You are not logged in.

Dear visitor, welcome to SPRINKLER TALK FORUM - You Got Questions, We've Got Answers. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains how this page works. You must be registered before you can use all the page's features. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

Wet_Boots

Supreme Member

Posts: 4,082

Location: Metro NYC

11

Thursday, August 1st 2013, 8:32pm

The time settings might very well be retained, by way of non-volatile memory, but the usual desire of controller owners is to never have to reset the clock after a power failure. That is a job for battery backup, and not for controller memory. Controller memory can't keep time.

Amateur

New Member

12

Friday, August 2nd 2013, 8:46am

Thank you. So that means, I assume, that it takes separate time-keeping circuitry (chips, etc.) powered by either line voltage or battery, to maintain clock and date settings during power failures. Why is this absent in so many controllers when it’s so essential to proper automatic program operation? Is it merely a cost-saving factor?

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Amateur" (Aug 2nd 2013, 8:52am)


Wet_Boots

Supreme Member

Posts: 4,082

Location: Metro NYC

13

Friday, August 2nd 2013, 9:39am

If a controller uses some of its non-volatile memory to store the displayed time, that still wouldn't change the need to correct the time after a power failure.

It happens that the Rainbird SST is a product not offered to the professional trade. Every controller a contractor might buy will have a battery backup that keeps time during power failures.

mrfixit

Moderator

Posts: 1,462

Location: USA

14

Friday, August 2nd 2013, 10:31am

I assume, that it takes separate time-keeping circuitry (chips, etc.) powered by either line voltage or battery, to maintain clock and date settings during power failures. Why is this absent in so many controllers when it’s so essential to proper automatic program operation? Is it merely a cost-saving factor?

Name another controller on the market that doesn't have a back up battery.

scercpio

Active Member

15

Friday, August 16th 2013, 4:22pm

Thank you. So that means, I assume, that it takes separate time-keeping circuitry (chips, etc.) powered by either line voltage or battery, to maintain clock and date settings during power failures. Why is this absent in so many controllers when it’s so essential to proper automatic program operation? Is it merely a cost-saving factor?
Yes, an RTC or Real Time Clock is needed to keep the time. An RTC circuit consists of a crystal to generate cycles which is then converts into time, and a memory chip to keeps track of the time. The memory cannot be non-volatile because non-volatile memory chips have limited number of write operations and the chip will be worn out soon if it is constantly written. This is why an RTC circuit typically has a battery and a volatile memory chip. The power to run an RTC isn't much. It can run on a 3.3v coin battery for years, but it too, eventually dies. Then you just replace the battery, tell it the current time and the battery will keep it running.

RTC circuit isn't cheap. That's why many low cost controllers avoid it. They would rather put a 9V battery in order to keep the whole controller alive during the temporary power outage.

Internet based controllers can get the time from the internet so they usually don't have RTC or backup battery. The time only needs to be updated once, right after the controller comes back from the outage, and it can just keeps on running until the power is interrupted.

Rate this thread