FJRF009.0: Ground Spider Research

[mcatrophy]

My previous post changed to prove I can't count. Among many non-talents I possess.

So, RH, what is

... my idea ...

?
The inquisitive (and possibly affected) want to know.

 

[RadioHowie]

My previous post changed to prove I can't count. Among many non-talents I possess.
So, RH, what is

... my idea ...

?
The inquisitive (and possibly affected) want to know.

To recap, instead of just dumping the connector and "spider" pin that goes in the connector, then soldering all the wires together, as Smitty did, I thought a better solution might be to dump the connector and "spider" pin, but instead of soldering the wires together, put a ring terminal on the end of each wire going to the connector and screwing them down to a barrier strip.....

.....THEN run a ground from that barrier strip to a grounding point on the engine block.

To me, it sounds like the problem is corrosion in the "spider" is creating a resistance heat buildup as current from several circuits looking for ground meet up in that connector. If there was a shorter, and less resitant path to ground from the connector itself, it would make sense some of the heat buildup in the harness would go away as the current is being grounded sooner. Plus, one could use a larger gauge wire to ground than the wires meeting at the connector to provide and even better ground.

Of course this all depends on if the "spider" actually is simply a point to tie 4 or 5 ground wires into one. That is a poor design and could be improved by sending the multiple ground points TO ground sooner.

The resident electrical specialists are more than welcome to chime and and say if my idea has no merit, but to me, it looks like a shortcut was made in the design of the wiring harness to facilitate ease of manufacture and installation and might be helped or even fixed by creating and providing better ground paths at each of the multi-ground connectors.

It also seems that if there are 6 wires going to those connectors, 5 of the wires are grounds for various circuits that are being combined at the junction and then being sent to ground through the 6th wire. Soldering all 6 together doesn't decrease the amperage load on the actual 6th wire one bit. It simply bypasses the connector. It just makes sense to get the current back to ground sooner and through a heavier gauge wire, hence my barrier strip idea.

Make any sense?

 

[smitty141]

My previous post changed to prove I can't count. Among many non-talents I possess.
So, RH, what is

... my idea ...

?
The inquisitive (and possibly affected) want to know.

To recap, instead of just dumping the connector and "spider" pin that goes in the connector, then soldering all the wires together, as Smitty did, I thought a better solution might be to dump the connector and "spider" pin, but instead of soldering the wires together, put a ring terminal on the end of each wire going to the connector and screwing them down to a barrier strip.....

.....THEN run a ground from that barrier strip to a grounding point on the engine block.

To me, it sounds like the problem is corrosion in the "spider" is creating a resistance heat buildup as current from several circuits looking for ground meet up in that connector. If there was a shorter, and less resitant path to ground from the connector itself, it would make sense some of the heat buildup in the harness would go away as the current is being grounded sooner. Plus, one could use a larger gauge wire to ground than the wires meeting at the connector to provide and even better ground.

Of course this all depends on if the "spider" actually is simply a point to tie 4 or 5 ground wires into one. That is a poor design and could be improved by sending the multiple ground points TO ground sooner.

The resident electrical specialists are more than welcome to chime and and say if my idea has no merit, but to me, it looks like a shortcut was made in the design of the wiring harness to facilitate ease of manufacture and installation and might be helped or even fixed by creating and providing better ground paths at each of the multi-ground connectors.

It also seems that if there are 6 wires going to those connectors, 5 of the wires are grounds for various circuits that are being combined at the junction and then being sent to ground through the 6th wire. Soldering all 6 together doesn't decrease the amperage load on the actual 6th wire one bit. It simply bypasses the connector. It just makes sense to get the current back to ground sooner and through a heavier gauge wire, hence my barrier strip idea.

Make any sense?

Looks like a good idea Howie.. but the problem is having enough wire to put connectors on and then screwing them to the block. And then the block is exposed to the weather. Where mine ground problem was just enough wire to strip and solder and heat shrink for waterproofing. If it was the connector under the tank, it is all you can do to get the cap and spider out of it. I will most likey remove and solder all my connections, one day with bike problem is enough for me...

Smitty

 

[SockMonkey]

RH: from a serviceability standpoint, your solution is almost ideal. From a practical standpoint, it's certainly less so. If doing away with the bridge connectors is the aim, then both you and Smitty are half right. The solution I'd recommend is removing the bridging connector, terminating each wire with a ring lug as you've suggested, but instead of taking the wire to a barrier strip, run an appropiately-sized stainless machine bolt through the lugs with nut and star washer. (You can even add a "tail" wire of whatever desired length to the stack to take all to a common frame ground somewhere.) The wires have been effectively bundled as Smitty did by soldering, but can be easily disassembled for servicing/trouble shooting/circuit isolation.

Just a thought...

 

[mcatrophy]

...To me, it sounds like the problem is corrosion in the "spider" is creating a resistance heat buildup as current from several circuits looking for ground meet up in that connector.

...

Make any sense?

I think the corrosion is the key. From all I've read (most that's been posted here and on other forums), there only seems to be heat build-up as a result of the poor connection due to the corrosion, the heat is such that it can burn the copper wire coming from the "spider".

If I'm correct in that, there is little point in having multiple frame earthing, and the wiring is perfectly capable of carrying the current.

In my previous incarnation, many years ago, using the frame as an earth connection on bikes or cars was common practice. This often led to corrosion at the earth points due to current flowing through a junction of dissimilar metals, usually copper and iron.

Even in my previous bike, a Triumph Trophy, corrosion at an earth point was a common source of problems, the photo below shows how I re-worked an earth connection that exhibited a measured resistance of 7 ohms!

[SIZE=8pt](Click on image for larger view)[/SIZE]



The way the FJR does it (as far as I can tell) means the frame earth is pretty much a single point reference, with the exception of the starter motor (high current but short duration) and spark plugs (very low current), so there's no likelihood of electrolytic effects.

It just seems to me that Yamaha failed to appreciate the corrosion that would occur in these unsealed and poorly plated connections, and the answer is to solder the 6 wires together, and preferably weather-proof the junction.

 

[Grumpy]

That spyder connector looks like tin coated steel. If that's the case you're going to continue to have a problem with it. Has anyone put a magnet on it to see if it's steel? If I had a Gen II I'd be trying to find someone to make a bunch of these connectors out of brass and your problem will go away!

 

[Fred W]

The only reason for using the spider connector, or for using individual terminal lugs per the Howie technique, would be for if you need to be able to disconnect the grounds from each other (or ground) at some point in the future. I just can't think of any reasons off the top of my head that you'd need to be able to do that.

 

[RadioHowie]

RH: from a serviceability standpoint, your solution is almost ideal. From a practical standpoint, it's certainly less so. If doing away with the bridge connectors is the aim, then both you and Smitty are half right. The solution I'd recommend is removing the bridging connector, terminating each wire with a ring lug as you've suggested, but instead of taking the wire to a barrier strip, run an appropiately-sized stainless machine bolt through the lugs with nut and star washer. (You can even add a "tail" wire of whatever desired length to the stack to take all to a common frame ground somewhere.) The wires have been effectively bundled as Smitty did by soldering, but can be easily disassembled for servicing/trouble shooting/circuit isolation.
Just a thought...

Socko, I actually like your idea better than mine, i.e., using a one-bolt junction instead of multiple connections.

I do think the idea of adding a "tail" as you suggest is added insurance and there's a blue-million places one could run the "tail" to improve the ground. If I was going to do this, I'd consider using a 12 or 14 gauge wire to ground the bundle of 18 gauge wires at the connector.

I know lots of folks don't care for frame grounds as opposed to block grounds, but since the Feej motor is firmly "grounded" to the frame at 9 separate locations, the motor mounts, and are done so with substantial hardware, I'd guess the frame is grounded to the battery negative as well as the block is.

A really good grounding point would be at the top-rear motor mounts here, either under the mount to motor bolt or the mount to frame bolt(s). Just don't remember right this moment if those mounts are obstructed by the airbox. They may be.

 

[RadioHowie]

The only reason for using the spider connector, or for using individual terminal lugs per the Howie technique, would be for if you need to be able to disconnect the grounds from each other (or ground) at some point in the future. I just can't think of any reasons off the top of my head that you'd need to be able to do that.

Fred, I think you're right on the money as to "why does this need to be built and designed this way?" Why would you want or need to remove the "spider" and unground several circuits? Beats hell outta me.

I can only guess and opine that the harness was designed this way to facillitate speed of assembly and lower cost in the construction of the harness. Not that anyone would EVER take a shortcut to benefit cost at the expense of reliability. Nah....THAT would never happen. :assassin:

BTW, someone jump in and correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall during any of my disassembly that my Gen I uses any of those multi-ground connectors. Anyone seen any on a Gen I?

 

[Fred W]

In each of the spiders, one of the wires already runs off to a frame ground point. The others go to devices that need the ground. Adding another "tail" off to another ground point should not be necessary, and actually could turn out to be a detrimental "ground loop", though I seriously doubt it considering the application.

No, I've never seen anything like these on my 1st Gen, but you've had yours stripped down a lot further than me mine.

 

[SockMonkey]

...and actually could turn out to be a detrimental "ground loop", though I seriously doubt it considering the application.

That's a very good point, Fred. There'd be no ill effects in a lighting circuit, but in an instrumentation or sensor circuit, there could be. On second thought, I'd probalby advise against a secondary ground path just to avoid any potential problems...

 

[RadioHowie]

...and actually could turn out to be a detrimental "ground loop", though I seriously doubt it considering the application.

That's a very good point, Fred. There'd be no ill effects in a lighting circuit, but in an instrumentation or sensor circuit, there could be. On second thought, I'd probalby advise against a secondary ground path just to avoid any potential problems...

Then the thing to do would be pull the "spider", use a VOM/DMM to determine which of the wires is the actual ground wire return and leave it out of the "bundle". Current running from 5 18-gauge wired sources grounding through a 10 or 12 gauge "pigtail" makes a lot more sense than having that same amount of current from 5 sources grounding through a wire the same gauge as the source wires. That's not just a cheap and/or lazy design...it's asking for trouble.

Regardless of the "ideal" solution, the current design certainly ain't the best way to do it. Continued failures being reported nearly on a daily basis proves that out.

 

[Grumpy]

...and actually could turn out to be a detrimental "ground loop", though I seriously doubt it considering the application.

That's a very good point, Fred. There'd be no ill effects in a lighting circuit, but in an instrumentation or sensor circuit, there could be. On second thought, I'd probalby advise against a secondary ground path just to avoid any potential problems...

And really shows up in a communication system!

 

[Fred W]

The problem that is in need of being fixed isn't undersized ground wires, it is faulty (corroding) connection of those wires. Sure, you could replace the one existing ground wire in each spider with a larger guage one but that is just fixing a problem that doesn't appear to exist.

Since the problem is clearly due to the corroding metal spider and subsequent degrading contact with the female pins in the connector, lopping off that connector and replacing it with something that will not corrode is the solution. As I said before, I'd just twist em up, put them into an appropriate size crimped ferrule for mechanical support (you should not rely on a soldered connection for the mechanical connection), solder the crimped connection with a big enough iron, then weather proof the whole junction with liquid tape or something similar. Problem solved.

 

[dcarver]

Here's how I welded mine, Smitty ain't got nothing on my mekanikal skilz..

and I do believe it's just carbon steel, the spider that is..

Remember the original thread started here <clicky me>

 

[bramfrank]

My original idea is the one I still favor . . . let the government force Yamaha to fix the problem properly.

 

[RadioHowie]

Yep....have one gigantic, plodding, glacial bureaucracy instruct another gigantic, plodding, glacial bureaucracy on how to fix something.

 

[csquared]

Picked up my FJR after having the wiring harness replaced. Took a look at the collector and one of the corner terminals was very black. Additionally, you could see that some of the insulation on the wires had started to melt. There was no cap that covered the collector so I do not know if it was melted but it was obvious that it had gotten pretty darned hot. The service manager said that they had compared the collector on the new and the old harness and did not see that any difference in its construction. I suspect that if there is a recall with an improved harness I'll be back in for another round. At least it's all been covered with no cost to me other that missing some really good riding weather.

On the road again......... :yahoo:

 

[happyPuppy]

I think Grumpy has the right idea, replace the spider with a non corrosive one. I know almost nothing about electronics other than a HS class. Are they that uncommon that someone does not make replacements that would work?

 

[Millsaps2]

Had an issue with this problem on one occasion. Riding along and the bike stops running, gages sweep back and forth several times and lights flash on instrument panel several times. Pull in the clutch and the bikes restarts. Had the bike in the shop this week for a coolant leak, my problem since I tried to remove the coolant pipe and did not get the o rings seated properly. Told the dealer about the grounding issue, they called Yamaha and they instructed the dealer to clean the grounding connections and apply dielectric grease. Will picked up the bike on Thursday and will give results of the dealer's findings. I have an 07 with 45,000 miles.