AeroElectric-List Archive Browser

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ao
January 19, 2002 - February 14, 2002

> ><< I've been renting airplanes for over 20 years and I've > lost track of the numbers of airplanes I've climbed into > that still had all the radios ON from the last shutdown. > The only radio failures I've ever experienced > were things that simply died while in operation and never > associated with a noteworthy electrical event such as > engine start, landing or flap operation, or system shutdown. > >> > >So, I guess this begs the question: "Does an Avionics Master make any sense"" > If the radios can be left on, the an avionics master is wasted time and >money, not to mention a single point for failure. I've written about this extensively. I was at Cessna when the avionics master switch was born. What we really knew about the physics of what was killing radios was pretty sad. Further, ALL electronics have become at least 10x more robust than the puny germanium transistors of 1968. The avionics master switch was conceived for the wrong reasons in 1960's and persists more as an homage to tradition than for any basis in fact. In the past, when I've encountered a devoted disciple of tradition who was still preaching the Gospel of Spikes and Gremlins, I would ask them to explain the physics behind their doctrine. To date, nobody has been willing to even discuss the physics . . . Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Aucountry(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 19, 2002
Subject: Re: Seperate Gyro master switch???
I've been telling people about the bogus beliefs behind the avionics master for years. Usually falls on deaf ears. Gary ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 19, 2002
From: William Mills <courierboy(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Seperate Gyro master switch???
> >I've been telling people about the bogus beliefs behind the avionics master >for years. Usually falls on deaf ears. > >Gary Seems like the avionics master switch today serves the same purpose as the "magic" feather that Walt Disney's "Dumbo" thought he needed for flight. Once Dumbo let go of THAT notion he flew just fine without it. Walt Disney wouldn't steer us wrong now would he? ;-) Bill Mills (don't know how to measure spikes, so I've signed-on with Bob, Matt and you guys) RANS Courier in progress SF bay area ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com>
Subject: Re: Seperate Gyro master switch???
Date: Jan 19, 2002
Hi Gary, I just need to be sure. In my Tiger, which has no master avionics switch, is it okay just to leave the radio switches in the on position all the time? Thansk, Ned ----- Original Message ----- From: <Aucountry(at)aol.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Seperate Gyro master switch??? > > I've been telling people about the bogus beliefs behind the avionics master > for years. Usually falls on deaf ears. > > Gary > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 19, 2002
From: ripsteel(at)edge.net (Mark Phillips)
Subject: Battery "Master" switch
With all the recent discussion about avionics masters, key switches, a/c security, etc. I would like to throw out to the assembled 'listers this possible alternative for your learned critique: Replace the master switch AND contactor with a manually operated battery disconnect switch mounted just out of sight, yet near at hand, perhaps just under the center of the panel. Switches such as this, used by the ground-racing set, (possibly only for emergencies?) can be found in Summits catalog, for example. They list one for $19.95 (SUM-G1432- no specs. given) up to one by Flaming River (FLA-FR1003-2, 250 amps continuous, 25K for 5 sec. and waterproof, for a whopping $82.95). It would seem there are switches available somewhere in between these, although I haven't seen them (haven't looked much, neither!), nor do I know if they have multiple contacts, are spring-loaded for fast operation, have useful duty-ratings, or are difficult to operate. Use of such a thing would: 1. be simpler (less failure points- I'm sure switch/contactor is dead reliable, but...) 2. no current draw (contactor coil draw is "only" a few amps, but amps is amps!) 3. produce no heat (good or bad, depending on where you live?!) 4. be fairly difficult for a potential thief to find, as if this would help here... 5. pretty much make sure nothing happened if someone was pokin' around in your plane, provided you remember to shut it off (connect a "ding-ding" key-in-switch noisemaker) Any experience, thoughts etc.- just don't tell me it's a stupid idea, I'd like to know why... From the Possumworks in TN Mark Phillips, RV-6A in progress... ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 19, 2002
From: Robert McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Battery "Master" switch
Mark; Having some experience with these switches in race cars I can give some small amount of insight. These switches are mandatory in most racing classes as an emergency cut-off. They are used by rescue workers in the case of accident to reduce the possibility of fire due to shorted wiring. !: Yes they are simpler IF the main battery cable is passing by the area where you intend to mount the switch anyway. Otherwise you have to run the full size battery cable to and from this switch location. This additional LIVE wiring is contrary to the purpose of a master contactor which is to eliminate as much live wiring as possible when it is off. This also applies even if the main cable runs past the proposed switch mounting area if the battery is not close by as the wiring from battery to switch will remain live with the switch off. As far as failure is concerned please see down side comments below. 2: This is true and a good thing. (many race cars are a dead loss electrical system with no charging capability) 3: True. (although no matter where you live waste heat energy is generally a bad thing) 4: True, many European cars (even Rolls Royce) used to have one of these switches installed adjacent to the trunk mounted battery as a crude but effective form of theft protection. A thief without knowledge of this switch trying to cross wire the ignition to steal the vehicle would find no current available. 5: True, when working on a vehicle with one of these switches installed it is common practice to turn off the battery switch to avoid potential "surprises" 6: They are generally quite easy to operate as most are intended as an emergency cut-off. They are, for the most part, designed to turn off a shorted battery and thus have very high interrupting ratings. The duty cycle is continuous. Many have auxiliary contacts designed to turn off such things as alternators which can be self sustaining if the battery is simply disconnected from the system. They usually have spring applied contacts so that as the contacts wear spring pressure compensates and maintains a consistent contact pressure. Now the down side. These switches, in my experience, are often the cause of a "dead" vehicle. In the street vehicles referred to above corrosion was often the culprit and in the race cars vibration was deadly for these switches. I have first hand knowledge of Lucas (prince of darkness) brand which were extremely vulnerable to vibration related problems and Bosch brand which, while much better, seemed susceptible to burned contacts and also eventually suffered vibration failure. All of the switches used in these cars were rated at 200 amps or greater but remember that cranking your starter can draw significant current especially when power is being supplied by a modern RG battery and it's cold outside. I would imagine that if you paid enough for a good aircraft quality brand of one of these devices you might get satisfactory service but, from experience, I'd be cautious. (As always you get what you pay for. Don't buy the $9.95 "special") Bob McC Mark Phillips wrote: > > With all the recent discussion about avionics masters, key switches, a/c security, > etc. I would like to throw out to the assembled 'listers this possible alternative > for your learned critique: > > Replace the master switch AND contactor with a manually operated battery disconnect > switch mounted just out of sight, yet near at hand, perhaps just under the center of > the panel. Switches such as this, used by the ground-racing set, (possibly only for > emergencies?) can be found in Summits catalog, for example. They list one for > $19.95 (SUM-G1432- no specs. given) up to one by Flaming River (FLA-FR1003-2, 250 > amps continuous, 25K for 5 sec. and waterproof, for a whopping $82.95). It would > seem there are switches available somewhere in between these, although I haven't seen > them (haven't looked much, neither!), nor do I know if they have multiple contacts, > are spring-loaded for fast operation, have useful duty-ratings, or are difficult to > operate. > > Use of such a thing would: > 1. be simpler (less failure points- I'm sure switch/contactor is dead reliable, > but...) > 2. no current draw (contactor coil draw is "only" a few amps, but amps is amps!) > 3. produce no heat (good or bad, depending on where you live?!) > 4. be fairly difficult for a potential thief to find, as if this would help here... > 5. pretty much make sure nothing happened if someone was pokin' around in your plane, > provided you remember to shut it off (connect a "ding-ding" key-in-switch noisemaker) > > Any experience, thoughts etc.- just don't tell me it's a stupid idea, I'd like to > know why... > > >From the Possumworks in TN > Mark Phillips, RV-6A in progress... > > _- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com>
Subject: Re: Battery "Master" switch
Date: Jan 19, 2002
Mark, I have been thinking of using the Flaming Rivers Battery disconnect switch for my Pulsar. The switch I have been looking at is in the Summit catalog and has a remote mounted handle and extension. The switch could be mounted on the firewall next to the battery and the remote handle in the cockpit. This would eliminate the ~1 amp drain for the contactor. My Jabiru engine alternator only puts out 15 amps so every amp I can save is good. I hadn't thought of the additional security the switch provides. That is a good idea. -ned ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Phillips" <ripsteel(at)edge.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery "Master" switch > > With all the recent discussion about avionics masters, key switches, a/c security, > etc. I would like to throw out to the assembled 'listers this possible alternative > for your learned critique: > > Replace the master switch AND contactor with a manually operated battery disconnect > switch mounted just out of sight, yet near at hand, perhaps just under the center of > the panel. Switches such as this, used by the ground-racing set, (possibly only for > emergencies?) can be found in Summits catalog, for example. They list one for > $19.95 (SUM-G1432- no specs. given) up to one by Flaming River (FLA-FR1003-2, 250 > amps continuous, 25K for 5 sec. and waterproof, for a whopping $82.95). It would > seem there are switches available somewhere in between these, although I haven't seen > them (haven't looked much, neither!), nor do I know if they have multiple contacts, > are spring-loaded for fast operation, have useful duty-ratings, or are difficult to > operate. > > Use of such a thing would: > 1. be simpler (less failure points- I'm sure switch/contactor is dead reliable, > but...) > 2. no current draw (contactor coil draw is "only" a few amps, but amps is amps!) > 3. produce no heat (good or bad, depending on where you live?!) > 4. be fairly difficult for a potential thief to find, as if this would help here... > 5. pretty much make sure nothing happened if someone was pokin' around in your plane, > provided you remember to shut it off (connect a "ding-ding" key-in-switch noisemaker) > > Any experience, thoughts etc.- just don't tell me it's a stupid idea, I'd like to > know why... > > From the Possumworks in TN > Mark Phillips, RV-6A in progress... > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Aucountry(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 19, 2002
Subject: Re: Seperate Gyro master switch???
In a message dated 1/19/02 10:48:40 AM, nthomas(at)mmcable.com writes: << Hi Gary, I just need to be sure. In my Tiger, which has no master avionics switch, is it okay just to leave the radio switches in the on position all the time? Thansk, Ned >> I have, and do from time to time. Being taught to turn things on after engine start and off prior to shutdown though is a habit that is hard to break. I have been flying a Tiger with an Avionics Master and I usually leave the master on and turn on and shut down equipment as if it weren't there. Gary ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 19, 2002
From: Finn Lassen <finnlassen(at)netzero.net>
Subject: Re: Battery "Master" switch
Ok, here's about 2 years of actual experience. I bought one of that kind of switch (red removable key) for about $8 from a Sun'n'Fun outdoor vendor. As I have my battery mounted just in front of the main spar, I mounted the switch right on the battery plus terminal within easy reach. Hasn't failed me yet. Of course I turn it on before hitting the starter switch. I don't think these switches are designed to switch that kind of starter current on and off, but are able to handle them when already turned on. It is real convenient and reassuring to know that when you turn it off there is no power anywhere in the plane: not under the instrument panel, no hot starter wire when working on the engine near the starter, and so on. Finn RV-3 Mazda 13-B rotary powered. 200 hours+ Ned Thomas wrote: > > Mark, > > I have been thinking of using the Flaming Rivers Battery disconnect switch > for my Pulsar. The switch I have been looking at is in the Summit catalog > and has a remote mounted handle and extension. The switch could be mounted > on the firewall next to the battery and the remote handle in the cockpit. > This would eliminate the ~1 amp drain for the contactor. My Jabiru engine > alternator only puts out 15 amps so every amp I can save is good. > > I hadn't thought of the additional security the switch provides. That is a > good idea. > > -ned ---------------------------------------------------- Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today Only $9.95 per month! http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net>
Subject: biasing landing, taxi lights
Date: Jan 20, 2002
Bob, In reading some material about the life giving effect of keeping a small current through bulb filaments when not in use, I was thinking about adding a resistor from master switch to light switch biasing a small amount of current through the bulb when the light is off and master switch is on. Is this an idea that may extend the life of these lamps? Dave Ford RV6 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne McMullen" <cmcmullen(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: biasing landing, taxi lights
Date: Jan 20, 2002
The shock to the filament is the initial current surge, while the element is cold. A gradual increase of turn-on current is the best. I have used this technique, a bias current, in other applications. But then we were switching the bulb on and off at a rapid rate. Wayne ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: biasing landing, taxi lights > > Bob, > > In reading some material about the life giving effect of keeping a small > current through bulb filaments when not in use, I was thinking about > adding a resistor from master switch to light switch biasing a small > amount of current through the bulb when the light is off and master > switch is on. Is this an idea that may extend the life of these lamps? > > > Dave Ford > RV6 > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com>
Subject: Re: biasing landing, taxi lights
Date: Jan 20, 2002
I understand that one of the features of the Control Vision switch panels is that it will turn the landing light on slowly. They call it "soft start." Also, as I recall, the Lo Presti "Boom Beam" ramps up the voltage to give a "Soft Start" to their bulb. Lo Presti's is really neat, except for the price. It only draws 3 amps and last 5000 hours and is much brighter. Check it out: http://www.speedmods.com/boom_beam.htm http://www.controlvision.com/frame.cfm?link=avionics.htm -ned ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wayne McMullen" <cmcmullen(at)attbi.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: biasing landing, taxi lights > > The shock to the filament is the initial current surge, while the element is > cold. A gradual increase of turn-on current is the best. I have used this > technique, a bias current, in other applications. But then we were switching > the bulb on and off at a rapid rate. > > Wayne > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net> > To: > Subject: AeroElectric-List: biasing landing, taxi lights > > > > > > Bob, > > > > In reading some material about the life giving effect of keeping a small > > current through bulb filaments when not in use, I was thinking about > > adding a resistor from master switch to light switch biasing a small > > amount of current through the bulb when the light is off and master > > switch is on. Is this an idea that may extend the life of these lamps? > > > > > > Dave Ford > > RV6 > > > > > > > > > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 20, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: biasing landing, taxi lights
> >Bob, > >In reading some material about the life giving effect of keeping a small >current through bulb filaments when not in use, I was thinking about >adding a resistor from master switch to light switch biasing a small >amount of current through the bulb when the light is off and master >switch is on. Is this an idea that may extend the life of these lamps? The notion of a "keep warm" circuit for large incandescent lamps is discussed in detail in the AeroElectric Connection. A resistor that bypasses a small amount of current around a switch that controls the lamps will keep the filament from achieving ambient temperature will hold the lamp at some useful point above its normal cold resistance. Consider a 55W halogen headlamp for a car. I just went to the bench and gathered the following data: Theoretical inrush from room temperature was calculated assuming 10 feet of 20 and 16 AWG wire (10 and 4 milliohms per foot respectively) in the power feedpath from a 14.0 volt bus. E I R W Irush(16) Irush(20) .014 .05 .28 .001 43.8 36.8 .030 .1 .3 .003 41.2 35.0 .046 .15 .31 .007 40.0 34.1 .064 .2 .32 .013 38.8 33.3 .080 .25 .32 .020 38.8 33.3 .100 .3 .33 .030 37.8 32.5 .144 .4 .36 .058 35.0 30.4 .210 .5 .42 .105 30.4 26.9 .295 .6 .49 .177 26.4 23.7 .427 .7 .61 .300 21.5 19.7 .700 .8 .88 .560 15.2 14.3 1.08 .9 1.20 .970 11.3 13.1 1.49 1.0 1.49 1.49 9.2 8.8 The general rule of thumb for keepwarm power has be 1 to 3% of the lamp's full power rating. Note that with 1.5 volts at 1.0A applied to the lamp (1.5W or 2.7%) the inrush current falls to something on the order of 2x the normal 4A running current. Now, here's the rub. To get 1A of current to flow from a 14v bus into a 1.5 ohm lamp you need a resistor (14.0-1.5)/1 = 12.5 ohms. This resistor will dissipate 1.5 x 12.5 18.8 watts. It will run pretty toasty and consume as much energy as that required to run two to four navigation receivers. The neatest way to do it is install a DC to DC converter with an output of 3.3 volts (common computer part) and use diodes from the output side to supply about 2.6 volts to every heavy incandescent lamp circuit (landing, taxi nav lights). DC to DC converters can be 85% efficient. Assuming 2A to taxi, 2A to landing, and 1A to nav lights you'll need 16.5 watts of keepwarm power. Assuming reasonable efficiency of the DC to DC converter . . . we'll only dump about 6 watts of heat out for the whole keepwarm system compared to 18.8 watts for JUST the landing light when a resistor is used. Another problem: DC-DC converters are strong potential noise generators. Intended for use with computers with strong immunity to radio frequency noise, they MAY not work well in airplanes without adding filtering and RF tight enclosures. On a related topic: There's some popular hype associated with several companies that offer wig-wag systems wherein they claim that inrush current limiting supplied standard with their products greatly enhances bulb life in the wig-wag mode. To investigate this claim, I put a data recorder on the same 55W headlamp and cycled it at .5 second on, .5 second off and observed the peak current each time the lamp was re-energized. It turns out that there is so much mass in the lamp's filament that it doesn't have a chance to cool below the 3% power temperature . . . in fact, at .5 second cycling, it didn't fall below the 10% power temperature between cycles. Inrush was about 7A. When I increased the timing to 1 second on 1 second off, the inrush went up to about 8A. Police cars use the wig-wags on their headlamps and get hundreds of hours of service from the bulbs without benefit of extra inrush current limiting. The feature certainly does no harm but it adds parts count and cost to the product without adding demonstrable value. Bottom line: RF interference issues coupled with the expense (about $50) for a DC to DC converter, the whole thing looses it's luster if you consider using automotive halogen lamps in lieu of FAA certified tractor headlights designed and still manufactured to their 1950's specifications. If it were my airplane, I'd make every effort to use low cost, modern lamps for exterior lighting which are demonstrably better performers than the products we all grew up with. Keepwarm is EASY to add later . . . run the GOOD lamps barefoot for a time and see if it's REALLY worth your time, effort and dollars to add a keepwarm system. While you're getting an airplane ready for first flight, there are things much more worthy of time and attention than lamp-life. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)tenforward.com>
Subject: Re: biasing landing, taxi lights
Date: Jan 20, 2002
Another GREAT!!!! reply. Paul original post: The notion of a "keep warm" circuit for large incandescent lamps is discussed in detail in the AeroElectric Connection. (rest deleted for space conservation) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 20, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: biasing landing, taxi lights
> >I understand that one of the features of the Control Vision switch panels is >that it will turn the landing light on slowly. They call it "soft start." >Also, as I recall, the Lo Presti "Boom Beam" ramps up the voltage to give a >"Soft Start" to their bulb. Lo Presti's is really neat, except for the >price. It only draws 3 amps and last 5000 hours and is much brighter. >Check it out: > >http://www.speedmods.com/boom_beam.htm > >http://www.controlvision.com/frame.cfm?link=avionics.htm The Lo Presti adaptation of the high pressure discharge lamps used on many automobiles to aircraft has made it possible to get a LOT of light for not much power on a small airplane. However, there are a couple of things to consider for these lamps. (1) their color temperature is very high . . . very nearly matching the color of clear blue sky. As a result, they provide almost no visual perception differential as recognition lights in the daytime when you are silhouetted against clear sky. We tried this lamp on the AGATE Bonanza at Raytheon . . . pilots were amazed that tower operators couldn't see them 5 miles out on a clear day when it was a sure bet that the lumens being tossed out the front of the airplane was 5x more than for the lamps they took off! (2) while certainly more reliable by virtue of a very long service life, inclusion of a bizillion-hour lamp doesn't make your landing light system as failure-proof as the lamp itself. The parts count for the high pressure lamp system is higher and the amount of wiring, circuit breakers, terminals and switches is the same as for incandescent lamps. If spotting an obstruction 1/2 mile down the runway is your real goal, then perhaps the modern lighting system is for you. If having a high order of probability of available light for a comfortable arrival after dark is the goal, it's hard to beat the an automotive halogen in each wing . . . one aimed for taxi, the other for landing but backing each other up as totally independent systems. Another useful thing to consider is use of a high/low beam headlamp and wiring your landing light up with a 2-10 progressive transfer switch to provide a backup filament in the same lamp assembly. If you'd like to include some extra help on inrush current control, check out the devices in the lower righthand corner of page 597 of the Digikey catalog: http://info.digikey.com/T021/V5/597-599.pdf The Digikey KC015L-ND inrush limiter in series with a 55W halogen lamp will ADD 5.0 ohms to the cold resistance of the lamp circuit. This would give you an inrush limit on the order of 2.6 amps! The device adds a warm resistance of about .11 ohms for a voltage drop of about .5 volts in normal operation. I used similar device in the taxi light circuit of the Gates-Piaggio GP-180 about 18 years ago. Worked fine. NOTE > > > > > This is a temperature dependent device. It needs to heat up to do it's job. Further, it has the disadvantage of solid wire leads designed to be installed on an etched circuit board like a disk ceramic capacitor. The first time the guys out in experimental tried to mount this thing in the taxi light fixture, they heat-sinked the thing to the fixture by virtue of a mounting intended to offset the fragile nature of solid leads. Because the thing couldn't heat up in a few seconds to protect itself, the taxi light wouldn't come on full bright and the inrush limiter would smoke. They burned up three or four of the things before they called over for help. I wound up building an assembly in a small metal electronics enclosure. Brought the solid leads out to nice terminals on the enclosure and supported the device in a little nest of fiberglas. These are a one-cycle per 5-10 minutes sort of thing. When you turn the lamp off, it takes some time for the gizmo to cool off in order to get the benefits of inrush limiting for the next cycle. Again, bottom line is that if we'd been mounting a really GOOD lamp on the nosegear back then, I probably wouldn't have messed with the inrush limiter. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bruce Gray" <bruce.gray(at)snet.net>
Subject: biasing landing, taxi lights
Date: Jan 20, 2002
Ned, The HID 'boom beam' has no filiment. It is a gasious discharge (plasma) light. That's the reason it lasts 5000 hours. Bruce ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 20, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: re: Avionics master switch???
> > >In a message dated 1/19/02 10:48:40 AM, nthomas(at)mmcable.com writes: > ><< Hi Gary, > >I just need to be sure. In my Tiger, which has no master avionics switch, >is it okay just to leave the radio switches in the on position all the time? > >Thansk, >Ned >> > >I have, and do from time to time. Being taught to turn things on after >engine start and off prior to shutdown though is a habit that is hard to >break. I have been flying a Tiger with an Avionics Master and I usually >leave the master on and turn on and shut down equipment as if it weren't >there. > >Gary One of the things we've come to understand about switches in airplanes over the years is that they don't get used often enough. Many an on/off switch on a radio became flakey because the avionics master switch made it unnecessary to operate the power switch on the radio. Switches that get cycled from time to time stay in better shape than switches that never move. As part of a pre-flight checklist, some builders cycle EVERY switch on the panel . . . if you make it a habit of using the panel mounted switch to energize each radio at start up and de-energize at shut down, it's far less likely that the switch contacts will become so corroded that they begin to loose connection. A friend of mine used to let me fly his C150 if I paid for fuel. It featured the super-elcheapo plastic rocker switches (about 40 cents as I recall). The FIRST switch to fail in nearly 30 years of service was the dome light switch . . . very low current stress and low usage. Pitot heat and landing light switches were working fine. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 21, 2002
From: John Rourke <john@allied-computer.com>
Subject: Several questions regarding alternators, regulators,
grounding and shielding (Pretty Long!) Bob, I hope these topics hasn't been covered to death already, I tried to read as much of every pertinent chapter and article as I could, but between that and the manuals for individual items (Rocky Mountain Engine Monitor, especially), I am still confused regarding grounding, shielding and other nefarious things electrical (despite having 90% of a EE degree and 10 years electronics manufacturing experience)... Background: Velocity RG aircraft, with factory-recommended automotive alternator and LR-3B about to be wired in, along with some elements of ControlVision's auto-resettable fuse board, 1 mag + 1 electronic ignition, 1 vacuum system (although will probably change to all-electric with backup alternator some day), Navaid wing-leveler... I am also using dual-side-sticks with Infinity grips, so I need quite a few relays to handle the current of roll trim, pitch trim, landing light, strobes, etc... I am therefore designing my own circuitboard to hold the relays, fastening all except two connections (Bat and Gnd) to be the Fast-On variety of electrical connection (and a 15-pin DB-type connector for each stick grip's wiring). The board will be 1/8" FR4 material, as used in high-vibration automotive environment. My questions are legion, I will try to be quick and to the point. 1) I would like to use the small DIP-style relays from DigiKey, able to handle 12A or 16A on the contacts. Should these be sufficient? (Before you say it, yes this will save me time, but more importantly - space. A neighbor's Velocity had enormous headaches trying to find places to put all the relays and the dozens of Fast-on connectors needed for them (not to mention troubleshooting them later), which I will avoid. Hopefully.) 2) I already have an automotive alternator installed, as recommended by the factory, and currently operating reliably on many Velocities. It is a 60-Amp model with internal regulator. I could get a different alternator without internal regulator, but so far can only find ones up to 50-Amp that use the same mounting method. Can the LR-3B be used with my current alternator, without disabling the internal regulator? 3) I currently have (2) 4-ga av-wire for the starting circuit (why 2 wires? - long story) from the starter contactor up front (near the battery), and a separate 8-ga from the alternator back to the main bus up front. Without relocating the starter contactor with the engine in back end running a short B-lead from the alternator to it, is there any anti-alternator noise benefit to terminating the 8-ga wire at the battery bus in the nose near the battery and running another (10-ga or 8-ga) from the battery to the main-bus in the cabin, rather than terminating at the main-bus and/or battery-bus inside the cabin directly? 4) I originally had planned a 3/4" copper conduit as a plane-length ground, and to carry wiring from the engine to the panel and nose areas (wires from the hell-hole take another route), but the number/size of wires quickly outgrew the space, and I was concerned that I was introducing two additional bolt connections at each end of the conduit - so I took it out and went to a single 15-foot 2-ga ground cable, from the battery direct to the engine. If I put the conduit back in, what kind of wires should be placed inside the conduit, for maximum electrical noise avoidance effect? 5) Related to #4 above, I noticed while preparing to wire the Rocky Mountain engine monitor, that it calls for (9) 2-wire twisted-pair-plus-shield, and (3) 3-wire(2-twisted)-plus-shield cables. This makes the bundle enormous. Even the simple spst-switch-closure alarm circuits call for 2-wire-twisted-plus-shield wire, and that seems like huge overkill to me. What is a reasonable solution for switches (assuming I do not use the conduit method)? 2-wire shielded (no twist)? Single-conductor shielded, with shield as ground return? Single-conductor shielded, with common ground? what about sensors such as OilP, OilT, FuelP, MAP, Shadin fuel flow transducer, what kind of shielding is typically necessary for those (the Velocity wiring guru didn't recommend *any* shielding for these)? I know that the fuel pump and strobe power really should have 2-twisted-wire-plus-shield, but what about electronic ignition? (Also, I know the mag wire must be single wire shielded, and the Alt-Field wire probably as well, although the LR3B literature implies this may not be necessary.) (I am sorry to inflict upon you this flood of queries, but I get so many different answers from different people..) 6) Related to #5 above, if I do go back to the conduit idea for grounding, what are the best wires to run inside? The noisy ones (field, alt B-lead, fuel-pump power, strobe power, electronic ignition?) to keep the noise in, or the other ones (sensors, switches, etc) to keep the noise out? In either case, what sensors can probably do without the shield and/or shield separate from ground return, and/or twisted wiring? I would ask you these questions on the phone (probably lots faster to answer on the phone than by typing), but perhaps there are more questions out there like these from others, that could all be answered at once... unfortunately, it will probably lead to more questions! Thanks very much for all your answers here, and for your availability to consult, in some strange way it makes paying the $500 or $1000 I will likely pay in the future easier, as I have already received so much in return with your advice here.... Thanks, -John R. (P.S.: Perhaps the time savings are illusory as you say, but I still like the Control Vision board idea... I am adding indicators for every protected circuit near the load or switch controlling the load, so that I know which item is going wrong. If I do indeed find little benefit from the board, I do still have the fuseblocks I got from you so long ago, so I can use those if necessary (maybe for battery-bus/essential-bus items?) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 21, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Several questions . . .
> >Bob, > >I hope these topics hasn't been covered to death already, I tried to >read as much of every pertinent chapter and article as I could, but >between that and the manuals for individual items (Rocky Mountain Engine >Monitor, especially), I am still confused regarding grounding, shielding >and other nefarious things electrical (despite having 90% of a EE degree >and 10 years electronics manufacturing experience)... > >Background: Velocity RG aircraft, with factory-recommended automotive >alternator and LR-3B about to be wired in, along with some elements of >ControlVision's auto-resettable fuse board, 1 mag + 1 electronic >ignition, 1 vacuum system (although will probably change to all-electric >with backup alternator some day), Navaid wing-leveler... > >I am also using dual-side-sticks with Infinity grips, so I need quite a >few relays to handle the current of roll trim, pitch trim, landing >light, strobes, etc... I am therefore designing my own circuitboard to >hold the relays, fastening all except two connections (Bat and Gnd) to >be the Fast-On variety of electrical connection (and a 15-pin DB-type >connector for each stick grip's wiring). The board will be 1/8" FR4 >material, as used in high-vibration automotive environment. If you have ONE d-sub connector on the board then I wouldn't mix-match d-sub terminations =AND= fast-ons. Fast-on tabs are difficult to add to an etched circuit board and take up much more room than a d-sub. Run everything through d-subs. 1/8" board material is overkill. 1/16" will be fine. >My questions are legion, I will try to be quick and to the point. > >1) I would like to use the small DIP-style relays from DigiKey, able to >handle 12A or 16A on the contacts. Should these be sufficient? (Before >you say it, yes this will save me time, but more importantly - space. A >neighbor's Velocity had enormous headaches trying to find places to put >all the relays and the dozens of Fast-on connectors needed for them (not If they have contact ratings sufficient to control the load, they'll be fine . . . but ditch the fast-ons. >to mention troubleshooting them later), which I will avoid. Hopefully.) > >2) I already have an automotive alternator installed, as recommended by >the factory, and currently operating reliably on many Velocities. It is >a 60-Amp model with internal regulator. I could get a different >alternator without internal regulator, but so far can only find ones up >to 50-Amp that use the same mounting method. Can the LR-3B be used with >my current alternator, without disabling the internal regulator? No . . . you can add external ov protection to an alternator with built in regulator. See: http://209.134.106.21/articles/crowbar.pdf http://209.134.106.21/articles/bleadov.pdf >3) I currently have (2) 4-ga av-wire for the starting circuit (why 2 >wires? - long story) from the starter contactor up front (near the >battery), and a separate 8-ga from the alternator back to the main bus >up front. Without relocating the starter contactor with the engine in >back end running a short B-lead from the alternator to it, is there any >anti-alternator noise benefit to terminating the 8-ga wire at the >battery bus in the nose near the battery and running another (10-ga or >8-ga) from the battery to the main-bus in the cabin, rather than >terminating at the main-bus and/or battery-bus inside the cabin >directly? Not much . . . probably not worth the effort. If it were my airplane, I'd move the starter contactor back onto the firewall. >4) I originally had planned a 3/4" copper conduit as a plane-length >ground, and to carry wiring from the engine to the panel and nose areas >(wires from the hell-hole take another route), but the number/size of >wires quickly outgrew the space, and I was concerned that I was >introducing two additional bolt connections at each end of the conduit - >so I took it out and went to a single 15-foot 2-ga ground cable, from >the battery direct to the engine. If I put the conduit back in, what >kind of wires should be placed inside the conduit, for maximum >electrical noise avoidance effect? Don't put the conduit in. Use wire and run all wires from cabin to engine along the same pathway in the same bundle. >5) Related to #4 above, I noticed while preparing to wire the Rocky >Mountain engine monitor, that it calls for (9) 2-wire >twisted-pair-plus-shield, and (3) 3-wire(2-twisted)-plus-shield cables. >This makes the bundle enormous. Even the simple spst-switch-closure >alarm circuits call for 2-wire-twisted-plus-shield wire, and that seems >like huge overkill to me. What is a reasonable solution for switches >(assuming I do not use the conduit method)? 2-wire shielded (no twist)? >Single-conductor shielded, with shield as ground return? >Single-conductor shielded, with common ground? what about sensors such >as OilP, OilT, FuelP, MAP, Shadin fuel flow transducer, what kind of >shielding is typically necessary for those (the Velocity wiring guru >didn't recommend *any* shielding for these)? I know that the fuel pump >and strobe power really should have 2-twisted-wire-plus-shield, but what >about electronic ignition? (Also, I know the mag wire must be single >wire shielded, and the Alt-Field wire probably as well, although the >LR3B literature implies this may not be necessary.) When you strike out on pathways not mapped by the manufacturer's instructions, one assumes that he/she understands the system's design as well or better than the guy who built it. Given the level of understanding of many folk in the certified-iron world these days, it's not unusual for a manufacturer to understand little about some aspects of his own product . . . however, unless you have made a detailed analysis of the circuitry and deduced for yourself what is and is not useful to do, you nor I have any basis for making a logical decision about how we might deviate from the instructions. >(I am sorry to inflict upon you this flood of queries, but I get so many >different answers from different people..) Understand . . . >6) Related to #5 above, if I do go back to the conduit idea for >grounding, what are the best wires to run inside? The noisy ones (field, >alt B-lead, fuel-pump power, strobe power, electronic ignition?) to keep >the noise in, or the other ones (sensors, switches, etc) to keep the >noise out? In either case, what sensors can probably do without the >shield and/or shield separate from ground return, and/or twisted wiring? IF you use conduit, ALL wires run inside. If the conduit is not already installed, don't install it but run all wires together in same bundle and shield as called out by the manufacturer's instructions. >I would ask you these questions on the phone (probably lots faster to >answer on the phone than by typing), but perhaps there are more >questions out there like these from others, that could all be answered >at once... unfortunately, it will probably lead to more questions! > >Thanks very much for all your answers here, and for your availability to >consult, in some strange way it makes paying the $500 or $1000 I will >likely pay in the future easier, as I have already received so much in >return with your advice here.... No problem. . . >Thanks, >-John R. > >(P.S.: Perhaps the time savings are illusory as you say, but I still >like the Control Vision board idea... I am adding indicators for every >protected circuit near the load or switch controlling the load, so that >I know which item is going wrong. If I do indeed find little benefit >from the board, I do still have the fuseblocks I got from you so long >ago, so I can use those if necessary (maybe for >battery-bus/essential-bus items?) Not trying to be obtuse here . . . but once you stick other products into the equation, the mix and match of techniques and architectures becomes a difficult thing to rationalize. If you need a battery bus, obviously, the fuseblock will do the job as it's not part of the Control Vision system . . . but these sorts of decisions kind of hang you out on a limb . . . neither I nor Control Vision would be 100% comfortable with recommendations when the outcome has features over which we have no control. Let me know how you feel about it a year from now . . . or after you have made any major changes to architecture like the all-electric cockpit . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 21, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: FAR 23.1353 and airworthiness tests for batteries
>Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 08:46:54 -0600 >To: Schmeelkpg(at)aol.com >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> >Subject: Re: FAR 23.1353 and airworthiness tests for batteries > >>Bob, I attended your presentation on March 14-15, 1998, at Manassas Airport in Virginia. You probably remember me. I was the one in the brown leather jacket in the back row who never said anything. >> >>Anyway, I did pay attention to what you said, and I came away with the thought that an RG battery was better than a flooded cell battery for a variety of reasons. So when we needed a new battery for our 1968 Mooney M20F a few months ago, I recommended to the other five owners of the plane that we get an RG battery to replace it. We got the battery, but one of the owners noticed that the documentation with it (a Gill G35S) implied that the battery could not be considered airworthy unless we tested it to a load of 30 amps for 80 percent of 30 minutes (24 minutes) to see if it still read more that 10.5 volts. (I found the same documentation at the Gill web site after searching for a while. Concorde has a similar requirement.) >> >>The other owner contacted a maintenance shop that said the test would take two hours. The shop's labor fee is $60 per hour. The other owner also contacted AOPA and was told that since the literature said it was an annual requirement, it would have to be done at every annual or the plane would not be airworthy. The other owner had never seen a test like this before, and he thought that we should go back to a flooded cell battery at the one-year point because testing the RG battery would be too expensive. > > The paragraph in question: > > >(h) In the event of a complete loss of the primary electrical power >generating system, the battery must be capable of providing at least 30 >minutes of electrical power to those loads that are essential to continued >safe flight and landing. The 30 minute time period includes the time needed >for the pilots to recognize the loss of generated power and take appropriate >load shedding action. > > Keep in mind that Part 23 is a design requirement. The paragraph says > "must be capable of" . . . this means that when the original type certificate > holder or the holder of a supplemental type certificate proposed the battery > for inclusion on the aircraft, they must show by test or analysis that the > battery meets its intended purposes. > > No document that is produced by any manufacturer is a regulation nor does > it carry the force of a regulation. When periodic capacity checks are > mandated they will be described in an official document specific to > the airplane under the heading "Conditions for Continued Airworthiness". > > The words that describe the test and how often it is done have to be > part of the maintenance manual published by the manufacturer -or- > included in the STC obtained by the manufacturer of the product > being retrofitted to the airplane. > > The recommendations you are referring to are cover their ass > weasel words. For example, when I sell my LV monitor/voltammeter > kit, the instructions say something like, "we recommend you > check the calibration of this instrument every annual and > using the following procedure." Most won't bother. But should > someone come back years from now complaining that my gizmo > was way out of calibration, I can ask, "Did you do the recommended > calibration procedure last annual?" > > You are required to do a capacity check only if it's described > in detail in the STC paperwork along with a pass-fail criteria. > In this case, the test would become part of the airframe's > official requirements by supplementing the factory documents. > If you were using this airplane in some kind of flight for > hire operation, there may be OPERATIONAL requirements under > Part 121, 135, etc. that required periodic capacity checks > but I don't suppose the airplane will be used that way. > > >>I knew enough about batteries from your course to know that you recommend a capacity check along the lines in the Gill literature, but not necessarily at the 80 percent level. I found in FAR 23.1353 that in 1996 the FAA had added paragraph (h) with a seeming requirement for a capacity check, though the requirement apparently pertains to all storage batteries, including flooded cell batteries, and to "those loads that are essential to continued safe flight and landing," rather than 30 amps. I contacted Gill, Concorde, AOPA, Mooney, the FAA, and two shops to find out if the FAR actually required a capacity check. I got a wide range of opinions, none of them in agreement, from all but the FAA, which sent me an e-mail thanking me for my comments on airport security in the wake of the September 11 events. >> >>I recognize that you do electricity, not FARs, but I hope you can help me. I know that a capacity check is wise, but is it an airworthiness requirement? If it is a requirement, who determines the amperage load used in the check -- the FAA, the battery manufacturer, the aircraft manufacturer, the owner/operator, or someone else? In your opinion, what is the best and safest way to conduct the check? > > All good questions to which the answers are benign because > the requirement doesn't exist. Unless specified otherwise > in the POH, "loads that are essential to continued > safe flight and landing" need to be determined by those > who operate the airplane. See chapter 17 of my book which > you can download at: > > http://209.134.106.21/articles/Rev9/ch17-9.pdf > > You need to determine for you OWN gratification how > much stuff can be shut off in order to leave only those > things active that you NEED for comfortable continuation > of flight. For my money, the 30 minute requirement > in FAR 23.1353 is BS . . . you should be confident > that fuel is the only limit to endurance on your airplane > and you should know (1) how to shed loads to conserve > en route energy usage until airport is in sight and > (2) whether the battery capacity you have on board will > cut the mustard. It's really EASY to do in a homebuilt > but not impossible on certified iron. > > >>I might note that neither of the shops knew about the check, and I doubt that any of the general aviation aircraft at the two fields have ever had the check performed. I got opinions from Gill, Concorde, and AOPA that were less than professional, leaving me in doubt that anyone understands the 1996 amendment to FAR 23.1353, if they even saw it. > > A repair shop is not required to KNOW the design > regulations for an airplane beyond a rudimentary knowledge > of what they should do or not do to avoid compromising > some feature in an airplane upon which they are hammering. > EVERYTHING the mechanic is supposed to know comes right > out of the OPERATING documents . . . 100 hour inspection > checklists, overhaul manuals, service manuals, etc. > Since the periodic capacity check has never showed up > in a manual they had to follow, it's understandable that > they wouldn't know anything about it. > >>If you don't want to dabble in interpretation of the FARs, can you at least give me the name and number of a person to contact at the FAA who can understand that this is a legitimate question about electrical systems that affects all of general aviation? > > Like the IRS and other organizations we've grown to > know and love, the FAA's front line grunts that answer > telephones are endowed with no more ability for > intuitive, logical thought than folks dragged in > off the street. Call 10 different people and I'll bet > you get at least 5 different answers. > > Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 21, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: "How to safeguard your avionics"
> > >>On their "safeguard your avionics" page, >>http://www.aea.net/R1/Secure/guide2.pdf > >On this page they say to make sure the airframe static wicks and grounding >straps are in good condition. Are static wicks necessary in slower >(<200mph) aircraft? With respect to avionics, how do they help? If they >are needed, how do you go about determining position and quantity? Static wicks are a performance issue . . . not a safeguard issue. Depending on paint, speed and atmospheric conditions you can build a static charge on the airplane that will begin to bleed off in random fashion with so much local current in the discharge that it creates an interfering noise in receivers. There are no 100% rules for the numbers and placements of static wicks. Further, static wick performance can vary widely from manufacturer to manufacturer . . . for awhile at Raytheon, we had to do receiving inspection on every wick that came in the door to insure a minimum performance level. The ultimate solution for number and placement of wicks on some RAC/Beechcraft products was hard won after a lot of cut-n-try flight testing. By-and-large, don't worry about them until you find that you need them. Flying in snow, is the most difficult situation to endure. If your radios are still receiving well then you will not need them. If the prop tips start glowing blue and you get little fuzzy lighting streamers around the edges of the windscreen, then it's a pretty sure bet that you've got a problem that can probably be helped by installing wicks. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HCRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 23, 2002
Subject: Molex Type Connector Question
Bob or other knowledgeable person: I am planning my RV-6 slider instrument panel to be removable for service and I am considering the use of Molex connectors to facilitate separation of the wire bundles between the panel mounted switches, lights and instruments and the fuse blocks and all the other stuff mounted behind the panel. My wiring scheme is basically per Figure Z-11. I would use the detent lock style connectors with receptacles mounted in the subpanel and free hanging plugs. I have the following questions and will appreciate any helpful comments and suggestions: 1. Are these connectors acceptable for experimental aircraft use? 2. Is this a reasonable plan? 3. Are there any "gotchus" I should know about? Thanks in advance and for your continued good natured support of people with dumb questions like this. Harry Crosby Pleasanton, California RV-6, starting wiring. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 23, 2002
From: "Gary A. Sobek" <rv6flier(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Molex Type Connector Question
--- HCRV6(at)aol.com wrote: > > Bob or other knowledgeable person: I am planning my RV-6 slider > instrument > panel to be removable for service and I am considering the use of > Molex > connectors to facilitate separation of the wire bundles between the > panel > mounted switches, lights and instruments and the fuse blocks and all > the > other stuff mounted behind the panel. My wiring scheme is basically > per > Figure Z-11. I would use the detent lock style connectors with > receptacles > mounted in the subpanel and free hanging plugs. I have the following > > questions and will appreciate any helpful comments and suggestions: > > 1. Are these connectors acceptable for experimental aircraft use? > > 2. Is this a reasonable plan? > > 3. Are there any "gotchus" I should know about? > > Thanks in advance and for your continued good natured support of > people with > dumb questions like this. > > Harry Crosby > Pleasanton, California > RV-6, starting wiring. Harry: I am using Molex style Amp connectors exclusive in my airplane. So far, no problems but the airplane is only 4 years old and has only flown 1,000+ hours. It has only been to to the Arctic Circle once, coast to coast 5 times, to the highest airport in North America, and also to the lowest. There were no wire splices used in construction of my airplane. Molex style connectors were used in their place. One thing I did was to have as few connections as possible. Every connection is a potential failure point. With that said, only add connectors where needed. My harness stays with the airplane. (RV-6 slider) The switches are removable from the panel and the radio stack stays in the airplane. The instruments all come out individually and the panel is removable but no wires come with it. Can one work on a panel like I describe above? Yes. I removed my Apollo GPS 360 and KX-125 and replaced them with SL-30, GX-60, ACU, MD200-306 indicator, NavAid, new vacuum regulator, new vacuum filters, new vacuum lines, and a new SigmaTek AI with 8 degree tilt. The vacuum system was in the airplane but was time to clean or replace the lines and filters. Suction regulator was one of three items that was installed used in the airplane. I now only have one used item left as two out of three have failed. I sold the GPS last week. Need to advertise the KX-125 and sell it. If you use Molex style connectors, purchase extra contacts along with the contact removal tool. There are several different size contacts and several different styles that are not interchangeable. I prefer to use in line or in harness connectors instead of having a receptacle mounted in a piece of metal. It is extra work to install the receptacle into a mount. Do it if you think it is worth the extra work. ===== Gary A. Sobek "My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell, 1,002.9+ Flying Hours So. CA, USA http://SoCAL_WVAF.tripod.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ronnie Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Molex Type Connector Question
Date: Jan 23, 2002
Yes, the Molex connectors are acceptable. But, I'd recommend the Amphenol plastic Circular Connectors. (do a search on these at www.digi-key.com) They don't cost much more than the Molex connectors and they have a very positive twist lock feature. I wired my Velocity instrument panel using the Molex's before someone showed me the Circular Connectors. I replaced them and am very happy with the change. ----- Original Message ----- From: <HCRV6(at)aol.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Molex Type Connector Question > > Bob or other knowledgeable person: I am planning my RV-6 slider instrument > panel to be removable for service and I am considering the use of Molex > connectors to facilitate separation of the wire bundles between the panel > mounted switches, lights and instruments and the fuse blocks and all the > other stuff mounted behind the panel. My wiring scheme is basically per > Figure Z-11. I would use the detent lock style connectors with receptacles > mounted in the subpanel and free hanging plugs. I have the following > questions and will appreciate any helpful comments and suggestions: > > 1. Are these connectors acceptable for experimental aircraft use? > > 2. Is this a reasonable plan? > > 3. Are there any "gotchus" I should know about? > > Thanks in advance and for your continued good natured support of people with > dumb questions like this. > > Harry Crosby > Pleasanton, California > RV-6, starting wiring. > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 23, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Molex Type Connector Question
> >Yes, the Molex connectors are acceptable. > >But, I'd recommend the Amphenol plastic Circular Connectors. (do a search on >these at www.digi-key.com) > >They don't cost much more than the Molex connectors and they have a very >positive twist lock feature. > >I wired my Velocity instrument panel using the Molex's before someone showed >me the Circular Connectors. I replaced them and am very happy with the >change. I agree. If you need multi-pin connectors, the circular plastic Tyco/AMP connectors are much easier to work with than the Waldom/Molex and they use superior contact materials. See page 146 of the Digikey Catalog at: http://info.digikey.com/T021/V5/145-147.pdf The Series 1 connectors use formed pins capable of more current than the Series 2. Series 1 pins can be installed with the B&C's BCT-1 crimp tool. http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#bct-1 My personal favorites are the Series 2 that use the same machined (or formed) pins as D-sub connectors. You can install and remove these pins with the same tools as D-subs. B&C RCT-3 crimp tool at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#rct-3 and DSE-1 extraction tool at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#dse-1 A typical Series 1 connector can be viewed at: http://catalog.tycoelectronics.com/TE/docs/pdf/9/14/167419.pdf A Series 2 is at: http://catalog.tycoelectronics.com/TE/docs/pdf/1/30/215031.pdf Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 24, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Molex Type Connector Question
> >Bob or other knowledgeable person: I am planning my RV-6 slider instrument >panel to be removable for service and I am considering the use of Molex >connectors to facilitate separation of the wire bundles between the panel >mounted switches, lights and instruments and the fuse blocks and all the >other stuff mounted behind the panel. My wiring scheme is basically per >Figure Z-11. I would use the detent lock style connectors with receptacles >mounted in the subpanel and free hanging plugs. I have the following >questions and will appreciate any helpful comments and suggestions: > >1. Are these connectors acceptable for experimental aircraft use? The Waldom/Molex connectors are the same genre' as AMP Mate-n-Locks. They've been used on automotive -AND- aircraft for over 35 years. >2. Is this a reasonable plan? I like to minimize the use of connectors where ever possible. Every connector adds three new joints to every wire. Would a wire bundle with say 12" of slack in it let you pull a panel down and tie it out of the way without using a connector? >3. Are there any "gotchus" I should know about? Nothing real serious. Minimize parts count and labor when you can but if a connector is really necessary to your goals, consider the circular plastic connectors cited in a couple of other posts to the list. They offer gold plated contacts and superior low cost tooling for very little additional cost. Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 24, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: current limiter in b-lead
Bob, Your new Fig. Z-22 shows an ANL current limiter in the b-lead when using a Skytec starter. I assume this wire run would only go from the alternator to the built-in starter solinoid and thus be fairly short.(Reference your fig. Z-14, rev.8) Would the circuit protection still be necessary and if so at which end to protect which device/length of wire? Yeah . . . we're concerned about shorted diodes in the alternator . . . here the source of power that blows the fuse is the battery. Without a PM starter system doesn't your circuit protection get put near the normal starter solenoid? Yes, because the b-lead needs protection from battery. With the PM starter, the b-lead is so short (rear of alternator to fat terminal on starter) that it's more a matter of mechanical convenience as to how the fuse is installed. For this application, I think I'd stay with the fast JJN/JJS series fuses covered with heat shrink . . . this combo is a bit easier to work with in the small space and closer quarters behind the starter and alternator. Bob . . . ------------------------------------------------------- < Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition > < of man. Advances which permit this norm to be > < exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the > < work of an extremely small minority, frequently > < despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed> < by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny > < minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes > < happens) is driven out of a society, the people then> < slip back into abject poverty. > < > < This is known as "bad luck". > < -Lazarus Long- > <-----------------------------------------------------> http://www.aeroelectric.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Robinson" <jbr(at)hitechnetworks.net>
Date: Jan 24, 2002
Subject: Re: current limiter in b-lead
Bob I have a SkyTek starter that was given to me and is good condition. Is this a PM starter? What special conditions are necessary with this starter? I was going to use a B&C starter but couldn't pass up the deal. Jim ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HCRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 26, 2002
Subject: Dumb Vacuum Pump Question
I'm looking at the Rapco vacuum system kit from Spruce and I see I have to specify whether I want a 215 CC pump or a 216 CW pump. Would some kind soul take pity and tell me which I need for an O-360 A1A, and why. Please no lectures about the merits of all electric, all of life requires trade offs. Harry Crosby Pleasanton, California RV-6, finish kit stuff ________________________________________________________________________________
From: FlyV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 26, 2002
Subject: Re: Dumb Vacuum Pump Question
In a message dated 1/26/2002 2:28:51 PM Pacific Standard Time, HCRV6(at)aol.com writes: << I'm looking at the Rapco vacuum system kit from Spruce and I see I have to specify whether I want a 215 CC pump or a 216 CW pump. Would some kind soul take pity and tell me which I need for an O-360 A1A, and why. Please no lectures about the merits of all electric, all of life requires trade offs. Harry Crosby Pleasanton, California RV-6, finish kit stuff >> You want a 215CC because it turns counterclockwise, which is what you need for your Lycoming. You may have an older style 211CC on there now. Cliff A&P/IA ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net>
Subject: Two Infinity grips - only one active at a time
Date: Jan 26, 2002
Bob and others, I have two Infinity grips and I want to be able to perform certain functions from (only) one or the other. I plan to put a toggle switch on the panel to control the "Infinity in command". I found a wiring diagram in the archives and built a box with two relays to control my flaps and it works fine on the bench in single (Infinity) grip mode. Can you explain how I can accomplish this? Thanks in advance, Tom Barnes -6 wiring ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 27, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Two Infinity grips - only one active at a time
> >Bob and others, > I have two Infinity grips and I want to be able to perform certain >functions from (only) one or the other. I plan to put a toggle switch >on the panel to control the "Infinity in command". > I found a wiring diagram in the archives and built a box with two >relays to control my flaps and it works fine on the bench in single >(Infinity) grip mode. Can you explain how I can accomplish this? > >Thanks in advance, > Tom Barnes -6 wiring Without knowing how many total circuits run through your stick grip switches and how they vary in function (pull up to bus, pull down to ground, logic level signals to black boxes, etc) I can say that the worst case scenario involves an umpteen pole, double throw switch to transfer each switching function back and forth between grips where the number umpteen represents the total number of switched functions. On some aircraft I've worked on, we designed "pilot priority" circuits such that if any single function is being commanded by both pilot and copilot controls, the pilot's controls had priority over the copilot's. Kind of slick as bells and whistle go but in my not so humble opinion, not very elegant. The added complexity of such systems adds failure modes and doesn't add much in the way of safety or convenience. When two people are likely to have their hands on the controls, it's a foregone and preflight briefed conclusion that "I HAVE THE AIRPLANE!" is the other guy's clue to drop what he is doing and let loose. The likelihood of having to use this tool very often is rare. Having said that, if you'd want to fax drawings of all the switches and circuits, I could sketch out the necessary goodies and wiring to do the job . . . If it were my airplane, I'd budget the time and dollars need for this effort toward a better looking paint job . . . Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net>
Subject: Re: Two Infinity grips - only one active at a time
Date: Jan 27, 2002
Bob, Thanks for your input. The man that sells the Infinity grip has led me to believe it was as simple as a "single switch" but in the same breath, he said he was not a techie and didn't know exactly how to do it. Because my panel has already been designed and cut and labeled for the switch, I will plan to limit the switch to just the flap up and flap down functions and next week will fax to you the schematic. Thanks again, Tom Barnes -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Two Infinity grips - only one active at a time > >Bob and others, > I have two Infinity grips and I want to be able to perform certain >functions from (only) one or the other. I plan to put a toggle switch >on the panel to control the "Infinity in command". > I found a wiring diagram in the archives and built a box with two >relays to control my flaps and it works fine on the bench in single >(Infinity) grip mode. Can you explain how I can accomplish this? > >Thanks in advance, > Tom Barnes -6 wiring Without knowing how many total circuits run through your stick grip switches and how they vary in function (pull up to bus, pull down to ground, logic level signals to black boxes, etc) I can say that the worst case scenario involves an umpteen pole, double throw switch to transfer each switching function back and forth between grips where the number umpteen represents the total number of switched functions. On some aircraft I've worked on, we designed "pilot priority" circuits such that if any single function is being commanded by both pilot and copilot controls, the pilot's controls had priority over the copilot's. Kind of slick as bells and whistle go but in my not so humble opinion, not very elegant. The added complexity of such systems adds failure modes and doesn't add much in the way of safety or convenience. When two people are likely to have their hands on the controls, it's a foregone and preflight briefed conclusion that "I HAVE THE AIRPLANE!" is the other guy's clue to drop what he is doing and let loose. The likelihood of having to use this tool very often is rare. Having said that, if you'd want to fax drawings of all the switches and circuits, I could sketch out the necessary goodies and wiring to do the job . . . If it were my airplane, I'd budget the time and dollars need for this effort toward a better looking paint job . . . Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= = = = http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list = ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 27, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: RE: Two Infinity grips - only one active at a time
> >Bob, > Thanks for your input. The man that sells the Infinity grip has >led me to believe it was as simple as a "single switch" but in the same >breath, he said he was not a techie and didn't know exactly how to do >it. > Because my panel has already been designed and cut and labeled >for the switch, I will plan to limit the switch to just the flap up and >flap down functions and next week will fax to you the schematic. There is a scenario where a single switch might get it. You need to arrange for ALL of the controlled devices to become activated by means of a switch closure to ground. This means that if you have 6 functions in the stick grip, there would be 6 wires plus a ground that would interface the switch to the system. In this case, a simple single pole, double throw switch could be used to complete the ground to one or the other grip but not both. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 27, 2002
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Battery management module or isolation
Browing the archive, I read about an individual who had an alternator failure on one flight. It was shorted and the breaker did not trip (in a Cessna). The battery went dead in seconds but he was able to land safely because he was using old technology, not the new stuff that depends on electricity. This made me think about the dual-battery setup... with the two contactors closed, I could see the two batteries going dead the same way as he experienced. And then, I read Bob's article "WHAT'S ALL THIS BATTERY ISOLATOR STUFF ANYHOW"? Figure 2 presents a configuration with a battery management module which would open the aux battery contactor immediately on alternator failure. Would this module really prevent damaging (or draining) the second battery in an alternator short situation where the fuse or breaker did achieve its duty? Bob, is this a module commercially available either from you or other sources? As an alternative, a friend is using a DC to DC converter to constantly charge his aux battery. The input of the converter is 9 to 75 volts and the output is 15 volts then regulated to 14v. The battery is not normally feeding the bus, but it can help during starting, thanks to an additional starter contactor. I can see that with his setup, the aux battery would be completely isolated from any main bus or alternator failure during operations. Any opinion on that? Thanks! Michel ===== ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 27, 2002
From: tom sargent <sarg314(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: fuel line support -6A
I'm routing the fuel line from the tank to the selector valve in a 6A. According to the AC413.13 book that's long enough to require a support (16" run is the limit). Affixing a clamp to the smaller gear weldment tubes would work, but I certainly don't want to drill any holes in those tubes. Does any one know of a good way to attach an adel clamp (or other clamp) to the gear weldment without drilling any holes in the weldment's tube? Or perhaps there's a better place to attach a support? -- Tom Sargent. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 27, 2002
From: "Tom..." <tsled(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: RE: Two Infinity grips - only one active at a
time Hold on guys! Most switches are "Break/Make" which means that the GND will be removed for a split second before the other sides control grip, switches, GNDs kick in. And, what if the switches on the other grip are not set the same??? I think it is a bit more complicated than you first think. Tom... "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote: > > > > >Bob, > > Thanks for your input. The man that sells the Infinity grip has > >led me to believe it was as simple as a "single switch" but in the same > >breath, he said he was not a techie and didn't know exactly how to do > >it. > > Because my panel has already been designed and cut and labeled > >for the switch, I will plan to limit the switch to just the flap up and > >flap down functions and next week will fax to you the schematic. > > There is a scenario where a single switch might get it. You need > to arrange for ALL of the controlled devices to become activated > by means of a switch closure to ground. This means that if you have > 6 functions in the stick grip, there would be 6 wires plus a ground > that would interface the switch to the system. In this case, a simple > single pole, double throw switch could be used to complete the > ground to one or the other grip but not both. > > Bob . . . > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 27, 2002
From: ripsteel(at)edge.net (Mark Phillips)
Subject: Re: fuel line support -6A
Perhaps you could put one adel clamp around the gear mount tube, then another around the gas line adjusted so the holes in the two clamps coincide, insert one screw through both, and voila', instant support. Not really sure if this is acceptable practice, but it would be a "support"! From the PossumWorks Mark -6A fuse tom sargent wrote: > > I'm routing the fuel line from the tank to the selector valve in a 6A. > According to the AC413.13 book that's long enough to require a support > (16" run is the limit). Affixing a clamp to the smaller gear weldment > tubes would work, but I certainly don't want to drill any holes in those > tubes. > > Does any one know of a good way to attach an adel clamp (or other clamp) > to the gear weldment without drilling any holes in the weldment's tube? > Or perhaps there's a better place to attach a support? > -- > Tom Sargent. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Vincent Welch" <welchvincent(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: fuel line support -6A
Date: Jan 27, 2002
On the -8A Van shows a -12 adel clamp around the gear leg weldment attached by a #8 screw and nut to a -6 adel clamp. The -6 is used to support the fuel line. Vince Welch RV-8A Finish Kit >From: tom sargent <sarg314(at)earthlink.net> >Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com >To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: AeroElectric-List: fuel line support -6A >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 14:33:18 -0700 > > > >I'm routing the fuel line from the tank to the selector valve in a 6A. >According to the AC413.13 book that's long enough to require a support >(16" run is the limit). Affixing a clamp to the smaller gear weldment >tubes would work, but I certainly don't want to drill any holes in those >tubes. > >Does any one know of a good way to attach an adel clamp (or other clamp) >to the gear weldment without drilling any holes in the weldment's tube? >Or perhaps there's a better place to attach a support? >-- >Tom Sargent. > > >http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 27, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: RE: Two Infinity grips - only one
active at a time > >Hold on guys! Most switches are "Break/Make" which means that the GND will be removed for a split >second before the other sides control grip, switches, GNDs kick in. And, what if the switches on >the other grip are not set the same??? I think it is a bit more complicated than you first think. > >Tom... What is the scenario wherein you perceive the momentary ground interruption to be a problem? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 27, 2002
From: "Tom..." <tsled(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: RE: Two Infinity grips - only one active at
atime Hiya Mr. Bob, Mr. Tom wrote he wanted to "perform certain functions" and that he had "built a box with two relays to control my flaps". What I am saying is that he has a lot of variables going and with out knowing types of relays (like you said (pull up or pulled down)) and switches (to +12v or to GND) he is using for whatever, my best guess is a single switch will not cut it. And what if he has his flaps switch set on one control and not on the other and then flips "the switch" on short final? Again, too many variables. Tom... Check out my Home Web Page at: http://home.pacbell.net/tsled "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote: > > > > >Hold on guys! Most switches are "Break/Make" which means that the GND will be removed for a split > >second before the other sides control grip, switches, GNDs kick in. And, what if the switches on > >the other grip are not set the same??? I think it is a bit more complicated than you first think. > > > >Tom... > > What is the scenario wherein you perceive the momentary > ground interruption to be a problem? > > Bob . . . > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 27, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Battery management module or isolation
> > >Browing the archive, I read about an individual who >had an alternator failure on one flight. It was >shorted and the breaker did not trip (in a Cessna). >The battery went dead in seconds but he was able to >land safely because he was using old technology, not >the new stuff that depends on electricity. If his battery had any snort left, it would have tripped the breaker. Here's a classic case where the battery was run years past operational failure . . . >This made me think about the dual-battery setup... >with the two contactors closed, I could see the two >batteries going dead the same way as he experienced. Not if you maintain your system with the most rudimentary of battery change out protocols. >And then, I read Bob's article "WHAT'S ALL THIS >BATTERY ISOLATOR STUFF ANYHOW"? > >Figure 2 presents a configuration with a battery >management module which would open the aux battery >contactor immediately on alternator failure. > >Would this module really prevent damaging (or >draining) the second battery in an alternator short >situation where the fuse or breaker did achieve its >duty? Sure . . . but (1) if you have any active notification of alternator failure, maintain the battery such that it gets replaced either (a) when capacity drops below that required to keep the e-bus running 3-4 hours or (b) new one every year in main slot, move main battery to aux slot. For my money, one battery and two alternators is head and shoulders above any of the alternatives. See the article for All Electric Airplane on a Budget. >Bob, is this a module commercially available either >from you or other sources? No, I've had so few requests for them, I've not been able to justify the time and expense of bringing it to production. I'm working on a do-it- yerself gizmo that you can build with Radio Shack parts. >As an alternative, a friend is using a DC to DC >converter to constantly charge his aux battery. The >input of the converter is 9 to 75 volts and the output >is 15 volts then regulated to 14v. The battery is not >normally feeding the bus, but it can help during >starting, thanks to an additional starter contactor. >I can see that with his setup, the aux battery would >be completely isolated from any main bus or alternator >failure during operations. To complicated, too expensive, too heavy . . . we can do better than this. Your questions and concerns at the outset of this discussion were based upon a series of events wherein the owner/operator of the airplane either didn't understand or didn't care about how the system worked and allowed it to degrade to a condition I haven't seen a shorted alternator diode in over 20 years . . . Don't think B&C has seen one ever on their ND reworks. The airplane cited in the opening paragraph probably still had the 1960's style, Ford junk alternator (for which there are several STC'd diode replacements that promise to be more robust) and a poorly maintained, flooded- cell battery. These are interesting stories but only from the perspective of how sad the technology and technical acumen of the certified world stacks the odds against comfortable completion of flight when something breaks. Latest AOPA pilot has yet another similar story. I believe the folks who participate in this list agree with me that we're building the finest airplanes to have ever flown. Further, I think we share a goal of removing the word EMERGENCY from the lexicon of our speech about electrical systems. Our mission is NOT to figure out how to deal with the problem of the past when they happen on our new airplanes. The mission is to understand how they happened in the paste and design both the system and the pilot's understanding so that they DON'T happen again in the future. >Any opinion on that? Yep . . . you got it. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: fuel line support -6A
Date: Jan 27, 2002
Double ty-wraps work also. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Phillips" <ripsteel(at)edge.net> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: fuel line support -6A Perhaps you could put one adel clamp around the gear mount tube, then another around the gas line adjusted so the holes in the two clamps coincide, insert one screw through both, and voila', instant support. Not really sure if this is acceptable practice, but it would be a "support"! From the PossumWorks Mark -6A fuse tom sargent wrote: > > I'm routing the fuel line from the tank to the selector valve in a 6A. > According to the AC413.13 book that's long enough to require a support > (16" run is the limit). Affixing a clamp to the smaller gear weldment > tubes would work, but I certainly don't want to drill any holes in those > tubes. > > Does any one know of a good way to attach an adel clamp (or other clamp) > to the gear weldment without drilling any holes in the weldment's tube? > Or perhaps there's a better place to attach a support? > -- > Tom Sargent. > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 27, 2002
From: Steve Kay <skay(at)optonline.net>
Subject: Re: fuel line support -6A
Double Ty-Raps are not an acceptable method. Hoses ty-rapped to engine mounts have been known to saw thru the steel mount due to oil and grit along with vibration. The adel to adel clamp method as outlined by Mark is standard aircraft methodology -Steve Cy Galley wrote: > > Double ty-wraps work also. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark Phillips" <ripsteel(at)edge.net> > To: > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: fuel line support -6A > > > Perhaps you could put one adel clamp around the gear mount tube, then > another > around the gas line adjusted so the holes in the two clamps coincide, insert > one > screw through both, and voila', instant support. Not really sure if this is > acceptable practice, but it would be a "support"! > > >From the PossumWorks > Mark -6A fuse > > tom sargent wrote: > > > > > > I'm routing the fuel line from the tank to the selector valve in a 6A. > > According to the AC413.13 book that's long enough to require a support > > (16" run is the limit). Affixing a clamp to the smaller gear weldment > > tubes would work, but I certainly don't want to drill any holes in those > > tubes. > > > > Does any one know of a good way to attach an adel clamp (or other clamp) > > to the gear weldment without drilling any holes in the weldment's tube? > > Or perhaps there's a better place to attach a support? > > -- > > Tom Sargent. > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Matthew Mucker" <matthew(at)mucker.net>
Subject: RE: Two Infinity grips - only one active at a time
Date: Jan 27, 2002
> Hold on guys! Most switches are "Break/Make" which means that > the GND will be removed for a split > second before the other sides control grip, switches, GNDs kick > in. And, what if the switches on > the other grip are not set the same??? I think it is a bit more > complicated than you first think. > > Tom... > That's exactly what you'd want. Let's say pilot has flaps up set, and copilot has flaps down set. The toggle is set to pilot side and flaps start going up. If the switch is flipped, and it's a break-before-make switch, there's an open circuit (no electricity flows) for an instant as the pilot's switch is cut out and the copilot's switch is cut in. Flaps start going down. If the toggle is a make-before-break, then there's an instant where the flaps motor is getting an "up" command from the pilot at the same time it's getting a "down" command from the copilot. Depending on how this is wired, it's very likely this results in a dead short to the power supply. A Very Bad Thing. I think that a break-before-make is what you'd want here. Ultimately, the solution is not to have duplicate controls. With one flaps switch on the center console, there's no doubt in anyone's mind which switch is commanding, and no possibility of confusion. And it's simpler and has fewer parts that could break and therefore fewer failure modes. Oops! I think I'm becoming a "disciple of Bob" here! -Matt ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Battery management module or isolation
Date: Jan 27, 2002
It is always amazing to me how the unique failure, the once in several lifetimes event, the fluke that happens under very unusual circumstances evokes a solution that will in all probability screw up conventional protections against "normal" failures. These schemes become complex, heavy, expensive, and for what? Something that the normal flyer will never experience in a 1000 years. Something that probably no one else has experienced. When one does the research, many of these unique happenings turn out to be an "urban legend," the figment of a vivid imagination. Just because it was published on the internet DOESN'T make it true. Always think of K.I.S.S. until the aberration goes away. Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh Editor, EAA Safety Programs cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org Always looking for articles for the Experimenter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery management module or isolation > > >Browing the archive, I read about an individual who >had an alternator failure on one flight. It was >shorted and the breaker did not trip (in a Cessna). >The battery went dead in seconds but he was able to >land safely because he was using old technology, not >the new stuff that depends on electricity. If his battery had any snort left, it would have tripped the breaker. Here's a classic case where the battery was run years past operational failure . . . >This made me think about the dual-battery setup... >with the two contactors closed, I could see the two >batteries going dead the same way as he experienced. Not if you maintain your system with the most rudimentary of battery change out protocols. >And then, I read Bob's article "WHAT'S ALL THIS >BATTERY ISOLATOR STUFF ANYHOW"? > >Figure 2 presents a configuration with a battery >management module which would open the aux battery >contactor immediately on alternator failure. > >Would this module really prevent damaging (or >draining) the second battery in an alternator short >situation where the fuse or breaker did achieve its >duty? Sure . . . but (1) if you have any active notification of alternator failure, maintain the battery such that it gets replaced either (a) when capacity drops below that required to keep the e-bus running 3-4 hours or (b) new one every year in main slot, move main battery to aux slot. For my money, one battery and two alternators is head and shoulders above any of the alternatives. See the article for All Electric Airplane on a Budget. >Bob, is this a module commercially available either >from you or other sources? No, I've had so few requests for them, I've not been able to justify the time and expense of bringing it to production. I'm working on a do-it- yerself gizmo that you can build with Radio Shack parts. >As an alternative, a friend is using a DC to DC >converter to constantly charge his aux battery. The >input of the converter is 9 to 75 volts and the output >is 15 volts then regulated to 14v. The battery is not >normally feeding the bus, but it can help during >starting, thanks to an additional starter contactor. >I can see that with his setup, the aux battery would >be completely isolated from any main bus or alternator >failure during operations. To complicated, too expensive, too heavy . . . we can do better than this. Your questions and concerns at the outset of this discussion were based upon a series of events wherein the owner/operator of the airplane either didn't understand or didn't care about how the system worked and allowed it to degrade to a condition I haven't seen a shorted alternator diode in over 20 years . . . Don't think B&C has seen one ever on their ND reworks. The airplane cited in the opening paragraph probably still had the 1960's style, Ford junk alternator (for which there are several STC'd diode replacements that promise to be more robust) and a poorly maintained, flooded- cell battery. These are interesting stories but only from the perspective of how sad the technology and technical acumen of the certified world stacks the odds against comfortable completion of flight when something breaks. Latest AOPA pilot has yet another similar story. I believe the folks who participate in this list agree with me that we're building the finest airplanes to have ever flown. Further, I think we share a goal of removing the word EMERGENCY from the lexicon of our speech about electrical systems. Our mission is NOT to figure out how to deal with the problem of the past when they happen on our new airplanes. The mission is to understand how they happened in the paste and design both the system and the pilot's understanding so that they DON'T happen again in the future. >Any opinion on that? Yep . . . you got it. Bob . . . http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 27, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Two Infinity grips - only one active at atime
> >Hiya Mr. Bob, > >Mr. Tom wrote he wanted to "perform certain functions" and that he had "built a box with two relays to >control my flaps". What I am saying is that he has a lot of variables going and with out knowing types >of relays (like you said (pull up or pulled down)) and switches (to +12v or to GND) he is using for >whatever, my best guess is a single switch will not cut it. > >And what if he has his flaps switch set on one control and not on the other and then flips "the switch" >on short final? Again, too many variables. Oh . . okay, that's what I'd told him earlier when I'd asked to see the schematic for what he wanted to control. I don't really like the idea for the switch for the reasons you mentioned . . . and others. We'll see if we can figure out a way to make it as surprise- proof as possible. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 27, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: RE: Two Infinity grips - only one active at a time
> >> Hold on guys! Most switches are "Break/Make" which means that >> the GND will be removed for a split >> second before the other sides control grip, switches, GNDs kick >> in. And, what if the switches on >> the other grip are not set the same??? I think it is a bit more >> complicated than you first think. >> >> Tom... >> > >That's exactly what you'd want. > >Let's say pilot has flaps up set, and copilot has flaps down set. > >The toggle is set to pilot side and flaps start going up. > >If the switch is flipped, and it's a break-before-make switch, there's an >open circuit (no electricity flows) for an instant as the pilot's switch is >cut out and the copilot's switch is cut in. Flaps start going down. > >If the toggle is a make-before-break, then there's an instant where the >flaps motor is getting an "up" command from the pilot at the same time it's >getting a "down" command from the copilot. Depending on how this is wired, >it's very likely this results in a dead short to the power supply. A Very >Bad Thing. > >I think that a break-before-make is what you'd want here. > >Ultimately, the solution is not to have duplicate controls. With one flaps >switch on the center console, there's no doubt in anyone's mind which switch >is commanding, and no possibility of confusion. > >And it's simpler and has fewer parts that could break and therefore fewer >failure modes. > >Oops! I think I'm becoming a "disciple of Bob" here! Bless you my son . . . . I'm still agonizing over whether or not to help this thing move forward. Trim systems NEED to be accessible to both pilots and they should not be so fast that inadvertent operation is a hair-raising event. Further, being momentary push-to-command-motion systems, there's no way to leave a trim system in a condition that becomes and unhappy surprise to the other pilot. I've had a number of builders wanting to put starter push buttons and flaps on the stick . . . if it's pilot's stick only it might not be so bad but having these controls on two sticks give one pause . . . I've got something between 1500-2000 hours and I can't imagine ever wanting to have such easy access to anything other than trim, intercom PTT, radio PTT, and maybe xponder ident and frequency flip flop . . . and even the last two are very low on the convenience list and high on the list of nuisance- inadvertent operations. Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 27, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Battery management module or isolation
> >It is always amazing to me how the unique failure, the once in several >lifetimes event, the fluke that happens under very unusual circumstances >evokes a solution that will in all probability screw up conventional >protections against "normal" failures. These schemes become complex, heavy, >expensive, and for what? Something that the normal flyer will never >experience in a 1000 years. Something that probably no one else has >experienced. > >When one does the research, many of these unique happenings turn out to be >an "urban legend," the figment of a vivid imagination. Just because it was >published on the internet DOESN'T make it true. Always think of K.I.S.S. >until the aberration goes away. > >Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh Agreed! My personal favorite came into being when the FAA became alarmed at the number of battery fires in airplanes fitted with Ni-Cad batteries. These critters have a negative temperature coefficient for ideal charging voltage. Further, they will readily accept a whole lot of amps of recharge current from the starter generator on a turbine engine. Without going into a lot of details about the root cause of the battery fires, it's sufficient to say that in any airplane with any battery the #1 task of the voltage regulator is to take care of a battery. Instead of mandating a voltage regulator with current and temperature sensing to anticipate and prevent battery overheat and subsequent fires, the wisdom of the moment called for adding a panel mounted readout of battery temperature and additions to the POH instructing the pilot how to manage battery overheating situations. We increased system complexity, cost and added to pilot workload when the technology to do the elegant thing was laying on the ground to be picked up and applied in a manner that was totally transparent to the pilot. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 28, 2002
Subject: transfer switch; and dual batteries
From: Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net>
on 1/28/02 02:51, AeroElectric-List Digest Server at aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com wrote: > Two Infinity grips - only one active at a time RE: "What happens when the transfer switch is thrown and the other pilot's switch is set differently...." The DC-9's I used to fly had an autopilot transfer switch. Many cups of coffee were spilled when the pilot-flying would be about to leave the flight deck... and would give the 'you have control' signal. If the co-pilot failed to coordinate his heading bug to the current aircraft heading before the autopilot inputs were passed to his side, some sudden and surprising roll-rates were triggered! fwiw > This made me think about the dual-battery setup... Last summer during my aircraft's test flying program, I experienced a failure of the drive/belt/pulley on my alternator while at an 'away' airport. I have an CAM100 (Honda auto conversion) with dual electronic ignition system, so I had to consider carefully if flight home without the alternator was a go or no-go item. My electrical system is patterned after Bob's 'dual RGB battery' system (with some mods for to the electronic ignition). I was able to keep Batt2, that feeds the ignition system, in isolation (i.e. master switchs OFF), and use the ESS BUS supply switch to connect Batt1 directly to the essential items required for flight. I had a pretty good idea of how long Batt2 could keep my engine running (i.e. much much longer than the ten minute flight home), and I could use the radios, etc. with no fear of ever killing my engine due to running down the battery.) It was just a short flight (which was good because even though I KNEW it was supposed to work like this, I'd never tested it before!) but it did prove the concept of having an alternator failure in flight, and being able to confidently finish the flight. So, thanks to Bob's design idea, I was able to safely ferry my aircraft home and avoid expensive taxis/hassels/repairs away from home base. Thanks again, Bob. (The only 'addition' I think I'll make from this experience, is to add a way to read Batt2 voltage independantly - just to give me a warm feeling that it's holding as expected ;-) -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca>
Subject: 2 stick grips, 1 flap switch
Date: Jan 28, 2002
Cheers, In case the abject logic of Bob's (and others') didn't put 'paid' to the account, why don't we note the number of airliners with two flap switches, one for each flyer. I've never seen one. Now mebbe we could look at the B47 (tandem pilot seats) but five'll get you ten it was an interlinked mechanical lever, just like the Harvard (T6). Ferg diesel Europa ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Nancy and Walter Shipley" <wshipley(at)esper.com>
Subject: Fried OV spike supression diode
Date: Jan 28, 2002
Bob, when I did my initial engine start yesterday, a puff of white smoke rose from the spike supression diode on my ov contactor. When I checked, I found the diode cracked and white residue on the contactor. Obviously, I had a spike in voltage, but why? To give you some background, I have an RV8A with an IO-360 engine, an Odyssey PC 625 RG battery (17ah), a nippon dinso alternator with built-in voltage regulator, and I wired in your OV contactor per your schematic entitled "OV PROTECTION FOR BUILT-IN REGULATOR." During this initial engine start, the engine ran quite rough. I don't know if this is related to the diode frying or whether it's due to improper ignition timing or ??? Any input you have will be greatly appreciated.............. Walt Shipley P.S. I will need another spike supression diode to install once the problem is solved, can I get that from you? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 28, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: RE: a few questions for you
>I ordered 2 of your S704-1 relays. How do I wire those? They have 2 'On' >connectors, 2 'Com' connectors and one unlabeled connector. The little terminals are for the coil of the relay. These are interchangeable. The fat terminals are for the switched contacts and they too are interchangeable. If you want to add a diode across the coil terminals for spike suppression (not a bit issue but easy to do too) you can install a 1N400x diode (from radio shack) as shown on http://209.134.106.21/articles/s704inst.jpg >I also have one of the B&C OV protection devices (LR3B-14). I noticed in >the wiring instructions that there is a temperature probe connection for the >battery. Is this available as an option? If not, is there a thermometer >inside the unit that regulates the voltage presented to the battery? In >other words, should the OV protection unit be located in the same climate >(in the cockpit) as the battery? I wrote once before about this but my >question wasn't very clear - still on a vertical learning curve. There is an optional battery temperature probe available for the LR3B series regulators. Unless you plan to spend hours cruising at the rarified altitudes wherein you might cold soak a battery while trying to charge it, you don't need this option. >Do you have any suggestions about a limit switch to limit the flap up >circuit on an RV? I noticed several pictures of limit switches in the >switch section of the 'connection, but don't see anything on the web site. Just the up-limit? . . . or do you need one for down too. Take a look at a radio shack 275-017 . . . these are pretty small but they would work. There's a little larger switch you can see at http://209.134.106.21/BasicSwitches.jpg and order from Digikey at http://www.digikey.com Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: My Infinity grip set up
Date: Jan 28, 2002
I have two Infinity grips in my RV-6A. On both sticks I have trim, flaps, and PTT. I can say that it is invaluable to have these controls on the stick. While in the pattern or on short final, it is VERY nice to just keep your hand on the throttle, and hand on the stick. With a movement of the the thumb, I can activate more flaps if I'm too fast, and minute trim adjustments are just dandy. If I were to do it again, I would defiinately put the flaps on the stick. On to the passneger stick. I'm tossed up here. I have flaps and trim on that stick as well. My 5 year old daughter rides with me and has never hit the switches. She knows not to, so it's not an issue. Every person I take flying I do the passenger brief, and let them know what the controls do. It has not been a problem. I let other pilots fly my airplane, but not land it. So far, I haven't had a pilot in the right seat that I felt comfortable enough with to allow to land the airplane. Most RV pilots would be flying their own airplane, so they aren't in mine. It would be nice to have in the event I became unconcious and had a pilot in the right seat. Or, if I had a qualified pilot with me who would like to land the airplane. So, in retrospect, I think I would still have installed it on both sticks. Next time, I think I will for safety purposes a disconnect switch on the panel that renders the buttons useless. Yes, it is added complexity, but since I only have flaps, trim, and PTT on the stick, it isn't critical. One could land the plane without these controls on the stick. The only thing they would have to do is reach over and push my push to talk for communications. For the other switches, I wouldn't use them. To complicated, and don't really need anything else. Engine start is useless in my opinion. You only turn your key or push your start button once, so it's not a convenience for in flight purposes. Flip flop might work, but usually when I do my flip flop, I have just changed freqs on the radio anyway, so my hand is at the radio, and I could hit the flip flop. Autopilot disconnect would be cool, but I have yet to use my Navaid, so I don't know if it is worth it or not. Lights/strobes? Nah. Again, you usually only hit this switch one time, so flight convenience is not an issue. My $.02. Paul Besing RV-6A N197AB Arizona http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing First Flight 22 July 01 Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software http://www.kitlog.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Two Infinity grips - only one active at a time > > > > >> Hold on guys! Most switches are "Break/Make" which means that > >> the GND will be removed for a split > >> second before the other sides control grip, switches, GNDs kick > >> in. And, what if the switches on > >> the other grip are not set the same??? I think it is a bit more > >> complicated than you first think. > >> > >> Tom... > >> > > > >That's exactly what you'd want. > > > >Let's say pilot has flaps up set, and copilot has flaps down set. > > > >The toggle is set to pilot side and flaps start going up. > > > >If the switch is flipped, and it's a break-before-make switch, there's an > >open circuit (no electricity flows) for an instant as the pilot's switch is > >cut out and the copilot's switch is cut in. Flaps start going down. > > > >If the toggle is a make-before-break, then there's an instant where the > >flaps motor is getting an "up" command from the pilot at the same time it's > >getting a "down" command from the copilot. Depending on how this is wired, > >it's very likely this results in a dead short to the power supply. A Very > >Bad Thing. > > > >I think that a break-before-make is what you'd want here. > > > >Ultimately, the solution is not to have duplicate controls. With one flaps > >switch on the center console, there's no doubt in anyone's mind which switch > >is commanding, and no possibility of confusion. > > > >And it's simpler and has fewer parts that could break and therefore fewer > >failure modes. > > > >Oops! I think I'm becoming a "disciple of Bob" here! > > > Bless you my son . . . . I'm still agonizing over whether or > not to help this thing move forward. Trim systems NEED to > be accessible to both pilots and they should not be so fast > that inadvertent operation is a hair-raising event. Further, > being momentary push-to-command-motion systems, there's no > way to leave a trim system in a condition that becomes > and unhappy surprise to the other pilot. > > I've had a number of builders wanting to put starter > push buttons and flaps on the stick . . . if it's pilot's > stick only it might not be so bad but having these > controls on two sticks give one pause . . . > > I've got something between 1500-2000 hours and I can't imagine > ever wanting to have such easy access to anything other than > trim, intercom PTT, radio PTT, and maybe xponder ident and > frequency flip flop . . . and even the last two are very > low on the convenience list and high on the list of nuisance- > inadvertent operations. > > Bob . . . > > //// > (o o) > ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= > < Go ahead, make my day . . . > > < show me where I'm wrong. > > ================================= > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: RE: a few questions for you
From: "nknobil(at)gwi.net" <nknobil(at)gwi.net>
Date: Jan 28, 2002
Bob, Would there be a problem in jumping the COM terminal to one of the little terminals in order to supply power to the coil and run the other to a switch between in and GROUND? Thankful for your input, as always, Nick Knobil RV-8 N80549 Bowdoinham, Maine Original Message: ----------------- From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 08:38:12 -0600 Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: a few questions for you >I ordered 2 of your S704-1 relays. How do I wire those? They have 2 'On' >connectors, 2 'Com' connectors and one unlabeled connector. The little terminals are for the coil of the relay. These are interchangeable. The fat terminals are for the switched contacts and they too are interchangeable. If you want to add a diode across the coil terminals for spike suppression (not a bit issue but easy to do too) you can install a 1N400x diode (from radio shack) as shown on http://209.134.106.21/articles/s704inst.jpg >I also have one of the B&C OV protection devices (LR3B-14). I noticed in >the wiring instructions that there is a temperature probe connection for the >battery. Is this available as an option? If not, is there a thermometer >inside the unit that regulates the voltage presented to the battery? In >other words, should the OV protection unit be located in the same climate >(in the cockpit) as the battery? I wrote once before about this but my >question wasn't very clear - still on a vertical learning curve. There is an optional battery temperature probe available for the LR3B series regulators. Unless you plan to spend hours cruising at the rarified altitudes wherein you might cold soak a battery while trying to charge it, you don't need this option. >Do you have any suggestions about a limit switch to limit the flap up >circuit on an RV? I noticed several pictures of limit switches in the >switch section of the 'connection, but don't see anything on the web site. Just the up-limit? . . . or do you need one for down too. Take a look at a radio shack 275-017 . . . these are pretty small but they would work. There's a little larger switch you can see at http://209.134.106.21/BasicSwitches.jpg and order from Digikey at http://www.digikey.com Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 28, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Fried OV spike supression diode
> >Bob, when I did my initial engine start yesterday, a puff of white smoke >rose from the spike supression diode on my ov contactor. When I checked, I >found the diode cracked and white residue on the contactor. Obviously, I >had a spike in voltage, but why? Sounds more like the diode was wired backwards. >To give you some background, I have an RV8A with an IO-360 engine, an >Odyssey PC 625 RG battery (17ah), a nippon dinso alternator with built-in >voltage regulator, and I wired in your OV contactor per your schematic >entitled "OV PROTECTION FOR BUILT-IN REGULATOR." > >During this initial engine start, the engine ran quite rough. I don't know >if this is related to the diode frying or whether it's due to improper >ignition timing or ??? The two symptoms are unrelated. I am concerned about other wiring issues. Normally, if this diode is reversed, it pops the alternator field circuit breaker without hurting the diode. You need to check the wiring associated with this circuit closely. >Any input you have will be greatly appreciated.............. > >Walt Shipley > >P.S. I will need another spike supression diode to install once the problem >is solved, can I get that from you? You can get it quicker from Radio Shack cat# 276-1141 (two in a blister pack for about $1) . . . or I can throw some in an envelope for you. check the photo at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/switch/s701-1l.jpg Note orientation of banded end of the diode. Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 28, 2002
From: William Mills <courierboy(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: My Infinity grip set up
Paul - Wouldn't the passenger's headset need to be plugged-in to the pilot's side jacks for this to work? Bill >----------snip---------- >The only thing they would have to do is reach over and push my push >to talk for >communications. >----------snip---------- >Paul Besing >RV-6A N197AB Arizona >http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing >First Flight 22 July 01 >Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software >http://www.kitlog.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Harlow" <jharlow(at)onearrow.net>
Subject: Re: My Infinity grip set up
Date: Jan 28, 2002
I have two Infinity grips installed on my Express and have duplicated the functions on both. The other day the flap switch did not work on the pilot side and just for grins I reached over and the co-pilots worked. Very grateful for reduntency in this case. I also have flip/flop, trim, PTT, A/P disconnect. John Have a GREAT day!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: My Infinity grip set up > > I have two Infinity grips in my RV-6A. On both sticks I have trim, flaps, > and PTT. I can say that it is invaluable to have these controls on the > stick. While in the pattern or on short final, it is VERY nice to just keep > your hand on the throttle, and hand on the stick. With a movement of the > the thumb, I can activate more flaps if I'm too fast, and minute trim > adjustments are just dandy. If I were to do it again, I would defiinately > put the flaps on the stick. > > On to the passneger stick. I'm tossed up here. I have flaps and trim on > that stick as well. My 5 year old daughter rides with me and has never hit > the switches. She knows not to, so it's not an issue. Every person I take > flying I do the passenger brief, and let them know what the controls do. It > has not been a problem. I let other pilots fly my airplane, but not land > it. So far, I haven't had a pilot in the right seat that I felt comfortable > enough with to allow to land the airplane. Most RV pilots would be flying > their own airplane, so they aren't in mine. It would be nice to have in the > event I became unconcious and had a pilot in the right seat. Or, if I had a > qualified pilot with me who would like to land the airplane. > > So, in retrospect, I think I would still have installed it on both sticks. > Next time, I think I will for safety purposes a disconnect switch on the > panel that renders the buttons useless. Yes, it is added complexity, but > since I only have flaps, trim, and PTT on the stick, it isn't critical. One > could land the plane without these controls on the stick. The only thing > they would have to do is reach over and push my push to talk for > communications. > > For the other switches, I wouldn't use them. To complicated, and don't > really need anything else. Engine start is useless in my opinion. You only > turn your key or push your start button once, so it's not a convenience for > in flight purposes. Flip flop might work, but usually when I do my flip > flop, I have just changed freqs on the radio anyway, so my hand is at the > radio, and I could hit the flip flop. Autopilot disconnect would be cool, > but I have yet to use my Navaid, so I don't know if it is worth it or not. > Lights/strobes? Nah. Again, you usually only hit this switch one time, so > flight convenience is not an issue. > > My $.02. > > Paul Besing > RV-6A N197AB Arizona > http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing > First Flight 22 July 01 > Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software > http://www.kitlog.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> > To: > Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Two Infinity grips - only one active at a > time > > > > > > > > > > > >> Hold on guys! Most switches are "Break/Make" which means that > > >> the GND will be removed for a split > > >> second before the other sides control grip, switches, GNDs kick > > >> in. And, what if the switches on > > >> the other grip are not set the same??? I think it is a bit more > > >> complicated than you first think. > > >> > > >> Tom... > > >> > > > > > >That's exactly what you'd want. > > > > > >Let's say pilot has flaps up set, and copilot has flaps down set. > > > > > >The toggle is set to pilot side and flaps start going up. > > > > > >If the switch is flipped, and it's a break-before-make switch, there's an > > >open circuit (no electricity flows) for an instant as the pilot's switch > is > > >cut out and the copilot's switch is cut in. Flaps start going down. > > > > > >If the toggle is a make-before-break, then there's an instant where the > > >flaps motor is getting an "up" command from the pilot at the same time > it's > > >getting a "down" command from the copilot. Depending on how this is > wired, > > >it's very likely this results in a dead short to the power supply. A > Very > > >Bad Thing. > > > > > >I think that a break-before-make is what you'd want here. > > > > > >Ultimately, the solution is not to have duplicate controls. With one > flaps > > >switch on the center console, there's no doubt in anyone's mind which > switch > > >is commanding, and no possibility of confusion. > > > > > >And it's simpler and has fewer parts that could break and therefore fewer > > >failure modes. > > > > > >Oops! I think I'm becoming a "disciple of Bob" here! > > > > > > Bless you my son . . . . I'm still agonizing over whether or > > not to help this thing move forward. Trim systems NEED to > > be accessible to both pilots and they should not be so fast > > that inadvertent operation is a hair-raising event. Further, > > being momentary push-to-command-motion systems, there's no > > way to leave a trim system in a condition that becomes > > and unhappy surprise to the other pilot. > > > > I've had a number of builders wanting to put starter > > push buttons and flaps on the stick . . . if it's pilot's > > stick only it might not be so bad but having these > > controls on two sticks give one pause . . . > > > > I've got something between 1500-2000 hours and I can't imagine > > ever wanting to have such easy access to anything other than > > trim, intercom PTT, radio PTT, and maybe xponder ident and > > frequency flip flop . . . and even the last two are very > > low on the convenience list and high on the list of nuisance- > > inadvertent operations. > > > > Bob . . . > > > > //// > > (o o) > > ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= > > < Go ahead, make my day . . . > > > < show me where I'm wrong. > > > ================================= > > > > > > > > > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Arnold de Brie" <ajdbrie(at)interestate.nl>
Subject: GPS antenna
Date: Jan 28, 2002
Hello everyone Does anybody know if it is possible to connect two GPS receivers, a King 89B and a Skyforce, to the same antenna? Is it necessary to use a special splitter or can one use just a BNC T-connector? Thanks in advance Arnold de Brie RV8 The Netherland ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ken Harrill <KHarrill(at)osa.state.sc.us>
Subject: fuel line support -6A
Date: Jan 28, 2002
Tom, I attached a small piece of angle to the "spar-floor board reinforcement angle", and mounted an adel clamp to it. Ken Harrill RV-6 final assembly -----Original Message----- From: tom sargent [mailto:sarg314(at)earthlink.net] Subject: AeroElectric-List: fuel line support -6A I'm routing the fuel line from the tank to the selector valve in a 6A. According to the AC413.13 book that's long enough to require a support (16" run is the limit). Affixing a clamp to the smaller gear weldment tubes would work, but I certainly don't want to drill any holes in those tubes. Does any one know of a good way to attach an adel clamp (or other clamp) to the gear weldment without drilling any holes in the weldment's tube? Or perhaps there's a better place to attach a support? -- Tom Sargent. http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Nancy and Walter Shipley" <wshipley(at)esper.com>
Subject: Re: Fried OV spike supression diode
Date: Jan 28, 2002
Bob, I said I wired up my OV protection circuit per your diagram, but today I found I didn't EXACTLY do that. I bought a contactor from you ( same as the one shown in s701-11.jpg). I wired the contactor in without noticing the jumper running from the small terminal on the left of the contactor to the large terminal labled "from battery" - your diagram for the OV protection doesn't show this jumper, so I assume I should have removed it? Anyway, I discovered today that this jumper was completely burned off - all that was left were the ring terminals. I also bought a couple of the Radio Shack diodes cat # 276-1141 as you suggested, but I'm wondering if I have the correct item. They're called "epoxy rectifiers" and they look different from the diode you supplied with the contactor. They are small ball shaped gizmos, grey on one side and black on the other. Are they suitable and which way do they go on the contactor? Thanks for getting back, and thanks for tolerating my ignorance........... Walt ---------- > From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fried OV spike supression diode > Date: Monday, January 28, 2002 12:06 PM > > > > > >Bob, when I did my initial engine start yesterday, a puff of white smoke > >rose from the spike supression diode on my ov contactor. When I checked, I > >found the diode cracked and white residue on the contactor. Obviously, I > >had a spike in voltage, but why? > > Sounds more like the diode was wired backwards. > > > >To give you some background, I have an RV8A with an IO-360 engine, an > >Odyssey PC 625 RG battery (17ah), a nippon dinso alternator with built-in > >voltage regulator, and I wired in your OV contactor per your schematic > >entitled "OV PROTECTION FOR BUILT-IN REGULATOR." > > > >During this initial engine start, the engine ran quite rough. I don't know > >if this is related to the diode frying or whether it's due to improper > >ignition timing or ??? > > The two symptoms are unrelated. I am concerned about other > wiring issues. Normally, if this diode is reversed, it > pops the alternator field circuit breaker without hurting > the diode. > > You need to check the wiring associated with this circuit > closely. > > > >Any input you have will be greatly appreciated.............. > > > >Walt Shipley > > > >P.S. I will need another spike supression diode to install once the problem > >is solved, can I get that from you? > > You can get it quicker from Radio Shack cat# 276-1141 (two in > a blister pack for about $1) . . . or I can throw some > in an envelope for you. > > check the photo at: > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/switch/s701-1l.jpg > > > Note orientation of banded end of the diode. > > > Bob . . . > > //// > (o o) > ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= > < Go ahead, make my day . . . > > < show me where I'm wrong. > > ================================= > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Curt Reimer" <cgreimer(at)mb.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: You Have Control
Date: Jan 28, 2002
> Many cups of coffee were spilled when the pilot-flying > would be about to leave the flight deck... and would give the 'you have > control' signal. This must be an airline pilot thing. I was taught to say "you have control" and the other pilot says "I have control", but alas I've never flown the line. What is the signal? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: CBFLESHREN(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 28, 2002
Subject: Re: You Have Control
I see what you're saying but if the sight of the Captain leaving the flight deck was'nt a clear enough signal that it's "his airplane" then he's got serious "comunication" problems ! ; - ) Chris . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brian & Debi Shannon" <wings(at)theshannons.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List Digest: 19 Msgs - 01/27/02
Date: Jan 28, 2002
Bob, What's up with the aeroelectric.com website.....It seems to have disappeared tonight?!?!? Is this a temporary problem? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 28, 2002
From: Dan DeNeal <rv6apilot(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Radio Shack Rotary Switch for CHT & EGT
Is it possible to use a rotary switch from Radio Shack to switch the signals from the probes to Vans CHT & EGT gauges? Does the wire have to be thermocouple wire all the way to the switch or can you use regular aircraft wire to carry the signal from the probe? Dan DeNeal Wiring RV6a ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 29, 2002
From: Wes Knettle <wsknettl(at)centurytel.net>
Subject: Stifling technology
Bob, Your statement struck home for me here! """""""These are interesting stories but only from the perspective of how sad the technology and technical acumen of the certified world stacks the odds against comfortable completion of flight when something breaks. Latest AOPA pilot has yet another similar story. I believe the folks who participate in this list agree with me that we're building the finest airplanes to have ever flown. Further, I think we share a goal of removing the word EMERGENCY from the lexicon of our speech about electrical systems. Our mission is NOT to figure out how to deal with the problem of the past when they happen on our new airplanes. The mission is to understand how they happened in the paste and design both the system and the pilot's understanding so that they DON'T happen again in the future. Bob . . ."""""""""""""""""" I have worked at maintaining certified airframes since 1966. I too feel we should learn and benefit from our past. Unfortunately the FAA doesn't support this idea. They prefer we all have an opportunity to die at the controls of 50 year old technology. Their lack of central control over rule interpretation and their fear of legal suits has made them useless in todays environment. I am ready to surrender my A&P / IA (license to obey the Moses of aviation) and join some group, somewhere that might be interested in flying safety through advanced knowlege and the application of some COMMON SENSE to the aeroplane. You will ask why I feel this way? Well last week I got a call from the FSDO that had my field approval request for replacing a prestolite alternator system on a Beech A23-24 with B&C's 40 amp unit and voltage regulator lying on their desk. They wanted to let me know they could not approve it. When I asked why I got a string of three answers, 1-We won't make a field approval on a change which has an equivalent change available as a commercial STC. (I read STC holder's wallet being protected by the FAA here) 2-Why don't you ask B&C to PMA or STC their system. (I read STC holder's wallet being protected by the FAA here also) 3-I don't want to expose myself to legal liability here. (FAA now acknowleges that they have a fear of being sued). Your tax dollar at work!!!! Heck no. Bureacracy, laziness, poor leadership, inadequate training and many other problems, Yes!! Well you can't fight city hall, so I'll just pack it in and crawl in a hole like they do. There goes a tremendous love of aviation and a tremendous amount of contempt for our government which no longer works for the people but instead work for themselves. Wes Knettle ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 29, 2002
From: Wes Knettle <wsknettl(at)centurytel.net>
Subject: Fuel line support
" Double ty-wraps work also. " Try to avoid using these on metal tubing. When left there for years gathering grit and oil they will actually saw thru aluminum and 4130 steel tubing. This is especially true in areas of high vibration and wind movement. In my 30 + years I have found severely chaffed tubing more often since the advent of popularity for the nylon wire ties then I ever found from the old AN742 clamps getting loose occasionally and chaffing tubing. The proper size ADEL rubber lined clamp will go a long way to preventing this. Of course it still requires a good look at each periodic inspection. Wes K Wisconsin ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 29, 2002
From: Steve Kay <skay(at)optonline.net>
Subject: Re: Fuel line support
Thank You Wes -Steve Wes Knettle wrote: > > " Double ty-wraps work also. " > > Try to avoid using these on metal tubing. When left there for years > gathering grit and oil they will actually saw thru aluminum and 4130 > steel tubing. This is especially true in areas of high vibration and > wind movement. In my 30 + years I have found severely chaffed tubing > more often since the advent of popularity for the nylon wire ties then I > ever found from the old AN742 clamps getting loose occasionally and > chaffing tubing. The proper size ADEL rubber lined clamp will go a long > way to preventing this. Of course it still requires a good look at each > periodic inspection. > > Wes K > Wisconsin > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca>
Subject: Not airline alone
Date: Jan 29, 2002
Cheers, "This must be an airline pilot thing. I was taught to say "you have control" and the other pilot says "I have control", but alas I've never flown the line. What is the signal?" You have it right, but not just airline - it's an aviation thing. Introduced at Flying Training schools so that the instructor can be sure the student isn't fighting the controls. In airliners, the pilots are within sight of one another (unlike fore-aft trainers) but THEN they say it because they're not talking to each other, they're talking to the tape - gives lawyers extra income. Happy Motoring Ferg diesel Europa ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 29, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: GPS antenna splitter?
> > >Hello everyone > >Does anybody know if it is possible to connect two GPS receivers, a King >89B and a Skyforce, to the same antenna? > >Is it necessary to use a special splitter or can one use just a BNC >T-connector? > >Thanks in advance > >Arnold de Brie RV8 > >The Netherland I looked through my catalogs . . . don't find any GPS splitters but intuitively, I don't see why they cannot be made to work. Problem is that a GPS signal is very, Very, VERY weak . . . and a splitter has losses of its own stacked on top of the fact that only half of the power coming in can be coupled to each receiver. I wouldn't use a splitter unless I was also using an amplified antenna. This has a downside in that you have a single active device with powered components that drives both receivers . . . single point of failure for both GPS receivers. If it were my airplane, I'd have separate antennas for each receiver to protect the integrity of the dual receiver installation. Yeah . . . I know, all those antennas look ugly but let's not forget the mess that Piper got into when they sacrificed electrical integrity and performance to save a few ounces by using aluminum battery cables on their fleet of single engine products. Small improvements in one aspect of the product's design can have significant effect on the performance of other systems. I catch a lot of flack from guys wanting to build show planes totally devoid of ugly whiskers when I remind them that the best PERFORMING antennas are independent, full sized and as clear as possible of obstructions. I recall a C-210 I saw coming down the assembly line in 1968 with dual nav coms, dual ADF, DME, HF (trailing wire antenna out the tail cone) and Transponder installations. This airplane really looked like it needed a shave. However, if any of those radios didn't perform to greatest potential, it WASN'T because we compromised the antenna installations. Dual GPS receivers can offer a lot of confidence in probability of comfortable execution and completion of any flight . . . consider doing everything practical to avoid compromising the performance and reliability. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Stifling technology
Date: Jan 29, 2002
A similar problem was solve on the Aeronca list when the local FSDO refused to approve the use of a C-85-8F because the STC was for an C-85 without the F. What does the "F" stand for? It is the flanged crank instead of the Taper shaft crank. Continental says its is the same engine, but the FSDO would not budge. They took the paper work to a different FSDO and it was approved. The owner is now happily flying it. You might check with B&C to see where they have had success with a field approval and have the paperwork sent it from there for approval. Some one the list might just volunteer to shepard the paper like happened on the Aeronca list. Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh Editor, EAA Safety Programs cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org Always looking for articles for the Experimenter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wes Knettle" <wsknettl(at)centurytel.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stifling technology Bob, Your statement struck home for me here! """""""These are interesting stories but only from the perspective of how sad the technology and technical acumen of the certified world stacks the odds against comfortable completion of flight when something breaks. Latest AOPA pilot has yet another similar story. I believe the folks who participate in this list agree with me that we're building the finest airplanes to have ever flown. Further, I think we share a goal of removing the word EMERGENCY from the lexicon of our speech about electrical systems. Our mission is NOT to figure out how to deal with the problem of the past when they happen on our new airplanes. The mission is to understand how they happened in the paste and design both the system and the pilot's understanding so that they DON'T happen again in the future. Bob . . ."""""""""""""""""" I have worked at maintaining certified airframes since 1966. I too feel we should learn and benefit from our past. Unfortunately the FAA doesn't support this idea. They prefer we all have an opportunity to die at the controls of 50 year old technology. Their lack of central control over rule interpretation and their fear of legal suits has made them useless in todays environment. I am ready to surrender my A&P / IA (license to obey the Moses of aviation) and join some group, somewhere that might be interested in flying safety through advanced knowlege and the application of some COMMON SENSE to the aeroplane. You will ask why I feel this way? Well last week I got a call from the FSDO that had my field approval request for replacing a prestolite alternator system on a Beech A23-24 with B&C's 40 amp unit and voltage regulator lying on their desk. They wanted to let me know they could not approve it. When I asked why I got a string of three answers, 1-We won't make a field approval on a change which has an equivalent change available as a commercial STC. (I read STC holder's wallet being protected by the FAA here) 2-Why don't you ask B&C to PMA or STC their system. (I read STC holder's wallet being protected by the FAA here also) 3-I don't want to expose myself to legal liability here. (FAA now acknowleges that they have a fear of being sued). Your tax dollar at work!!!! Heck no. Bureacracy, laziness, poor leadership, inadequate training and many other problems, Yes!! Well you can't fight city hall, so I'll just pack it in and crawl in a hole like they do. There goes a tremendous love of aviation and a tremendous amount of contempt for our government which no longer works for the people but instead work for themselves. Wes Knettle http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 29, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric Server Outage
> >Bob, > > What's up with the aeroelectric.com website.....It seems to have >disappeared tonight?!?!? Is this a temporary problem? Paul tells me that his connectivity went down and when he tried to get help, the various institutions involved all claimed, "must be the other guy's problem." Folks who went home at 5 p.m. were unavailable to continue the discussion until this morning . . . but the system came alive before he could talk to anyone. Wonder if the REAL culprit will come forward and explain what was wrong . . . Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Rough running engine - Was: Fried OV spike supression
diode
From: Daniel H Kight <kightd@basf-corp.com>
Date: Jan 29, 2002
01/29/2002 11:52:57 AM Walt, You may have a different problem, but here's my recent experience for what it's worth. A couple of weeks ago, I cranked up my IO-320 (160 HP w/ Bendix injection system) for the first time and it also ran rough as a cob. Even though the engine was run on a test bench at Aero Sport Power (Bart LaLonde) the idle mixture must be adjusted for your particular prop load. Mine was way too rich - to the point that the engine would not even run at idle with the mixture knob full forward. Pulling the knob out about halfway made it purr like a kitten, so I leaned out the idle mixture on the fuel servo, and now it runs like it's supposed to. The idle mixture is controlled by the length of the linkage between the butterfly control arm and the idle mixture control arm. The little "Star" turnbuckle (held in place by a spring) is turned in or out to change the linkage length and consequently the idle mixture. It has no effect on the high speed mixture, which is controlled by the mixture knob (attached to the arm on the other side of the servo). I'd be happy to send you a copy of the Bendix service manual if you could use it. Danny Kight Anderson, SC RV-6 - hope to make the first flight this weekend!!!!! >During this initial engine start, the engine ran quite rough. I don't know >if this is related to the diode frying or whether it's due to improper >ignition timing or ??? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 29, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Radio Shack Rotary Switch for CHT & EGT
> >Is it possible to use a rotary switch from Radio Shack >to switch the signals from the probes to Vans CHT & >EGT gauges? > >Does the wire have to be thermocouple wire all the way >to the switch or can you use regular aircraft wire to >carry the signal from the probe? Check out the article at: http://209.134.106.21/articles/excerpt.pdf . . . and then see if you still have any questions. Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 29, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Not airline alone
> >Cheers, >"This must be an airline pilot thing. I was taught to say "you have control" >and the other pilot says "I have control", but alas I've never flown the >line. What is the signal?" > You have it right, but not just airline - it's an aviation >thing. Introduced at Flying Training schools so that the instructor can be >sure the student isn't fighting the controls. In airliners, the pilots are >within sight of one another (unlike fore-aft trainers) but THEN they say it >because they're not talking to each other, they're talking to the tape - >gives lawyers extra income. Read a book many years ago wherein an instructor pilot of WWI era talked about his experiences with students. A light tap on the shoulder of the guy in the front seat said, "you have the airplane" . . . a robust smack on the back of his head said, "it's MY airplane." Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David J. Spencer" <djs(at)Group54.com>
Subject: Re: Stifling technology
Date: Jan 29, 2002
Wes... I'll be sorry if you leave the aviation field as I think you are a valued member with a treasure-chest of knowledge, but I am glad that you have come to see the truth about the FAA... they are truly useless and serve no one except those who pay kickbacks. David J. Spencer Beech Super III djs(at)Group54.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wes Knettle" <wsknettl(at)centurytel.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stifling technology > > Bob, > Your statement struck home for me here! > > """""""These are interesting stories but only from the > perspective of how sad the technology and technical > acumen of the certified world stacks the odds > against comfortable completion of flight > when something breaks. > > Latest AOPA pilot has yet another similar story. > I believe the folks who participate in this list > agree with me that we're building the finest airplanes > to have ever flown. Further, I think we share a goal > of removing the word EMERGENCY from the lexicon of > our speech about electrical systems. Our mission > is NOT to figure out how to deal with the problem > of the past when they happen on our new airplanes. > The mission is to understand how they happened in the > paste and design both the system and the pilot's > understanding so that they DON'T happen again in > the future. > > Bob . . ."""""""""""""""""" > > I have worked at maintaining certified airframes since 1966. I too feel > we should learn and benefit from our past. Unfortunately the FAA doesn't > support this idea. They prefer we all have an opportunity to die at the > controls of 50 year old technology. Their lack of central control over > rule interpretation and their fear of legal suits has made them useless > in todays environment. I am ready to surrender my A&P / IA (license to > obey the Moses of aviation) and join some group, somewhere that might be > interested in flying safety through advanced knowlege and the > application of some COMMON SENSE to the aeroplane. > > You will ask why I feel this way? Well last week I got a call from the > FSDO that had my field approval request for replacing a prestolite > alternator system on a Beech A23-24 with B&C's 40 amp unit and voltage > regulator lying on their desk. They wanted to let me know they could not > approve it. When I asked why I got a string of three answers, > 1-We won't make a field approval on a change which has an equivalent > change available as a commercial STC. (I read STC holder's wallet being > protected by the FAA here) > 2-Why don't you ask B&C to PMA or STC their system. (I read STC > holder's wallet being protected by the FAA here also) > 3-I don't want to expose myself to legal liability here. (FAA now > acknowleges that they have a fear of being sued). > > Your tax dollar at work!!!! Heck no. Bureacracy, laziness, poor > leadership, inadequate training and many other problems, Yes!! Well you > can't fight city hall, so I'll just pack it in and crawl in a hole like > they do. There goes a tremendous love of aviation and a tremendous > amount of contempt for our government which no longer works for the > people but instead work for themselves. > > Wes Knettle > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Nancy and Walter Shipley" <wshipley(at)esper.com>
Subject: Re: Rough running engine - Was: Fried OV spike supression
diode
Date: Jan 29, 2002
Now this is something I hadn't even considered. This engine came off an RV6A with a two blade prince prop, and I'm using a three blade catto prop. I'll give this a whirl... Thanks, man, I appreciate the input. Walt ---------- > From: Daniel H Kight <kightd@basf-corp.com> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Rough running engine - Was: Fried OV spike supression diode > Date: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 6:52 AM > <kightd@basf-corp.com> > > > Walt, > > You may have a different problem, but here's my recent experience for what > it's worth. > > A couple of weeks ago, I cranked up my IO-320 (160 HP w/ Bendix injection > system) for the first time and it also ran rough as a cob. Even though the > engine was run on a test bench at Aero Sport Power (Bart LaLonde) the idle > mixture must be adjusted for your particular prop load. Mine was way too > rich - to the point that the engine would not even run at idle with the > mixture knob full forward. Pulling the knob out about halfway made it purr > like a kitten, so I leaned out the idle mixture on the fuel servo, and now > it runs like it's supposed to. > > The idle mixture is controlled by the length of the linkage between the > butterfly control arm and the idle mixture control arm. The little "Star" > turnbuckle (held in place by a spring) is turned in or out to change the > linkage length and consequently the idle mixture. It has no effect on the > high speed mixture, which is controlled by the mixture knob (attached to > the arm on the other side of the servo). I'd be happy to send you a copy > of the Bendix service manual if you could use it. > > > Danny Kight > Anderson, SC > RV-6 - hope to make the first flight this weekend!!!!! > > > >During this initial engine start, the engine ran quite rough. I don't know > >if this is related to the diode frying or whether it's due to improper > >ignition timing or ??? > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Hebeard2(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 29, 2002
Subject: Re: Not airline alone
When I learned to fly in the Army Air Corp. during W.W.II, the signal the instructor always used to indicate transfer of control of the airplane was a violent side to side shaking of the stick. Harley ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Clark, Thomas IFC" <Tom.Clark(at)utcfuelcells.com>
Subject: Re: Not airline alone
Date: Jan 29, 2002
Electric list, I am interested in hearing about grounding using the airframe verses using a separate ground back to the battery. I have a -8 with a battery in the back and was planning on using an airframe ground but am having second thoughts due the pre-priming of all the airframe parts. All feedback is welcome. I do have a instrument ground bus up front with a #14 wire back to the battery but for nav lights, landing lights and the starter I was going to rely on the airframe for a ground. Tom Clark -8 Fastback ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 29, 2002
From: Steve Kay <skay(at)optonline.net>
Subject: Re: Not airline alone
Clark, get yourself a bonding brush. When you see it you'll understand the principal. It looks like a counterbore but with a short stainless steel wire brush where the cutter would be. If you solid rivet the one hole after using it, you'll have a very reliable ground for the life of the airframe. This is how it's done on production aluminum aircraft and the brush is used again to attach the various components and ground straps where needed. -Steve "Clark, Thomas IFC" wrote: > > Electric list, > > I am interested in hearing about grounding using the airframe verses using a > separate ground back to the battery. I have a -8 with a battery in the back > and was planning on using an airframe ground but am having second thoughts > due the pre-priming of all the airframe parts. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Miles McCallum" <milesm(at)avnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Not airline alone
Date: Jan 29, 2002
Asked my old man about it - he flew for 44 years - and he said that in his early days, some captains would growl "sit on your hands and don't touch nothin' but your ***..." Not exactly CRM, but reckons he never had a problem! Also mentioned that when he was an instructor on Tiger Moths during the early part of the war, they used a communications system called a gosport tube - one end was a megaphone over the instructors mouth, feeding a pair of tubes clamped to the student pilot's ears. Reckoned that worked pretty well, and was much appreciated by both parties as it was difficult to deliver a smack on the head past the windshield. Miles > > > >Cheers, > >"This must be an airline pilot thing. I was taught to say "you have control" > >and the other pilot says "I have control", but alas I've never flown the > >line. What is the signal?" > > You have it right, but not just airline - it's an aviation > >thing. Introduced at Flying Training schools so that the instructor can be > >sure the student isn't fighting the controls. In airliners, the pilots are > >within sight of one another (unlike fore-aft trainers) but THEN they say it > >because they're not talking to each other, they're talking to the tape - > >gives lawyers extra income. > > Read a book many years ago wherein an instructor pilot of WWI > era talked about his experiences with students. A light > tap on the shoulder of the guy in the front seat said, > "you have the airplane" . . . a robust smack on the back > of his head said, "it's MY airplane." > > Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Nancy and Walter Shipley" <wshipley(at)esper.com>
Subject: Re: Rough running engine - Was: Fried OV spike supression
diode
Date: Jan 29, 2002
Danny, since getting your earlier message, I retimed the engine, then cranked 'er up again. Ran much smoother, but only when I had the cockpit mixture control about half rich. Next, I played with the star shaped dealie and shure enough, the engine ran much better. I still need to play with the star some more, but thanks to you I'm heading in the right direction. I will take you up on your offer of the Bendix Service Manual. Can you send it via email? If not, my address is: Walt Shipley 116 Tanasi Dr Loudon, TN 37774 By the way where is Anderson, SC? We lived in Camden for a while many years ago..... Thanks again. Hope you get your bird flying and everything goes well. Walt ---------- > From: Daniel H Kight <kightd@basf-corp.com> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Rough running engine - Was: Fried OV spike supression diode > Date: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 6:52 AM > <kightd@basf-corp.com> > > > Walt, > > You may have a different problem, but here's my recent experience for what > it's worth. > > A couple of weeks ago, I cranked up my IO-320 (160 HP w/ Bendix injection > system) for the first time and it also ran rough as a cob. Even though the > engine was run on a test bench at Aero Sport Power (Bart LaLonde) the idle > mixture must be adjusted for your particular prop load. Mine was way too > rich - to the point that the engine would not even run at idle with the > mixture knob full forward. Pulling the knob out about halfway made it purr > like a kitten, so I leaned out the idle mixture on the fuel servo, and now > it runs like it's supposed to. > > The idle mixture is controlled by the length of the linkage between the > butterfly control arm and the idle mixture control arm. The little "Star" > turnbuckle (held in place by a spring) is turned in or out to change the > linkage length and consequently the idle mixture. It has no effect on the > high speed mixture, which is controlled by the mixture knob (attached to > the arm on the other side of the servo). I'd be happy to send you a copy > of the Bendix service manual if you could use it. > > > Danny Kight > Anderson, SC > RV-6 - hope to make the first flight this weekend!!!!! > > > >During this initial engine start, the engine ran quite rough. I don't know > >if this is related to the diode frying or whether it's due to improper > >ignition timing or ??? > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 29, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: GPS antenna location
> >A recent post to the aeroelectric list asked about a splitter for dual >GPS antennas. The honorable Mr. Nuckolls says this may be problematic >and preferred 2 separate antennas(ae?) Are those of you who have >located these on the glare-shield or under the cowling satisfied with >the results? When I run my infamous dual-gps-for-under-$200 system, both hand-helds are setting in front of me with their butts Velcro'd to the top of the glare shield and the uppermost forward corner laying against the windshield and held in place with a small dollop of windshield sealant (black, somewhat sticky putty). In the high wing aircraft I fly, view of the sky behind the wings has to be compromised. I don't know HOW much compromise is present and the radios perform well from this location. If you're considering antennas inside the cockpit on a canopy aircraft, I have to believe they'll work equal to or better than what I've enjoyed to date. Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 29, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: RE: Airframe grounds
>Electric list, > >I am interested in hearing about grounding using the airframe verses using a >separate ground back to the battery. I have a -8 with a battery in the back >and was planning on using an airframe ground but am having second thoughts >due the pre-priming of all the airframe parts. All feedback is welcome. I do >have a instrument ground bus up front with a #14 wire back to the battery >but for nav lights, landing lights and the starter I was going to rely on >the airframe for a ground. In a nutshell, components NOT directly associated with the instrument panel can be grounded locally. If you don't have it already, I suggest you acquire a copy of the AeroElectric Connection and check the chapters on grounding and noise. A metal airplane assembled with rivets cannot have components insulated from each other. No matter how much primer you may have used . . . the forces exerted by a rivet swelling to fill the hole is far more than any paint can stand up to. Ditch the #14 wire . . . it adds nothing but weight to your airplane. When attaching HEAVY current feeders to the airframe, pick the heaviest structural material you can drill a hole in without compromising structural integrity (for example, be cautious about where and how big holes in a spar might be). Clean the area around the hole equal to the diameter of a washer sized to the fastener. In the case of a battery ground, use a minimum 10-32 threaded fastener . . . 1/4-28 is better. Torque the 10-32 fastener 20-25 in-lb, torque 1/4-28 fastener 50-70 in-lb. These torque values will enhance the probability of achieving a gas-tight joint between the wire terminal and the airframe. After the bolt is tightened, it wouldn't hurt to spray the connection with primer. Gizmos with lighter wire like pitot heat, landing and taxi lights, nav-lights and strobe power supply can also use local grounds . . . use 8-32 minimum hardware torqued to 12-15 in-lb and cover with primer. The starter and alternator get ground via the crankcase. No special attention is necessary. You should have a nice flexible bonding jumper between a hefty bolt on the crankcase and the firewall ground block. Except for the outlying gizmos described above, everything else should ground to the firewall ground bus with each device enjoying its own ground wire. Taking these simple steps will provide joint integrity that will last the lifetime of the airplane. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca>
Subject: "you have control"
Date: Jan 30, 2002
"Read a book many years ago wherein an instructor pilot of WWI era talked about his experiences with students. A light tap on the shoulder of the guy in the front seat said, "you have the airplane" . . . a robust smack on the back of his head said, "it's MY airplane." Bob . . ." I soloed on a Harvard (T-6). The rear (instructor) joystick comes out and stows for soloing from the front seat. Many a fellow stoogent came away from early dual with a bump on the back of his head where the instructor had taken ot the stick and prodded said head through the rollover structure. One of our guys was big, gregarious and macho. He put up with this insolent prodding for a while and then lost it on the next occurence. Knowing the instructor was without a joystick, he rolled the plane over and then jinked the pitch, thumping the boss's pumpkin all over the rear cockpit. He came back and landed and said "one word, and you'll never make it to the Officers' Mess". He wasn't there next day. Apparently he wasn't suited to flight. Somehow I felt we lost a great fighter pilot. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2002
From: Frank and Dorothy <frankv(at)infogen.net.nz>
Subject: Re: "you have control"
At 03:34 31/01/2002, you wrote: >I soloed on a Harvard (T-6). The rear (instructor) joystick comes out and >stows for soloing from the front seat. Many a fellow stoogent came away from >early dual with a bump on the back of his head where the instructor had >taken ot the stick and prodded said head through the rollover structure. Dunno if its true, but this hoary old legend dates from the WW2 era... Apparently, in the Tiger Moth the rear stick is also removable. And a certain air force instructor, to demonstrate his faith in his student's ability would ostentatiously drop his stick over the side. One enterprising student, knowing that this was coming up, secreted a spare stick in the front cockpit. When the instructor dropped his stick over the side, the student bellowed "If you say so, Sir!" and dropped the spare stick over the side too. No mention of whether this student got his wings or not. Frank. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 30, 2002
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Electrical installation -- friendly neighbors?
