AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-bm
December 17, 2002 - January 07, 2003
> with a screw (should have been included in the mag
> installation kit.)
>
>> Or, do I run it to the firewall ground block?
>
> No.
>
>> Ignorance sure ain't bliss.
>
> That's what we're here for. As the Beatles once said,
> "I get by with a little help from my friends."
>
> Bill
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "MATTHEW PRATHER" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
I am getting my O-200 powered, newly electrified Varieze running
again. I have replaced one of the Bendix mags with an LSE CDI
ignition system. The directions for it say to time it with an
inductive pickup timing light. That works great, and it made me
wonder whether I could use the same method on the mag. Not
surprisingly, when I clipped the inductive pickup onto the sheilded
aircraft lead, the light didn't work. So, my question is, would
it be easier to splice in a little section of unshieled wire into
one of the plug leads, and then use my pickup on that section, or
can (should) I build a little buzz-box? It seems like all I need to
make one of those is a light bulb and a battery (though that won't
produce a buzz). When the points are closed, it should complet a
circuit, making the bulb light, and when they open, the light should
go out. Is that right?
Thanks for ideas.
Regards,
Matt Prather
N34RD
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | firewall pass through |
I'm installing a Grand Rapids EIS that will take the place of all the
"normal" guages. This instrument has two bundles of wires that go firewall
forward. Is there any problem with stuffing these bundles through only two
holes in the firewall? They'll be pretty thick, but I've got grommets that
will hold them.
All the egt/cht wires will go through one hole and all the other sensor
wires plus p leads plus electric primer lead will go through the other.
It looks like I can route all these wires to the top center of the engine
mount, then aft through the firewall and direct to the EIS.
Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
Robert Dickson
RV-6A electrical
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 12/16/2002 11:32:32 PM Central Standard Time,
bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
>
> >I'm planning out my panel now and it includes the basic 6 pack. The
> >exception is what to do about the DG & AI. Whether to replace with
> >the Dynon or not. The cost of the electric DG & AI versus the
> >suction is really steering me away from the "old fashioned" electric
> >gyros. Either way, Dynon or the standard 6 pack, I would choose to
> >have the T&B, VSI and good old fashioned compass for backup.
> >
> >The only reason that I have been able to justify to myself to use
> >the Dynon type EFIS's is that it just seems cool! I would still
> >have to have the same backup instruments to feel comfortable in IFR.
>
>
I am building a Lancair ES. I intend to have an all electric system,
Z-14. I have looked at BMA, and Dynon. Dynon is the one I will go with simply
because it fits in a standard 3 1/8 hole. So I will adjust my six pack
accordingly so that when the Dynon is available, I'll just slip it in. You
have to account for the face plate. At that time I will slide the DG/AI ever
to the copilots side as steam gauge electric backup. Its a little more money,
however, its a great piece of mind, and less hassle to rip out a vacuum
system or repair down the road.
Regards,
Ed Silvanic
N823MS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerzy Krasinski <krasins(at)ceat.okstate.edu> |
Bob,
I got Michel MX385 radio, which is a direct replacement for Cessna ARC
RT385A. I have pinouts of the connectors. I found that in addition to
the standard inputs and outputs, there are three extra pins there that
I have not seen before.
These are:
pin 1 Phn sidetone in
pin 14 Phn sidetone out
pin 19 Sidetone out
I called TKN/Michel and talked to an engineer there, but probably I got
a wrong engineer, he had no idea what these pins were for.
By any chance do you know what these are? I could probably leave these
pins alone, but I am driven by curiosity.
Thank you,
Jerzy
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: strange pins |
| From: | "MATTHEW PRATHER" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Just guessing, but those sound like optional intercom pins like the
Microair radios have.
Matt Prather
N34RD
>
>
> Bob,
>
> I got Michel MX385 radio, which is a direct replacement for Cessna ARC
> RT385A. I have pinouts of the connectors. I found that in addition to
> the standard inputs and outputs, there are three extra pins there that
> I have not seen before.
> These are:
> pin 1 Phn sidetone in
> pin 14 Phn sidetone out
> pin 19 Sidetone out
>
> I called TKN/Michel and talked to an engineer there, but probably I got
> a wrong engineer, he had no idea what these pins were for.
> By any chance do you know what these are? I could probably leave these
> pins alone, but I am driven by curiosity.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Jerzy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Sower <canarder(at)starband.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Voltage Regulator .... |
"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >I have the link to that website Bob discussed that has all those
> >$5 regulators. All I could find was part numbers and prices.
> >No application information at all. How do we order from those
> >folks without application information?
> Don't understand . . . you want a list of cars that use
> these regulators? I think you can take the list I linked
> into any parts store and they can supply one of the numbers
> listed or cross one or more numbers listed to a brand
> they stock.
OK. I'd never heard of them and I went to a parts house and they hadn't either
so I quit
looking. I'll go to NAPA and some other serious vendors and look for a cross reference.
>
>
> This regulator was generic to Ford products from
> 1965 to 1992.
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Voltage Regulator .... |
All ya gotta do is walk into the nearest Advance Auto Parts or Autozone
and say, "Gimme a regulator for my 1975 Ford LTD". No need to order
nuthin'... :-)
A regulator is a regulator is a regulator.......
Sam Buchanan (RV-6 with 440 hrs on $9.00 Ford regulator)
"The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com
===============================
Jim Sower wrote:
>
>
> "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >I have the link to that website Bob discussed that has all those
> > >$5 regulators. All I could find was part numbers and prices.
> > >No application information at all. How do we order from those
> > >folks without application information?
> > Don't understand . . . you want a list of cars that use
> > these regulators? I think you can take the list I linked
> > into any parts store and they can supply one of the numbers
> > listed or cross one or more numbers listed to a brand
> > they stock.
>
> OK. I'd never heard of them and I went to a parts house and they hadn't either
so I quit
> looking. I'll go to NAPA and some other serious vendors and look for a cross
reference.
>
> >
> >
> > This regulator was generic to Ford products from
> > 1965 to 1992.
> >
> > Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jon Croke" <Jon(at)joncroke.com> |
| Subject: | Re: firewall pass through |
I would also like to ADD to this question: is a rubber grommet all that is
required in the firewall.?? Is some additional 'plugging' of the hole
required to keep air/gasses from passing thru this opening?? I am concerned
about not giving the DAR something to complain about... Im looking for what
standard practices desire... !!
Thanks in advance
Jon
<robert@thenews-journal.com>
>
> I'm installing a Grand Rapids EIS that will take the place of all the
> "normal" guages. This instrument has two bundles of wires that go firewall
> forward. Is there any problem with stuffing these bundles through only two
> holes in the firewall? They'll be pretty thick, but I've got grommets that
> will hold them.
> All the egt/cht wires will go through one hole and all the other sensor
> wires plus p leads plus electric primer lead will go through the other.
> It looks like I can route all these wires to the top center of the engine
> mount, then aft through the firewall and direct to the EIS.
>
> Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
>
> Robert Dickson
> RV-6A electrical
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister(at)qia.net> |
Hi,
I'd like to just add my two cents worth. Bob has put together a well
reasoned case for electric a/h & dg's.
I too struggled with the cost of these devices and while I agree with the
total cost of ownership argument I took a different approach.
I have installed a vacuum system along with a pressure switch to alert me
when (not if) the pump fails. In addition I have a Naviad wing leveler.
The reasoning is that I will know immediately when the pump fails and I will
be able to maintain a wings level situation if I am in IMC conditions using
the Navaid.
I too look longingly at devices being offered by Dyon and Blue Mountain and
I am hoping by the time my vacuum based devices have failed that these newer
technologies will be ready for prime time and I will be able to replace my
50 year old technology with one of these offerings.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: 10157 Jones
>
>
> > Bob, I posted this on the RV-7 Yahoo group list in response to a
> > discussion that was taking place about electric gyros. I didn't get my
> > question answered so I'll try you. What I'm really trying to find out
is
> > why would I spend the extra $1,500 dollars for an electric version of
> > gyros and also what the failure rate is for the electric gyros. Thanks
> > for you book. Very useful for me a first time builder. Doug
> >
> >Group:
> >Please help me to understand some things about electric gyros.
> >I've been all over the board on what I want to do. Everything from
> >put the suction pump in to looking at the EFIS lite or the Dynon
> >EFIS.
> >
> >I am assuming that in this discussion we are not talking about
> >solid state gyros, but instead something like an electric RC Allen
> >artificial horizon. How do they work? With suction pump the
> >suction turns vanes and spins up the gyros. What causes the
> >electric gyros to spin up? An electric motor in each gyroscopic
> >instrument?
>
> Yes . . .
>
>
> > What is the failure rate of the electric motor versus
> >the suction pump?
>
> I don't have hard numbers from any formal studies. Further,
> there is more to consider than pump of failures. The
> general consensus is that overall reliability of all-electric
> gyros is more reliable than vacuum because you don't have a
> single failure (pump) that takes down both gyros. Further,
> cost of system ownership is lower in the long run because
> you're not dragging filtered but still microscopically
> contaminated air through the gyros which accelerates their
> overhaul cycles.
>
> > When a suction pump goes, there is typically an
> >indication that the pump is getting weak by reduced suction gauge
> >readings over time. (Flame suit on, I'm sure that some have
> >experienced catastrophic pump failures.)
>
> They generally do not fail gracefully. The pump
> performance is pretty good until one vane fails.
> The debris then takes the rest of the vanes out.
> It's all over an a few milliseconds.
>
> > Is there an indication of
> >electric gyros degrading?
>
> They too have gross failure modes that will cause
> a gyro not to spin up . . . or to precess badly. But
> one gyro going belly up doesn't take the other one
> with it.
>
> > Future maintenance expense? Replace
> >suction pump (which you can do yourself) versus overhauling the
> >electric gyros by an avionics shop?
>
> Over the lifetime of the airplane, cost of ownership
> for the electric gyros should be lower. You get the
> further benefits of having two engine driven power
> sources which adds robustness not only to the gyro
> system but to other electrically driven essentials
> as well. Your airplane is easier to build, work on
> and should be 4-5 pounds lighter as for having left
> out the vacuum plumbing.
>
> >I'm planning out my panel now and it includes the basic 6 pack. The
> >exception is what to do about the DG & AI. Whether to replace with
> >the Dynon or not. The cost of the electric DG & AI versus the
> >suction is really steering me away from the "old fashioned" electric
> >gyros. Either way, Dynon or the standard 6 pack, I would choose to
> >have the T&B, VSI and good old fashioned compass for backup.
> >
> >The only reason that I have been able to justify to myself to use
> >the Dynon type EFIS's is that it just seems cool! I would still
> >have to have the same backup instruments to feel comfortable in IFR.
>
> that would really blow the budget would it not?
>
> >I can't seem to get buying the electric gyros. (I consider myself
> >conservative, my wife says cheap). From Aircraft Spruce for RC
> >Allen instruments, Electric DG 1850, Electric AI 1750 total cost
> >$3,600. Vac DG 689, Vac AI 728 & vac pump 685 for a total cost of
> >$2,100.
> >
> >Honestly, I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade, I'm just trying
> >to understand why I should spend $1,500 dollars more for the same
> >function.
>
> You pay it up front or pay more later . . . and if you don't
> have the benefit of a second alternator in the vacated vacuum
> pump pad, then you miss the opportunity to craft one of the
> most reliable electrical systems flying in any light aircraft.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie and Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: strange pins |
>>
>>
>>Bob,
>>
>>I got Michel MX385 radio, which is a direct replacement for Cessna ARC
>>RT385A. I have pinouts of the connectors. I found that in addition to
>>the standard inputs and outputs, there are three extra pins there that
>>I have not seen before.
>>These are:
>>pin 1 Phn sidetone in
>>pin 14 Phn sidetone out
>>pin 19 Sidetone out
>>
>>I called TKN/Michel and talked to an engineer there, but probably I got
>>a wrong engineer, he had no idea what these pins were for.
>>By any chance do you know what these are? I could probably leave these
>>pins alone, but I am driven by curiosity.
>>
>>Thank you,
>>
>>Jerzy
>>
>>
Sidetone is the sound of your own voice in the headphones when you talk during
transmit. This is an optional feature on most radios. In my limited experience
with a/c radios, two pins are usually tied together to activate the feature.
This is purely a guess, but I would bet that pin 14 is headphone level audio out
& should be tied to pin 1 so that you hear your voice in the headphones when you
transmit.
Perhaps pin 19 is speaker level sidetone audio. (hard to imagine a use for it,
though)
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: firewall pass through |
><robert@thenews-journal.com>
>
>I'm installing a Grand Rapids EIS that will take the place of all the
>"normal" guages. This instrument has two bundles of wires that go firewall
>forward. Is there any problem with stuffing these bundles through only two
>holes in the firewall? They'll be pretty thick, but I've got grommets that
>will hold them.
Don't see any reason why not . . .
>All the egt/cht wires will go through one hole and all the other sensor
>wires plus p leads plus electric primer lead will go through the other.
>It looks like I can route all these wires to the top center of the engine
>mount, then aft through the firewall and direct to the EIS.
>
>Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
Sounds good to me.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: firewall pass through |
>
>
>I would also like to ADD to this question: is a rubber grommet all that is
>required in the firewall.?? Is some additional 'plugging' of the hole
>required to keep air/gasses from passing thru this opening?? I am concerned
>about not giving the DAR something to complain about... Im looking for what
>standard practices desire... !!
>
>Thanks in advance
Don't your kit instructions speak to this? Here's a
Tony B article stolen from Sport Aviation
http://216.55.140.222/temp/Grommet_Shields.pdf
After the wiring is all in place and shields
screwed down, a molding of fire-putty around
the wire on the firewall side finishes off the
installation. This has been the stone-simple
technique used on type certificated aircraft
for a LONG time . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: firewall pass through |
>
>
>Bob. . . ,
>
>Thank you! Thats what I was looking for! (article)
>And no, unfortunately my kit manual doesnt go into that detail....
>I owe you one!!
It's kinda frustrating that the guys who put out these
REALLY nice kits don't go into details like this. It's
not difficult and it can only advance the state of the art
and confidence levels of their builders.
Bob. . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: firewall pass through grommet covers |
Will this work for you?
I used some dies that I made on a lathe to make the standard style grommet
covers out of some annealed stainless steel sheet material. I used my 5 inch
bench vise as a press and produced very nice covers. I then went through my
junk drawer and found some quite large washers and used them to accomplish
the same results. holding the various pieces while tightening the vise was
awkward but it worked well enough.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: firewall pass through
>
> >
> >
> >Bob. . . ,
> >
> >Thank you! Thats what I was looking for! (article)
> >And no, unfortunately my kit manual doesnt go into that detail....
> >I owe you one!!
>
> It's kinda frustrating that the guys who put out these
> REALLY nice kits don't go into details like this. It's
> not difficult and it can only advance the state of the art
> and confidence levels of their builders.
>
> Bob. . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | vacuum instrument supply |
> > What is the failure rate of the electric motor versus
> >the suction pump?
>
> I don't have hard numbers from any formal studies. Further,
> there is more to consider than pump of failures.
This may not be the forum, but somebody started it by mentioning "vacuum,"
so...
I designed a (patented) pressure regulator that will provide a continuous
power source for vacuum instruments from a turbocharged engine regardless of
engine operating condition. It eliminates the need for a mechanical vacuum
pump and should last forever as there are no wearing parts. I'm looking for
someone to test the first unit as my turbocharged ES is quite a ways from
being completed. Anyone interested?
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
<>
Okay, you asked for ideas - here's a couple for what they're worth: First,
a test light hooked to the P-lead won't work, as the resistance to ground is
almost the same with the points open as with them closed. You can use an
ohm-meter to measure the slight change. Turn the prop VERY SLOWLY as the
voltage induced by the mag could wipe out your meter if you turn it at any
speed at all. Second idea: Add an unshielded extension to the P-lead and
hook your inductive light to that. It will trigger twice per rev, but
that's okay as you'll still get the image at the position you're looking
for. Then take the extension out when you're done. Using a light with the
engine running is much more hazardous, so I would tape the light to the top
of the engine with the trigger taped down and then read the light from the
driver's seat.
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | vacuum instrument supply |
> I designed a (patented) pressure regulator that will provide a continuous
> power source for vacuum instruments from a turbocharged engine .....
Sounds very interesting, Gary. I'll be testing my 13B turbo soon. Email me
off line at sladerj(at)bellsouth.net
Regards,
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerzy Krasinski <krasins(at)ceat.okstate.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: strange pins |
Charlie,
I did not think about it, but it makes sense.A simple experiment will
confirm. But my other radio does not seem to have that feature.
Thank you very much for the info.
Jerzy
Charlie and Tupper England wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>Bob,
>>>
>>>I got Michel MX385 radio, which is a direct replacement for Cessna ARC
>>>RT385A. I have pinouts of the connectors. I found that in addition to
>>>the standard inputs and outputs, there are three extra pins there that
>>>I have not seen before.
>>>These are:
>>>pin 1 Phn sidetone in
>>>pin 14 Phn sidetone out
>>>pin 19 Sidetone out
>>>
>>>I called TKN/Michel and talked to an engineer there, but probably I got
>>>a wrong engineer, he had no idea what these pins were for.
>>>By any chance do you know what these are? I could probably leave these
>>>pins alone, but I am driven by curiosity.
>>>
>>>Thank you,
>>>
>>>Jerzy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>Sidetone is the sound of your own voice in the headphones when you talk during
>transmit. This is an optional feature on most radios. In my limited experience
>with a/c radios, two pins are usually tied together to activate the feature.
>
>This is purely a guess, but I would bet that pin 14 is headphone level audio out
>& should be tied to pin 1 so that you hear your voice in the headphones when you
> transmit.
>
>Perhaps pin 19 is speaker level sidetone audio. (hard to imagine a use for it,
>though)
>
>Charlie
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum instrument supply |
>
> > > What is the failure rate of the electric motor versus
> > >the suction pump?
> >
> > I don't have hard numbers from any formal studies. Further,
> > there is more to consider than pump of failures.
