For a novice, will you please tell me what I see in looking at the w/f on the eu2000i running the WFCO converter and the w/f on the Microquiet running the same. Is there any important difference?
Learjet wrote: inverter types are less reliable due to all the electronics.
Ok, what do you mean?
I thought my statement was self explanatory, but let me clarify it for you.
Simply, anytime you have more parts that can fail, it increases the chance of failure. You have electronics operating in a harsh environment of vibrations, heat and sometimes moisture.
2006 Nissan Titan CC with tow package added Timbrens
2006 KZ Frontier 2303P-F
Dual 6 volt GC batts
Equal-i-zer
Prodigy brake controller
Yamaha EF2600c Tri-Fuel Gen.
"The Honda's and Yamaha new inverter types produce a pure sine wave at 60 Hertz. Pure and simple."
Someone please bring me up to speed: How is Honda's inverter perfectly smoothing the output from an ADC (analog to digital converter) and supporting circuitry in order to create a continuous sine wave? It used to take a transformer (or choke?) somewhere after an ADC to do it (w/o rotating machinery) but maybe there's a solid state oscillator circuit way to construct a continuous repeating wave without using iron. Is Honda using a large transformer or choke in their gennys to do it? (not likely)
"So an oscilliscope is lying???"
Like I stated, if you don't zoom in your scope enough to examine the inverter generator's "sine wave" close enough, you will not see the small steps making up the simulated sine wave. Your sine wave liking equipment won't care about the small steps, however, so no problem with them being there in the Honda's simulated wave. Still way better for some equipment than a MSW output.
I just noticed Wayne's scope waveforms, in particlar the last one.
Thanks, Wayne, for showing Honda's waveform magnified enough to show the steps. I thought there should be some steps buried in there instead of a smooth continuous wave. It's very difficult to create a truely analog sine wave using only solid state circuitry. It's not necessary to create one, either, for powering sine wave sensitive equipment if the steps are small enough ... which is what Honda is doing.
Your scope screens also show that the waveforms from an Onan are continuous pure analog - but not noise free.
It might prove interesting to look at some Honda inverter outputs at various generator engine speeds to see if the good noise performance is maintained independent of AC current being delivered.
Simply, anytime you have more parts that can fail, it increases the chance of failure. You have electronics operating in a harsh environment of vibrations, heat and sometimes moisture.
I agree with this on an "all things being equal" basis, but not all things are equal. The only way to validate this statement is with actual field data. There have been a few reports of electronics failures in Honda eu-series generators, and I've seen none for Yamaha or Robin-Subaru inverter models. There have been a lot more reports of failures in Onan built-in AVR generators, but that doesn't prove a thing either. The Honda electronics are 100% contained in a single, potted module. Using a microprocessor, there's a possibility it has a pretty low parts count. Are the brushes on an AVR generator really more reliable than the electronics on an inverter generator? How about the engines and the starters that the electronics are mated to? Not meaning to step on any toes, based on posts here it appears that the low cost inverter generators are noticeably less reliable than the red, blue, and yellow (Robin Subaru) high-priced units. The broad-brush statement doesn't fly. I'll believe statistically significant data, or controlled conditions test results.
Learjet wrote: inverter types are less reliable due to all the electronics.
Ok, what do you mean?
I thought my statement was self explanatory, but let me clarify it for you.
Simply, anytime you have more parts that can fail, it increases the chance of failure. You have electronics operating in a harsh environment of vibrations, heat and sometimes moisture.
Simply, anytime you have more parts that can fail, it increases the chance of failure. You have electronics operating in a harsh environment of vibrations, heat and sometimes moisture.
I agree with this on an "all things being equal" basis, but not all things are equal. The only way to validate this statement is with actual field data. There have been a few reports of electronics failures in Honda eu-series generators, and I've seen none for Yamaha or Robin-Subaru inverter models. There have been a lot more reports of failures in Onan built-in AVR generators, but that doesn't prove a thing either. The Honda electronics are 100% contained in a single, potted module. Using a microprocessor, there's a possibility it has a pretty low parts count. Are the brushes on an AVR generator really more reliable than the electronics on an inverter generator? How about the engines and the starters that the electronics are mated to? Not meaning to step on any toes, based on posts here it appears that the low cost inverter generators are noticeably less reliable than the red, blue, and yellow (Robin Subaru) high-priced units. The broad-brush statement doesn't fly. I'll believe statistically significant data, or controlled conditions test results.
"There have been a lot more reports of failures in Onan built-in AVR generators"
Yes, almost every day we see new reports of Onan and less expensive inverters with failures. I have been RV'ing all my life. Just tried to count the Onan's I've owned and believe the number is six. I can't remember of one that did not need service. And the expense of repairs was high. I own a MH with a Onan and it to needs to go to the shop. Two AVR failures. And one poster mentioned 'moister'. Big fault of built-ins IMHO. Road dirt and water all over the gen and into the genset genhead. Now someone will say, yes but, there are more Onan's than all others put together. IMHO, more head aches with generators than all other causes.
I have three generators: 1 Generac 3500XL and 2 EU2000s. A circuit board went bad in the Generac. (VR I think) I've never had anything go wrong with the EU2000s. Forget telling Boeing... tell the Navy that their boomers are unreliable. Must be true... they keep sinking.
Learjet wrote: anytime you have more parts that can fail, it increases the chance of failure.
The key to that statement is "the chance". If these parts are as or more reliable than say, the engine itself, your point is moot. If these parts are less so and have statistically significant failure rates, then you do have a point. So far, nobody's seen significant inverter parts failures that I'm aware of. That's why we pay top dollar for these generators. Theoretically, yes your point is taken, which is why many people don't buy RV's with slides.
Offline
