Panhard Ignition Trigger Testing 2
03/04/13 18:17 Filed in: Panhard Ignition
I had a request from a fellow Panhardista to look at the ignition units performance at 8V dc, so after work today I started to have a play, and I hooked up a zener diode, and a resistor to pull the 12V battery down to 6V.
I connected up this 6V to the IgnitionTCI 6.1 and used a cordless drill to rotate the trigger wheel on the rig, and it performed exactly as yesterday!
This is too good, so I thought I’d drop the voltage some more, so I added a LED, and pulled it down to just over 4V, whilst the screen video was running (edited out), which to be fair is 1V over the rated minimum for the ignition, and yet again the programmable ignition performed admirably. Good result.
Here’s a video clip, a little bit too long, but you get some idea. I used the drill slowly at first, then held it steady (around 65 rpm), and then went a little faster. The smaller dial is the advance curve, and it is jumping up to reach it’s lowest value. The lowest speed it can calculate advance is 180 rpm, so most of time it is below this.
Afterwards, I added a second sensor, but used the first sensors wiring that fed the Imfsoft ignition unit, to check the sensor. i also increased the air gap to 4mm from 2.5mm, to see how this would affect slow speed cranking performance, and there was no change.
I then wired up the first sensor again, so I had two sensors 180º apart at the cam, therefore 360º apart at the crankshaft, and checked I was getting sequential ignition, AND I was.
Better still I was able to flick start a spark, by rotating the wheel magnet past the sensor. This is a bit like using a starting handle, which is even more impressive.
I am still using the inductive sensors from a Peugeot 405/406, and to be honest I am not thinking of changing this set up. I know a Hall effect sensor has greater tolerance to interference, but these sensors do have a separate ground pin, and they work well enough for me. Plus the air gap was at 4mm by the time I had finished testing, so that gives plenty of tolerance to concerns about the magnetic tips collecting ferrous particles.
The only thing I am likely to change is the size & quality of the magnet, because the new one will be a smaller diameter & made of SmCo26, a high temperature samarium cobalt variant.
I connected up this 6V to the IgnitionTCI 6.1 and used a cordless drill to rotate the trigger wheel on the rig, and it performed exactly as yesterday!
This is too good, so I thought I’d drop the voltage some more, so I added a LED, and pulled it down to just over 4V, whilst the screen video was running (edited out), which to be fair is 1V over the rated minimum for the ignition, and yet again the programmable ignition performed admirably. Good result.
Here’s a video clip, a little bit too long, but you get some idea. I used the drill slowly at first, then held it steady (around 65 rpm), and then went a little faster. The smaller dial is the advance curve, and it is jumping up to reach it’s lowest value. The lowest speed it can calculate advance is 180 rpm, so most of time it is below this.
Afterwards, I added a second sensor, but used the first sensors wiring that fed the Imfsoft ignition unit, to check the sensor. i also increased the air gap to 4mm from 2.5mm, to see how this would affect slow speed cranking performance, and there was no change.
I then wired up the first sensor again, so I had two sensors 180º apart at the cam, therefore 360º apart at the crankshaft, and checked I was getting sequential ignition, AND I was.
Better still I was able to flick start a spark, by rotating the wheel magnet past the sensor. This is a bit like using a starting handle, which is even more impressive.
I am still using the inductive sensors from a Peugeot 405/406, and to be honest I am not thinking of changing this set up. I know a Hall effect sensor has greater tolerance to interference, but these sensors do have a separate ground pin, and they work well enough for me. Plus the air gap was at 4mm by the time I had finished testing, so that gives plenty of tolerance to concerns about the magnetic tips collecting ferrous particles.
The only thing I am likely to change is the size & quality of the magnet, because the new one will be a smaller diameter & made of SmCo26, a high temperature samarium cobalt variant.
blog comments powered by Disqus
