Received: from PCH.mit.edu (18.7.21.50) by mail.efplus.com (192.168.0.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.485.1; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 13:07:29 -0700 Received: from PCH.MIT.EDU (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by PCH.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.8) with ESMTP id 088Jv9aw009000; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 15:57:38 -0400 Received: from outgoing-exchange-7.mit.edu (OUTGOING-EXCHANGE-7.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.58]) by PCH.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.8) with ESMTP id 088Jv90v008997 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 15:57:09 -0400 Received: from w92exedge3.exchange.mit.edu (W92EXEDGE3.EXCHANGE.MIT.EDU [18.7.73.15]) by outgoing-exchange-7.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 088JutQ3007731 for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 15:57:08 -0400 Received: from w92expo15.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.74.69) by w92exedge3.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.73.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1293.2; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 15:56:21 -0400 Received: from oc11exhyb8.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.1.113) by w92expo15.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.74.69) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1365.1; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 15:56:55 -0400 Received: from NAM10-BN7-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.70.101) by oc11exhyb8.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.1.113) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 15:56:55 -0400 Received: from DM5PR2001CA0022.namprd20.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:4:16::32) by BY5PR01MB6049.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:10b6:a03:1bd::13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3348.15; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 19:56:53 +0000 Received: from DM3NAM03FT030.eop-NAM03.prod.protection.outlook.com (2603:10b6:4:16:cafe::f8) by DM5PR2001CA0022.outlook.office365.com (2603:10b6:4:16::32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3348.16 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 19:56:53 +0000 Received: from mail-lf1-f54.google.com (209.85.167.54) by DM3NAM03FT030.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.82.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3348.16 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 19:56:53 +0000 Received: by mail-lf1-f54.google.com with SMTP id q8so331051lfb.6 for ; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 12:56:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Alan Pearce To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Sender: "piclist-bounces@mit.edu" Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2020 12:56:41 -0700 Subject: Re: [OT]:: Likelihood of car alternator fault being due to worn field winding brushes? Thread-Topic: [OT]:: Likelihood of car alternator fault being due to worn field winding brushes? Thread-Index: AdaGG65+bvbC1dlWTJuvUCEFHFm7PQ== Message-ID: References: <70f3e5ea-822a-8adc-d206-70c9040ec4eb@jle.co.uk> List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , In-Reply-To: <70f3e5ea-822a-8adc-d206-70c9040ec4eb@jle.co.uk> Reply-To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthAs: Anonymous X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthSource: TS500.efplus4.local X-MS-Has-Attach: X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SenderIdResult: Pass X-MS-Exchange-Organization-PRD: mit.edu X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: received-spf: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of googlemail.com designates 209.85.167.54 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com; client-ip=209.85.167.54; helo=mail-lf1-f54.google.com; dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bDMrMLL8+IqUGegaOPlaAKwKURuQVr/yTfMUt0xy9KU=; b=tp4oVGJCrbZxelB+8CjPvO6HPjaPfu//5OScQZJwZUKmXAFUT7XSsLS5oRbRVMm9QD OdvTLo4zLwwjTdRoQugXGNstpM8EZWDpP1FRC9fGPnq/4nmoDP2XTPo7/qKmgh2F32Mc wC9yHkIjBpzD+eV3NZLaE3cmmDhMs0nWjT6GpOuKPkJf3G6qeKThkAjK27K/R8WBx4qi guSZaXACmg3XdJBskH3XciXzEA9+ghRoqAhXM57w3sl2alWAi3XwHaNk99kJW1K3VqKz /jG1hVymA34U8MjfSMokPNcI1zB8R/VCivza7x4slWFXKCZnfvRV+EevmOzRu5eFwOjp ANzA== authentication-results: spf=pass (sender IP is 209.85.167.54) smtp.mailfrom=googlemail.com; mit.edu; dkim=pass (signature was verified) header.d=googlemail.com;mit.edu; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=googlemail.com; errors-to: piclist-bounces@mit.edu list-id: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." list-post: x-beenthere: piclist@mit.edu x-mailman-version: 2.1.6 x-received: by 2002:a19:cc4d:: with SMTP id c74mr293924lfg.188.1599595012030; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 12:56:52 -0700 (PDT) x-topics: [OT] x-mime-autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by PCH.mit.edu id 088Jv90v008997 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 I would agree. A reconditioned unit will (should) also have its bearings replaced, which will probably be required after almost 20 years. On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 at 17:34, John Lawton wrote: > > Sounds like a clear case for fitting a reconditioned unit. > > John > > On 08/09/2020 16:48, Bob Blick wrote: > > Hi Russell, > > If the brushes have gone bad, it's quite likely that other damage has o= r will soon happen to the alternator. Since it's a closed loop system, the = regulator is going to try to maintain current, so there might be arcing and= excess heat which can damage the slip rings and potentially the regulator = itself. Not saying that's what's happening here, but just fyi. The damage t= o the slip rings isn't going to be as bad as what happens in a motor with a= slotted commutator, you can probably clean it up good enough to get a few = more years before the new brush is gobbled up. > > Cheers, Bob > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu on behalf of Ru= ssellMc > > Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2020 7:03 AM > > To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. > > Subject: [OT]:: Likelihood of car alternator fault being due to worn fi= eld winding brushes? > > > > *TL;DR: If a 2001 Toyota Corolla alternator is faulty, how likely it is > > that the field winding brushes have gone open circuit?* > > It's reasonably likely that the alternator is the original one. > > ___________________ > > > > My son's 2001 Toyota Corolla has stopped charging its battery. > > The battery holds charge and the alternator does not draw substantial > > current when off. > > > > Indications are that the alternator system is dead. > > It seems likely that there has not been a diode short circuit as in my > > experience these draw substantial battery current. > > > > A mechanic will remove and replace the alternator at an acceptable pric= e. > > Alternator replacement is acceptable if necessary. > > > > *Can anyone suggest how likely it is that the field winding brushes hav= e > > gone open circuit?* > > For various reasons I'm not inclined to do alternator diode replacement= s or > > other repairs but if brush failure was the cause then a repair sounds > > liable to be a sensible solution. > > > > > > > > Russell McMahon > > -- > > > > > > -- > http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .