Deep Cycle battery.
Auto Sleeper call them respectively the Vehicle and Habitation Battery!
I don't have many diagrams of the vehicle wiring but it seems to me that the Varta battery is as much part of the vehicle electrics as the Calcium Silver one is when the engine is running and only when the vehicle charge relay is released the Varta then becomes isolated from the vehicle and is then used a Leisure Battery
The drawing I have shows the starter battery (Calcium Silver) supplying:
Starter Motor and Alternator.
Passenger Junction Box power, start related.
And the Varta deep cycle battery via a bus bar suppling:
3 fused (60a) customer connections.
Passenger junction box power, non-start related.
Heated front windscreen.
Standard relay box power, non-start related.
Engine junction box, non start related.
I have to say I am a bit surprised that I don't seem to have a dedicated Leisure battery but does it matter ? Everything works fine I would just like to benefit from the full charge that can be delivered by using the 3 stage charge cycle. This is a July 2007 vehicle.
Kind regards
Pete |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
The following members of MHF thanked dipsticks for this posting
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 8:12 am |
 |
|
DABurleigh  |
|
 |
| |
| Joined: May 09, 2005 |
| Posts: 6801 |
|
| MH: Murvi Morello |
| Location: Basingstoke |
Medals: None
|
|

|
Status: Offline |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
It seems to me you simply have the normal arrangement we all have but your batteries are co-located? If so on the one hand this means your habitation/ leisure battery will get a better charge than most of us (the extra distance introduces resistance). On the other, it suggests to me, but I need to think about it some more, that the batteries ought to be the same for long life.
Dave |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
The following members of MHF thanked DABurleigh for this posting
|
|
|
Motorhome Facts Forum Index -> Tech / Mech Chat
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 2 of 2
Goto page Previous 1, 2
|
|
|
|
phpBB © 2001-2003 phpBB Group
|
|
|
|
|
|
|