Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: Storage Batteries

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Royal City, WA
    Posts
    150
    You can purchase starter motors for Diesel engines that have over current protection build into them. I havestarters with over current protection on some of my drilling equipment. It’s in the starter motor rather than in the wireing.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    The Motor City, Michigan USA
    Posts
    708
    Quote Originally Posted by Sahib View Post
    It is a bit surprising that the code does not require it. ...
    I'm not surprised.
    Getting a backup generator started might be more important than protecting its starter wiring.
    A fault isn't likely to set the building on fire because a room containing an engine and fuel will be substantially non-combustible.
    And there's a limited amount of energy in a battery. At some point, the battery will go dead and the overcurrent event will end.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    SCV Ca, USA
    Posts
    324
    There is s safety reason behind not having a protective device for conductors intended for starters or to initiate operation of prime movers, controls et al.
    Starters only run in a few seconds. The power burst needed are also unstable especially when a few attempts failed where drop in battery voltage leads to rise in Amps.
    I would hate to see an emergency power cells, battery banks unable to start a prime mover that would cause a life and death situation in an ICU (hospital) caused by a blown 50 cent fuse.

    This is a territory of ASME and I'm sure they did a lot of thinking to come up with the idea.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Placerville, CA, USA
    Posts
    19,239
    Quote Originally Posted by myspark View Post
    There is s safety reason behind not having a protective device for conductors intended for starters or to initiate operation of prime movers, controls et al.
    Starters only run in a few seconds. The power burst needed are also unstable especially when a few attempts failed where drop in battery voltage leads to rise in Amps.
    I would hate to see an emergency power cells, battery banks unable to start a prime mover that would cause a life and death situation in an ICU (hospital) caused by a blown 50 cent fuse.

    This is a territory of ASME and I'm sure they did a lot of thinking to come up with the idea.
    Where you cannot risk a loss of battery because of a marginal condition, the relatively simple alternative is to make sure that a short in the critical wiring cannot start a fire.
    It does also make working on an energized system a bit hazardous.
    I was told of a pair of tin-knockers working in a Telco CO installing an A/C duct. To get at the space they had to stand on the main bus bars of the 48V battery bank. No great shock risk there, but when they dropped the duct the middle section vanished and the two ends hit the floor.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    SCV Ca, USA
    Posts
    324
    There is no such thing as PERFECT DESIGN. You have to weigh the risk against the benefits.
    We spent a lot time about compromise during our college days.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •