 |
Mobile DC Power: One Fuse or Two?
8 March 2020 | by [My apologies. I fumble-fingered WordPress and published a draft version of this article that was incomplete. This is the corrected version. ]
Sometime during the 20th Century, I learned that fuses (or circuit breakers) are used in electrical circuits to prevent catastrophic failure. Fuses open in response to an electrical fault that causes excessive current to flow. The job of the fuse is to minimize the damage and keep things from catching on fire. When I started installing amateur transceivers into vehicles, I learned that you should connect wires directly to the car battery (or darn close) and you should fuse both the positive and negative power leads. I was surprised by the need for two fuses, but there are technical arguments for it. Besides, the transceiver manufacturers recommend it in their manuals. (See figure below.)
I am focusing this discussion on a typical 2m/70cm FM transceiver installation – that is what I have the most experience with and that is the most common ham mobile installation. Such a radio typically draws ~10 A on transmit, so the DC power is usually fused with something like a 15 A (or 20 A) fuse. Keep in mind that a 15 A fuse is not going to protect delicate circuitry but might stop more serious damage or fire.
Connect To The Battery?
Alan/K0BG has an excellent website that provides guidance on mobile radio installations. He points out that modern vehicles usually have an Electrical Load Detector (ELD) inserted into the negative lead of the battery, so that the vehicle control systems can monitor the state of the battery. It is important to connect your radio on the “other side” of the ELD, near where it connects to the vehicle chassis. Oh, and never use the existing vehicle wiring to power your radio (especially not the 12 V accessory plug).
One Fuse or Two Controversy
Recently, I became aware of controversy with regard to proper fusing. Some people are questioning the practice of fusing both DC power leads, while others are vigorously defending it.
For example, there is a lively eham.net discussion here. Ed/W1RFI provides some useful insight on the ARRL forum. Alan/K0BG covers the topic of DC power on his wiring and grounding page. Tom/W8JI argues for the one fuse approach on his website.
What Do The Manufacturers Say?
Generally, you should follow the advice of the manufacturer on any equipment installation, so I took a look at a few owner’s manuals. Most (or all?) of the manuals for the amateur gear show the two fuse method. See the ICOM example below. (Note that they don’t show the presence of the ELD.)
I also took a look at some commercial land mobile radio manuals. Motorola shows the single fuse approach.
Hytera also shows a single fuse in its land mobile manuals.
ICOM makes both amateur and commercial land mobile gear, so I wondered what they recommend for their land mobile product line. Ha, funny thing, they show two fuses, with a comment that says, “Depending on version, the fuse holder may not be attached to the black cable.” Well, isn’t that special?
So is the two-fuse thing some kind of ancient amateur radio practice and the land mobile industry has gone a different path? Sometimes industries adopt “standard” approaches and then forget why with time.
Some Circuit Analysis
After reading through all of the arguments, I tried to distill them down to their essence. I created a wiring diagram that may help explain the concepts. Or maybe not. An automobile is a complex electrical and electronic system, so any practical diagram risks oversimplifying the situation. But here’s my best shot at it.
The center of the diagram shows the body/chassis of the vehicle which is connected to the negative lead of the battery, through the ELD. The transceiver is directly connected to the + terminal of the battery (via Fuse 1) and the chassis side of the ELD (via Fuse 2). The engine starter is connected to the battery with heavy cables and is also connected to the body/chassis. While there are a large number of other electrical devices in a modern vehicle, only one is shown here as an example (with a switch and fuse).
The circuit shows the antenna connected to the radio with a coaxial cable. The shield of that cable is almost always grounded to the vehicle chassis at the antenna. (Magnetic mount antennas are one exception and I am sure there are others.) I can say that every mobile installation I’ve ever done had the coaxial cable connected to the chassis. This is an important point because it provides a chassis connection for the transceiver at point C (whether you wanted it or not). There may be other ways that a transceiver is connected to chassis (point B), including the mounting bracket, external speaker, microphone or other accessories.
Arguments For and Against
The argument for fusing the negative lead is to protect against return current from other devices that find its way back to the battery through the transceiver’s negative power lead. For example, the starter could have a fault in its negative cable, causing the current to flow through the chassis to the transceiver and back to the battery. The starter current can be hundreds of amperes which would likely overload the radio wire which is sized for 15 amperes. The fuse will open and protect the negative lead (and maybe the radio, to some extent).
The argument against fusing the negative lead is that if the fuse opens up, it could cause problems. Suppose Fuse 2 opens up due to some transient condition. If the transceiver is completely isolated, Fuse 2 would remove power from the transceiver. However, the return path at the antenna coax (point C) will most likely allow the radio to continue functioning using the coax as the negative return. Typically, this is RG-58 or similar cable, which is not intended to carry significant DC current and may fry under the load. If the current is coming from a fault in the starter wiring (big current), this is going to be a bad day for your mobile.
My Conclusions
I think both arguments have merit but choosing one fuse or two requires estimating which problem is most likely and judging the overall impact of the fault. The negative lead fuse can do only one thing well: protect the negative lead. It might provide some protection to the transceiver but there are a lot of sensitive circuits inside the radio that will get destroyed with 15 A flowing. Again, the connection at point C means that the radio will be connected to chassis and current can flow.
If Fuse 2 is eliminated it allows for the flow of high currents through the negative lead of the transceiver. This is not desirable but is it better or worse than the current flowing through the coax shield? Probably better. If a high current device (the starter) has a wiring failure that dumps large currents into the chassis, it may find a number of return paths. Lots of current is going to flow somewhere and potentially cause damage, with or without a negative lead fuse.
I will note that bonding the transceiver to the vehicle chassis has some benefit (point B in the diagram). You may or may not have this connection depending on how you mounted the radio. This electrical connection can shunt any currents away from the coaxial cable, hopefully doing less damage that way.
What am I going to do? My future mobile installations will have only one fuse in the positive lead. I’ll also bond the radio body to the vehicle chassis, with a hefty, low-resistance connection.
My existing mobile installations all have two fuses. I won’t be changing them out because the risk of inducing a problem with the negative lead fuse is rather low. I don’t see the negative lead fuse as a big risk. If you choose to follow the amateur radio manufacturer’s two fuse recommendation, I understand.
A Request
The amateur radio equipment manufacturers need to give this issue a fresh look. At a minimum, the presence of ELD’s needs to be addressed and the common recommendation of wiring directly to the battery is obsolete. But the one-fuse-or-two issue should also get a careful look by the manufacturer’s engineering teams.
That’s my analysis. What do you think?
(Runs and ducks for cover.)
Note: This article is my technical opinion but my attorney says to tell you that you are responsible if you destroy your vehicle while wiring up your transceiver.
The post Mobile DC Power: One Fuse or Two? appeared first on The KØNR Radio Site.
10 Responses to “Mobile DC Power: One Fuse or Two?”
 Ham Radio Deluxe |
 Ham Radio Prep |
 Ham Radio School |
 KB3IFH QSL Cards  Hip Ham Shirts  HamRadioAuctions Reliance Antennas Enigma Shop |  morseDX  Ni4L Antennas  R&L Electronics antennas.us Ears to Our World |
- Matt W1MST, Managing Editor
Thanks for the article. I have a mobile installation to get to once it warms up. Was not aware of the ELD in vehicles.
The schematic associated with “Wiring diagram for radio transceiver installation, includin” was half way out of the frame, FWIW.
I spent a couple of years, in between my broadcast engineering gigs, doing 2-way radio work, and none of the commercial radios that I worked on ever had any kind of protection on either of the ground leads. This was back in the days when there was a control head in the cab and a radio box in the truck or rear of the vehicle. There was a ground lead on the control head and another ground lead on the radio box. Both of the ground leads went to vehicle chassis, and the one on the radio box never went back to the battery, due to the lesser voltage drop through the chassis.
The Ham Writer Standards Manual really should preclude using the words “fuse” and “protecting circuits, radios, electronic devices”, etc. in the same sentence.
Fuses are to stop wiring that is carrying excess current from starting fires.
I would never connect a radio negative lead to the battery negative post in a vehicle. Use the same point the battery negative is bonded to the vehicle chassis if you feel you must route the ground back into the engine compartment. But far more often the ground was bonded to the chassis withing a few feet of the the main radio unit.
One of my jobs at a Motorola MSS for over a decade was training our installers in power and signal wiring tie points. These type of connections for primary power were not negotiable.
