AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-bh
October 24, 2002 - October 31, 2002
It appears that this avoids the need for the original board and
attedant construction. Fusible links needed from the shunts, of course.
Jim Foerster
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Z-11a, Single ECU |
> I'd run it via fusible link from the aux battery only. This
> is what a second battery is for . . . provide a totally
> independent source of power for the engine that is not
> also loaded with other goodies.
>
> If push comes to shove, you can always close both battery
> contactors and get main battery power to the ECU
I thought both contactors were closed during normal ops?
I have the same situation - one ECU and two batteries. I was thinking that
for "normal operations" I'd like the fuel pumps and ECU to go and off with
the master. This would make for simpler operation, and everything would shut
down with the master. Any reason why I couldnt wire the ECU and pumps with a
fuseable link to the essential bus on the "normal" side their switch, and a
fuseable link to the aux battery bus on the "Emergency" side? If this is
"acceptable" practice, which switch type would be best?
John Slade
Cozy IV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary K" <flyink(at)efortress.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Plug for Auto Alternator |
I also used spade connectors for this too but it's highly recommended to use
PIDG double-crimp connectors. The spade connectors from NAPA are probably
single-crimp and allow the wire to move and eventually break. You should
have a whole pile of different sized PIDG terminals and good PIDG crimpers
to wire a plane anyway.
Gary K.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kent/Jackie Ashton" <kjashton(at)vnet.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Plug for Auto Alternator
>
> Neil, I had the same problem. I couldn't find a plug but I eventually
used
> large size spade connectors from NAPA which fit the wire and slide onto
the
> alternator, Then secured the wires with a small adel clamp.
> --Kent A.
>
> Neil Clayton wrote:
>
> >
> > I bought a 60 Amp Honda alternator. Fits well and is mechanically
attached
> > to the plane, but I need to attach it electrically and the 3-pin plug
that
> > normally attaches it to the cars' system is of course not part of the
> > alternator purchase. How can I locate this plug?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Neil Clayton
> > Cozy MkIV #493
> >
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
In a message dated 10/23/02 11:25:17 PM Central Daylight Time,
gary(at)liming.org writes:
> I see type cert planes with both boost pump switches and manual (plunger
> type) primers - Why?
>
> I suspect they had a good reason to do that, but I don't see it. Just
> making sure I am not missing something.
>
> Gary Liming
>
Good Morning Gary,
I may have missed part of the point here, but as to the priming function of
an electric boost pump, It All Depends on the type of fuel controller system
in the aircraft. If it has a basic float type carburetor, the boost pump
merely supplies a positive head of pressure to assure adequate flow for the
needle valve controlled by the float to control.
In that case, an electrically operated valve can be installed so as to bypass
the carburetor and send fuel to prime either directly to the cylinder or via
a central priming point, usually somewhere down stream of the carburetor.
On the other hand, a pressure injection carburetor, such as a PS5C, will flow
fuel through the carburetor any time that sufficient pressure is applied.
More pressure, more fuel. On those units, no solenoid is need. All you have
to do is operate the pump.
They same is true for the Continental/Bendix style of constant flow fuel
injection systems.
Any help?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
>
>In a message dated 10/23/02 11:25:17 PM Central Daylight Time,
>gary(at)liming.org writes:
>
> > I see type cert planes with both boost pump switches and manual (plunger
> > type) primers - Why?
> >
> > I suspect they had a good reason to do that, but I don't see it. Just
> > making sure I am not missing something.
> >
> > Gary Liming
> >
>
>Good Morning Gary,
>
>I may have missed part of the point here, but as to the priming function of
>an electric boost pump, It All Depends on the type of fuel controller system
>in the aircraft. If it has a basic float type carburetor, the boost pump
>merely supplies a positive head of pressure to assure adequate flow for the
>needle valve controlled by the float to control.
>
>In that case, an electrically operated valve can be installed so as to bypass
>the carburetor and send fuel to prime either directly to the cylinder or via
>a central priming point, usually somewhere down stream of the carburetor.
>
>On the other hand, a pressure injection carburetor, such as a PS5C, will flow
>fuel through the carburetor any time that sufficient pressure is applied.
>More pressure, more fuel. On those units, no solenoid is need. All you have
>to do is operate the pump.
>
>They same is true for the Continental/Bendix style of constant flow fuel
>injection systems.
I wish it were so simple/logical. The 172XP in the late 60's is
fuel injected and has a hand primer too . . . Never knew what to
do with it. I need to check the POH next time I rent it and
see what it suggests.
Virtually all low wing, carbureted aircraft I've flown have
electric boost pumps and as I recall, all POH checklists call
for the pump to be running during takeoff and approach to landing.
Low wing fuel injected have boost pumps too, but most don't
call to run the pump during any time other than engine priming
(which pre-flights the pump) or instances of engine driven
pump failure.
The Beech Sundowner was carbureted and had a manual
primer. The Skipper (designed after the Sundowner
with Pug Piper contributing considerable input)
had an electric primer, obviously only functional
if the boost pump was also running. The Skipper
is the only airplane I've flown with an electric
primer.
The advantages of minimizing the fuel plumbing
in the cockpit are obvious but consider an alternative
advantage of an electric primer system on an
engine with any kind of fuel delivery system.
Install a 4-port primer system feed by an electric
valve downstream of an electric pump. Put a needle
valve in the primer line and calibrate primer fuel
flow for 55 to 65% power fuel flows for your
particular engine. The primer can be used for its
obvious function in pre-flight.
Should the engine suffer fuel starvation due to
any sort of discontinuity in the normal fuel
delivery system, one can pull the mixture to idle
cutoff, turn on the primer system and adjust the
throttle (now a mixture control) for smoothest
running engine.
I proposed this to a Long-Ez builder about 12 years
ago. He plumbed is primer system to get fuel
from the left tank through its own outlet
and filter. His fuel management protocol was
to switch tanks such that the left tank always
as as much or more fuel than the right tank.
He tested this system in flight and reported
performance as anticipated. How many airplanes
flying have DUAL, redundant and totally independent
fuel delivery systems?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Lazarus Long and LED Primer |
I was privileged to meet 79 year-old Lazarus Long (AKA Robert A. Heinlein, the
"Mark Twain of Sci Fi") in 1987 not too long before he died. He stood about 5
feet-tall, weighed perhaps 90 pounds and walked with a cane. He was impeccably
dressed, white haired and dapper. We was still writing and just working on more
Lazarus Long. I was amazed he was so tiny; this didn't fit with my idea of
him at all.
For a great collection of his quotes try:
http://www.bobgod.com/writer/lazaruslong.html
LED Primer:
1) LEDs will emit light if their voltage is above some small voltage, usually a
couple of volts. Incandescent lamps when you think about it, behave the same
(but for very different reasons).
2) LEDs lifetimes are nearly infinite if not pushed too hard; there are LEDs that
have been on continuously for thirty years and counting. LEDs will be common
household lamps in the next few years. Plug-in replacement lamps for most applications
are available or easy to craft yourself. They are not extremely efficient
(lumens/watt), but they are small, cool, and last almost forever.
3) LEDs are brighter and dimmer depending on the current through them. (Forget
pulse-width modulation...that's usually not the way it's done). If you increase
the voltage to them, the current through them increases and they get brighter.
If you reduce the resistance the same thing happens. Don't exceed the recommended
maximum current. Most common LEDs work well at 20 milliamps (or as Bob
spells it miliamps). For the mathematically inclined: V(supply)-V(led)R(in series)
x I(led).
4) Using LEDs in parallel: Incandescent lamps (and many other things) INCREASE
resistance when they're on so the hot lamp gets less of the current. This is good.
But LEDs (and many other things) decrease resistance when they're on so all
the current wants to go through one LED. This is not good; one LED's current
will quickly spiral up, leading to things not working. To prevent this, you
only have to give each little LED its own little resistor.
5) If you want to dim parallel LEDs (each of which may be on or off) then it is
easiest to change the voltage to the LEDs. Bob's zener+bypass switch or any voltage
regulator works well.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: ELT control wire? |
Russ Werner wrote:
>
>
> It's just telephone cable. Not critical by any means. Buy the 25 footer
> and clip off the male end. Reinstall a new male end where you need it and
> be sure to swap wires accordingly, as the ELT wires cross enroute while the
> telephone wires don't.
*** Thanks Russ. That's what I did. Actually, the 25-footer worked fine
as it was wired. I had to snip the connector and crimp on a new one anyway
to fish the wire through the floor.
- Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
Bob:
Watching closely the Z-14 system planning for shannon. Interested in
doing the wirebook. Thought I had a program that would read dwg files, but
don't. Checked at the store, autocad at 3300.00. Never found autocad lite,
but did find turbo autocad at best buy for 99.99. Will this work?
________________________________________________________________________________
Bob:
Sorry. Looking for autcad info. Been flying all night. Up in Canada
now.
Thanks,
Ed Silvanic
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Z-11a, Single ECU |
>
> > I'd run it via fusible link from the aux battery only. This
> > is what a second battery is for . . . provide a totally
> > independent source of power for the engine that is not
> > also loaded with other goodies.
> >
> > If push comes to shove, you can always close both battery
> > contactors and get main battery power to the ECU
>I thought both contactors were closed during normal ops?
that's right . . . the only time the ECU would be running
aux battery only is if the alternator is off line whereupon
you separate the batteries to do their respective tasks.
>I have the same situation - one ECU and two batteries. I was thinking that
>for "normal operations" I'd like the fuel pumps and ECU to go and off with
>the master. This would make for simpler operation, and everything would shut
>down with the master. Any reason why I couldnt wire the ECU and pumps with a
>fuseable link to the essential bus
Use a fuse from the e-bus . . . fusible links are special
case, single feed protection where very high reliablity
is desired and faulting that line has no chance of
precipitating problems into the rest of the system.
Consider that if you get into a J-3 with NO electrical
system and flip the mag switches ON, that engine
is ready to run. There no particular reason I can
understand why this should change just because we
added an electrical system.
If it were my airplane, I'd wire all devices
needed to support engine operation from battery
busses. If I have smoke in the cockpit, all DC
PWR MASTER switches can go to OFF and the engine
will continue to run.
> . . . on the "normal" side their switch, and a
>fuseable link to the aux battery bus on the "Emergency" side? If this is
>"acceptable" practice, which switch type would be best?
"Traditional" practice based on 60 some odd years
experience watching the regulated side of aviation where
the term ECU might as well be a foreign language.
"Traditional" practice masquerades as "acceptable".
The truly acceptable practice comes from logic
and understanding of component characteristics and
the user's desires for system operational features
and reliability.
The inescapable fact is that the engine of your choice
has ONE ECU . . . this is a very complex piece of
electronics with a lots of failure modes. If it is
your perception that the chance of aux battery failure
in your airplane is so far above zero that you consider
a multiple-source ECU power switching to be a risk
mitigation, and your logic is more compelling than mine
then the airplane should be wired as you see fit.
Be careful of fusible links . . . these attach only
to very low impedance points in the system were a robust
battery can be expected to open the link and interrupt
only ONE circuit.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Loadmeter reappears with alt field voltage |
>
>
> Yikes! That progressive transfer feature of 2-50 switch was *not* what I
>wanted. What I wanted was a double pole, triple throw toggle, one position
>spring loaded. This would be for the two alternator situation. Perhaps
>describing the one alternator design would illustrate the idea more easily.
> The shunt is in the B lead from the alternator. Two wires come from the
>shunt and connect to the lower set of fixed contacts on the DPDT switch:
>call these left and right. The ammeter connects to the switched pair of
>contacts. With the lower set active, the ammeter reads the current through
>the shunt. In the other switch postion, which is a momentary spring loaded
>position, the ammeter positive side is connected to a 20K resistor which
>goes from the left upper switch contact to the field connection. The right
>upper contact is grounded, and completes the circuit. The meter is now a
>voltmeter-0 to 20.
> And the expanded scale voltmeter? Just connect the minus side to
>ground, and the positive side to the minus side of the ammeter. It will
>read the voltage of the shunt 'downstream' side. When the switch is up, to
>read field voltage, the expanded scale voltmeter will read zero--which is
>fine, as the field voltage is read only for a brief moment. That is why I
>wanted a spring loaded toggle. A momentary DPDT push button would also do,
>but is hard to find with push on terminals. Since the field voltage is of
>interest only to the owner of the OBAM plane, the brief zero reading on the
>voltmeter side should cause no concern.
> Now for the two alternator case. A rotary switch with two poles and
>three positions would work, but then we lose the push-on connection, and the
>spring return from reading field voltage. You would not want the meter
>displaying field voltage all the time because you forgot to reset the
>switch. I have just found a suitable toggle in the Allied catalog, but it
>is a solder unit stock # 70-8619 listed as On-On-(On) and DP3T. This is a
>subminiature unit and could easily mount next to the meter. Pigtails leads
>could then be connected with the crimp-on knife connects. If you must have
>standard toggle switches, then use two: one DPDT to select one of two
>alternator shunts, and the second spring-loaded DPDT On-(On) switch to
>switch the ammeter between the field voltage resistor-ground pair, and the
>shunt pair going to the ammeter.
> It appears that this avoids the need for the original board and
>attedant construction. Fusible links needed from the shunts, of course.
First, before we take hammers-n-saws to the system, let's determine
if the data package for duplicating the original product is of
use to you. If not, why not? Once we've determined the need
to re-arrange things, let's discuss logical ways to do so.
One thing I'm not sure you understand about the instrument as-supplied
by Westach is that the expanded scale voltmeter side of the instrument
is not stand-alone. Westach's offerings at expanded scale instruments
were not up to the requirements I placed on my design so I ordered
only basic meter movements in the instrument (see specification
control drawing for 9021-200-2) and accomplished calibration and
scaling on the etched circuit board.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Plug for Auto Alternator |
>
>
>Neil, I had the same problem. I couldn't find a plug but I eventually used
>large size spade connectors from NAPA which fit the wire and slide onto the
>alternator, Then secured the wires with a small adel clamp.
>--Kent A.
Beware of auto parts stores crimp-on terminals. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/faston3.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/terminal.pdf
Auto parts stores around here have the "HELP" line
of odd-and-ends for automotive hardware that may
include replacement mating connectors for various
alternators.
My personal preference is to use a PIDG Fast-on
to go directly to the appropriate terminal using
strain relief as suggested in Kent's post.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LED Dimmer Switch |
>
>Bob,
>
>I thought the LR3 just grounded the low volt warning light contact when the
>voltage dropped.
That's right. In the common vernacular of electro_speak this
is a "pull-down" activation of the lamp.
>So, you're saying that when I hook the LED with a 220ohm resister in
>parallel & one in series to the LR3, that it will not behave like it does on
>my breadboard (where I have the other LED's hooked up to the same power
>bus)? Do I need to run a separate power line to the LR3 indicators separate
>from the other 6 LED's I have hooked up? Or can they all share the same
>power line?
Since power is in the "pull up side" of the "pull-down" activate
lamp, it is possible to run all the LEDs from a single power source
as illustrated in my sketch.
>When I include one LED with a parallel resistor and the others without, on
>the dim setting (through the zener) only those that do not have a resistor
>light up. The result is that the LR3 warning light remains dark even when I
>connect it to ground. If instead of connecting it to ground on the
>breadboard, it is connected to the LR3, will it work in this configuration?
Hmmm . . . you're beginning to get a glimpse into the perverseness
of behavior of LEDs when you try to treat them like voltage driven
devices. A red led has about 2.0 volts across it at all intensities
and its light output varies with current.
Lets try this for the LR3 wiring:
http://216.55.140.222/temp/LED_Dimming2.gif
>(for example, if in your diagram, one of the LED's had a resister in
>parallel with the LED and the others didn't, the one with the parallel
>resistor doesn't do it's job).
Yup, the original suggestion wouldn't tolerate dimming.
Let's see if this works better.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey Battery Question |
>
>
>Thanks Denis,
>
> If Van says its OK, then I'd go for it.
If Van or anyone else has a recommendation and
can explain it in a logical way that you and
I understand and agree, then I'd "go for it" too . . .
Any lack of understanding as listeners should
raise valid concerns and skepticism about
what is being proposed. Van is a nice guy,
I'm a nice guy, there are lots of nice guys
out there with opinions . . . but don't trust
a single one of them to drive important decisions
about your airplane unless they also help you
understand and agree with the opinion.
Unlike working on the certified side, you're
allowed to do this . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
In a message dated 10/24/02 9:51:45 AM Central Daylight Time,
bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
> I wish it were so simple/logical.
Golly Bob, I still think it is simple and logical. All it requires is that
you understand the engines fuel delivery system.
Float type carburetors need to have a method of getting fuel to the
carburetor bowl so that it may be fed to the engine as needed. The level of
the fuel in the bowl is controlled by the float needle.
High wing airplanes generally have an adequate head of fuel pressure to keep
fuel available to the bowl, but there have been a few that have back up
engine driven pumps, "just in case" or to provide a higher pressure than the
high fuel tank provides. Most aircraft that have engine driven pumps are
also provided with a back up electric pump these days, though in days of
yore, the back up for the engine driven pump was often a hand operated one.
I am not aware of any airplane using a "fuel Injection" system that does not
also use an engine driven fuel pump.
In some of the simpler systems, such as that used by Continental on most of
their current production, the speed of the pump, therefore the pressure
available, is one of the determinants of the amount of fuel fed to the
engine.
The PS5C carburetor is very similar to the type of fuel injection system
commonly used on Lycoming engines. It has A, B and C chambers that measure
airflow and such to decide how much fuel to feed the engine. The PS5C is
referred to by the manufacturer as a Pressure Injection Carburetor. There is
no fuel flowing in the "venturi" or fuel control body of the carburetor. It
is injected into the airstream as it leaves the carburetor body.
Any fuel control system that utilizes that sort of fuel control device will
react to a higher pressure by putting more fuel on the fire. Therefore,
running an electric pump or wobbling a hand wobble pump will add fuel to the
engine. That is how the early versions of the Bonanza and Navion were
primed. I assume other engine using the PS5C did likewise.
That is why engines that are equipped with fuel injection, or pressure
injected carburetors, don't tend to have the standby pumps operated for
takeoff or landing. It would add an undesired amount of fuel to the engine.
There are exceptions, but they should be covered in the POH.
I think you will find that almost all of the aircraft which recommend that
the electric standby pump be operated during takeoff and landing will have a
float type carburetor.
Engines that have some sort of pressure injection will recommend that the
pump only be used when needed. That usually means for priming the engine or
after the failure of the engine driven pump. It can occasionally be used
during high altitude and high temperature conditions.
It IS simple and logical. However, it does require that the operator be aware
of what type of fuel delivery system is used on the engine being operated.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>Bob:
>
> Sorry. Looking for autcad info. Been flying all night. Up in Canada
>now.
>
>Thanks,
There are 3 cad programs on my CD_Rom that will open, edit, save
and print my drawings. You can order from
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AECcatalog.html
I had the CD_ROM on the server for awhile and lots of
folks downloaded it . . . drove traffic (read billing)
on my server up quite a bit.
As soon as I can get my experimental server back on
the DSL line (not metered) I'll make the download
available again.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>Bob:
>
> Watching closely the Z-14 system planning for shannon. Interested in
>doing the wirebook. Thought I had a program that would read dwg files, but
>don't. Checked at the store, autocad at 3300.00. Never found autocad lite,
>but did find turbo autocad at best buy for 99.99. Will this work?
Older versions did. Don't know about the latest. You could
contact the supplier on the 'net ad ask about cross-application
capabilities of the current version with respect to AutoCAD R14
format of my drawings.
Or you can get the CD_Rom at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AECcatalog.html
which has three CAD programs on it that will work.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Foerster" <jmfpublic(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Loadmeter reappears with alt field voltage |
Bob,
If the Westach instrument calibration is not good enough so that you used a
linear 'bare' movement, then the unit they are selling now, with the expanded
scale components already in the meter case, won't work with your board. I already
have one of their -30-0+30 ammeter and 7-17 volt dual indicator instruments
which looks exactly like their newer model with your scale of 10-15 volts
and 'loadmeter' 0 to 100%. What I have has the internal circuitry for the expanded
scale, and I would expect that their new unit does, too. (They sell these
units for use in boats and cars as well as airplanes) If so, the external
circuit board, which is far more flexible and can be calibrated, would not work
with their newer unit. We need to talk to them about making the unit without
the expanded scale circuitry. Drat--I already ordered my meter from them, and
it will probably have the internal expanded scale circuitry. Is there a reasonable
way to open up these meters to make direct connection?
Jim Foerster
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer |
Valve
>
>In a message dated 10/24/02 9:51:45 AM Central Daylight Time,
>bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
>
> > I wish it were so simple/logical.
>
>Golly Bob, I still think it is simple and logical. All it requires is that
>you understand the engines fuel delivery system.
Didn't disagree with anything you said . . . the "illogical"
condition I cited was the presence of a hand operated primer
in a certified airplane that left the factory with a fuel-injected
engine in it.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob W M Shipley" <Rob(at)RobsGlass.com> |
| Subject: | Suggested wiring circuits. |
Bob,
Why have the voltmeter reading voltage from the essential bus after the diode rather
than from the battery bus?
Thanks as always for enlightenment.
Rob
Rob W M Shipley.
RV9A fuselage. N919RV resvd.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Loadmeter reappears with alt field voltage |
>
>
>Bob,
> If the Westach instrument calibration is not good enough so that you
> used a linear 'bare' movement, then the unit they are selling now, with
> the expanded scale components already in the meter case, won't work with
> your board. I already have one of their -30-0+30 ammeter and 7-17 volt
> dual indicator instruments which looks exactly like their newer model
> with your scale of 10-15 volts and 'loadmeter' 0 to 100%. What I have
> has the internal circuitry for the expanded scale, and I would expect
> that their new unit does, too.
Have you seen any specifications for the instrument or did
they specifically tell you that it was a stand-alone instrument?
> (They sell these units for use in boats and cars as well as
> airplanes) If so, the external circuit board, which is far more flexible
> and can be calibrated, would not work with their newer unit. We need to
> talk to them about making the unit without the expanded scale
> circuitry. Drat--I already ordered my meter from them, and it will
> probably have the internal expanded scale circuitry. Is there a
> reasonable way to open up these meters to make direct !
>connection?
I'm lost. I guess we're not talking about the same beast
at all. Yes, Westach makes dual pointer instruments with
a 7-17 expanded scale, stand-alone voltmeter -AND- a
minus-zero-plus ammeter in either 30 or 60 amp full scale
ranges. Got one on my bench right now getting torn down
for failure analysis. One of our members here on the list
let all the smoke out of the second instrument in a row.
Need to figure out how and why.
Some folks mentioned that the instrument I specified for
my VM/LM product was now being offered by Westach and
featured in their what's new page at http://www.westach.com/whatsnew.htm
This is pretty close to what I was buying from them
EXCEPT the normal and battery only operating voltage
arcs are the wrong color. I was unable to find any
further description of the instrument shown so I don't
know if they've gone to the trouble to add their own
voltmeter scaling circuitry inside or if the instrument
is truly a mis-painted clone of what I originally
purchased.
Have you had any conversation with them about their
newest offering? Suggest you sent a copy of the
9021-200-2 drawing to them and ask if what you're
getting meets those specifications. If the instrument
IS to that drawing, then we need to talk about whether or
not you wish or intend to clone the product I offered.
If so, then you'll find all the data necessary to
accomplish this task posted as cited earlier. If not,
then you're free to deduce any other interface for
the instrument you wish.
If the Westach offering is NOT equal to the 9021-200-2
instrument, then cloning my original design is no longer
an issue. I'm not favorably impressed with the
Westach technique for scaling their expanded scale
voltmeters . . . I wanted an instrument that could
be externally calibrated to compensate for manufacturing
variations and ageing effects. This is why I chose the
route illustrated in the data package.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Top <jjtop1(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Loadmeter reappears with alt field |
voltage
>
> One thing I'm not sure you understand about the instrument as-supplied
> by Westach is that the expanded scale voltmeter side of the instrument
> is not stand-alone. Westach's offerings at expanded scale instruments
> were not up to the requirements I placed on my design so I ordered
> only basic meter movements in the instrument (see specification
> control drawing for 9021-200-2) and accomplished calibration and
> scaling on the etched circuit board.
Yo Bob:
I think that there are enough of us out here in homebuilt land that
had planned to use your unit to make it worthwhile offering it again.
I designed it into my panel / electrical scheme a couple of years ago
and was really disappointed when you discontinued it.
Whacha think?
--
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Battery Management Module |
Bob,
The time has come for me to order all the necessary bits and pieces for the
Big Wiring.
I'd like to order a low voltage/battery management module for our 2 battery
project. But I'm afraid I was unable to locate it on your site.
May I ask you how I could place an order for this item, along with other
pieces of equipment ?
thanks in advance,
Gilles Thesee
MCR4S structure complete
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Fuel Boost or Prime Pumps? |
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: Gary Liming
"Hi OC, and others who responded. I left out 'valve' in the first post,
sorry. I guess I didn't make myself too clear - let me rephrase the question:
I see type cert planes with both boost pump switches and manual (plunger
type) primers - Why? I suspect they had a good reason to do that, but I don't
see it. Just making sure I am not missing something.Gary Liming"
10/24/2002
Hello Gary, It boils down to the meaning of words, the engine design, and the
details of how the fuel system is plumbed.
In the case you describe above the aircraft designer / builder felt that he
needed an electrically driven fuel boost pump to back up the engine driven
fuel pump. But that electrically driven fuel boost pump was not plumbed into
the engine priming system in any fashion so the designer / builder also
needed a manual priming pump.
Things can get a bit confusing as there can be some various combinations and
permutations involved. Procedures could call for the electrically driven fuel
boost pump to be on during engine cranking, but that doesn't automatically
make it into a priming pump.
Why did the engine designer / builder include an electrically driven fuel
boost pump in his design? Maybe he was concerned with the engine driven fuel
pump failing at some point and then the electrically driven fuel boost pump
would suppy enough fuel to allow the airplane to be flown safely to a landing
point chosen by the pilot.
The most critical "some point" that the designer had in mind may have been in
the takeoff / landing pattern where the pilot would have little time to
react. So why not just have the electrically driven fuel boost pump on at all
times in the takeoff / landing pattern? Well it is very possible that if this
electrically driven fuel boost pump can supply enough fuel to operate the
engine all by itself then when both the engine driven pump and the
electrically driven pump are operating the engine may get drowned and quit
operating. How to solve that problem?
One solution is to have a two stage (high output and low output) electrically
driven fuel boost pump. Then the procedure is to operate the electrically
driven fuel boost pump in the low output stage at all times in the takeoff /
landing pattern so that if the engine driven fuel pump fails at that critical
time the engine will still keep running at a lower power setting long enough
for the pilot to select the high output stage from the electrically driven
fuel boost pump and then fly the airplane safely.
There can be other variations on the theme of what constitutes a well
designed system and what constitutes acceptable operating procedures (both
from a mechanical and from an ergonomic viewpoint).
So the precise meaning of words in connection with fuel pumps (valve, boost,
prime, transfer*), the type of engine fuel induction system (cabureted or
injected), and the plumbing of the fuel system are all critical elements in
understanding the design and operating procedures of an aircraft's fuel
system.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
*PS: I once listened to a 10 minute conversation that I was not participating
in where some of the participants were talking about fuel transfer pumps
(that move fuel from tank to tank) and some of the participants were talking
about fuel boost pumps. All participants were using just the term "fuel pump"
and the conversation was chaotic and useless because of the sloppy
terminology.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
In a message dated 10/24/02 1:27:57 PM Central Daylight Time,
bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
> Didn't disagree with anything you said . . . the "illogical"
> condition I cited was the presence of a hand operated primer
> in a certified airplane that left the factory with a fuel-injected
> engine in it.
>
> Bob . . .
>
I agree! It would be nice to know what they had in mind!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Raby" <ronr(at)advanceddesign.com> |
I am building a Lancair ES and want to put a Garmin or Appolo stack into my plane.
I also want to do the wiring. Both companies have a policy that these parts
need to be dealer installed. How does everyone get around this problem?
Ron Raby
N829R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Z-11a, Single ECU |
When wiring and ECU:
> Use a fuse from the e-bus . . . fusible links are special
> case, single feed protection where very high reliablity
> is desired and faulting that line has no chance of
> precipitating problems into the rest of the system.
Not sure I understand this. Surely, the ECU has the highest possible
reliability requirements.
By the way, this ECU (from RWS aka Tracy Crook) has two feed pins and two
independant computers. Apparantly there is a common component inside which
limits the redundancy. I'm not sure why.
> If it were my airplane, I'd wire all devices
> needed to support engine operation from battery
> busses. If I have smoke in the cockpit, all DC
> PWR MASTER switches can go to OFF and the engine
> will continue to run.
Of course. I should have known that.
BTW - My multi-meter is on the way back.
Regards,
John Slade
Adding the multi dimension control wheels to my panel as we speak.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: buying Radio's |
Ron Raby wrote:
>
>
> I am building a Lancair ES and want to put a Garmin or Appolo stack into
> my plane. I also want to do the wiring. Both companies have a policy that
> these parts need to be dealer installed. How does everyone get around this
> problem?
>
*** I installed a GNS430 in my Sundowner. I got around Garmin's policy by
having the selling shop fabricate me a harness for the radio. Then they
went on record as the "installing shop".
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Phillips <ripsteel(at)edge.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
> Should the engine suffer fuel starvation due to
> any sort of discontinuity in the normal fuel
> delivery system, one can pull the mixture to idle
> cutoff, turn on the primer system and adjust the
> throttle (now a mixture control) for smoothest
> running engine.
Reminds me of a story I read as a young'n about a P-51 pilot whose fuel pump was
rendered
inop by hostile fire- he nursed it all the way back to merry old England using
the primer
alone- story said his hand was worn to the bone but he saved his Mustang AND his
bacon.
Remembering the story, I've often wondered if this may be a feasible backup for
a Lyc on a
homebuilt, even if plumbed to only 3 cylinders, drawing from the gascolator, bypassing
both
pumps plus the carb- I picture a firewall-mounted manual pump with an actuator
rod extending
rearward to within sweating pilots reach- probably won't get much ROC, but maybe
the prop
wouldn't get visible either. Plus you'd sound like a LeRhone (sp?) rotary as you
made the
field (silence/pump/brrrrrrump!-silence/pump/brrrrrrump!) Any thoughts?
Mark Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: buying Radio's |
Ron:
I just bought a Garman stack: Aud/Com 340, GNS-530, GNS-430, and
Transponder GTX327. Lancair will allow you to install your own, but Garman
pushes to do the harness, then allows you to slide it in and apply your own
power sources. I checked around from several sources, and prices varied from
24-29K. I was lucky and got the whole stack for 18,133.00. They did my wire
harness for 500.00. This included the wiring between units, i.e. the com
panel as well as the wiring between the GNS's. Other leads that will be
labeled will be the 4 headset sets, and the leads for power. Believe me the
500.00 is well worth the money, as it will take them 45 days to do. Just had
a friend buy a GNS-530 for his Seneca, paid 13K for it plus 2000.00 for
installation. All I will have to do is slide it in, connect the antenna,
headset jacks, and decide as per Bob's schematic planning as to where each
radio gets its power. I will be going what I call a partial EFIS, EFIS/Lite
from BMA; so I will have to buy the Garman 106a so I can display, vor, loc,
ILS, and GPS tracking. I am beginning to cut/paste instruments pictures on my
panel for layout. I will admit, I am little biased, my Lancair ES will look
something like the A300 I fly for FedEx. Don't want to make things to
confusing, a little standardization won't hurt.
Of all the manufacturer's, Garman has been the best to work with when
coming to home builts, as far as performance, Appolo I hear is a good choice.
Regards,
Ed Silvanic
Lancair ES
N823MS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | msteitle(at)mail.utexas.edu |
| Subject: | Re: Starter-engaged Warning |
Bob,
Thanks for the excellent explanation of the real purpose of a starter
engagement warning light. I sometimes think us airplane types just like lots
of knobs and pretty lights.
Mark
Quoting "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" :
>
>
> >
> >Ed,
> >You're one of the few that are actually flying. So, can you hear your
>
> >starter
> >with the engine running? Or does your headset/exhaust drown out all
> other
> >sounds? If you can hear the starter whirring away do you really need a
>
> >warning
> >light to tell you that?
> >Mark
>
>
> A bit of history might help here. In the certified world, there
> are many instances of stuck starter contactors wherein the
> pilot was unaware of the event and damage was done.
>
> MOST of these events were on lower priced single engine aircraft
> using contactors not well suited for starter control service . . .
> we won't go into naming names here. Of course, conventional
> wisdom in the certified world was not to make it easy to
> improve on the suitability of the contactor by (ughhh!)
> putting an AUTOMOTIVE device on in place of the junk . . .
> "I know, let's put a light on the panel to tell the pilot
> when the contactor sticks!
>
> It's easier to add a Band-Aid to a certified ship than
> it is to fix a problem.
>
> In our airplanes, we're using very robust starter
> contactors so the likelihood of this happening is
> at least an order of magnitude lower . . . but again,
> it is not zero.
>
> This begs the question, "Will we hear the results of
> this event and shut things down in time to prevent severe
> damage?" It also begs the question, "Will we always
> keep an eye on the light to make sure it goes out
> when the starter button is released?"
>
> We can debate the merits of adding this feature for
> days but it won't change the facts . . . the chances
> of a stuck contactor are not zero, the chances of
> being distracted and being unaware of the event
> are not zero, and the chances of a warning light
> going unnoticed are not zero either.
>
> Bottom line is that the vast majority of light
> singles do not have this light and in the grand
> scheme of things, the certified stuff wears out
> or breaks far more often than they are destroyed
> by stuck contactors. It's a real toss up. I probably
> wouldn't put one on my airplane unless it was included
> in an annunciator array that shows lots of other
> good things to know and is certain to be observed
> more often than some lowly light tucked away somewhere
> on the panel like the certified ships.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
In a message dated 10/24/02 3:45:37 PM Central Daylight Time,
ripsteel(at)edge.net writes:
> Remembering the story, I've often wondered if this may be a feasible backup
> for a Lyc on a
> homebuilt, even if plumbed to only 3 cylinders, drawing from the
> gascolator, bypassing both
> pumps plus the carb- I picture a firewall-mounted manual pump with an
> actuator rod extending
> rearward to within sweating pilots reach- probably won't get much ROC,
Good Afternoon Mark,
Since it appears to be war story time-------
About fifty years ago, a friend of mine had an engine failure in his Cessna
170 that was caused by a plugged gascolator screen.
After that, he added a T fitting where the fuel line came out of the left
fuel tank. He ran that to a small needle valve (the type used to adjust the
vacuum for the T&B). From the needle valve he ran it to a small fitting
which he had added just at the outflow of the float type carburetor. (He put
it in the carburetor body mainly because that was the easiest place to drill
a hole and run a tap.)
He could shut off the fuel valve, open the needle valve and adjust the fuel
to match whatever amount of air was coming through the carburetor. By
adjusting both the throttle and the needle valve, anything from full power to
idle was possible.
Obviously, that will only work on a high wing airplane. On a low wing
airplane, you would need a pump of some kind. Electric would be nice, but a
hand operated wobble pump is doable. Any of the common old style hand
operated fuel pumps would be easier to use than a standard primer.
There have been many cases of folks getting an airplane home on primers.
Fact is, the Continental Fuel injection system is really not much more than a
continuous primer with the fuel mechanically adjusted to provide the proper
mix. Unlike the fancier fuel injection systems, such as the PS5C, or the
float type carburetors, the throttle body does not measure the airflow at
all. There is no balance of pressures or vacuum used at all.
I could be wrong, but I think the Continental folks developed their simple
system after they noted how many people had managed to get it home on the
primer alone.
More than one way to skin a cat.
As to using the hand wobble pump to keep the airplane airborne, I had an
engine pump fail on takeoff in a Bonanza about fifty years ago. It wasn't
particularly difficult to keep it running, but it doesn't allow you to do
much else in the cockpit. I purchased a standby electric pump to augment the
wobble pump as soon as they were made available.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
A few months ago there was a discussion of "set and forget" flap switches
that would move the flaps to a pre-set position and stop. I see Van's now
has such a switch for RV's. $200.00
http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1035492734-228-216&bro
wse=new&product=fps
Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: buying Radio's |
Ok. So where did you purchase the radios at such a good price?
Ron Smith
N566U RV8A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Foerster" <jmfpublic(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Loadmeter reappears with alt field voltage |
Bob, it looks like I will be replicating your original system-which is what
I had planned to do in the first place. I'm encouraged to hear that you
will be opening up the Westach meter. Looks like I can do the same, replace
the faceplate with that terrific meter scale faceplate that you posted, and
make direct connection to the meter movement. I'll be happy to build the PC
board, and thanks for all the help with this topic.
Jim Foerster
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Loadmeter reappears with alt field voltage |
>
> >
> > One thing I'm not sure you understand about the instrument as-supplied
> > by Westach is that the expanded scale voltmeter side of the instrument
> > is not stand-alone. Westach's offerings at expanded scale instruments
> > were not up to the requirements I placed on my design so I ordered
> > only basic meter movements in the instrument (see specification
> > control drawing for 9021-200-2) and accomplished calibration and
> > scaling on the etched circuit board.
>
>Yo Bob:
>
>I think that there are enough of us out here in homebuilt land that
>had planned to use your unit to make it worthwhile offering it again.
>
>I designed it into my panel / electrical scheme a couple of years ago
>and was really disappointed when you discontinued it.
>Whacha think?
It's not going to rise from the ashes in our
shop. Someone mentioned that Westach was
"offering the same instrument" I used
to sell. I'll e-mail a copy of the drawing to them
and see if this is indeed the case.
When I first read that, I was thinking that it
would be relatively easy for folks to roll their
own based on the data package and artwork I
published. I see now how we may have got our
signals crossed.
I suspect they've added standalone expanded scale
voltmeter circuitry . . . external signal conditioners
are not generally in their bag of tricks. Maybe I should
give them a link to the data package and see if they
would want to pick the product up or do their own
version. I'll explore that.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
Bob,
Haven't heard from you for a couple days on the system design exercise
we were working on on the list. Obviously, I'm anxious to move forward.
I'm not trying to be pushy, but would you mind taking a look at my
responses to you and advise me? I've basically decided that your
method/advice is what I want to follow (chosen from all the advice out
there, ie Lancair, other builders, etc), so until I get some of your
great words of wisdom on my project, I'm pretty much in total limbo :)
With my project moving half way across the US in just over a week for
finish bodywork and paint, limbo is not a good place for me to be, LOL
:) Let me know what you come up with. Thanks, as always, for your
patience and willingness to educate.
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: buying Radio's |
Ron,
Contact John Stark at: Stark Avionics, Hangar 12, Columbus Metro
Airport,Columbus, GA 31909, Phone (706) 324-3770 or 321-1008;
email:jts7(at)starband.net.
He sells Garmin and Apollo at significant discount.
Richard Dudley
Ron Raby wrote:
>
>
> I am building a Lancair ES and want to put a Garmin or Appolo stack into my
plane. I also want to do the wiring. Both companies have a policy that these parts
need to be dealer installed. How does everyone get around this problem?
>
> Ron Raby
>
> N829R
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Voltmeter/Loadmeter project |
>
>
>Bob, it looks like I will be replicating your original system-which is what
>I had planned to do in the first place. I'm encouraged to hear that you
>will be opening up the Westach meter.
The one I am opening is toast. Also, to open these up you have
to drill off some tubular rivet tops . . . no really good way
to put them back together. Go look at the photos in
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/Westach
>Looks like I can do the same, replace
>the faceplate with that terrific meter scale faceplate that you posted, and
>make direct connection to the meter movement. I'll be happy to build the PC
>board, and thanks for all the help with this topic.
Look at
http://216.55.140.222/temp/Westach/Westach4.jpg
This face plate looks like it may have been mounted before
the meter movements were installed cause the needles thread
through from opposite sides. If you took those four
screws out, do you think you could get the faceplace
past the needles without whacking them? I've made
LOTS of new faceplates for meters in the past 30 years
with the first ones laid out in ink, lettered with
Leroy pens and then shot down photographically. Last
week I did one in AutoCAD and pasted a laser print
right to the scale plate. I don't think I'd tackle
one of these things in my shop.
Let's see if (1) Westach is interested in taking on
the whole product and (2) what a plug-n-play instrument
would cost. I wrote them a few minutes ago and forwarded
the data package to them. Let's see what they say.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Francis, CMDR David" <David.Francis(at)defence.gov.au> |
| Subject: | SEC: UNCLASSIFIED - LOAD ANALYSIS |
Bob and friends,
I have been following the load analysis thread and have done my own, and it
is very informative. I am building a RV7 for IFR. The comm/nav radios are
included in the two EFIS. I have been undecided between Z12 and Z14. The
analysis clarified the decision. Assume Jabiru engine with 20-25 amp
alternator plus 40 amp B&C, 2 x batteries. Bus nomenclature is as per Z14,
ie. main bus is essential bus. Where there is no value of amperage I either
dont know yet or its an intermittent load.
This analysis tells me that pitot heat and landing lights need to be used
sparingly in some situations like night circuits, IFR approaches, main
alternator out. Z14 gives me the best headroom in the worst situations
(cruise in cold cloud, night circuits), because I can operate both
alternators together, but it is more complex than a modified A12. Either way
the standby alternator is heavily loaded when the main one is dead.
Appreciate any comments. David Francis, Canberra, Australia
<<...OLE_Obj...>>
Email: David.Francis(at)cbr.defence.gov.au
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Z-11a, Single ECU |
>
>When wiring and ECU:
> > Use a fuse from the e-bus . . . fusible links are special
> > case, single feed protection where very high reliablity
> > is desired and faulting that line has no chance of
> > precipitating problems into the rest of the system.
>Not sure I understand this. Surely, the ECU has the highest possible
>reliability requirements.
You don't want to tie onto the e-bus with a fusible link
where the diode normal feedpath and alternate feedpaths
are not designed to cleanly open a fusible link.
If you use a fusible link in the ECU power path, it should
tie right to the battery (+) side of the battery contactor.
If you choose to run the ECU from the e-bus, use a breaker
or fuse like the rest of the current protection on the bus.
>By the way, this ECU (from RWS aka Tracy Crook) has two feed pins and two
>independant computers. Apparantly there is a common component inside which
>limits the redundancy. I'm not sure why.
>
> > If it were my airplane, I'd wire all devices
> > needed to support engine operation from battery
> > busses. If I have smoke in the cockpit, all DC
> > PWR MASTER switches can go to OFF and the engine
> > will continue to run.
What do you mean by two feed pins? Are these separate
power inputs for each half of a redundant system?
>Of course. I should have known that.
>
>BTW - My multi-meter is on the way back.
Got it today. It's sick. Will talk to Todd
at B&C about it tomorrow.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
>
>In a message dated 10/24/02 3:45:37 PM Central Daylight Time,
>ripsteel(at)edge.net writes:
>
> > Remembering the story, I've often wondered if this may be a feasible
> backup
> > for a Lyc on a
> > homebuilt, even if plumbed to only 3 cylinders, drawing from the
> > gascolator, bypassing both
> > pumps plus the carb- I picture a firewall-mounted manual pump with an
> > actuator rod extending
> > rearward to within sweating pilots reach- probably won't get much ROC,
>
>Good Afternoon Mark,
>
>Since it appears to be war story time-------
>
>About fifty years ago, a friend of mine had an engine failure in his Cessna
>170 that was caused by a plugged gascolator screen.
>
>After that, he added a T fitting where the fuel line came out of the left
>fuel tank. He ran that to a small needle valve (the type used to adjust the
>vacuum for the T&B). From the needle valve he ran it to a small fitting
>which he had added just at the outflow of the float type carburetor. (He put
>it in the carburetor body mainly because that was the easiest place to drill
>a hole and run a tap.)
>
>
>There have been many cases of folks getting an airplane home on primers.
>Fact is, the Continental Fuel injection system is really not much more than a
>continuous primer with the fuel mechanically adjusted to provide the proper
>mix. Unlike the fancier fuel injection systems, such as the PS5C, or the
>float type carburetors, the throttle body does not measure the airflow at
>all. There is no balance of pressures or vacuum used at all.
>
>I could be wrong, but I think the Continental folks developed their simple
>system after they noted how many people had managed to get it home on the
>primer alone.
>
>More than one way to skin a cat.
At my last weekend seminar I talked to a builder about
this system:
See:
http://216.55.140.222/temp/NoValve.gif
He plans to put optical low fuel warning light sensors in
each tank at the 5 gal usable point.
Another optical sensor in the right tank at 1/2 full will
trigger the transfer pump to move fuel from the left tank
maintaining the right tank at half full until the left tank's
low fuel warning light comes on. Auto transfer is stopped
at that point which leaves 5gal in left tank as reserve.
When low fuel light comes on in right tank, the
transfer optionally resumes to maintain fuel in the right tank
at 5 gal until after the left tank is exhausted.
If the transfer and/or main delivery scheme becomes
disabled for any reason, the nurse-it-down-on-the-
primer option is available for not less than 5 gal
of capacity for all but the last hour of flight.
Three switches. Three solid state pumps. Three
level sensors and a handful of electronics parts.
No valves and no fittings in the cabin where people
sit.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>Bob,
>
>Haven't heard from you for a couple days on the system design exercise
>we were working on on the list. Obviously, I'm anxious to move forward.
>I'm not trying to be pushy, but would you mind taking a look at my
>responses to you and advise me? I've basically decided that your
>method/advice is what I want to follow (chosen from all the advice out
>there, ie Lancair, other builders, etc), so until I get some of your
>great words of wisdom on my project, I'm pretty much in total limbo :)
Sorry. I've been nose-to-the-stone on a RAC project. Need to get
a spin-chute controller tested and installed in a Premier by
Sunday. Haven't been able to spend as much time on e-mail
as usual.
>With my project moving half way across the US in just over a week for
>finish bodywork and paint, limbo is not a good place for me to be, LOL
>:) Let me know what you come up with. Thanks, as always, for your
>patience and willingness to educate.
We're all learn'n here . . .
Consider upsizing the main alternator to 90A. This would take care
of your headroom problems on the main bus. If you upsized the aux
alternator, then we'd have to move some main-bus loads to the aux
bus and I'd rather keep the aux bus as clean as possible.
>---
>Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
>
>
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Shannon's Lancair |
>
>
>Bob,
>
>Haven't heard from you for a couple days on the system design exercise
>we were working on on the list. Obviously, I'm anxious to move forward.
>I'm not trying to be pushy, but would you mind taking a look at my
>responses to you and advise me? I've basically decided that your
>method/advice is what I want to follow (chosen from all the advice out
>there, ie Lancair, other builders, etc), so until I get some of your
>great words of wisdom on my project, I'm pretty much in total limbo :)
Sorry. I've been nose-to-the-stone on a RAC project. Need to get
a spin-chute controller tested and installed in a Premier by
Sunday. Haven't been able to spend as much time on e-mail
as usual.
>With my project moving half way across the US in just over a week for
>finish bodywork and paint, limbo is not a good place for me to be, LOL
>:) Let me know what you come up with. Thanks, as always, for your
>patience and willingness to educate.
We're all learn'n here . . .
Consider upsizing the main alternator to 90A. This would take care
of your headroom problems on the main bus. If you upsized the aux
alternator, then we'd have to move some main-bus loads to the aux
bus and I'd rather keep the aux bus as clean as possible.
OOPS! Hit the send button accidently again. Here's a sketch of the
rear batteries version of Z-14
http://216.55.140.222/temp/DB-DA_PDD.gif
We'll have to figure out a way to do some heavy duty
battery bus distribution near the batteries on the main
battery side to accommodate the ANL's for hydraulics
and a/c compressor. Adding a ground bus adjacent to
the batteries gives us a place to tie all those fat wires
together for ground feeder, battery minus leads and
the big motors. You could also ground strobe supply
and nav lights back there.
With the cross-feed up on the firewall, I think you can
see how it becomes the distribution point for fat wires
to fan out to the panel and things on the engine.
I think I'll do an alternative figure Z-14 for the next
revision to show exactly this situation.
Let's continue to refine the spread sheet. You'll need
to get "hard" numbers from suppliers for those currents
in doubt. I think you should plan to MEASURE each of these
when the airplane is finished just to make sure the
analysis is complete and accurate.
If you upsize the main alternator, I think you'll be
in good shape. You spoke about adding some heat
hot patch on windshield? hot prop? You've got a
40A budget for these things since the a/c and fan
will never run during heating season.
I'll try to get a look at the latest spread sheet
but can't spend too much more time on it tonight.
Bob . . .
>---
>Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
>
>
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
In a message dated 10/24/02 10:06:33 PM Central Daylight Time,
bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
> Three switches. Three solid state pumps. Three
> level sensors and a handful of electronics parts.
> No valves and no fittings in the cabin where people
> sit.
>
> Bob . . .
>
Good Evening Bob,
Very Interesting!
May I assume this is on a low wing airplane?
I guess all the electricity and such scares me a bit, but then, isn't this
whole site about having a good sound electrical system?
I still think I might consider adding one of those nice little hand wobble
pumps that were so ubiquitous back in WWII. And I am the guy who doesn't
want to add an ounce of unnecessary weight!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Z-11a, Single ECU |
> You don't want to tie onto the e-bus with a fusible link
> where the diode normal feedpath and alternate feedpaths
> are not designed to cleanly open a fusible link.
You lost me here. Not hard to do.
> If you use a fusible link in the ECU power path, it should
> tie right to the battery (+) side of the battery contactor.
> If you choose to run the ECU from the e-bus, use a breaker
> or fuse like the rest of the current protection on the bus.
Tracy recommends no fuse, so maybe direct to the AUX battery is best.
> What do you mean by two feed pins? Are these separate
> power inputs for each half of a redundant system?
I wish. Unfortunately, Tracy tells me, they both go the same point inside.
Perhaps its designed for yet to be installed total redundancy.
> Got it today. It's sick. Will talk to Todd
> at B&C about it tomorrow.
Thanks. I'm confused enough without any help from bad meter readings.
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
> He plans to put optical low fuel warning light sensors in...
Anyone know where I can get these?
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <WernerSchneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
>
> Install a 4-port primer system feed by an electric
> valve downstream of an electric pump. Put a needle
> valve in the primer line and calibrate primer fuel
> flow for 55 to 65% power fuel flows for your
> particular engine. The primer can be used for its
> obvious function in pre-flight.
>
Hello Bob,
that is my intention to do, however I have to tee in a fuel pump for that
as my highwing Glastar has no such setup (fuel boost pump) planned, I intend
to do that at the gascolator primer port. Question, concerning fuel pump and
valve, do you know of anybody selling such parts? Do I also need the valve,
as I could go directly for a blocking primer pump?.
Many thanks for your help
Werner
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <WernerSchneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
http://www.ppavionics.com/products.htm
They sell it have them in my header tanks for my glastar, work great!
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve
>
> > He plans to put optical low fuel warning light sensors in...
> Anyone know where I can get these?
> John Slade
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
>
>In a message dated 10/24/02 10:06:33 PM Central Daylight Time,
>bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
>
> > Three switches. Three solid state pumps. Three
> > level sensors and a handful of electronics parts.
> > No valves and no fittings in the cabin where people
> > sit.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
>
>Good Evening Bob,
>
>Very Interesting!
>
>May I assume this is on a low wing airplane?
Yeah. Long-Ez
>I guess all the electricity and such scares me a bit, but then, isn't this
>whole site about having a good sound electrical system?
Yup
>I still think I might consider adding one of those nice little hand wobble
>pumps that were so ubiquitous back in WWII. And I am the guy who doesn't
>want to add an ounce of unnecessary weight!
Saw one in a junk box out at RAC a few years back. I think
it was the one used in early Bonanzas. Probably just needs
o-rings. Interested?
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Z-11a, Single ECU |
>
> > You don't want to tie onto the e-bus with a fusible link
> > where the diode normal feedpath and alternate feedpaths
> > are not designed to cleanly open a fusible link.
>You lost me here. Not hard to do.
See http://216.55.140.222/temp/NoFLink.gif
You mentioned tying one of the feeds to your ECU through
a fusible link to the e-bus . . . the sketch shows how
this is a bad deal.
> > If you use a fusible link in the ECU power path, it should
> > tie right to the battery (+) side of the battery contactor.
> > If you choose to run the ECU from the e-bus, use a breaker
> > or fuse like the rest of the current protection on the bus.
>Tracy recommends no fuse, so maybe direct to the AUX battery is best.
That is essentially what the fusible link to the aux battery
does for you. VERY reliable but still keeps that wire from
toasting its entire length and taking other wires with it.
> > What do you mean by two feed pins? Are these separate
> > power inputs for each half of a redundant system?
>I wish. Unfortunately, Tracy tells me, they both go the same point inside.
>Perhaps its designed for yet to be installed total redundancy.
Have him give drop me a note. If there is some desire
on his part to effect separate functionality schemes
to provide some sort of back up, I'd be pleased to help
him with it.
The point I was offering in our discussions was that
(1) given the easily implemented philosophy for battery
maintenance, we'll never suffer an unusable battery and
(2) the aux battery is backed up by the main battery by
simply turning the master switches back on that
there was no value in making the ECU power control switch
select from one of two different power sources.
This was especially significant given the relative
complexities of the ECU itself, worrying about redundant
power sources approaching the reliability of wing attach
bolts was something of an overkill.
Now, if Tracy has a scheme for building independent
circuits internal to his product, either one of which will
run the engine, THEN supplying these from separate sources
begins to make some sense.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
>
>
>http://www.ppavionics.com/products.htm
>
>They sell it have them in my header tanks for my glastar, work great!
The principal upon which these things function was first
brought to my attention when I was about 16 years old.
Delco batteries were fitted with a special battery cap
called "The Delco Eye" . . . it was simply a piece
of plastic rod, cut to a 90-degree cone on the far
end an mounted to a filler cap.
If battery water was low, ambient light entering
the cap end of the rod was reflected back causing the
cap's center to appear bright - meaning add water.
When submerged in liquid, the center was black.
I built some sensors using photocells and light
bulbs to do some fuel sloshing studies in a Baron
about 25 years ago. A few years later, we used the
same principal to design and fabricate a whole
line of low-liquid level sensors at Electro-Mech
that are now used in dozens of places on RAC
products.
It's solid, no-moving parts, dead-nuts calibration
for alerting one to levels in a tank.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
>
>
> >
> > Install a 4-port primer system feed by an electric
> > valve downstream of an electric pump. Put a needle
> > valve in the primer line and calibrate primer fuel
> > flow for 55 to 65% power fuel flows for your
> > particular engine. The primer can be used for its
> > obvious function in pre-flight.
> >
>Hello Bob,
>
>that is my intention to do, however I have to tee in a fuel pump for that
>as my highwing Glastar has no such setup (fuel boost pump) planned, I intend
>to do that at the gascolator primer port. Question, concerning fuel pump and
>valve, do you know of anybody selling such parts? Do I also need the valve,
>as I could go directly for a blocking primer pump?.
The Fawcet pumps are in-expensive but I think they use
reed valves and will free flow if pressurized on the inlet
end. You would need the solenoid valve too. ACS has both.
You'll also need a needle valve to calibrate the primer
fuel flow. These are a pretty common plumbing part in brass.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Suggested wiring circuits. |
>
>Bob,
>Why have the voltmeter reading voltage from the essential bus after the
>diode rather than from the battery bus?
>Thanks as always for enlightenment.
Depending on your meter, it may draw some small but
significant amount of power that would run the battery
down if fed from the battery bus.
If one want's to steer around doing the mental math
of adding diode drop to the reading to know bus voltage,
just flip the e-bus alternate feed switch on for a moment.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Z-11a, Single ECU |
> See http://216.55.140.222/temp/NoFLink.gif
> a fusible link to the e-bus . . . the sketch shows how this is a bad
deal.
Thank you. That turned the light on. Obvious when you think about it.
Tracy's email is tcrook(at)rotaryaviation.com I'll forward you're note on to
him.
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
In a message dated 10/25/02 7:36:43 AM Central Daylight Time,
bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
> Saw one in a junk box out at RAC a few years back. I think
> it was the one used in early Bonanzas. Probably just needs
> o-rings. Interested?
>
> Bob . . .
>
Good Morning Bob,
There is undoubtedly someone with an early Bonanza who would like to have one
of those.
As you are undoubtedly already aware, The Bonanza hand wobble pumps went
through many iterations during the days they were used on production
aircraft.
All of them were incorporated in a single unit which combined the function of
fuel selector valve, fuel strainer and fuel pump in one casting. Very light
weight and reduced labor to install. Neat design. Unfortunately, problems
surfaced. The handle was on top and was used to pump vertically. It was not
the best ergonomic position for pumping. Rotating the handle would change
the tank selection. It occasionally happened that the operator would
unintentionally rotate the selector valve while pumping for fuel pressure.
Sometimes so much that the engine would quit. Also, on the very early ones,
sideward loads on the shaft, while pumping, would bend, or even break, the
vertical shaft.
Beech added a tower to stiffen the structure and changed the tank selection
feature such that the handle would only serve to switch tanks when in the
very bottom position. They did that by having it sit in a notch when all the
way down. You guessed it, they then had trouble with the folks not being
able to find the notch when they wanted to switch tanks.
On the first ones few iterations, it was possible to put the handle on the
shaft in two positions, one hundred and eighty degrees apart. This meant
that one would be burning from the left when he/she thought they were on the
right.
Beech's fix was to issue a Service Letter advising folks to drill and tap the
shaft on just one side so that the handle would always be put back on in the
correct orientation, provided that the small indexing screw was always
replaced. Unfortunately, it wasn't made clear what orientation the valve and
handle should be in when the modification was made. That resulted in a
situation such that if a unit was installed that had the indexing hole on the
opposite side of the shaft from one which had been done the other way, the
handle would still point to the wrong tank even when the indexing screw was
installed. Actually happened to me once upon a time.
The end result of all theses problems was that Beech finally separated the
fuel pump function from the valve selection function. They were all still in
the same casting, but the pump action used a nice, much more ergonomically
correct, stroke on a separate handle that operated the pump through a linkage
arrangement. They added a direct and very ordinary fuel selector to the
valve.
I believe that arrangement was first used on the C35.
It stayed in production until the last of the E-series engine equipped
aircraft.
If the one that you saw was one of those lever operated combination units,
please latch onto it and let some of the folks operating older Bonanzas know
about it. That lever operated one is a very nice unit. The earlier ones are
of interest primarily to those who like to be able to restore antiques to
their original configuration.
The wobble pump that I would use, if I were to want a manually operated pump,
would be one of those which has no function other than being a fuel pump.
They were round. Looked about like a large Tuna can. The shaft went into
one flat side of the can and the wobbling motion was very comfortable. I
believe it was used on the early Beech 18s as well as many other aircraft of
the day. It was easy to pump and by controlling the rate of the stroke, fuel
pressure could be maintained quite close to the desired number. It was not
at all a frantic style effort.
Sorry about the rambling. I'll try to stick to electrical stuff from now on!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wobble pumps |
>
>In a message dated 10/25/02 7:36:43 AM Central Daylight Time,
>bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
>
> > Saw one in a junk box out at RAC a few years back. I think
> > it was the one used in early Bonanzas. Probably just needs
> > o-rings. Interested?
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
>
>Good Morning Bob,
>
>There is undoubtedly someone with an early Bonanza who would like to have one
>of those.
>The wobble pump that I would use, if I were to want a manually operated pump,
>would be one of those which has no function other than being a fuel pump.
>They were round. Looked about like a large Tuna can. The shaft went into
>one flat side of the can and the wobbling motion was very comfortable. I
>believe it was used on the early Beech 18s as well as many other aircraft of
>the day. It was easy to pump and by controlling the rate of the stroke, fuel
>pressure could be maintained quite close to the desired number. It was not
>at all a frantic style effort.
>
>Sorry about the rambling. I'll try to stick to electrical stuff from now on!
No problem. If we don't recall and share the history of
our art, then it wasn't worth doing! The pump I saw was
a stand-alone device. This was years ago . . . we had a
big clean-up plant wide a year or so ago. Seems some big-wig
walking through the facility was put off by all the "junk"
in various boxes and cabinets around the plant.
Now everything is clean, uninteresting and sterile. All the
rotabins are gone from the experimental flight hangar.
You gotta go scrounge parts from the factory bins (which
get locked up at night so second shift exp-mechanics are
SOL).
Experimental can now do anything but experiment. That's
why most of the stuff I do for them is out of my shop
at home.
Bob. . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: buying Radio's |
Ron:
Contact Jeff Smith at 941-358-1404, Navasota Avionics shop in
Sarasota, FL. They are a big Bizjet FBO and by Garman stack in volume.
Regards,
ED
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | John Slade's Multimeter Problems |
>
> > sounds like your meter is broke. If you would
> > be so kind as to return it to me at
>Ahha!. And I thought it was me. What a relief!
>I'll mail it next week. Thanks.
The meter was indeed bad.
I've spoke with Todd. He is going to send you
a new meter.
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Suggested wiring circuits. |
Bob:
On another note. During bench testing, can I put a voltage/amp gauge
on my power supply to monitor volts amp loads as I turn each item on.
Ed Silvanic
Lancair ES
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Accessory loads testing . . . |
>
>Bob:
>
> On another note. During bench testing, can I put a voltage/amp gauge
>on my power supply to monitor volts amp loads as I turn each item on.
Sure. In fact, I highly recommend it. Open the fuse or circuit breaker
for each item and hook your multimeter across the opening in the
current mode. Or just hook your multimeter in series with the output
from your power supply.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: buying Radio's |
For Garmin stuff talk to John Stark at Stark Avionics, 706-321-1008. He has
the best prices I have found and is a heck of a nice guy to deal with. He
may also handle Apollo but I've never asked about that.
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, electrical stuff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | John Slade's Multimeter Problems |
> The meter was indeed bad.
> I've spoke with Todd. He is going to send you
> a new meter.
Thanks, Bob.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Accessory loads testing . . . |
Bob:
On another note. You asked me to slow down with Ed's Lancair -System
planning, because of two other projects going on. When can I send my next
pass? I have my annual check ride on the 9th/10th of next month. I usually
slow down two weeks prior to prepare for this two day check ride. I am
monitoring the current system planning going on with Shannon and someone
else. I am downloading info and creating a sub manual to your Aeroelectric
Connection book. I won't be doing any heavy work in the shop on the airplane,
however, I can send a few passes through if you have the time. Hopefully this
would allow me to begin buying hardware right after my check ride or I can
ask for a reserve time to send my next pass after the 10th. What would be
best for you? Basically I've been doing my own passes each time you
correct/advise on the current projects. My second pass when you see it will
look like someone's 10th pass when you get it, but other people would not
benefit from seeing the on going changes. Whatever is good for you is OK for
me. I just don't want to go too cold on this learning process.
Oh, yes, as always thanks for your tip on hooking my voltmeter in
series with my power supply to check equipment/bus loads. though I haven't
started the panel yet, I am thinking ahead.
Regards,
Ed Silvanic
N823MS
Lancair ES
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | GPS/NAV Illuminated Annunciator |
For all-
Was very impressed with the GPS/NAV relay kit, which I purchased from Eric
M. Jones.
It went together real sweetly, and works as advertised.
(Thank you Eric!)
What I'm looking for now is
one of those impressive looking Illuminated Annunciator switches that has
two legends.
NAV on the top, and GPS on the bottom. Push the button and it toggles from
on to the other.
The switching action would of course energize or de-energize the relay. The
lights for the legends should probably be routed thru the relay as well, so
that the appropriate legend won't light unless the relay did switch.
Anyone have any sources for such a switch?
Or a Better Idea...?
(Planned installation on an RV6 set up for light IFR)
Rolf
RV6 Old and Slow (and so is the kit)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom & Cathy Ervin" <tcervin(at)valkyrie.net> |
| Subject: | Re: buying Radio's |
John Stark does handle Apollo as I bought a SL-30 in the stack I bought of
him. I have a Garmin 430, Apollo SL-30 & Garmin 327 Transponder prewired by
Stark Avionics.
Tom in Ohio (Fiberglass City)
----- Original Message -----
From: <HCRV6(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: buying Radio's
>
> For Garmin stuff talk to John Stark at Stark Avionics, 706-321-1008. He
has
> the best prices I have found and is a heck of a nice guy to deal with. He
> may also handle Apollo but I've never asked about that.
>
> Harry Crosby
> Pleasanton, California
> RV-6, electrical stuff
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net> |
Bob,
I have a firewall mounted 7ah battery on engine side of firewall tied to SD8 alternator
relay. Should I provide a fuse link at the battery terminal protecting
the 24" wire going to the relay?
Dave Ford
RV6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>Bob,
>
>I have a firewall mounted 7ah battery on engine side of firewall tied to
>SD8 alternator relay. Should I provide a fuse link at the battery
>terminal protecting the 24" wire going to the relay?
This small a battery doesn't need a honk'n conctactor.
Something like our S704-1 relay would suffice. Can you
mount this little puppy closer? If not, put in the
fusible link.
Your description of the wiring is not clear to me.
Are you using one of the z-drawings?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
| Subject: | Shopping for supplies....Questions |
Perusing 'lectric Bob's web site for supplies, I find myself with these
questions:
1. Soldering wires to a d-sub, or crimping machined pins and pushing
them into a d-sub connector -- what's the difference? When do I use one
and not the other?
2. On the Tools page, does the BCT-1 also crimp the machine pins? If
so, I would have no need to buy both the BCT-1 and the RCT-3, right?
C. I see female fast-on spade terminals, but no male counterparts.
Why? I was thinking of using this combo for the occasional connection
in the airplane. Is it not recommended?
Thanks,
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Shopping for supplies....Questions |
>
>Perusing 'lectric Bob's web site for supplies, I find myself with these
>questions:
>
>1. Soldering wires to a d-sub, or crimping machined pins and pushing
>them into a d-sub connector -- what's the difference? When do I use one
>and not the other?
When the product you're installing comes with a solder-type
d-sub and you don't have and/or don't want to change to
the other style connector, then you'll have to solder it.
Either technique is entirely adequate to the task if done
with the right tools, skill and understanding.
>2. On the Tools page, does the BCT-1 also crimp the machine pins? If
>so, I would have no need to buy both the BCT-1 and the RCT-3, right?
The BCT-1 is for open-barrel sheet metal pins as
shown on http://216.55.140.222/articles/matenlok/matenlok.html
The RCT-3 is for machined pins as shown here
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/connect/connect.html#S604
The crimp-pin d-subs sold in many stores like Radio Shack have
the open barrel pins. I use the connector housings from Radio
Shack when I need to get some in a hurry or on a weekend and
use the machined pins in them . . . but either can be installed
in a satisfactory manner. I prefer and usually always use
the machined pins in my projects.
>C. I see female fast-on spade terminals, but no male counterparts.
>Why? I was thinking of using this combo for the occasional connection
>in the airplane. Is it not recommended?
It's only been recently that anyone offered a male fast-on
in the PIDG style (metal liners in the insulation grip).
They've been available in plasti-grip for a long time but
I wouldn't use these on my airplane.
If you want to make a serviceable splice in two wires
I would recommend knife splices like this
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/ksplc2.jpg
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary K" <flyink(at)efortress.com> |
| Subject: | Re: mini connectors |
I sent some pictures to the lists, not sure why it didn't come thru yet on
the 'lectric list. I used some Deans R/C model connectors on my MAC grips
and thought other people might be interested in using these in tight spots.
I included the link below and some ordering information. They are probably
available at any hobby shop that carries radio-controlled cars/planes. I
mail-ordered mine thru Omni Models 1-800-342-6464.
2-pin F46670 $1.39
3-pin F46671 $1.49
4-pin F46674 $1.85
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/flyink@efortress.com.10.26.2002/index.ht
ml
or main page at http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
Gary Krysztopik
Pelican PL w/Stratus EA-81 subaru
96.438% complete
Newport, R.I.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: mini connectors |
>
>I sent some pictures to the lists, not sure why it didn't come thru yet on
>the 'lectric list. I used some Deans R/C model connectors on my MAC grips
>and thought other people might be interested in using these in tight spots.
>I included the link below and some ordering information. They are probably
>available at any hobby shop that carries radio-controlled cars/planes. I
>mail-ordered mine thru Omni Models 1-800-342-6464.
>
>2-pin F46670 $1.39
>3-pin F46671 $1.49
>4-pin F46674 $1.85
>
>http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/flyink@efortress.com.10.26.2002/index.ht
>ml
>
>or main page at http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
>
>Gary Krysztopik
>Pelican PL w/Stratus EA-81 subaru
>96.438% complete
>Newport, R.I.
Gary, thanks for the heads up on this. Omni Models has a website
and a brief search of their offerings turned up some interesting
possibilities. Check out:
http://www2.omnimodels.com/cgi-bin/woi0001p.pgm?Q=1&I=WSDM3005
This is an example of hundreds of variations on a theme in
0.1" spaced, 0.025" square posted connectors common throughout
the electronics industry. With this small spacing and in-line
design, they're fairly easy to work with for tight spot,
low current applications like the control wheel switch harnesses.
Many of these connectors do not positively lock to each other
when mated so a piece of suitably sized heatshrink over the mated
pairs is in order.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: JPH530 to intercom adapter |
>Below is the result of your inquiry. It was submitted by
>Randy Garrett (rgarrett7(at)attbi.com) on Sunday, October 27, 2002 at 00:29:09
>
>Sunday, October 27, 2002
>Hi Bob ...
>
>I bought a JRC handheld from you as well as the cigarette lighter
>adapter. I would like to hook it into my intercom. I figured the easiest
>way was to make a custom cable that plugs into the headset adapter on the
>handheld. Would you happen to know what kind of plugs those
>are? Hopefully, they are pretty standard.
>
>BTW, I bought the handheld because it had gotten good reviews. I have
>gotten several compliments on how the radio sounds, even though I am still
>just using the rubber ducky antenna. I have been intended to connect it
>to a real external antenna but it is working so well that I just haven't
>gotten around to it. I can easily talk 25-30 miles even though the
>mounting is hideous. No telling how well it will do with an actual
>antenna (:-)
I don't know if you can purchase the loose connectors
to mate with the radio but the headset adapter that
comes with the radio could be easily adapted to the
end of a harness connecting the hand-held to the intercom.
My radio is loaned out right now but when I get it
back, I'll look at the connectors and see if I can
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Adding stick grip PTT switches |
>Below is the result of your inquiry. It was submitted by
>dennis leasock (dleasock(at)aol.com) on Sunday, October 27, 2002 at 01:41:50
>
>Sunday, October 27, 2002
> Hi Bob
>...Quick question, I'm installing a PM-2000 intercom and I want to wire a
>PTT switch in the control stick. How do I do that? Thanks for the help.
Here's a link to part of the wiring diagram I publish for
the 760VHF Microair radio.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/audio/760v1.pdf
Note that the microphone jacks at the bottom of the
page have extended PTT switches scabbed onto the
appropriate terminals of each mic jack. These
are not vulnerable signal wires so a simple, twisted
pair extension works fine.
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tom Brusehaver <cozytom(at)mn.rr.com> |
| Subject: | New Technologies |
I read in the Oct 21 EETimes about a couple new
products that may be useful for our new fangled
airplanes.
Motorola has a new power switch designed to replace
relays in cars. I have used relays, and I really hate
'em. This sounds nice. It is designed to make relay
free vehicles. Part number is MC33982
<http://www.eetimes.com/pw/potw/OEG20021018S0046>
The other product, is more clever than totally useful,
since I don't think it could be adapted to airplanes.
Phillpis has a chip that can monitor the tire pressure.
It uses the cars keyless entry receiver to read tire
pressure, pretty clever, since the receiver is on all
the time, and when you are driving it probably does
nothing. It may not work for airplanes since most
aircraft tires use tubes, but maybe sometime it
could be adapted.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New Technologies |
>
>
>I read in the Oct 21 EETimes about a couple new
>products that may be useful for our new fangled
>airplanes.
>
>Motorola has a new power switch designed to replace
>relays in cars. I have used relays, and I really hate
>'em. This sounds nice. It is designed to make relay
>free vehicles. Part number is MC33982
> <http://www.eetimes.com/pw/potw/OEG20021018S0046>
>
>The other product, is more clever than totally useful,
>since I don't think it could be adapted to airplanes.
>Phillpis has a chip that can monitor the tire pressure.
>It uses the cars keyless entry receiver to read tire
>pressure, pretty clever, since the receiver is on all
>the time, and when you are driving it probably does
>nothing. It may not work for airplanes since most
>aircraft tires use tubes, but maybe sometime it
>could be adapted.
All this stuff is coming down the pike at ever
increasing capability. I've participated in a number
of solid state relay designs at RAC and have some
planned for AEC too. Eric Jones has been massaging
some designs he would like to offer to the OBAM
industry. I have a couple of his parts on my
bench now to look at and hope to hook some of
them up to try out yet this weekend.
Those of you with a technical bent and a
rosin-core smoking habit may like to look over
a sampling of the recent offerings from various
silicon foundries which I've posted at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/NewStuff
I'm working with two designs using the
Profet smart high side switches for use
on certified ships at RAC. A local supplier of
custom parts to the aircraft industry here in
Wichita has several products certified using
the Profet parts.
Exciting times ahead.
Bob . . .
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Fwd: crimping or solderring - Ongoing thread on another |
list
Hi Gang,
What Bob writes (below) is certainly a factual statement and
I don't disagree, *BUT*, my original question was simple and
has been referenced by many only in spiritual and oblique
references that do not qualify for the "Quantifiable Answer"
award. Show me the list of rules"?
Who's rules are you interested in? I could sit down and
write some. AC43-13 proposes a lot of good "advice" that
become "rules" in the hands of enthusiastic bureaucrats.
Phil Burger offered us lots of "rules" in his SA article.
The statement, "UNDERSTANDING of the physics, and personal
responsibility", is certainly relevant to my question and
that is why I asked for a reasonable, definitive and irrefutable
answer. I am beginning to believe there isn't one, just hyperbola.
The "rule" is that 35 + 26 = 61, your consternation
seems to arise from having to make a decision as to
whether you add it up in your head, use pencil and paper,
a scientific calculator, abacus or super-computer to
arrive at the answer.
It appears that Rick provided the best answer that is available:
"AC 43-13 1b Chapter 11 Section 14 Paragraph 11-174 a. Selection
of Wire Terminals, "Pre-insulated crimp type ring-tongue terminals
are preferred."
Okay, call this a "rule" if it makes you feel better . . .
There have been too many believable "war stories" that have related
to wire failing due to a solder connection, particularly larger ones
like the type used on starters and other vibration prone areas of
attachment. I must pay attention to these subjective accounts as
they convey a certain claim of identifiable truth.
What subjective accounts are you referring to? I've never
seen a single war story that offered an explanation as to
the physics of a failure or a rational engineering or
systems approach to keeping it from happening again.
Let's take any war story you find "believable" and do a
critical analysis of facts cited to see how they add value
to our deliberations.
Until I can be shown otherwise, my larger connections will be
crimped.
. . . with tools I hope are calibrated to the task . . .
I've seen some pretty creative suggestions for things
you mash in a vise, pound with a hammer, or squash
with a wrench. NONE of the articles I've read for
building and using these tools talked about slicing
open finished joints to inspect for "gas tightness"
under the microscope.
The smaller wires will be soldered only when crimping is
not possible. Most, where applicable, will be supported physically
near the solder or crimped connection. This is based on the most
reliable document to date; the FAA AC 43-13 and AC 65-15 Airframe
Handbook. I guess this is what the airlines use.
Are you sure? I wouldn't bet on it. Every airframe manufacturer
has it's own set of "rules" . . . we have bookshelves of
various and sundry process specifications at RAC . . some
read sorta like AC43-13, some read sorta like engineering
applications manuals from AMP. Most read like the words
of people who have been doing something in a successful way
for a long time and want to share that knowledge.
I'm curious. How has anything I've suggested argued with
the documents you've cited above? I'm a bit amused at
the notion of calling AC14-13 "the most reliable document
to date."
When AC43-13 was being updated about 6-7 years ago, the
FAA sent a draft copy to Earl Lawrence at EAA asking that
it be reviewed by folks within the OBAM community for
"gross errors . . . we don't want to get off onto any
tangents driven by differences of opinion". They asked
for responses in two weeks.
Earl sent me the electrical section and asked for a
speedy response. I used up the better part of every
evening for a week and produced a document detailing
about 90 data points where the proposed update to
AC43-13 were at best poor practice and in many cases
dead wrong.
I have a copy of what Earl sent back to the FAA. All
totaled, I think EAA members had several hundred
"suggestions" for improvement to the document.
The update scheduled for two weeks didn't happen
for months . . . in fact I think it was over a year.
When the revision did hit the streets, many of the
suggestions EAA made had been incorporated into the
document . . . but far too many did not and new problems
were generated in the rewrite.
One of these days, I plan to do a "Layman's Guide to
the use of AC43-13 Electrical Section" . . . it's
going to be a big chore and I'm not looking forward to
it.
Bottom line is that what you've proposed for your airplane
is going be just fine. Should this be carved in stone
to make it a set of "rules" . . . are you looking for a
consensus suggesting that anyone who decides to do
it differently has placed his future in jeopardy?
It's precisely this sort of quest for comfort in
traditional techniques and/or bureaucratic decision
making that has brought certified aviation to the point
it is today . . .
|---------------------------------------------|
| Independence, Kansas . . . your #1 source |
| factory fresh, 50-year old airplanes. |
|---------------------------------------------|
You guys are without a doubt, building the best airplanes
to have ever flown . . .
Bob . . .
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: crimping or solderring - Ongoing thread on |
another list
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
> It appears that Rick provided the best answer that is available:
> "AC 43-13 1b Chapter 11 Section 14 Paragraph 11-174 a. Selection
> of Wire Terminals, "Pre-insulated crimp type ring-tongue terminals
> are preferred."
>
> Okay, call this a "rule" if it makes you feel better . . .
>
*** I had an earnest discussion about this very point with my favorite
FSDO inspector. He told me that the FAA "prefers" these connectors because
they are very very good for aircraft manufacturers, because
******** They can be applied by untrained personnel. **********
Whereas soldering is a skill that takes a week or so to learn.
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Slaughter" <willslau(at)alumni.rice.edu> |
| Subject: | Fwd: crimping or soldering - Ongoing thread on |
another list
All,
I recently took a couple of guys I know out to lunch in return for
electrical connection advice. They work for a local company which makes lots
of the "electro-whizzies" that fly on Space Shuttle missions. They use both
soldering and crimping (not on the same terminal of course). Crimping is
usually specified where the number of identical connections is high, but is
subject to rounds of destructive pull tests of sample articles both before
and after the production items are done. They use very expensive and
frequently calibrated crimping tools. Soldering is simply inspected as part
of the normal QC process, and moved on down the line.
Gas tightness and proper strain relief are the electrical and mechanical
elements of a successful connection. Both can be achieved by a variety of
means.
William
Bottom line is that what you've proposed for your airplane
is going be just fine. Should this be carved in stone
to make it a set of "rules" . . . are you looking for a
consensus suggesting that anyone who decides to do
it differently has placed his future in jeopardy?
It's precisely this sort of quest for comfort in
traditional techniques and/or bureaucratic decision
making that has brought certified aviation to the point
it is today . . .
|---------------------------------------------|
| Independence, Kansas . . . your #1 source |
| factory fresh, 50-year old airplanes. |
|---------------------------------------------|
You guys are without a doubt, building the best airplanes
to have ever flown . . .
Bob . . .
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: crimping or solderring |
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> >
> >
> > It appears that Rick provided the best answer that is available:
> > "AC 43-13 1b Chapter 11 Section 14 Paragraph 11-174 a. Selection
> > of Wire Terminals, "Pre-insulated crimp type ring-tongue terminals
> > are preferred."
> >
> > Okay, call this a "rule" if it makes you feel better . . .
> >
>*** I had an earnest discussion about this very point with my favorite
>FSDO inspector. He told me that the FAA "prefers" these connectors because
>they are very very good for aircraft manufacturers, because
>
> ******** They can be applied by untrained personnel. **********
>
> Whereas soldering is a skill that takes a week or so to learn.
yup . . . maybe even 8 days . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ray P. Stallings" <JetJockey(at)alumni.utexas.net> |
Does anyone have plans to make a simple tone generator that can be connected
as an aux input to an intercom system to provide a gear up warning? I
already have the logic switching for the landing gear up and an external
buzzer in place but it is often difficult to hear it when wearing my helmet.
Any help is greatly appreciated. I have a PSI PMA-4000 audio panel
installed.
Regards,
Ray
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net> |
Bob,
I am using Z-25 for wiring the SD-8, S704-1 relay and small battery. The only
difference is I am not using the 701 contactor and along with the e-buss feed
there is also a FADEC primary power buss off the battery. I guess studying a
little further I would have seen there is a fuse link shown from battery to relay,
sorry.
Dave
,
> >
> >I have a firewall mounted 7ah battery on engine side of firewall tied to
> >SD8 alternator relay. Should I provide a fuse link at the battery
> >terminal protecting the 24" wire going to the relay?
>
> This small a battery doesn't need a honk'n conctactor.
> Something like our S704-1 relay would suffice. Can you
> mount this little puppy closer? If not, put in the
> fusible link.
>
> Your description of the wiring is not clear to me.
> Are you using one of the z-drawings?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New Technologies |
The BTS555 ProFET is used in the pitot heat controller on the Citation X.
David Swartzendruber
Wichita
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/NewStuff
>
> I'm working with two designs using the
> Profet smart high side switches for use
> on certified ships at RAC. A local supplier of
> custom parts to the aircraft industry here in
> Wichita has several products certified using
> the Profet parts.
>
> Exciting times ahead.
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stucklen" <wstucklen1(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Low Voltage Warning & Aux Batt management module |
Bob,
Any chance you might make the .DWG file available for the Low Voltage Warning
& Aux Batt management Module. I'd like to include it in my wiring documentation
for the new plane...
Fred Stucklen
RV-6A N925RV
2006 Hrs of safe flying!
Working on 2'd RV-6A (Slow Build Version)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New Technologies |
>
>
>The BTS555 ProFET is used in the pitot heat controller on the Citation X.
Did Benny Lee do that one or someone else?
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Crimping or soldiering electrical terminals - continued |
Thanks for your reply and I do appreciate the time you have
spent.
No problem. It's what I do . . .
*IF* I knew anything about this subject I wouldn't have asked
for help with *specifics*. I don't have the time to experiment
and see who is right (or wrong). You are generally regarded as
a guru in your discipline and I had hoped there would be a
"reasonable, definitive and irrefutable answer", Since I have
not been shown anything (by anyone), I guess I need to choose
what seems to be the safest course of direction.
I am not trying to argue or diminish your knowledge on the
subject in any form or fashion. I simply need a document that
will be an accurate guide and keep me out of trouble. The 43-13
is generally regarded as the "accepted" methodology, not
withstanding an heretofore unseen document that would supersede
the 43-13 handbook.
You mention that you could sit down and write some. Let me
tell you that would be welcomed with open arms throughout
the experimental community. I have read a lot of what you
have wrote and it makes a lot of sense. A document about
wiring in an vibrating environment would be a great asset
to our community. "To Solder or Not to Solder".
Okay. Here are the "rules" by which Bob Nuckolls would
wire his own airplane:
RULE 1: First choice for joining/terminating any wires up
through 22 through 12AWG are PIDG style terminals as described in
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/terminal.pdf
using tools like
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#rct-1
or better.
---------------------------
RULE 2: Where there is a choice, I would select fast-ons over
threaded fasteners in the 22 to 12 AWG range using
terminals like
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/wiring.html#faston
with features as explained in
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/faston3.pdf
---------------------------
RULE 3: When I have to live with a treaded fastener then
these terminals are in order . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/wiring.html#s816p
----------------------------
RULE 4: For wires larger than 12AWG, then I would solder and heatshrink
joints as described in . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/big_term.pdf
Using materials like . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/s812.jpg
which are supplied with double-wall heatshrink for finishing.
-------------------------------
RULE 5A: Permanent splicing of single conductors to be accomplished
with butt splices like . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/s816.jpg
-------------------------------
RULE 5B: but if it was deemed desirable to break the
splice open for future convenience, a knife splice and heat
shrink would be used thusly . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/ksplc2.jpg
-------------------------------
RULE 6: When the accessory items are supplied with
nylon connectors like AMP Mate-n-Lock or Molex, pins
are installed with a tool like . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#bct-1
used thusly . . .
http://216.55.140.222/articles/matenlok/matenlok.html
These connectors would only be used as an accommodation
for the use of an accessory that comes with them already
installed. They are not my connector style of choice for any
other applications.
------------------------------------
RULE 7A: When working with accessories supplied with
D-sub connectors, the first choice of mating connectors
is the removable pin variety that will accept machined
pins like . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/connect/connect.html#S604
installed with a tool like
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#rct-3
and removed with a tool like . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#dse-1
RULE 7B: if for any reason the crimped-pin mating d-sub is
not available, then soldering is my second choice using
techniques described in . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/dsubs/d_solder.html
and tools like
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#s101_1
or better
-----------------------------------------
RULE 7C: If options 7A and 7B are not practical, then the
lowest order choice for working with d-subs is open barrel
crimped pins installed with a tools and techniques like
those described in RULE 6.
-----------------------------------------
RULE 8: Installation of connectors on coaxial cables to
antennas are installed per
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/bnccrimp.pdf
using tool . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#rct-2
and wire . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/antenna/antenna.html#rg-400
and connectors . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/antenna/antenna.html
-------------------------------------------
RULE 9: A single point ground system shall be established behind
the instrument panel with sufficient attach points for all
accessories in the cockpit area. In deference to RULE 2,
a forest-of-fast-on-tabs ground block similar to . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/wiring.html#gndblk
The threaded stud on the ground block assembly would penetrate
the firewall and be used to terminate battery (-) leads on
either side of firewall and the crankcase ground strap on
the engine side of the firewall.
In the case of canard pushers with the battery up front,
the ground bus would be mounted forward of the instrument
panel. If the airplane's firewall is metalic, then a
brass bolt and appropriate washers and nuts would be used
to provide an engine compartment ground stud and connection
of the ground lead to the firewall. A ground strap like . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/wiring.html#bbs
. . . will be used to connect the crankcase to the firewall
ground stud.
Any ground straps provided around the rubber biscuits of
an engine mount will be removed. Engine mounts are for holding
engines on airplanes and not use for any part of the electrical
system.
-------------------------------------------
RULE 10: Tefzel wire used throughout with the exception of
cranking circuit fat wires where 4AWG or 2AWG welding cable
would be used. An alternative FAT wire could be one of the
new copper-clad aluminum wires. These new materials are as
solderable and crimpable as pure copper conductors.
Caution
To get the same electrical performance, you need to use about
2AWG steps larger wire than for copper but the installed wire
will still be lighter.
Here endeth the reading of the rules. In parallel universes
there are differing rules which may well prove to be as useful
or perhaps even better than those cited in Bob's universe.
Given what Bob has learned up to and including Sunday,
October 27, 2003 the rules cited above are his personal
choices for practical, solid techniques using moderately
priced materials, and tools. Adherence to these rules is likely
to produce an electrical system where (1) component wear-out
and failure are the sole causes for maintenance and
(2) the wiring can be expected to perform as intended over
the lifetime of the airplane.
================================================================
Here is how I perceive the question, "When can you use solder on
a #2 wire?" Answer, "Well, that depends!". I can't deal with that
kind of an answer. Unfortunately that is all I have been getting
from our canard community rank and file.
Yes, it does depend . . . on only one thing. Whether or
not YOU want to solder wires. If any of the rank and file
disagree with this, please invite them to bring the facts
as they perceive them over to the AeroElectric-List. If
I'm unaware of some critical information on the matter,
I and several hundred others are intently interested
in knowing what it is.
This isn't a battle of wills or a turf war. We need to
be constantly evolving the art and science of building
airplanes based on physics. If I am in error, nobody is
more interested in knowing about it than I am.
> Let's take any war story you find "believable" and do a
> critical analysis of facts cited to see how they add value
> to our deliberations.
Bob, you are getting picky here, I must have hit a nerve, I
didn't mean to. Take my word for it however, there have been
recent posts of this and breaking because they were soldered.
I just am not going to find them at this time as most were
bad work anyway. One fellow e-mailed me and stated a bad crimp
is just as bad a bad solder. Hummmmm?
Yup, he's right . . .
You brought up war stories as having an influence on your
deliberations. I've written many times and with extreme
disfavor on consideration of what I call "Dark and stormy
night" stories as useful data for the design and fabrication
of an electrical system. I'll suggest that most
of those stories came about due to a lack of
understanding on the part of pilots, manufacturers and
bureaucrats as to what it takes to produce a reliable
flight system.
See http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev9/ch17-9.pdf
Our easy-to-achieve goals for having airplanes that stand
above the spam-cans is (1) design for failure tolerance
and (2) take on the responsibility to learn how to use
ANY chosen assembly technique effectively. There will ALWAYS
be failures of one kind or another in ANY system. Yeah,
you might even burn a soldered terminal off the end of
a wire cause you didn't put it on right . . . but you might
burn a crimped terminal off too for EXACTLY THE SAME
REASON.
You mentioned $120.00 for a tool. To me that is not an
outrageous price. I'll look into them shortly. I suspect I
will need several. Perhaps you could recommend one.
