This DeWalt 9116 charger has had battery packs forced into it repeatedly and strongly enough to crease-open board foil in the area and crack R49 ntc thermistor in half. The thermistor chip fragment remaining in the R49 half-package still measures ~77K, but standard values suggest this should be sloser to either 13K, 25K, 37K or 120K at room temperature.
So what's the correct normal R49 value for replacement?
As a result of the physical damage, other parts are also damaged, but I believe these have been fairly easy to track down, identify and replace.
Dunno. I couldn't find a schematic. Easiest way is probably to find an identical charger and measure the resistance.
This might be interesting and possibly useful:
I see DeWalt chargers at the local used tool dealer for about $20. Not sure which model but it looks similar. It's always easier to repair something when you have a working unit available with which to compare.
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
I've already accessed the images - this version is a later revision with slightly different artwork and a completely different controller (higher pin count, wider body). The area around R49 and other temperature sensors is the same. The charger model has been recalled and revised a couple of times - has different voltage versions with the same part number, it seems.
An unreadable schematic off the web assists in identifying functions of most parts in the power train and drive cctry. Have been working on switchers for some decades, so this section offers few surprises. I can probably get function with a fixed value here, but am looking for confirmation for a correct repair.
This thing and it's exploded electrolytic picked off the floor at a work site. Cracked board looks like original fault, but much damage resulting.....no working unit for comparison. Just hope the controller section is as carefully partitioned as schematic suggests - no reason to fail unless chip supply(and program memory) also got scrambled.
Of course, when a repair is made, I'll let you know. I suspect that R values similar to those exhibited by the part epoxied onto the battery terminal may be expected. That would have been the simplest design approach.
It looks like the controller is well enough to control it's indicator, giving line fault and battery fault signals. R49 is currently adjusted to equal the epoxied thermistor value (77K at 20C still not easily replacable with off-the-shelf ntc values).
Without a DeWalt battery to charge, sequencing a simulated battery insertion becomes an issue. For a start - I don't know what characteristics the third terminal is supposed to have - is this an internal ntc or ptc? There's no problem coming up with a representative NiCd string. I need more evidence of function from the controller - at least a charging cycle.
The reason for the cracked board is finally suggested to be a piece of
1/8th long wire insulation that has been stripped off a wire, then jammed sideways between the negative and signal terminals - preventing total battery insertion and possibly pushing the battery back out of contact when insertion pressure was removed. This was the same colour as the housing and could easily have been mistaken for an intentional physical detail of the assembly.
The unreadable schematic proves to contain a number of basic connection errors. This is kind of reassuring; as drawn it made no sense in certain areas. You see a capacitor in series with an emitter, you know somebody's playing with you.
Extra PIC pins are generally just given pull-ups and are left alone, the later mod obviously just shooting for better program memory space.
Funny construction. This thing should have been able to go through a single wave solder, with it's smd parts adhered to the underside. The only orphan in the process, now, is the PIC, which has to have been placed and soldered manually to the under side, post-wave. No plated through holes, but a pretty good supply of autotest points on the solder side, so not everything is left to luck in production.
Sort of a warning to all designers - the product recall of this model number in ~Y2K was also about the connectors - they were detatching and rattling around 'presenting a potential shock hazard' when lodging in the air holes. There's no internal isolation barrier present, just the plastic of the charger frame and battery housing providing reinforced isolation. Makes sense if you're going to pay 'all that money' for the tooling and material anyways, just for a charger.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.