I am retired now, but I was an avionics tech for 33 years at a major commercial airline. Before that I worked at a regional carrier as a shop tech and aircraft “R&E” (radio and electrical) tech. Before that I worked as an avionics installer at an FBO (fixed-base operator), installing all manner of electronic gee-gaws in private aircraft, including communications and navigation systems. In all that time, I never saw a fused ground or chassis connection. All of the equipment chassis were bonded together and connected directly to the airframe, usually with copper braid of at least 1/2″ width, without benefit of a fuse or circuit breaker. The “hot” DC connection typically went to a circuit breaker which was connected to a buss. This buss was typically connected to an “avionics master” breaker switch which went to +28 or +14VDC, depending on the system. In commercial aircraft, control heads are mounted in the cockpit and the “R/T” units are remotely installed in racks in the avionics bay under the cockpit floor. The “R/T” chassis are all bonded together behind the racks and connected to the airframe as directly as is practical. I could be wrong, of course, but I wonder if the second fuse so typically seen in amateur transceivers might be for the accomodation of positive-ground vehicles like White Freightliners or MGs.
I should clarify two things… I installed a CB radio in a White Freightliner back in the ’70’s, and I found out the hard way that this particular truck was positive ground. This was a long time ago, and I should say that perhaps these vehicles are no longer positive-ground. Also, I mentioned MGs… many if not most English cars; Jaguar’s, etc., were positive ground back in the 50’s and 60’s. I’m old and not at all up-to-date on what modern English automobile designers are up to. Hopefully everyone has switched over to negative ground by now! Also I mentioned “R/T” units… for those who may be unfamiliar, this means “Receiver/Transmitter” units, which are typically remotely located. The operating frequency, audio levels and so-forth are controlled with a small box located in the cockpit for operator access. This is the same concept as used with most commercial radio systems as previously mentioned.
Finally an article that actually explains WHY you should use 2 fuses. I have worked as a mechanic years ago, and you would be surprised what people think is acceptable for wiring a radio (Am, or FM, or a combo, or Ham equipment).
I worked on a pickup truck where the driver used one fuse on the positive side of his AM/FM/cassette radio going to the battery, and used a chassis ground point for the negative side. He kept frying out his radio, and claimed it was a “factory defect”. After the third replacement, my boss asked me to check it all out. I found the problem. He had a starter cable that was chaffed and contacting other wires at times, and apparently it WAS trying to draw from the battery. It didn’t do much good to his radio. He paid for the work I did, but it got correctly fixed, also using 2 fuses.
My take is to connect the radio return to the nearest and best chassis bonding point. This follows the Motorola protocol and minimizes the likelihood that a large load might co-opt the radio’s ground connection (it also keeps one from bypassing the ELD). Since most radios have at least two connections to chassis ground anyway (in addition to the power return), this makes sense for that reason also.
I used to be against this protocol. I was died-in-the-wool, run two fat conductors to the battery (+) and (-), and don’t bother me with any other option. However, most automobile chassis offer a low resistance path back to the battery (-) post. On my Mazda 7 installation, I measured the chassis resistance at about 2.5 milli-ohms. That was the same resistance as a piece of #4 AWG wire run between the same points. Saves on expensive copper as well, BTW.
Bonding copper to steel is not without issues, but careful attention to allowable dissimilar metal connections provides some options (in my case, I solder tinned 4, 1-terminal, all-copper terminal blocks and bolted them to the car chassis and connected all of them with a single piece of #4 AWG copper, so this greatly reduced the connection resistance).
So now I am all-for using chassis return to power my equipment (this has also been influenced by my work in the avionics industry, as mentioned by K8SFC). My $0.02 worth, at least.
Not discussed here is non-automobile installations. In that instance, where there is no definitive “chassis ground”, I more lean to the two-fuse approach. However, overall, I don’t think a rule of thumb is a good idea. Each power cable install needs to have individual attention. Hence, the importance of providing more “why” than “what”. The “why” has been in short supply and even this discussion cannot provide a definitive answer since the actions have been steeped in “common practice”.
Thank you Bob, K0NR, for the discussion. It is good to see folks out here investigating “stuff”.
Cheers
Hope I can help. You have overlooked a couple of points and do not fully understand what a Grounded System vs a Floating System does and how they work.