I just read the Chapter 16 on noise... euh... on "Electromagnetic Compability" and I did not find an answer I was looking for. I intend to install the battery contactors behind the passenger seat of my plane... but I have other gizmos there as well. On the right side is mounted the Strobe power supply and ELT transmitter. I mounted the Navaid servo on the left side. Can I install the contactors and battery bus fuse blocs near the strobe power supply? Or would I be better off installing those on the other side of the plane? I'm now trying to put more stuff on the right side to balance everything I've put on the left side (from a weight distribution stand point). See http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/images/Dcp01219.jpg for where it the electrical system would be located. I would make the channel holding the strobe pwr supply wider and fix both contactors and fuse blocs on the channel. Thx. Michel ===== ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 30, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Electrical installation -- friendly
neighbors? > >I just read the Chapter 16 on noise... euh... on >"Electromagnetic Compability" and I did not find an >answer I was looking for. > >I intend to install the battery contactors behind the >passenger seat of my plane... but I have other gizmos >there as well. I presume that since you use the plural form of contactor that you have two batteries and a contactor for each. I further presume that both batteries are back there next to their respective contactors. >On the right side is mounted the Strobe power supply >and ELT transmitter. I mounted the Navaid servo on >the left side. > >Can I install the contactors and battery bus fuse >blocs near the strobe power supply? Or would I be >better off installing those on the other side of the >plane? Shortest practical connections are best. The feed wire between hot side of battery contactor and battery bus blocks would ideally be 6" or less. These parts are not vulnerable to noise from components located nearby. >I'm now trying to put more stuff on the right side to >balance everything I've put on the left side (from a >weight distribution stand point). Lateral weight distribution of fuselage mounted items is not a big deal in single engine airplanes from a perspective of handling qualities. If you have wing tanks, differences in fuel load from side to side will have a much more profound effect which may prompt the installation of electric roll trim. >See >http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/images/Dcp01219.jpg > >for where it the electrical system would be located. >I would make the channel holding the strobe pwr supply >wider and fix both contactors and fuse blocs on the >channel. Where are the batteries with respect to the contactors? Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 30, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Alternator warning light
>Bob, > > I am looking for a simple circuit that will cause a light to come on when the alternator stops charging, similar to the L lead function in automotive voltage regulators (my aircraft regulator has no L lead). Do you know of one? > Sure. Go to our website at http://www.aeroelectric.com Click on: "Article Reprints, Newsgroup Threads, CAD Drawing Downloads" Under the section on How To Articles click on: "Click here for the schematic on a do it yourself low voltage monitor." This device is the very best way to get timely active notification of any charging system failure that renders the alternator incapable of carrying ship's electrical loads. All of the parts are available from Digikey for about $10.00 I recommend you avoid any of the automotive approaches for driving an idiot light. First, without having a schematic of how the sensor works, I can't tell if it will catch all failures . . . Second, the proposed circuit will nicely drive a high intensity red led that's small enough to mount right in front of you on the panel where you cannot miss it . . . it flashes too. . . Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
From: jerry(at)tr2.com
Subject: Re: Alternator warning light
Date: Jan 30, 2002
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > "Click here for the schematic on a do it yourself low voltage monitor." *** Looks like a straightforward circuit. A bit too complex to get my FSDO to sign it off on a field approval, though. Wonder how hard it would be to build it really - REALLY - small. And stick it onto the back of a cigarette lighter plug? And since the cig lighter socket isn't really in the direct scan - stick on a REALLY bright LED? I seem to remember that a 555 can source 200mA or so... - Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com ) ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Alternator warning light
Date: Jan 31, 2002
From: "Mike Gray" <mgray(at)graymatter.org>
Bob - Have you a LED solution to the standard filament lamp? Obviously the life of a LED is better, not to mention heat dissipation, power consumption and mechanical strength. Mike Gray >Bob, > > I am looking for a simple circuit that will cause a light to come on when the alternator stops charging, similar to the L lead function in automotive voltage regulators (my aircraft regulator has no L lead). Do you know of one? > Sure. Go to our website at http://www.aeroelectric.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 30, 2002
From: John Rourke <john@allied-computer.com>
Subject: Re: Alternator warning light
Mike, All you need to convert any incandescent circuit to an LED, is a current-limiting resistor in series - and LEDs exist that even have them built-in. For instance, go to <http://www.digikey.com/scripts/us/dksus.dll?KeywordSearch> and look up "160-1046". 23 cents is all it costs! You can also get little panel-mount LED holders, they're pretty cheap too, I've got tons of extras I've had laying around here for years that I'll never use (if you ever come through MLB, stop by), but you may as well include them in your order from DK, they're pretty cheap too. -John R. Mike Gray wrote: > > > Bob - Have you a LED solution to the standard filament lamp? Obviously > the life of a LED is better, not to mention heat dissipation, power > consumption and mechanical strength. > > Mike Gray > > >Bob, > > > > I am looking for a simple circuit that will cause a light to come > on when the alternator stops charging, similar to the L lead function in > automotive voltage regulators (my aircraft regulator has no L lead). Do > you know of one? > > > > Sure. Go to our website at http://www.aeroelectric.com > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BAKEROCB(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 30, 2002
Subject: spike eating diodes again
1/30/2002 Hello Bob, It appears that a significant portion of the questions that you receive deal with the spike suppression diodes. You have my understanding and sympathy if you feel that we acolytes are beating a dead horse, but still I'd like to give that poor beast a few more whacks. I have gleaned two fundamentals regarding connecting the spike suppression diodes from your teaching: 1) The diode goes across the coil of the contactor. 2) The cathode end of the diode (the one with the bar in the diagrams and the one with the stripe / bar / darkening on the diode itself) connects to the positive end of the contactor coil. Now I'd like to describe a local circuit diagram: A) Envision a three terminal battery master contactor. One contactor large terminal is connected by heavy AWG wire to the plus terminal of the battery. This same contactor terminal is also connected internally to one end of the contactor coil inside the contactor. B) The other large terminal on the battery master contactor is connected by heavy AWG wire to the input side of the airplane's starter contactor. C) The one small terminal on the side of the battery master contactor is connected internally to the opposite end of the contactor coil from A) above. This small terminal is also connected externally by wire to the battery master switch. When the battery master switch is closed it completes a circuit to ground, current then flows through the contactor coil and the contactor coil magnetic force moves the slug which closes the contact points between the two large terminals. D) The circuit diagram in question has a spike suppression diode connected from the small terminal of the master battery contactor directly to ground. The cathode (bar) end of the diode is on the terminal end of this connection to ground. Now the local circuit described in A) through D) above appears to me to violate the two criteria given in 1) and 2) above because the diode is not across the coil and the cathode (bar) end of the diode is attatched to the negative end instead of the positive end of the coil. I am further concerned because it appears to me that the plus terminal of the battery is constantly connected to ground through the contactor coil wire and the diode. So here are my questions: AA) Will the circuit described in A) through D) above provide proper spike suppression protection for the battery master switch? BB) If the circuit described in A) through D) above will not provide proper spike protection what connection of the diode and small terminal will provide the proper protection? CC) Will the circuit described in A) through D) above have any adverse affects on the intended or desired circuit operation? Separate, but related question: Of these two diodes listed below which one is preferred for spike suppression and why? DD) Type 1N5400, Cat No 276-1141, 3 Amp, 200 Amp Surge, 50 Peak Inverse Voltage. EE) Type 1N4001, Cat No 276-1101, 1 Amp, 30 Amp Surge, 50 Peak Inverse Voltage. Many thanks for your continuing help for your wandering troops. 'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 30, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Alternator warning light
> >Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: >> >> >> "Click here for the schematic on a do it yourself low voltage monitor." > >*** Looks like a straightforward circuit. A bit too complex to get my FSDO >to sign it off on a field approval, though. > > Wonder how hard it would be to build it really - REALLY - small. And >stick it onto the back of a cigarette lighter plug? And since the cig >lighter socket isn't really in the direct scan - stick on a REALLY bright >LED? I seem to remember that a 555 can source 200mA or so... The LEDs I supply with my LVM-14 are very bright with the circuit shown. Yes, you could easily build this into a cigar lighter plug and then orient the LED so that it shines right at your face . . . you'll see it. If it were my Cessna, I'd put it in anyhow and just not tell them about it. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2002
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Electrical installation -- friendly neighbors?
Thanks Bob for the answers! --- "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > Where are the batteries with respect to the > contactors? This is a good question. My answer is somewhere in the tail. I mean that exact location will be determined when I do an initial weight and balance. I am pretty sure it will be behind the contactors location. The location I'm planning for the contactors is interesting to me because it allows me to install most of the electrical system even though I don't know exactly where the batteries will be. It is also a location that will make maintenance and fixes really easy. I won't need to work through a small access panel. I'm planning to use aviation cable from contactor to starter and welding cable from batteries to contactors. However, I will most certainly exceed desireable distances between the batteries and the contactors. I rationalize that the risks associciated with physical damages are much less in the tail than they are on a firewall electrical installation. I am very open to critiques and comments. So please do not hesitate to put me back on the right path if required. Michel ===== ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2002
From: "J. Davis" <jd(at)lri.sjhc.london.on.ca>
Subject: starter brushes
Greetings... I recently put new brushes in my starter. While it was apart, I cleaned up the commutator and made sure the slots were free of any buildup or debris. I noticed during the next two or three starts, that the starter was spinning the engine significantly faster than it did before, which I attributed to the clean commutator, possibly harder brush material. This seemed like a Good Thing... The next start, the engine spun for about a second, then the starter went quiet. Upon disassembly, I found the braided copper cable to the 'hot' brush had cleanly parted near to where it was connected to a tab on the post. It had clearly heated up and burned through like a fusible link. I looked very carefully for any signs of a short, but couldn't see any. I did notice that the part of the commutator where the brushes ride had gone quit dark in colour already. Any ideas what might have caused this? Should I be looking the armature as a possible culprit? Or maybe the 3rd party brushes were just not heavy enough? They seemed identical to the originals... FWIW, this is a light-weight starter for a Rotax 582. Thanks for any enlightenment here... -- Regards, J. flying: Zenair STOL CH701/582 C-IGGY , >150 hrs. building: Sonex #325, engine undecided, probably Jabiru 3300/6/120hp | J. Davis, M.Sc. (comp_sci) | email: jd(at)uwo.ca | | SysMgr, research programmer | voice: (519) 646 6100 x64166 | | Lawson Research Institute | fax: (519) 646 6135 | | London, Ontario | lriweb.sjhc.london.on.ca/~jd | If you spend any time administering Windows NT, you're far too familiar with the Blue Screen of Death (BSOD) ... - "MSDN Flash" email newsletter ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: spike eating diodes again
> >1/30/2002 > >Hello Bob, It appears that a significant portion of the questions that you >receive deal with the spike suppression diodes. You have my understanding and >sympathy if you feel that we acolytes are beating a dead horse, but still I'd >like to give that poor beast a few more whacks. Hmmm . . . if he's still twitching, whack away . . . >I have gleaned two fundamentals regarding connecting the spike suppression >diodes from your teaching: > >1) The diode goes across the coil of the contactor. Yes >2) The cathode end of the diode (the one with the bar in the diagrams and the >one with the stripe / bar / darkening on the diode itself) connects to the >positive end of the contactor coil. Correct >Now I'd like to describe a local circuit diagram: > >A) Envision a three terminal battery master contactor. One contactor large >terminal is connected by heavy AWG wire to the plus terminal of the battery. >This same contactor terminal is also connected internally to one end of the >contactor coil inside the contactor. > >B) The other large terminal on the battery master contactor is connected by >heavy AWG wire to the input side of the airplane's starter contactor. > >C) The one small terminal on the side of the battery master contactor is >connected internally to the opposite end of the contactor coil from A) above. > This small terminal is also connected externally by wire to the battery >master switch. When the battery master switch is closed it completes a >circuit to ground, current then flows through the contactor coil and the >contactor coil magnetic force moves the slug which closes the contact points >between the two large terminals. Correct so far . . . >D) The circuit diagram in question has a spike suppression diode connected >from the small terminal of the master battery contactor directly to ground. >The cathode (bar) end of the diode is on the terminal end of this connection >to ground. I presume your talking about somebody else's wiring diagram. What you describe is a situation similar to an airworthiness directive issued against the classic OFF-L-R-BOTH-START keyswitch offered by Aircraft Spruce and others. The AD was INTENDED to replace starter switch contacts badly burned by the inductive effects of the starter contactor and add a diode for the purported task of mitigating the inductive kick from the contactor and improved on switch contact longevity. The AD calls for putting a diode ACROSS THE SWITCH contacts. Take a peek at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/nodiode.jpg Here's an oscilloscope trace of the inductive kick across a contactor coil when no diode is present. I had to rig a very fast switching mechanism so that contact spreading velocity was too high for a fire to form between the opening contacts . . . Voltage across the coil rises quickly reaching more than 300 volts in about 300 microseconds. Take a peek at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/doncoil.jpg Here you see how the diode stops the intensive negative going swing of the inductive spike because electron flow of the spike puts the diode in a FORWARD conducting mode. Now look at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/donswtch.jpg Here, the diode is across the switch, just like the FAA says you should do it. Note that the collapsing field in the contactor coil is taking the terminal negative, just like it did in the first picture you looked at . . . this puts the diode in a REVERSE current mode . . . no current flows. Note in this figure how we can see where the fire lights up between the poor switch contacts. We can also see where the fire finally goes out after about 1.2 milliseconds. The remaining field collapse still takes the spike to over 300 volts. >Now the local circuit described in A) through D) above appears to me to >violate the two criteria given in 1) and 2) above because the diode is not >across the coil and the cathode (bar) end of the diode is attatched to the >negative end instead of the positive end of the coil. I am further concerned >because it appears to me that the plus terminal of the battery is constantly >connected to ground through the contactor coil wire and the diode. The situation you describe is the same as for the starter contactor example shown in the figures above. The diode is in the WRONG place to do its job. Your perceptions and suspicions are well founded with the exception of the last sentence. Note that with a diode across the battery master switch contacts and with the switch open, the small terminal of the contactor coil rises to battery voltage. This puts the diode in a reverse bias mode and no current flows. >So here are my questions: > >AA) Will the circuit described in A) through D) above provide proper spike >suppression protection for the battery master switch? No . . . >BB) If the circuit described in A) through D) above will not provide proper >spike protection what connection of the diode and small terminal will provide >the proper protection? None . . . ya gotta put a BIG terminal on one end of the diode and tie it to the battery side of the contactor . . . I.E. get the diode properly wired across the coil. >CC) Will the circuit described in A) through D) above have any adverse >affects on the intended or desired circuit operation? Battery contactors don't store a lot of energy. Likelihood of experiencing observable wear and tear on the battery master is problematical . . . intermittent duty starter contactors draw a LOT more current and store more energy, hence the situation that brought the FAA cavalry galloping over the hill to save us from an enemy they didn't understand. >Separate, but related question: Of these two diodes listed below which one is >preferred for spike suppression and why? > >DD) Type 1N5400, Cat No 276-1141, 3 Amp, 200 Amp Surge, 50 Peak Inverse >Voltage. > >EE) Type 1N4001, Cat No 276-1101, 1 Amp, 30 Amp Surge, 50 Peak Inverse >Voltage. Take you pick . . . ANY diode does the job with respect to physics of the task. The electrical stresses on a diode in this application are tiny. I PREFER the 1N540x series diodes because they have bigger leads and a mechanically more robust design. You can see how we put the diodes on in. http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/switch/s701-1l.jpg http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/switch/s701-2.jpg Note these diodes ARE the 1N540x series devices. You can get these from Radio Shack in blister paks of two diodes for about $1. The starter contactor shown at . . . http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/switch/s702-1l.jpg . . . doesn't have a visible diode . . . the contactors we buy have the diode already built in. >Many thanks for your continuing help for your wandering troops. My pleasure. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca>
Subject: naughty LEDs
Date: Jan 31, 2002
"I've got tons of extras I've had laying around here for years that I'll never use " John: They should have been lying around for years. If they've been laying, no wonder there are tons. Good idea! Ferg A064 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2002
From: John Rourke <john@allied-computer.com>
Subject: Re: spike eating diodes again
That doesn't make any sense - if you want to stop contact arcing, you put a _capacitor_ across the contacts, not a diode... you put the diode across the coil to clamp the reverse EMF. This is SOP, no, required engineering practice - and the FAA doesn't know about it?!? BTW, _is_ a capacitor across the switch a good idea? I don't think it's really necessary if you've got the clamping diode, but I guess it wouldn't hurt (unless you consider it another "point of failure" item where the risk outweighs the benefit). Anyway, thanks for pointing out the obvious about the diode, I'll have to check mine (it's got an external diode wired across two contacts, I'll have to check which ones)... I had assumed it would be wired correctly across the coil not the switch... -John R. "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote: > I presume your talking about somebody else's wiring diagram. > What you describe is a situation similar to an airworthiness > directive issued against the classic OFF-L-R-BOTH-START keyswitch > offered by Aircraft Spruce and others. The AD was INTENDED to > replace starter switch contacts badly burned by the inductive > effects of the starter contactor and add a diode for the > purported task of mitigating the inductive kick from the > contactor and improved on switch contact longevity. The AD > calls for putting a diode ACROSS THE SWITCH contacts. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2002
From: John Rourke <john@allied-computer.com>
Subject: Re: naughty LEDs
Ooooh, you got me! I cringe every time I see the "loose/lose" thing, I need to keep an eye on the "lie/lay" thing too! Thanks, -John P.S.: The digiKey part number for the afore-mentioned panel-LED-mount is MP52-ND. Fergus Kyle wrote: > > > "I've got tons of extras I've had laying around here for years that I'll > never use " > > John: > They should have been lying around for years. If they've been > laying, no wonder there are tons. > Good idea! > Ferg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Electrical installation -- friendly neighbors?
> >Thanks Bob for the answers! > > >--- "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > >> Where are the batteries with respect to the >> contactors? > >This is a good question. My answer is somewhere in >the tail. I mean that exact location will be >determined when I do an initial weight and balance. I >am pretty sure it will be behind the contactors >location. >However, I will most certainly exceed desireable >distances between the batteries and the contactors. I >rationalize that the risks associciated with physical >damages are much less in the tail than they are on a >firewall electrical installation. > >I am very open to critiques and comments. So please >do not hesitate to put me back on the right path if >required. Not a problem. You obviously UNDERSTAND what the recommendations are and why. You're making a considered deviation from the recommendations based on risk assessment for which you are willing to accept responsibility. The only time I have a problem is when someone is being driven by hangar tales and advice from people who embrace tradition and myth more closely than physics and understanding. Drive on sir . . . your prospects for a long and enjoyable relationship with your project are bright. Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <nknobil(at)gwi.net>
Subject: RE: a few questions for you
Date: Jan 31, 2002
Bob, Would there be a problem in jumping the COM terminal to one of the little terminals in order to supply power to the coil and run the other to a switch between in and GROUND? Thankful for your input, as always, Nick Knobil RV-8 N80549 Bowdoinham, Maine Original Message: ----------------- From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 08:38:12 -0600 Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: a few questions for you >I ordered 2 of your S704-1 relays. How do I wire those? They have 2 'On' >connectors, 2 'Com' connectors and one unlabeled connector. The little terminals are for the coil of the relay. These are interchangeable. The fat terminals are for the switched contacts and they too are interchangeable. If you want to add a diode across the coil terminals for spike suppression (not a bit issue but easy to do too) you can install a 1N400x diode (from radio shack) as shown on http://209.134.106.21/articles/s704inst.jpg >I also have one of the B&C OV protection devices (LR3B-14). I noticed in >the wiring instructions that there is a temperature probe connection for the >battery. Is this available as an option? If not, is there a thermometer >inside the unit that regulates the voltage presented to the battery? In >other words, should the OV protection unit be located in the same climate >(in the cockpit) as the battery? I wrote once before about this but my >question wasn't very clear - still on a vertical learning curve. There is an optional battery temperature probe available for the LR3B series regulators. Unless you plan to spend hours cruising at the rarified altitudes wherein you might cold soak a battery while trying to charge it, you don't need this option. >Do you have any suggestions about a limit switch to limit the flap up >circuit on an RV? I noticed several pictures of limit switches in the >switch section of the 'connection, but don't see anything on the web site. Just the up-limit? . . . or do you need one for down too. Take a look at a radio shack 275-017 . . . these are pretty small but they would work. There's a little larger switch you can see at http://209.134.106.21/BasicSwitches.jpg and order from Digikey at http://www.digikey.com Bob . . . http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: spike eating diodes again
> >That doesn't make any sense - if you want to stop contact arcing, you >put a _capacitor_ across the contacts, not a diode... you put the diode >across the coil to clamp the reverse EMF. This is SOP, no, required >engineering practice - and the FAA doesn't know about it?!? A capacitor across the coil behaves like the capacitor across the points in the tried and well worn Kettering ignition system we drove for about 70 years. Here the task was to mitigate arcing at the points WITHOUT restraining the magnitude of the voltage swing. All the capacitor does is give the voltage rise a shallower slope so that the points (slow, cam operated) have a chance to open and break the arc . . . from that point on, the field continues to collapse in the coil and you get the full effect of that collapse at the coil's secondary winding when the spark lights the fire in a cylinder. A capacitor COULD have a similar beneficial effect for switch contacts. In fact, if you use a capacitor and resistor in series (so that the capacitor doesn't dump high inrush to the switch contacts as they close) you could very readily protect the contacts on switch that controls a battery or starter contactor. This is discussed in detail in chapter 6 of the AeroElectric Connection. Reverse or counter EMF is that voltage generated by the RISE of magnetic field in the coil that causes coil current to ramp up in the classic mirror image of an R*C curve except in this case it's an L/R curve. The diode is not a participant in the routing of current flow while the switch is closed/closing and the current is rising. Counter EMF in magnetic circuits is always less than applied voltage. The diode only goes to work when the circuit is broken and the collapsing magnetic field is trying to maintain current the energized current flow. This isn't counter EMF but an unrestrained forward EMF that works hard (300+ volts!). Unless routed off to do harmless work by warming up some diodes and wire, will start a fire across the switch contacts and burn away some metal. The photos I published show that this effect is achieved in grand style with a diode across the contactor's coil. Perhaps somebody in the FAA understands this but I've never met them. Whoever did the AD on the ACS keyswitch obviously didn't understand it either. >BTW, _is_ a capacitor across the switch a good idea? I don't think it's >really necessary if you've got the clamping diode, but I guess it >wouldn't hurt (unless you consider it another "point of failure" item >where the risk outweighs the benefit). Don't need the cap if you have the diode. The cap and series resistor are bigger and more expensive than a diode and the diode is much easier to install and mechanically more robust. Once the diode is in place, there's nothing for the capacitor to do. Back before I fully understood these things, I thought it would be cool to make the points in my '57 Chevy last forever by putting a diode across the coil. Sure 'nuf . . . no arcing . . but the engine didn't run either. That's when I built my first transistorized Kettering system with a rewound GM coil and a three 2N174 germanium power transistors. Point current dropped to 1 amp purely resistive and the capacitor went away. The problem then became one of keeping the points working good. When the fire went away, the natural ability to burn away oil film went away too. A brand new set of points would get flaky and had to be cleaned periodically because the o-ring in my distributor shaft wasn't keeping the greasy stuff out of the points compartment. Not all that glitters is gold . . . >Anyway, thanks for pointing out the obvious about the diode, I'll have >to check mine (it's got an external diode wired across two contacts, >I'll have to check which ones)... I had assumed it would be wired >correctly across the coil not the switch... You got it. . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: starter brushes
> >Greetings... I recently put new brushes in my starter. While it was >apart, I cleaned up the commutator and made sure the slots were free >of any buildup or debris. I noticed during the next two or three >starts, that the starter was spinning the engine significantly >faster than it did before, which I attributed to the clean >commutator, possibly harder brush material. This seemed like a Good >Thing... The next start, the engine spun for about a second, then >the starter went quiet. Hmmm . . . how many total brushes are in your starter . . . four perhaps? If it has four brushes, perhaps one brush of a pair was not making good contact. This can make the remaining set work much harder. >Upon disassembly, I found the braided copper cable to the 'hot' brush >had cleanly parted near to where it was connected to a tab on the >post. It had clearly heated up and burned through like a fusible >link. I looked very carefully for any signs of a short, but couldn't >see any. I did notice that the part of the commutator where the >brushes ride had gone quit dark in colour already. A happy commutator is a sort of light walnut brown in color. >Any ideas what might have caused this? Should I be looking the >armature as a possible culprit? Or maybe the 3rd party brushes were >just not heavy enough? They seemed identical to the originals... FWIW, this is a light-weight starter for a Rotax 582. It's a little difficult to formulate a hypothesis wihtout knowing more about the motor. Four brushes or two? Permanent magnet field or wound with wire? Do you have access to a starter current ammeter . . automotive supply stores sell a device that reads the magnetic field around the starter power cable without having to break into the cable. Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
From: jerry(at)tr2.com
Subject: Re: spike eating diodes again
Date: Jan 31, 2002
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > the points in the tried and well worn Kettering ignition system > we drove for about 70 years. Here the task was to mitigate arcing > at the points WITHOUT restraining the magnitude of the voltage > swing. All the capacitor does is give the voltage rise a shallower > slope so that the points (slow, cam operated) have a chance to > open and break the arc *** Not exactly. If I remember correctly, the capacitor and the ignition coil form a resonant circuit, producing high-amplitude oscillations at the primary of around 10 kHz during spark discharge. Take the capacitor out, the engine will run very poorly - if at all. So it's not just there to protect the points. We learned the "minus-minus-minus" rule: if the MINUS point is MINUS metal, then the condenser is MINUS capacity. And vice versa too. Too much capacity would move metal in the other direction. - Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com ) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 01, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: spike eating diodes again
> >Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: >> >> the points in the tried and well worn Kettering ignition system >> we drove for about 70 years. Here the task was to mitigate arcing >> at the points WITHOUT restraining the magnitude of the voltage >> swing. All the capacitor does is give the voltage rise a shallower >> slope so that the points (slow, cam operated) have a chance to >> open and break the arc > >*** Not exactly. If I remember correctly, the capacitor and the ignition >coil form a resonant circuit, producing high-amplitude oscillations at the >primary of around 10 kHz during spark discharge. Take the capacitor out, >the engine will run very poorly - if at all. So it's not just there to >protect the points. sameo, sameo . . . with the capacitor out the coil collapse rate was a function of it's self resonant frequency . . . much higher than with a capacitor added. Voltage rate of rise would be so fast that a fire would form between the points that never went out until stored energy in the coil was used up. . . . energy stored in the coil would be expended burning points and none made it to the spark plug. If you add too much capacity, rate of rise is slowed too much (resonant frequency too low) and spark performance suffered. "Protecting the points" and maximizing the energy fed to the spark plug were hand-in-hand benefits of choosing the right size capacitor for the task. Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 01, 2002
From: "J. Davis" <jd(at)lri.sjhc.london.on.ca>
Subject: Re: starter brushes
On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > Hmmm . . . how many total brushes are in your starter . . . > four perhaps? If it has four brushes, perhaps one brush > of a pair was not making good contact. This can make the > remaining set work much harder. > Just two brushes, each is about 10mm x 8mm. Permanent magnet. Its essentially the kind of starter you'd find on a motorcycle or snowmobile. No solenoid, just a remotely mounted relay which sends the full load from the 12V12A 'gel' battery to the post connected to the hot brush. The other brush goes to ground. The starter mounting bolts go through rubber grommets, so it has a ground strap to the engine, and the strap was installed and presumably well grounded to both sided. That's about it... I realize it'll be tough to post-mortem, just wondered what might account for the significantly faster RPM and subsequent failure of the brush lead, all else being equal... > Do you have access to a starter current ammeter . . automotive > supply stores sell a device that reads the magnetic field around > the starter power cable without having to break into the cable. > I'm sure I could borrow one... Thanks for your time. -- Regards, J. flying: Zenair STOL CH701/582 C-IGGY , >150 hrs. building: Sonex #325, engine undecided, probably Jabiru 3300/6/120hp | J. Davis, M.Sc. (comp_sci) | email: jd(at)uwo.ca | | SysMgr, research programmer | voice: (519) 646 6100 x64166 | | Lawson Research Institute | fax: (519) 646 6135 | | London, Ontario | lriweb.sjhc.london.on.ca/~jd | I thought Pauly Shore was the end of civilization - until I saw Chris Farley, who made Pauly Shore look like Laurence Olivier. -- Harlan Ellison ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 01, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Electrical system question
>Hello, > >I have an RV-4 that has a 35 amp alternator installed. The ammeter >fluctuates all the time even with all electrical equipment turned off. I had >the alternator tested and it works as advertised. I replaced the voltage >regulator and still have the same problem. What do you mean my "fluctuates" . . . does the ammeter simply deflect toward discharge and sits motionless at some reading or does it wiggle around? How large are the excursions? Are we talking about a reading on the order of 2-3 amps or is it larger? I presume further that you're talking about a minus-0-plus battery ammeter. Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tom & Cathy Ervin" <tcervin(at)valkyrie.net>
Subject: Heated Pitot Wireing
Date: Feb 01, 2002
List, Does it make a difference which wire I use for the ground on a Gretz Heated Pitot? Thanks, Tom in Ohio ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 01, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Heated Pitot Wireing
> >List, Does it make a difference which wire I use for the ground on a >Gretz Heated Pitot? > > Thanks, Tom in Ohio No, the pitot heater is not polarity sensitive. Be advised that this critter is rated for about 8A continuous draw but will PEAK at over 15A for several seconds during initial turn on. If you're using fuseblocks, I recommend a 20A fuse and 14AWG wire. If your using circuit breakers, a 15A breaker and 14AWG wire. Bob . . . //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= < Go ahead, make my day . . . > < show me where I'm wrong. > ================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 02, 2002
Subject: Electrical system comments
From: Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net>
The following link provides a description and diagram of my electrical system as it now stands. Any comments, thoughts and criticisms gladly accepted: http://www.total.net/~grantc/pages/ArtTechnical/Electrical Thanks! -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)gte.net>
Subject: Starter failure
Date: Feb 02, 2002
<> It might sound redundant, but it's not hard to damage the braid as it comes out of the terminal. It could have been done installing the brush, since there is usually not quite enough lead length to do it without straining the lead. A few broken strands will concentrate the current in the remaining strands and one thing "leads" to another. That doesn't explain the "higher rpm" though, which I missed on your earlier post. That could be caused by the magnets becoming demagnetized, possibly by impacts during assembly or disassembly (never subject permanent magnets to impact loads, although I'm not sure how susceptible ferrite magnets are to this trauma). finally, the unit could have been put together with the brush holder rotated slightly out of position, which could also cause the problem. Timing of the brushes is very important. A final remote possibility is that while cleaning the commutator you inadvertently pushed metal into the plastic insulator between segments, causing a short between segments. In theory, only solvent should be used to clean the gaps between commutator segments. Gary Casey not a EE, that's for sure ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gretz aero" <warrengretz(at)gretzaero.com>
Subject: Re: Heated Pitot Wireing
Date: Feb 02, 2002
Hello Tom and the List, It does not make any difference at all as to which electrical pin of the heated pitot tube is ground. Warren Gretz Gretz Aero http://www.gretzaero.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom & Cathy Ervin" <tcervin(at)valkyrie.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Heated Pitot Wireing > > List, Does it make a difference which wire I use for the ground on a > Gretz Heated Pitot? > > Thanks, Tom in Ohio > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Robinson" <jbr(at)hitechnetworks.net>
Date: Feb 02, 2002
Subject: Re: aeroelectric web site
Bob Is your web site down? I need to order some wire. Jim ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ross" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: GPS antenna connector
Date: Feb 02, 2002
My GPS antenna has a screw on type female end. My coax cable has a BNC female end. How do I connect the two? Is there some fancy male/male TNC/BNC connector? Ross Mickey RV6A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James E. Clark" <jclark(at)conterra.com>
Subject: GPS antenna connector
Date: Feb 02, 2002
Yes, there is such a "cable". One came with our antenna and is about 6-8" long. Seemed to have been a "stock" cable as opposed to one that was custome made. James -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ross Subject: AeroElectric-List: GPS antenna connector My GPS antenna has a screw on type female end. My coax cable has a BNC female end. How do I connect the two? Is there some fancy male/male TNC/BNC connector? Ross Mickey RV6A http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list ---------------------------------------------------- Is email taking over your day? Manage your time with eMailBoss. Try it free! http://www.eMailBoss.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ross" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: GPS antenna connector
Date: Feb 02, 2002
What antenna do you have. Mine came with the GX-60 I bought. Ross ----- Original Message ----- From: "James E. Clark" <jclark(at)conterra.com> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: GPS antenna connector > > Yes, there is such a "cable". One came with our antenna and is about 6-8" > long. > > Seemed to have been a "stock" cable as opposed to one that was custome made. > > > James > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ross > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: GPS antenna connector > > > My GPS antenna has a screw on type female end. My coax cable has a BNC > female end. How do I connect the two? Is there some fancy male/male > TNC/BNC connector? > > Ross Mickey > RV6A > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > Is email taking over your day? Manage your time with eMailBoss. > Try it free! http://www.eMailBoss.com > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 03, 2002
From: Jim and Lucy <jpollard(at)mnsi.net>
Subject: Re: Electrical system comments
Hi Grant Thanks for putting your electrical diagram online. at http://www.total.net/~grantc/Images/ElectSchem.gif First a question... What is the diode on the field exciter wire on the alternator do? Now a comment. Consider if something should happen to the keyswitch or its wireing feed. The motor would stop because of no fuel and spark. If you were fast and could throw the emergency igniton switch before the engine quit turning you would be ok. I say before the engine quit turning because if the keyswitch was bad you could not use it to crank the engine for a restart. So your dual ign and fuel pumps with their dual power sources would not do you any good if you can't use the starter for a restart. Belt redrive engines stop pretty fast when they are shut down. If you were at altitude you may airstart the engine (big maybe). Our redrive auto engines are not good for airstarting and staying within vne. If you have a 9-1 compression ratio it handprops like 18-1 with the 2-1 redrive. Possibly a cure would be to leave the emergency ignition switch closed when flying. That way if there ever was a problem in the key switch circuitry the engine would stay running and you would not need to use the starter. Just a thought. I could have missed something. I am just learning all this wireing stuff. Jim Pollard ch601hds ea-81 not wired yet > >The following link provides a description and diagram of my electrical >system as it now stands. Any comments, thoughts and criticisms gladly >accepted: > >http://www.total.net/~grantc/pages/ArtTechnical/Electrical > >Thanks! > >-- >Grant Corriveau >Montreal >Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 >C-GHTF >www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 02, 2002
From: Jaye and Scott Jackson <jayeandscott(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Electrical system question
Do you have the white and red, split master/alternator switch? If you do, this is one case where you get what you pay for. Even a T-210 comes with this garbage and the ammeter in the one we owned used to dance rythmically accompanied by a simple tune in our headphones. It was just high-resistance in the switch contacts. Changing it fixed it right up.... Scott In Vancouver ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Electrical system question > > >Hello, > > > >I have an RV-4 that has a 35 amp alternator installed. The ammeter > >fluctuates all the time even with all electrical equipment turned off. I had > >the alternator tested and it works as advertised. I replaced the voltage > >regulator and still have the same problem. > > What do you mean my "fluctuates" . . . does the ammeter > simply deflect toward discharge and sits motionless at some > reading or does it wiggle around? How large are the > excursions? Are we talking about a reading on the order > of 2-3 amps or is it larger? > > I presume further that you're talking about a minus-0-plus > battery ammeter. > > > Bob . . . > > //// > (o o) > ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= > < Go ahead, make my day . . . > > < show me where I'm wrong. > > ================================= > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Electrical system comments
Date: Feb 03, 2002
Hi Grant, I fly an "All Electric" Mazda Rotary in my RV-6A. There clearly a number of ways to provide for "redundancy" to better ensure continued operation. Not knowing what your power load is its hard to tell, but I might suggest raising the 20 amp fuse on battery 2 to 30 amps. My two fuel pumps (I have both on during take off and landing) draws 5-7 amps each (and they are one of the lower current ones I could find), but that adds up to 10-14 amps. My boost pump on for take off and landing draws around 2 amps. Throwing in the intermittent igntion and that is probably another 4 amps average, if you have fuel injectors probably in the same range of 4 amps and you find your self up to 20-24 amps fairly quickly not counting any other current drains. Yes, I know the circuit breaker/fuse is there to protect the wire not the components, but if the fuse won't stand the load then you could have bigger problems than heated wiring. My design approach was to have the minimum number of components between my batteries (I have two, one functions as a back up) and my critical systems - fuel and ignition. I have these critical components wired to a bus with only a circuit breaker and switch between them. I have two fuel pumps and two independent ignition systems (Mazda Wankel rotary comes that way stock) each with their own circuit breaker. So only a DC rated high amperage, high quality (expensive) toggle switch and the circuit breaker is between my critical component and power. Now to show you how annal retentive I can be, I worried about the high quality switches failing or the circuit breakers failing - hopefully unlikely as they are rated for 10s of thousands of cycles. But, still I fretted. So I hooked up a wire straight from the battery bus to the critical component by passing switches and existing circuit breakers. This wire has a 40 amp circuit breaker in it that is normally open. However, if I push it in then power is routed around the switches and circuit breakers directly to the critical componets. It works, push it in and you can shut off all the switches and pull their indiviudal circuit breakers and the engine keeps running. The battery bus is tied to each of my two batteries through its own 40 amp circuit breaker. Each battery is connected to the charging circuit through the normal relay. That way should a battery malfunction (short), I can disconnect it from the battery bus by pulling the defective battery's circuit breaker or opening the relay. A battery management circuit enables me to bring the aux battery on-line manually, automatically (sensing its charge voltage) or it can be isolated from the rest of the circuit. The main battery can be isolated by shutting off the master switch. So far I have 125 hours flying this arrangement with no problem. Of course every component you add is one that weighs more and one that can fail and there is certainly more than one way of doing it. FWIW Ed Anderson Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim and Lucy" <jpollard(at)mnsi.net> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electrical system comments > > Hi Grant > Thanks for putting your electrical diagram online. > at > http://www.total.net/~grantc/Images/ElectSchem.gif > > First a question... > What is the diode on the field exciter wire on the alternator do? > > > Now a comment. > Consider if something should happen to the keyswitch or its wireing > feed. > The motor would stop because of no fuel and spark. If you were > fast and could throw the emergency igniton switch before the > engine quit turning you would be ok. I say before the engine > quit turning because if the keyswitch was bad you could not > use it to crank the engine for a restart. So your dual ign and > fuel pumps with their dual power sources would not do you > any good if you can't use the starter for a restart. > Belt redrive engines stop pretty fast when they are shut down. > If you were at altitude you may airstart the engine (big maybe). > Our redrive auto engines are not good for airstarting and staying > within vne. > If you have a 9-1 compression ratio it handprops like 18-1 > with the 2-1 redrive. > Possibly a cure would be to leave the emergency ignition > switch closed when flying. That way if there ever was a problem > in the key switch circuitry the engine would stay running and > you would not need to use the starter. > > Just a thought. I could have missed something. I am just > learning all this wireing stuff. > > Jim Pollard > ch601hds > ea-81 > not wired yet > > > > > >The following link provides a description and diagram of my electrical > >system as it now stands. Any comments, thoughts and criticisms gladly > >accepted: > > > >http://www.total.net/~grantc/pages/ArtTechnical/Electrical > > > >Thanks! > > > >-- > >Grant Corriveau > >Montreal > >Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 > >C-GHTF > >www.theWingStayedON.ca > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 03, 2002
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 9 Msgs - 02/02/02
From: Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net>
... > What is the diode on the field exciter wire on the alternator do? This prevents the alternator relay from becoming latched ON once the alternator is functioning. The overvoltage protection setup requires that this relay must switch OFF whenever the ov protection cb opens. But the alternator 'backfeeds' once it starts working, so I added the diode to block this. > Now a comment. > Consider if something should happen to the keyswitch or its wireing > feed. > The motor would stop because of no fuel and spark. If you were > fast and could throw the emergency igniton switch before the > engine quit turning you would be ok. This is why I routinely put the 'emer ignition' switch ON for takeoff and landing and low-level flight. But your concerns are valid. I'm just not sure how to achieve the same level of self-sufficiency as a magneto system when using electronic ignition. I wonder if I could introduce a self-latching relay of sorts that would protect the ignition bus, but would stay unpowered on the ground while parked...a kill switch?). My key switch does have an 'accessory' position to the left of 'OFF' that isn't being used. Maybe I could arrange to make this a 'kill' setting that unpowers this 'emer ignition relay'... I would also want something to warn me if my ignition feed primary system has failed... You've got me thinking (again!)... how to make it reliable and SIMPLE and familiar! Thanks!? ;-) > Belt redrive engines stop pretty fast when they are shut down. > If you were at altitude you may airstart the engine (big maybe). > Our redrive auto engines are not good for airstarting and staying > within vne. I haven't tested this yet... but I find that it's not too hard to pull the engine through a compression cycle on the ground. Thanks for the advice - I'll keep you posted as I would like to see what happens in flight (at a safe altitude - over an airfield! -- of course). -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net>
Subject: MS specs
Date: Feb 03, 2002
Is there a place where I can find specifications for "MS" part numbers? As an example, I have some MS25041 PRESS-TO-TEST INDICATORs and I would like to see if there is an electrical socket that fits the three (3) pin connection, rather than soldering wires to the pins. Thanks in advance, Tom Barnes -6 electrical ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James E. Clark" <jclark(at)conterra.com>
Subject: GPS antenna connector
Date: Feb 03, 2002
Don't exactly recall. It came with the reconditioned KMD-150. It was manucatured for King by Comant (**I think**). My main point was that you should in fact be able to find the cable rather easily. James -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ross Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS antenna connector What antenna do you have. Mine came with the GX-60 I bought. Ross ----- Original Message ----- From: "James E. Clark" <jclark(at)conterra.com> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: GPS antenna connector > > Yes, there is such a "cable". One came with our antenna and is about 6-8" > long. > > Seemed to have been a "stock" cable as opposed to one that was custome made. > > > James > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ross > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: GPS antenna connector > > > My GPS antenna has a screw on type female end. My coax cable has a BNC > female end. How do I connect the two? Is there some fancy male/male > TNC/BNC connector? > > Ross Mickey > RV6A > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > Is email taking over your day? Manage your time with eMailBoss. > Try it free! http://www.eMailBoss.com > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list ---------------------------------------------------- Is email taking over your day? Manage your time with eMailBoss. Try it free! http://www.eMailBoss.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 03, 2002
From: Finn Lassen <finnlassen(at)netzero.net>
Subject: How to take a Magellan GPS 315A apart
Anybody successfully taken a GPS 315 apart? If so, how? Mine finally stopped working. Probably a bad connection between antenna and receiver, as software works fine. I've already cleared memory and even uploaded latest firmware and re-initialized, of course. In the past it would occasionally and intermittently loose signal from all satellites. This happened more and more frequently over the last year to the point where it doesn't see any permanently. I'm sure I'll get a bunch of responses along the lines of which GPS I should use, how to re-initialize it, etc., etc., but all I want to know is: How does one open it up? Finn ---------------------------------------------------- Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today Only $9.95 per month! http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 04, 2002
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 5 Msgs - 02/03/02
From: Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net>
> ... > I fly an "All Electric" Mazda Rotary in my RV-6A. There clearly a > number of ways to provide for "redundancy" to better ensure continued > operation. ... > Ed Anderson > Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered Hi Ed, Thanks for that description. It sounds that in principle you've come to similar conclusions as I have. I'll check that 20 amp breaker (I think that the diagram might be outdated - I may have already upgraded that...). One other possibility I've looked at in place of the breaker is a fuselink ala Bob Nuckolls and GMC etc...as this is apparently even less trouble-prone than a fuse. I also found some CBs that fit into my automotive style fuse holders, that automatically reset after a short circuit/overload condition once the condition is removed. I thought this would be handy, but haven't implemented them yet because Bob Nuckolls suggests that they aren't very good quality breakers, and that this goes against the philosophy that we don't really want to reset circuits in flight if they've shutdown for a reason... So, I'm going to continue looking into some sort of transparent 'self-contained' backup system to that ignition bus... -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 5 Msgs - 02/03/02
Date: Feb 04, 2002
----- Original Message ----- From: "Grant Corriveau" <grantC(at)total.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 5 Msgs - 02/03/02 > > > > ... > > I fly an "All Electric" Mazda Rotary in my RV-6A. There clearly a > > number of ways to provide for "redundancy" to better ensure continued > > operation. > ... > > Ed Anderson > > Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered > > Hi Ed, > > Thanks for that description. It sounds that in principle you've come to > similar conclusions as I have. I'll check that 20 amp breaker (I think that > the diagram might be outdated - I may have already upgraded that...). > > One other possibility I've looked at in place of the breaker is a fuselink > ala Bob Nuckolls and GMC etc...as this is apparently even less trouble-prone > than a fuse. > > I also found some CBs that fit into my automotive style fuse holders, that > automatically reset after a short circuit/overload condition once the > condition is removed. I thought this would be handy, but haven't implemented > them yet because Bob Nuckolls suggests that they aren't very good quality > breakers, and that this goes against the philosophy that we don't really > want to reset circuits in flight if they've shutdown for a reason... > > So, I'm going to continue looking into some sort of transparent > 'self-contained' backup system to that ignition bus... > > -- > Grant Corriveau > Montreal > Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 > C-GHTF > www.theWingStayedON.ca > Hi Grant, Yes, I think Bob provides a great service with his list/webpage/products/advice. The only thing I am not quite in syn with Bob on, although I understand his argument, is the use of fuses. I flew too many hours in military aircraft where you could get a temporary overload which would pop a circuit breaker and you could push it back in and keep operating (sometimes). I do agree with Bob that you pay a premium for a top quality circuit breaker and anything less is questionable. The only place is use fuses is in the power circuit for my engine instruments. I've only had one fail and I might have shorted a terminal with a screw driver and did not notice until later. Looks like you have a sound electrical design - the main thing is making certain that you take into consideration all? possible failure modes and their effect on the rest of the electrical system. By the way a fellow Canadian by name of Yvon Cournoyer is flying a rotary powered Zenith CH-200, I think he is in your neck of the woods, but not certain. Might be worthwhile comparing notes. Yvon Cournoyer E-mail Address(es): geryvon(at)videotron.ca By the way, great web page. Enjoyed your 1st flight videos Ed ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Leonard Garceau" <lhgcpg(at)westriv.com>
Subject: computer program
Date: Feb 04, 2002
I want to do a schematic drawing of my aircraft wiring. Does anyone know of a computer program that is used for aircraft wiring or related wiring harnesses that will work? Have a good one, Leonard ________________________________________________________________________________
From: DWENSING(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 05, 2002
Subject: Re: computer program
In a message dated 2/4/02 8:54:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, lhgcpg(at)westriv.com writes: <> I did mine with Microsoft Publisher. It probably took more time then a program specifically for that purpose but work for me. It has been easy to change and update. Dale Ensing RV-6A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Daniel H Kight <kightd@basf-corp.com>
Date: Feb 05, 2002
Subject: Bendix manual
02/05/2002 08:30:00 AM Walt, I put the Bendix manual in the mail to you this morning. Sorry, the drawings that show the internal fuel circuits are not very clear, but my original is also a photocopy. Take care, Danny Kight P.S. Here's a photo of my RV-6 just prior to the first flight on Saturday!!! (See attached file: Danny's RV-6.jpg) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 05, 2002
From: Charles Brame <charleyb(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Taxi light question
I plan to have a standard landing light set up in my RV-6A. The lights will be mounted in the wing tips and I plan to have a wigwag system. What I have not figured out is a taxi light. Do I need a taxi light in addition to the two landing lights? If so, how does one wire it up? Can I use one of the landing lights as a taxi light? How will that affect the wigwag system? Charlie RV-6A N11CB (res) San Antonio ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 05, 2002
From: Mark Steitle <msteitle(at)mail.utexas.edu>
Subject: Re: computer program
>The Sept. '99 issue of Nuts-N-Volts had an article on using Powerpoint to >create your own symbols for doing schematics. I think they still have >back issues available at http://www.nutsvolts.com/toc_Pages/sep99toc.htm. POWERPOINTING YOUR PROJECTS =97 PART 1 - Steve Daniels Learn how to use Microsoft=92s PowerPoint for creating a personalized =93palette=94 of schematic symbols and a =93toolkit=94 for creating PC board drawings. If you don't want to order the back issue, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out on your own. Mark Steitle Lancair ES > >In a message dated 2/4/02 8:54:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, >lhgcpg(at)westriv.com writes: > ><of > a computer program that is used for aircraft wiring or related wiring > harnesses that will work? > >> > > = = = http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list = ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Clifford Begnaud" <shoeless(at)barefootpilot.com>
Subject: Re: computer program
Date: Feb 05, 2002
You can download a demo version of Intellicad from this web site: http://www.cadopia.com/ This cad program is compatible with autocad and is very powerful. You can then get some predrawn schematics from Electric Bob at www.aeroelectric.com he even has files with all the symbols needed to do your drawing. Cliff > > < of > a computer program that is used for aircraft wiring or related wiring > harnesses that will work? > >> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: jerry(at)tr2.com
Subject: Re: computer program
Date: Feb 05, 2002
DWENSING(at)aol.com wrote: > > > < of > a computer program that is used for aircraft wiring or related wiring > harnesses that will work? > >> *** I use TurboCad V7 for schematics. Works great. If you check out www.turbocad.com - somewhere deep in the site, there is a 2D cad program for free. 2D is all you need for schematics.... - Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com ) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Andrew Seefried" <seefried(at)telus.net>
Subject: program
Date: Feb 05, 2002
Leonard, I use Microsoft Visio - is CAD compatible - demo version available for $10 - amazing capability. Andrew Seefried ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 05, 2002
From: "Gary A. Sobek" <rv6flier(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: www.aeroelectric.com
Looks like Bob's web site is down. Does anyone have another web site that has a list of his schedule classes? I assume that Bob is still in business. There are several builders in the SoCAL area that are intereted and I have recommend his class to them. EAA Tech Counselor ===== Gary A. Sobek "My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell, 1,002.9+ Flying Hours So. CA, USA http://SoCAL_WVAF.tripod.com http://greetings.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gary K" <flyink(at)efortress.com>
Subject: Re: program
Date: Feb 05, 2002
I also used Visio and it worked great for me. Used it for my panel too. Gary K. ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrew Seefried <seefried(at)telus.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: program > > Leonard, > I use Microsoft Visio - is CAD compatible - demo version available for $10 - > amazing capability. > Andrew Seefried > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Nancy and Walter Shipley" <wshipley(at)esper.com>
Subject: Re: Bendix manual02/05/2002 08:30:00 AM
Date: Feb 05, 2002
Thanks a bunch, Danny. Maybe someday when my -8A is flying I can come down and see you. I'm fairly familiar with your part of SC. I visited Chandelle Estates fly-in community about a year ago, and I seriously considered moving there, but my wife wasn't happy with the idea of leaving TN. Since then we have bought a lot in a fly-in community near Greenville, TN, which is about 75 miles E of Knoxville. Hope to move there in the near future. Thanks again for the manual......I owe you one, man. If you're ever up this way and need a place to stay, let me know. Walt ---------- > From: Daniel H Kight <kightd@basf-corp.com> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Bendix manual02/05/2002 08:30:00 AM > Date: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 8:29 AM > <kightd@basf-corp.com> > > > Walt, > > I put the Bendix manual in the mail to you this morning. Sorry, the > drawings that show the internal fuel circuits are not very clear, but my > original is also a photocopy. > > Take care, > > Danny Kight > > P.S. Here's a photo of my RV-6 just prior to the first flight on > Saturday!!! > > (See attached file: Danny's RV-6.jpg) > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 06, 2002
Subject: A challenge for Electric Bob.... ;-)
From: Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net>
on 2/5/02 02:51, AeroElectric-List Digest Server at aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com wrote: > Yes, I think Bob provides a great service with his > list/webpage/products/advice. Many of us have learned a lot about 'electifying' our aircraft from Bob, his book and his website. But I think there's something missing...the diagrams assume that the engine will be a standard aircraft type with magnetos and a mechanical fuel pump. One of the reasons automotive engines are becoming more popular, is similar to one of Bob's main complaints with 'certified' electrical systems (i.e. locked into old technology). Perhaps he can be convinced to take on the challenge and provide some circuit designs with auto conversions in mind... 1/ We're usually using an automotive alternator (hey - it came with the engine!). He publishes an overvoltage protection circuit for this kind of internally-regulated system. Are there any other particularities that need to be addressed? 2/ With electric fuel pumps exclusively, we have the same need for maintaining the fuel pressure. 3/ Without mags, we need an extremely reliable electrical supply for the ignition system, preferably with redundancy equal to or better than mags. 4/ How can we wire up electronic ignition (especially dual systems), to have simple, familiar operations with maximum safety in the event of electrical problems? Can Bob's philosophy which features the 'Essential' bus to make alternator failures a 'non-event', be expanded to include these key items?. Can he (will he) also come up with an overall design that meets the specific needs of us auto-conversion engine operators??? ;-) (Is he 'listening'.... ??) Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net>
Subject: circuit breakers
Date: Feb 06, 2002
Bob, I was wondering about using 7.5 amp circuit breakers (since I already have them) in place of the 5 amp called for in the alternator field circuit and the SD-8 relay circuit. Is this an acceptable change? Dave Ford RV6 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Livingston John W Civ ASC/ENFD <John.Livingston(at)wpafb.af.mil>
Subject: A challenge for Electric Bob.... ;-)
Date: Feb 06, 2002
Grant, Bob's work doesn't assume standard aircraft engines with magnetos. Far from it. He specifically addresses: electronic ignition, electric fuel pumps, etc. Look a little closer. John -----Original Message----- From: Grant Corriveau [mailto:grantC(at)total.net] Subject: AeroElectric-List: A challenge for Electric Bob.... ;-) on 2/5/02 02:51, AeroElectric-List Digest Server at aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com wrote: > Yes, I think Bob provides a great service with his > list/webpage/products/advice. Many of us have learned a lot about 'electifying' our aircraft from Bob, his book and his website. But I think there's something missing...the diagrams assume that the engine will be a standard aircraft type with magnetos and a mechanical fuel pump. One of the reasons automotive engines are becoming more popular, is similar to one of Bob's main complaints with 'certified' electrical systems (i.e. locked into old technology). Perhaps he can be convinced to take on the challenge and provide some circuit designs with auto conversions in mind... 1/ We're usually using an automotive alternator (hey - it came with the engine!). He publishes an overvoltage protection circuit for this kind of internally-regulated system. Are there any other particularities that need to be addressed? 2/ With electric fuel pumps exclusively, we have the same need for maintaining the fuel pressure. 3/ Without mags, we need an extremely reliable electrical supply for the ignition system, preferably with redundancy equal to or better than mags. 4/ How can we wire up electronic ignition (especially dual systems), to have simple, familiar operations with maximum safety in the event of electrical problems? Can Bob's philosophy which features the 'Essential' bus to make alternator failures a 'non-event', be expanded to include these key items?. Can he (will he) also come up with an overall design that meets the specific needs of us auto-conversion engine operators??? ;-) (Is he 'listening'.... ??) Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James Stone" <jandkstone(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: program
Date: Feb 07, 2002
I checked out the Visio website and the $10 version is only active on your computer for 30 days, did you find that a reality? Do you then have to shell out 500 bucks to buy the software? Jim >From: "Gary K" <flyink(at)efortress.com> >Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com >To: >Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: program >Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 18:36:53 -0500 > > >I also used Visio and it worked great for me. Used it for my panel too. > >Gary K. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Andrew Seefried <seefried(at)telus.net> >To: >Subject: AeroElectric-List: program > > > > > > > Leonard, > > I use Microsoft Visio - is CAD compatible - demo version available for >$10 - > > amazing capability. > > Andrew Seefried > > > > >http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > > > > > >http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Matthew Mucker" <matthew(at)mucker.net>
Subject: program
Date: Feb 07, 2002
Hey all, Try Eagle from www.cadsoft.de. It's a program for schematic capture and circuit board layout, but you can use just the schematic capture part. It's quite a nice package, and the freeware version has surprisingly few limitations. -Matt > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of James > Stone > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 9:10 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: program > > > > > I checked out the Visio website and the $10 version is only > active on your > computer for 30 days, did you find that a reality? Do you then have to > shell out 500 bucks to buy the software? > Jim > > > >From: "Gary K" <flyink(at)efortress.com> > >Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > >To: > >Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: program > >Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 18:36:53 -0500 > > > > > >I also used Visio and it worked great for me. Used it for my panel too. > > > >Gary K. > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: Andrew Seefried <seefried(at)telus.net> > >To: > >Subject: AeroElectric-List: program > > > > > > > > > > > > Leonard, > > > I use Microsoft Visio - is CAD compatible - demo version available for > >$10 - > > > amazing capability. > > > Andrew Seefried > > > > > > > >http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > > > > > > > > > > >http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: jerry(at)tr2.com
Subject: Re: program
Date: Feb 07, 2002
James Stone wrote: > > > I checked out the Visio website and the $10 version is only active on your > computer for 30 days, did you find that a reality? Do you then have to > shell out 500 bucks to buy the software? *** Yes and no. Check out the list of new features in the current software. Decide if you need them. If not, go buy a downrev one on Ebay. Much cheaper! - Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com ) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ronnie Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: program
Date: Feb 07, 2002
Try www.turbocad.com they have a free 2 D package. I used Turbocad Version 6 to do all of my wiring, panel layouts (printed out the layouts to cut my panel - worked wonderfully!) Ronnie Brown ----- Original Message ----- From: <jerry(at)tr2.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: program > > James Stone wrote: > > > > > > I checked out the Visio website and the $10 version is only active on your > > computer for 30 days, did you find that a reality? Do you then have to > > shell out 500 bucks to buy the software? > > *** Yes and no. > > Check out the list of new features in the current software. Decide if > you need them. If not, go buy a downrev one on Ebay. Much cheaper! > > - Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com ) > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 07, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Temporary e-mail address . . .
