Looking for a UPS Design That Doesn't Overheat Batteries

Jerry Avins wrote:

Roy L. Fuchs wrote: Jerry Avins wrote: Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
A ball bearing is hardened steel, and it will NOT shrink significantly in this scenario... at all.

Two facts stated,
1) the composition of a ball bearing is hardened steel, and
2) hardened steel will not shrink significantly in this scenario.

...
Hardening doesn't reduce steel's coefficient of thermal expansion.

An unrelated fact that has nothing to do with the above facts, or with this discussion.

There are reasons that steel is used in the making of a ball bearing, dumbass. Low thermal expansion rates is only one reason.
You snipped your claim that I responded to:

You posted no valid response, and instead stated an unrelated fact that was never in contention and has no logical significance for the discussion.

"A ball bearing is hardened steel, and it will NOT shrink significantly in this scenario... at all."
You're getting too worked up. For your own good: plonk.

You should have run away long before this. It's too late, you've already made too many statements that cannot be backed out of.
-- Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com

Roy L. Fuchs wrote:

It NAY have a lower resistance at rest, but when used for carrying current, it will most certainly be heating up...

And you NAY be a nitwit :-)
Nick

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 23:25:49 GMT, "JoeSP" Gave us:

"Roy L. Fuchs" wrote in message On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 18:35:53 -0400, Jerry Avins Gave us:
Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
...
A ball bearing is hardened steel, and it will NOT shrink significantly in this scenario... at all.
...
Hardening doesn't reduce steel's coefficient of thermal expansion.
There are reasons that steel is used in the making of a ball bearing, dumbass. Low thermal expansion rates is only one reason.
Nearly a total lack of knowledge in this exchange.
I'd say that you eccentricity in this matter far exceeds mine.

Ever heard of Cincinnati Milacron?
I knew about 100,000th inch fits and tolerances at age 8, way back in 1968. I think I can handle Crazy Mr. Cold Bearing Boy.

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 19:38:54 -0400, Jerry Avins Gave us:

Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 18:35:53 -0400, Jerry Avins Gave us:
Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
...
A ball bearing is hardened steel, and it will NOT shrink significantly in this scenario... at all.
...
Hardening doesn't reduce steel's coefficient of thermal expansion.
There are reasons that steel is used in the making of a ball bearing, dumbass. Low thermal expansion rates is only one reason.
You snipped your claim that I responded to: "A ball bearing is hardened steel, and it will NOT shrink significantly in this scenario... at all."
You're getting too worked up. For your own good: plonk.

The only thing more retarded than your position on this pliers across the battery thing is the fact that you think that your kill filter edit announcement means a goddamned thing.
You are truly retarded.

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 19:49:31 -0400, Jerry Avins Gave us:

Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
Jerry Avins wrote:
You're right, of course, but it hadn't occurred to me. Parallel batteries are as iffy as parallel diodes. Ballast resistors can force load sharing, but that's lousy design.
More ignorance. Parallel strings are *common* with large capacity systems. No "ballast resistors" needed.
It is a very effective design.
The operative word is "large". Ballast resisters, constituting lousy design, are not used. Frequent maintenance inspections are the rule, with individual strings being taken off line and their terminal voltages checked. In very large systems, a coulomb meters is in series with each string. Parallel battery packs are a bad idea in a closet in the back office, where somebody comes around once a month to make nice.

What a dope, you are.
Coulomb meters? Hahahaha!

On 4 Jun 2006 20:45:46 -0400, nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu Gave us:

Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
It NAY have a lower resistance at rest, but when used for carrying current, it will most certainly be heating up...
And you NAY be a nitwit :-)
Nick

Grow the fuck up, little boy. Once that happen, you NAY have a clue.

Trus me when it's minus forty it takes more than a few seconds to cook a starter.........but thank you for your concern
"Roy L. Fuchs" wrote:

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 15:08:23 GMT, no one that you know nooneshome@shaw.ca> Gave us:

nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu wrote:
Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
Shorting them actually uses up what charge is available and doesn't warm the battery enough to make it crank harder.
It is total myth.
Untrue. Take a look at some capacity vs temp curves. Warming a fully-charged cold battery can increase the available capacity, releasing more than the energy used to warm it.
Nick
And warming up a pair of pliers is just stupid and a waste of reserve cranking amps...........when it's minus 40 I just hit the key and hold it even if it doesnt crank very good at first it will. 99 times out of a hundred it allways starts the car. I got allot of practice at this I never plug my beaters in. If it fails me more than two or three times I fix the car or get a new beater.
Holding the starter on while it is NOT cranking can damage the starter in a matter of a few seconds. That is the only thing wrong with what you have said. You should crank, and pause... crank and pause. If the starter stops cranking, sure it passes current, but it ALL passes through one winding in the starter, and the commutator bars for that winding, as well as the winding itself can suffer greatly. For one thing the heat generated causes the shellac on the mag wire to liquify, allowing inter-winding shorts to occur.

fuck you roy my boy toy top posted and your NAME IN SMALL Get with the times you dirty old man you dont own usenet anymore and we will ost any way we like
"Roy L. Fuchs" wrote:

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 14:52:40 -0700, jk Gave us:
If top posting is offensive to you don read it. Top posting or not, is NOTHING more than a MINOR convention, but is not big deal. Being an A-Hole about it is an whole other thing.
Being a blatant, non conformist, abject fucking retard about it is an entirely different thing as well, dumbfuck.
Fucking anarchistic, adolescent, mosh pit punk fucktards like you are NOT going to get away with dumbing down the entire world to your level of utter stupidity.
Pull your pants up, boy.

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 06:47:43 GMT, Roy L. Fuchs wrote:

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 14:25:53 +1000, Peter Dettmann peter@aardvark.net.au> Gave us:
On Sat, 3 Jun 2006 17:26:50 -0700, "Will" <westes-usc@noemail.nospam wrote:
"Peter Dettmann" wrote in message You also have probelms keeping your posts just to appropriate news groups. SPAM is what is is.
I rarely cross post this widely, but for this thread there was not a single newsgroup that best covered UPS. Which specific newsgroups do you think this subject didn't belong in, and why?
sci.engr.electrical.sys-protection is the most obvious one as the question seems not to be a question related to power line system protection.
Peter Dettmann
What a wuss. Get over it, boy.

I can handle it, but point out the ongoing bad manners. Your comments seem not to be relevant nor assist in the matter.
Peter Dettmann

I like it on top so stuff it you dont own usenet ....us newbies do now.........go walk your dog or something and think about that!
"Roy L. Fuchs" wrote:

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 07:06:29 GMT, no one that you know nooneshome@shaw.ca> Gave us:
Wait a sec you do this lol I wish you were my neighbour........I would have all my friends over for a laugh.
He claims to be an engineer too.
Your only claim to fame is that you are a top posting Usenet retard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting

On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 04:39:26 +0000, Don Klipstein wrote:

In article , repatch wrote: On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 09:18:24 -0400, Jerry Avins wrote:
Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu wrote:
Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
Shorting them actually uses up what charge is available and doesn't warm the battery enough to make it crank harder.
It is total myth.
Untrue. Take a look at some capacity vs temp curves. Warming a fully-charged cold battery can increase the available capacity, releasing more than the energy used to warm it.
Wrong. Read what he wrote: "doesn't warm the battery enough". That is true. Long before you get the battery warmer, you make it deader!
Besides, shorting a battery to warm it is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard of for other reasons, not the least of which is the potential for an explosion that will make you really really really ugly.
If it works, don't knock it. The attitude, "If I can't explain it, I can't believe it" is more than a bit silly, don't you think?
I agree, and I'm not going to comment on whether it works or not.
That said, I would NEVER do such a thing. It's dangerous for numerous reasons (big sparks under a hood are never good, grease can burn quite easily).
I hope you would have found a better example...

In my personal experience? No. I have on the other hand HAD a fire under the hood due to the grease/residue on the engine catching. Fortunately there wasn't much and it burned itself out very quickly, but had there been more it would have been a very bad day for me.
It doesn't matter if my example isn't "good enough", big sparks under the hood of a car are NEVER a good idea. The possibility of a small gasoline leak would be reason enough to never attempt such a thing.
Heck, consider that by doing this the pair of pliers weld themselves onto the connections, a car battery pumping hundreds if not thousands of amps through a pair of pliers uncontrolled would cause me to run.

On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 04:19:55 +0000, no one that you know wrote:

Trus me when it's minus forty it takes more than a few seconds to cook a starter.........but thank you for your concern

I'm not exactly disagreeing with you (cranking for more then 10 seconds would concern me if you didn't give the starter a break between tries), but the op was talking about a STALLED starter. Whether or not this is good for the starter I don't know, what I do know is it's pretty pointless since a stalled starter has no chance of starting the engine, and you're simply wasting energy by doing so.
TTYL

no one that you know wrote:

Trus me when it's minus forty it takes more than a few seconds to cook a starter.........but thank you for your concern

Wanna bet?
-- Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com

In article , Roy L. Fuchs wrote:

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 11:09:58 -0400, Jerry Avins Gave us:
I tried it as a skeptic, and it worked for me. Have you tried it?
You do not know what you tried, nor did you observe the results correctly enough to know what occurred.

Is this "disinformation" by someone who not long ago had as an argument a complaint of top posting by an opponent where the arguments are supposed to be technical and based on scientific facts and scientific observations?
This lends credence to a past post maybe last month claiming that Roy L. Fuchs is/was actually someone that I found to be so low that I only found the cretin to look good when his/its opponent was the lower-still infratroll Rod Speed!
Otherwise, post test methods and results that others can reproduce.
- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

In article , repatch wrote:

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 09:18:24 -0400, Jerry Avins wrote:
Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu wrote:
Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
Shorting them actually uses up what charge is available and doesn't warm the battery enough to make it crank harder.
It is total myth.
Untrue. Take a look at some capacity vs temp curves. Warming a fully-charged cold battery can increase the available capacity, releasing more than the energy used to warm it.
Wrong. Read what he wrote: "doesn't warm the battery enough". That is true. Long before you get the battery warmer, you make it deader!
Besides, shorting a battery to warm it is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard of for other reasons, not the least of which is the potential for an explosion that will make you really really really ugly.
If it works, don't knock it. The attitude, "If I can't explain it, I can't believe it" is more than a bit silly, don't you think?
I agree, and I'm not going to comment on whether it works or not.
That said, I would NEVER do such a thing. It's dangerous for numerous reasons (big sparks under a hood are never good, grease can burn quite easily).

I hope you would have found a better example...
Grease is not ignitable by sparks (not even microdroplets of molten metal) until warmed past its flash point which is usually over 150 degrees C. Heck, diesel oil has a lower flash point than grease in general, and diesel oil has a higher flash point than kerosene, and kerosene is supposed to have its flash point above 100 degrees F (37 degrees C to the nearest degree).
Ever drop a lit match into a bucket of diesel oil? I would bet my life that the match flame drowns!
If I was forced at gunpoint to drop a lit match into a fuel tank of a diesel-fueled truck, my thoughts would be along the lines of disarming the perpetrator while he is shocked by lack of catastrophic explosion! And I would surely not complain about the cost of a replacement fuel filter for the truck owner!
(Gasoline is a different story...)
- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)