SkyRC MC3000 help thread

I understand every bit of what you’re expressing there, and I feel likewise on most points, except for perhaps the popular belief that all software/firmware in all types of devices require or should require regular updates. That is not always true in my experience, but I’m mostly referring to industrial control systems, test equipment, etc., and that experience is not ‘typical’; of course this is considered as ‘test equipment’ to me.

Anyway, the only thing which overrides everything you said, and which I mostly agree with is very simple, but critical:

I am currently aware of no other device / product currently on the market that can replace it. Couple with that with the belief that no such product is likely to be forthcoming from any manufacturer in even the medium term future, means that n+1 redundancy for critical equipment being required, I simply had no option but to buy a second one. It’s just that simple.

1 Thank

One needs to talk / include numbers here to discuss this. There is discharge cutoff voltage (Cut Volt) [in volts], discharge current (in amps), etc. What numeric values do you need for those 2 parameters, or if there are additional parameters you need to change, what value do you need for those?

Yes, I asked for clarification but al I got was this:

Still not entirely sure what @sonofcy means by this.

Sure, the charge part is ok, charge to 4.1V with 0.5C until charge current is 0.05C. That is doable.
The discharge settings are the problem, the discharge cut off is 1.5V with CC of 0.5C. Using the Lithium profile as the starting point, the cut off only goes to 2.5. I can use the LTO profile for discharge and LiIon for charge.

Sorry, at 82 with Sick Sinus Syndrome (heart disease) I often speak incorrectly. It’s the "Discharge Cut-Off Voltage’. I found that LTO chemistry allows that level. It just means charging with the Lithium profile and discharging with the LTO profile. I have not yet determined if Refresh, and Cycle can be made to work, but Storage will be doable. I think I can manually do a refresh and Cycle, it will just take more programming and an inconvenient operating mode.

1 Thank

It sounds as if what you’re describing may be a functional, and somewhat acceptable ‘workaround’ to accomodate a chemistry so new, and likely with only moderate prevalence in the market at this point. I’m not sure there’s another cylindrical cell charger/analyzer on the market that you could even do this with, so personally I’d take that as a ‘win’.

This market space for this type of product is very small, and our options extremely limited at this point. I wish the MC3000 had some more serious competition, but I’m afraid that’s not the case. I would agree that the MC3000 would allow for / support even further development, and as a platform, it’s ‘good’ enough to ‘deserve’ that, but I doubt the product support structure will allow us to take full advantage of what it could do, or that market demand will bring that about. I think ‘it is what it is’ may apply here to a large extent;-). It would be nice to see further development done, or even a successor product, but I’m not holding my breath. I think I’m sounding a lot like what @Mandrake50 said (heaven forbid:-)

Do you know what Discharge Reduce is and what settings are typical for LiIon and NA?

I agree with you. You and @Mandrake50 have opened my eyes. See also my reply to @Mandrake50 's comment some posts above :slight_smile:

Thanks again!

Does that help. Sometimes this is listed in data sheets, but not often. I can find nothing on it for NA Ion cells. I checked my setting for capacity testing I have D.Reduce set at 0.65 for my typical use. But I admit is is a guess. I have changed that for testing specific cells when the data sheet provides the specification. The setting can be good for getting a higher capacity rating by taking into account a cells capability to rebound. But I am not sure it tells you anything about real life capacity in use with devices that have LVP. It is more for those that want to duplicate as closely as possible the manufacturers process in testing capacity. (as far as I can tell).

Unfortunately I can’t seem to find much specific data for charging NA-Ion cylindrical cells in general. A price to be paid for early adopters, I guess.

Perhaps the Gyrfalcon S4000/8000 will be that eventually? Enova certainly seems to be aiming it that way from the thread here on BLF.

1 Thank

I notice that they just kind of mentioned that they are looking into adding support for NA-Ion cells too.
Right now it (the S8000) is like an MC3000 lite. It can “only” charge at 2 amps per slot (not that this is a big deal for my use case). It lacks a BT app and computer interface and software. The UI is quite like the MC300. The capacitive (??) buttons are a bit wonky. But it is currently considerably cheaper (~$70). Also it looks like they are really serious about upgrading functionality and usability.

I hope so. Since I began using MC3000 last year, I’ve found little / nothing of substance more to wish for, so I bought a second one. I’m good, as it meets my needs very well. However, I think the product space needs / deserves another truly viable, competitive option (if not several), hopefully with some value add over the MC3000. The market may or not justify that on paper; however I don’t like being single-sourced on anything with no viable options.

I happen to use nothing larger than 18650 and don’t expect to want to, but I know others these days are using larger cells which either don’t fit well or at all. Something that also addresses that would be great for them.

Can bluetooth be turned off via the UI? Or does it always broadcast?

The MC3000? Yes it can be turned off in the menus.

1 Thank

This post has been deleted by OP due to inappropriate content.

Good luck. I have lots of chargers, but have not disassembled any of them…other than the MC3000.
Much less taken detailed photos.

You might be better off starting a new thread. It would also be real helpful to be specific about what you are looking for. That way people who might take apart their chargers to help out would know what to take photos of.

This post has been deleted by poster due to inappropriate content.

There aren’t any such legal implications. Go ahead and reverse engineer the thing and share the schematics while you are at it, that’s fine too.
I recommend that you do study law, as being so ignorant of it will leave you victim of any illegitimate claimant.

No kidding. And you managed to not say much of anything.

1 Thank

At least he completely sidestepped describing what he is interested in. But @Desertcat seems to like be a bit opaque about things, for whatever reason.

YES! - I was eagerly awaiting the punchline … which … never came.