Not $120 for A tool but the WHOLE SET of tools
. . . see citations in list of rules above.
When I amuse my wife she becomes exuberant and happy. I hope
I have effected you in the same manner. If you consider that
no other document has been offered, except the 43-13, to answer
my specific question, I guess it accurately fits the description.
All I have seen are several multi page documents, although well
written, do not answer my original question regarding solder
in the vibrating arena.
I've made the statement numerous times and will repeat it
here. There is no significant difference in a properly
soldered versus properly crimped joint on a wire. Crimping
takes specialized tools and less skill; soldering uses
very in-expensive tools and takes some practice. I cannot
cite any reason for saying that one technique is better
than the other with respect to service life in your airplane.
> One of these days, I plan to do a "Layman's Guide to
> the use of AC43-13 Electrical Section" . . . it's
> going to be a big chore and I'm not looking forward to
> it.
It would appear that it is a badly needed document. Having
been inundated with just about every "war story" and Uncle
Herbs snake oil remedy for proper wiring, I would personally
be relieved to have in my possession such a document. All
kidding aside, you should dedicate it to me. I represent the
many who don't know but will admit it.
I think you're making it more complicated than it
needs to be. This is the objection I have for the
way the EXP-Bus was sold at OSH last time I was there.
A guy behind the counter hands you this whippy
assembly that looks really complicated . . .
http://www.controlvision.com/pages/avionics_expbus.htm
. . .and it only costs $300! You hold the thing in your
hand an think, "Damn! I'd NEVER be able to figure out
something like this," while the guy behind the counter
tells you about all the whippy things it will do and
how much "time" it will save.
The question you don't know to ask and he doesn't offer
is "Does this product offer the simplest, lowest parts
count, equal or better performance result at the same
or lower cost of ownership." My answer to that
question is, "No, it does not."
When you pick up an English language dictionary, one
finds perhaps 100,000+ words contained therein of which
most literate adults use less than two percent
of the total. Yet I think we communicate very well.
AC43-13 is a similar document. It's a real piece of
work and LOOKS important because its got this
whippy government agency seal on the cover.
Like the EXP-Bus and the dictionary, there are a handful
of core facts and features around which 95% of your
system will be designed and built and I think I've
touched on most of them above.
> It's precisely this sort of quest for comfort in
> traditional techniques and/or bureaucratic decision
> making that has brought certified aviation to the point
> it is today . . .
>
> |---------------------------------------------|
> | Independence, Kansas . . . your #1 source |
> | factory fresh, 50-year old airplanes. |
> |---------------------------------------------|
You have a valid point. I only wish my Long will be around
as long and respected as the veritable DC-3.
No-biggie. Solar UV is going to rot the poor bugger
to dust before any of your wiring falls apart.
Again, thanks for your time. I do feel honored that someone
of your stature has taken the time to try and straighten me
out and be a help.
Another no-biggie. You've just fallen victim to a
veritable blizzard of non-information that provides
job-security for certain classes of worker citizens
in other aviation venues.
You're really better prepared than you think you are
but pouring over a document that's 95% floobydust will
only make the answers harder to find and understand.
Put down your copy of AC43-13 and let's get started
on your airplane. If questions come up along the way,
you'll get better answers TAILORED to your situation
off the list-servers than you'll get out of that
document.
By the way, my e-mail address at nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com
is going away in a few days. 95% of what arrives there is
either spam or virus attacks. Use bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net
instead. There's an e-mail generator on the website at
http://aeroelectric.com/bob.nuckolls/ that will forward
to the Cox account. I'm trying to avoid publishing my
direct e-mail address on publicly accessed web pages
to keep from getting picked up by so many spam-bots.
Better yet, join the AeroElectric-List . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New Technologies |
>
>
>I think it's a Cessna design built at Cessna. I betcha it'd blow us away to
>know how much that card cost's to replace as a spare part.
You got that right . . . but Benny isn't a low-dollar outfit
either. He just moves at the speed of light outside the
OEM walls while the guys inside haven't broken the sound
barrier yet.
In any case, it's nice that when folks are getting
plugged in to the new parts and making them work for
their customers. I hope their design proves to be
good value in the field.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
Bob,
I've considered your suggestion of upsizing the main alt to 90A.
However, I am not aware of a unit offered in the mount I need. Also,
I'm not entirely sure I have the "correct" things on the PRI and AUX
busses anyway, so I'm not sure if moving things around is called for or
not.
If possible, here is how I'd like to proceed (and proceed I NEED TO DO).
I'd like to jointly take a look at my equipment and busses, and see if
each component is on the right bus. Then I can go from there as far as
alternator requirements for each bus. Can we do that? The spreadsheet
is posted at
http://shannon.v8eaters.com/images/lancair/airplane_amp_draw_3.xls
The components in question are in yellow.
I really like the idea of the ESS bus feed off the main busses through a
diode (and a switch with NC relay), with an ALT feed switch straight off
the battery. I like it so much, that I think I want to create two ESS
busses, one off of each the MAIN and AUX bus. My panel is already cut
out with 2 switches, so I might as well use them. This will allow me to
have a place to put my "pampered" SFS too. I plan to do this behind a
N.C. bosch relay, so its failure mode would resort to the buss being on
if either the switch or the relay fails. The back up would be the ALT
FEED switches. I feel this is warranted due to my need of a "pampered"
buss, it adds some convenience features (which are important to me), and
it is very well backed up in its failure modes (switch fails:ON, relay
coil fails:ON, further backed up by ALT FEED). I realize this is not
the minimum parts solution, but it feels right. Thoughts?
Another question that I have pondered in an attempt to get the amp draw
under control is to switch to a 28 volt system. Can we discuss the
merits of this, as I don't recall it being discussed. This would
ideally cut most of my amp draws in half (I assume), which should put me
back in business. However, it would require a different battery for
sure. Are there batteries in the same size as my 17ah 14v ones in a 28V
variety? Will I still need 17ah, or will half of that suffice? Will
the required starter current go from 200 to 100? Do all of your
contactors your sell work on 28V systems?
Thanks.
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
-----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: Re: AeroElectric-List: system
>
>
>Bob,
>
>Haven't heard from you for a couple days on the system design exercise
>we were working on on the list. Obviously, I'm anxious to move
forward.
>I'm not trying to be pushy, but would you mind taking a look at my
>responses to you and advise me? I've basically decided that your
>method/advice is what I want to follow (chosen from all the advice out
>there, ie Lancair, other builders, etc), so until I get some of your
>great words of wisdom on my project, I'm pretty much in total limbo :)
Sorry. I've been nose-to-the-stone on a RAC project. Need to get
a spin-chute controller tested and installed in a Premier by
Sunday. Haven't been able to spend as much time on e-mail
as usual.
>With my project moving half way across the US in just over a week for
>finish bodywork and paint, limbo is not a good place for me to be, LOL
>:) Let me know what you come up with. Thanks, as always, for your
>patience and willingness to educate.
We're all learn'n here . . .
Consider upsizing the main alternator to 90A. This would take care
of your headroom problems on the main bus. If you upsized the aux
alternator, then we'd have to move some main-bus loads to the aux
bus and I'd rather keep the aux bus as clean as possible.
>---
>Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
>
>
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
That's a nice spreadsheet, Shannon. Thanks. I think I'll steal it!
I have one comment. I'd suggest that you need the AC during decent,
depending on where you are. Certainly here in S. Florida you need AC as you
decend back into the heat and humidity.
John Slade
Cozy IV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Test results (& methodology) for NiMH AA digital camera |
use
The table of "usable minutes" of several brand names is interesting.
Somewhat related to some testing done by Bob a few months ago re handheld
GPS & comm batteries (were those AAA?)
http://www.imaging-resource.com/ACCS/BATTS/BATTS.HTM
David Carter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DHartley(at)aascworld.com |
| Subject: | Headset/ Mic Jack insulation |
Hello, I wanted to know if the anti rotation tang on my jacks, need to be
cut off if I'm using the insulated washers?
David L. Hartley
209 983-3318
209 983-3281 Fax
209 929-2649 Pager
dhartley(at)aascworld.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Headset/ Mic Jack insulation |
>
>Hello, I wanted to know if the anti rotation tang on my jacks, need to be
>cut off if I'm using the insulated washers?
I think they do . . . You don't want them to "bite"
into the washer.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DHartley(at)aascworld.com |
| Subject: | Headset/ Mic Jack insulation |
I guess you would lose the "anti rotation" feature then. Does anyone
consider that to be an issue, or just snug them up good n tight?
David L. Hartley
Program Manager
Applied Aerospace Structures Corp.
209 983-3318
209 983-3281 Fax
209 929-2649 Pager
dhartley(at)aascworld.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net]
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Headset/ Mic Jack insulation
>
>Hello, I wanted to know if the anti rotation tang on my jacks, need to be
>cut off if I'm using the insulated washers?
I think they do . . . You don't want them to "bite"
into the washer.
Bob . . .
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Crimping or soldiering electrical terminals - continued |
Bob:
Finally recieved your CD-Rom Disk. How do I isolate one of the
drawings on the Lancair IV so I can begin my wirebook and get ideas for my
Lancair ES. Are we able to print it out by page?
Thanks
Ed Silvanic
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jon Finley" <jon(at)finleyweb.net> |
| Subject: | Aux Battery Management Module Availability |
Hi Bob,
I've scoured your site and B&C's site looking for your Aux Battery
Management Module but can't find it. Is it available?? If so, please
point me to the details.
Also, I'm trying to figure out how to "size" a Schottky diode. I'm
totally lost and would appreciate links regarding this topic.
Thanks for all the resources and information that you provide. Also
have appreciated your appearances at the Q2/Dragonfly Fly-In in Kansas
over the last several years - great presentations!
Jon Finley
N90MG Q2 - Subaru EJ-22 DD - 440 Hrs. TT - 0 Hrs Engine
Apple Valley, Minnesota
http://www.FinleyWeb.net/default.asp?id=96
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randy Gaugler <rgaugler(at)microserve.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-11a, Single ECU |
Bob, I started this post and have been following it closely between you
and John.
To answer your question, My current draw is about 4 amps to the ECU. I also
have a memory wire that
is wired hot all the time that draws very little.
I'm not worried about an ECU or Aux battery failure, just my SINGLE toggle
switch that provides it power.
If I'm going to add a second switch, I would be nice to be able to tap into
the second battery.
Randy
>
>
> >
> >
> >Bob, I am using Z-11a with a single ECU to keep the motor noisy. Not sure
> >of the best way
> >to feed it from either battery buss. Two diodes to prevent cross feed would
> >lower the voltage
> >in an alternator out situation. One double pole switch could be another
> >single point failure.
> >I am thinking about two switches side by side, on-off-on, that have their
> >handles tied together.
> >Up would be normal feed from one battery, center is off, and down would be
> >feed from the
> >other battery. Any thoughts or suggestions from anyone are always welcome.
> >That's what
> >makes this group work so well!
>
>
> I'd run it via fusible link from the aux battery only. This
> is what a second battery is for . . . provide a totally
> independent source of power for the engine that is not
> also loaded with other goodies.
>
> If push comes to shove, you can always close both battery
> contactors and get main battery power to the ECU but if
> you've got a less-than-two-year-old battery in the aux
> slot, I can't see this happening. How much current does
> your ECU draw in cruise?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ray Stallings <from Web-Mail>" <JetJockey(at)alumni.utexas.net> |
| Subject: | Gear Warning Tone |
I posted the following message this weekend which
probably explains why I didn't get any responses. I
know someone out there knows how to do this, so here
goes again:
Does anyone have plans to make a simple tone generator
that can be connected as an aux input to an intercom
system to provide a gear up warning? I already have
the logic switching for the landing gear up and an
external buzzer in place but it is often difficult to
hear it when wearing my helmet.
Any help is greatly appreciated. I have a PSE PMA-4000
audio panel installed.
Regards,
Ray
Ray Stallings
Email: JetJockey(at)alumni.utexas.net
PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
http://www.peoplepc.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ray Stallings <from Web-Mail>" <JetJockey(at)alumni.utexas.net> |
| Subject: | Gear Warning Tone |
I posted the following message this weekend which
probably explains why I didn't get any responses. I
know someone out there knows how to do this, so here
goes again:
Does anyone have plans to make a simple tone generator
that can be connected as an aux input to an intercom
system to provide a gear up warning? I already have
the logic switching for the landing gear up and an
external buzzer in place but it is often difficult to
hear it when wearing my helmet.
Any help is greatly appreciated. I have a PSE PMA-4000
audio panel installed.
Regards,
Ray
Ray Stallings
Email: JetJockey(at)alumni.utexas.net
PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
http://www.peoplepc.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
> The meter is made by "Vector". It claims to be accurate to .1V. Here's
> a URL:
>
> http://store.yahoo.com/rodi/vec008.html
For others who may be interested...
Mine came in today. It's a nice little unit and seems to work as advertised.
It has high, medium and low voltage LEDs and a backlit LCD display. It's
powered from a cigarette lighter socket. I havent had the back off yet, but
it has 4 screws. I think the thing can be disassembled and hard wired fairly
easily. Moving the LEDs might be a little harder.
I also received two $15.95 batteries from http://meci.com/ They're exactly
the same size as my $56 panasonic. The terminals look a little less sturdy,
but strong enough. I've yet to see how they perform.
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Headset/ Mic Jack insulation washers |
>
>I guess you would lose the "anti rotation" feature then. Does anyone
>consider that to be an issue, or just snug them up good n tight?
If the jacks had to withstand rotary tightening motions
in the normal course of usage, their might be some concerns.
I've used these parts for years in situations not
utilizing the anti-rotation feature . . .doesn't seem
to be a problem with a whole lota push'n and pull'n go'n
on.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie and Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Gear Warning Tone |
"Ray Stallings " wrote:
>
>
> I posted the following message this weekend which
> probably explains why I didn't get any responses. I
> know someone out there knows how to do this, so here
> goes again:
>
> Does anyone have plans to make a simple tone generator
> that can be connected as an aux input to an intercom
> system to provide a gear up warning? I already have
> the logic switching for the landing gear up and an
> external buzzer in place but it is often difficult to
> hear it when wearing my helmet.
>
> Any help is greatly appreciated. I have a PSE PMA-4000
> audio panel installed.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ray
>
> Ray Stallings
> Email: JetJockey(at)alumni.utexas.net
> PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
> http://www.peoplepc.com
Ray,
Saw your post, limited time to research for you right now.
Try searching Google for '555 timer ic' & you should find something that will
work. You want an oscillator tuned somewhere between 400hz & 3khz.
A direct link to the mfgr's web site is
http://www.national.com/pf/LM/LM555.html
If you haven't found a solution in a few days, email me direct & I'll try a
little harder to find you a circuit.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Shannon's Lancair system . . . |
>
>
>Bob,
>
>I've considered your suggestion of upsizing the main alt to 90A.
>However, I am not aware of a unit offered in the mount I need.
Which engine/alternator combination are you considering?
> Also,
>I'm not entirely sure I have the "correct" things on the PRI and AUX
>busses anyway, so I'm not sure if moving things around is called for or
>not.
The interesting thing here is that it's not terribly critical at
this time. If you arrange your aux and main busses adjacent to each
other with spare breakers in the space between them, loads can
be easily exchanged between busses as reasons become known
in the future. Same thing with main and aux battery busses. If
they are in close proximity, loads can be exchanged between these
sources as well.
The most important part of your load analysis now is to have
a good handle on exactly how many total devices need power and
what the total loads are. Decisions on exactly where
the power comes from can be adjusted.
>If possible, here is how I'd like to proceed (and proceed I NEED TO DO).
>I'd like to jointly take a look at my equipment and busses, and see if
>each component is on the right bus. Then I can go from there as far as
>alternator requirements for each bus. Can we do that? The spreadsheet
>is posted at
>
>http://shannon.v8eaters.com/images/lancair/airplane_amp_draw_3.xls
>
>The components in question are in yellow.
>
>I really like the idea of the ESS bus feed off the main busses through a
>diode (and a switch with NC relay), with an ALT feed switch straight off
>the battery. I like it so much, that I think I want to create two ESS
>busses, one off of each the MAIN and AUX bus. My panel is already cut
>out with 2 switches, so I might as well use them. This will allow me to
>have a place to put my "pampered" SFS too. I plan to do this behind a
>N.C. bosch relay, so its failure mode would resort to the buss being on
>if either the switch or the relay fails. The back up would be the ALT
>FEED switches. I feel this is warranted due to my need of a "pampered"
>buss, it adds some convenience features (which are important to me), and
>it is very well backed up in its failure modes (switch fails:ON, relay
>coil fails:ON, further backed up by ALT FEED). I realize this is not
>the minimum parts solution, but it feels right. Thoughts?
Wouldn't do it if it were my airplane . . . but then it's
not my airplane.
>Another question that I have pondered in an attempt to get the amp draw
>under control is to switch to a 28 volt system. Can we discuss the
>merits of this, as I don't recall it being discussed. This would
>ideally cut most of my amp draws in half (I assume), which should put me
>back in business.
It would help . . .
> However, it would require a different battery for
>sure.
Yup . . . and unfortunately there are no commercial RG
batteries as practical as the pair of 17 a.h. batteries.
Two pairs of 17's is way to big to even consider.
> Are there batteries in the same size as my 17ah 14v ones in a 28V
>variety?
> Will I still need 17ah, or will half of that suffice?
You could consider dropping down to pairs of 10-12 ah batteries
with a small penalty in weight and a slight gain in total
battery energy stored and a pretty hefty boost in price.
>Will the required starter current go from 200 to 100?
It will be less but not by half.
> Do all of your contactors your sell work on 28V systems?
We have only 28v dimmers and OV modules. Further, going to
28V shuts you out of anything and everything automotive.
Obviously, there are tens of thousands of 28v single engine
airplanes flying. If your power budget has become unmanageable
on a 14 volt system, then 28 may be your only choice.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: The importance of load analysis. |
>
>That's a nice spreadsheet, Shannon. Thanks. I think I'll steal it!
>I have one comment. I'd suggest that you need the AC during decent,
>depending on where you are. Certainly here in S. Florida you need AC as you
>decend back into the heat and humidity.
>John Slade
>Cozy IV
Good thought John . . . in fact, everyone on the list should
get a copy for reference. The load analysis is a major design
tool that becomes increasingly important as system complexity
goes up. The load analysis exercise was what raise flags
that a 28v system may well be NECESSARY on Shannon's airplane.
By doing the analysis first instead of after hardware has been
purchased can save one from unhappy discoveries about things
that were easily foreseen.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Gear Warning Tone |
>
>
>I posted the following message this weekend which
>probably explains why I didn't get any responses. I
>know someone out there knows how to do this, so here
>goes again:
>
>Does anyone have plans to make a simple tone generator
>that can be connected as an aux input to an intercom
>system to provide a gear up warning? I already have
>the logic switching for the landing gear up and an
>external buzzer in place but it is often difficult to
>hear it when wearing my helmet.
>
>Any help is greatly appreciated. I have a PSE PMA-4000
>audio panel installed.
Here's a circuit I used for a customer at Electro-Mech
about 25 years ago.
http://216.55.140.222/temp/GearWarn.gif
It uses one integrated circuit and a few simple
components. Output is a 400 Hz tone pulsed at
approx 2 times per second. Adjust the value
of R to get desired matching volume with other
audio sources. Suggest you start with 1K ohm
here and adjust as necessary. Less resistance
is more volume.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shay King" <shaking(at)eircom.net> |
| Subject: | CH701/Battery earth |
Dear Bob,
I'm starting the wiring on mt CH701 with Rotax 912s. The a/c is all metal with
battery in rear fuselage.
1/ Is it OK to earth the battery locally in the rear fuselage [ the structure is
very light ] or would it be better to bring an earth cable all the way forward
to the ground bus on the back of the firewall?
2/The Rotax installation manual gives wire sizes in mm squared. Is there a handy
conversion table somewhere, mm squared to AWG ?
Regards,
Shay King.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Del Johnson, North Point Solutions, Inc" <del.johnson(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel State Detector |
Bob, I would like to construct a couple of the fuel detectors, that use a
plastic rod. They look like they would be simple to construct and shouldn't
cost very much. You mentioned that you have constructed similar devices.
I have two questions:
1. Where would you place the light source (infrared) in relation to the
light sensor? My first thought would be to drill out a cavity that would
house the infrared LED and place the infrared sensor behind the LED.
2. What kind of plastic rod would not react to the various kinds of
auto/aviation that it might come in contact with and where can you purchase
that material?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Gear Warning Tone |
> Here's a circuit I used for a customer at Electro-Mech
> about 25 years ago.
Gee Bob. I wish I knew enough about electronics to build little gizmos like
this. I wonder if you would mind using this example to to give me (and
others) a shove over the last couple of hurdles into this facinating world.
Let me make a start by attempting to interpret the drawing and come up with
a shopping list for Radio Shack:
1. Breadboard
2. 100 ohm 1/2 watt resistor
3. Part # IN4742A
4. 10uf capacitor
5. Integrated circuit CD4093 with 14 terminals
6. 1k resistor (for starters) vary as needed for volume
7. .01 uf capacitor
8. 150 ohm resistor
9. .047 uf capacitor
10. 56k ohm resistor
11. 100k resistor
12. 4.7 uf capacitor
How'd I do?
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Fuel State Detector |
> Bob, I would like to construct a couple of the fuel detectors, that use
a...
Yes, Bob. Info please. I'd like to build a couple of these too!
John Slade
PS I built an LED annunciator panel and it went to my head.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Shannon's Lancair system . . . |
With all the considerations, unfortunately, 28V is not really an option
for me. Components are already ordered, and not having automotive
compatability just won't suffice. 14V it is.
My engine is the Continental IO-550N, with one of the AeroSupercharger
Solutions vortec superchargers on it. The supercharger is on the
co-pilot side, where the alternator usually is. Therefore, the kit
comes with a 60A alternator that is mounted on the pilot side to the
machined front plate that attaches to the front of the engine that also
holds the supercharger. AeroSS has been working with Kelly Aerospace to
offer other options.
Kelly Aerospace is making a couple of 70A units, but neither is
available just yet. One would mount to the front and be belt driven
with the supercharger, just like the 60A unit. This is what I planned
to use, along with the B&C 20 on a pad. However, this combination is
proving to not be up to the task, unfortunately. The other Kelly unit
sounds promising though. It is a 70A unit that mounts to the pad on the
back of the engine. It is suppose to be available in a couple months.
If this unit would materialize, I would strongly consider installing 2
of these units, one on each pad. Then, on my load analysis and buss
structure, I would just move the A/C to the AUX BUSS and be done. Also,
this would keep a supercharger belt breakage from attempting to ruin my
electrical day. Does this sound feasible?
As far as my buss structure; I understand your comment about it not
being extremely important at this time to have it all worked out.
However, to me it is, as I have to get the panel all cut and the labels
laser etched on the panel. If I change my mind later, then I have to
get the metal re-cut (not likely) or more than likely, I'll just have to
live with the changes that won't be properly reflected in the groupings
and labels on the panel. A picture of my preliminary panel can be seen
at
http://shannon.v8eaters.com/images/lancair/Knoepflein-l2k-092002.pdf
where you can see the groupings and labels I'm talking about. I want to
get this right the first time. It is not right now I know.
I've done the 4th go-around on the spreadsheet. I think it's getting
closer. It's posted at
http://shannon.v8eaters.com/images/lancair/airplane_amp_draw_4.xls
Still looking for any and all comments and suggestions. Thanks.
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
-----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: Shannon's Lancair system . . .
>
>
>Bob,
>
>I've considered your suggestion of upsizing the main alt to 90A.
>However, I am not aware of a unit offered in the mount I need.
Which engine/alternator combination are you considering?
> Also,
>I'm not entirely sure I have the "correct" things on the PRI and AUX
>busses anyway, so I'm not sure if moving things around is called for or
>not.
The interesting thing here is that it's not terribly critical at
this time. If you arrange your aux and main busses adjacent to each
other with spare breakers in the space between them, loads can
be easily exchanged between busses as reasons become known
in the future. Same thing with main and aux battery busses. If
they are in close proximity, loads can be exchanged between these
sources as well.
The most important part of your load analysis now is to have
a good handle on exactly how many total devices need power and
what the total loads are. Decisions on exactly where
the power comes from can be adjusted.
>If possible, here is how I'd like to proceed (and proceed I NEED TO
DO).
>I'd like to jointly take a look at my equipment and busses, and see if
>each component is on the right bus. Then I can go from there as far as
>alternator requirements for each bus. Can we do that? The spreadsheet
>is posted at
>
>http://shannon.v8eaters.com/images/lancair/airplane_amp_draw_3.xls
>
>The components in question are in yellow.
>
>I really like the idea of the ESS bus feed off the main busses through
a
>diode (and a switch with NC relay), with an ALT feed switch straight
off
>the battery. I like it so much, that I think I want to create two ESS
>busses, one off of each the MAIN and AUX bus. My panel is already cut
>out with 2 switches, so I might as well use them. This will allow me
to
>have a place to put my "pampered" SFS too. I plan to do this behind a
>N.C. bosch relay, so its failure mode would resort to the buss being on
>if either the switch or the relay fails. The back up would be the ALT
>FEED switches. I feel this is warranted due to my need of a "pampered"
>buss, it adds some convenience features (which are important to me),
and
>it is very well backed up in its failure modes (switch fails:ON, relay
>coil fails:ON, further backed up by ALT FEED). I realize this is not
>the minimum parts solution, but it feels right. Thoughts?
Wouldn't do it if it were my airplane . . . but then it's
not my airplane.
>Another question that I have pondered in an attempt to get the amp draw
>under control is to switch to a 28 volt system. Can we discuss the
>merits of this, as I don't recall it being discussed. This would
>ideally cut most of my amp draws in half (I assume), which should put
me
>back in business.
It would help . . .
> However, it would require a different battery for
>sure.
Yup . . . and unfortunately there are no commercial RG
batteries as practical as the pair of 17 a.h. batteries.
Two pairs of 17's is way to big to even consider.
> Are there batteries in the same size as my 17ah 14v ones in a 28V
>variety?
> Will I still need 17ah, or will half of that suffice?
You could consider dropping down to pairs of 10-12 ah batteries
with a small penalty in weight and a slight gain in total
battery energy stored and a pretty hefty boost in price.
>Will the required starter current go from 200 to 100?
It will be less but not by half.
> Do all of your contactors your sell work on 28V systems?
We have only 28v dimmers and OV modules. Further, going to
28V shuts you out of anything and everything automotive.
Obviously, there are tens of thousands of 28v single engine
airplanes flying. If your power budget has become unmanageable
on a 14 volt system, then 28 may be your only choice.
Bob . . .
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Peter Laurence <dr.laurence(at)mbdi.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel State Detector |
Del,
Another and possibly easier approach would be a capacitance sender.
Peter
> Bob, I would like to construct a couple of the fuel detectors, that use a
> plastic rod. They look like they would be simple to construct and
shouldn't
> cost very much. You mentioned that you have constructed similar devices.
>
> I have two questions:
>
> 1. Where would you place the light source (infrared) in relation
to the
> light sensor? My first thought would be to drill out a cavity that would
> house the infrared LED and place the infrared sensor behind the LED.
>
> 2. What kind of plastic rod would not react to the various kinds
of
> auto/aviation that it might come in contact with and where can you
purchase
> that material?
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
Hi Bob,
Our project is to have 240/33 ohm empty to full fuel level senders in the
wings.
Of course, due to the irregular shape of the wing internal tank, the UMA
gauge indication won't match the actual content.
For the ends of the scale, there are the built-in zero and full adjustments.
But what about the intermediate readings ?
I was thinking of an electonic device "correcting" the input, to
approximately match the 1/2 and 1/4 marks on the gauge faces. Is such a
device easily feasible ?
Thanks in advance,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DWENSING(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel State Detector |
In a message dated 10/29/02 9:14:49 AM Eastern Standard Time,
dr.laurence(at)mbdi.org writes:
Or, check out the fuel sensors sold by Aircraft Extras Inc. You can see at
www.aircraftextras.com
> Another and possibly easier approach would be a capacitance sender.
>
> Peter
>
> > Bob, I would like to construct a couple of the fuel detectors, that use a
> > plastic rod. They look like they would be simple to construct and
> shouldn't
> > cost very much. You mentioned that you have constructed similar devices.
> >
> > I have two questions:
> >
> > 1. Where would you place the light source (infrared) in relation
> to the
> > light sensor? My first thought would be to drill out a cavity that would
> > house the infrared LED and place the infrared sensor behind the LED.
> >
> > 2. What kind of plastic rod would not react to the various kinds
> of
> > auto/aviation that it might come in contact with and where can you
> purchase
> > that material?
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
It looks like I got my $15.95 worth!
Both these MECI.COM batteries seem unable to take a charge. The charger sits
at 1.5 amps and the batteries read 11.2 volts until I give them a tiny bulb
to light up, then they drop to 8 volts and the bulb glows dimly. Is there a
trick to this, or are they total junk?
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>Our project is to have 240/33 ohm empty to full fuel level senders in the
>wings.
>Of course, due to the irregular shape of the wing internal tank, the UMA
>gauge indication won't match the actual content.
>For the ends of the scale, there are the built-in zero and full adjustments.
>But what about the intermediate readings ?
>I was thinking of an electonic device "correcting" the input, to
>approximately match the 1/2 and 1/4 marks on the gauge faces. Is such a
>device easily feasible ?
You betcha. I use a micro-controller with a built in
a/d to read the sensor and convert the reading to true
value based on a lookup table built into the software.
I've used this basic architecture perhaps a dozen times
for various applications over the years.
http://216.55.140.222/temp/FuelGage.gif
It's becoming easier every day. Here's a nifty new chip from Motorola
http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=68HC908QT4&nodeId=01M98634
it's supported with low cost development systems and
editor-assemblers with lucid, intuitive syntax . . .
one of the easiest processors in the world to make work.
