Ed Nisley's Blog: Shop notes, electronics, firmware, machinery, 3D printing, laser cuttery, and curiosities. Contents: 100% human thinking, 0% AI slop.
Category: Science
If you measure something often enough, it becomes science
The first two charges for those Baofeng BL-5 batteries show that the actual capacity isn’t quite up to the 1800 mA·h spec:
Baofeng BL-5 Packs – First two charges
The (meager) instructions say that the batteries will reach “full capacity” after three charges. Unless there’s a miracle waiting in the wings for that third charge, I very much doubt that they’ll get any better than the 1400 to 1500 mA·h you see in that graph. Note that the two batteries have quite different capacities and that the capacity for Pack B decreased on the second charge (purple vs. green trace).
Compare that with the Wouxun batteries (plotted with Gnuplot, rather than a screen grab):
Wouxun 7.4 V Packs
Those are all at 250 mA, which is certainly less than the peak current and probably more than the average current. It’s close enough for now, anyway, and shows that the Wouxun batteries actually live up to their spec.
Huh. Who’d’a thunk it?
It looks like the blinky lights should go into power-save mode under 7 V, because there just isn’t that much capacity left when the cells start rolling over the edge of the cliff.
Although the M2’s heated build platform works well enough, somebody who knows what he’s doing (you know who you are: thanks!) sent me an improved version. It’s a PCB heater, laid out to compensate for the usual edge cooling, firmly attached to a tempered glass plate with genuine 3M thermally conductive tape:
Improved M2 HBP – test setup
They designed the heater around the 30 VDC power supply used in their other equipment. Although I had high moderate hopes that a boost power supply would convert the 24 V supply I already had for the stepper driver bricks into the 30 V for the heater, it was not to be. So there’s a 36 V 9.7 A 350 W supply arcing around the planet that (I think) should work better: adjust the voltage down as far as it’ll go, soak up another few volts in the solid-state relay, and Things Should Be Close Enough to 30 V. One can buy a genuine 30 V supply, but it costs surprisingly more than either 24 V or 36 V supplies on the surplus / eBay market and won’t really provide the proper voltage without upward tweaking anyway.
I replaced their standard 0.156 inch square terminals with Anderson Powerpoles, soldered a length of shielded cable to the 100 kΩ thermistor pads, and gimmicked up a connection to the 24 V supply; it delivered 23.7 V at the PCB terminals. The thermistor is 100 kΩ at 25 °C and 11.4 kΩ at 77 °C. The PCB heater is 5.9 Ω at 25 °C and 7.3 Ω at 77 °C; it dissipates 77 W at 77 °C (no, that’s not a typo).
The ultimate temperature looks to be about 90 °C with a 24 V supply, which isn’t quite enough for ABS (which I’m not using in the M2 right now, but probably will eventually). The time constant, assuming the 1-e-1 point is 66 °C, works out to about 9 minutes; it’ll be up to final temperature in half an hour. Those numbers aren’t quite as accurate as one might wish, because the heater power drops as the temperature rises and the copper resistance increases.
A 30 V supply would dissipate 120 W at 77 °C and rumor has it that the ultimate temperature is around 125 °C, which would be fine for ABS. Goosing the power a bit would produce more heat, but I’v been running the Thing-O-Matic at 110 °C and that’s good enough. More power, of course, gets it to the temperature setpoint faster, which is probably a Very Good Thing.
Obviously, you need PWM to control the temperature; given a 9 minute time constant, a bang-bang controller will work perfectly well.
The original data, including the thermistor resistance after I got my act together, plus a cute little temperature-vs-time graph:
Improved M2 HBP – 24 V supply
The colored flyspecks are part of the paper; I salvaged a stack of fancy menu cards from a trash can and padded them up as geek scratch paper.
For reasons that will become apparent in a while, I got a pair (*) of boost power supplies from the usual eBay source, allegedly capable of boosting a 10-to-32 VDC input to a 12-to-35 VDC output, up to 10 A and 150 W:
Boost power supply
After establishing that it would not produce 30 V into a 5.9 Ω load (5.1 A, but 152 W), I got systematic.