Pop the hood of any vehicle and take notice of the battery Negative Terminal Post wiring. You are going to see a large wire going to the chassis at the fender well or firewall. Call it a Bonding Jumper. Your vehicle uses the chassis as both a negative circuit conductor and ground to save weight and space. All negative current uses the chassis and returns to the battery negative terminal via the Bonding Jumper including engine cranking current.
Now consider how you connect the radio keeping one important fact in mind. Inside your radio, the negative power input is electrically bonded to the chassis of the radio and coax shield. Time to connect your radio DC negative and coax shield. You elect to go straight to the battery term post with Dc negative, and then terminate coax conventionally to antenna mount.
Draw the circuit you created out in your mind’s eye. You now have two Bonding Jumpers in parallel. One is the vehicle’s factory-installed Bonding Jumper. The other one you added with your radio’s negative power wire and coax shield. You placed your radio in a nasty Ground Loop. DC parallel circuit laws apply. Vehicle operating current is using your radio as a wire. You are in a Ground Loop.
You can prove this easily with a clamp-on DC amp-meter. Turn your radio off and clamp either the negative radio power wire or coax, makes no difference. Put the key in the ignition and start the engine while observing the Amp-Meter. You saw a quick burst of 20 to 30 amps cranking the engine, and went down quickly to 1 amp or less after the engine started. all with the radio turned off. Your radio is in parallel with the vehicle Bonding Jumper. As a consequence will have roughly 3 to 10% of all vehicle current flowing through your radio’s ground plane creating noise. Now turn on all accessories to maximum power and watch the current go up through your radio.
Here is where it gets dangerous. You take the car to the garage for some work. The mechanic needs to disconnect battery power and trained to disconnect the Negative. Sees your radio wiring and does not want to mess with it and disconnects the Bonding Jumper at the Firewall. Does his work and forgets to reconnect the Bonding Jumper. Or it could be wear and tear while you are driving. Mechanic or you gets in the car. All the lights come on as normal. Turn the key on and all the bells and whistles work normally. Then you go to crank the engine and hear it slowly crank like a weak battery and the cabin fills with smoke. Upon investigation you find the insulation burnt off the radio negative wire and coax shield. Fuse on positive wire and the insulation is just fine. That is when you figured out your radio was the bonding jumper and why the manufacture provided you with a second fuse.
If you had terminated the radio negative to the chassis, all that goes away. Your radio no longer shares any vehicle current ever. Not possible. No need for the second fuse because it is a Grounded System. All a Grounded System means is one of the circuit conductors is bonded to Ground. Some Examples are a tap in a transformer like neutral on AC power. or either Negative or Positive on a DC System. Grounded Systems makes it inexpensive and easy to provide overcurrent protection with fuses and breakers. You only need to provide a fuse or breaker on Un-Grounded circuit conductors. Negative is grounded and requires no fuse. In fact, would violate all electrical codes.
A Floating System where no circuit conductors are grounded still requires all Un-Grounded circuit conductors to have a fuse or breaker installed plus a Ground Fault Detection (GFD) installed. A Floating DC system would require a fuse on both Positive and Negative because neither has been grounded, plus a GFD circuit. Gets expensive and why we have Grounded Systems.
ICOM provides two fuses for hams who demand to terminate both polarities directly to the battery to protect them from themselves. As you noticed the professional side like Motorola and two-way radio shops throw the second fuse in the part bin.
Hope that helps.
AI5DH
AI5DH is wrong. He spreads his moronic grounding theories all over ham radio sites and forums. Usually personally attacking anyone who disagrees with him. He has been banned from QRZ multiple times. Dereck may know how cell towers are wired, which I highly doubt he leaves his office long enough to observe, but is severely mistaken when it comes to amateur radio systems.
I’m not a radio electronics guy but I’ve worked on cars electrical systems for most of my life. There has never been any common system in cars/trucks that have ever fused the ground side other than ham radio. I personally think that the start of the two fuse idea was old hams with a misguided mentality of “protect the radio at all costs”! If it was that important, all the critical systems in a vehicle would have ground side fuses. I don’t believe that the ground side fuse hurts a thing but I seriously doubt it is providing any additional protection. As you mentioned in your article, ground will still likely be carried via the antenna coax.
Matt