I've moved my working e-mail address for the AeroElectric-List so that I can get back into the conversations. No news on the server yet . . . Private e-mails to me should be sent to nuckolls(at)kscable.com Bob . . . ----------------------------------------- ( "The whole of science is nothing more ) ( than a refinement of everyday ) ( thinking." Albert Einstein ) ----------------------------------------- http://www.aeroelectric.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Piers Herbert" <piers.herbert(at)ntlworld.com>
Subject: Battery contactor
Date: Feb 07, 2002
Hi, I have not posted to this list before. I am planning to start a RV8 soon. I was wondering if anybody has used a batery contactor which might be better or more reliable than the standard kind in the Vans / Aircraft spruce catalogues. A search of the internet came up with this one which claims a hold in current of just 0.13 amps. http://www.kilovac.com/ciitech/documents/doc_1280.html I don't know if this would be suitable or worth the money. Price is quoted at $69. Piers ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Battery contactor
Date: Feb 07, 2002
This relay may end up in a design I'm doing right now. It's interesting how the "economizer" makes the relay work on 12 or 24V systems and backs off on the coil current after closing to allow their claim of .13amps. If you energize the relay with a variable power supply, you can watch the current from the power supply go down as you increase the voltage. It will handle 500 amps for 100 seconds at 85C, 200 amps continuous at 85C, and 250 amps continuous at 50C, so starting your engine should be no problem for it. If you don't need the relay right away, I may be able to sell you one at a lower price because I'll be buying them in larger quantities if I end up selecting this relay. David Swartzendruber Wichita > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On > Behalf Of Piers Herbert > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 4:35 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery contactor > > > --> > > Hi, > > I have not posted to this list before. I am planning to start > a RV8 soon. > > I was wondering if anybody has used a batery contactor which > might be better or more reliable than the standard kind in > the Vans / Aircraft spruce catalogues. > > A search of the internet came up with this one which claims a > hold in current of just 0.13 amps. > > http://www.kilovac.com/ciitech/documents/doc_1280.html > > I don't know if this would be suitable or worth the money. > Price is quoted at $69. > > Piers > > > =========== > =========== > =========== > Search Engine: > http://www.matronics.com/search > =========== > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gary K" <flyink(at)efortress.com>
Subject: Re: program
Date: Feb 07, 2002
> I checked out the Visio website and the $10 version is only active on your > computer for 30 days, did you find that a reality? Do you then have to > shell out 500 bucks to buy the software? > Jim > I already had Visio at work, didn't realize it was so expensive. Gary K. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 07, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: program
> > > I checked out the Visio website and the $10 version is only active on your > > computer for 30 days, did you find that a reality? Do you then have to > > shell out 500 bucks to buy the software? > > Jim > > > > I already had Visio at work, didn't realize it was so expensive. > >Gary K. Getting into the conversation late . . . what kind of tasks are you considering for Visio? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gary K" <flyink(at)efortress.com>
Subject: Re: program
Date: Feb 08, 2002
> Getting into the conversation late . . . what kind of > tasks are you considering for Visio? > > Bob . . . Bob, here's the original email below- I want to do a schematic drawing of my aircraft wiring. Does anyone know of a computer program that is used for aircraft wiring or related wiring harnesses that will work? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2002
From: Wes Knettle <wsknettl(at)centurytel.net>
Subject: Visio site
Subject: AeroElectric-List: program Leonard, I use Microsoft Visio - is CAD compatible - demo version available for $10 - amazing capability. Andrew Seefri I cn't seem to get to the visio site at MSN's main site. Does anyone have the site URL handy? Wes K ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: program
> > > Getting into the conversation late . . . what kind of > > tasks are you considering for Visio? > > > > Bob . . . > >Bob, here's the original email below- > > > >I want to do a schematic drawing of my aircraft wiring. Does anyone know of >a computer program that is used for aircraft wiring or related wiring >harnesses that will work? Download http://209.134.106.21/CAD/cad.pdf and http://209.134.106.21/CAD/cad.exe and http://209.134.106.21/CAD/cad.txt This is an older version of IntelliCAD which used to be available from their website at no cost by simply registering. This program will open and edit the drawing files which are also downloadable from my website at: http://209.134.106.21/articles/seminar.exe and http://209.134.106.21/articles/wirebook.exe The drawings you'll find in these files will probably represent 80-90% of the work necessary to do your own page-per-system wirebook. You can pick and chose from the various pages to assemble a document that is easily modified to match what you want do do. want to do. Bob . . . -------------------------- TEMPORARY WEBSITE ADDRESS: http://209.134.106.21 -------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: Visio site
> > >Subject: AeroElectric-List: program > > > >Leonard, >I use Microsoft Visio - is CAD compatible - demo version available for >$10 - >amazing capability. >Andrew Seefri > >I cn't seem to get to the visio site at MSN's main site. Does anyone >have the site URL handy? > >Wes K P.S. Visio as a CAD program sucks big time. I use it to import images from other CAD programs into windows applications but as a tool for crafting original documents, it's seriously lacking . . . Bob . . . -------------------------- TEMPORARY WEBSITE ADDRESS: http://209.134.106.21 -------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Matthew Mucker" <matthew(at)mucker.net>
Subject: Visio site
Date: Feb 08, 2002
> P.S. Visio as a CAD program sucks big time. I use it to import > images from other CAD programs into windows applications but > as a tool for crafting original documents, it's seriously > lacking . . . > > > Bob . . . > Bob's right... but on the other hand, Visio was never intended to BE a CAD program. Folks, there are plenty of schematic drawing packages out there. Most of 'em have limited freeware versions. I use CADSoft Eagle, which has a steep learning curve but is kinda nice once you get the swing of things. (You have to control it both with mouse movements AND a command line, at the same time, for instance.) Keep searching the net and you'll find some. Try WinDraft by Ivex, or Eagle by CADSoft, or go to some Printed Circuit Board manufaturer's sites for more links. -Matt ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2002
From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org>
Subject: Re: program
Just wanted to let the list know that I have been using the freebie TurboCAD with Bob's drawings and it works just fine. They give you the 2D version so that you'll like it and upgrade to the 3D version, but the 2D version is complete and works fine. The program is compatible with AutoCAD and several other formats. They are at http://www.turbocad.com Also, I made up a bunch of full size instrument panel templates that may be printed and cut out and laid on the actual panel for a feel for how they all fit together, if anyone wants them, send me an email. > >I want to do a schematic drawing of my aircraft wiring. Does anyone know of > >a computer program that is used for aircraft wiring or related wiring > >harnesses that will work? > > > Download http://209.134.106.21/CAD/cad.pdf > and http://209.134.106.21/CAD/cad.exe > and http://209.134.106.21/CAD/cad.txt > > This is an older version of IntelliCAD which used > to be available from their website at no cost by simply > registering. This program will open and edit the > drawing files which are also downloadable from my > website at: > > http://209.134.106.21/articles/seminar.exe > > and > > http://209.134.106.21/articles/wirebook.exe > > The drawings you'll find in these files will > probably represent 80-90% of the work necessary > to do your own page-per-system wirebook. You > can pick and chose from the various pages > to assemble a document that is easily modified > to match what you want do do. > want to do. > > > Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2002
From: Jim Burley <j.r.burley(at)larc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: program
Bob, I'm working on a Mac and cannot utilize an "EXE" file. Could you provide a link to a "ZIP" file as well? I already have a CAD program - just need the seminar & wirebook files. Jim Burley > > http://209.134.106.21/articles/seminar.exe > > and > > http://209.134.106.21/articles/wirebook.exe > > The drawings you'll find in these files will > probably represent 80-90% of the work necessary > to do your own page-per-system wirebook. You > can pick and chose from the various pages > to assemble a document that is easily modified > to match what you want do do. > want to do. > > Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2002
From: rswan19(at)comcast.net
Subject: Re: program
Try CircuitMaker Student version. It's free and it works for what you want to do. http://www.microcode.com/downloads/student.htm R ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Haywire" <haywire(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: program
Date: Feb 08, 2002
Yeah, but it limits you to 50 "devices" in the student version. It's not really supposed to be used as a CAD program, but as a way of analyzing circuits. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of > rswan19(at)comcast.net > Sent: February 8, 2002 2:26 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: program > > > Try CircuitMaker Student version. It's free and it works for > what you want > to do. > http://www.microcode.com/downloads/student.htm > R > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2002
From: rswan19(at)comcast.net
Subject: Re: program
What are you building a Space Shuttle? I don't think you would need more than 50 devices in a homebuilt. R ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: RE: program
> >Yeah, but it limits you to 50 "devices" in the student version. It's not >really supposed to be used as a CAD program, but as a way of analyzing >circuits. I think circuitmaker is a program designed to assist in the design of etched circuit boards. You draw the schematic in a specialized drawing application that ports directly to an etched circuit board layout program. For airplane wiring diagrams you need a real CAD program like ProCAD, IntelliCAD, AutoCAD, etc. Bob . . . -------------------------- TEMPORARY WEBSITE ADDRESS: http://209.134.106.21 -------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: program
> >What are you building a Space Shuttle? I don't think you would need more >than 50 devices in a homebuilt. Here, the "devices" being referred to are things like integrated circuits, resistors, sockets, etc. The try-it-to-see-if-you-like- it programs are generally crippled in some way . . . like limited number of devices . . . or you're prevented from outputing data to any kind of file or printer to transport fabrication data, etc. Interestingly enough, the last time I did a full up wirebook on a relatively simple, single engine airplane, the reference designator list ended up with over 100 "devices" . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: program
> >Bob, > >I'm working on a Mac and cannot utilize an "EXE" file. Could you >provide a link to a "ZIP" file as well? I already have a CAD program >- just need the seminar & wirebook files. Okay, try http://209.134.106.21/articles/Cad_Dwgs.zip Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2002
From: John Rourke <john@allied-computer.com>
Subject: Re: program
Check this out: http://www.advancedmsinc.com/creator/index.htm You can download a free demo, but the schematic package is only $99, so it's not too expensive to get the real deal. (I forget what part is crippled, I think it's limited to 255 devices or you can't print or something like that). It really does work well, I bought the full-on $1000 professional electronic schematic-capture/pcboard-layout/auto-router package that is now only about $500, and I don't mind the extra $$$, it costs so much less and does everything the $10,000 Futurenet/Redicad Tango etc packages do. -John R. "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote: > > > > > >What are you building a Space Shuttle? I don't think you would need more > >than 50 devices in a homebuilt. > > Here, the "devices" being referred to are things like integrated > circuits, resistors, sockets, etc. The try-it-to-see-if-you-like- > it programs are generally crippled in some way . . . like limited > number of devices . . . or you're prevented from outputing data > to any kind of file or printer to transport fabrication data, etc. > > Interestingly enough, the last time I did a full up wirebook on a > relatively simple, single engine airplane, the reference designator > list ended up with over 100 "devices" . . . > > Bob . . . > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2002
From: "Jerry Latimer" <ljm10587(at)qwest.net>
Subject: Re: program
I just opened the CAD files with TURBOCAD LT which is a free program. Jerry Latimer ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: program > > > > > > Getting into the conversation late . . . what kind of > > > tasks are you considering for Visio? > > > > > > Bob . . . > > > >Bob, here's the original email below- > > > > > > > >I want to do a schematic drawing of my aircraft wiring. Does anyone know of > >a computer program that is used for aircraft wiring or related wiring > >harnesses that will work? > > > Download http://209.134.106.21/CAD/cad.pdf > and http://209.134.106.21/CAD/cad.exe > and http://209.134.106.21/CAD/cad.txt > > This is an older version of IntelliCAD which used > to be available from their website at no cost by simply > registering. This program will open and edit the > drawing files which are also downloadable from my > website at: > > http://209.134.106.21/articles/seminar.exe > > and > > http://209.134.106.21/articles/wirebook.exe > > The drawings you'll find in these files will > probably represent 80-90% of the work necessary > to do your own page-per-system wirebook. You > can pick and chose from the various pages > to assemble a document that is easily modified > to match what you want do do. > want to do. > > > Bob . . . > > -------------------------- > TEMPORARY WEBSITE ADDRESS: > http://209.134.106.21 > -------------------------- > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Craig Snively" <craigsn(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
Date: Feb 08, 2002
I'm working on connecting up my EFIS/One from Blue Mountain Avionics into my existing airplane. I'm looking for a special switch (or suggestions), connecting my EGT/CHT sensors to the system. The EFIS has 6 inputs for thermocouples, and I have a 6 cylinder Lyc. So I was gonna put my 3 hottest cylinders, both EGT & CHT (for a total of 6 inputs), and then use a (and this is where I need the help), a 6 way (6PDT on-on switch - if there is such a thing). Then I would switch from my 3 hottest cylinders, which I want to monitor most of the time, and to check the others as needed. If anyone has a better suggestion, let me know. By the way, I've seen Bob's thermocouple information in Chap 14 of the current Aeroelectric Connection. Thanks. Craig ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: CHT EGT Switch
Date: Feb 09, 2002
Call Ron at Rocky Mountain Insturment. He has a 6 way switch that allows you to have one input into your your unit, but switch between all cylinders both CHT and EGT. You could connect as many as you like to the switch. Paul Besing RV-6A N197AB Arizona http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing First Flight 22 July 01 Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software http://www.kitlog.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Snively" <craigsn(at)hotmail.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: > > I'm working on connecting up my EFIS/One from Blue Mountain Avionics > into my existing airplane. I'm looking for a special switch (or > suggestions), connecting my EGT/CHT sensors to the system. The EFIS has > 6 inputs for thermocouples, and I have a 6 cylinder Lyc. So I was gonna > put my 3 hottest cylinders, both EGT & CHT (for a total of 6 inputs), > and then use a (and this is where I need the help), a 6 way (6PDT on-on > switch - if there is such a thing). Then I would switch from my 3 > hottest cylinders, which I want to monitor most of the time, and to > check the others as needed. > > If anyone has a better suggestion, let me know. By the way, I've seen > Bob's thermocouple information in Chap 14 of the current Aeroelectric > Connection. > > Thanks. > > Craig > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 09, 2002
From: David Mullins <n323xl(at)mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: CHT EGT Switch
The 6 way switch is a Westach unit. So check on prices as they vary from retailers. Dave Mullins Nashua, New Hampshire http://n323xl.iwarp.com Paul Besing wrote: > > Call Ron at Rocky Mountain Insturment. He has a 6 way switch that allows > you to have one input into your your unit, but switch between all cylinders > both CHT and EGT. You could connect as many as you like to the switch. > > Paul Besing > RV-6A N197AB Arizona > http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing > First Flight 22 July 01 > Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software > http://www.kitlog.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Craig Snively" <craigsn(at)hotmail.com> > To: > Subject: AeroElectric-List: > > > > > > I'm working on connecting up my EFIS/One from Blue Mountain Avionics > > into my existing airplane. I'm looking for a special switch (or > > suggestions), connecting my EGT/CHT sensors to the system. The EFIS has > > 6 inputs for thermocouples, and I have a 6 cylinder Lyc. So I was gonna > > put my 3 hottest cylinders, both EGT & CHT (for a total of 6 inputs), > > and then use a (and this is where I need the help), a 6 way (6PDT on-on > > switch - if there is such a thing). Then I would switch from my 3 > > hottest cylinders, which I want to monitor most of the time, and to > > check the others as needed. > > > > If anyone has a better suggestion, let me know. By the way, I've seen > > Bob's thermocouple information in Chap 14 of the current Aeroelectric > > Connection. > > > > Thanks. > > > > Craig > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Cameron" <toucan(at)78055.com>
Subject: CADD for schematics
Date: Feb 09, 2002
Visual CADD, the successor to Generic CADD, is pretty good for schematics, as far as CADD programs go. [Some of you may remember, Generic CADD sold for 99 bucks and it was so good, AutoCAD bought the company and then shut it down. Too much competition.] For serious schematic work, however, dedicated schematic programs are far better. I'm still using an ancient DOS version of Tango (from Excel), but the integrated schematic plus printed circuit board and autorouting program cost me $2600 quite a few years ago. Prices now are much higher. Jim Cameron Lancair ES N143ES ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2002
From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net>
Subject: Toggle Switch Hole Drilling
For what it's worth. One of Lectric Bob's Shop Notes addresses Toggle Switch Installation. His suggestion for cutting a hole for the body is to use a 15/32" spotfacer fitted with a 1/8" pilot drill. I am sure that this tool works well. However, in calling one major tool company I found that technical person was not familiar with spotfacers. A call to a local tool supplier located a source of 15/32" spotfacers for about $30. The same supplier had a Black & Decker 15/32" "Bullet Drill" for $8.95 (marked down from $12). The bullet drill has a 15/32" body with a cutting end that looks very much like the spotfacer's in Bob's photo. It has an integral pilot about 5/32". I tried it on the .060 aluminum of the instrument panel at about 600 rpm in my drill press. It cuts like a gem making a very clean hole an creating a minimal burr. Richard Dudley -6A (N331RD reserved) finish kit ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James Foerster" <jfoerst(at)jps.net>
Subject: Mechanics of panel design
Date: Feb 10, 2002
I'm building a Jabiru J400, 4 seat high wing plane. The manual section for the instrument panel is not yet ready, but I may wish to modify what they have to make a panel that is easy to work on. For example, it could be made in 3 removable sections. I don't know details of panel construction, such as the creation of a subpanel layer to allow mounting cable tiedowns without putting holes in the visible panel. Or, how to mount things: slide out box, vs removable whole panel, etc. Anyone have a source of design information here? I don't want to reinvent the wheel, and want to borrow some ideas fom other panel designs. I would appreciate reference to books or magazine articles or web sites. Jim Foerster ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Hebeard2(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 10, 2002
Subject: Re: Toggle Switch Hole Drilling
Black & Decker Bullet drill bits are available from Avery Tools. Shown on page 29 of their catalog. Website www.avaerytools.com Harley Beard RV-6A ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2002
From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Toggle Switch Hole Drilling
Harley, Thanks for your comments. The drills on page 29 of Avery catalog (as shown in the drawings at the top of the page) are the common type of drills with the tapered tip. The drill that I described has a smaller diameter pilot and the cutting surface of the body is concave so that its outer edges cut before the inner part. The result is that when the outer edges of the drill break through, it leaves a "washer" of the cut metal. Richard Dudley Hebeard2(at)aol.com wrote: > > > Black & Decker Bullet drill bits are available from Avery Tools. Shown on > page 29 of their catalog. Website www.avaerytools.com > Harley Beard RV-6A > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com>
Subject: Toggle Switch Hole Drilling
Date: Feb 10, 2002
I just thought I'd add my 2 cents worth. The easiest way I've found for drilling the multitdue of toggle switch, circuit breaker, intercom knobs, dimmer pot, etc.. holes is to use a plain ole' UINIBIT. Its so much quicker that chucking up a new bit for every size, and does equally good of job on the holes. Just my opinion. The unibit is the single most usefull bit for building a metal plane. Cheers, Stein Bruch RV6, Minneapolis, Almost ready for hgr. -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Richard Dudley Subject: AeroElectric-List: Toggle Switch Hole Drilling For what it's worth. One of Lectric Bob's Shop Notes addresses Toggle Switch Installation. His suggestion for cutting a hole for the body is to use a 15/32" spotfacer fitted with a 1/8" pilot drill. I am sure that this tool works well. However, in calling one major tool company I found that technical person was not familiar with spotfacers. A call to a local tool supplier located a source of 15/32" spotfacers for about $30. The same supplier had a Black & Decker 15/32" "Bullet Drill" for $8.95 (marked down from $12). The bullet drill has a 15/32" body with a cutting end that looks very much like the spotfacer's in Bob's photo. It has an integral pilot about 5/32". I tried it on the .060 aluminum of the instrument panel at about 600 rpm in my drill press. It cuts like a gem making a very clean hole an creating a minimal burr. Richard Dudley -6A (N331RD reserved) finish kit http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2002
From: John Rourke <john@allied-computer.com>
Subject: Re: Toggle Switch Hole Drilling
It's available at Sears too. They may not have the 15/32 size, but most Ace Hardware stores do. Probably True-Value too. -John R. James Stone wrote: > > > Thanks for the info Richard, > I've never seen what you describe at the local hardware store and assumed > you had not either and that was why you were sharing your discovery with us. > Thanks again, I'm heading for the web site now. > Jim > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: FlyV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 10, 2002
Subject: Re: Toggle Switch Hole Drilling
In a message dated 2/10/2002 4:28:20 PM Pacific Standard Time, rhdudley(at)att.net writes: <> I have a Unibit with a max. diameter of 1/2" that has steps every 1/32". The larger size Unibits are stepped every 1/16". Cliff ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: Dimmer Lead
> >Can anyone tell me where the dimmer leads on my avionics go? Is it to >power via a dimmer bus or to ground via a dimmer? Or somewhere else? > >Richard Dudley >-6A finish Dimmer leads are power inputs from an adjustable voltage source such as a rheostat or more modern, solid state dimmers like those on our website. Bob . . . -------------------------- TEMPORARY WEBSITE ADDRESS: http://209.134.106.21 -------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Lenleg(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 11, 2002
Subject: Website
Bob: What is going on with your website. I am trying to order parts .... been unable to get the site to come up for days?????? Len Leggette, RV-8A Greensboro, N.C. N910LL (res) Hooking up systems ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Schemmel, Grant" <Grant.Schemmel(at)utmc.aeroflex.com>
Subject: Used equipment question
Date: Feb 11, 2002
I have a question for the list, that I hope someone out there can answer: Does anybody have experience with how you go about judging the appraised value of a wrecked aircraft? I am looking towards my next project, and was thinking that the best way to get most of the expensive pieces in one swoop would be to bid on something that's up for salvage. Don't have a clue though (since I've not done this before) as to how you go about putting a value on one. There was a good article in the Feb Sport Aviation about it, but the author didn't say how to do the valuation. Appreciate any tips, Thanks! Grant Schemmel ch601hds w/ o-200 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: Website
> >Bob: > >What is going on with your website. I am trying to order parts .... been >unable to get the site to come up for days?????? > >Len Leggette, RV-8A >Greensboro, N.C. N910LL (res) >Hooking up systems The main site is down. Click on the temporary cite address below and you can get access to the files. You won't be able to automatically mail an order . . . fill out the form, and print it. Then fax to B&C at 316.283.7400 or you can call in an order to 316.283.8000 (ask for Todd). Bob . . . -------------------------- TEMPORARY WEBSITE ADDRESS: http://209.134.106.21 -------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2002
From: Glenn Rainey <nimbusaviation(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Battery contactors
Triggered by a recent posting with quite a nifty high-spec contactor - I am left wondering if there are any really LIGHTWEIGHT devices out there - this one was almost a pound weight ... any pointers chaps? Cheers Glenn LEZ (Scotland) http://greetings.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HCRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 11, 2002
Subject: Re: Toggle Switch Hole Drilling
Get a No. 1 Unibit, it one goes up to 1/2 in. by 1/32 increments, including 15/32. Harry Crosby Pleasanton, California RV-6, finish kit stuff ________________________________________________________________________________
From: jerry(at)tr2.com
Subject: Re: Toggle Switch Hole Drilling
Date: Feb 11, 2002
Richard Dudley wrote: > > Jim, > Here is some more information that may be of help. > Another builder once showed me some drills which he called "pilot > drills). I thought they might be the same as my bullet drill. I just > talked with him. His description, that the cutting face is concave is > the same as my 15/32 drill. He checked the package. His are Black & > Decker. They use both the Bullet Drill and Pilot Drill names. It looks > as thought the generic name is Pilot Drill. He said that he has seen > them at both Home Depot and Loew's and that he would expect to find them > also at woodworking stores. *** I just saw them at the Harbor Freight retail store in Newark, CA. - Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com ) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2002
From: Tom Brusehaver <cozytom(at)mn.rr.com>
Subject: Re: CADD for schematics
Since no one is mantioning anything open source, I will. Xfig is a wonderful simple drawing program. Comes with components for drawing schematics (physical and symbol). Outputs in most of the common formats (CGM imports into word, embedded postscript, bitmap graphics formats). It comes with most Linux distributions. Best of all it is free (as in beer and speach). http://www.xfig.org Jim Cameron wrote: > > Visual CADD, the successor to Generic CADD, is pretty good for > schematics, as far as CADD programs go. [Some of you may remember, Generic > CADD sold for 99 bucks and it was so good, AutoCAD bought the company and > then shut it down. Too much competition.] > For serious schematic work, however, dedicated schematic programs are > far better. I'm still using an ancient DOS version of Tango (from Excel), > but the integrated schematic plus printed circuit board and autorouting > program cost me $2600 quite a few years ago. Prices now are much higher. > > Jim Cameron > Lancair ES N143ES ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: Battery contactors
> > >Triggered by a recent posting with quite a nifty >high-spec contactor - I am left wondering if there are >any really LIGHTWEIGHT devices out there - this one >was almost a pound weight ... > >any pointers chaps? The only lighter alternative might be a manually operated switch. I have had a number of builders adapt race-car and/or marine battery switches to their airplanes. One can fabricate a mechanical push-pull rod or perhaps a Bowden control on a bellcrank to make the switch easily accessable from the pilot's seat. Bob . . . -------------------------------------- < Our main website is down. Click on > < http://209.134.106.21 for access > < to the files. You won't be able > < to automatically mail an order . . > < Fill out the form, and print it. >\ < Fax to B&C at 316.283.7400 or you > < can call in an order to > < 316.283.8000 and ask for Todd > -------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2002
From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Dimmer Lead
Thanks, Bob. RHDudley Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > > > >Can anyone tell me where the dimmer leads on my avionics go? Is it to > >power via a dimmer bus or to ground via a dimmer? Or somewhere else? > > > >Richard Dudley > >-6A finish > > Dimmer leads are power inputs from an adjustable voltage source > such as a rheostat or more modern, solid state dimmers like those > on our website. > > Bob . . . > > -------------------------- > TEMPORARY WEBSITE ADDRESS: > http://209.134.106.21 > -------------------------- > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com>
Subject: Aeroelectric article Detailing How to build a jack
for a handheld
Date: Feb 11, 2002
A few months ago there was an excellent article at the Aeroelectric connection showing how to build a jack for a handheld to use the aircraft com antennae. I was wanting to build this tomorrow but cannot find the article on the temp web site. Does anyone know how I can find the article? I wanted to go to Radio Shack and buy the jack. Does anyone know what jack was used? I think it was the type that has a switch that is normally closed that opens when the jack inserts. What is this type of jack called? Thank you, ned ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com>
Subject: Re: Dimmer Lead
Date: Feb 11, 2002
A few months ago there was an excellent article at the Aeroelectric connection showing how to build a jack for a handheld to use the aircraft com antennae. I was wanting to build this tomorrow but cannot find the article on the temp web site. Does anyone know how I can find the article? I wanted to go to Radio Shack and buy the jack. Does anyone know what jack was used? I think it was the type that has a switch that is normally closed that opens when the jack inserts. What is this type of jack called? Thank you, ned ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com>
Subject: Aeroelectric article Detailing How to build a jack
for a handheld
Date: Feb 11, 2002
A few months ago there was an excellent article at the Aeroelectric connection showing how to build a jack for a handheld to use the aircraft com antennae. I was wanting to build this tomorrow but cannot find the article on the temp web site. Does anyone know how I can find the article? I wanted to go to Radio Shack and buy the jack. Does anyone know what jack was used? I think it was the type that has a switch that is normally closed that opens when the jack inserts. What is this type of jack called? Thank you, ned ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Lonnie Benson" <lonben(at)erols.com>
Subject: Re: Aeroelectric article Detailing How to build a jack
for a handheld
Date: Feb 12, 2002
Suggest you read Jim Weirs' article "Build a $2 cockpit antenna diplexer for your handheld" page 53, March 2002 Kitplanes Magazine. He uses a Radio Shack plug 274-288 and a jack 274-248. Lonnie Benson Building a Murphy Rebel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Aeroelectric article Detailing How to build a jack for a handheld > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2002
From: Glenn Rainey <nimbusaviation(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: panel accessory power jack
(coming thick and fast these questions) - looking for a consensus on the *best* [safe,secure,etc etc] panel socket for power to run a handheld device like GPS or whatever off ships power. What do the pundits recommend ? (not that nasty automotive socket). And yes, I hate to have trailing power cables in the cockpit, but just occasionally...... :> cheers Glenn Rainey LEZ, Scotland UK http://greetings.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: FlyV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 12, 2002
Subject: Re: panel accessory power jack
In a message dated 2/12/2002 6:08:37 AM Pacific Standard Time, nimbusaviation(at)yahoo.com writes: << (coming thick and fast these questions) - looking for a consensus on the *best* [safe,secure,etc etc] panel socket for power to run a handheld device like GPS or whatever off ships power. >> I'm interested in the same thing. Cliff ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: Handheld Antenna Jack
> >A few months ago there was an excellent article at the Aeroelectric >connection showing how to build a jack for a handheld to use the aircraft >com antennae. I was wanting to build this tomorrow but cannot find the >article on the temp web site. Does anyone know how I can find the article? > >I wanted to go to Radio Shack and buy the jack. Does anyone know what jack >was used? I think it was the type that has a switch that is normally closed >that opens when the jack inserts. What is this type of jack called? > >Thank you, >ned The piece was uploaded to both servers but I neglected to get it listed in the index of articles. Goto http://209.134.106.21/articles.html and find the first item in the How To list . . . Thanks for the heads-up . . . Bob . . . -------------------------------------- < Our main website is down. Click on > < http://209.134.106.21 for access > < to the files. You won't be able > < to automatically mail an order . . > < Fill out the form, and print it. >\ < Fax to B&C at 316.283.7400 or you > < can call in an order to > < 316.283.8000 and ask for Todd > -------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: Aeroelectric article Detailing How to build a jack
for a handheld > >Suggest you read Jim Weirs' article "Build a $2 cockpit antenna diplexer for >your handheld" page 53, March 2002 Kitplanes Magazine. He uses a Radio >Shack plug 274-288 and a jack 274-248. > >Lonnie Benson >Building a Murphy Rebel In the interest of concise speech, there ARE devices called duplexers, diplexers, circulators and couplers that allow multiple devices to share an antenna. The panel mounted jack is not such a device. It's simply a receptacle that connects your hand held to the antenna when the plug is inserted. It also features a switch contact that automatically disconnects the panel mounted radio from the antenna when the plug is inserted. This is the same kind of functionality that disconnects the hand-held's speaker when you plug in headphones, etc. The parts in Jim's article are the same as those suggested in http://209.134.106.21/articles.html Bob . . . -------------------------------------- < Our main website is down. Click on > < http://209.134.106.21 for access > < to the files. You won't be able > < to automatically mail an order . . > < Fill out the form, and print it. >\ < Fax to B&C at 316.283.7400 or you > < can call in an order to > < 316.283.8000 and ask for Todd > -------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: panel accessory power jack
Date: Feb 12, 2002
Is anyone familiar with the connector that airlines are using to provide 12V power at the passenger seats? Cessna is using this same connector to provide a 12V power jack in the new singles. Radio Shack used to make an adapter that converted it to a standard cigarette lighter type plug. David Swartzendruber Wichita > > (coming thick and fast these questions) - looking for > a consensus on the *best* [safe,secure,etc etc] panel > socket for power to run a handheld device like GPS or > whatever off ships power. What do the pundits > recommend ? (not that nasty automotive socket). And > yes, I hate to have trailing power cables in the > cockpit, but just occasionally...... :> > > cheers > > Glenn Rainey > LEZ, Scotland UK > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com>
Subject: Re: Aeroelectric article Detailing How to build
a jack for a handheld
Date: Feb 12, 2002
Thanks Bob! I'm out to Radio Shack to buy the parts. ned ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Aeroelectric article Detailing How to build a jack for a handheld > > > > >Suggest you read Jim Weirs' article "Build a $2 cockpit antenna diplexer for > >your handheld" page 53, March 2002 Kitplanes Magazine. He uses a Radio > >Shack plug 274-288 and a jack 274-248. > > > >Lonnie Benson > >Building a Murphy Rebel > > In the interest of concise speech, there ARE devices called > duplexers, diplexers, circulators and couplers that allow > multiple devices to share an antenna. The panel mounted > jack is not such a device. It's simply a receptacle that > connects your hand held to the antenna when the plug is > inserted. It also features a switch contact that automatically > disconnects the panel mounted radio from the antenna when > the plug is inserted. This is the same kind of functionality > that disconnects the hand-held's speaker when you plug in > headphones, etc. > > The parts in Jim's article are the same as those suggested > in http://209.134.106.21/articles.html > > > Bob . . . > > -------------------------------------- > < Our main website is down. Click on > > < http://209.134.106.21 for access > > < to the files. You won't be able > > < to automatically mail an order . . > > < Fill out the form, and print it. >\ > < Fax to B&C at 316.283.7400 or you > > < can call in an order to > > < 316.283.8000 and ask for Todd > > -------------------------------------- > > http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: panel accessory power jack
> >In a message dated 2/12/2002 6:08:37 AM Pacific Standard Time, >nimbusaviation(at)yahoo.com writes: > ><< (coming thick and fast these questions) - looking for > a consensus on the *best* [safe,secure,etc etc] panel > socket for power to run a handheld device like GPS or > whatever off ships power. >> I hesitate to call out any specific pair of connectors as they would be but one of hundreds of possibilities suited to this task but here are some options to consider: Radio Shack 274-346 panel mounted RCA Phono jack to connect to power source and a RS 42-2370 (3' wire with plug already on one end and bare wires to accept a connector that fits your radio). Radio Shack 274-002/274-001 mated pair Radio Shack 274-1576/274-1573 mated pair. A panel mounted BNC female connector (our S605BF) could provide a place to plug a BNC male (Our S605CM). I've installed these connectors on shielded wire (Our S906-1-22). The wire is smaller than coax so you need to fill the open voids with 5-minute epoxy on the cable male. You can solder a single strand to the center conductor on the panel mounted female, seat the pin and fill the back side with epoxy. The connector then finds "ground" through its mounting. There are LOTS of ways to do this. Go to your local parts supply store and let your imagination work on what ever you find hanging on the racks. Bob . . . -------------------------------------- < Our main website is down. Click on > < http://209.134.106.21 for access > < to the files. You won't be able > < to automatically mail an order . . > < Fill out the form, and print it. >\ < Fax to B&C at 316.283.7400 or you > < can call in an order to > < 316.283.8000 and ask for Todd > -------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Stan Blanton" <stanb(at)door.net>
Subject: Re: panel accessory power jack
Date: Feb 12, 2002
> << (coming thick and fast these questions) - looking for > a consensus on the *best* [safe,secure,etc etc] panel > socket for power to run a handheld device like GPS or > whatever off ships power. >> > > How about a small power supply connecter such as is used to charge your handheld radio. A common size might be a 2.5mm. Switchcraft makes a whole line including plugs and panel jacks. The 712 line of plugs and 760 series of jacks would work. Try p/n SC1051-ND & SC1052-ND in Digikey. (p.151 , catalog T011) P/ N SC1148-ND even has a locking ring. This is just like the connection that Headsets Inc. uses on the batterypower supply for their ANL headset battery supplies. The disadvantage to any of these is that specific power cables would need to be made for your GPS, handheld etc. but thay are small and lightweight. Stan Blanton RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2002
From: William Mills <courierboy(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Aeroelectric article Detailing How to
build a jack for a handheld And we saw it HERE first! . . . hmmm > The parts in Jim's article are the same as those suggested > in http://209.134.106.21/articles.html > > > Bob . . . > > -------------------------------------- > < Our main website is down. Click on > > < http://209.134.106.21 for access > > < to the files. You won't be able > > < to automatically mail an order . . > > < Fill out the form, and print it. >\ > < Fax to B&C at 316.283.7400 or you > > < can call in an order to > > < 316.283.8000 and ask for Todd > > -------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Piers Herbert" <piers.herbert(at)ntlworld.com>
Subject: Internally regulated alternator
Date: Feb 12, 2002
Bob, First of all, thanks for sending the aeroelectric connection. I am planning to install a Wilksch engine which uses a Denso alternator (I think the number is JA188IR) with an internal regulator. The scheme for adding OV protection to an internally regulated alternator (Z-24) shows an alternator OV disconnect contactor. Is the contactor nescessary when adding OV protection to this alternator, and if so could you explain why it is not sufficient for the crowbar module just to short the field circuit to gound? Regards, Piers Herbert ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James E. Clark" <jclark(at)conterra.com>
Subject: panel accessory power jack
Date: Feb 12, 2002
Was just looking at stuff like this over the last few days. And yes, 2.5mm [ID] is a common size. Another one of the "common" sizes (available at more than one store ;-) ) was the 5.5mm/2.1mm [OD/ID] combination. {Note that you want to be careful and get the OD/ID pairing right on this.} Was able to locate both the plug and the jack as well as a plug with 6ft of wire and bare ends to connect to whatever you wanted on the other end. As Bob mentioned, the combinations are endless, so make sure you pick a pair that is "easy to find". There are three of us here that are going to use the 5.5mm/2.1. Might just as well have used the 5.5/2.5 but one of my buddies had alredy gone with "2.1" **AND** I was able to find the stuff mentioned above. Hope this rambling helps in some way. James -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Stan Blanton Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: panel accessory power jack > << (coming thick and fast these questions) - looking for > a consensus on the *best* [safe,secure,etc etc] panel > socket for power to run a handheld device like GPS or > whatever off ships power. >> > > How about a small power supply connecter such as is used to charge your handheld radio. A common size might be a 2.5mm. Switchcraft makes a whole line including plugs and panel jacks. The 712 line of plugs and 760 series of jacks would work. Try p/n SC1051-ND & SC1052-ND in Digikey. (p.151 , catalog T011) P/ N SC1148-ND even has a locking ring. This is just like the connection that Headsets Inc. uses on the batterypower supply for their ANL headset battery supplies. The disadvantage to any of these is that specific power cables would need to be made for your GPS, handheld etc. but thay are small and lightweight. Stan Blanton RV-6 http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list ---------------------------------------------------- Is email taking over your day? Manage your time with eMailBoss. Try it free! http://www.eMailBoss.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2002
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Handheld COM Antenna jack
Where can we find the 0.010" brass material specified in Bob's article to make the housing for the jack? ===== ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 http://greetings.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2002
From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org>
Subject: Re: Handheld COM Antenna jack
> >Where can we find the 0.010" brass material specified >in Bob's article to make the housing for the jack? Hobby stores that carry R/C planes usually have some small sheet brass pieces available. You could try there. Gary Liming ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2002
From: John Rourke <john@allied-computer.com>
Subject: Re: Handheld COM Antenna jack
Ace Hardware (and probably many other hardware stores) have a little hobbyist section with sheet, rod and tube stock of stainless, brass and aluminum... good for all kinds of little jobs! -John Michel Therrien wrote: > > > Where can we find the 0.010" brass material specified > in Bob's article to make the housing for the jack? > > ===== > ---------------------------- > Michel Therrien CH601-HD > http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby > http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 > > http://greetings.yahoo.com > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: Internally regulated alternator
> > >Bob, > >First of all, thanks for sending the aeroelectric connection. > >I am planning to install a Wilksch engine which uses a Denso alternator (I >think the number is JA188IR) with an internal regulator. > >The scheme for adding OV protection to an internally regulated alternator >(Z-24) shows an alternator OV disconnect contactor. > >Is the contactor nescessary when adding OV protection to this alternator, >and if so could you explain why it is not sufficient for the crowbar module >just to short the field circuit to gound? One COULD build a crowbar module that was hefty enough to open the alternator b-lead fuse . . . but it's a lot bigger device than the little critter we sell. Further, if your system suffers from any nuisance trips, you don't want to be replacing that fuse very often . . . of course you could put a breaker there . . . but that forces the electronics in the crowbar module to get bigger yet. What you suggest is technically possible but fraught with practical hazards. Bob . . . -------------------------------------- < Our main website is down. Click on > < http://209.134.106.21 for access > < to the files. You won't be able > < to automatically mail an order . . > < Fill out the form, and print it. >\ < Fax to B&C at 316.283.7400 or you > < can call in an order to > < 316.283.8000 and ask for Todd > -------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Haywire" <haywire(at)telus.net>
Subject: panel accessory power jack
Date: Feb 12, 2002
I hate the automotive style "cigarette lighter" plug as well, however many items that you will want to plug in use less than 12 volts. Most new devices locate the power transformer inside the plug, so if you clip this off and put on your new plug you will have the incorrect voltage to your expensive device. I'd really like to improve on this antiquated power receptacle for my plane, but I really don't have the time or inclination to rewire every adapter cord for every accessory. Maybe Bob could design a variable voltage power supply plug with all the built in safeguards to prevent frying our "gizmos". How 'bout it Bob? heh, heh...... pleeeaasee S. Todd Bartrim 13B rotary powered RV-9 (finish kit) C-FSTB (reserved) > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert > L. Nuckolls, III > Sent: February 12, 2002 7:25 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: panel accessory power jack > > > III" > > > > > >In a message dated 2/12/2002 6:08:37 AM Pacific Standard Time, > >nimbusaviation(at)yahoo.com writes: > > > ><< (coming thick and fast these questions) - looking for > > a consensus on the *best* [safe,secure,etc etc] panel > > socket for power to run a handheld device like GPS or > > whatever off ships power. >> > > I hesitate to call out any specific pair of connectors > as they would be but one of hundreds of possibilities > suited to this task but here are some options to consider: > > Radio Shack 274-346 panel mounted RCA Phono jack > to connect to power source and a RS 42-2370 (3' > wire with plug already on one end and bare wires > to accept a connector that fits your radio). > > Radio Shack 274-002/274-001 mated pair > > Radio Shack 274-1576/274-1573 mated pair. > > A panel mounted BNC female connector (our > S605BF) could provide a place to plug a > BNC male (Our S605CM). I've installed these > connectors on shielded wire (Our S906-1-22). > > The wire is smaller than coax so you need to fill > the open voids with 5-minute epoxy on the cable > male. You can solder a single strand to the center > conductor on the panel mounted female, seat the pin > and fill the back side with epoxy. The connector then > finds "ground" through its mounting. > > There are LOTS of ways to do this. Go to your > local parts supply store and let your imagination > work on what ever you find hanging on the racks. > > Bob . . . > > -------------------------------------- > < Our main website is down. Click on > > < http://209.134.106.21 for access > > < to the files. You won't be able > > < to automatically mail an order . . > > < Fill out the form, and print it. >\ > < Fax to B&C at 316.283.7400 or you > > < can call in an order to > > < 316.283.8000 and ask for Todd > > -------------------------------------- > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2002
From: "Robert E. Falstad" <RandBFalstad(at)compuserve.com>
Subject: Aeroelectric article Detailing How to build a jack
for a handheld Message text written by INTERNET:aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com >: AeroElectric-List: Aeroelectric article Detailing How to build a jack for a handheld< Ned, The March '02 issue of Kitplanes has an article on this exact topic by Jim Weir, Bob's colleague? competitor? (friendly, I hope!). Jim calls out Radio Shack P/N 274-288 (plug) and P/N 274-248 (jack). Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: panel accessory power jack
> > I hate the automotive style "cigarette lighter" plug as well, > however many >items that you will want to plug in use less than 12 volts. Most new devices >locate the power transformer inside the plug, so if you clip this off and >put on your new plug you will have the incorrect voltage to your expensive >device. > I'd really like to improve on this antiquated power receptacle for my >plane, but I really don't have the time or inclination to rewire every >adapter cord for every accessory. > Maybe Bob could design a variable voltage power supply plug with > all the >built in safeguards to prevent frying our "gizmos". How 'bout it Bob? heh, >heh...... pleeeaasee >S. Todd Bartrim >13B rotary powered >RV-9 (finish kit) >C-FSTB (reserved) funny you should mention that. I JUST e-mailed off the artwork on a prototype order for new dimmer boards. These boards have pads on the layout to accept surface mounted potentiometers. When the 'bugs' are worked out, the dimmer line will be expanded to include two-voltage fixed regulators useful for things like two-speed trim controllers. Of course, one could use a single channel of the same device to provide a regulated, filtered source of voltage lower than the 14V bus to power any accessories that need the lower voltage. These critters will be offered by B&C in the same range of sizes as the current dimmers and will physically LOOK the same. Only the parts on the boards and the wiring will be different. Should have boards back next Monday and we'll stuff a few up for bench testing. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: Your Phone Call
>Bob, I have been unable to get your website and didn't know which of us >had the >problem. By the above note, you do. I would assume that in a week or less >you'll be back in business. If longer, please let me know. > >One specific question. I took your seminar at Manassas several years ago. >I'm only know getting into the details of wiring. In reviewing your book I >find that all the sample diagrams include words to the effect that the >battery master and the alternator field should come on together. I can't >find in the book nor do I remember you discussing this. Why should they >come on together when the engine isn't even running? Back in the days of generators, you could have either generator, battery or both switches ON or OFF in any combination. When alternators came along, we discovered that you should not allow most alternators to try to run without a battery on line. Here was where the split rocker was born . . . battery ON/alternator OFF - OK. Battery ON/ Alternator ON - OK. Battery OFF/Alternator is forced OFF too. Before I had a source of inexpensive toggles with progressive transfer contacts, I reasoned that there was no particular advantage in trying to avoid turning the alternator on before starting the engine. Modern RG batteries didn't care and neither did the alternator. Hence, all the early power distribution diagrams show two pole, single throw switch to control both alternator and battery together. In years since, we've located and now stock the S700-2-10 switch that will let you mimic the functionality of the split rocker but in a switch that looks like it belongs on the panel with the rest of the switches. If you have an revision 8 or later book, check out free upgrades that you may download at http://209.134.106.21/articles.html You will note that all of the later power distribution diagrams suggest the use of the S700-2-10 switch which you can acquire at: http://209.134.106.21/Catalog/BCcatalog.html >Another question comes to mind. I believe that you and B&C sell only female >PDIG fastons. I would like to find some male ones but have not. Can you >tell me a source? I want to use them as disconnects at the wing root for >wires in the wing. Is that considered satisfactory or bad? I have male PIDG style connectors I ordered in to look at. They DO have metallic insulation support. They're a Waldom-Molex part. I'm writing up a short article about them that will be published on the website. I don't recommend them. The knife splices are far superior for this task. In the mean time take a peek at: http://209.134.106.21/articles/KnifeSplice/KnifeSplice1.jpg http://209.134.106.21/articles/KnifeSplice/KnifeSplice2.jpg http://209.134.106.21/articles/KnifeSplice/FastOnMale.jpg If you really want the male fast-ons, I'm going to sell the ones that I have for what I've got in them. A bag of 20 pieces is $10 each postage paid. I have red and blue sizes. Bob . . . -------------------------------------- < Our main website is down. Click on > < http://209.134.106.21 for access > < to the files. You won't be able > < to automatically mail an order . . > < Fill out the form, and print it. > < Fax to B&C at 316.283.7400 or you > < can call in an order to > < 316.283.8000 and ask for Todd > -------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: How to build a jack for a handheld
> >Ned, > >The March '02 issue of Kitplanes has an article on this exact topic by Jim >Weir, Bob's colleague? competitor? (friendly, I hope!). Sure . . . I've known Jim for at least 15 years and we've traded ideas on a number of projects and topics. In fact, I've quoted a piece of his at: http://209.134.106.21/Catalog/avionics/weir_760.html Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HCRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 13, 2002
Subject: ANL Question
Bob or anyone: Can someone explain or refer me to any source of information that would explain ANLs and how they work. Thanks. Harry Crosby Pleasanton, California RV-6, finish kit stuff ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: ANL Question
> >Bob or anyone: Can someone explain or refer me to any source of information >that would explain ANLs and how they work. Thanks. > >Harry Crosby >Pleasanton, California >RV-6, finish kit stuff Sure. Take a peek at the new articles listed in the What's New box at the top of this page: http://209.134.106.21/articles.html Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 14, 2002
From: Frank and Dorothy <frankv(at)infogen.net.nz>
Subject: Power bus in wing?
Hi all, I'd appreciate any comments anyone has on this idea... I'm going to have a wig-wag landing light flasher in my RV6. To do that, I'm going to need to use a couple of high-current transistors to actually turn the light on/off. I figured that these might as well go out at the tip near the lights themselves and save some heavy-current wiring. And then I thought that the same technique could be used for turning on/off nav lights and strobes. In the tip, would be a little power-distribution board and the strobe power supply. The power distribution board would be supplied by a single heavy-duty (I guess about 10 amps if all the lights are on) 14.4V power cable, and have several low-current inputs to turn on/off high-current transistors. Maybe relays might be OK for the nav lights and strobes, since these don't need to be turned on/off very often. Question: Is this a reasonable scheme? I can see a couple of negatives: * Single point of failure. But all I'd be losing would be the lights on one side. In the end, none of them is essential. * More complexity. More things to go wrong. But electronics is pretty reliable nowadays, especially solid-state stuff. * More expensive. Or would it be? Less wire needed. * The main bus wire would be sized and fused to carry a lot of current. If that shorted, it could be very bad. Especially if there was a bit of fuel around. * Probably need fuses in the wingtip to protect the wiring between the power distribution board and the lights. If one of these blew, it would be a pain to replace. Some positives: * Lighter. But maybe only by a few ounces. * Easy to add other devices in the wingtip. But what else would you want out there? * More efficient power distribution. But power losses through distribution are pretty minimal anyway. * An interesting project. This alone might outweigh a few of the negatives :-) Another interesting possibility would be to distribute the power using AC. I know of a research project where power is distributed round a boat at 100V, 10KHz AC. Each device has a small rectifier to convert back to 12V. I was told that, there being no common 'Ground', there can't be short circuits. Frank. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" <gcomfo(at)tc3net.com>
Subject: Re: Power bus in wing?
Date: Feb 13, 2002
----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank and Dorothy" <frankv(at)infogen.net.nz> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Power bus in wing? > I'm going to have a wig-wag landing light flasher in my RV6. To do that, > I'm going to need to use a couple of high-current transistors to actually > turn the light on/off. Why not just use Bob Haan's wig-wag system? Gordon Comfort N363GC ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: Power bus in wing?
> > >Hi all, > >I'd appreciate any comments anyone has on this idea... > >I'm going to have a wig-wag landing light flasher in my RV6. To do that, >I'm going to need to use a couple of high-current transistors to actually >turn the light on/off. I figured that these might as well go out at the tip >near the lights themselves and save some heavy-current wiring. And then I >thought that the same technique could be used for turning on/off nav lights >and strobes. In the tip, would be a little power-distribution board and the >strobe power supply. The power distribution board would be supplied by a >single heavy-duty (I guess about 10 amps if all the lights are on) 14.4V >power cable, and have several low-current inputs to turn on/off >high-current transistors. Maybe relays might be OK for the nav lights and >strobes, since these don't need to be turned on/off very often. Why not have each circuit get its own power feed. The solid state relay is fine but this doesn't necessarily mean that you need to generate any single point failures. >Question: Is this a reasonable scheme? > >I can see a couple of negatives: > >* Single point of failure. But all I'd be losing would be the >lights on one >side. In the end, none of them is essential. > >* More complexity. More things to go wrong. But electronics is pretty >reliable nowadays, especially solid-state stuff. > >* More expensive. Or would it be? Less wire needed. Wire is still cheaper than electro-goodies. Remote switching may be particularly attractive if, for example, you would like to use miniature switches to do the input work and keep strong magnetic fields off the panel. >* The main bus wire would be sized and fused to carry a lot of >current. If >that shorted, it could be very bad. Especially if there was a bit of fuel >around. Yes . . . this wire WOULD be an extension of ship's power distribution bus . . . methinks it better to keep this compact (i.e. fuse blocks). >* Probably need fuses in the wingtip to protect the wiring between the >power distribution board and the lights. If one of these blew, it would be >a pain to replace. Not if you let each system enjoy separately protected circuits at the bus. >Some positives: >* Lighter. But maybe only by a few ounces. Or heavier by a few ounces . . . depends on how you mount your electronics. In any case, it's a wash for weight. >* Easy to add other devices in the wingtip. But what else would you >want >out there? Can't think of a thing. >* More efficient power distribution. But power losses through >distribution >are pretty minimal anyway. Debatable . . . >* An interesting project. This alone might outweigh a few of the >negatives :-) > >Another interesting possibility would be to distribute the power using AC. >I know of a research project where power is distributed round a boat at >100V, 10KHz AC. Each device has a small rectifier to convert back to 12V. I >was told that, there being no common 'Ground', there can't be short circuits. Hmmmmm . . . I'd really like to see the architecture on this one. I cannot visualize the advantage. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Main server back up
Our main server is back up, sorta. You can access the pages like always but there are still details to work out for the scripts that handle order forms. Will let you all know when it's fully functional again. Bob . . . -------------------------- TEMPORARY WEBSITE ADDRESS: http://209.134.106.21 -------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Piers Herbert" <piers.herbert(at)ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: Internally regulated alternator
Date: Feb 14, 2002
>One COULD build a crowbar module that was hefty enough >to open the alternator b-lead fuse . Sorry, I was not thinking of a crowbar in the B lead. I was just trying to understand why the internally regulated alternator (Z-24) needs a contactor whereas the externally regulated one (Z-23) does not. If the crowbar trips the field breaker would this not stop the alternator output (Denso alternator)? Regards, Piers ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 14, 2002
From: Frank and Dorothy <frankv(at)infogen.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Power bus in wing?
At 14:04 14/02/2002, you wrote: > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Frank and Dorothy" <frankv(at)infogen.net.nz> >To: >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Power bus in wing? > > > > I'm going to have a wig-wag landing light flasher in my RV6. To do that, > > I'm going to need to use a couple of high-current transistors to actually > > turn the light on/off. > >Why not just use Bob Haan's wig-wag system? What I'm talking about is essentially Bob's system, reconfigured a little, and with a couple of extras. Incidentally, Bob's system works out quite expensive for me here in NZ. For about a third of Bob's price, I bought a light flasher kit from Dick Smith (about the equivalent of your radio Shack, I think). It flashes two 50W lights alternately, with an adjustable flash rate. Frank. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net>
Subject: Circuit breaker
Date: Feb 14, 2002
Bob, Just wondered what your thoughts are on substituting 7.5 amp breakers for the 5 amp field breakers for the main and SD8 alternators since I already have a couple of 7.5 breakers on hand. Dave Ford ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 14, 2002
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: Re: Internally regulated alternator
> > > >One COULD build a crowbar module that was hefty enough > >to open the alternator b-lead fuse . > >Sorry, I was not thinking of a crowbar in the B lead. I was just trying to >understand why the internally regulated alternator (Z-24) needs a contactor >whereas the externally regulated one (Z-23) does not. If the crowbar trips >the field breaker would this not stop the alternator output (Denso >alternator)? > >Regards, > >Piers

January 19, 2002 - February 14, 2002

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ao