A 100 Ω resistor drew 1/4 A while I set the output to 28 V. Doubling up the resistors showed that it worked OK at half an amp:
Boost supply – 50 ohm load
Four 6 Ω resistors in series draw 1.2 A, then (channeling the true spirit of DIY 3D printing) two in series drew 2.3 A:
Boost supply – 12 ohm load
That’s 32 W each and, yes, they did get toasty, but, no, I didn’t leave them turned on all that long.
But a 6 Ω resistance still didn’t work, so the supply can’t provide 4.7 A at 130 W. In case you were wondering, that’s two 6 Ω resistors in series and a pair of those strings in parallel, so each resistor still sees 32 W.
In terms of driving the actual load, these supplies aren’t going to light it up.
Ah, well, whaddaya want for five buck from halfway around the planet?
(*) Davy’s Aphorism: Never buy only one of any surplus item, because you’ll never find another. Get at least two, maybe three if it’s something you might actually use.
A month ago I tossed a new bag of silica gel into the basement safe and put the used one on the workbench to see how much more water it would adsorb. The numbers worked out like this:
Bag + staples: about 8 g
Dry weight: 500 g of silica gel beads
At 24%RH: 575 g = +67 g water
At basement ambient, about 50%RH: 652 g = +144 g water
At upstairs ambient, about 65%RH: 673 g = +165 g water
At 50%RH, the capacity is about 27% = 135 g of water, which is close to the measured 144 g. The logger recording groundwater temperature says the average humidity hovers just under 55%RH, in which case 28% capacity = 140 g of water: as close as you could possibly hope for.
At 65%RH, the capacity is about 32% = 160 g of water, which is very close to the measured 165 g.
The safe humidity remains flatlined at the logger’s 15%RH minimum level, with one blip when I installed the door gasket strips:
Basement_Safe – 2013-08-28
After I accumulate a few more used bags, we’ll see how well they regenerate.
A bit of rummaging in the Big Box o’ Weatherstripping produced the stub end of a spool bearing 1/4 x 1/8 foam tape that exactly fills the gap between the Basement Safe’s door and liner:
Basement Safe – Foam door seal – latch side
The hinge side of the door has tape between the door liner and the safe wall, because that closes in compression rather than shear:
Basement Safe – Foam door seal – hinge side
There should be a big bump in the humidity record marking that installation, but I don’t expect any immediate difference. If the silica gel lasts more than two months, I’ll consider it a win.
A bag of 50 cheap Hall effect sensors arrived from the usual eBay vendor, who was different from all previous eBay vendors (if in name only). Passing 124 mA through the armored FT50 toroid with 25 turns of 26 AWG wire, we find this distribution of bias points, measured as the offset from the actual VCC/2:
eBay 49E Hall Effect Sensor Bias Histogram
The bias point is actually referenced to the negative terminal (usually ground) with a ±0.25 V variation around the nominal. SS49 sensors run about 0.5 V below VCC/2 (2.25 V with a 5 V supply), SS49E sensors at 2.5 V with a tighter VCC limit that suggests you better stay pretty close to 5.0 V.
Allowing for the fact that I really don’t have good control over the actual magnetic field, the gain distribution seems tight:
eBay 49E Hall Effect Sensor Sensitivity Histogram
You’ll recall the Genuine Honeywell sensor specs:
SS49 – nominal 0.9 mV/G, limits 0.6 to 1.25 mV/G
SS49E – nominal 1.4 mV/G, limits 1.0 to 1.75 mV/G
The gain is roughly half that of the previous “49E” sensors, confirmed by sticking one of them this field. I don’t know which is more accurate, but these have a much prettier distribution.
So this lot resembles 49E sensors in both bias and gain.
Given the bias variation, though, it’s obvious that a DC application must measure the zero-field output and apply an analog offset to the amplifier, because a twiddlepot setting won’t suffice. Most likely, you’d want to update the offset every now and again to compensate for temperature variation, too.
Tossing the outliers gives an average gain of 1.17, which would give results within 10% over the lot. Given that you don’t care about the actual magnetic field, you could calibrate the output voltage for a known input current and get really nice results.
If you were doing position sensing from a known magnet, you’d want better control of the magnetic field gradient.
The Smell of Molten Projects in the Morning 