You can also consider devices like the Basic Stamp
from
http://www.parallaxinc.com/
This chip set needs an external A/D to make work but it
programs in tiny-basic . . . again, very easy to
get up and running.
Once you've digitized your non-linear data and
corrected for sensor and tank geometry, there are LOTS
of nice options for dealing with the new linear, accurate
data. You can drive an el-cheapo LCD meter with
the decimal point set to read out nearest tenth of
a gallon out of 199.9 gallons max. You can drive a bar
graph display. You can output the data in serial format
for communication with other smart electro-whizzies on
the panel.
Get unhooked from the steam-gages and a whole new world
of accuracy, stability and flexibility opens up for you.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: tone generator |
alpath.net>
>Thanks Bob,
>
>Is there anything I need to do differently for a 28V
>airplane?
>
>Regards,
>
>Ray Stallings
Increase the 150 ohm resistor to 1500 ohms
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Fuel State Detector |
>
> > Bob, I would like to construct a couple of the fuel detectors, that use
>a...
>Yes, Bob. Info please. I'd like to build a couple of these too!
>John Slade
>
>PS I built an LED annunciator panel and it went to my head.
When you can buy them ready to mount for about $40 each,
it's not worth the time and trouble to build them. I've
designed and built my last optical liquid level sensor.
I'd sure look at http://www.ppavionics.com/LFL.htm
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Gear Warning Tone Generator |
>
> > Here's a circuit I used for a customer at Electro-Mech
> > about 25 years ago.
>Gee Bob. I wish I knew enough about electronics to build little gizmos like
>this. I wonder if you would mind using this example to to give me (and
>others) a shove over the last couple of hurdles into this facinating world.
>
>Let me make a start by attempting to interpret the drawing and come up with
>a shopping list for Radio Shack:
>
>1. Breadboard
>2. 100 ohm 1/2 watt resistor
>3. Part # IN4742A
>4. 10uf capacitor
>5. Integrated circuit CD4093 with 14 terminals
>6. 1k resistor (for starters) vary as needed for volume
>7. .01 uf capacitor
>8. 150 ohm resistor
>9. .047 uf capacitor
>10. 56k ohm resistor
>11. 100k resistor
>12. 4.7 uf capacitor
>
>How'd I do?
>John Slade
Quite well sir. Good for you! Just to make sure
my recollection for parts sizes was in the ballpark
I went to the workbench and bread-boarded the circuit
as shown . . .
http://216.55.140.222/temp/ToneGen.jpg
This is an excellent candidate for a clad-board
project. See
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/cladboard/cladboard.html
I'd build it up on a flat sheet first or breadboard
as in the photo and get it working.
Then, build a small box out of ECB material or sheet
brass . . . all the parts can be (Ughh!) SOLDERED
together. Put a 9-pin d-sub connector on one wall
of the box. I'd shoot for about 1" x 2" by 3/4" thick.
Assemble your tested circuit inside. Test one more time
before you fill with spray-can insulation foam from
lumber yard. After foam sets up, trim flush with top
of your box and solder a lid on it. Cheap, dirty,
and tough as a boot. Works good and lasts a long time.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel State Detector |
>Solutions, Inc"
>
>Bob, I would like to construct a couple of the fuel detectors, that use a
>plastic rod. They look like they would be simple to construct and shouldn't
>cost very much. You mentioned that you have constructed similar devices.
>
>I have two questions:
>
> 1. Where would you place the light source (infrared) in relation
> to the
>light sensor? My first thought would be to drill out a cavity that would
>house the infrared LED and place the infrared sensor behind the LED.
>
> 2. What kind of plastic rod would not react to the various kinds of
>auto/aviation that it might come in contact with and where can you purchase
>that material?
If really gotta go off and build one, consider clear polysulphone rod,
high intensity red LED (cheap and plentiful) and photodetector of your
choice . . . I used to make my own photo-transistors by cutting the top
of a metal can device like a 2N2222A and using epoxy to mount the
transistor in the back of the sensor assembly.
Using 5/8" to 3/4" rod, you can cut a saw slot in one end to divide
it in half and put a curtain between the light source and photo
transistor. Thin aluminum or brass sheet works.
Drill holes so that the photo detector and light source can be mounted
either side of the curtain looking toward the sensor end of the rod.
cut the rod to desired length and form 90 degree cone on end. Polish
cut surfaces to optically clear quality.
Devise means for mounting your assembly through the wall of a tank
or better yet, put the whole thing inside the tank and bring only
wires out.
Devise means for exciting the LED (resistor from 5-12 volt source)
and watching the photo transistor current (LM311 works well) and use
LM311 to drive another LED on panel to indicate when the tip of your
sensor is in/out of the liquid.
None of this is hard to do, just tedious and lots of process and
packaging issues to whip. Wouldn't do it from scratch like this unless
there was an overwhelming reason for doing so. There are lots of folks
who build them better than I can for a whole lot less money.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Kaidor" <jerry(at)tr2.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
>
> You betcha. I use a micro-controller with a built in
> a/d to read the sensor and convert the reading to true
> value based on a lookup table built into the software.
>
*** And for those who are software-challenged, the same thing can be done
entirely in
hardware. You take an A/D converter and have it drive a little ROM ( Read
Only Memory ).
The A/D converter supplies addresses to the ROM. The ROM data outputs go to
a D/A converter which drives your meter.
The only "programming" to be done is to put the output-voltage words into
the ROM.
- Jerry Kaidor (
jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DWENSING(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Regulated power supply |
Bob, or any of you electronically smart guys out there.
I found a 10 amp regulated power supply on sale at local Radio Shack for $60.
Is that big enough for testing circuitry in my VFR panel? Do have electric AH
and Navaid wing leveler.
Dale Ensing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | How to do this . . . |
Got a note from a reader having trouble dealing with
the end of shielded wires getting a clean, compact
connection to join the shield with one of the conductors
under the shield.
Went to the workbench and shot these photos . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/HowToDoThis
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bartrim, Todd" <sbartrim(at)mail.canfor.ca> |
| Subject: | RE: Fuel State Detector |
> When you can buy them ready to mount for about $40 each,
> it's not worth the time and trouble to build them. I've
> designed and built my last optical liquid level sensor.
>
> I'd sure look at http://www.ppavionics.com/LFL.htm
>
> Bob . . .
>
Unfortunately they are not very good to do business with. I
originally designed my fuel system around one of their products. After I
ordered it, he requested that I give him a US shipping address. I pointed
out that I didn't live in the US, so what good would that do me? So he
refunded my money. I guess he didn't really want to do business after all.
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
RE: AeroElectric-List: RE: Fuel State Detector
When you can buy them ready to mount for about $40 each,
it's not worth the time and trouble to build them. I've
designed and built my last optical liquid level sensor.
I'd sure look at http://www.ppavionics.com/LFL.htm
Bob . . .
Unfortunately they are not very good to do business with. I originally designed
my fuel system around one of their products. After I ordered it, he requested
that I give him a US shipping address. I pointed out that I didn't live in the
US, so what good would that do me? So he refunded my money. I guess he didn't
really want to do business after all.
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel State Detector |
>
>Del,
>
>Another and possibly easier approach would be a capacitance sender.
>
>Peter
I've fiddled with these a bit . . . they are the technology
of choice for linear fuel level measurement and indication
but still suffer from linearization problems that beg the
use of a micro-controller to straighten out the data.
For single point liquid level sensing, it's difficult to beat
opto and/or float switch techniques.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Fwd: Simple Light Dimmer? |
Bob,
I once made a light dimmer from an 2N3055 power transistor, 560 ohm
resistor, a 0-5000 ohm pot and a capacitor to stop it from occillating.
But, now I don't know how to wire it.(?) I mounted it right on the back of
the pot and it works ok in my Long EZ. Do you have a forum or something?
Where I can access your stuff. I did find your website.
Thanks, John Perry
I proposed just the gizmo you're describing to Cessna
single engine facilities in 1966.
See: http://216.55.140.222/temp/1966Dimmer.pdf
The single engine facility decided it wasn't a good
it in the 310/320 series aircraft a few months later.
This was the best we knew how to do in 1966. Problems
with it then and now is the lack of robustness and
the fact that the circuit is not a good voltage regulator.
Little bumps in bus voltage will flash the panel lamps.
A more modern approach is described at
http://216.55.140.222/temp/DimFab.pdf
This dimmer is a true output votlage regulator. Further,
momentary shorts on the controller's output doesn't
send the silicon off to the happy hunting grounds.
The 1966 technique was used on MANY production aircraft
up through the mid 80's . . .
As far as I know, we did the first short circuit proof,
true regulating lighting controllers for the Barons and
Bonanzas while I worked at Electro-Mech about 1985.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Regulated power supply |
>
>Bob, or any of you electronically smart guys out there.
>I found a 10 amp regulated power supply on sale at local Radio Shack for $60.
>Is that big enough for testing circuitry in my VFR panel? Do have electric AH
>and Navaid wing leveler.
>Dale Ensing
Sure. You don't need to turn EVERYTHING on at once to test them.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cheap batteries |
>
>It looks like I got my $15.95 worth!
>Both these MECI.COM batteries seem unable to take a charge. The charger sits
>at 1.5 amps and the batteries read 11.2 volts until I give them a tiny bulb
>to light up, then they drop to 8 volts and the bulb glows dimly. Is there a
>trick to this, or are they total junk?
Doesn't sound good.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
----- Message d'origine -----
De : "Jerry Kaidor"
:
Envoy : mardi 29 octobre 2002 17:31
Objet : Re: AeroElectric-List: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
> >
> > You betcha. I use a micro-controller with a built in
> > a/d to read the sensor and convert the reading to true
> > value based on a lookup table built into the software.
> >
>
> *** And for those who are software-challenged, the same thing can be done
> entirely in
> hardware. You take an A/D converter and have it drive a little ROM ( Read
> Only Memory ).
> The A/D converter supplies addresses to the ROM. The ROM data outputs go
to
> a D/A converter which drives your meter.
>
> The only "programming" to be done is to put the output-voltage words
into
> the ROM.
>
> - Jerry Kaidor (
> jerry(at)tr2.com )
>
>
Bob and Jerry,
Thank you for your replies. The principle seems clear.
Nevertheless I'm afraid I'll need some more guidance to sort everytihing out
: which A/D model, which ROM module, how do I hook them up, etc.
Of course, when it comes to entering some instructions or values (via my PC
?), I hope I'll succed, but could you give me more detailed info ?
Thanks
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Gear Warning Tone Generator |
> I went to the workbench and bread-boarded the circuit
> as shown . . .
>
> http://216.55.140.222/temp/ToneGen.jpg
>
Cool! That's just the kind of help I need.
Now, one extra little question, if I may....
How do I make it beep intermittently, warble, squeal or otherwise get my
attention better than a steady tone?
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Shannon's Lancair system . . . |
>
>
>With all the considerations, unfortunately, 28V is not really an option
>for me. Components are already ordered, and not having automotive
>compatability just won't suffice. 14V it is.
>
>My engine is the Continental IO-550N, with one of the AeroSupercharger
>Solutions vortec superchargers on it. The supercharger is on the
>co-pilot side, where the alternator usually is. Therefore, the kit
>comes with a 60A alternator that is mounted on the pilot side to the
>machined front plate that attaches to the front of the engine that also
>holds the supercharger. AeroSS has been working with Kelly Aerospace to
>offer other options.
>
>Kelly Aerospace is making a couple of 70A units, but neither is
>available just yet. One would mount to the front and be belt driven
>with the supercharger, just like the 60A unit. This is what I planned
>to use, along with the B&C 20 on a pad. However, this combination is
>proving to not be up to the task, unfortunately. The other Kelly unit
>sounds promising though. It is a 70A unit that mounts to the pad on the
>back of the engine. It is suppose to be available in a couple months.
>If this unit would materialize, I would strongly consider installing 2
>of these units, one on each pad. Then, on my load analysis and buss
>structure, I would just move the A/C to the AUX BUSS and be done. Also,
>this would keep a supercharger belt breakage from attempting to ruin my
>electrical day. Does this sound feasible?
These are brand new units with no track record. Given what
I've observed over the past 40 years efforts of GEAR DRIVING
things off of engines that don't rotate smoothly . . . I am
cautious and skeptical. The mechanical design problems are
formidable.
It would be great if they come to pass and have a service
life equal to or hopefully MUCH better than most of the
certified examples already out there but I'd hate to see
your design become DEPENDENT upon their success.
>As far as my buss structure; I understand your comment about it not
>being extremely important at this time to have it all worked out.
>However, to me it is, as I have to get the panel all cut and the labels
>laser etched on the panel. If I change my mind later, then I have to
>get the metal re-cut (not likely) or more than likely, I'll just have to
>live with the changes that won't be properly reflected in the groupings
>and labels on the panel. A picture of my preliminary panel can be seen
>at
>http://shannon.v8eaters.com/images/lancair/Knoepflein-l2k-092002.pdf
>where you can see the groupings and labels I'm talking about.
The more complex the airplane, the more important it is to
design in flexibility. I recommend reverse engraved switch
and breaker-panel overlays from Werner Berry
http://www.sptpanel.com/instrument_panels.htm
. . . with pre-drilled spares holes. Carving your nomenclature
into large, hard to change panels pre-supposes you're going
to get it exactly right the first time and are betting on
never changing it. . . very long odds even when attempted by
folks who have been designing airplanes for 40 years.
> I want to
>get this right the first time. It is not right now I know.
>
>I've done the 4th go-around on the spreadsheet. I think it's getting
>closer. It's posted at
>http://shannon.v8eaters.com/images/lancair/airplane_amp_draw_4.xls
>
>Still looking for any and all comments and suggestions. Thanks.
The airplane as you presently perceive it is going to be
a truly amazing machine . . . my suggestion to you and other
builders is to be cautious of the desire to build a show
machine with everything but the kitchen sink. Having lots
of toys does not necessarily translate into an equivalent
level of flight system reliability.
Lost a good friend some years back who was flying a C-210
WITH the kitchen sink. If ever there was an airplane outfitted
for robustness against failure in the certified world, this
was IT.
What he really had was a complex system that added
difficulties of understanding and offered few options
for sorting good information from bad information.
http://216.55.140.222/temp/DEN99FA034.pdf
The airplane got away from him once and after
recovery, with the adrenaline running 1000% over
nominal he had to figure out what broke, and which
set of instruments were really giving him the right
information and then FLY those instruments.
If I were building ANY class airplane in which it
was my intent to spend lots of time in clouds,
I would have dual, gps guided wing levelers
running from independent power sources. This
ensures that I have at least one system to keep
the dirty side down and pointy end forward while
I sorted things out and got my adrenaline levels
back down.
You've taken on a formidable task and if you have the
cash and time, the machine of your dreams will
come to pass. Be careful that the snowstorm of
bells and whistles doesn't obscure or even
hamper your grasp on the minimum equipment needed
to comfortably end every flight irrespective of
what fails.
Every control, every new feature adds to a list
of whizzy features that are fun to contemplate with our
friends here on the list . . . but each has a dark
side effect on our limitations as humans when
things are not going well in the cockpit.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: CH701/Battery earth |
>
>Dear Bob,
>I'm starting the wiring on mt CH701 with Rotax 912s. The a/c is all metal
>with battery in rear fuselage.
>
>1/ Is it OK to earth the battery locally in the rear fuselage [ the
>structure is very light ] or would it be better to bring an earth cable
>all the way forward to the ground bus on the back of the firewall?
That would be my choice.
>2/The Rotax installation manual gives wire sizes in mm squared. Is there
>a handy conversion table somewhere, mm squared to AWG ?
4AWG will suffice for the Rotax's cranking circuit.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
I looks like it would be cheaper and easier to install
a capacitance fuel level system with the EIS probes
(adjustable at 5 different levels).
But this would be too simple. I too am interested in
finding a solution to make the 240-33 gauges work.
Right now, when empty is empty and full is full, mine
shows 1/4 when I have 1/2 of fuel.
One friend partly resolved the situation by adjusting
the fuel sender arm so it shows full when there is 3/4
of fuel in the tank. But I would have liked to ear
that we can solve this with a resistor arrangement or
a simple fix.
Michel
--- Jerry Kaidor wrote:
> Kaidor"
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
>
> >
> > You betcha. I use a micro-controller with a
> built in
> > a/d to read the sensor and convert the reading
> to true
> > value based on a lookup table built into the
> software.
> >
>
> *** And for those who are software-challenged, the
> same thing can be done
> entirely in
> hardware. You take an A/D converter and have it
> drive a little ROM ( Read
> Only Memory ).
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
Michel,
>
> I looks like it would be cheaper and easier to install
> a capacitance fuel level system with the EIS probes
> (adjustable at 5 different levels).
>
It actually IS a capacitance type probe, that emulates a 240/33 probe.
The gauges are UMA analog units.
> But this would be too simple. I too am interested in
> finding a solution to make the 240-33 gauges work.
> Right now, when empty is empty and full is full, mine
> shows 1/4 when I have 1/2 of fuel.
Hence my posting.
>
> One friend partly resolved the situation by adjusting
> the fuel sender arm so it shows full when there is 3/4
> of fuel in the tank. But I would have liked to ear
> that we can solve this with a resistor arrangement or
> a simple fix.
>
The thing looks quite easy to the electronic techies. But I'm unable to find
my way in the A/D converter or EPROM stuff.
Here is how I seem to understand things :
In the principle, you convert your values from analog to digital, make the
gizmo issue the correct output according to a table you entered in your
EPROM after having filled your tanks bucket by bucket. Then you re-convert
the output signal from digital to analog, in order for the gauge to display
the correct reading.
After some trial and error, one should come out with a reasonably linear
indicator.
But I'm at at a loss about how one could ACTUALLY accomplish that....
And do you need an extra device to flash the EPROM ?
Would a kind guru please help with a detailed step by step ' Fuel gauge
linearization for dummies' ?
Thanks,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
>The thing looks quite easy to the electronic techies. But I'm unable to find
>my way in the A/D converter or EPROM stuff.
>Here is how I seem to understand things :
>In the principle, you convert your values from analog to digital, make the
>gizmo issue the correct output according to a table you entered in your
>EPROM after having filled your tanks bucket by bucket. Then you re-convert
>the output signal from digital to analog, in order for the gauge to display
>the correct reading.
that's pretty accurate.
>After some trial and error, one should come out with a reasonably linear
>indicator.
One trial, no error. You hit it right the first time.
I fill the tank from a gas pump in .2 gallon increments
and record the binary value output by the a/d converter. This
technique assumes that for EVERY change in fuel volume
there is SOME change in voltage . . . i.e. the float
has to be free to move over empty to full.
>But I'm at at a loss about how one could ACTUALLY accomplish that....
>And do you need an extra device to flash the EPROM ?
Output from the A/D becomes an ADDRESS for the eprom.
For each "address" output by the a/d, you have a true
gallons value that needs to be programmed into the eprom.
Output put from eprom is applied to a d/a which becomes
a new analog value for display.
I used to have several boards around to program eproms
but I'm not even sure where they are now. Haven't needed
one in 5 or 6 years.
>Would a kind guru please help with a detailed step by step ' Fuel gauge
>linearization for dummies' ?
I prefer the micro-controllers cause all the stuff is
in one chip and they're easily programmed and/or
re-programmed from your PC.
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Gear Warning Tone Generator |
>
> > I went to the workbench and bread-boarded the circuit
> > as shown . . .
> >
> > http://216.55.140.222/temp/ToneGen.jpg
> >
>Cool! That's just the kind of help I need.
>Now, one extra little question, if I may....
>How do I make it beep intermittently, warble, squeal or otherwise get my
>attention better than a steady tone?
>John Slade
The schematic I published was used to emulate the
intermittent beeping of a gear warning horn on the
Bonanzas and Barons. That circuit drives an amplifier
and speaker built into the same envelope as the original
electro-mechanical warning horns.
The circuit constants shown give you about 400 Hz tone
beeped two times per second.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Fuel State Detector |
> > When you can buy them ready to mount for about $40 each,
> > it's not worth the time and trouble to build them. I've
> > designed and built my last optical liquid level sensor.
> >
> > I'd sure look at http://www.ppavionics.com/LFL.htm
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> Unfortunately they are not very good to do business with. I
>originally designed my fuel system around one of their products. After I
>ordered it, he requested that I give him a US shipping address. I pointed
>out that I didn't live in the US, so what good would that do me? So he
>refunded my money. I guess he didn't really want to do business after all.
Just checked his website where I found:
"NOTE: Shipping charges shown are for FedEx Ground,
within the United States. Non-US customers please
email us for shipping costs. For multiple-item purchases,
subtract the "shipping credit" from the total."
How long ago did you talk to him? Perhaps he has acquired
a new view of the world economy since then. These are
really small gizmos. They would ship very inexpensively
through the mails.
If push comes to shove, I'll buy them and ship them to
you.
Bob. . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Shannon's Lancair system . . . |
Now I'm confused. Your B&C unit is gear driven also, but it's not prone
to the same failures? I don't understand.
Are you suggesting to stick with a belt driven unit along with a gear
driven unit, over 2 gear driven units?
On the panel overlays...Lancair is building my panel. The basic panel
will have aluminum inserts with the holes cut. As I understand it, the
standard practice is to powdercoat this insert, and then have it laser
etched for the labels and whatnot. I've followed the link you provided,
but don't understand how this overlay would interface with my inserts.
Would it overlay the whole panel in which Lancair wouldn't have to do
any laser etching, or would it just overlay parts of it, or would it
completely replace what Lancair has already cut?
I'm sorry to hear and read about your friend. I understand what you are
saying. Building in that robustness and simplicity is what I'm trying
to do, as well as make it simple during failure. I've tried to think
through every failure and how to handle them. I've tried to be as
complete as possible during the planning stages, and that's why I ask so
many questions.
I could list all the failure modes and my proposed solution, but that
would take a while. Your basic Z14 system design is so well thought out
and robust, that little else is needed. With the "kitchen sink", as you
call it, in my plane, I feel it is important to have an ESS bus linked
off of one of the busses so I can quickly shed load and have just the
essentials on it. The essentials to me are an attitude indicator (SFS
w/ AHRS, and a backup 2" AI), gps, audio panel, com, autopilot, and
transponder. Since the SFS is in my list, and since it unfortunately
needs to be "pampered", I have to hide it behind a switch. In my
experience, a relay is more robust than a switch, so in my design, I'll
use a NC relay that is activated by a switch. Switch fails, bus is on.
Relay fails, bus is on. Some failure that results in neither of the
above working, I'll have an ALT FEED, as outlined in your diagrams. If
the SFS didn't have to be "pampered", forget the switch and relay.
However, I don't have that option. I could put the switch between the
ESS bus and the SFS. However, I like the added feature of just shutting
it all off, and feel the NC relay along with the ALT FEED switch
adequately backs it up.
The basic failure modes are pretty simple: if an alternator goes out,
turn it off and use the crossfeed; if a contactor goes out use the
crossfeed and possibly the ALT FEED, etc, etc. I think the ultimate
failure would be power out engine failure (or both alts), so you have no
alts. In this case, in my design I would first turn the ESS ALT FEED
on, and then turn both battery contactors and alternator fields off.
The remaining equipment that would be running is listed in my
spreadsheet and above in my ESS list. I honestly feel I could
accomplish this changeover in less than 2 seconds (one switch on, two
double switches off) after the problem was realized. This results in an
amp draw of 10.75 amps off of the AUX battery. If I understand
correctly, this should leave me with 17/10.75=1.6 hours of runtime on
the ESS components....all with the flip of 3 switches.
Now, with all that said (that was a little look at what is going on in
my head), I'd like to hear your personal design. You said that "that is
not the way I would do it if it was my plane". So, please tell us how
you would do it with the equipment I've selected. I think that would be
a very enlightening exercise for all the readers and current system
builders to see. Then we can see your thought process and hopefully
walk away more educated, smarter, and with safer systems. You've
obviously been doing this a lot longer than most of us, so I'm sure we
could all benefit from seeing how you'd do it with my equipment. The
sheer "kitchen-sinkness" of my equipment list should cover all basis's
for any future readers looking for the same guidance.
Also, (as if that wasn't enough), I need more info on your proposed dual
wing levelers. I assume you mean some sort of autopilot, or are you
discussing something else? I plan the trutrak as my primary, but would
consider putting something else on the other bus (a much simpler system
I assume than a 3axis trutrak?). Would this require another servo on
the ailerons? The trutrak gets its gyro info from its own internal gyro
(mini fast-resetting AHRS if I understand correctly). Where would the
additional wind leveler get its info? Can you recommend a simple wing
leveler?
As always, thanks for taking the time....
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
-----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: Shannon's Lancair system . . .
>
>
>With all the considerations, unfortunately, 28V is not really an option
>for me. Components are already ordered, and not having automotive
>compatability just won't suffice. 14V it is.
>
>My engine is the Continental IO-550N, with one of the AeroSupercharger
>Solutions vortec superchargers on it. The supercharger is on the
>co-pilot side, where the alternator usually is. Therefore, the kit
>comes with a 60A alternator that is mounted on the pilot side to the
>machined front plate that attaches to the front of the engine that also
>holds the supercharger. AeroSS has been working with Kelly Aerospace
to
>offer other options.
>
>Kelly Aerospace is making a couple of 70A units, but neither is
>available just yet. One would mount to the front and be belt driven
>with the supercharger, just like the 60A unit. This is what I planned
>to use, along with the B&C 20 on a pad. However, this combination is
>proving to not be up to the task, unfortunately. The other Kelly unit
>sounds promising though. It is a 70A unit that mounts to the pad on
the
>back of the engine. It is suppose to be available in a couple months.
>If this unit would materialize, I would strongly consider installing 2
>of these units, one on each pad. Then, on my load analysis and buss
>structure, I would just move the A/C to the AUX BUSS and be done.
Also,
>this would keep a supercharger belt breakage from attempting to ruin my
>electrical day. Does this sound feasible?
These are brand new units with no track record. Given what
I've observed over the past 40 years efforts of GEAR DRIVING
things off of engines that don't rotate smoothly . . . I am
cautious and skeptical. The mechanical design problems are
formidable.
It would be great if they come to pass and have a service
life equal to or hopefully MUCH better than most of the
certified examples already out there but I'd hate to see
your design become DEPENDENT upon their success.
>As far as my buss structure; I understand your comment about it not
>being extremely important at this time to have it all worked out.
>However, to me it is, as I have to get the panel all cut and the labels
>laser etched on the panel. If I change my mind later, then I have to
>get the metal re-cut (not likely) or more than likely, I'll just have
to
>live with the changes that won't be properly reflected in the groupings
>and labels on the panel. A picture of my preliminary panel can be seen
>at
>http://shannon.v8eaters.com/images/lancair/Knoepflein-l2k-092002.pdf
>where you can see the groupings and labels I'm talking about.
The more complex the airplane, the more important it is to
design in flexibility. I recommend reverse engraved switch
and breaker-panel overlays from Werner Berry
http://www.sptpanel.com/instrument_panels.htm
. . . with pre-drilled spares holes. Carving your nomenclature
into large, hard to change panels pre-supposes you're going
to get it exactly right the first time and are betting on
never changing it. . . very long odds even when attempted by
folks who have been designing airplanes for 40 years.
> I want to
>get this right the first time. It is not right now I know.
>
>I've done the 4th go-around on the spreadsheet. I think it's getting
>closer. It's posted at
>http://shannon.v8eaters.com/images/lancair/airplane_amp_draw_4.xls
>
>Still looking for any and all comments and suggestions. Thanks.
The airplane as you presently perceive it is going to be
a truly amazing machine . . . my suggestion to you and other
builders is to be cautious of the desire to build a show
machine with everything but the kitchen sink. Having lots
of toys does not necessarily translate into an equivalent
level of flight system reliability.
Lost a good friend some years back who was flying a C-210
WITH the kitchen sink. If ever there was an airplane outfitted
for robustness against failure in the certified world, this
was IT.
What he really had was a complex system that added
difficulties of understanding and offered few options
for sorting good information from bad information.
http://216.55.140.222/temp/DEN99FA034.pdf
The airplane got away from him once and after
recovery, with the adrenaline running 1000% over
nominal he had to figure out what broke, and which
set of instruments were really giving him the right
information and then FLY those instruments.
If I were building ANY class airplane in which it
was my intent to spend lots of time in clouds,
I would have dual, gps guided wing levelers
running from independent power sources. This
ensures that I have at least one system to keep
the dirty side down and pointy end forward while
I sorted things out and got my adrenaline levels
back down.
You've taken on a formidable task and if you have the
cash and time, the machine of your dreams will
come to pass. Be careful that the snowstorm of
bells and whistles doesn't obscure or even
hamper your grasp on the minimum equipment needed
to comfortably end every flight irrespective of
what fails.
Every control, every new feature adds to a list
of whizzy features that are fun to contemplate with our
friends here on the list . . . but each has a dark
side effect on our limitations as humans when
things are not going well in the cockpit.
Bob . . .
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
With a battery buss that has the circuit breakers in the panel, which
would you suggest: an appropriately sized ANL current limiter or a fuse
at the battery end to protect the 8-10 gauge wire?
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
That sounds great and simple... so would anyone on
this list propose to sell a little black box that
would linearize my senders' outputs?
I would provide the resistance for various fuel levels
of each one of my two probes and that individual would
make and program that black box for me. All I'd have
to do is to pay for it and install it in my plane.
It seems that this could be a very good and viable
commercial product. And I think that the same box
would work with any resistive fuel senders.
How much would that be worth? If it is reasonable,
I'm definitively a buyer.
Michel
> >the correct reading.
>
> that's pretty accurate.
>
> >After some trial and error, one should come out
> with a reasonably linear
> >indicator.
>
> One trial, no error. You hit it right the first
> time.
> I fill the tank from a gas pump in .2 gallon
> increments
> and record the binary value output by the a/d
> converter. This
> technique assumes that for EVERY change in fuel
> volume
> there is SOME change in voltage . . . i.e. the
> float
> has to be free to move over empty to full.
>
> >But I'm at at a loss about how one could ACTUALLY
> accomplish that....
> >And do you need an extra device to flash the EPROM
> ?
>
> Output from the A/D becomes an ADDRESS for the
> eprom.
> For each "address" output by the a/d, you have a
> true
> gallons value that needs to be programmed into
> the eprom.
> Output put from eprom is applied to a d/a which
> becomes
> a new analog value for display.
>
> I used to have several boards around to program
> eproms
> but I'm not even sure where they are now. Haven't
> needed
> one in 5 or 6 years.
>
>
> >Would a kind guru please help with a detailed step
> by step ' Fuel gauge
> >linearization for dummies' ?
>
> I prefer the micro-controllers cause all the
> stuff is
> in one chip and they're easily programmed and/or
> re-programmed from your PC.
>
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
I might be persuaded to do such a "black box". It depends a little on
how soon everyone would have to have it. My plate is pretty full the
rest of this year, but if everyone could wait 4 - 6 months for the end
product, I could probably meet that kind of a deadline.
David Swartzendruber
Wichita
>
> That sounds great and simple... so would anyone on
> this list propose to sell a little black box that
> would linearize my senders' outputs?
>
> I would provide the resistance for various fuel levels
> of each one of my two probes and that individual would
> make and program that black box for me. All I'd have
> to do is to pay for it and install it in my plane.
>
> It seems that this could be a very good and viable
> commercial product. And I think that the same box
> would work with any resistive fuel senders.
>
> How much would that be worth? If it is reasonable,
> I'm definitively a buyer.
>
> Michel
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
Bob,
thank you for responding.
>
> >After some trial and error, one should come out with a reasonably linear
> >indicator.
>
> One trial, no error. You hit it right the first time.
> I fill the tank from a gas pump in .2 gallon increments
> and record the binary value output by the a/d converter. This
> technique assumes that for EVERY change in fuel volume
> there is SOME change in voltage . . . i.e. the float
> has to be free to move over empty to full.
The probe is actually a capacitive device thart emulates a resistive probe.
My buddy helped in the liter by liter fuel handling in another more advanced
plane. The probe seems to be sufficiently sensitive.
>
> >But I'm at at a loss about how one could ACTUALLY accomplish that....
> >And do you need an extra device to flash the EPROM ?
>
> Output from the A/D becomes an ADDRESS for the eprom.
> For each "address" output by the a/d, you have a true
> gallons value that needs to be programmed into the eprom.
Understand.
> Output put from eprom is applied to a d/a which becomes
> a new analog value for display.
OK
>
> I used to have several boards around to program eproms
> but I'm not even sure where they are now. Haven't needed
> one in 5 or 6 years.
>
If we go for an eprom, maybe we'd better ask some electronics teacher in
school.
> >Would a kind guru please help with a detailed step by step ' Fuel gauge
> >linearization for dummies' ?
>
> I prefer the micro-controllers cause all the stuff is
> in one chip and they're easily programmed and/or
> re-programmed from your PC.
>
Micro-controller ? I like the idea. But what's it like ?
Any suggestion for a shopping list I could hand to the man behind the
counter at the 'Shack or else ?
Surely it includes some connecting device, maybe an RS-232 connector I could
hook my PC on ?
And hopefully a sheet with the basic commands and programming instructions,
maybe in assembling language ?
Any info will be appreciated.
Thanks,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
Tell me what to plan for and I'll be OK. I assume
that from my standpoint, I need to plan for installing
a small box such as this one:
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/DCP01829.JPG
And it would have similar terminals for the following
connections:
. +12V
. GND
. Sender
. Fuel Gauge (Sender connection)
Would that be it?
If yes, it means that it would be really easy to
retrofit the system at any time and thus, you can take
your time to do it.
Michel
--- David Swartzendruber
wrote:
> Swartzendruber"
>
> I might be persuaded to do such a "black box". It
> depends a little on
> how soon everyone would have to have it. My plate
> is pretty full the
> rest of this year, but if everyone could wait 4 - 6
> months for the end
> product, I could probably meet that kind of a
> deadline.
>
> David Swartzendruber
> Wichita
>
> >
> > That sounds great and simple... so would anyone on
> > this list propose to sell a little black box that
> > would linearize my senders' outputs?
> >
> > I would provide the resistance for various fuel
> levels
> > of each one of my two probes and that individual
> would
> > make and program that black box for me. All I'd
> have
> > to do is to pay for it and install it in my plane.
> >
> > It seems that this could be a very good and viable
> > commercial product. And I think that the same box
> > would work with any resistive fuel senders.
> >
> > How much would that be worth? If it is
> reasonable,
> > I'm definitively a buyer.
> >
> > Michel
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Forum -
> Contributions of
> any other form
>
> latest messages.
> other List members.
>
> aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bartrim, Todd" <sbartrim(at)mail.canfor.ca> |
| Subject: | RE: Fuel State Detector |
> If push comes to shove, I'll buy them and ship them to
> you.
>
> Bob. . .
>
>
Hi Bob;
Thanks for the offer, but I've since redesigned that portion of my
fuel system and believe I have a better, simpler solution. Something's are
blessings in disguise.
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
RE: AeroElectric-List: RE: Fuel State Detector
If push comes to shove, I'll buy them and ship them to
you.
Bob. . .
Hi Bob;
Thanks for the offer, but I've since redesigned that portion of my fuel system
and believe I have a better, simpler solution. Something's are blessings in disguise.
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
>
>
>I might be persuaded to do such a "black box". It depends a little on
>how soon everyone would have to have it. My plate is pretty full the
>rest of this year, but if everyone could wait 4 - 6 months for the end
>product, I could probably meet that kind of a deadline.
Dave, go peek at
http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=68HC908QT4&nodeId=01M98634
There's a $19 development system from Digikey
search on "M68DEMO908QT4"
or a board layout for the development board at:
http://e-www.motorola.com/collateral/M68DEMO908QT4MECH.pdf
http://e-www.motorola.com/collateral/M68DEMO908QT4SCH.pdf
this critter programs in our favorite source code
syntax.
All of the PC based programming and de-bugging tools
are downloadable for free.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>With a battery buss that has the circuit breakers in the panel, which
>would you suggest: an appropriately sized ANL current limiter or a fuse
>at the battery end to protect the 8-10 gauge wire?
I presume your talking about extending the battery
bus to some place remote from the battery. I cannot
recommend doing that nor suggest any techniques
that would facilitate that action.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> >Would a kind guru please help with a detailed step by step ' Fuel gauge
> >linearization for dummies' ?
>
> I prefer the micro-controllers cause all the stuff is
> in one chip and they're easily programmed and/or
> re-programmed from your PC.
>
*** Actually, so do I. And that Motorola chip that Bob pointed out is
nothing short of amazing. Am I to understand that it's an 8-pin DIP with
its own ROM, RAM, D/A and timer/PWM unit? Wow.
One should be able to use the PWM ( Pulse Width Modulation ) thing as
an ersatz analog output. To make the needle swing high, you make the pulse
wide. To make the needle swing low, you make the pulse narrow.
The program would consist of a little tiny loop: thus:
top_of_loop:
x = ADC_reading
y = conversion_table[ x ]
pwm = y
goto top_of_loop
...round & round & round she goes...
This would probably use a fraction of a percent of the little CPU's
power. If there are any I/O pins left, it'd be awful tempting to add a
line like this in the middle of the loop somewhere:
if( x < 13 ) then light the low-fuel light.
The "13" is of course whatever # you judged to mean "low fuel". You could
even have multiple lights:
if( x < 20 ) then light the no-takeoff light.
You could even have it doing periodic tasks totally unrelated to fuel,
but that's probably confusing at maintenance time.
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Fuel State Detector |
Todd,
> fuel system and believe I have a better, simpler solution.
>Something's are blessings in disguise.
Well? Dont keep us all in suspense.
One thought I had was that the capacitance gauge puts out a variable
voltage - how hard could it be to have a circuit that switched on an LED at
a certain adjustable voltage?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
I just ordered the $19 development system from Digikey. This has got to be
about the simplest microcontroller project you could ask for. What is the
max number of fuel probes any one airplane will have? I would think that
two would be common, (one in each wing). One fuel signal conditioner could
"linearize" both fuel probes.
The connections would then be:
+12V
GND
Sender1
Sender2
Fuel Gauge 1
Fuel Gauge 2
and as Jerry suggested, you could have
Low Fuel Lamp 1
Low Fuel Lamp 2
One 9-pin D-sub could handle it all, and the whole board may fit in the
D-Sub Backshell like you've done before Bob.
David Swartzendruber
Wichita
> Dave, go peek at
>
>
http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=68HC908QT4&n
odeId=01M98634
>
> There's a $19 development system from Digikey
> search on "M68DEMO908QT4"
>
> or a board layout for the development board at:
>
> http://e-www.motorola.com/collateral/M68DEMO908QT4MECH.pdf
> http://e-www.motorola.com/collateral/M68DEMO908QT4SCH.pdf
>
> this critter programs in our favorite source code
> syntax.
>
> All of the PC based programming and de-bugging tools
> are downloadable for free.
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
>
>
>I just ordered the $19 development system from Digikey. This has got to be
>about the simplest microcontroller project you could ask for. What is the
>max number of fuel probes any one airplane will have? I would think that
>two would be common, (one in each wing). One fuel signal conditioner could
>"linearize" both fuel probes.
I was wondering about that but I think the pwm timer will
only drive one port at a time . . . but at about $3 a chip,
who cares if it takes two?
>The connections would then be:
>+12V
>GND
>Sender1
>Sender2
>Fuel Gauge 1
>Fuel Gauge 2
>and as Jerry suggested, you could have
>Low Fuel Lamp 1
>Low Fuel Lamp 2
>
>One 9-pin D-sub could handle it all, and the whole board may fit in the
>D-Sub Backshell like you've done before Bob.
Funny you should think about that. I think I'd go for
the 15-pin d-sub shell just to get the real-estate inside
the shell. Or go 9-pin on an open board like
http://216.55.140.222/temp/MVC-138X.JPG
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Fogerson" <rickf(at)velocitus.net> |
| Subject: | Microair T2000 transponder obsoleted? |
I have heard the Microair T2000 transponder has been obsoleted. Can anyone confirm
this and does anyone know how the new model will differ and availability,
price, etc. of the new model.
Thanks, Rick Fogerson
RV3 fuselage near finish
Boise, ID
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <WernerSchneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Fuel State Detector |
Hello Todd,
very strange, I'm located in Switzerland and had no problem at all to order
and receive the aux tank switch and the low level warning devices.
Everything went very smooth, as I did order for more then one set, I even
got some discount without asking for it. Also the advice how to mount them
into my header tanks was for free and very much appreciated.
So I have a problem to understand what went wrong when you've tried to do
business with them.
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bartrim, Todd" <sbartrim(at)mail.canfor.ca>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: RE: Fuel State Detector
>
>
> > When you can buy them ready to mount for about $40 each,
> > it's not worth the time and trouble to build them. I've
> > designed and built my last optical liquid level sensor.
> >
> > I'd sure look at http://www.ppavionics.com/LFL.htm
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> Unfortunately they are not very good to do business with. I
> originally designed my fuel system around one of their products. After I
> ordered it, he requested that I give him a US shipping address. I pointed
> out that I didn't live in the US, so what good would that do me? So he
> refunded my money. I guess he didn't really want to do business after all.
>
> S. Todd Bartrim
> Turbo 13B rotary powered
> RX-9endurance (FWF)
> C-FSTB (reserved)
> http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
>
>
>
>
>
> RE: AeroElectric-List: RE: Fuel State Detector
>
>
> When you can buy them ready to mount for about $40 each,
>
> it's not worth the time and trouble to build them. I've
>
> designed and built my last optical liquid level sensor.
>
>
> I'd sure look at http://www.ppavionics.com/LFL.htm
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> Unfortunately they are not very good to do business with. I originally
designed my fuel system around one of their products. After I ordered it, he
requested that I give him a US shipping address. I pointed out that I didn't
live in the US, so what good would that do me? So he refunded my money. I
guess he didn't really want to do business after all.
>
>
> S. Todd Bartrim
>
> Turbo 13B rotary powered
>
> RX-9endurance (FWF)
>
> C-FSTB (reserved)
>
>
> http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ian Scott" <jabiru22(at)yahoo.com.au> |
| Subject: | 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
What about recalibrating the markings on the gauge face?
Really you guys make something simple so hard.
Ian
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
gilles.thesee
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge
--> <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Michel,
>
> I looks like it would be cheaper and easier to install
> a capacitance fuel level system with the EIS probes (adjustable at 5
> different levels).
>
It actually IS a capacitance type probe, that emulates a 240/33 probe.
The gauges are UMA analog units.
> But this would be too simple. I too am interested in
> finding a solution to make the 240-33 gauges work.
> Right now, when empty is empty and full is full, mine
> shows 1/4 when I have 1/2 of fuel.
Hence my posting.
>
> One friend partly resolved the situation by adjusting
> the fuel sender arm so it shows full when there is 3/4
> of fuel in the tank. But I would have liked to ear
> that we can solve this with a resistor arrangement or
> a simple fix.
>
The thing looks quite easy to the electronic techies. But I'm unable to
find my way in the A/D converter or EPROM stuff. Here is how I seem to
understand things : In the principle, you convert your values from
analog to digital, make the gizmo issue the correct output according to
a table you entered in your EPROM after having filled your tanks bucket
by bucket. Then you re-convert the output signal from digital to analog,
in order for the gauge to display the correct reading. After some trial
and error, one should come out with a reasonably linear indicator. But
I'm at at a loss about how one could ACTUALLY accomplish that.... And do
you need an extra device to flash the EPROM ?
Would a kind guru please help with a detailed step by step ' Fuel gauge
linearization for dummies' ?
Thanks,
Gilles
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
http://www.sold.com.au - SOLD.com.au
- Find yourself a bargain!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
I don't necessarily want to extend it, but I want to have the CB's in
the panel with the rest of them. Therefore, the wire that runs from the
battery to the circuit breakers needs protection at the battery end. I
was considering a ANL limiter or a fuse, but didn't know which to use.
Why is this a problem?
Here is the stuff on the bat bus:
Door Seal
Cabin Lights
Dimmable Panel Lighting
Power Points
Fuel Trans Pump
Fuel Boost Pump (High/Low)
I want the CB's in the panel mainly for the fuel pump. If the high/low
switch fails with the fuel pump stuck on High, it can actually flood the
engine and kill it. Therefore, I want to be able to remove power.
Why is this a problem? What would you suggest?
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
-----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: Re: AeroElectric-List: batt buss
>
>
>With a battery buss that has the circuit breakers in the panel, which
>would you suggest: an appropriately sized ANL current limiter or a
fuse
>at the battery end to protect the 8-10 gauge wire?
I presume your talking about extending the battery
bus to some place remote from the battery. I cannot
recommend doing that nor suggest any techniques
that would facilitate that action.
Bob . . .
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
----- Message d'origine -----
De : "Ian Scott"
:
Envoy : mercredi 30 octobre 2002 12:15
Objet : RE: AeroElectric-List: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge
>
> What about recalibrating the markings on the gauge face?
>
> Really you guys make something simple so hard.
>
> Ian
>
Ian,
I wouldn't care to open a brand new guaranted indicator just to change the
markings. Besides, when in flight, we often judge the indication just by
glancing at the pointers. What about a pointer position right half way
between zero and full, but meaning only 1/8 or 1/6th tank ? Or the alarm LED
turning on at 1/2 tank ?
I'd prefer calibrating the whole system just to have the indicator
reasonably reflecting the actual situation inside the tank.
It seems to me far easier to install a small calibrating gizmo, PROVIDED
someone far more knowledgeable than I am was kind enough to help in the
design at a -hopefully- reasonable cost ;-)
Cheers
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Schroeder <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Shannon -
I've looked at your load analysis and have a couple of questions
regarding how you calculated the loads for some of the equipment.
We are also installing a Tru Trak DFC 250 autopilot. The books calls for
1 amp for the controller and 2 amps each for the two servos (pitch &
roll). Since one would be using the autopilot for cruise, climb and
descent, I would think that the load would be closer to 5 amps than the
1 that you show. The servos work almost constantly, especially in
turbulence.
For the Garmin 430, you show only .5 amp. The Apollo multi-purpose units
have a separate breaker/power source for each purpose. I can't see how
.5 amp can cover all of the functions of the Garmin, especially with the
display running constantly and the need to transmit frequently on the
VHF during IFR flight.
You show a footnote that indicates your interest in a PRISM. As I
understand the product, they include their "Supplenator" as a mandatory
source of power for the system. This is a self exciting alternator that
puts out about 40 amps and needs a pad on the engine for mounting.
I do not mean to complicate your already difficult problem of putting 10
pounds into a 5 pound paper bag, but if you have some kind of
calculation for reducing the nominal values published by the equipment
manufacturers, we would appreciate getting a copy. It just seems that
the loads you show and plan for are on the lighter side of the fence -
and in my experience, the bag always breaks at the wrong time.
Bob: If you have some kind of calculation/table of values, we would
appreciate getting a copy. We are working on our load analysis and
wonder how to calculate steady state values that can be less than those
specified by the manufacturers.
Many thanks,
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Miles McCallum" <milesm(at)avnet.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
Avilec do exactly what you want (complete system) -as fitted to various
Europas.
M
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
John,
You are totally correct on the Tru-trak. I originally only figured 1.0
amp on the load analysis, thinking that the servos would be intermittent
and could be pulled from the battery. Now that I think about it, your
analysis is probably a lot more accurate. I'll make the change. Also,
yesterday I stated that my Tru-trak was a 3 axis when I was asking bob
about a wing leverler....this was incorrect, mine is the same as yours,
2 axis.
As for the garmin, I was showing it in the RX state. Actually, there
are 2 lines for the garmin (it has separate sources too from what I
understand), .5 each, so 1.0 total. I'm not sure how to handle the RX
versus TX draw in the load analysis, but I agree my numbers are probably
on the low side when on TX (probably about 5 amps then?). I'd love to
see some hard numbers on the garmin and the Apollo. Once I understand
how to account for this, I'll make the changes. Any suggestions?
Yes, I realize the PRISM is suppose to have the supplenator. I'm going
out to GAMI the middle of November for one of their new engine seminars,
so I should have a lot more details at that point. I'm not holding my
breath for the system though, and my planning will go on like its not
going to be there. The Kelly units I plan are their standard unit with
an attached gear drive, so if I do have to use the supplenator, I will
just move the one Kelly to be belt driven from the front. That's my
plan anyway. Worst case, I won't use a supplenator...afterall, it is my
plane :) (nothing is mandatory)
I appreciate your thoughts, and your sympathy for my plight.
Unfortunately, I have no magic calculations for defying the laws of
physics--I just made some mistakes that you pointed out. Do you see any
other mistakes, or have any recommendations bus wise, etc? I'm open to
all suggestions.
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John
Schroeder
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Load Analysis
Shannon -
I've looked at your load analysis and have a couple of questions
regarding how you calculated the loads for some of the equipment.
We are also installing a Tru Trak DFC 250 autopilot. The books calls for
1 amp for the controller and 2 amps each for the two servos (pitch &
roll). Since one would be using the autopilot for cruise, climb and
descent, I would think that the load would be closer to 5 amps than the
1 that you show. The servos work almost constantly, especially in
turbulence.
For the Garmin 430, you show only .5 amp. The Apollo multi-purpose units
have a separate breaker/power source for each purpose. I can't see how
.5 amp can cover all of the functions of the Garmin, especially with the
display running constantly and the need to transmit frequently on the
VHF during IFR flight.
You show a footnote that indicates your interest in a PRISM. As I
understand the product, they include their "Supplenator" as a mandatory
source of power for the system. This is a self exciting alternator that
puts out about 40 amps and needs a pad on the engine for mounting.
I do not mean to complicate your already difficult problem of putting 10
pounds into a 5 pound paper bag, but if you have some kind of
calculation for reducing the nominal values published by the equipment
manufacturers, we would appreciate getting a copy. It just seems that
the loads you show and plan for are on the lighter side of the fence -
and in my experience, the bag always breaks at the wrong time.
Bob: If you have some kind of calculation/table of values, we would
appreciate getting a copy. We are working on our load analysis and
wonder how to calculate steady state values that can be less than those
specified by the manufacturers.
Many thanks,
John
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Electro-whizzies..... |
Bob,
As a longtime disciple I have managed to tag along, acquiring
experience and understanding old advice. By way of explanation, I have
measured the height of fuel from 1 cm. to the top of the inlet port in
litres and have graphed it to reveal a fairly constant relationship in two
parts. My interest is in translating the depth of a very convoluted fuel
tank into litres etc.
However I have been left out to dry on the latest topic, the
Motorola micro-controller 68HC908QT4. I went to the page and couldn't
understand a thing. I appreciate it's powerful, but it appears that one
requires about two hundred pieces of literature to utilize it, few of which
seem to escape gibberish in the titling.
In addition, they show about five different sizes of 'bug' and refer to such
things as 'roadmaps' where there are no roads.
Is there a dictionary to translate this into English? I also
plumbed the dark recesses of the Basic Stamp (?) without ever breaking the
code. Where can I start from scratch to comprehend these barriers? I realise
this may be a massive crusade to take a small hand and guide it out of the
forest.............
From a steamdriven rockbound triode-heater........
Ferg
Europa A064
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
----- Message d'origine -----
De : "Miles McCallum"
:
Envoy : mercredi 30 octobre 2002 13:36
Objet : Re: AeroElectric-List: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge
>
> Avilec do exactly what you want (complete system) -as fitted to various
> Europas.
>
> M
>
Hi,
Found something on Avelec website. But I'm afraid they sell a complete
system, with senders and all.
We already have the gauges in place, the senders are defined, what we need
is linearize the readings.
cheers,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>I don't necessarily want to extend it, but I want to have the CB's in
>the panel with the rest of them. Therefore, the wire that runs from the
>battery to the circuit breakers needs protection at the battery end. I
>was considering a ANL limiter or a fuse, but didn't know which to use.
>Why is this a problem?
>
>Here is the stuff on the bat bus:
The general rule of thumb for any always hot
wire in a certified airplane is 5A or less
in the size of it's feeder protection. Battery
busses have been classically used to power things
that MUST be available whether or not any
of the ship's power distribution systems are
hot.
These would include things like emergency lighting,
utility lighting, clocks, radio memories, and in
OBAM aircraft, I've suggested that electrically
dependent engines should be battery bus powered.
I would also avoid the use of breakers because
in spite of their current rating, they are
capable of delivering 10x to 1000x more energy
into a faulted line BEFORE opening than a fuse
which is very fast. In the interest of maximizing
crashworthiness of the airplane, fuses are
preferred.
>Door Seal
>Cabin Lights
>Dimmable Panel Lighting
>Power Points
>Fuel Trans Pump
>Fuel Boost Pump (High/Low)
>
>I want the CB's in the panel mainly for the fuel pump. If the high/low
>switch fails with the fuel pump stuck on High, it can actually flood the
>engine and kill it. Therefore, I want to be able to remove power.
I've never seen a switch fail in an "ON" position except
on that was so badly abused that it welded the contacts
closed. This ain't gonna happen on a fuse protected, boost
pump circuit.
Why is the door seal on the battery? Further, panel lighting
can take lots of amps . . . I'd put a gooseneck map light
or perhaps a single fixture overhead flood on the battery
but not general panel lighting.
You've already got the most robust, failure tolerant system
to have ever flown in a light airplane. Likelihood of power
not being available from either the main bus or aux bus
to run necessary things is extremely low. So think of battery
busses as supporting things that need to run with the main
systems are OFF either by reason of having parked the airplane
or deliberately shut off due to smoke in the cockpit to give
you a more elbow room to sort out the next step without having
the engine quit.
In my airplane, battery busses are fuse blocks located adjacent
to the battery and fitted with the smallest practical fuse to
power the system of interest.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
>
>What about recalibrating the markings on the gauge face?
>
>Really you guys make something simple so hard.
>
>Ian
Simple IF:
The analog instrument is a style that lends itself to
being disassembled and re-scaled . . .
The instrument is not a digital readout that shows
percent or other kind of fuel quantity . . .
---------
I've re-scaled a lot of instruments but I've never
been able to make my instrument look just like the
rest of the instruments unless I made them all.
Putting some kind of electronic data conditioning
allows one to re-calibrate the system due to influences
of age without having to pull the senders.
It also allows one to add features like low fuel warning
lights with almost no added cost or effort.
My first car was a '41 Pontiac I paid $25 for. My present
car is 54 years younger and cost 500 times as much. The
fuel gages in BOTH vehicles are !#@$!@#$. EITHER
vehicle would have benefited from some circuitry as
simple as having a potentiometer to set the zero
and full scale readings for the instrument.
Jelly-bean micro-controllers add still another
opportunity to build OUR airplanes as if they were
designed in 2002 instead of 1952.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Fuel State Detector |
>
>
>One thought I had was that the capacitance gauge puts out a variable
>voltage - how hard could it be to have a circuit that switched on an LED at
>a certain adjustable voltage?
Not difficult. In fact, that's stone simple if you're using
a micro-controller to do the signal processing.
It's a minor-revision to a circuit like our aux battery management
module to operate a light above/below a set voltage level.
Schematics have been published on my website.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RE: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
----- Message d'origine -----
De : "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
:
Envoy : mercredi 30 octobre 2002 05:36
Objet : AeroElectric-List: RE: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge
>
> >
> >
> >I just ordered the $19 development system from Digikey. This has got to
be
> >about the simplest microcontroller project you could ask for. What is
the
> >max number of fuel probes any one airplane will have? I would think that
> >two would be common, (one in each wing). One fuel signal conditioner
could
> >"linearize" both fuel probes.
>
> I was wondering about that but I think the pwm timer will
> only drive one port at a time . . . but at about $3 a chip,
> who cares if it takes two?
>
> >The connections would then be:
> >+12V
> >GND
> >Sender1
> >Sender2
> >Fuel Gauge 1
> >Fuel Gauge 2
> >and as Jerry suggested, you could have
> >Low Fuel Lamp 1
> >Low Fuel Lamp 2
> >
> >One 9-pin D-sub could handle it all, and the whole board may fit in the
> >D-Sub Backshell like you've done before Bob.
>
> Funny you should think about that. I think I'd go for
> the 15-pin d-sub shell just to get the real-estate inside
> the shell. Or go 9-pin on an open board like
> http://216.55.140.222/temp/MVC-138X.JPG
>
>
> Bob . . .
Bob and all,
Here's a link to the fuel-level senders we'll be using
http://www.datcon.com/prelease/printelli.htm
Cheers,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mprather(at)spro.net |
| Subject: | Re: Electro-whizzies..... |
Fergus,
When I was in college, one of our 2nd year classes was
'Microprocessors.' A super-useful class. We used one of
(the many) microcontroller workbooks as the basis for
most of the class, and worked through many of the examples
in the book with our own, personal Mot HC11 evaluation
board. We did lots of projects in both assembly and C,
and after finishing the class we were pretty well prepared
to use the system to control a small, autonomous robot. I
think we could have handled a gas gage too...
In order to learn to use one of these little microprocessors,
I'd recommend getting one of these project books and working
through the examples. I just looked out at amazon.com and
found that there were 53 titles under the heading of
'microcontroller.' I liked several of them, including
"PIC'n Techniques, PIC Microcontroller Applications Guide."
Maybe someone else on the list can recommend their favorite
title?
If everything in these books seems like jibberish, I'd recommend
trying to find a microcontroller, or digital electronics class
at your local university. When you buy the cookbook (whichever
you choose), you might consider buying the exact project board
that the book was written for. This way you can work through
the exact examples without getting bogged down in translating
from one system to another. These things are really useful
machines.
All of this talk has gotten me fired up to do a project... Maybe
a flight computer with an AoA or something like that.
Matt Prather
N34RD
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca>
Date: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 7:52 am
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electro-whizzies.....
>
> Bob,
> As a longtime disciple I have managed to tag along,
> acquiringexperience and understanding old advice. By way of
> explanation, I have
> measured the height of fuel from 1 cm. to the top of the inlet port in
> litres and have graphed it to reveal a fairly constant relationship
> in two
> parts. My interest is in translating the depth of a very convoluted
> fueltank into litres etc.
> However I have been left out to dry on the latest
> topic, the
> Motorola micro-controller 68HC908QT4. I went to the page and couldn't
> understand a thing. I appreciate it's powerful, but it appears that
> onerequires about two hundred pieces of literature to utilize it,
> few of which
> seem to escape gibberish in the titling.
> In addition, they show about five different sizes of 'bug' and
> refer to such
> things as 'roadmaps' where there are no roads.
> Is there a dictionary to translate this into English? I
> alsoplumbed the dark recesses of the Basic Stamp (?) without ever
> breaking the
> code. Where can I start from scratch to comprehend these barriers?
> I realise
> this may be a massive crusade to take a small hand and guide it out
> of the
> forest.............
> From a steamdriven rockbound triode-heater........
> Ferg
> Europa A064
>
>
> _-
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Shannon's Lancair system . . . |
>
>
>Now I'm confused. Your B&C unit is gear driven also, but it's not prone
>to the same failures? I don't understand.
It's a 20A machine that uses exactly the same coupling
hardware as a popular line of vacuum pumps. Further,
it's direct drive. No additional gearing in the power path.
While engine's gear train may be rated for the additional horsepower
required to produce 70A at the vacuum pump pad, the rotor
of such a machine will be heavier -AND- there will need
a gear-train inside the alternator to make the rotor run
faster . . . this step up gearing would probably be
something on the order of 2 to 1 or more . . . inertial
effects reflecting back to the engine's gear train -AND-
inertial effects on the alternator's own gear train
are new and untried conditions.
The task has been mounted by a very capable company and
I suspect they'll eventually whip all the problems
but I'm not sure I would be designing an airplane that
depended on those machines to support my first-flight
configuration.
>Are you suggesting to stick with a belt driven unit along with a gear
>driven unit, over 2 gear driven units?
A belt driven alternator has no failure modes that will
trash an engine. I'd take a belt driven accessory over
a gear driven accessory any day.
>On the panel overlays...Lancair is building my panel. The basic panel
>will have aluminum inserts with the holes cut. As I understand it, the
>standard practice is to powdercoat this insert, and then have it laser
>etched for the labels and whatnot. I've followed the link you provided,
>but don't understand how this overlay would interface with my inserts.
>Would it overlay the whole panel in which Lancair wouldn't have to do
>any laser etching, or would it just overlay parts of it, or would it
>completely replace what Lancair has already cut?
They would lay on top of the panel structure. As relatively
small, inexpensive overlays, they're easy to change later.
>I'm sorry to hear and read about your friend. I understand what you are
>saying. Building in that robustness and simplicity is what I'm trying
>to do, as well as make it simple during failure. I've tried to think
>through every failure and how to handle them. I've tried to be as
>complete as possible during the planning stages, and that's why I ask so
>many questions.
Very good . . . and I'll continue to answer to the best
of my abilities or find folks who can. I just get a little
uneasy when discussing airplanes with the kinds of features
you have proposed. Just trying to assure myself that you
are not suffering from poorly supported "delusions of
invulnerability" . . .
I'd like for you to be around writing about your airplane
on this list for many years after first flight . . .
>I could list all the failure modes and my proposed solution, but that
>would take a while.
You don't have to do this for me/us but by all means do it
for yourself. The key to survival is having the absolute
minimum number of things to observe, interpret and deduce
an appropriate action for when things are not going well.
Every new feature adds a decision making point that
detracts from your duties as pilot. If you can get the
electrical emergency procedures page in your POH down to
a few paragraphs on one page, then you will have done
as well as can be done . . .
>The basic failure modes are pretty simple: if an alternator goes out,
>turn it off and use the crossfeed; if a contactor goes out use the
>crossfeed and possibly the ALT FEED, etc, etc. I think the ultimate
>failure would be power out engine failure (or both alts), so you have no
>alts. In this case, in my design I would first turn the ESS ALT FEED
>on, and then turn both battery contactors and alternator fields off.
>The remaining equipment that would be running is listed in my
>spreadsheet and above in my ESS list. I honestly feel I could
>accomplish this changeover in less than 2 seconds (one switch on, two
>double switches off) after the problem was realized. This results in an
>amp draw of 10.75 amps off of the AUX battery. If I understand
>correctly, this should leave me with 17/10.75=1.6 hours of runtime on
>the ESS components....all with the flip of 3 switches.
The likelihood of failing two critical components
on any single flight is very small . . . in fact
we don't even have to consider it in the certification
part 23 aircraft.
Battery capacity and battery-only operations are
not worth spending much time on with a Z-14 configuration.
Capacity becomes a cranking performance issue.
>Now, with all that said (that was a little look at what is going on in
>my head), I'd like to hear your personal design. You said that "that is
>not the way I would do it if it was my plane". So, please tell us how
>you would do it with the equipment I've selected.
. . . thought I did. I published the four-bus sketch
last week some time that defined mechanical architecture
and in terms of electrical architecture, it's no different
than Figure Z-14. The need for pamper-busses is driven by
selection of equipment and outside the scope of my advice
. . . so I don't think there is much left to decide
on your project.
I noticed at least one other post where the writer was
beginning to comb the nits out of your load analysis
and this is a good thing to be doing at this stage.
You indicated that your switch and breaker arrangements
needed to be carved in stone because of the chosen
fabrication technique so it's time to finalize the
loads on each bus so the stone-masons can get started.
> I think that would be
>a very enlightening exercise for all the readers and current system
>builders to see. Then we can see your thought process and hopefully
>walk away more educated, smarter, and with safer systems. You've
>obviously been doing this a lot longer than most of us, so I'm sure we
>could all benefit from seeing how you'd do it with my equipment. The
>sheer "kitchen-sinkness" of my equipment list should cover all basis's
>for any future readers looking for the same guidance.
I think we're about there . . .
>Also, (as if that wasn't enough), I need more info on your proposed dual
>wing levelers. I assume you mean some sort of autopilot, or are you
>discussing something else? I plan the trutrak as my primary, but would
>consider putting something else on the other bus (a much simpler system
>I assume than a 3axis trutrak?). Would this require another servo on
>the ailerons? The trutrak gets its gyro info from its own internal gyro
>(mini fast-resetting AHRS if I understand correctly). Where would the
>additional wind leveler get its info? Can you recommend a simple wing
>leveler?
Hadn't really thought about it in terms of specific products.
My thought processes were occupied with failure mode effects
analysis while reading thorough the accident report and trying
to put myself in Terry's shoes.
It occurred to me that his airplane was very well equipped
to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars yet the condition
that ultimately forced his undoing was keeping the airplane
right side up while trying to figure out which of those
killobuck gizmos on the panel were lying to him.
Of course, his airplane had to be SAFE in terms some lawyers
in Washington could understand so the options available to him
were much more expensive than our options. But if it were my
OBAM aircraft and I had the desire and budget to cover the panel
with toys, it would be no big deal to have something like
a 1.5 killobuck Nav-Aid or similar device in each wing as well.
Mooney aircraft use to come with a Britian vacuum wing-leveler
as STOCK equipment. Further, the wing-leveler was ON all the the
time. You could push a button on the wheel to momentarily
disconnect it -OR- being vacuum servos, you could simply
override the wing-leveler with the wheel and when you turned
loose, the airplane returned to level.
This feature was credited with saving the buns of more than
one Mooney-load of people when the pilot's day was not going
well. When Terry's day wasn't going well he didn't have
the critical assistance that $1,500 worth of hardware could
have provided. Something to consider . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Microair T2000 transponder obsoleted? |
>
>
>I have heard the Microair T2000 transponder has been obsoleted. Can
>anyone confirm this and does anyone know how the new model will differ and
>availability, price, etc. of the new model.
>
>Thanks, Rick Fogerson
>RV3 fuselage near finish
>Boise, ID
Where did you hear this? I've searched the net
including Microair's website with nary a mention
of this. I note that Microair is now offering
harnesses from the factory too. Good move on their
part. Now, if they'd just update their installation
manuals a bit . . .
I'll call the distributor to see if they're arware
of any changes but I don't think it's very likely that
Microair would be changing a brand new and very popular
product so soon after the agonizing task of getting
blessings from Washington.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | One chip fuel gage signal conditioner |
>
>Bob and Jerry,
>
>Thank you for your replies. The principle seems clear.
>Nevertheless I'm afraid I'll need some more guidance to sort everytihing out
>: which A/D model, which ROM module, how do I hook them up, etc.
>Of course, when it comes to entering some instructions or values (via my PC
>?), I hope I'll succed, but could you give me more detailed info ?
>
>Thanks
Let's back off the a/d - prom - d/a approach and see
how hard we need to beat up on Dave to do a one-chip
design if we help him with it . . .
Watch this space . . .
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
>
>Tell me what to plan for and I'll be OK. I assume
>that from my standpoint, I need to plan for installing
>a small box such as this one:
>
>http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/DCP01829.JPG
>
>And it would have similar terminals for the following
>connections:
>
>. +12V
>. GND
>. Sender
>. Fuel Gauge (Sender connection)
>
>Would that be it?
>If yes, it means that it would be really easy to
>retrofit the system at any time and thus, you can take
>your time to do it.
Pretty close. There would probably also be a pull-down
signal for a low fuel warning light too.
9-pins is enough. Assembly wouldn't need to be very
big. Something like
http://216.55.140.222/temp/MVC-138X.JPG
except connector would be right angle device.
We'll see what tickles Dave's fancy . . .
after he's had time to fire up the development
system he ordered.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tony Babb" <tonybabb(at)alejandra.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electro-whizzies..... |
Ferg,
Like you I've been lurking for a while, learning as I go. My learning curve
is pretty steep but I think this issue was like a vertical brick wall to me
too.
That makes two little hands....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electro-whizzies.....
>
> Bob,
> As a longtime disciple I have managed to tag along, acquiring
> experience and understanding old advice. By way of explanation, I have
> measured the height of fuel from 1 cm. to the top of the inlet port in
> litres and have graphed it to reveal a fairly constant relationship in two
> parts. My interest is in translating the depth of a very convoluted fuel
> tank into litres etc.
> However I have been left out to dry on the latest topic, the
> Motorola micro-controller 68HC908QT4. I went to the page and couldn't
> understand a thing. I appreciate it's powerful, but it appears that one
> requires about two hundred pieces of literature to utilize it, few of
which
> seem to escape gibberish in the titling.
> In addition, they show about five different sizes of 'bug' and refer to
such
> things as 'roadmaps' where there are no roads.
> Is there a dictionary to translate this into English? I also
> plumbed the dark recesses of the Basic Stamp (?) without ever breaking the
> code. Where can I start from scratch to comprehend these barriers? I
realise
> this may be a massive crusade to take a small hand and guide it out of the
> forest.............
> >From a steamdriven rockbound triode-heater........
> Ferg
> Europa A064
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RE: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=68HC908QT4&nodeId=01M98634
>
> There's a $19 development system from Digikey
> search on "M68DEMO908QT4"
>
*** Cool! Can this board take a ZIF socket and program chips to stick
in something else? Or can it only program the permanently installed one?
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Dual Alternators |
Bob:
As I study for my annual check ride here, I am still following
Shannon's system planning. I have mentioned to you before that I am using a
rear belt drive for the Main 60amp alternator, with an Aux B&C 20amp
alternator on the vacuum pad. Is this OK? Is there some setup for the Aux
alternator to be belt driven as well?
Finally figured out how to use your CD-ROM. Have modified the IVP
wirebook for my Lancair ES. Knowing that I am fixed gear, and no
pressurization, I am eliminate these items off the respected schematics. Kind
off going backwards on this, but learning.
When can I send you my second pass of Bus loading for Ed's Lancair ES
System planning?
Thanks,
Ed Silvanic
N823MS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Low Voltage Warning & Aux Batt management module |
m>
>Bob,
>
> Thanks.... I'm assuming you'll release the .DWG file after that. I'm
>trying to put together the schematic documentation for the new plane and
>would like to include it.......
Oh, if all you need is the schematic in AutoCAD, you can get it
http://216.55.140.222/temp/ABMM_Schematic.dwg
> I definitely want one. I'm planning a dual battery, single Alternator,
>dual electronic ignition system. I haven't started wiring yet, and won't
>until I get the first pass of the schematics done. When they are done, I'll
>send you a copy. Maybe you can do a quick critique.....
Maybe we can publish them for others on the list
to join into the conversation.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electro-whizzies..... |
>
>Bob,
> As a longtime disciple I have managed to tag along, acquiring
>experience and understanding old advice. By way of explanation, I have
>measured the height of fuel from 1 cm. to the top of the inlet port in
>litres and have graphed it to reveal a fairly constant relationship in two
>parts. My interest is in translating the depth of a very convoluted fuel
>tank into litres etc.
> However I have been left out to dry on the latest topic, the
>Motorola micro-controller 68HC908QT4. I went to the page and couldn't
>understand a thing. I appreciate it's powerful, but it appears that one
>requires about two hundred pieces of literature to utilize it, few of which
>seem to escape gibberish in the titling.
>In addition, they show about five different sizes of 'bug' and refer to such
>things as 'roadmaps' where there are no roads.
> Is there a dictionary to translate this into English? I also
>plumbed the dark recesses of the Basic Stamp (?) without ever breaking the
>code. Where can I start from scratch to comprehend these barriers? I realise
>this may be a massive crusade to take a small hand and guide it out of the
>forest.............
> From a steamdriven rockbound triode-heater........
Ferg,
If one had the interest when you and I were knee-high to
a grasshopper, an amateur radio handbook combined with
some time scrounging around behind the radio-tv repair
shop for junkers to strip would get us launched in
the hobbyist technology of the day.
Today's technology hobbyist has a whole new kind of junk
box to dig around in and the books are different too.
If you're interested in broadening your horizons, get
one of the Stamps-in-Class kits that comes with books,
experiments and sample applications.
There are hundreds of discussion groups and websites
that publish the thoughts and questions of like-minded
individuals who have open this new door.
Consider a subscription to Nuts and Volts magazine. This
publication has become the premier rag encompassing
most the modern electronics experimenter venues including
communications, processors, software, robotics, lasers,
etc.
It's easier than it looks. I got my feet wet in
micro-processor assembly language about 20 years ago
after putting it off for 5 years. Three weeks after
purchasing my first development system (AIM-65 for
about $1,000) I was writing software I could sell.
You can get more powerful development systems today
for well under $200 . . . some as low as $19.00!
Give it a try . . . it's a blast and quite practical
too.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual Alternators |
>
>Bob:
>
> As I study for my annual check ride here, I am still following
>Shannon's system planning. I have mentioned to you before that I am using a
>rear belt drive for the Main 60amp alternator, with an Aux B&C 20amp
>alternator on the vacuum pad. Is this OK?
Sure . . . especially you're using B&C alternators in both
slots.
>Is there some setup for the Aux
>alternator to be belt driven as well?
I think you've mis-understood my statements about gear driven
accessories. Allow me to clarify . . .
The worst performing alternators in the history of the
transportation industry are those bolted to gear-drive
ports of aircraft engines.
Some of the problems are founded on the fact that they're
certified and the best-we-knew-how-to-do in 1965.
Another problem is that the rotational vibration present
in the output torque of a reciprocating engine puts
special requirements on gear train design and attention
that must be paid to resonances of the rotating masses
at the end of the gear train.
My skeptical view of ANY new gear-driven product is based
on 40 years of observation and sad tales of woe from
customers who have had to overhaul a perfectly good
running engine because a gear-driven gizmo came apart
and dropped itty-bitty pieces of metal in their engine.
Risks to the engine for vacuum pump pad driven accessories
is VERY LOW . . . this due to the way the spline drive
pad protects the engine's interior from any pieces that
might come off the accessory if it fails.
That takes care of one concern leaving only the other . . .
has the product achieved any kind of track record on
real engines in real airplanes? I think Kelly has as
good a shot as anybody and I hope they pull it off
with the first attempt . . . I'd just ask them to
prove the products quality on THEIR engine and not
on MY engine.
> Finally figured out how to use your CD-ROM. Have modified the IVP
>wirebook for my Lancair ES. Knowing that I am fixed gear, and no
>pressurization, I am eliminate these items off the respected schematics. Kind
>off going backwards on this, but learning.
That's what it's all about. It's my most sincere wish that
participation on this list will pay off in levels of understanding
and quality of your finished product that are unmatched
anywhere else.
> When can I send you my second pass of Bus loading for Ed's Lancair ES
>System planning?
Can you publish it on a server somewhere so we can all look at
look at it? If not, e-mail it to me directly and I'll post
it from here.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> >
> >
> http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=68HC908QT4&nodeId=01M98634
> >
> > There's a $19 development system from Digikey
> > search on "M68DEMO908QT4"
> >
>*** Cool! Can this board take a ZIF socket and program chips to stick
>in something else? Or can it only program the permanently installed one?
If you look at the board photo, there's a second set of
dip-8 layout holes that are in parallel with the soldered in
chip. You can put a machined pin or zif socket in this slot
and cut out the soldered-in chip and you're off and run'n
Are you going to get one?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
>
>
>Found something on Avelec website. But I'm afraid they sell a complete
>system, with senders and all.
>We already have the gauges in place, the senders are defined, what we need
>is linearize the readings.
>cheers,
>
>Gilles
Can you deduce the specs for the instruments. Need to know
movement resistance and current for full scale.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Peter Laurence <dr.laurence(at)mbdi.org> |
> >With a battery buss that has the circuit breakers in the panel, which
> >would you suggest: an appropriately sized ANL current limiter or a fuse
> >at the battery end to protect the 8-10 gauge wire?
>
> I presume your talking about extending the battery
> bus to some place remote from the battery. I cannot
> recommend doing that nor suggest any techniques
> that would facilitate that action.
>
> Bob . . .
Bob,
How far do you consider "remote" ?
Peter
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
So, I'll take the Door Seal and Panel lighting off (I was considering
the reverse etched stuff, but was waiting to hear back from you on my
previous post to make a decision.....it appears to draw a VERY low
amount of current, even less than the flood light you prescribe). What
about the fuel pumps?
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
-----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: batt buss
>
>
>I don't necessarily want to extend it, but I want to have the CB's in
>the panel with the rest of them. Therefore, the wire that runs from
the
>battery to the circuit breakers needs protection at the battery end. I
>was considering a ANL limiter or a fuse, but didn't know which to use.
>Why is this a problem?
>
>Here is the stuff on the bat bus:
The general rule of thumb for any always hot
wire in a certified airplane is 5A or less
in the size of it's feeder protection. Battery
busses have been classically used to power things
that MUST be available whether or not any
of the ship's power distribution systems are
hot.
These would include things like emergency lighting,
utility lighting, clocks, radio memories, and in
OBAM aircraft, I've suggested that electrically
dependent engines should be battery bus powered.
I would also avoid the use of breakers because
in spite of their current rating, they are
capable of delivering 10x to 1000x more energy
into a faulted line BEFORE opening than a fuse
which is very fast. In the interest of maximizing
crashworthiness of the airplane, fuses are
preferred.
>Door Seal
>Cabin Lights
>Dimmable Panel Lighting
>Power Points
>Fuel Trans Pump
>Fuel Boost Pump (High/Low)
>
>I want the CB's in the panel mainly for the fuel pump. If the high/low
>switch fails with the fuel pump stuck on High, it can actually flood
the
>engine and kill it. Therefore, I want to be able to remove power.
I've never seen a switch fail in an "ON" position except
on that was so badly abused that it welded the contacts
closed. This ain't gonna happen on a fuse protected, boost
pump circuit.
Why is the door seal on the battery? Further, panel lighting
can take lots of amps . . . I'd put a gooseneck map light
or perhaps a single fixture overhead flood on the battery
but not general panel lighting.
You've already got the most robust, failure tolerant system
to have ever flown in a light airplane. Likelihood of power
not being available from either the main bus or aux bus
to run necessary things is extremely low. So think of battery
busses as supporting things that need to run with the main
systems are OFF either by reason of having parked the airplane
or deliberately shut off due to smoke in the cockpit to give
you a more elbow room to sort out the next step without having
the engine quit.
In my airplane, battery busses are fuse blocks located adjacent
to the battery and fitted with the smallest practical fuse to
power the system of interest.
Bob . . .
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bartrim, Todd" <sbartrim(at)mail.canfor.ca> |
| Subject: | Microair T2000 transponder obsoleted? |
I'm not certain, but what you may have heard about was the new
radio's & transponder's from X-Air in Australia. IIRC correctly, some of the
techies from Microair went over to X-Air to ply their trade after Microair
was bought out by Jabiru? Seems they didn't see eye to eye with the new
management.
X-Air's products look very much like Microair's, but with some
improvements that may make the Microair products seem obsolete. As Bob
pointed out, since Microair just finished get their "holy water" shower,
they are unlikely to improve their product anytime soon.
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
RE: AeroElectric-List: Microair T2000 transponder obsoleted?
I'm not certain, but what you may have heard about was the new radio's transponder's
from X-Air in Australia. IIRC correctly, some of the techies from Microair
went over to X-Air to ply their trade after Microair was bought out by Jabiru?
Seems they didn't see eye to eye with the new management.
X-Air's products look very much like Microair's, but with some improvements that
may make the Microair products seem obsolete. As Bob pointed out, since Microair
just finished get their holy water shower, they are unlikely to improve
their product anytime soon.
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bartrim, Todd" <sbartrim(at)mail.canfor.ca> |
| Subject: | RE: Fuel State Detector |
> Todd,
> > fuel system and believe I have a better, simpler solution.
> >Something's are blessings in disguise.
> Well? Dont keep us all in suspense.
>
> One thought I had was that the capacitance gauge puts out a variable
> voltage - how hard could it be to have a circuit that switched on an LED
> at
> a certain adjustable voltage?
>
I had built a fiberglass header tank, with ports for mounting the
fuel state detectors which were used to provide a high & low level signal to
PPA's "smart switch" which would control the level of the 5usg header tank
by controlling 2 transfer pumps from 6 wingtanks.
After the PPA deal fell through, I realized that I wasn't entirely
comfortable with this system anyway. So due to my recently greatly improved
skills at TIG welding aluminum, I decided to build a new tank out of 5052
AL. This tank will be vented only for purging of air, then will be a flow
through design. The transfer pumps are still in place, but will function as
boost pumps only. The high press FI pumps will draw fuel through the tank.
This removes allot of unnecessary electronics from this system. Tank will
also have a simple capacitance probe in it connected to a microprocessor
which I'm planning on using to display fuel level in my other 6 tanks. I
will likely also have an LED low level warning light.
I recently bought the "Basic Stamp" Board of Education, in which I'm
learning how to build my own "electro-goodies". It's allot simpler than I
expected. I will likely use the new Motorola or similar chip to accomplish
this task. I realize that this basic stamp could easily handle this, but I
would prefer to keep this free for educational purposes.
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
RE: AeroElectric-List: RE: Fuel State Detector
Todd,
fuel system and believe I have a better, simpler solution.
Something's are blessings in disguise.
Well? Dont keep us all in suspense.
One thought I had was that the capacitance gauge puts out a variable
voltage - how hard could it be to have a circuit that switched on an LED at
a certain adjustable voltage?
I had built a fiberglass header tank, with ports for mounting the fuel state detectors
which were used to provide a high low level signal to PPA's smart switch
which would control the level of the 5usg header tank by controlling 2 transfer
pumps from 6 wingtanks.
After the PPA deal fell through, I realized that I wasn't entirely comfortable
with this system anyway. So due to my recently greatly improved skills at TIG
welding aluminum, I decided to build a new tank out of 5052 AL. This tank will
be vented only for purging of air, then will be a flow through design. The transfer
pumps are still in place, but will function as boost pumps only. The high
press FI pumps will draw fuel through the tank. This removes allot of unnecessary
electronics from this system. Tank will also have a simple capacitance
probe in it connected to a microprocessor which I'm planning on using to display
fuel level in my other 6 tanks. I will likely also have an LED low level warning
light.
I recently bought the Basic Stamp Board of Education, in which I'm learning how
to build my own electro-goodies. It's allot simpler than I expected. I will
likely use the new Motorola or similar chip to accomplish this task. I realize
that this basic stamp could easily handle this, but I would prefer to keep this
free for educational purposes.
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bartrim, Todd" <sbartrim(at)mail.canfor.ca> |
| Subject: | RE: Fuel State Detector |
> very strange, I'm located in Switzerland and had no problem at all to
> order
> and receive the aux tank switch and the low level warning devices.
> Everything went very smooth, as I did order for more then one set, I even
> got some discount without asking for it. Also the advice how to mount them
> into my header tanks was for free and very much appreciated.
>
> So I have a problem to understand what went wrong when you've tried to do
> business with them.
>
> Werner
>
He definitely didn't offer any discount. Maybe he thought he would have to
send it via dogsled. Who knows what he was thinking. All I know is that I
paid my money and received very rude and inappropriate treatment from
someone who is conducting a business. He should take some lessons on
customer service from someone like Microfastners or Real World Solutions,
both of which have provided me with excellent customer service. (sorry Bob,
I haven't yet bought from you (except your book - through the builders
bookstore), so I can't truthfully add your name... but I'm sure you would
deserve it ;-))
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
RE: AeroElectric-List: RE: Fuel State Detector
very strange, I'm located in Switzerland and had no problem at all to order
and receive the aux tank switch and the low level warning devices.
Everything went very smooth, as I did order for more then one set, I even
got some discount without asking for it. Also the advice how to mount them
into my header tanks was for free and very much appreciated.
So I have a problem to understand what went wrong when you've tried to do
business with them.
Werner
He definitely didn't offer any discount. Maybe he thought he would have to send
it via dogsled. Who knows what he was thinking. All I know is that I paid my
money and received very rude and inappropriate treatment from someone who is conducting
a business. He should take some lessons on customer service from someone
like Microfastners or Real World Solutions, both of which have provided me
with excellent customer service. (sorry Bob, I haven't yet bought from you (except
your book - through the builders bookstore), so I can't truthfully add
your name... but I'm sure you would deserve it ;-))
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
----- Message d'origine -----
De : "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
:
Envoy : mercredi 30 octobre 2002 20:50
Objet : AeroElectric-List: Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge
>
>
> >
> >
> >Found something on Avelec website. But I'm afraid they sell a complete
> >system, with senders and all.
> >We already have the gauges in place, the senders are defined, what we
need
> >is linearize the readings.
> >cheers,
> >
> >Gilles
>
>
> Can you deduce the specs for the instruments. Need to know
> movement resistance and current for full scale.
>
> Bob . . .
>
Bob and all,
The gauges are made by UMA. They are 2"1/4 OPTI-ALERT FUEL QTY 240/30 OHM.
I'll conduct some investigation at UMA to get the info.
As for the senders, we'll use the ones the kit manufacturer provides.
I pasted the wrong URL in my last posting. The correct model is a CGF 3 wire
from Centroid Products.
http://www.centroidproducts.com/data.htm
Here is an excerp from their website :
'FUEL SENSOR PROBE (Gasoline or Diesel) - The probe is constructed of
concentric tubing [....]. The tubes, [.....] acts as a capacitor that has
one value in air (empty tank) and changes in value as the fuel level rises
inside the probe. The amplifier converts these values to a signal suitable
to drive a standard meter or other display device.'
I understand it is a classical capacitance sender, except the output
emulates that of a 240/33 resistive probe.
Thanks for all the help,
Cheers
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bartrim, Todd" <sbartrim(at)mail.canfor.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Electro-whizzies..... |
HI Ferg;
I'd just like to echo Bob's advice. I recently bought the Basic
Stamp "Board of Education" from Digi-Key (another great company to deal
with) then downloaded the "Stamps in Class" curriculum. It quickly
introduces you to basic programming and soon you will find yourself
experimenting with simple robotics and real world interfaces. I find it
interesting and entertaining.
Gee, when I was in school, all the techno-nerds used to get beat-up
and now.... oh gawd nooooo..... I'm becoming one of them......... just say
no to pocket protectors! ;-)
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [SMTP:bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 10:12 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Electro-whizzies.....
>
>
>
> >
> >Bob,
> > As a longtime disciple I have managed to tag along,
> acquiring
> >experience and understanding old advice. By way of explanation, I have
> >measured the height of fuel from 1 cm. to the top of the inlet port in
> >litres and have graphed it to reveal a fairly constant relationship in
> two
> >parts. My interest is in translating the depth of a very convoluted fuel
> >tank into litres etc.
>
> > However I have been left out to dry on the latest topic, the
> >Motorola micro-controller 68HC908QT4. I went to the page and couldn't
> >understand a thing. I appreciate it's powerful, but it appears that one
> >requires about two hundred pieces of literature to utilize it, few of
> which
> >seem to escape gibberish in the titling.
> >In addition, they show about five different sizes of 'bug' and refer to
> such
> >things as 'roadmaps' where there are no roads.
>
> > Is there a dictionary to translate this into English? I also
> >plumbed the dark recesses of the Basic Stamp (?) without ever breaking
> the
> >code. Where can I start from scratch to comprehend these barriers? I
> realise
> >this may be a massive crusade to take a small hand and guide it out of
> the
> >forest.............
>
>
> > From a steamdriven rockbound triode-heater........
>
> Ferg,
>
> If one had the interest when you and I were knee-high to
> a grasshopper, an amateur radio handbook combined with
> some time scrounging around behind the radio-tv repair
> shop for junkers to strip would get us launched in
> the hobbyist technology of the day.
>
> Today's technology hobbyist has a whole new kind of junk
> box to dig around in and the books are different too.
> If you're interested in broadening your horizons, get
> one of the Stamps-in-Class kits that comes with books,
> experiments and sample applications.
>
> There are hundreds of discussion groups and websites
> that publish the thoughts and questions of like-minded
> individuals who have open this new door.
>
> Consider a subscription to Nuts and Volts magazine. This
> publication has become the premier rag encompassing
> most the modern electronics experimenter venues including
> communications, processors, software, robotics, lasers,
> etc.
>
> It's easier than it looks. I got my feet wet in
> micro-processor assembly language about 20 years ago
> after putting it off for 5 years. Three weeks after
> purchasing my first development system (AIM-65 for
> about $1,000) I was writing software I could sell.
>
> You can get more powerful development systems today
> for well under $200 . . . some as low as $19.00!
>
> Give it a try . . . it's a blast and quite practical
> too.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
> > >With a battery buss that has the circuit breakers in the panel, which
> > >would you suggest: an appropriately sized ANL current limiter or a fuse
> > >at the battery end to protect the 8-10 gauge wire?
> >
> > I presume your talking about extending the battery
> > bus to some place remote from the battery. I cannot
> > recommend doing that nor suggest any techniques
> > that would facilitate that action.
> >
> > Bob . . .
>
>Bob,
>
>How far do you consider "remote" ?
Immediate vicinity. FAA lets us leave
6" of wire "unprotected" . . . obviously,
we could probably stretch that a few inches
if we needed to. The task is to minimize
the risk to adjacent wiring and components
and 6" was sort of latched onto about 30 years
ago as no-big-deal.
In the BIG airplanes, some battery busses ARE feed
through ANL limiters or other protective
device because it's not uncommon to locate the
battery bus several feet away just due to the
way these ships are built.
This degrades crash-worthiness and I can't
see a really good reason to do it in the airplanes
we're building. The need to access a fuse
panel in an airplane that is NOT going to suffer
nuisance trips is very rare. Just like our cars,
the vast majority of fuses in a car being hauled
to the crusher are the same ones installed by
the factory.
For our purposes, I'd rather suggest that
battery busses be mounted to be as close as
practical to the battery that feeds it. We then
drop quickly onto low-current, INDIVIDUALLY
protected feeders that open in milliseconds
with no argument or unnecessary delay.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carlos Sa <carlosfsa(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: Re: Fuel State Detector |
> > >Would a kind guru please help with a detailed step by step ' Fuel gauge
> > >linearization for dummies' ?
> >
> > I prefer the micro-controllers cause all the stuff is
> > in one chip and they're easily programmed and/or
> > re-programmed from your PC.
With all the discussion around sophisticated gizmos, didn't anybody think of
replacing the scale on the gauge??
Calibrate easily...Color pen or pencil, paper.... real cheap...
;o)
Carlos
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
I'm installing a fuse block next to the battery now, 6 position, ordered
it from you today. Should I put the fuel pumps on it or not?
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
-----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: batt buss
>
> > >With a battery buss that has the circuit breakers in the panel,
which
> > >would you suggest: an appropriately sized ANL current limiter or a
fuse
> > >at the battery end to protect the 8-10 gauge wire?
> >
> > I presume your talking about extending the battery
> > bus to some place remote from the battery. I cannot
> > recommend doing that nor suggest any techniques
> > that would facilitate that action.
> >
> > Bob . . .
>
>Bob,
>
>How far do you consider "remote" ?
Immediate vicinity. FAA lets us leave
6" of wire "unprotected" . . . obviously,
we could probably stretch that a few inches
if we needed to. The task is to minimize
the risk to adjacent wiring and components
and 6" was sort of latched onto about 30 years
ago as no-big-deal.
In the BIG airplanes, some battery busses ARE feed
through ANL limiters or other protective
device because it's not uncommon to locate the
battery bus several feet away just due to the
way these ships are built.
This degrades crash-worthiness and I can't
see a really good reason to do it in the airplanes
we're building. The need to access a fuse
panel in an airplane that is NOT going to suffer
nuisance trips is very rare. Just like our cars,
the vast majority of fuses in a car being hauled
to the crusher are the same ones installed by
the factory.
For our purposes, I'd rather suggest that
battery busses be mounted to be as close as
practical to the battery that feeds it. We then
drop quickly onto low-current, INDIVIDUALLY
protected feeders that open in milliseconds
with no argument or unnecessary delay.
Bob . . .
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> > > There's a $19 development system from Digikey
> > > search on "M68DEMO908QT4"
> > >
> >*** Cool! Can this board take a ZIF socket and program chips to stick
> >in something else? Or can it only program the permanently installed one?
>
> If you look at the board photo, there's a second set of
> dip-8 layout holes that are in parallel with the soldered in
> chip. You can put a machined pin or zif socket in this slot
> and cut out the soldered-in chip and you're off and run'n
>
> Are you going to get one?
>
*** Could be. Although I really REALLY have no money at this time. A big
real estate deal, plus ongoing Instrument training is eatin' it all up.
Should change mid-November.
WRT only having one PWM controller - who needs a PWM controller? You
just do it in software....
I'd have a 1-ms or even 500-microsecond interrupt. This would interrupt
the main program consisting of... ...a do-nothing loop. Well, maybe that
main loop could update the low-limit LEDs. 500-microseconds,
that's 2000 times a second. If we do 10 pulses a second ( the meter needle
should stay still ), that's 200 interrupt ticks per pulse, or 200 discrete meter
needle "levels".
The current input for each side would be sampled with the built-in ADC
and applied to a table ( one for each side ) which would have the output
"level". Each output level would be a "number of ticks for the output to be
ON", and a "number of ticks for the output to be OFF". These two numbers
would always add up to the total number of ticks per pulse, in our sample
case, 200.
The interrupt service could also have a state machine for blinking the
fuel low LEDs when the fuel got REALLY low.
The main loop could also have code that would constantly check the sanity
of the interrupt, and reset the processor if the interrupt went awry. I
think the chip has a built-in watchdog timer - if the main loop detected
that the interrupt was dead ( or in bye-bye-land ), it would just stop
kicking the watchdog. It would also have stack check code ( checking for
stack overflow ) and any other bulletproofing stuff I could think of.
It'd be a piece of cake to have the thing come up from reset in a VERY
small fraction of a second.
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Dual alternators vs one alternator/dual batteries/Vacuum |
pump
Bob:
Thanks for answering my question about the Aux Alt on the Vacuum pad.
Before I get into to it too far, is there a real advantage of a dual Alt/Bat
over a single Alt/dual Bat, and a vacuum pump. Coming from the A300 Airbus of
many times over protection of several sources, would it not make sense to
have another source of power, i.e., vacuum pump vise a total electric plane?
This of course is based on not having any type of EFIS on board.
Thanks,
Ed Silvanic
N823MS
Lancair ES
P.S. I'll be sending you my second pass soon.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
John,
Did a little more research. Garmin 430 is 1.44 amps normal on nav/gps
side. The com side is 6.0 when TX, basically nothing when RX. The
GTX327 is 15 watts/22watts max, so about 1.5 amps max at 14v. audio
panel is 1.5
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John
Schroeder
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Load Analysis
Shannon -
I've looked at your load analysis and have a couple of questions
regarding how you calculated the loads for some of the equipment.
We are also installing a Tru Trak DFC 250 autopilot. The books calls for
1 amp for the controller and 2 amps each for the two servos (pitch &
roll). Since one would be using the autopilot for cruise, climb and
descent, I would think that the load would be closer to 5 amps than the
1 that you show. The servos work almost constantly, especially in
turbulence.
For the Garmin 430, you show only .5 amp. The Apollo multi-purpose units
have a separate breaker/power source for each purpose. I can't see how
.5 amp can cover all of the functions of the Garmin, especially with the
display running constantly and the need to transmit frequently on the
VHF during IFR flight.
You show a footnote that indicates your interest in a PRISM. As I
understand the product, they include their "Supplenator" as a mandatory
source of power for the system. This is a self exciting alternator that
puts out about 40 amps and needs a pad on the engine for mounting.
I do not mean to complicate your already difficult problem of putting 10
pounds into a 5 pound paper bag, but if you have some kind of
calculation for reducing the nominal values published by the equipment
manufacturers, we would appreciate getting a copy. It just seems that
the loads you show and plan for are on the lighter side of the fence -
and in my experience, the bag always breaks at the wrong time.
Bob: If you have some kind of calculation/table of values, we would
appreciate getting a copy. We are working on our load analysis and
wonder how to calculate steady state values that can be less than those
specified by the manufacturers.
Many thanks,
John
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mprather(at)spro.net |
| Subject: | Re: Dual alternators vs one alternator/dual |
batteries/Vacuum pump
Ooh boy. You may have opened a can of worms with that line
of questioning! Much of the evidence shows that modern
alternators have a much longer life, and lower rate of
failure than do vacuum pumps. If you are going to keep the
airplane for a while, the increased initial cost of electric
gyros is outweighed by not having to replace a vacuum pump.
Matt Prather
N34RD
----- Original Message -----
From: N823ms(at)aol.com
Date: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 4:22 pm
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dual alternators vs one alternator/dual
batteries/Vacuum pump
>
> Bob:
>
> Thanks for answering my question about the Aux Alt on the
> Vacuum pad.
> Before I get into to it too far, is there a real advantage of a
> dual Alt/Bat
> over a single Alt/dual Bat, and a vacuum pump. Coming from the A300
> Airbus of
> many times over protection of several sources, would it not make
> sense to
> have another source of power, i.e., vacuum pump vise a total
> electric plane?
> This of course is based on not having any type of EFIS on board.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ed Silvanic
> N823MS
> Lancair ES
>
> P.S. I'll be sending you my second pass soon.
>
>
> _-
>
- The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
> _-
>
=======================================================================_-!! NEW
!!
> _-
>
List Related Information
> _-
>
=======================================================================
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <WernerSchneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
> >that is my intention to do, however I have to tee in a fuel pump for that
> >as my highwing Glastar has no such setup (fuel boost pump) planned, I
intend
> >to do that at the gascolator primer port. Question, concerning fuel pump
and
> >valve, do you know of anybody selling such parts? Do I also need the
valve,
> >as I could go directly for a blocking primer pump?.
>
> The Fawcet pumps are in-expensive but I think they use
> reed valves and will free flow if pressurized on the inlet
> end. You would need the solenoid valve too. ACS has both.
>
> You'll also need a needle valve to calibrate the primer
> fuel flow. These are a pretty common plumbing part in brass.
>
Hello Bob,
one last question to this issue, can I put the pump AND the valve on the
same switch? I have already a 1-5 switch, so priming on the up position, off
in the middle and "fuel injection" on the down position, fuse and wiring
would then be the combined load of both, right?
Many thanks
Werner
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Shannon's Lancair system . . . |
I've taken more guidance and made another attempt....a final one I hope.
http://shannon.v8eaters.com/images/lancair/airplane_amp_draw_5.xls
I made a few more movements (off bat bus, etc), and updated the
currents. Any other suggestions? I'm starting to build tomorrow if
not?
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
-----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: Shannon's Lancair system . . .
>
>
>Now I'm confused. Your B&C unit is gear driven also, but it's not
prone
>to the same failures? I don't understand.
It's a 20A machine that uses exactly the same coupling
hardware as a popular line of vacuum pumps. Further,
it's direct drive. No additional gearing in the power path.
While engine's gear train may be rated for the additional horsepower
required to produce 70A at the vacuum pump pad, the rotor
of such a machine will be heavier -AND- there will need
a gear-train inside the alternator to make the rotor run
faster . . . this step up gearing would probably be
something on the order of 2 to 1 or more . . . inertial
effects reflecting back to the engine's gear train -AND-
inertial effects on the alternator's own gear train
are new and untried conditions.
The task has been mounted by a very capable company and
I suspect they'll eventually whip all the problems
but I'm not sure I would be designing an airplane that
depended on those machines to support my first-flight
configuration.
>Are you suggesting to stick with a belt driven unit along with a gear
>driven unit, over 2 gear driven units?
A belt driven alternator has no failure modes that will
trash an engine. I'd take a belt driven accessory over
a gear driven accessory any day.
>On the panel overlays...Lancair is building my panel. The basic panel
>will have aluminum inserts with the holes cut. As I understand it, the
>standard practice is to powdercoat this insert, and then have it laser
>etched for the labels and whatnot. I've followed the link you
provided,
>but don't understand how this overlay would interface with my inserts.
>Would it overlay the whole panel in which Lancair wouldn't have to do
>any laser etching, or would it just overlay parts of it, or would it
>completely replace what Lancair has already cut?
They would lay on top of the panel structure. As relatively
small, inexpensive overlays, they're easy to change later.
>I'm sorry to hear and read about your friend. I understand what you
are
>saying. Building in that robustness and simplicity is what I'm trying
>to do, as well as make it simple during failure. I've tried to think
>through every failure and how to handle them. I've tried to be as
>complete as possible during the planning stages, and that's why I ask
so
>many questions.
Very good . . . and I'll continue to answer to the best
of my abilities or find folks who can. I just get a little
uneasy when discussing airplanes with the kinds of features
you have proposed. Just trying to assure myself that you
are not suffering from poorly supported "delusions of
invulnerability" . . .
I'd like for you to be around writing about your airplane
on this list for many years after first flight . . .
>I could list all the failure modes and my proposed solution, but that
>would take a while.
You don't have to do this for me/us but by all means do it
for yourself. The key to survival is having the absolute
minimum number of things to observe, interpret and deduce
an appropriate action for when things are not going well.
Every new feature adds a decision making point that
detracts from your duties as pilot. If you can get the
electrical emergency procedures page in your POH down to
a few paragraphs on one page, then you will have done
as well as can be done . . .
>The basic failure modes are pretty simple: if an alternator goes out,
>turn it off and use the crossfeed; if a contactor goes out use the
>crossfeed and possibly the ALT FEED, etc, etc. I think the ultimate
>failure would be power out engine failure (or both alts), so you have
no
>alts. In this case, in my design I would first turn the ESS ALT FEED
>on, and then turn both battery contactors and alternator fields off.
>The remaining equipment that would be running is listed in my
>spreadsheet and above in my ESS list. I honestly feel I could
>accomplish this changeover in less than 2 seconds (one switch on, two
>double switches off) after the problem was realized. This results in
an
>amp draw of 10.75 amps off of the AUX battery. If I understand
>correctly, this should leave me with 17/10.75=1.6 hours of runtime on
>the ESS components....all with the flip of 3 switches.
The likelihood of failing two critical components
on any single flight is very small . . . in fact
we don't even have to consider it in the certification
part 23 aircraft.
Battery capacity and battery-only operations are
not worth spending much time on with a Z-14 configuration.
Capacity becomes a cranking performance issue.
>Now, with all that said (that was a little look at what is going on in
>my head), I'd like to hear your personal design. You said that "that
is
>not the way I would do it if it was my plane". So, please tell us how
>you would do it with the equipment I've selected.
. . . thought I did. I published the four-bus sketch
last week some time that defined mechanical architecture
and in terms of electrical architecture, it's no different
than Figure Z-14. The need for pamper-busses is driven by
selection of equipment and outside the scope of my advice
. . . so I don't think there is much left to decide
on your project.
I noticed at least one other post where the writer was
beginning to comb the nits out of your load analysis
and this is a good thing to be doing at this stage.
You indicated that your switch and breaker arrangements
needed to be carved in stone because of the chosen
fabrication technique so it's time to finalize the
loads on each bus so the stone-masons can get started.
> I think that would be
>a very enlightening exercise for all the readers and current system
>builders to see. Then we can see your thought process and hopefully
>walk away more educated, smarter, and with safer systems. You've
>obviously been doing this a lot longer than most of us, so I'm sure we
>could all benefit from seeing how you'd do it with my equipment. The
>sheer "kitchen-sinkness" of my equipment list should cover all basis's
>for any future readers looking for the same guidance.
I think we're about there . . .
>Also, (as if that wasn't enough), I need more info on your proposed
dual
>wing levelers. I assume you mean some sort of autopilot, or are you
>discussing something else? I plan the trutrak as my primary, but would
>consider putting something else on the other bus (a much simpler system
>I assume than a 3axis trutrak?). Would this require another servo on
>the ailerons? The trutrak gets its gyro info from its own internal
gyro
>(mini fast-resetting AHRS if I understand correctly). Where would the
>additional wind leveler get its info? Can you recommend a simple wing
>leveler?
Hadn't really thought about it in terms of specific products.
My thought processes were occupied with failure mode effects
analysis while reading thorough the accident report and trying
to put myself in Terry's shoes.
It occurred to me that his airplane was very well equipped
to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars yet the condition
that ultimately forced his undoing was keeping the airplane
right side up while trying to figure out which of those
killobuck gizmos on the panel were lying to him.
Of course, his airplane had to be SAFE in terms some lawyers
in Washington could understand so the options available to him
were much more expensive than our options. But if it were my
OBAM aircraft and I had the desire and budget to cover the panel
with toys, it would be no big deal to have something like
a 1.5 killobuck Nav-Aid or similar device in each wing as well.
Mooney aircraft use to come with a Britian vacuum wing-leveler
as STOCK equipment. Further, the wing-leveler was ON all the the
time. You could push a button on the wheel to momentarily
disconnect it -OR- being vacuum servos, you could simply
override the wing-leveler with the wheel and when you turned
loose, the airplane returned to level.
This feature was credited with saving the buns of more than
one Mooney-load of people when the pilot's day was not going
well. When Terry's day wasn't going well he didn't have
the critical assistance that $1,500 worth of hardware could
have provided. Something to consider . . .
Bob . . .
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Shannon's Lancair system . . . |
In a message dated 10/29/02 12:02:57 PM Central Standard Time,
bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
> If I were building ANY class airplane in which it
> was my intent to spend lots of time in clouds,
> I would have dual, gps guided wing levelers
> running from independent power sources. This
> ensures that I have at least one system to keep
> the dirty side down and pointy end forward while
> I sorted things out and got my adrenaline levels
> back down.
>
Good Evening Bob,
I think that would be great! My only question is. If one fails, how do you
know which one is the good one?
The only way that I am aware of is to revert to some sort of rate based
flying.
I keep hoping that some of the new solid state attitude devices will become
available at a weight and cost that works.
In the meantime though, I strongly recommend the installation of two old
fashioned needle and ball instruments. Not those abominable pieces of junk
known as Turn Coordinators. I think they are very useful as a sensor for an
autopilot, but I think they are the reason nobody can fly partial panel these
days. I could beat that to death, but I won't.
I do recommend the dual T&B because it is so easy to tell which one is
telling you the truth. If it wiggles at all, it is telling you enough to
save your tail. If it doesn't wiggle, it is no darn good. No voting or
analysis required. Also, unlike the Turn Coordinator, it will never tell you
a lie.
The T&B s still relatively cheap, light weight, non tumbling and very
reliable.
Until the solid state stuff comes up to speed, I think the T&B is the best
bet available.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Schroeder <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Load Analysis |
Shannon -
Thanks for the info.
John
Shannon Knoepflein wrote:
> Did a little more research. Garmin 430 is 1.44 amps normal on nav/gps
> side. The com side is 6.0 when TX, basically nothing when RX. The
> GTX327 is 15 watts/22watts max, so about 1.5 amps max at 14v. audio
> panel is 1.5
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
>
> >
> > Are you going to get one?
> >
>*** Could be. Although I really REALLY have no money at this time. A big
>real estate deal, plus ongoing Instrument training is eatin' it all up.
>Should change mid-November.
That's only a few weeks away . . .
> WRT only having one PWM controller - who needs a PWM controller? You
>just do it in software....
PWM controllers are nice if you have a tiny controller
and don't want the overhead . . . the a/d has a scan mode
too I think . . . once you set it up and turn it on, you
just go read an address for latest value assigned to
the address.
> I'd have a 1-ms or even 500-microsecond interrupt. This would interrupt
>the main program consisting of... ...a do-nothing loop. Well, maybe that
>main loop could update the low-limit LEDs. 500-microseconds,
>that's 2000 times a second. If we do 10 pulses a second ( the meter needle
>should stay still ), that's 200 interrupt ticks per pulse, or 200 discrete
>meter
>needle "levels".
that would work
> The current input for each side would be sampled with the built-in ADC
>and applied to a table ( one for each side ) which would have the output
>"level". Each output level would be a "number of ticks for the output to be
>ON", and a "number of ticks for the output to be OFF". These two numbers
>would always add up to the total number of ticks per pulse, in our sample
>case, 200.
>
> The interrupt service could also have a state machine for blinking the
>fuel low LEDs when the fuel got REALLY low.
>
> The main loop could also have code that would constantly check the sanity
>of the interrupt, and reset the processor if the interrupt went awry. I
>think the chip has a built-in watchdog timer
yes it does . . .
> - if the main loop detected
>that the interrupt was dead ( or in bye-bye-land ), it would just stop
>kicking the watchdog. It would also have stack check code ( checking for
>stack overflow ) and any other bulletproofing stuff I could think of.
>
> It'd be a piece of cake to have the thing come up from reset in a VERY
>small fraction of a second.
Yup . . . if Dave can't get to it are you going to do it?
Bob. . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Solenoid Engine Primer Valve |
> > The Fawcet pumps are in-expensive but I think they use
> > reed valves and will free flow if pressurized on the inlet
> > end. You would need the solenoid valve too. ACS has both.
> >
> > You'll also need a needle valve to calibrate the primer
> > fuel flow. These are a pretty common plumbing part in brass.
> >
>Hello Bob,
>
>one last question to this issue, can I put the pump AND the valve on the
>same switch? I have already a 1-5 switch, so priming on the up position, off
>in the middle and "fuel injection" on the down position, fuse and wiring
>would then be the combined load of both, right?
Use a 2-50 wired per figure Z-11. If you wish, you can drive each
device from it's own circuit protection.
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>I'm installing a fuse block next to the battery now, 6 position, ordered
>it from you today. Should I put the fuel pumps on it or not?
Does your engine have or do you plan to have electronic
ignition in the future? Single or dual electronic ignitions
could run from battery bus(es). I noticed both a boost and
fuel transfer pumps. How are these used?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Electric Gyro question |
I am having the exact same problem with my RC Allen attitude indicator. My
set up is also the same with this instrument on my essential bus. My engine
is running and the flag will not go away until I turn on the essential bus
switch.
The readings on my radio master bus is 13.4 while the reading on my essentail
bus is only 12.4. I am getting a big drop through the diode.
Bob, what can I do about this?
Len Leggette RV-8A
N901LL (res)
Greensboro, N.C.
Flying !!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual gps aided wing levelers . . . |
>
>In a message dated 10/29/02 12:02:57 PM Central Standard Time,
>bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
>
> > If I were building ANY class airplane in which it
> > was my intent to spend lots of time in clouds,
> > I would have dual, gps guided wing levelers
> > running from independent power sources. This
> > ensures that I have at least one system to keep
> > the dirty side down and pointy end forward while
> > I sorted things out and got my adrenaline levels
> > back down.
> >
>
>Good Evening Bob,
>
>I think that would be great! My only question is. If one fails, how do you
>know which one is the good one?
You fly on one and keep the other in reserve. I would use
alternate wing levelers on inbound-outbound legs of trip
to exercise both.
>The only way that I am aware of is to revert to some sort of rate based
>flying.
The wing levelers are rate based and VERY simple electronically.
GPS engines are now well under $100. Each device could have
it's own gps receiver and rate sensor. Software would watch
cross-track error and turn rate and light a lamp when it is
determined that steering commands are not driving loop errors
in the right direction. The most probable failures are easy
to spot in software and raise the flag.
>I keep hoping that some of the new solid state attitude devices will become
>available at a weight and cost that works.
>
>In the meantime though, I strongly recommend the installation of two old
>fashioned needle and ball instruments. Not those abominable pieces of junk
>known as Turn Coordinators. I think they are very useful as a sensor for an
>autopilot, but I think they are the reason nobody can fly partial panel these
>days. I could beat that to death, but I won't.
The wing levelers do just that . . . the rate sensor is canted off
vertical to give some degree of look-ahead for an impending turn.
>I do recommend the dual T&B because it is so easy to tell which one is
>telling you the truth. If it wiggles at all, it is telling you enough to
>save your tail. If it doesn't wiggle, it is no darn good. No voting or
>analysis required. Also, unlike the Turn Coordinator, it will never tell you
>a lie.
>
>The T&B s still relatively cheap, light weight, non tumbling and very
>reliable.
My friend Terry had a working attitude indicator and a working
turn coordinator. Flying needle-ball-airspeed with your pucker
factor at red-line out is a mixed bag no matter how many working
instruments you have of any kind.
>Until the solid state stuff comes up to speed, I think the T&B is the best
>bet available.
The solid state stuff IS up to speed . . . has been for almost ten years.
The COST of implementing gps aided wing leveling with precision sky-hole
boring has been too high to compete with contemporary, off-the-shelf
products. With the availability of low cost rate sensors (about $40) and
gps engines (about $60), jelly-bean processors that run at 50 Mhz ($5)
there are no more excuses. The technology is laying on the ground and
dirt cheap (pun intended).
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual alternators vs one alternator/dual batteries/Vacuum |
pump
>
>Ooh boy. You may have opened a can of worms with that line
>of questioning! Much of the evidence shows that modern
>alternators have a much longer life, and lower rate of
>failure than do vacuum pumps. If you are going to keep the
>airplane for a while, the increased initial cost of electric
>gyros is outweighed by not having to replace a vacuum pump.
There are additional advantages in weight savings and
enhancements to maintenance efforts when all the plumbing
and hoses go away.
Electric gyros don't have to run on air that MUST contain
particulates that are too small to be captured by the
best filter so they tend to run longer between overhauls
too . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel State Detector |
>
> > > >Would a kind guru please help with a detailed step by step ' Fuel gauge
> > > >linearization for dummies' ?
> > >
> > > I prefer the micro-controllers cause all the stuff is
> > > in one chip and they're easily programmed and/or
> > > re-programmed from your PC.
>
>
>With all the discussion around sophisticated gizmos, didn't anybody think of
>replacing the scale on the gauge??
>Calibrate easily...Color pen or pencil, paper.... real cheap...
Yup, considered that . . . I post comments on
that technique earlier today.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Dual gps aided wing levelers . . . |
In a message dated 10/30/02 9:50:43 PM Central Standard Time,
bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
> The solid state stuff IS up to speed . . . has been for almost ten years.
> The COST of implementing gps aided wing leveling with precision sky-hole
> boring has been too high to compete with contemporary, off-the-shelf
> products. With the availability of low cost rate sensors (about $40) and
> gps engines (about $60), jelly-bean processors that run at 50 Mhz ($5)
> there are no more excuses. The technology is laying on the ground and
> dirt cheap (pun intended).
>
> Bob . . .
>
Good Evening Bob,
All sounds great to me. I am absolutely astounded by what Jim Younkin has
done with his stuff.
I agree wholeheartedly with you about the need for a full time stabilization
system, such as the one used by Mooney. A device like that might have saved
JFK jr, provided he had enough awareness to NOT press down the button while
holding a death grip on the wheel.
I also agree that it is becoming very easy to get way too much equipment in a
small airplane. It doesn't make things easier, it makes things harder. Just
too much to look at and too much potential for confusion.
I still think that if a human being is included in the loop (I have no
objection if he/she is not, provided that the reliability is adequate) there
is a need for a simple indication that tells whether or not the aircraft is
turning. I realize that if the wings are level and all other forces are in
balance, the aircraft will not turn, but when we become confused, the one
thing that will save our bacon is if we can recognize the turn and get it
stopped. I think the old T&B, not a Turn Coordinator will do that best.
Stop the turn and you will survive.
If electronics can do it reliably, I am all for it. We had far fewer
instances of loss of control in the days before we had such heavily loaded
cockpits.
The worst case we can have is when equipment generates a requirement that we
have to vote to see which equipment is giving us the correct information.
I hope to see examples of your GPS aided solid state wing leveler soon!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Kaidor" <jerry(at)tr2.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 'linearizing' a fuel gauge |
>
> Yup . . . if Dave can't get to it are you going to do it?
>
*** Well,
I'm not building an airplane, and I think the FAA will get mad at me if I
stick something like
that in my Sundowner. Although the Sundowner could REALLY use some
linearizing help in the fuel gauge department.
- Jerry Kaidor (
jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Wiring a fuel injection fuel pump |
Bob,
I'm wiring my EFI pumps and trying to decide what gauge wire to use. When
running the pumps seem to draw a max of about 1.6 amps (tested with my new
multi-meter - thanks). Clearly stamped on the pump casing is "Requires 20
AMP fuse".
I'm confused. What gauge wire and what size fuse should I use?
Regards,
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Shannon's Lancair system . . . |
I may be mistaken, but I think the solid state stuff is ready. The
Trutrak has its own built in gyros from what I understand. They aren't
as fancy as the Xbow500 AHRS or anything, as they don't have to be, but
they work great from what I hear. Might be something to check out.
Which one is the T&B and which one is the Turn coord? I'm not sure I've
been alive long enough :) to know the difference. The one I'm planning
has the ball, obviously, and then has the flag at the 12oclock position
that moves left and right. The one in my 182RG I currently fly has a
little airplane that tilts. Which is which, and why is one better than
the other?
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: Shannon's Lancair system . . .
In a message dated 10/29/02 12:02:57 PM Central Standard Time,
bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
> If I were building ANY class airplane in which it
> was my intent to spend lots of time in clouds,
> I would have dual, gps guided wing levelers
> running from independent power sources. This
> ensures that I have at least one system to keep
> the dirty side down and pointy end forward while
> I sorted things out and got my adrenaline levels
> back down.
>
Good Evening Bob,
I think that would be great! My only question is. If one fails, how do
you
know which one is the good one?
The only way that I am aware of is to revert to some sort of rate based
flying.
I keep hoping that some of the new solid state attitude devices will
become
available at a weight and cost that works.
In the meantime though, I strongly recommend the installation of two old
fashioned needle and ball instruments. Not those abominable pieces of
junk
known as Turn Coordinators. I think they are very useful as a sensor
for an
autopilot, but I think they are the reason nobody can fly partial panel
these
days. I could beat that to death, but I won't.
I do recommend the dual T&B because it is so easy to tell which one is
telling you the truth. If it wiggles at all, it is telling you enough
to
save your tail. If it doesn't wiggle, it is no darn good. No voting or
analysis required. Also, unlike the Turn Coordinator, it will never
tell you
a lie.
The T&B s still relatively cheap, light weight, non tumbling and very
reliable.
Until the solid state stuff comes up to speed, I think the T&B is the
best
bet available.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
I will possibly upgrade to the PRISM electronic ignition in the future,
but don't expect it to be ready for some time. The boost pump in inline
with the left/right fuel selector and the engine driven pump...it has a
lo and hi setting. Its for priming, starting, takeoff and landing. The
transfer pump transfers fuel from the center fuel cell I built, to the
left wing tank to be used by the normal fuel system. This is an add-on
feature I built that holds 11-12 gallons of reserve. It works through a
check valve and tees into the left tank fuel return.
(http://shannon.v8eaters.com/images/lancair/ 09_2002 and 10_2002).
Normal operation is to burn 1.5 hours from the left tank, switch to
right, and then transfer center to left. I'm still not sure whether to
put these on the bat or regular bus?
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
-----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: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: batt buss
>
>
>I'm installing a fuse block next to the battery now, 6 position,
ordered
>it from you today. Should I put the fuel pumps on it or not?
Does your engine have or do you plan to have electronic
ignition in the future? Single or dual electronic ignitions
could run from battery bus(es). I noticed both a boost and
fuel transfer pumps. How are these used?
Bob . . .
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shannon Knoepflein" <kycshann(at)kyol.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual gps aided wing levelers . . . |
Is one of these devices you mentions available at this time Bob? Sounds
simple, cheap, and an easy add-on to the other bus.
---
Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann(at)kyol.net
-----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: Dual gps aided wing levelers . . .
>
>In a message dated 10/29/02 12:02:57 PM Central Standard Time,
>bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
>
> > If I were building ANY class airplane in which it
> > was my intent to spend lots of time in clouds,
> > I would have dual, gps guided wing levelers
> > running from independent power sources. This
> > ensures that I have at least one system to keep
October 24, 2002 - October 31, 2002
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-bh