>
>This may not be the forum, but somebody started it by mentioning "vacuum,"
>so...
>I designed a (patented) pressure regulator that will provide a continuous
>power source for vacuum instruments from a turbocharged engine regardless of
>engine operating condition. It eliminates the need for a mechanical vacuum
>pump and should last forever as there are no wearing parts. I'm looking for
>someone to test the first unit as my turbocharged ES is quite a ways from
>being completed. Anyone interested?
Gary,
Can you send me literature on the product?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Braly <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum instrument supply |
What happens when the engine quits in the clouds? Or an induction coupling
comes undone while IFR?
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: vacuum instrument supply
>
> > > What is the failure rate of the electric motor versus
> > >the suction pump?
> >
> > I don't have hard numbers from any formal studies. Further,
> > there is more to consider than pump of failures.
>
>This may not be the forum, but somebody started it by mentioning "vacuum,"
>so...
>I designed a (patented) pressure regulator that will provide a continuous
>power source for vacuum instruments from a turbocharged engine regardless
of
>engine operating condition. It eliminates the need for a mechanical vacuum
>pump and should last forever as there are no wearing parts. I'm looking
for
>someone to test the first unit as my turbocharged ES is quite a ways from
>being completed. Anyone interested?
Gary,
Can you send me literature on the product?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Sower <canarder(at)starband.net> |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum instrument supply |
<... when the engine quits in the clouds ...>
I would hazard a guess that almost any battery would keep your instruments alive
until you're on the ground. Ten or fifteen minutes would do it. :o)
George Braly wrote:
>
> What happens when the engine quits in the clouds? Or an induction coupling
> comes undone while IFR?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net]
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: vacuum instrument supply
>
>
>
>
> >
> > > > What is the failure rate of the electric motor versus
> > > >the suction pump?
> > >
> > > I don't have hard numbers from any formal studies. Further,
> > > there is more to consider than pump of failures.
> >
> >This may not be the forum, but somebody started it by mentioning "vacuum,"
> >so...
> >I designed a (patented) pressure regulator that will provide a continuous
> >power source for vacuum instruments from a turbocharged engine regardless
> of
> >engine operating condition. It eliminates the need for a mechanical vacuum
> >pump and should last forever as there are no wearing parts. I'm looking
> for
> >someone to test the first unit as my turbocharged ES is quite a ways from
> >being completed. Anyone interested?
>
> Gary,
>
> Can you send me literature on the product?
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum instrument supply |
> <... when the engine quits in the clouds ...>
> I would hazard a guess that almost any battery would keep your
> instruments alive until you're on the ground.
> Ten or fifteen minutes would do it. :o)
True, provided that you have electric instruments, or an electric vacuum
backup. This gizmo is proposed as a main vacuum source.
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sweet" <wsweet(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | BNC crimp connectors |
I have used only the solder type BNC connectors, because for aircraft, stranded
center conductor coaxial cable must be used. All the crimp-type BNC connectors
that I have been able to find have a smaller diameter hole for center conductor.
Anyone know of the part number/manufacturer of the crimp-type that will work???
Wayne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mprather(at)spro.net |
Gary,
Thanks for getting back to me.
I hadn't thought about the ground path through the primary winding. The
buzz boxes must have a circuit that detects the inductance associated
with running an AC current through that winding.
I might try your 2nd suggestion. Fortunately, in a Varieze, you can stand
in the rear cockpit with the engine running and have a perfect view of the
timing marks and the case split.
Matt Prather
N34RD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: BNC crimp connectors |
>
>I have used only the solder type BNC connectors, because for aircraft,
>stranded center conductor coaxial cable must be used. All the crimp-type
>BNC connectors that I have been able to find have a smaller diameter hole
>for center conductor. Anyone know of the part number/manufacturer of the
>crimp-type that will work???
>Wayne
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/antenna/antenna.html#s605cm
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | LVWarn/ABMM instructions uploaded |
I've got a draft copy of the installation instructions
uploaded for review by anyone with an interest in this
product. The hardware has been done for awhile but
I didn't want to post kit offerings until all the paperwork
was done.
You can see the instructions at:
http://216.55.140.222/Catalog/inst/9005-701A.pdf
I'll be combing the glitches out of it for a day or so
. . . any questions or critical review suggestions are
welcome.
Will post the kit offerings this weekend.
Bob . . .
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| The man who does not read good books has no advantage |
| over the man who cannot read them. |
| - Mark Twain |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie and Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum instrument supply |
Probably the same thing that happens when the engine quits while using a
standard vacuum pump. Or when a hose comes off a standard vacuum pump.
:-)
George Braly wrote:
>
>
> What happens when the engine quits in the clouds? Or an induction coupling
> comes undone while IFR?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net]
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: vacuum instrument supply
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>>> What is the failure rate of the electric motor versus
>>>>the suction pump?
>>>
>>> I don't have hard numbers from any formal studies. Further,
>>> there is more to consider than pump of failures.
>>
>>This may not be the forum, but somebody started it by mentioning "vacuum,"
>>so...
>>I designed a (patented) pressure regulator that will provide a continuous
>>power source for vacuum instruments from a turbocharged engine regardless
>
> of
>
>>engine operating condition. It eliminates the need for a mechanical vacuum
>>pump and should last forever as there are no wearing parts. I'm looking
>
> for
>
>>someone to test the first unit as my turbocharged ES is quite a ways from
>>being completed. Anyone interested?
>
>
> Gary,
>
> Can you send me literature on the product?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: System Planning |
Ok, Grok, I'm not Bob but try this on for size..... :-)
If you don't use the E-bus system, how are you going to restore power to
the essentials on a a conventional system if the main contactor is
toast??
Me thinks the purpose of the E-bus is to provide power even if
EVERYTHING from the main contactor (including the contactor) forward is
gone.
Sam Buchanan (RV-6 with essential bus, still learning)
======================
Mark Phillips wrote:
>
>
> Dear Bob,
>
> If I have a mind left, please consider this inquiry:
>
> After following the Aeroelectric list since its inception, and even
> after my second reading of -The Book-, I am obviously missing something
> fundamental; please set me straight. In following your philosophy in
> all preliminary planning, I have faithfully designed for the Main and
> Essential/Endurance bus architecture. Now that my system drawing
> (basically Z-11) is staring back at me from the screen, I am trying to
> understand what the fundamental purpose is for this arrangement. I have
> looked for specific references that speak to this, even in your articles
> on the web, and have failed to locate them. (link me up, Scotty!) I
> understand shedding non-essential loads upon alternator failure, and
> isolation of ailing systems (I think!), but after distributing goodies
> to the busses, every single circuit attached to the Main bus is
> independently protected and switchable. (exceptions to "switchable":
> EIS engine monitor- but I'm thinking this belongs on the E-bus, please
> advise-, and your -201 low volts monitor) It appears that if things get
> dicey while airborne, one would kill the Master, switch all the stuff
> off, resume Master, then add only "essential" components for each phase
> of flight pending safe arrival.
>
> My ship is a day/nite VFR RV, carb & dual mags, with 17ah batt,
> contactors and all fat wires FWF.
>
> Not questioning the validity of the E-bus architecture, I just prefer to
> understand the whats & whys of all this stuff before I commit (all stuff
> but them little black boxes, that is- them's still FM to me!)
>
> Signed,
> Not Grokking in TN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: System Planning |
> It appears that if things get
> dicey while airborne, one would kill the Master, switch all the stuff
> off, resume Master, then add only "essential" components for each phase
> of flight pending safe arrival.
This is one of the points of the E buss arch. When things get "dicey", you
want to concentrate on flying, not turning off and on switches. This
simplifies the process. 1) alternator blows 2) turn off main 3) turn on E
Buss 4) fly to appropriate landing site.
Some of us have added options such as a crossfeed from the E bus to the main
fuse block. IF you are in control of the situation after #1-4 above, then
switch all non-E bus appliances off, turn on the crossfeed switch and then
turn on the non- E buss appliance you want to power.
Ross
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: System Planning |
In a message dated 12/19/02 1:28:47 PM Central Standard Time,
ripsteel(at)edge.net writes:
> It appears that if things get
> dicey while airborne, one would kill the Master, switch all the stuff
> off, resume Master, then add only "essential" components for each phase
> of flight pending safe arrival.
>
Good Afternoon Rip,
This may not be at all applicable to your situation, but it does relate to
just how much can be expected of a pilot when stuff hits the fan.
When The Convair 340 was first put on the line, the electrical fire procedure
said to kill the master. After that, one was to pull all of the circuit
breakers. That was followed by restoring electrical power by switching the
master back on.
We were then told to reactive required circuits by closing the applicable
circuit breaker. If the smoke returned, we were to leave that circuit
breaker pulled, restore the rest and continue the flight in an appropriate
manner.
That worked just fine as long as all we did was talk about it. When the
first cockpit simulators came along, we tried to follow that procedure.
It didn't work at all. We found that it took almost a half hour to just go
through the steps listed.
Obviously, new, more workable procedures were developed!
I only mention this to point out that what sometimes seem like a rational,
workable, solution doesn't work in the real world.
In this case, the use of a rudimentary flight simulator made that obvious.
On occasion, even procedures that have worked well in a simulator have been
found to fail in the heat of an actual emergency.
Design and think through everything to your hearts content, but retain a
familiar back up to keep you going if things don't work out the way you think
they will.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: BNC crimp connectors |
Wayne,
I have used crimped BNC connectors from Aeroelectric and Digi-Key with
RG-400 that has stranded center connector. The Digi-Key part number is
All64-ND and the Aeroelectric part is the only one they list. They both
use a crimp tool that is sold by Aeroelectric.
Regards,
Richard Dudley
-6A FWF
Wayne Sweet wrote:
>
>
> I have used only the solder type BNC connectors, because for aircraft, stranded
center conductor coaxial cable must be used. All the crimp-type BNC connectors
that I have been able to find have a smaller diameter hole for center conductor.
Anyone know of the part number/manufacturer of the crimp-type that will
work???
> Wayne
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sweet" <wsweet(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BNC crimp connectors |
Richard,
Thanks for the info. Just placed my order.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Dudley" <rhdudley(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: BNC crimp connectors
>
> Wayne,
>
> I have used crimped BNC connectors from Aeroelectric and Digi-Key with
> RG-400 that has stranded center connector. The Digi-Key part number is
> All64-ND and the Aeroelectric part is the only one they list. They both
> use a crimp tool that is sold by Aeroelectric.
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard Dudley
> -6A FWF
>
> Wayne Sweet wrote:
> >
> >
> > I have used only the solder type BNC connectors, because for aircraft,
stranded center conductor coaxial cable must be used. All the crimp-type BNC
connectors that I have been able to find have a smaller diameter hole for
center conductor. Anyone know of the part number/manufacturer of the
crimp-type that will work???
> > Wayne
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kc" <samdacat(at)elp.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: firewall pass through |
??Where can I get information on the Grand Rapids EIS??
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Dickson" <robert@thenews-journal.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: firewall pass through
<robert@thenews-journal.com>
>
> I'm installing a Grand Rapids EIS that will take the place of all the
> "normal" guages. This instrument has two bundles of wires that go firewall
> forward. Is there any problem with stuffing these bundles through only two
> holes in the firewall? They'll be pretty thick, but I've got grommets that
> will hold them.
> All the egt/cht wires will go through one hole and all the other sensor
> wires plus p leads plus electric primer lead will go through the other.
> It looks like I can route all these wires to the top center of the engine
> mount, then aft through the firewall and direct to the EIS.
>
> Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
>
> Robert Dickson
> RV-6A electrical
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: firewall pass through |
http://hometown.aol.com/enginfosys
----- Original Message -----
From: "kc" <samdacat(at)elp.rr.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: firewall pass through
>
> ??Where can I get information on the Grand Rapids EIS??
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert Dickson" <robert@thenews-journal.com>
> To: "Aeroelectric List"
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: firewall pass through
>
>
> <robert@thenews-journal.com>
> >
> > I'm installing a Grand Rapids EIS that will take the place of all the
> > "normal" guages. This instrument has two bundles of wires that go
firewall
> > forward. Is there any problem with stuffing these bundles through only
two
> > holes in the firewall? They'll be pretty thick, but I've got grommets
that
> > will hold them.
> > All the egt/cht wires will go through one hole and all the other sensor
> > wires plus p leads plus electric primer lead will go through the other.
> > It looks like I can route all these wires to the top center of the
engine
> > mount, then aft through the firewall and direct to the EIS.
> >
> > Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
> >
> > Robert Dickson
> > RV-6A electrical
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: firewall pass through |
try http://hometown.aol.com/enginfosys/index.htm
Greg is very user friendly.
Robert Dickson
RV-6A electrical
----------
>From: "kc" <samdacat(at)elp.rr.com>
>To:
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: firewall pass through
>Date: Thu, Dec 19, 2002, 10:36 PM
>
>
> ??Where can I get information on the Grand Rapids EIS??
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert Dickson" <robert@thenews-journal.com>
> To: "Aeroelectric List"
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: firewall pass through
>
>
> <robert@thenews-journal.com>
>>
>> I'm installing a Grand Rapids EIS that will take the place of all the
>> "normal" guages. This instrument has two bundles of wires that go firewall
>> forward. Is there any problem with stuffing these bundles through only two
>> holes in the firewall? They'll be pretty thick, but I've got grommets that
>> will hold them.
>> All the egt/cht wires will go through one hole and all the other sensor
>> wires plus p leads plus electric primer lead will go through the other.
>> It looks like I can route all these wires to the top center of the engine
>> mount, then aft through the firewall and direct to the EIS.
>>
>> Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
>>
>> Robert Dickson
>> RV-6A electrical
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister(at)qia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: firewall pass through |
See http://hometown.aol.com/enginfosys/ , great product I have one. - Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | coaxial cable center conductor |
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Wayne Sweet"
<<..........skip....for aircraft, stranded center conductor coaxial cable
must be used.......skip......Wayne>
12/20/2002
Hello Wayne, That is a very definitive statement, but I am not sure that it
is valid in all regards.
If I remember right RG 142 coaxial cable (18 AWG silver coated, copper
covered, solid steel center conductor) has been "blessed" / is also being
used.
Bob Nuckolls can you please comment? Thanks
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: System Planning |
>
>In a message dated 12/19/02 1:28:47 PM Central Standard Time,
>ripsteel(at)edge.net writes:
>
> > It appears that if things get
> > dicey while airborne, one would kill the Master, switch all the stuff
> > off, resume Master, then add only "essential" components for each phase
> > of flight pending safe arrival.
> >
>
>Good Afternoon Rip,
>
>This may not be at all applicable to your situation, but it does relate to
>just how much can be expected of a pilot when stuff hits the fan.
>
>When The Convair 340 was first put on the line, the electrical fire procedure
>said to kill the master. After that, one was to pull all of the circuit
>breakers. That was followed by restoring electrical power by switching the
>master back on.
>Design and think through everything to your hearts content, but retain a
>familiar back up to keep you going if things don't work out the way you think
>they will.
>
>Happy Skies,
>
>Old Bob
Exactly. When designing any new system I try to build on
a principal brought to light in the 14th century by William
of Occam who observed:
"Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily." Over the
centuries, scholarly thinkers have elaborated on this
theme in modern syntax by suggesting, "when you have two
competing theories which make exactly the same predictions,
the one that is simpler is the better."
Our goal in system design is to be tolerant of any single
failure and to recover the mission with the simplest possible
set of actions. Your description of the emergency procedures
for the 340 are not unique. I cringe at the size and complexity
of emergency procedures for many of our products. It seems
that our most sought after outcome for any failure is to
keep it from becoming an emergency. The second goal is
to minimize things a crew has to do to deal with
the failure event.
Over the past 15 years of conversation with you folks in
the land of OBAM aircraft, we've been refining the architecture
and companion check list down to a rather simple result. We still
still see a builder from time to time that wants an
avionics master or builds additional busses and feed-paths
between various sources and loads . . . which in the
OBAM aircraft world is just fine. If their checklists are
accurately thought out, and piloting/system analysis
skills for dealing with all situations they might
encounter are adequate, the end result (put the wheels
on the ground) will be the same.
But if one embraces the simple-idea offered by a
14th century thinker, less is better. Simplicity
may improve the statistical probability of a
successful, no-emergency outcome for a failure event.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: firewall pass through |
In a message dated 12/19/02 7:41:31 PM Pacific Standard Time,
samdacat(at)elp.rr.com writes:
<< ?Where can I get information on the Grand Rapids EIS?? >>
616-583-8000 or www.hometown.aol.com/emginfosys.
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, electrical (still)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: System Planning |
>
> > It appears that if things get
> > dicey while airborne, one would kill the Master, switch all the stuff
> > off, resume Master, then add only "essential" components for each phase
> > of flight pending safe arrival.
>
>
>This is one of the points of the E buss arch. When things get "dicey", you
>want to concentrate on flying, not turning off and on switches. This
>simplifies the process. 1) alternator blows 2) turn off main 3) turn on E
>Buss 4) fly to appropriate landing site.
>
>Some of us have added options such as a crossfeed from the E bus to the main
>fuse block. IF you are in control of the situation after #1-4 above, then
>switch all non-E bus appliances off, turn on the crossfeed switch and then
>turn on the non- E buss appliance you want to power.
When and why would you want to do this? Once the airport
is in sight, and there is a matter of convenience to be
addressed in running more electrics, why not just turn
the master switch back on?
When you feed directly from the e-bus BACK to the main
bus, you put a requirement on the alternate feed path
that makes a simple fused protection too large for crash
safety.
I'll be publishing drawings with the next revision for
adding a battery relay, a sort of mini-contactor
at the battery to handle e-bus loads in special cases.
But if one is down to battery only operation, e-bus
alternate feed path loads can easily be shaved down
to 5 amps or less. If one has a well maintained battery,
then the likelihood of having power to run more goodies
during approach to landing is quite good and closing the
battery master contactor to do this is the appropriate
thing to do.
I'm going to quit calling the e-bus an "essential"
bus . . . this word implies the notion of tense
situation. Let's call it the "endurance" bus . . .
running in this mode should be no big deal so that
when we get where we're going, it's still no big
deal to complete the flight.
Burdening the e-bus with main bus loads says
we're not comfortable with what we've designed
into the architecture and companion checklist.
Would it not be better to eliminate the source
of discomfort?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: System Planning |
> I'll be publishing drawings with the next revision for
> adding a battery relay, a sort of mini-contactor
> at the battery to handle e-bus loads in special cases.
Bob, I'm curious why somebody would want/need that. Sounds like just an
additional point of failure...when that realy goes, would the battery bus
and/or e-bus be rendered useless? I'm just getting my feet wet here, so go
easy on me... 8
)
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Ah, yes, Occam's Razor. So true!
Best regards,
Rob Housman
Europa XS Tri-Gear A070
Airfarame complete
Irvine, CA
-----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 Planning
Exactly. When designing any new system I try to build on
a principal brought to light in the 14th century by William
of Occam who observed:
"Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily." Over the
centuries, scholarly thinkers have elaborated on this
theme in modern syntax by suggesting, "when you have two
competing theories which make exactly the same predictions,
the one that is simpler is the better."
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Firewall Penetrations |
| From: | Jack Haviland <jgh(at)iavbbs.com> |
Stainless steel shields for wire and cable firewall penetrations are
readily available (and easy to make) but who sells the asbestos washers
and "fire putty" used with them. That "system" is probably
significantly safer than the "plastic grommets and high temperature
RTV" combination used by many builders but the parts are hard to find.
Jack H.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John & Amy Eckel <eckel1(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Penetrations |
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Firewall Penetrations
>
> Stainless steel shields for wire and cable firewall penetrations are
> readily available (and easy to make) but who sells the asbestos washers
> and "fire putty" used with them. That "system" is probably
> significantly safer than the "plastic grommets and high temperature
> RTV" combination used by many builders but the parts are hard to find.
>
> Jack H.
Try the following page and search for "fire stop."
http://www.mcmaster.com/
John
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
I am having problems getting the price out of Whelan, so what does Whelan model
7080500 LED tail light cost?
I am considering putting a kit together that will be FAA spec or better but (of
course) not FAA approved.
Lifetime 100,000 hours ("about forever"). Amps 1/2 of #93/94 lamp. 14.5 and 28V.
What would anyone pay for such a kit?
Eric M. Jones
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: System Planning |
RE changing 'essential bus' to "endurance bus'...
Wrong thing to do BOb... W R O N G!
ESSENTIAL says it all...
What happened to Ocams Razor?
Denny - who will have an essential bus, with diode selection for no brainer
switching cause I will be too busy messing my pants to be worried about
getting switches in the correct pattern...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: System Planning
>
> >
> > > It appears that if things get
> > > dicey while airborne, one would kill the Master, switch all the stuff
> > > off, resume Master, then add only "essential" components for each
phase
> > > of flight pending safe arrival.
> >
> >
> >This is one of the points of the E buss arch. When things get "dicey",
you
> >want to concentrate on flying, not turning off and on switches. This
> >simplifies the process. 1) alternator blows 2) turn off main 3) turn on
E
> >Buss 4) fly to appropriate landing site.
> >
> >Some of us have added options such as a crossfeed from the E bus to the
main
> >fuse block. IF you are in control of the situation after #1-4 above,
then
> >switch all non-E bus appliances off, turn on the crossfeed switch and
then
> >turn on the non- E buss appliance you want to power.
>
> When and why would you want to do this? Once the airport
> is in sight, and there is a matter of convenience to be
> addressed in running more electrics, why not just turn
> the master switch back on?
>
> When you feed directly from the e-bus BACK to the main
> bus, you put a requirement on the alternate feed path
> that makes a simple fused protection too large for crash
> safety.
>
> I'll be publishing drawings with the next revision for
> adding a battery relay, a sort of mini-contactor
> at the battery to handle e-bus loads in special cases.
>
> But if one is down to battery only operation, e-bus
> alternate feed path loads can easily be shaved down
> to 5 amps or less. If one has a well maintained battery,
> then the likelihood of having power to run more goodies
> during approach to landing is quite good and closing the
> battery master contactor to do this is the appropriate
> thing to do.
>
> I'm going to quit calling the e-bus an "essential"
> bus . . . this word implies the notion of tense
> situation. Let's call it the "endurance" bus . . .
> running in this mode should be no big deal so that
> when we get where we're going, it's still no big
> deal to complete the flight.
>
> Burdening the e-bus with main bus loads says
> we're not comfortable with what we've designed
> into the architecture and companion checklist.
> Would it not be better to eliminate the source
> of discomfort?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
US$428.95 for the 28VDC LED tail light assembly (P/N 11-01228) from Aircraft
Spruce.
Best regards,
Rob Housman
Europa XS Tri-Gear A070
Airfarame complete
Irvine, CA
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Eric M.
Jones
Subject: AeroElectric-List: LED tail light
I am having problems getting the price out of Whelan, so what does Whelan
model 7080500 LED tail light cost?
I am considering putting a kit together that will be FAA spec or better but
(of course) not FAA approved.
Lifetime 100,000 hours ("about forever"). Amps 1/2 of #93/94 lamp. 14.5 and
28V.
What would anyone pay for such a kit?
Eric M. Jones
________________________________________________________________________________
Eric
You know that Whelan's price will be 10 X reasonable. Why not go for
the whole enchilada and make kits for navigation and white wing tip
position lights?
Tom
beecho@pw-x.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
M. Jones
Subject: AeroElectric-List: LED tail light
I am having problems getting the price out of Whelan, so what does
Whelan model 7080500 LED tail light cost?
I am considering putting a kit together that will be FAA spec or better
but (of course) not FAA approved.
Lifetime 100,000 hours ("about forever"). Amps 1/2 of #93/94 lamp. 14.5
and 28V.
What would anyone pay for such a kit?
Eric M. Jones
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Miles McCallum" <milesm(at)avnet.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Stainless hardware |
Gartmann stainless seems to have vanished - are they still going (does
anyone have a web address or phone #) - one in the aerocrafters and vans
listings don't work.
Or any other suggestions....
Cheers,
Miles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Penetrations |
----- Original Message -----
From: "John & Amy Eckel" <eckel1(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Firewall Penetrations
>
>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Firewall Penetrations
>
>
> >
> > Stainless steel shields for wire and cable firewall penetrations are
> > readily available (and easy to make) but who sells the asbestos washers
> > and "fire putty" used with them. That "system" is probably
> > significantly safer than the "plastic grommets and high temperature
> > RTV" combination used by many builders but the parts are hard to find.
> >
> > Jack H.
The 3M fire barrier caulk (the red stuff) is available at most Home Depot
stores in the electrical dept for about $10.00 a tube. This may or may not
be what you are looking for but it is the same stuff that's sold by aircraft
supply houses for about $25 a tube. You have to look really close to find
the stuff as the stores I've visited had it hidden pretty well.
Bill (Skybolt)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerzy Krasinski <krasins(at)ceat.okstate.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Penetrations |
Actually, RTV is pretty good. Try to burn it with a torch. You will find
that it converts into white powdery stuff that pretty well sticks
together. RTV is a silicone rubber. At high temperature it decomposes
into quartz powder, increasing its volume and packing the opening.
Quartz is very resistant against high temperature. Firebricks are made
of quartz.
Jerzy
John & Amy Eckel wrote:
>
>
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Firewall Penetrations
>
>
>
>
>>
>>Stainless steel shields for wire and cable firewall penetrations are
>>readily available (and easy to make) but who sells the asbestos washers
>>and "fire putty" used with them. That "system" is probably
>>significantly safer than the "plastic grommets and high temperature
>>RTV" combination used by many builders but the parts are hard to find.
>>
>>Jack H.
>>
>>
>
>Try the following page and search for "fire stop."
>http://www.mcmaster.com/
>
>John
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: System Planning |
>
>Dear Bob,
>
>If I have a mind left, please consider this inquiry:
>
>After following the Aeroelectric list since its inception, and even
>after my second reading of -The Book-, I am obviously missing something
>fundamental; please set me straight. In following your philosophy in
>all preliminary planning, I have faithfully designed for the Main and
>Essential/Endurance bus architecture. Now that my system drawing
>(basically Z-11) is staring back at me from the screen, I am trying to
>understand what the fundamental purpose is for this arrangement. I have
>looked for specific references that speak to this, even in your articles
>on the web, and have failed to locate them. (link me up, Scotty!) I
>understand shedding non-essential loads upon alternator failure,
. . . try to think more in terms of watching your
gas gage go down when it's 100 miles across an uninhabited
stretch of desert before you have any chance of buying
gas. What speed on your car gives you best gas mileage.
It's NOT 80 mph, it's probably not 10 mph either. At some
speed between 10 and 80 you'll stand the greatest chance
of arriving with perhaps fuel to spare.
If your alternator quits, all you've got is battery power.
What things are necessary for en route operations . . . how
do exterior lights help you get there? How do engine instruments
help? The major point of discussions in Chapter 17 is that
very few things are needed to adequately navigate to where
your destination is in sight. This shouldn't be a sweat'n
bullets deal. When I get into a rental machine, I don't
care if ANYTHING electrical on the panel is working
all the way . . . I intend to get where I'm going in
the J-3 mode if necessary. In fact, since I have no
in, should I have an alternator failure, I'd shut the
whole system down. I've been flying with dual hand
held GPS receivers for years. I've got a hand held
VOR/COM and flashlights in the bag. When I've got
the airport in sight, I'll raise any tower or
approach facility on the hand held first. Let them
know what's going on and then bring the battery back
on line.
If there's enough stuff to make the approach more
graceful, fine. If not, fine too.
That's what your e-bus is about. Since you're not
saddled with holy-watered hardware, YOUR plan-B
is the e-bus. Stuff in the flight bag is plan-C.
When I fly, all I've got is Plan B in the flight
bag but that's better than MOST of our spam-can
flying brethren understand and take advantage of.
I object to words like dicey, tense, critical, essential,
etc, when it comes to electrics. What's truly essential
is airframe, engine and pilot. Everything else is just
along for the adventure. If you have a trip from time
to time that lets you take advantage of superior
systems architecture and pilot understanding . . .
great. I presume that's at least of the reasons why
you're rolling your own flying machine.
> . . . and
>isolation of ailing systems (I think!),
. . . what system might be ailing to the extent
that shutting it down becomes either convenient
or necessary? That falls under the category
of single system failure that's usually handled
with the operating the appropriate switch to OFF
along with carefully chosen, colorful expletives.
After that, so what? You hammer on it when you get home.
> . . . but after distributing goodies
>to the busses, every single circuit attached to the Main bus is
>independently protected and switchable. (exceptions to "switchable":
>EIS engine monitor- but I'm thinking this belongs on the E-bus, please
>advise-, and your -201 low volts monitor).
How do engine instruments help you get where you're
going? How often do you expect any given instrument
to give you some bit of information en route that
is particularly interesting? Tooling along on the
e-bus doesn't keep you from bringing the master on
every 15 minutes to peek at a few things before
you turn it back off.
> . . . . It appears that if things get
>dicey while airborne, one would kill the Master, switch all the stuff
>off, resume Master, then add only "essential" components for each phase
>of flight pending safe arrival.
>
>My ship is a day/nite VFR RV, carb & dual mags, with 17ah batt,
>contactors and all fat wires FWF.
If you do plan to fly in clouds then there are a variety
of ways to keep a single failure from making your
trip go bad. ALL failures and the effects due to failure
can be deduced and dealt with by adjustments to
architecture and your understanding on how to use them.
Since you're going to stay out of clouds, then
building a system for sweat-free-flying is no big deal.
>Not questioning the validity of the E-bus architecture, I just prefer to
>understand the whats & whys of all this stuff before I commit (all stuff
>but them little black boxes, that is- them's still FM to me!)
Are you using fuse blocks? Got plenty of spares in each
block? You don't need to carve all these decisions
into stone today. In fact, after you've been flying
for a year and you decide some electro-whizzy needs to move
from one bus to another, you just move the wire to
the other fuse block and put in the appropriate
fuse. This airplane is experimental . . . you're going
to go find out what works best for you. Modifications
along the way are simply milestones along the pathway to
excellence.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: System Planning |
>
>Ok, Grok, I'm not Bob but try this on for size..... :-)
>
>If you don't use the E-bus system, how are you going to restore power to
>the essentials on a a conventional system if the main contactor is
>toast??
>
>Me thinks the purpose of the E-bus is to provide power even if
>EVERYTHING from the main contactor (including the contactor) forward is
>gone.
Yup . . . that too.
>Sam Buchanan (RV-6 with essential bus, still learning)
. . . and doing just fine with that too.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Billie Lamb" <N254BL(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: System Planning |
I agree completely. I am very comfortable with the term essential and doubt
you'll be able to escape it. Let's just learn to enjoy it.
Bill Lamb
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: System Planning
>
> RE changing 'essential bus' to "endurance bus'...
> Wrong thing to do BOb... W R O N G!
> ESSENTIAL says it all...
> What happened to Ocams Razor?
>
> Denny - who will have an essential bus, with diode selection for no
brainer
> switching cause I will be too busy messing my pants to be worried about
> getting switches in the correct pattern...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: System Planning
>
>
>
> >
>
> > >
> > > > It appears that if things get
> > > > dicey while airborne, one would kill the Master, switch all the
stuff
> > > > off, resume Master, then add only "essential" components for each
> phase
> > > > of flight pending safe arrival.
> > >
> > >
> > >This is one of the points of the E buss arch. When things get "dicey",
> you
> > >want to concentrate on flying, not turning off and on switches. This
> > >simplifies the process. 1) alternator blows 2) turn off main 3) turn
on
> E
> > >Buss 4) fly to appropriate landing site.
> > >
> > >Some of us have added options such as a crossfeed from the E bus to the
> main
> > >fuse block. IF you are in control of the situation after #1-4 above,
> then
> > >switch all non-E bus appliances off, turn on the crossfeed switch and
> then
> > >turn on the non- E buss appliance you want to power.
> >
> > When and why would you want to do this? Once the airport
> > is in sight, and there is a matter of convenience to be
> > addressed in running more electrics, why not just turn
> > the master switch back on?
> >
> > When you feed directly from the e-bus BACK to the main
> > bus, you put a requirement on the alternate feed path
> > that makes a simple fused protection too large for crash
> > safety.
> >
> > I'll be publishing drawings with the next revision for
> > adding a battery relay, a sort of mini-contactor
> > at the battery to handle e-bus loads in special cases.
> >
> > But if one is down to battery only operation, e-bus
> > alternate feed path loads can easily be shaved down
> > to 5 amps or less. If one has a well maintained battery,
> > then the likelihood of having power to run more goodies
> > during approach to landing is quite good and closing the
> > battery master contactor to do this is the appropriate
> > thing to do.
> >
> > I'm going to quit calling the e-bus an "essential"
> > bus . . . this word implies the notion of tense
> > situation. Let's call it the "endurance" bus . . .
> > running in this mode should be no big deal so that
> > when we get where we're going, it's still no big
> > deal to complete the flight.
> >
> > Burdening the e-bus with main bus loads says
> > we're not comfortable with what we've designed
> > into the architecture and companion checklist.
> > Would it not be better to eliminate the source
> > of discomfort?
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: coaxial cable center conductor |
>
>AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Wayne Sweet"
>
>
> <<..........skip....for aircraft, stranded center conductor coaxial cable
>must be used.......skip......Wayne>
>
>12/20/2002
>
>Hello Wayne, That is a very definitive statement, but I am not sure that it
>is valid in all regards.
>
>If I remember right RG 142 coaxial cable (18 AWG silver coated, copper
>covered, solid steel center conductor) has been "blessed" / is also being
>used.
>
>Bob Nuckolls can you please comment? Thanks
RG400 and RG142 are electrically equal to each other.
They differ only mechanically in that RG142 has a solid
center conductor. My personal preference is 400 but
I wouldn't throw away a fine piece of 142. The
connectors we sell work on both cables.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe and Carole Tuminello <mouseysf(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Re: citabria triiong overvoltage relay |
My mechanic said id is a solid state regulator and that if it was that it
would simply go all together not act intermitent. I put the new battery in
and it still did it, but less frequently.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: citabria triiong overvoltage relay
>
> >
> >
> >Matt,
> >Thanks the old battery is fine. It reads the full voltage static, I think
> >12.8 volts. Somebody else having a similar problem says it is most likely
> >the old over voltage relay causing nuisance trips. We shall see.
> >Thank you
> >Joe
> >----- Original Message -----
> > > >>by wx30. The ampmeter jumps up and overvolts cuttign off the
alternator.
> > > >>Resest it and it does it again and again. I have a new alternator,
> > > >>only 3 years old. The battery is 3 years old also and has plenty of
> > > >>cranking power. Someone is trying to convince me the battery has a
> > > >>shorted cell.,
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >Before I end up replacing the battery and voltage regulator, does
anyone
> >have any ideas?
>
> The only form of battery condition that can make
> the system unstable to the degree that an ov protection
> system trips is an OPEN battery. If it started
> your engine then this possibility is eliminated.
>
> If you get spikes in the ammeter the same time the ov trips,
> then there is a problem with the regulator -OR- wiring that
> hooks up the regulator/field wiring. I had a similar problem
> with an airplane that was getting transient shorts between the
> field and b-leads attached to the alternator. There have
> been situations where pieces came loose inside an alternator
> and allowed it to go into runaway mode but this is VERY rare.
>
> I think Dave S. commented on this and I agree that the problem
> seems most likely to reside in your regulator.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Schroeder <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LED tail light |
Eric -
Depends on the price. Ledtronics has a bunch of replacement bulbs made
from LEDs. Going commercial, or getting them to fabricate such a light
might be cheaper and less hassle. Anything will be cheaper and probably
better than Whelan!
John Schroeder
>
> I am considering putting a kit together that will be FAA spec or better but (of
course) not FAA approved.
> Lifetime 100,000 hours ("about forever"). Amps 1/2 of #93/94 lamp. 14.5 and 28V.
>
> What would anyone pay for such a kit?
>
> Eric M. Jones
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CBFLESHREN(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Penetrations |
" RTV is a silicone rubber. At high temperature it decomposes
into quartz powder,"
Not trying to step on toes here but I believe "RTV" (Room Temperature
Vulcanizing) is simply a means by which many compositions "set" or "cure".
Granted there are "silicone rubbers" that "set" in this fashion. However,
most of the MANY different types of caulks (latex etc) at the hardware stores
do too ! Lastly, clearly not all of these would result in "quartz" if burned
. Just felt like clarifying- Happy Holidays to all . Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Roy Glass or Mary Poteet <rlglass(at)alaska.net> |
| Subject: | LASAR ignition wiring |
How does one wire the p-leads for a LASAR ignition? I want to use toggle
switches for each magneto and a push-button starter. The blue and green
wires from the LASAR low voltage control harness do not appear to be
shielded and do not go directly to a magneto, instead they go to the
controller box. I realize that each magneto needs to be grounded to be
"off," but how does one do this with a LASAR? Should I use a shielded
p-lead wire with the primary wire attached to terminal 3 of a
single-pole switch and the wire's shielding connected to both terminal 2
AND to panel ground? The other end of each shielded wire would not be
grounded to a magneto or engine ground (single-point ground, but with a
short length of shielded wire). The other end of the primary wire would
be spliced to the blue or green harness wire. Is there a better way? Is
a shielded p-lead even needed with the LASAR? Should I shorten the
non-shielded harness wires to reduce the chance of noise or leave them
be (about 6 feet long) and just use a short length of shielded wire to
get past the firewall? Lots of questions, and I haven't even gotten to
the CHT part yet. Can someone direct me to a wiring diagram for the
LASAR using toggle switches instead of a key switch?
Roy Glass, RV-6, fwf, Anchorage, Alaska
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
"Stainless steel shields for wire and cable firewall penetrations are
> readily available (and easy to make) but who sells the asbestos washers
> and "fire putty" used with them. That "system" is probably
> significantly safer than the "plastic grommets and high temperature
> RTV" combination used by many builders but the parts are hard to find.
> Jack H.
Try the following page and search for "fire stop."
http://www.mcmaster.com/
.......and perhaps "Fastening and Sealing" then "Adhesives, Sealants and
Caulk". I couldn't find FireStop, but it's a start - page 3137.
Ferg
Europa A064
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shay King" <shaking(at)eircom.net> |
| Subject: | Rotax 912S Voltage Reg Wiring, |
Dear List,
I have 2 questions regarding the wiring of the 912s voltage reg:
1/ Has anyone else found that the barrel on the push on connectors supplied
with the voltage reg. are a bit too small for the 2.5mm/10AWG wire thats specified
in the installation manual?
2/ The "L" position on the reg. supplies a 3watt charging light. Does this
light illuminate when the reg. is charging or does it go out when the reg is charging?
Any help or other advice about wiring up this thing greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Shay King. Zenith 701/ Rotax 912S
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall stuff |
In a message dated 12/21/02 6:41:02 AM Central Standard Time, VE3LVO(at)rac.ca
writes:
> Try the following page and search for "fire stop."
> http://www.mcmaster.com/
>
> .......and perhaps "Fastening and Sealing" then "Adhesives, Sealants and
> Caulk". I couldn't find FireStop, but it's a start - page 3137.
> Ferg
> Europa A064
>
Good Morning Ferg,
Try typing "Fire Stop" in the space allowed for searching the catalog.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
There were lots of questions on and off the list - let me answer a few:
1. How does it work? It is basically a pressure regulator with 2 inlets
and 2 outlets besides 2 lines to the instruments. The inlets are
atmospheric and compressor discharge pressures. The outlets are to
atmospheric and intake manifold pressures. The system always picks the 2
lowest pressures to use to generate instrument differential pressure. If
there is enough manifold vacuum, atmospheric pressure is used as the
upstream pressure and manifold pressure for the downstream side. In the
cruise mode running under boost the upstream side uses compressor discharge
pressure and the downstream atmospheric pressure. In other conditions
compressor discharge and manifold pressure could both be selected. In no
event is the instruments subjected to more than 5 inches above atmospheric
or less than 5 inches below atmospheric pressure. You can see that the
instruments are sometimes running under pressure and sometimes under vacuum.
2. What are the failure modes? If the engine is running with the throttle
wide open, but without boost there may not be enough differential pressure.
With the engine running, though, the turbo will always be producing
something. Also, this mode could only happen at very low engine speed, not
possible under normal conditions. If the engine quits, but is still
windmilling there will be no boost and the throttle would have to be closed
to generate enough manifold vacuum to run the instruments. If the engine
seizes there is nothing that can be done. If a boost hose comes off,
whether to the regulator or from the turbo to the engine, the system reverts
to the same condition as a Precise Flight backup system - you have to close
the throttle enough to get vacuum. The same thing would be required if the
exhaust pipe between the engine and turbo broke. The worst case scenario
would be if the engine seized while in IMC and in that case the electric
gyros would have to be used.
3. Since there could be traces of oil in the compressor discharge the inlet
filter must be relied on to remove the contamination, so I'm assuming this
filter would have to be replaced more often than for a normal vacuum system.
The instrument vacuum gage would work normally, as would a low vacuum
warning light.
I am attaching a copy of the text and a drawing from the patent as a Word
document, but I am not enough of a computer expert to know how to make the
attachment get there. Anyone that wants one can also contact me off-list.
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax 912S Voltage Reg Wiring, |
----- Message d'origine -----
De : "Shay King"
:
Envoy : samedi 21 dcembre 2002 13:42
Objet : AeroElectric-List: Rotax 912S Voltage Reg Wiring,
>
> Dear List,
> I have 2 questions regarding the wiring of the 912s voltage reg:
>
> 1/ Has anyone else found that the barrel on the push on connectors
supplied with the voltage reg. are a bit too small for the 2.5mm/10AWG wire
thats specified in the installation manual?
>
2.5mm is between 14AWG and 12AWG. Hence 12AWG is amply sufficient.
> 2/ The "L" position on the reg. supplies a 3watt charging light. Does
this light illuminate when the reg. is charging or does it go out when the
reg is charging?
>
The light goes on when the voltage is below a fixed value. To date I have
been unable to perform a measurement for this actual value.
Cheers,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
"The 3M fire barrier caulk (the red stuff) is available at most Home Depot
stores in the electrical dept for about $10.00 a tube. This may or may not
be what you are looking for but it is the same stuff that's sold by aircraft
supply houses for about $25 a tube. You have to look really close to find
the stuff as the stores I've visited had it hidden pretty well.Bill
(Skybolt)"
Bill:
Can you spec the exact product? Here, Home Deepot have
everything but. I would like to order the exact copy, as there is lots of
"just-as-good" material on the shelves to flog.
Ferg
Europa A064
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
Bob,
Compliments of the Season.
In the topic of E-bus, allow me an opinion. Keep 'Essential'. I
know the temptation to call something by its functional purpose, but that
undoes all my 'mediaeval' training and experience.
The management of my former airline (easy, now) raised hell when
pilots trained in the 'old ways' called the "Thrust Levers" - throttles! My
God, don't these people understand? Things are different now! Of course this
was at the behest of Boeing - who have the temerity to think they are the
inventors of flight. The fact that the "thrust levers" sat on the "throttle
stand" didn't even phase these words-smiths. So one old geezer (who flew
like a bird) failed and went back to the last aircraft to eke out his
existence. What a waste.
The airline used to serve a small container called, "for your
salad".
Not what it is, but what it's for. I wonder what they would call toilet
paper?
As a lifetime birdman, I figure it's what fellow pilots call it,
not what some upwardly-mobile scrambler dubs it. So it's "throttle" for the
Go-lever, and "essential" for what's needed. Endurance is for law students.
Just my $.02..........
Ferg Europa A064
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Thanks for your replies.
The Ledtronics (and others) do not satisfy the FAA requirements regarding luminosity,
angle, or color.
The one I am prototyping has 40 SMD LEDs in the correct geometry, a voltage regulator
and all the right stuff. The parts and PCB cost about $50. Assembled it
would cost $120. No housing or bayonet connector...you'd have to invent your
own.
Rob Housman reports that Whelan charges $428.95 for their LED tail light. (Actually
not an unreasonable price.)
As a kit I would still have to charge $100 shipping included. Is this reasonable?
You must have some skill in small surface mount electronic assembly, and probably
a stereo microscope. It has 40 SMD LEDs, 20 1210-size resistors, a 317
voltage regulator chip, a few more SMD caps and resistors, and a few minor odds
and ends all on a 1.25" X 1.90" PCB. This may be hard for some, but I would
guarantee that a person with reasonable soldering skill will have no problem.
Interested? Contact me off line. I will build the first of these after Xmas.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe and Carole Tuminello <mouseysf(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Re: citabria triiong overvoltage relay |
My mechanic said it is a solid state regulator and that if it was that it
would simply go all together not act intermitent. I put the new battery in
and it still did it, but less frequently. Does that make sense about solid
state regulators? I'm pretty frustrated. Looks like all I have left to
replace now is the regulator and it will all be new.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: citabria triiong overvoltage relay
>
> >
> >
> >Matt,
> >Thanks the old battery is fine. It reads the full voltage static, I think
> >12.8 volts. Somebody else having a similar problem says it is most likely
> >the old over voltage relay causing nuisance trips. We shall see.
> >Thank you
> >Joe
> >----- Original Message -----
> > > >>by wx30. The ampmeter jumps up and overvolts cuttign off the
alternator.
> > > >>Resest it and it does it again and again. I have a new alternator,
> > > >>only 3 years old. The battery is 3 years old also and has plenty of
> > > >>cranking power. Someone is trying to convince me the battery has a
> > > >>shorted cell.,
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >Before I end up replacing the battery and voltage regulator, does
anyone
> >have any ideas?
>
> The only form of battery condition that can make
> the system unstable to the degree that an ov protection
> system trips is an OPEN battery. If it started
> your engine then this possibility is eliminated.
>
> If you get spikes in the ammeter the same time the ov trips,
> then there is a problem with the regulator -OR- wiring that
> hooks up the regulator/field wiring. I had a similar problem
> with an airplane that was getting transient shorts between the
> field and b-leads attached to the alternator. There have
> been situations where pieces came loose inside an alternator
> and allowed it to go into runaway mode but this is VERY rare.
>
> I think Dave S. commented on this and I agree that the problem
> seems most likely to reside in your regulator.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen Johnson" <spjohnsn(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: citabria triiong overvoltage relay |
A good thing to do would be to get a portable oscilloscope and take a look
at the battery voltage to see how clean it is. A bad alternator with some
diodes blown will cause ripple in the voltage which can trip the overvoltage
relay.
Steve Johnson
building RV-8
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe and Carole Tuminello" <mouseysf(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: citabria triiong overvoltage relay
>
> My mechanic said id is a solid state regulator and that if it was that it
> would simply go all together not act intermitent. I put the new battery in
> and it still did it, but less frequently.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: citabria triiong overvoltage relay
>
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >Matt,
> > >Thanks the old battery is fine. It reads the full voltage static, I
think
> > >12.8 volts. Somebody else having a similar problem says it is most
likely
> > >the old over voltage relay causing nuisance trips. We shall see.
> > >Thank you
> > >Joe
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > > > >>by wx30. The ampmeter jumps up and overvolts cuttign off the
> alternator.
> > > > >>Resest it and it does it again and again. I have a new alternator,
> > > > >>only 3 years old. The battery is 3 years old also and has plenty
of
> > > > >>cranking power. Someone is trying to convince me the battery has a
> > > > >>shorted cell.,
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >Before I end up replacing the battery and voltage regulator, does
> anyone
> > >have any ideas?
> >
> > The only form of battery condition that can make
> > the system unstable to the degree that an ov protection
> > system trips is an OPEN battery. If it started
> > your engine then this possibility is eliminated.
> >
> > If you get spikes in the ammeter the same time the ov trips,
> > then there is a problem with the regulator -OR- wiring that
> > hooks up the regulator/field wiring. I had a similar problem
> > with an airplane that was getting transient shorts between the
> > field and b-leads attached to the alternator. There have
> > been situations where pieces came loose inside an alternator
> > and allowed it to go into runaway mode but this is VERY rare.
> >
> > I think Dave S. commented on this and I agree that the problem
> > seems most likely to reside in your regulator.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh(at)bellsouth.net> |
Ferg:
The 3M name on the tube is...Fire Barrier CP 25WB+ Caulk. It's latex based.
The 3M I.D. # is 98-0400-5379-9.
We have 6 Home Depots here in the Memphis area and I found the caulk at 5 of
them. Don't look in the paint section. The only place that I've found it
is in electrical section. And, it's usually hidden pretty well. One store
had it in the shipping box on the floor level. If you need any more info
off the tube drop a note.
Bill
Skybolt
> Bill:
> Can you spec the exact product? Here, Home Deepot have
> everything but. I would like to order the exact copy, as there is lots of
> "just-as-good" material on the shelves to flog.
> Ferg
> Europa A064
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 12/21/2002 3:46:12 PM Central Standard Time,
n744bh(at)bellsouth.net writes:
>
> The 3M name on the tube is...Fire Barrier CP 25WB+ Caulk. It's latex
> based.
> The 3M I.D. # is 98-0400-5379-9.
> We have 6 Home Depots here in the Memphis area and I found the caulk at 5
> of
> them. Don't look in the paint section. The only place that I've found it
> is in electrical section. And, it's usually hidden pretty well. One store
> had it in the shipping box on the floor level. If you need any more info
> off the tube drop a note.
>
Bill:
In reviewing the mail today, I noticed the "Memphis area". Do you live
in the Memphis area? I am building a Lancair ES in Collierville. What are you
building?
ED
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 'Essential' bus |
>
>Bob,
> Compliments of the Season.
> In the topic of E-bus, allow me an opinion. Keep 'Essential'. I
>know the temptation to call something by its functional purpose, but that
>undoes all my 'mediaeval' training and experience.
> The management of my former airline (easy, now) raised hell when
>pilots trained in the 'old ways' called the "Thrust Levers" - throttles! My
>God, don't these people understand? Things are different now! Of course this
>was at the behest of Boeing - who have the temerity to think they are the
>inventors of flight. The fact that the "thrust levers" sat on the "throttle
>stand" didn't even phase these words-smiths. So one old geezer (who flew
>like a bird) failed and went back to the last aircraft to eke out his
>existence. What a waste.
> The airline used to serve a small container called, "for your
>salad".
>Not what it is, but what it's for. I wonder what they would call toilet
>paper?
> As a lifetime birdman, I figure it's what fellow pilots call it,
>not what some upwardly-mobile scrambler dubs it. So it's "throttle" for the
>Go-lever, and "essential" for what's needed. Endurance is for law students.
But would you call your vacuum pump a venturi? A fuel injector
a carburetor? A wet wing tank a bladder? A rotating beacon a strobe?
A GPS receiver an omni? Lots of features in our airplanes have
come and gone and I think it's safe to say were not saddened to
see many of them go.
Things "essential" are those that make the airplane come down
when they quit . . . if those are 'lectric things, then
run them from a battery bus . . . That way, when there are
bad smells that might have something to do with electrical
stuff, killing ALL master switches will not trade a
bad situation for a worse one.
Just as fiberglas, carbon fiber, epoxy and nc-cut-n-drilled
metal offer new paradigms in structures, I hope
what we do here offers new paradigms in the architecture
and operation of electrical systems. If I were to use
the word "essential bus" in conversation with one of the
ol' gray-beards in flight test, he would nod his head and
assume I was talking about HIS personal experience base when in
fact, there is a BIG difference in our respective understanding.
For him, meeting an FAA notion of 30 minute of battery power
to get on the ground is a tried, true and ACCEPTABLE
way to think about electrical systems. When I say "endurance
bus" his eyes widen and he wonders what the hell I'm talking
about. NOW . . . that I have his attention, instead of
discussing the less-than-30-minutes interval it takes
for a tense situation to become an emergency, we can
discuss the notion of calmly, deliberately and comfortably
driving on to airport of original intended destination.
I respectfully suggest my friend, that IS an endurance bus.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax 912S Voltage Reg Wiring, |
>
> >
>
>The light goes on when the voltage is below a fixed value. To date I have
>been unable to perform a measurement for this actual value.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Gilles
Gilles, I would be interested in knowing what you
find out about this light. Rotax folks don't know.
The regulator/rectifier is built for them by
a third party . . . they barely know how to hook
it up and they sure don't understand how it works.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LASAR ignition wiring |
>
>
>How does one wire the p-leads for a LASAR ignition? I want to use toggle
>switches for each magneto and a push-button starter. The blue and green
>wires from the LASAR low voltage control harness do not appear to be
>shielded and do not go directly to a magneto, instead they go to the
>controller box. I realize that each magneto needs to be grounded to be
>"off," but how does one do this with a LASAR?
> Should I use a shielded
>p-lead wire with the primary wire attached to terminal 3 of a
>single-pole switch and the wire's shielding connected to both terminal 2
>AND to panel ground? The other end of each shielded wire would not be
>grounded to a magneto or engine ground (single-point ground, but with a
>short length of shielded wire). The other end of the primary wire would
>be spliced to the blue or green harness wire. Is there a better way? Is
>a shielded p-lead even needed with the LASAR? Should I shorten the
>non-shielded harness wires to reduce the chance of noise or leave them
>be (about 6 feet long) and just use a short length of shielded wire to
>get past the firewall? Lots of questions, and I haven't even gotten to
>the CHT part yet. Can someone direct me to a wiring diagram for the
>LASAR using toggle switches instead of a key switch?
How did you come into the hardware? No installation manual?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: System Planning |
>
> > "Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily." .... "when you
> have two
> > competing theories which make exactly the same predictions,
> > the one that is simpler is the better."
>
>...which is exactly why I am working at convincing myself that having a
>triple bus
>(main/"e"/batt) system is an advantage over dual (main/batt) - We're
>talking about a simple
>day/nite VFR experimental where total circuits requiring shutdown number
>about 3 to 5
>(alternator, comm, xpndr, wing leveler, stereo, ?) for day ops, or about 7
>to 9 (add strobes,
>pos, panel lites, maybe landing lites if on) for nite. My RV certainly
>ain't no full-dress
>Lancair IVP (darn!) or Convair 340. Would it not be prudent to shut off
>anything on the
>E-bus if a problem is encountered before selecting "Alternate
>Feed"? ("...and just what did
>I hook to that E-bus? Best shut it all off anyway to be sure...")
>
>What started this was trying to determine appropriate placement of
>circuits to the
>appropriate bus. Much is no-brainerism- outside lights, wing lever,
>stereo, coffee pot:
>Main!! Comm, Engine monitor, EFIS, GPS, panel lights: easy-
>"E-bus"!! ...or is it? What
>about flaps?
The only times you wouldn't have flaps available at the
end of a sans alternator flight are (1) if the battery were
undersized or under-maintained and ran down completely in
the max-endurance mode or (2) you've lost the battery
contactor and the alternator along with it in which case you
need to land without flaps. Of course, flap motors, switches
and other devices in the wiring have been known to fail
too . . . this isn't JUST about where to hang things for
alternator-out operations, it's about considering EVERY
way in which a system may become unavailable to you and
having a plan to deal with it.
>Elevator trim?
Trims are very low current loads and intermittent too.
You are most likely to have a failure during trimmed flight.
Continuing to landing with the aircraft trimmed this way
shouldn't be a big deal . . . if it is a big deal, what
are your plans for when the trim motor craps? But running
trim from the e-bus doesn't represent a large energy
budget.
>Transponder?
Transponder is #1 communications tool in a minimum power mode
requiring max pilot attention. Squawk 7600 and get on with
your job. When you've got the airport in sight and comfortable
arrival is assured, call the tower and say, "Gee the radio
just came back on line . . . we're in good shape, no
emergency to declare, got information November, would
like a clearance to land."
>Fuel pump?
Does your airplane fall down when the pump isn't working,
run it from the battery bus.
> What are the important criteria to
>examine? I prefer solid rationale to "best guess", and as I am a low time
>pilot and first
>time builder, any guidance would be most appreciated! Got any simple
>rules this lowly
>grasshopper can abide by? Or better yet, just give me a simple list-
>(butcha better be able
>to tell me WHY what stuff goes WHERE!)
Tell yourself. This is an exercise in deducing all the
ways that having or not having a particular piece of equipment
will affect the flight . . . and having a plan for dealing
with it needs to be done before you put first light
under the wheels.
It's not hard if you understand the role that each piece of
equipment plays in the grand scheme of things. You didn't need
to know much about it to get through the holy-watered flight
school syllabus . . .
Battery busses are (1) for things that keep the powered airplane from
behaving
like an glider even when alternator and battery switches are OFF and (2)
for powering things that need to be operated on the ground while the
airplane
is being loaded and/or stored like clocks, courtesy lights, radio memories,
etc.
Endurance busses are for goodies needed to get from point A to point B even
if (1) the alternator has quit or (2) the main battery contactor has quit.
The e-bus isn't just for load reduction convenience, it has dual supply
paths
so that goodies powered therefrom work even when the normal feed-path has
opened up for whatever reason. The e-bus can carry MORE than minimal
goodies
for sweat-free termination of flight but (1) additional goodies NOT needed
during max-endurance flight need to have their own power switches so that
they can be independently turned and (2) e-bus alternate feed path needs
to be designed to carry a full-up e-bus load even though you don't plan to
operate it fully loaded in the max-endurance mode.
>Thanks for your patience, opinions and for just being here- can't imagine
>doing this alone-
>And the best Holiday Wishes to all on the A-list!!
No problem, that's what were ALL here for. Your decisions are based on
a collection of simple-ideas assembled in a manner that fits your
vision of a finished product. It might look complicated 'cause there's
lots of ideas . . . but taken one system at a time and dissected
down to the core concepts, it's a lot simpler than you think. We just
need to talk about it for awhile. When you are finished, the way
your airplane goes together will be based on your understanding
and needs and not upon a pile of anyone's recommendations or
pronouncements.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 14 Msgs - 12/21/02 |
> But would you call your vacuum pump a venturi? A fuel injector
> a carburetor? A wet wing tank a bladder? A rotating beacon a strobe?
> A GPS receiver an omni? Lots of features in our airplanes have
> come and gone and I think it's safe to say were not saddened to
> see many of them go.
Well, yes, I see your point. I'm not trying to put a name to
something which has gone, nor find fault with legitimate nomenclature. Let's
call a spade a spayed. It's just that the lever I mentioned is not a
throttle any more than it's a power control. But since many decades pilots
cave called it a throttle and I'm prepared to join the multitude to keep
word-smiths from changing things for personal gain. I didn't mean to include
you in that group!
> Things "essential" are those that make the airplane come down
> when they quit . . . if those are 'lectric things, then run them from
a battery bus . . . That way, when there are bad smells that might have
something to do with electrical stuff, killing ALL master switches will not
trade a bad situation for a worse one."
Quite right. I thought of putting the second 'essential' fuel
pump on the alternate battery, so that I can double the choice of power in
the event of either primary battery failure (remote I admit) or pump
breakdown. Since electrical power is vital to my engine I figured it was
more than an endurance item. Besides, I've made my placards......
"> I respectfully suggest my friend, that IS an endurance bus.> Bob .
."
It is unquestionably. You're the man.
Cheers, Ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax 912S Voltage Reg Wiring, |
----- Message d'origine -----
De : "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
:
Envoy : dimanche 22 dcembre 2002 18:14
Objet : Re: AeroElectric-List: Rotax 912S Voltage Reg Wiring,
>
>
> >
> > >
> >
> >The light goes on when the voltage is below a fixed value. To date I have
> >been unable to perform a measurement for this actual value.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Gilles
>
> Gilles, I would be interested in knowing what you
> find out about this light.
Not much at the moment, I'm afraid. Pilots and builders don't care much
about electricity, and the measurements I took are very partial.
> Rotax folks don't know.
> The regulator/rectifier is built for them by
> a third party . . . they barely know how to hook
> it up and they sure don't understand how it works.
The thing is made by DUCATI, a renowned motorcycle builder in Italy.
Unfortunately it has a poor reliability record among bikers, and many of
them replace it with Honda units. At least that is what I gathered from an
extensive research on the Internet.
And my Honda dealer friends know still less about their regulators....I'll
have a try at the DUCATI dealer.
Rotax litterature could shed some light on the operation of the rectifier/
regulator. They speak of SRCs, sense connections not to be severed,
etc...But I presume you already got the manuals ?
Something just occured to me. In case I could lay my hands on a
rectifier/regulator, are there any tests an ordinary builder could perform
on it to learn more with a 5 amps adjustable power supply ?
Any suggestions ?
Best wishes from France
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Piston Aircraft PFD's |
12/22/2002
A while back there were several postings on the subject of piston aircraft
PFD's (Primary Flight Displays) and the attempts to develop them, sell them,
and install them in our OBAM (Owner Built and Maintained) aircraft.
For further education on this subject I invite your attention to an article
on page 50 of the January 2003 issue of Flying magazine.
The article is entitled "Finally a PFD for Pistons" and it discusses the
Avidyne Flight Max Entegra along with some fundamental principles involved
in non rotating gyros.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Roy Glass or Mary Poteet <rlglass(at)alaska.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LASAR ignition wiring |
"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
>
>
> >
> >
> >How does one wire the p-leads for a LASAR ignition? I want to use toggle
> >switches for each magneto and a push-button starter. The blue and green
> >wires from the LASAR low voltage control harness do not appear to be
> >shielded and do not go directly to a magneto, instead they go to the
> >controller box. I realize that each magneto needs to be grounded to be
> >"off," but how does one do this with a LASAR?
>
> snip
>
> How did you come into the hardware? No installation manual?
>
> Bob . . .
>
The hardware came with my new Lycoming O-320 from Van's. The
instructions (service letter SL1-96) are for hacking into a certified
ship's existing ignition system and refer to splicing into the existing
p-leads which are connected to a key switch (ensuring that shielding on
the p-lead does not ground p-lead at splice and removing the jumper wire
in the key switch for the right mag). From John Huft (RV8 Pagosa
Springs, CO 28 hours flying with LASAR): "The blue and green wires are
simply grounded to turn the mags off, and left open to turn the mags on.
The magic box senses the ground and turns the mags off. There is not the
usual noise on these wires, because they are not P-leads at all. You can
cut these wires to whatever length is convienent. The cables from the
magic box to the mags are pre-prepared, and are not to be messed with."
Therefore, I plan to hook the green and blue wires to #3 terminals on
seperate single-pole switches, and a panel ground wire to each terminal
#2, and leave each terminal #1 open so that the down position is "off."
Wanting to get this stuff right because I don't like hot mags, frying
expensive gizmos, or radio noise.
roy, rv-6, firewall forward stuff, anchorage, ak
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LASAR ignition wiring |
>
>
>
>"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >How does one wire the p-leads for a LASAR ignition? I want to use toggle
> > >switches for each magneto and a push-button starter. The blue and green
> > >wires from the LASAR low voltage control harness do not appear to be
> > >shielded and do not go directly to a magneto, instead they go to the
> > >controller box. I realize that each magneto needs to be grounded to be
> > >"off," but how does one do this with a LASAR?
> >
> > snip
> >
> > How did you come into the hardware? No installation manual?
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
>
>The hardware came with my new Lycoming O-320 from Van's. The
>instructions (service letter SL1-96) are for hacking into a certified
>ship's existing ignition system and refer to splicing into the existing
>p-leads which are connected to a key switch (ensuring that shielding on
>the p-lead does not ground p-lead at splice and removing the jumper wire
>in the key switch for the right mag). From John Huft (RV8 Pagosa
>Springs, CO 28 hours flying with LASAR): "The blue and green wires are
>simply grounded to turn the mags off, and left open to turn the mags on.
>The magic box senses the ground and turns the mags off. There is not the
>usual noise on these wires, because they are not P-leads at all. You can
>cut these wires to whatever length is convienent. The cables from the
>magic box to the mags are pre-prepared, and are not to be messed with."
Found a copy of the service bulletin at
http://www.unisonindustries.com/pdf/marketing_literature/SL1-96(F).pdf
It's pretty clear that the ignition control leads are
configured so as to be transparent to the ignition switch
as to whether the ignition system is magneto or LASAR.
>Therefore, I plan to hook the green and blue wires to #3 terminals on
>seperate single-pole switches, and a panel ground wire to each terminal
>#2, and leave each terminal #1 open so that the down position is "off."
That ought to do it.
Here's some stuff I found about local aviation writer's
LASAR installation on his Cherokee 180 in Earl Long's
facility at Dead Cow International . .
http://www.avweb.com/articles/lasar1/
http://www.avweb.com/articles/lasar2/
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BillRVSIX(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Van's lighted gages |
Hello just wondering if anyone new how many watts or amps the light bulbs
draws in the vans lighted instruments (Fuel presser, oil press&temp, volts
and amps, tack) there is not any info on there web page. I need to size the
wire and circuit breaker on my drawing. Second question in Van's catalog the
ammeter dose not say if it is lighted has anyone installed one and is it
lighted all the others are. Thanks
Bill Higgins
Pembroke Ma
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Van's lighted gages |
In a message dated 12/22/02 4:51:07 PM Pacific Standard Time,
BillRVSIX(at)aol.com writes:
<< just wondering if anyone new how many watts or amps the light bulbs
draws in the vans lighted instruments (Fuel presser, oil press&temp, volts
and amps, tack) there is not any info on there web page. >>
Don't know about the others (but I'd bet they are all the same) but the
lights in Van's voltmeter draws 60 ma with from a 12 volt battery. Should be
pretty close to 50 ma at 14 volts. I checked the lights in several other
manufacturers instruments and they also drew 50 to 60 ma at 12 volts. Hope
this helps.
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, electrical (still)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom & Cathy Ervin" <tcervin(at)valkyrie.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Van's lighted gages |
The Amp Gauge is lighted.
Tom in Ohio
----- Original Message -----
From: <BillRVSIX(at)aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Van's lighted gages
>
> . Second question in Van's catalog the
> ammeter dose not say if it is lighted has anyone installed one and is it
> lighted all the others are. Thanks
>
> Bill Higgins
> Pembroke Ma
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: System Planning |
>
> > I'll be publishing drawings with the next revision for
> > adding a battery relay, a sort of mini-contactor
> > at the battery to handle e-bus loads in special cases.
>
>Bob, I'm curious why somebody would want/need that. Sounds like just an
>additional point of failure...when that realy goes, would the battery bus
>and/or e-bus be rendered useless? I'm just getting my feet wet here, so go
>easy on me... 8
No, only ONE of TWO feeds to the e-bus would be affected.
The normal feed is still intact. Adding the relay does
increase complexity in control of the alternate feed path
(1) One switch, one fuse, two pieces of wire versus (2) a
switch, fuse, diode, relay and four pieces of wire. The relay
is not known for stellar reliability but the one we need
is very lightly stressed an more robust than products we
grew up with.
Plastic airplanes are a bit less worrisome . . .
even under crash loads and deformations, the likelihood
of faulting wires to ground is low. Metal airplanes
are not so benign in this regard. In my metal airplane, an
e-bus alternate feed path fused at greater than 5A
would be relay controlled at the battery bus . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Firewall Penetrations |
| From: | Jack Haviland <jgh(at)iavbbs.com> |
The label on the 3M fire stop caulk available in the electrical
department of Home Depot stores indicates it is water based material
that remains flexible and expands when subjected to heat. Sounds great
for immobilizing electrical cables where they pass through firewall
grommets but silicone based, high temperature Permatex RTV is reported
to have similar flexibility and heat resistance properties. Is there a
safety related reason for choosing one over the other? Has anybody
found measured data on the flame resistance of the two alternatives?
I did not find it on the company websites.
Is there a safety related reason for choosing rubber grommets over
plastic snap-in bushings? The latter would seem to offer better
mechanical protection to the cable. Has anybody found asbestos based
grommets?
Finally, if the cable is already protected by a firewall grommet and
some type of flexible "immobilizing caulk", does the addition of a
stainless fire shield (with another hole in it that the cable must pass
through and be isolated from) provide significant added protection?
Jack H.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Wilson <pwilson(at)climber.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Penetrations |
Jack,
I happened to be fabricating the Bingellis firewall grommets when
this thread started and was frustrated trying to find the asbestos
material. What I am using scrap are Fiberfrax disks in layers leaving
the SS foil in place as further protection to accomplish the same
purpose. I am going to use plain old rubber grommets for mechanical
protection at the firewall penetration backed up with red silicone
for an air tight seal.
It appears to be over-kill based on the planes I have examined
around the airport. But My fix should give significant fire
protection.
Paul
===========
>
>The label on the 3M fire stop caulk available in the electrical
>department of Home Depot stores indicates it is water based material
>that remains flexible and expands when subjected to heat. Sounds great
>for immobilizing electrical cables where they pass through firewall
>grommets but silicone based, high temperature Permatex RTV is reported
>to have similar flexibility and heat resistance properties. Is there a
>safety related reason for choosing one over the other? Has anybody
>found measured data on the flame resistance of the two alternatives?
>I did not find it on the company websites.
>
>Is there a safety related reason for choosing rubber grommets over
>plastic snap-in bushings? The latter would seem to offer better
>mechanical protection to the cable. Has anybody found asbestos based
>grommets?
>
>Finally, if the cable is already protected by a firewall grommet and
>some type of flexible "immobilizing caulk", does the addition of a
>stainless fire shield (with another hole in it that the cable must pass
>through and be isolated from) provide significant added protection?
>
>Jack H.
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerzy Krasinski <krasins(at)ceat.okstate.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Penetrations |
Chris,
You are right. I should have said "silicone RTV rubber" rather than
"RTV rubber".
Most of these RTV silicones would be fine for the application, but to
make sure I would suggest to make a test with a torch. If it melts and
burns smoking as most of carbon based rubbers will do, I would not
consider it good. If it decomposes without melting, packing the tube
with white powdery stuff, it should be fine.
One possible problem with most popular RTV silicones is that during
curing they release corrosive acetic acid. That should not affect
stainless steel and a high quality wire insulation like teflon, but
might start corrosion on open surfaces of corrosion nonresistant metals
in contact with the stuff or even around. However, there are many
versions of RTV silicones that are non corrosive.
Jerzy
CBFLESHREN(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> " RTV is a silicone rubber. At high temperature it decomposes
>into quartz powder,"
>
> Not trying to step on toes here but I believe "RTV" (Room Temperature
>Vulcanizing) is simply a means by which many compositions "set" or "cure".
>Granted there are "silicone rubbers" that "set" in this fashion. However,
>most of the MANY different types of caulks (latex etc) at the hardware stores
>do too ! Lastly, clearly not all of these would result in "quartz" if burned
>. Just felt like clarifying- Happy Holidays to all . Chris
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Stucklen" <wstucklen1(at)cox.net> |
From: "Ronald A. Cox" <racox(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 12/20/02
Listers,
The concept of marking the inboard edge of the ailerons with flap position settings
works quite well. When i changed from mechanical flaps to electric flaps
on my RV-6A, I marked the ailerons before I installed the electric system (
I wanted to make sure that the positions were the same...). It worked wel for
the nine years I flew the plane, and is still working out OK for the new owner..
When people ask me what I do when it gets dark outside and I caouldn't see
the markings, I tell them, that if you really need to know where the flaps are
after dark, you sholdn't be flying after dark..... Fly often, and know your
aircrafts flying characteristics. If you really know them, you don't need to
know where the flaps are positioned.....
Fred Stucklen
RV-6A
Over 2000 hours of safe flying.....
Working to finish the new RV-6A by this summer....
Why, on an airplane like an RV, or Glasair, etc., would one need a flap
indicator???
You can look out the window and see the flaps, can't you? Another thing
I'd
think one could easily do without, without losing anything.
A couple of little lines on the flap at various extension points where the
flaps extend from the trailing edge, and you're all set.
I can't think of a situation where the precise flap setting is of any real
use to the pilot. You're either "flaps up" or "some flaps", "more flaps"
and "all flaps", right?
More K.I.S.S. it would seem to me.
Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 12/23/2002 2:56:54 AM Eastern Standard Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: Roy Glass or Mary Poteet
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: LASAR ignition wiring
<>
12/23/2002
Hello Roy, Sounds like deja vu all over again. I bought a Unison SlickStart
starting vibrator for my TCM IO-240 B9B powered KIS TR-1. Every bit of
information in the Unison installation instruction (SL2-96) was couched in
terms of "take an existing ignition system like this and modify it like so".
If one didn't have an existing system to modify or to reverse engineer so
that one could understand how the SlickStart unit functioned there was
absolutely no way to know how to wire it.
I managed to get some initial erroneous information from Unison (probably
provided by some marketing type) and wired my system up wrong. Being a
skeptical type I continued to probe Unison and finally got what seems correct
(and totally different) wiring information.
Let me suggest two sources within Unison that may be of further help to you
and others. One is Adam Mohler, Unison GA representative. He can be reached
at 904-739-4068 or at <>. The other is Harry
Fenton. Try reaching him at 815-965-4700. At one time his email was
<>
Harry has an excellent article in the November 2002 issue of Aircraft
Maintenance Technology magazine on installing the SlickStart. He may have
written something similar for the Lasar system.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
PS: Unison faithfully sends me a bill for $30 every year to renew my
subscription to the Unison Industries F-1100 Master Service Manual. They
always cash my check, but the letter that I include with the check that asks
questions like "When are you going to include information on a fielded item
that is not yet in your manual?" or point out that there are missing part
numbers and erroneous information in the current manual never gets a response.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James E. Clark" <jclark(at)conterra.com> |
| Subject: | Has this list been dormant for five days? |
Have there really been no posts to this list since December 23rd? Or am I
not getting stuff?
Is there anyone who has received anything since 12/23/02 (10:04PM)?
I know we are middle of the holidays but I was just wondering.
James
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | doug ochsner <dnochsner(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Has this list been dormant for five days? |
Jim:I haven't received anything either.Thought I had
been bounced from the list.
--- "James E. Clark" wrote:
> Clark"
>
>
> Have there really been no posts to this list since
> December 23rd? Or am I
> not getting stuff?
>
> Is there anyone who has received anything since
> 12/23/02 (10:04PM)?
>
> I know we are middle of the holidays but I was just
> wondering.
>
>
> James
>
>
>
> Click on the
> this
> generous
> _->
> -
> Contributions
> any other
> Forums.
>
> latest messages.
> List members.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
>
Digests:http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Has this list been dormant for five days? |
In a message dated 12/29/02 9:49:35 AM Central Standard Time,
jclark(at)conterra.com writes:
> I know we are middle of the holidays but I was just wondering.
>
Dead as a Door Nail here!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Mills <courierboy(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Has this list been dormant for five days? |
>
>
>James, I went and re-subscribed yesterday thinking I had somehow been
>dropped from the list?
>
>Tom in Ohio
Hi all -
I went to:
http://www.matronics.com/browse/aeroelectric-list
and found there had been no traffic for six days.
Thanks Matt -
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
What are you folks using for toggle switch spacing on your panels? Also,
anyone want to comment on how and why they grouped their switches?
I'm using two toggles for mags/start and am generally following Z-11.
After a very quiet week on this list, maybe this will get some chatter going
and I can learn something I really need to know.
TIA for your thoughts.
Robert Dicksom
RV-6A electrical
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Reid" <Reid(at)Siebert.com> |
| Subject: | A Question to End the Holiday Doldrums |
If I wire a new 12-volt, 300-cranking amp battery
in series with a new 12-volt, 1000-cranking amp battery,
how many 24-volt cranking amps will be available for use?
Reid Siebert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randy Pflanzer <F1Rocket(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: A Question to End the Holiday Doldrums |
Uh....enough so that the prop will spin fast enough for powered flight
with the ignition off???
Sure puts my 17 AH battery to shame.
Randy
(F1 Rocket #95)
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/f1rocket/
----- Original Message -----
From: Reid <Reid(at)Siebert.com>
Date: Monday, December 30, 2002 9:24 am
Subject: AeroElectric-List: A Question to End the Holiday Doldrums
>
>
> If I wire a new 12-volt, 300-cranking amp battery
> in series with a new 12-volt, 1000-cranking amp battery,
> how many 24-volt cranking amps will be available for use?
>
> Reid Siebert
>
>
> _-
>
=======================================================================_
> _-> _-
>
======================================================================_-
= - The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
> _-
>
======================================================================_-
= !! NEWish !!
> _-
>
======================================================================_-
= List Related Information
> _-
> ======================================================================
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Kramer" <edkramer(at)Prodigy.net> |
List,
I have a question. My original plan was to use the airframe as the ground for
things such as the strobe power supply, nav-lights ect. I've been told radio
noise can be eliminated by running a ground wire directly from the unit to the
firewall. If this is true what kind of a ground wire is used? (just insulated
or must it be shielded).
Thanks!
Ed Kramer
West Seneca, NY
Zenith CH 701
edkramer(at)prodigy.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: A Question to End the Holiday Doldrums |
In a message dated 12/30/2002 9:28:40 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Reid(at)Siebert.com writes:
>
> If I wire a new 12-volt, 300-cranking amp battery
> in series with a new 12-volt, 1000-cranking amp battery,
> how many 24-volt cranking amps will be available for use?
>
> Reid Siebert
>
>
Reid, As you state: "in series" you will have only the Max capacity of the
smaller battery. You will have 300 amps available at 24 volts. After that,
the voltage will fall to something far less than 24 V and nearly 12 V for the
duration of the capacity of the 1000 amp battery.
This configuration will likely destroy the 300 amp battery. In series, once
the 300 amp battery's charge is depleted, the load current of the larger
battery will try to reverse charge the depleted battery. Not good at all!
John P. Marzluf
Columbus, Ohio
Outback, (out back in the garage)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | A Question to End the Holiday Doldrums |
I believe your 17AH battery can deliver 300 cranking amps as well. The
two batteries in series will be limited by the 300 cranking amp battery,
so your 17AH battery has nothing to be ashamed of.
David Swartzendruber
Wichita
>
> Uh....enough so that the prop will spin fast enough for powered flight
> with the ignition off???
>
> Sure puts my 17 AH battery to shame.
>
> Randy
> (F1 Rocket #95)
> http://mywebpages.comcast.net/f1rocket/
> >
> > If I wire a new 12-volt, 300-cranking amp battery
> > in series with a new 12-volt, 1000-cranking amp battery,
> > how many 24-volt cranking amps will be available for use?
> >
> > Reid Siebert
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: A Question to End the Holiday Doldrums |
In a message dated 12/30/2002 9:28:40 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Reid(at)Siebert.com writes:
>
> If I wire a new 12-volt, 300-cranking amp battery
> in series with a new 12-volt, 1000-cranking amp battery,
> how many 24-volt cranking amps will be available for use?
>
> Reid Siebert
>
>
Extreme caution should be exercised when charging or discharging any
batteries in series! Even innocent child's toys can catch fire by mixing
"drycell" batteries of different chemistry/capacity/characteristics!
John P. Marzluf
Columbus, Ohio
Outback, (out back in the garage)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
I drilled mine the other day...0.8 inches on center.
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On
> Behalf Of Robert Dickson
> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 9:02 AM
> To: Aeroelectric List
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: toggle spacing
>
>
> --> <robert@thenews-journal.com>
>
> What are you folks using for toggle switch spacing on your
> panels? Also,
> anyone want to comment on how and why they grouped their switches?
>
> I'm using two toggles for mags/start and am generally following Z-11.
>
> After a very quiet week on this list, maybe this will get
> some chatter going and I can learn something I really need to know.
>
> TIA for your thoughts.
>
> Robert Dicksom
> RV-6A electrical
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie and Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: A Question to End the Holiday Doldrums |
Reid wrote:
>
>
> If I wire a new 12-volt, 300-cranking amp battery
> in series with a new 12-volt, 1000-cranking amp battery,
> how many 24-volt cranking amps will be available for use?
>
> Reid Siebert
>
300
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: toggle spacing |
><robert@thenews-journal.com>
>
>What are you folks using for toggle switch spacing on your panels? Also,
>anyone want to comment on how and why they grouped their switches?
>
>I'm using two toggles for mags/start and am generally following Z-11.
>
>After a very quiet week on this list, maybe this will get some chatter going
>and I can learn something I really need to know.
I use .8" spacing for the switches we sell. I've published
some exemplar layouts for switch panels at
http://216.55.140.222/temp//Switches.pdf
If the switches go in a single row, I try to organize
switches used pre/post-flight separate from those used
in flight. Two row switch panels might put the engine
and DC power switches above those used for lighting
and other functions likely to be used en route.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Over-voltage protection (again) |
In reading all the submissions about over-voltage protection I have come up
with a question. It is based on the assumption that the only failure that
can cause an over-voltage condition is that of the voltage regulator,
assuming that the regulator is external or otherwise not internally powered.
The typical over-voltage protection circuit is in series with the regulator
and disconnects the power feed to the field. I'm assuming that the
protection device could be on either side of the regulator. Question: Why
not just install a second regulator in series with the first? The second
one could be adjusted to a somewhat higher voltage than the first one and
could be designed to provide an output for a warning light if it came on
line. Therefore, a (primary) regulator failure would result in a system
voltage of, say, 15 volts instead of 14 and a warning indicator. Nothing
would have to be done by the pilot and he could complete his flight without
worry of running out of battery. This would seem like a more elegant
solution than to just kill the alternator if the voltage regulator fails,
which only replaces one emergency with another less urgent one.
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Airframe ground |
>
>List,
> I have a question. My original plan was to use the airframe as the
> ground for things such as the strobe power supply, nav-lights ect. I've
> been told radio noise can be eliminated by running a ground wire directly
> from the unit to the firewall. If this is true what kind of a ground wire
> is used? (just insulated or must it be shielded).
You use the same wire to "ground" things as you use
to "power" things . . . shielded wire is used only
when the installation instructions for the device
call for it.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CBFLESHREN(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: toggle spacing |
In a message dated 12/30/2002 9:04:02 AM Eastern Standard Time,
robert@thenews-journal.com writes:
> >What are you folks using for toggle switch spacing on your panels?
Hi Robert, assuming you are not in dire need of EVERY square millimeter
of your panel space, the most relevant affect dictating minimum spacing
(since you're not building a Certificated A/C) on the front of the panel is
your finger size/length. Unless you want to make the concerted effort of
using only the tip of your index finger & thumb, locate your switches at
least far enough apart so you can comfortably cycle the switches without
cycling it's neighbor . You can "slot" a piece of scrap material, install
three switches in the slot, chuck it up in your vice & cycle the middle
switch in a comfortable manner. Try left & right hands. At least a few hairs
greater distance than it takes to not disturb switches 1 and 3 is your
minimum clearance. Obviously switch type can limit spacing behind the panel
(i.e. a typical 4 pole toggle switch is 1.5" wide). Rocker type switches are
typically smaller & selected with just a finger tip so they are often the
choice for tighter spacing. Wire routing & the way the wires attach to the
switch can also influence spacing. At a minimum the switches should never
touch each other behind the panel.
> Also, anyone want to comment on how and why they grouped their
switches?
In turbulence you don't want to have to actually read what a given switch's
function is. If you have 12 similar switches in a row , you will have a hard
time actually counting "5" from either end. So! Grouping "choices" are only
limited by your imagination. Landing, taxi, strobe and nav (position) lights
would be a logical "group" separated from a continuing "row" by at least one
switch hole spacing being blank. Longer "rows" of switches are dealt with by
occasionally installing a switch with a differently designed lever or any one
of a variety switch guards or at least a different color. This way you can
quickly count 2 from the right of "this" switch or 3 from the left of that
switch . Obviously never include batt master or buss switches or fuel boost
or transfer pump switches where they could possibly be confused with anything
else !
I have not checked lately but I'm sure Bob addresses all of this somewhere
in the "Connection" publication. I think that's where I learned it ! Hope my
2 cent's worth is helpful .
Good luck Robert & Happy New Year ! Chris Fleshren
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Walter Casey <mikec(at)caseyspm.com> |
On page 17-9 of "Electrical System Reliability" Bob recommends an SD-20
20A backup alternator.
I can't find this alternator on the B&C web site.
Is this a discontinued item or what?
Best wishes
Walter
********************************************
* Walter Casey
*
* 6528 S. Oneida Ct. *
* Englewood, CO 80110-4617 USA *
* *
* Phone (303) 771-0815 *
* FAX (303) 220-1477 *
* eMail mikec(at)caseyspm.com *
********************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Whollo80(at)aol.com |
I'm using a Garmin 90 and sometimes lose coverage on cloudy days. Would using
one of the externally mounted antennas improve my coverage? Everything that I
see in Aircraft Spruce is a little bit on the expensive side. Any thoughts?
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: GPS Antennas |
In a message dated 12/30/02 7:36:06 PM Central Standard Time,
Whollo80(at)aol.com writes:
> I'm using a Garmin 90 and sometimes lose coverage on cloudy days. Would
> using
> one of the externally mounted antennas improve my coverage? Everything that
> I
> see in Aircraft Spruce is a little bit on the expensive side. Any thoughts?
Good Evening Bill,
The clouds should have absolutely nothing to do with your GPS coverage.
However, getting a full view of the sky is always a good idea. The 90 was a
good unit in it's day and still has the capability of providing useful
information, but the technology curve is still rising quite steeply on such
equipment. You might consider upgrading to something like the Garmin 196.
Any remote antenna that will allow a better view of the sky will make the 90
work a bit better. I don't know whether an active antenna will help with the
90 or not, but why don't you call the Garmin service number? I have found
them to be easy to get hold of and full of good information.
I added an active antenna for use with my Trimble 2000 Approach Plus. That
old antique had it's performance noticeably improved by the addition.
Look up Garmin at: www.garmin.com
They have data there as to the phone numbers to call.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Whollo80(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: GPS Antennas |
Thanks Bob, like always you are a great help.
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS Antennas |
I bought a remote amplified antenna from GPSGeek on
eBay. 20$ and it performs as well as my other remote
Garmin amplified antenna (I have one in each car).
Michel
--- BobsV35B(at)aol.com wrote:
> BobsV35B(at)aol.com
>
> In a message dated 12/30/02 7:36:06 PM Central
> Standard Time,
> Whollo80(at)aol.com writes:
>
> > I'm using a Garmin 90 and sometimes lose coverage
> on cloudy days. Would
> > using
> > one of the externally mounted antennas improve my
> coverage? Everything that
> > I
> > see in Aircraft Spruce is a little bit on the
> expensive side. Any thoughts?
>
> Good Evening Bill,
>
> The clouds should have absolutely nothing to do with
> your GPS coverage.
> However, getting a full view of the sky is always a
> good idea. The 90 was a
> good unit in it's day and still has the capability
> of providing useful
> information, but the technology curve is still
> rising quite steeply on such
> equipment. You might consider upgrading to something
> like the Garmin 196.
>
> Any remote antenna that will allow a better view of
> the sky will make the 90
> work a bit better. I don't know whether an active
> antenna will help with the
> 90 or not, but why don't you call the Garmin service
> number? I have found
> them to be easy to get hold of and full of good
> information.
>
> I added an active antenna for use with my Trimble
> 2000 Approach Plus. That
> old antique had it's performance noticeably improved
> by the addition.
>
> Look up Garmin at: HREF="www.garmin.com">www.garmin.com
>
> They have data there as to the phone numbers to
> call.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
>
>
>
> Click on the
> this
> generous
> _->
> -
> Contributions
> any other
> Forums.
>
> latest messages.
> List members.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
>
Digests:http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> 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
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Perry" <eperry(at)san.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Checking the crowbar OV module |
Is there any convenient way to check the OV module for proper operation?
Ed Perry
eperry(at)san.rr.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Checking the crowbar OV module |
>
>Is there any convenient way to check the OV module for proper operation?
>Ed Perry
>eperry(at)san.rr.com
See notes section of
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/crowbar.pdf
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>On page 17-9 of "Electrical System Reliability" Bob recommends an SD-20
>20A backup alternator.
>I can't find this alternator on the B&C web site.
>Is this a discontinued item or what?
>Best wishes
>Walter
Try
http://www.bandcspecialty.com/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?2X358218
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>On page 17-9 of "Electrical System Reliability" Bob recommends an SD-20
>20A backup alternator.
>I can't find this alternator on the B&C web site.
>Is this a discontinued item or what?
>Best wishes
>Walter
On other pages I show an SD-8 which is considerably less
expensive and lighter . . . are you sure you NEED one
as big as the SD-20?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Kellar" <rkellar(at)attbi.com> |
Thank you for you quick response. I missed the part about the breaker in
the instructions. I'll install a breaker and fly some more and then let you
know here on the list. Re: Voltage before the fuse blows...I am too busy
flying the takeoff to notice. I'll bring a passenger to monitor this value.
Bob Kellar
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: 10179 Kellar
> >Below is the result of your inquiry. It was submitted by
> >Robert Kellar (rkellar(at)attbi.com) on Sunday, December 29, 2002 at
22:51:40
>
> >
> >Sunday, December 29, 2002
> >
> >Robert Kellar
> >
> >,
> >Email: rkellar(at)attbi.com
> >Comments/Questions: I am using your voltage regulator LR3B-14 in my
> >RV6. Purchased 2 years ago. Worked wonderfully until 2 months ago. On
> >multiple occasions the 5A fuse from the bus to the master switch to
> >terminal 6 blows.
>
> This fuse should have been a circuit breaker . . . all of our
> installation drawings show a breaker used with any form of
> crowbar overvoltage protection.
>
> > When not blown the voltage regulator functions perfectly 20+ amps
> > charge then cycles down to less than 5 amps for flight. Usually the
fuse
> > lasts for 1 hr or less and then with the next flight, as I take off the
> > fuse will blow and the blinking warning light comes on. Replace the
fuse
> > and I can fly again for awhile. I have inspected everything in the
panel,
> > wires, connections etc looking for a possible short or failure. My
> > question is...Is there anything internal to the unit that could cause
> > this intermittent failure? If not, I will continue my investigation of
> > all the wire out to the alternator looking for a possible intermittent
short.
>
> Do you have a voltmeter in the airplane? What does it read
> just before the ov system trips?
>
> > Thank you for your response and all the help provided on the net and
in
> > your electical manual and diagrams.
>
> My pleasure sir.
>
> I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
> to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
> share the information with as many folks as possible.
> You can join at . . .
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
>
> Thanks!
>
> Bob . . .
>
> |---------------------------------------------------|
> | A lie can travel half way around the world while |
> | the truth is till putting on its shoes . . . |
> | -Mark Twain- |
> |---------------------------------------------------|
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Walter Casey <mikec(at)caseyspm.com> |
Thanks Bob,
No I am not sure. I have just started investigating.
Best wishes,
Walter
On Monday, December 30, 2002, at 10:12 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III
wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>> On page 17-9 of "Electrical System Reliability" Bob recommends an
>> SD-20
>> 20A backup alternator.
>> I can't find this alternator on the B&C web site.
>> Is this a discontinued item or what?
>> Best wishes
>> Walter
>
> On other pages I show an SD-8 which is considerably less
> expensive and lighter . . . are you sure you NEED one
> as big as the SD-20?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Recombinant Gas Batteries |
| From: | Walter Casey <mikec(at)caseyspm.com> |
In the literature Bob appears to recommend the RG batteries. The
problem is that I have searched both B&C and AircraftSpruce but can't
find the RG batteries.
Please help.
Walter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Recombinant Gas Batteries |
Hello Walter,
If you have a battery dealer or shop nearby. Go there and enquire about
"Glass Mat Technology batteries" Before I bought my Odyssey PC-680 from
http://www.Batteries4Everything.com I spent some time digging in my local
area. When I asked for information about RG batteries I got blank looks and
treated like a dolt. Eventually one of the salesman took pity on me and
informed me that the RG reference was "old" and that "GMT" was the new title
for what "old Bob" (;-)! refers to as RG batteries.
The local asking price for the Odyssey PC-680 was $200.00 Canadian. Needless
to say I went shopping on the net. Someone on the List told me to check out
the pricing at Batteries 4 Everything, their price was $62.55 US.
Surprisingly Van's price was much higher at $ 160.00 US!
Happy New Year Walter,
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Walter Casey" <mikec(at)caseyspm.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Recombinant Gas Batteries
>
> In the literature Bob appears to recommend the RG batteries. The
> problem is that I have searched both B&C and AircraftSpruce but can't
> find the RG batteries.
> Please help.
> Walter
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS Antennas |
Yes, the exterior antenna is a night and day difference... But, the suction
cup antennas that mount on the windshield will probably solve your problem
at lesser cost...
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: <Whollo80(at)aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
>
> I'm using a Garmin 90 and sometimes lose coverage on cloudy days. Would
using
> one of the externally mounted antennas improve my coverage? Everything
that I
> see in Aircraft Spruce is a little bit on the expensive side. Any
thoughts?
>
> Bill
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS Antennas |
Bob, I have to take exception to your statement that clouds make no
difference... A thick layer of clouds does absorb energy from the satellite
signals.. If you have a good antenna and therefore a good signal to noise
ratio you will not notice it... But if your receiver s/n ratio is marginal
for what ever reason, a few more dB of loss will make a difference...
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: <BobsV35B(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
>
> In a message dated 12/30/02 7:36:06 PM Central Standard Time,
> Whollo80(at)aol.com writes:
>
> > I'm using a Garmin 90 and sometimes lose coverage on cloudy days. Would
> > using
> > one of the externally mounted antennas improve my coverage? Everything
that
> > I
> > see in Aircraft Spruce is a little bit on the expensive side. Any
thoughts?
>
> Good Evening Bill,
>
> The clouds should have absolutely nothing to do with your GPS coverage.
> However, getting a full view of the sky is always a good idea. The 90 was
a
> good unit in it's day and still has the capability of providing useful
> information, but the technology curve is still rising quite steeply on
such
> equipment. You might consider upgrading to something like the Garmin 196.
>
> Any remote antenna that will allow a better view of the sky will make the
90
> work a bit better. I don't know whether an active antenna will help with
the
> 90 or not, but why don't you call the Garmin service number? I have found
> them to be easy to get hold of and full of good information.
>
> I added an active antenna for use with my Trimble 2000 Approach Plus.
That
> old antique had it's performance noticeably improved by the addition.
>
> Look up Garmin at: www.garmin.com
>
> They have data there as to the phone numbers to call.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | cranking amps vs. amp-hours |
<>
Just for the fun of it, I will take a crack at this. Don't use the actual
numbers in my explanation as they are just for example: The cranking amps
of a 12-volt battery is rated by taking a fully charged battery and putting
sufficient load on it to drop the voltage to a value of maybe 8 volts. This
has to be sustained for only a short time - 10 seconds perhaps. To measure
the amp-hour capacity the same fully charged battery has a relatively small
load, maybe 2 amps, applied and the battery voltage is measured. When it
drops to some value (10 volts?) the time is measured. Presumably you could
draw 2 amps of current from a 16 amp-hour battery for 8 hours before its
voltage dropped to 10 volts. As you can see, the two ratings quantify two
quite different attributes of a battery. The cranking amps measure how
energetically it will crank the engine and the amp-hour rating will tell you
how long the battery will last after the alternator fails. To optimize a
battery for maximum amp-hours you need lots of lead and lots of acid. To
optimize it for cranking amps you need lots of electrode surface area (like
by making the plates porous, reducing the amount of lead).
What happens when you put the "300-amp" and the "1,000-amp" batteries in
series? Presumably you would rate the cranking amps at 16 volts, given the
numbers above. The capability would be more than 300 amps as the 300 amp
battery could be pulled down below 8 volts, maybe 6 volts, at which time the
more powerful battery would be down to 10 volts. The total amperage would
then be something more than 300 amps, but probably not close to 1,000. I'd
guess 350 or 400. But what about capacity? You didn't say what the
amp-hour rating of each battery was. Presumably the 1,000-amp battery also
had the larger capacity. Certainly, as someone else replied, if you ran the
pair completely dead the smaller capacity battery would eventually be
charged in the reverse direction, but that's not really a horrible
condition.
Bottom line is that while combining two mis-matched batteries in series
isn't such a great idea, the biggest problem is that you aren't getting full
benefit from the larger of the two batteries, whether considering cranking
power in amps or capacity in amp-hours. And the battery life won't be
maximized as one of the batteries will go through more severe
charge/discharge cycles than the other.
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Recombinant Gas Batteries |
| From: | Walter Casey <mikec(at)caseyspm.com> |
Thanks Jim,
That was a great help.
Walter :-)
On Monday, December 30, 2002, at 02:33 AM, Jim Jewell wrote:
>
>
> Hello Walter,
>
> If you have a battery dealer or shop nearby. Go there and enquire about
> "Glass Mat Technology batteries" Before I bought my Odyssey PC-680
> from
> http://www.Batteries4Everything.com I spent some time digging in my
> local
> area. When I asked for information about RG batteries I got blank
> looks and
> treated like a dolt. Eventually one of the salesman took pity on me and
> informed me that the RG reference was "old" and that "GMT" was the new
> title
> for what "old Bob" (;-)! refers to as RG batteries.
> The local asking price for the Odyssey PC-680 was $200.00 Canadian.
> Needless
> to say I went shopping on the net. Someone on the List told me to
> check out
> the pricing at Batteries 4 Everything, their price was $62.55 US.
> Surprisingly Van's price was much higher at $ 160.00 US!
>
> Happy New Year Walter,
>
> Jim in Kelowna
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Walter Casey" <mikec(at)caseyspm.com>
> To:
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Recombinant Gas Batteries
>
>
>>
>>
>> In the literature Bob appears to recommend the RG batteries. The
>> problem is that I have searched both B&C and AircraftSpruce but can't
>> find the RG batteries.
>> Please help.
>> Walter
>>
>>
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-> _-
> ======================================================================
> _-
> ======================================================================
> _-
> ======================================================================
> _-
> ======================================================================
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: cranking amps vs. amp-hours |
Gary, good job at establishing the basics - I'll try to build on your
explanation, but I'm just going to focus on "cranking amps" only, since
"amphour capacity" is fairly unrelated (and didn't seem to be part of
the question anyways)...
First, cranking capacity is pretty much a measure of resistance, as I
understand Bob's several essays on the subject... and in one article, he
mentioned that B&C uses 8.5 volts as the desired endpoint voltage for a
"dump test", where the load resistance is lowered until that voltage
level is achieved, and then identifying the current that brought about
that much of a voltage drop... so let's use that, and also assume that
an equivalent 24-volt system would look for double that voltage (17 volts).
The process involves first determining the internal resistances of each
battery - and it is a simple inverse relationship (lower internal
resistance == higher cranking amps), and I'll assume the battery
manufacturer used the same criteria as Bob's "dump test" for their
"cranking-amp" test (and if not it's probably similar). So anyway, if
we're looking for 8.5 volts at the terminal, that would imply a 4.1-volt
drop internally (12.6-8.5), so the internal resistance of the 300-ca
battery would be 4.1/300, or 13.7 milliOms; the 1000-ca battery would
have an internal resistance of 4.1/1000, or 4.1 milliohms. Add the two
together to get 17.8 milliohms total resistance and, assuming you are
looking for a 17-volt level from 25.2 volt potential (8.2 volt drop),
you would see that with about 461 cranking amps (8.2/.0178).
As for a constant drain eventually reverse-charging one of the
batteries, I think that would depend entirely on the reserve amphour
capacity of the battery rather than its cranking amps - and unless you
know that, you can't know which one would outlast the other.
That's how I understand it anyway, if I'm wrong I welcome any correction!
I am curious, though, as to why anyone would do that - perhaps to use a
24-volt starter but 12 volts for everything else? If so, I'd think that
would be an inefficient way to get total battery energy, per unit mass.
I'd think it would usually be better to use two equal batteries,
especially if you're using a yearly replacement schedule for one battery
each year.
-John
Gary Casey wrote:
>
> < in series with a new 12-volt, 1000-cranking amp battery,
> how many 24-volt cranking amps will be available for use?>>
>
> Just for the fun of it, I will take a crack at this. Don't use the actual
> numbers in my explanation as they are just for example: The cranking amps
> of a 12-volt battery is rated by taking a fully charged battery and putting
> sufficient load on it to drop the voltage to a value of maybe 8 volts. This
> has to be sustained for only a short time - 10 seconds perhaps. To measure
> the amp-hour capacity the same fully charged battery has a relatively small
> load, maybe 2 amps, applied and the battery voltage is measured. When it
> drops to some value (10 volts?) the time is measured. Presumably you could
> draw 2 amps of current from a 16 amp-hour battery for 8 hours before its
> voltage dropped to 10 volts. As you can see, the two ratings quantify two
> quite different attributes of a battery. The cranking amps measure how
> energetically it will crank the engine and the amp-hour rating will tell you
> how long the battery will last after the alternator fails. To optimize a
> battery for maximum amp-hours you need lots of lead and lots of acid. To
> optimize it for cranking amps you need lots of electrode surface area (like
> by making the plates porous, reducing the amount of lead).
>
> What happens when you put the "300-amp" and the "1,000-amp" batteries in
> series? Presumably you would rate the cranking amps at 16 volts, given the
> numbers above. The capability would be more than 300 amps as the 300 amp
> battery could be pulled down below 8 volts, maybe 6 volts, at which time the
> more powerful battery would be down to 10 volts. The total amperage would
> then be something more than 300 amps, but probably not close to 1,000. I'd
> guess 350 or 400. But what about capacity? You didn't say what the
> amp-hour rating of each battery was. Presumably the 1,000-amp battery also
> had the larger capacity. Certainly, as someone else replied, if you ran the
> pair completely dead the smaller capacity battery would eventually be
> charged in the reverse direction, but that's not really a horrible
> condition.
>
> Bottom line is that while combining two mis-matched batteries in series
> isn't such a great idea, the biggest problem is that you aren't getting full
> benefit from the larger of the two batteries, whether considering cranking
> power in amps or capacity in amp-hours. And the battery life won't be
> maximized as one of the batteries will go through more severe
> charge/discharge cycles than the other.
>
> Gary Casey
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman and Gretchen Howell" <testwest(at)earthlink.net> |
Sorry, Denny, I think you're the one off base.
GPS uses a psuedorandom noise technique for signal propagation and decoding.
The signal strength is ALREADY below the level of the background noise. That
is why you sometimes hear of the various satellite signals referred to as
"PRN"s. PRN is a neat way to make a weak signal difficult to jam.
The only reason "clouds" may affect the performance is "maybe" some static
buildup on the airframe. Personally, I would do some more investigating of
the problem report rather than continue talking about clouds and GPS.
Bill, contact me off list if you would. Let's see what we can deduce from a
more detailed examination of your squawk.
Norm Howell
Experimental Test Pilot
Boeing (formerly Douglas), Long Beach
building: Berkut 540, dual EI, fig Z-13
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dennis
O'Connor
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
Bob, I have to take exception to your statement that clouds make no
difference... A thick layer of clouds does absorb energy from the satellite
signals.. If you have a good antenna and therefore a good signal to noise
ratio you will not notice it... But if your receiver s/n ratio is marginal
for what ever reason, a few more dB of loss will make a difference...
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: <BobsV35B(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rhett Westerman" <Rhettwesterman(at)cox.net> |
Bob and Bob,
I had the exact same problem and could not get it resolved. I finally
replaced the OVM and all is well now.
best,
Rhett
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert
Kellar
Subject: AeroElectric-List: OV regulatro
Thank you for you quick response. I missed the part about the breaker in
the instructions. I'll install a breaker and fly some more and then let you
know here on the list. Re: Voltage before the fuse blows...I am too busy
flying the takeoff to notice. I'll bring a passenger to monitor this value.
Bob Kellar
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: 10179 Kellar
> >Below is the result of your inquiry. It was submitted by
> >Robert Kellar (rkellar(at)attbi.com) on Sunday, December 29, 2002 at
22:51:40
>
> >
> >Sunday, December 29, 2002
> >
> >Robert Kellar
> >
> >,
> >Email: rkellar(at)attbi.com
> >Comments/Questions: I am using your voltage regulator LR3B-14 in my
> >RV6. Purchased 2 years ago. Worked wonderfully until 2 months ago. On
> >multiple occasions the 5A fuse from the bus to the master switch to
> >terminal 6 blows.
>
> This fuse should have been a circuit breaker . . . all of our
> installation drawings show a breaker used with any form of
> crowbar overvoltage protection.
>
> > When not blown the voltage regulator functions perfectly 20+ amps
> > charge then cycles down to less than 5 amps for flight. Usually the
fuse
> > lasts for 1 hr or less and then with the next flight, as I take off the
> > fuse will blow and the blinking warning light comes on. Replace the
fuse
> > and I can fly again for awhile. I have inspected everything in the
panel,
> > wires, connections etc looking for a possible short or failure. My
> > question is...Is there anything internal to the unit that could cause
> > this intermittent failure? If not, I will continue my investigation of
> > all the wire out to the alternator looking for a possible intermittent
short.
>
> Do you have a voltmeter in the airplane? What does it read
> just before the ov system trips?
>
> > Thank you for your response and all the help provided on the net and
in
> > your electical manual and diagrams.
>
> My pleasure sir.
>
> I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
> to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
> share the information with as many folks as possible.
> You can join at . . .
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
>
> Thanks!
>
> Bob . . .
>
> |---------------------------------------------------|
> | A lie can travel half way around the world while |
> | the truth is till putting on its shoes . . . |
> | -Mark Twain- |
> |---------------------------------------------------|
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: cranking amps vs. amp-hours |
><jrourke@allied-computer.com>
>
>Gary, good job at establishing the basics - I'll try to build on your
>explanation, but I'm just going to focus on "cranking amps" only, since
>"amphour capacity" is fairly unrelated (and didn't seem to be part of
>the question anyways)...
. . . correct. I've seen 1.2 a.h. cells that would dump
over 1000 amps. Unfortunately, they were so difficult to
build that the process never made it to the marketplace.
>First, cranking capacity is pretty much a measure of resistance, as I
>understand Bob's several essays on the subject... and in one article, he
>mentioned that B&C uses 8.5 volts as the desired endpoint voltage for a
>"dump test", where the load resistance is lowered until that voltage
>level is achieved, and then identifying the current that brought about
>that much of a voltage drop... so let's use that, and also assume that
>an equivalent 24-volt system would look for double that voltage (17 volts).
>
>The process involves first determining the internal resistances of each
>battery - and it is a simple inverse relationship (lower internal
>resistance == higher cranking amps), and I'll assume the battery
>manufacturer used the same criteria as Bob's "dump test" for their
>"cranking-amp" test (and if not it's probably similar). So anyway, if
>we're looking for 8.5 volts at the terminal, that would imply a 4.1-volt
>drop internally (12.6-8.5), so the internal resistance of the 300-ca
>battery would be 4.1/300, or 13.7 milliOms; the 1000-ca battery would
>have an internal resistance of 4.1/1000, or 4.1 milliohms. Add the two
>together to get 17.8 milliohms total resistance and, assuming you are
>looking for a 17-volt level from 25.2 volt potential (8.2 volt drop),
>you would see that with about 461 cranking amps (8.2/.0178).
. . . I believe this analysis is correct.
>As for a constant drain eventually reverse-charging one of the
>batteries, I think that would depend entirely on the reserve amphour
>capacity of the battery rather than its cranking amps - and unless you
>know that, you can't know which one would outlast the other.
True . . . but unless the 1000CA battery is one of those
itty-bitty cells I cited above, it's a fair bet that the
battery with the larger cranking current rating is also
the larger battery with respect to capacity . . . so
in a series connected deep discharge of the pair of
batteries, the smaller one would be at risk for reverse
charge damage.
>That's how I understand it anyway, if I'm wrong I welcome any correction!
>
>I am curious, though, as to why anyone would do that - perhaps to use a
>24-volt starter but 12 volts for everything else? If so, I'd think that
>would be an inefficient way to get total battery energy, per unit mass.
>I'd think it would usually be better to use two equal batteries,
>especially if you're using a yearly replacement schedule for one battery
>each year.
I was curious about this configuration too. I have used
pairs of identical batteries in series to get 48V for
cranking and then paralleled them for operation as
a 28v system for flight operations. Unless there is
some compelling reason to carry the 1000CA battery,
a pair of 17 a.h. RG batteries would yield 300-400
amps for cranking and 34 a.h. capacity for flight
operations . . . a rather robust combination for about
any airplane.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mitch Williams <mitchw62(at)Prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 26 Msgs - 12/30/02 |
Bill,
I've had a gps-90 for about 5 years. It would lose
satellites from time to time and sometimes take
forever to find itself again.
about 3 years ago, I installed an externally mounted
active antenna from GPSwolf for about $60 - included
with a radio upgrade on a 337. I went from 3-4
satellites receiving, to all 8, all the time. It
works much better but didn't solve all problems. IT
STILL GET LOST, and TAKE FOREVER TO FIND ITSELF.
I was giving rides over the Christmas lights last week
and didn't turn on the gps90 - didn't need it. Decide
to turn it on during the trip. It could only find 2
sats, then 3 sats, then none - I looked over the
cables, unplugged, repluges, power-off power-on, no
difference - yea it was cloudy - Who knows? Still no
sats. Next day, all eight working fine - well it took
10 minutes to find them.
I used a 195 on a 5 hour trip a couple months ago. It
found all 12 in seconds and never missed a beat.
As Bob said, the 90 is getting long in the tooth. A
better investment be a newer 12 sat parallel unit in
place of the 8 sat serial.
Mitch N7155A
> Whollo80(at)aol.com
>
> I'm using a Garmin 90 and sometimes lose coverage on
> cloudy days. Would using
> one of the externally mounted antennas improve my
> coverage? Everything that I
> see in Aircraft Spruce is a little bit on the
> expensive side. Any thoughts?
>
> Bill
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: cockpit backup batteries |
>Bob,
>I want to rig a lead from my 300 amp starter boster,
>(with 12v dc outlet) to my instrument panel cigar
>lighter that can be used to power the bus in the event
>of an electrical failure. my aircraft is a 62 mooney
>m20c with a 14v system with an overhauled delco remy
>50 amp generator.
Have you ever considered a field approval for a
B&C L-60? It offers about 10x the reliability of that
generator and should run the lifetime of the airplane.
> . . my concern is that if i take two cigarette lighter
>adapters, snip off the ends and wire them together, the
>wiring will not be able to handle the load required to power
>the buss, which i would estimate to be 20-30 amps with
>pitot heat on.
A max endurance IFR load (w/pitot heat) of less
than 15A should be possible. This is still pushing
a cigar lighter connector . . . ESPECIALLY two of
these things in series. They were originally designed
to work in a situation where high energy losses were
EXPECTED . . . i.e., heat up the little coil of
heater wire in a lighter . . . several decades of
attempts to improve on the electrical integrity
of these connectors haven't accomplished much.
I cannot recommend that anyone configure a system
that might DEPEND on these connectors as part
of a system intended to back up the primary
power source. I personally don't use them
in any situation loaded to more than 10A
(small inverters used run computers and
test equipment in vehicles).
You mentioned a 300 amp rating on the booster
battery. These are generally fitted with 17 a.h.
RG batteries. ALL of the commercial, off the
shelf, booster products I've disassembled for
inspection use the very cheapest batteries
on the market. While they are indeed an RG product,
I would be hesitant to suggest they might be
a dependable back up power source. If my
airplane needed a 17 a.h. battery to get home
I'd have no problems going to Sams or WalMart
to scavenge the battery out of a portable
power product to get me home, but I wouldn't
leave that battery in service very long.
Backup batteries as a cockpit accessory have
been offered for years (saw one during my first
trip to OSH in '86). It seems like a good idea
but only because it interfaces with the airplane
in ways that keep those-who-think-they-know-more-
about-airplanes-than-us at arm's length. The
siren song of a certification-free solution
is compelling . . . but if you found yourself
truly in need of this device on some flight,
the LAST things you need to be fiddling with
are (1) twisting crappy connectors around in their
sockets in an attempt to improve connections,
(2) trying to maximize endurance with load-
reduction decisions and (3) being disappointed
when the battery inside the low-dollar, shade-
tree mechanic's product turns out to have less
capability than you would have supposed.
If I owned your airplane I would first
ditch the generator for ANY alternator . . .
but a B&C L-60 would be the first choice.
Put a new battery in every year -OR- do
capacity checks to insure that I had a
SUBSTANTIAL endurance capability sans
alternator . . . for my OBAM airplane
friends, this means for duration of fuel
aboard. You probably can't get that much
time but it's a certainty that with
considered planning for battery maintenance
and load reduction, you can get a whole lot
more from the standard ship's battery than
you'll ever get from a 20-pound lead missile
setting on the floor of the cockpit.
A third feature I'd work for is to convert
the avionics bus into an endurance bus
and provide it with normal and alternate
feed paths as described in Chapter 17
of the 'Connection which you can download
at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev9/ch17-9.pdf
This modification would require moving
a few things not generally considered
"avionics" to the new endurance bus.
>any suggestions regarding how to wire this lead
>and what to use would be appreciated. happy new year....
Accomplish these things my friend and I am
certain you'll end up with a simpler, lighter,
easier to maintain and certainly more reliable
system than a basket full of cigar-lighter
connected batteries will ever offer.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 26 Msgs - 12/30/02 |
I have a 195 and a 196 in the plane... Both are reliable... The 196 is much
faster to boot up and locate itself...
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mitch Williams" <mitchw62(at)Prodigy.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 26 Msgs - 12/30/02
>
> Bill,
> I've had a gps-90 for about 5 years. It would lose
> satellites from time to time and sometimes take
> forever to find itself again.
> about 3 years ago, I installed an externally mounted
> active antenna from GPSwolf for about $60 - included
> with a radio upgrade on a 337. I went from 3-4
> satellites receiving, to all 8, all the time. It
> works much better but didn't solve all problems. IT
> STILL GET LOST, and TAKE FOREVER TO FIND ITSELF.
>
> I was giving rides over the Christmas lights last week
> and didn't turn on the gps90 - didn't need it. Decide
> to turn it on during the trip. It could only find 2
> sats, then 3 sats, then none - I looked over the
> cables, unplugged, repluges, power-off power-on, no
> difference - yea it was cloudy - Who knows? Still no
> sats. Next day, all eight working fine - well it took
> 10 minutes to find them.
>
> I used a 195 on a 5 hour trip a couple months ago. It
> found all 12 in seconds and never missed a beat.
>
> As Bob said, the 90 is getting long in the tooth. A
> better investment be a newer 12 sat parallel unit in
> place of the 8 sat serial.
>
> Mitch N7155A
>
>
> > Whollo80(at)aol.com
> >
> > I'm using a Garmin 90 and sometimes lose coverage on
> > cloudy days. Would using
> > one of the externally mounted antennas improve my
> > coverage? Everything that I
> > see in Aircraft Spruce is a little bit on the
> > expensive side. Any thoughts?
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS Antennas |
Oh gee Norm, it's so nice to be dismissed... Since the signal is below the
noise level already another 20dB of loss ratio means nothing, I guess you
will have no problem recovering a C/No 33 dB-Hz from a now -172dBm
signal....
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: "Norman and Gretchen Howell" <testwest(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
>
> Sorry, Denny, I think you're the one off base.
>
> GPS uses a psuedorandom noise technique for signal propagation and
decoding.
> The signal strength is ALREADY below the level of the background noise.
That
> is why you sometimes hear of the various satellite signals referred to as
> "PRN"s. PRN is a neat way to make a weak signal difficult to jam.
>
> The only reason "clouds" may affect the performance is "maybe" some static
> buildup on the airframe. Personally, I would do some more investigating of
> the problem report rather than continue talking about clouds and GPS.
>
> Bill, contact me off list if you would. Let's see what we can deduce from
a
> more detailed examination of your squawk.
>
> Norm Howell
> Experimental Test Pilot
> Boeing (formerly Douglas), Long Beach
> building: Berkut 540, dual EI, fig Z-13
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dennis
> O'Connor
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
>
>
>
>
> Bob, I have to take exception to your statement that clouds make no
> difference... A thick layer of clouds does absorb energy from the
satellite
> signals.. If you have a good antenna and therefore a good signal to noise
> ratio you will not notice it... But if your receiver s/n ratio is marginal
> for what ever reason, a few more dB of loss will make a difference...
>
> Denny
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <BobsV35B(at)aol.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Recombinant Gas Batteries |
>
>In the literature Bob appears to recommend the RG batteries. The
>problem is that I have searched both B&C and AircraftSpruce but can't
>find the RG batteries.
>Please help.
>Walter
"Recombinant Gas" (RG) is also "Starved Electrolyte" is also
"Glass-Mat-Technology", is also "Vented Sealed Lead Acid" (VLSA),
and sometimes called "Maintenance Free" but can become confused
with flooded batteries having glued on caps to make them
"Maintenance Difficult" . . . they are oft referred to in
error as "Gel-Cell" batteries in honor of the first series of
"Immobilized Electrolyte" batteries of some 40 odd years ago.
By and large, ANY lead-acid battery offered today other than
flooded batteries for use in vehicles will be the more
modern technology product irrespective of what name the
sales person recognizes.
See the following sites for a tip-of-the-iceberg view
of available products and some additional information
on battery technologies.
http://www.hepi.com/
http://www.concordebattery.com/
http://www.panasonic.com/industrial/battery/oem/chem/seal/index.html
http://www.mywebplace.com/yuasaspec.html
http://www.sbw.org/batcap/
http://www.batteryweb.com/optima.cfm
http://www.batteryweb.com/powersonic12vsla.cfm
http://www.4unique.com/battery/battery_tutorial.htm
http://www.4unique.com/battery/batteries.htm
If your heart is really set on a "gel-cell" battery, you
can get 'em here:
http://www.batteryweb.com/sonnenschein.cfm
. . . and to top it off my friends, here's a seller
that delivers much elephant-hocky about products
he doesn't even know the proper name for much less
understand how they work.
http://www.emesystems.com/batcharg.htm
Happy new year.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS Antennas |
>
>
>Yes, the exterior antenna is a night and day difference... But, the suction
>cup antennas that mount on the windshield will probably solve your problem
>at lesser cost...
Active GPS antennas don't have to be expensive. I've used
a number of products from these folks and plans to use
quite a few more. Check out these $19 active antennas
http://www.laipac.com/products/gps/GPS%20Active%20Antennas.htm
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS receivers |
>
>Bill,
>I've had a gps-90 for about 5 years. It would lose
>satellites from time to time and sometimes take
>forever to find itself again.
>about 3 years ago, I installed an externally mounted
>active antenna from GPSwolf for about $60 - included
>with a radio upgrade on a 337. I went from 3-4
>satellites receiving, to all 8, all the time. It
>works much better but didn't solve all problems. IT
>STILL GET LOST, and TAKE FOREVER TO FIND ITSELF.
>
>I was giving rides over the Christmas lights last week
>and didn't turn on the gps90 - didn't need it. Decide
>to turn it on during the trip. It could only find 2
>sats, then 3 sats, then none - I looked over the
>cables, unplugged, repluges, power-off power-on, no
>difference - yea it was cloudy - Who knows? Still no
>sats. Next day, all eight working fine - well it took
>10 minutes to find them.
>
>I used a 195 on a 5 hour trip a couple months ago. It
>found all 12 in seconds and never missed a beat.
>
>As Bob said, the 90 is getting long in the tooth. A
>better investment be a newer 12 sat parallel unit in
>place of the 8 sat serial.
I've been using Magellan hand helds in the cockpit
for years. I prop them up on the glare-shield with
a velcro foot hold and a dab of windshield sealant
between the back of the antenna and the plexiglas.
The oldest receiver (2000) is about 5 years old
and it will loose lock in a high-g, 90 degree
turn but recover in a few seconds. The later
models (300/310/315) don't suffer from this
effect. ALL receivers take much more time to
figure out where we are if (1) they are turned
on some distance from where they were turned off
and (2) we're now moving over the ground at
more than 100 kts. This is why I put fresh
batteries in both receivers, plunk them down
on the glare-shield and turn them on during
pre-flight.
Once they figure out where we are, they've
performed very well for gizmos that cost about
$100 each. Just as an experiment, I've left
one shut off and then turned it on after 200 miles
of travel and while still airborne. The 2000
never did get locked on for the remainder
of the flight (about 10 minutes) . . . but
figured it all out while on taxi to the ramp.
The 300 series devices took about 5 minutes
but did eventually sort out all the puzzle
pieces. I plan to cold-initialize one of these
guys in flight some day and see how it does.
Bob . . .
>Mitch N7155A
>
>
> > Whollo80(at)aol.com
> >
> > I'm using a Garmin 90 and sometimes lose coverage on
> > cloudy days. Would using
> > one of the externally mounted antennas improve my
> > coverage? Everything that I
> > see in Aircraft Spruce is a little bit on the
> > expensive side. Any thoughts?
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
>
>
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: OV protection |
>
>
>Bob and Bob,
>
> I had the exact same problem and could not get it resolved. I finally
>replaced the OVM and all is well now.
>
>best,
>
>Rhett
Was your OVM one that I had upgraded? Do you still have the
old one?
The case under discussion is for an LR3 regulator with
built-in OV protection. Slightly different circuit but
with similar potential for nuisance trips under certain
conditions. We modified the design on these also about
18 months ago.
I'm curious in this instance as to why a unit that
performed well for several years showed a new problem.
We need to be sure it's not responding to a true higher
than normal bus voltage condition before we offer to take
his unit back for modification.
Thousands of these regulators and OV modules have
been in service for over 10 years and in a very small
number of cases, have we seen the nuisance tripping
condition. Sometimes it's related to system architecture.
Troubles on a new installation in Bonanzas first brought
the problem to light . . . EVERY airplane would do it.
In the case under discussion, I'm curious as to what
changed to make a successful application go sour after
several years of service.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Wilson <pwilson(at)climber.org> |
| Subject: | second alternator |
Lots of discussion on alternators over the years. I would like to
get help for my 912 Kitfox. For 10 to 12 amps slightly less than the
Rotax, the L40/SD20 and SD8/200G seen on the B&C web page. The vacuum
drive while being handy is expensive due to the modifications
required for the Rotax to get the gears installed. So I am looking at
two alternators and adding a belt drive unit.
I probably can modify the Accessory drive B&C alternators to add a
pulley and mounting provisions. The PM units are slightly smaller and
lighter (2.9 vs 5.7 pounds).
Question: Is the SD8 an acceptable alternative to the SD20? The cost
is less for the SD8 and it uses a less expensive regulator. I wonder
what I would give up with the SD8.
What is the heritage of the SD8?
Thanks, Paul
PS, The alternators are described at:
http://www.bandcspecialty.com/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?2X358218
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rhett Westerman" <Rhettwesterman(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: OV protection |
Bob,
I had the OVM module installed and put 644 hours on it in three years. Put
it in service in 98 but purchased the OVM probably in 97. Early on it
tripped a few times but then quit tripping and performed well for about 600
hours. Then the plane sat for a year and I put a new engine and alternator
in the plane. Same regulator etc.
The tripping started immediately. I swapped regulators and alternators with
no change. Still got the tripping. Checked wiring etc and still no
resolution. Last thing to change was the module itself. That did the job.
Also note went back to the original alternator I got with the new engine and
the same regulator that I have now had for many years. This was in Nov and
now 50 hours later not one trip.
I just assumed the OVM went bad. BTW, I have the vision system that records
min and max voltages and the voltage was not going above 14.6 when the
tripping was occurring, so there was never a voltage spike unless it was too
fast for the Vision to capture.
best,
-----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: OV protection
>
>
>Bob and Bob,
>
> I had the exact same problem and could not get it resolved. I finally
>replaced the OVM and all is well now.
>
>best,
>
>Rhett
Was your OVM one that I had upgraded? Do you still have the
old one?
The case under discussion is for an LR3 regulator with
built-in OV protection. Slightly different circuit but
with similar potential for nuisance trips under certain
conditions. We modified the design on these also about
18 months ago.
I'm curious in this instance as to why a unit that
performed well for several years showed a new problem.
We need to be sure it's not responding to a true higher
than normal bus voltage condition before we offer to take
his unit back for modification.
Thousands of these regulators and OV modules have
been in service for over 10 years and in a very small
number of cases, have we seen the nuisance tripping
condition. Sometimes it's related to system architecture.
Troubles on a new installation in Bonanzas first brought
the problem to light . . . EVERY airplane would do it.
In the case under discussion, I'm curious as to what
changed to make a successful application go sour after
several years of service.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman and Gretchen Howell" <testwest(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi everyone
Hope the message below does not offend anyone. I probably could have couched
my previous reply to Denny a bit more diplomatically.
Here is an interesting link for those into GPS signal detection:
http://esl.eng.ohio-state.edu/~swe/argus/argus1.pdf
The interesting point to the present discussion is the signal to noise ratio
that a normal GPS code is dug out of the background noise is -34dB or 4 x
10**-4. Or, the background noise is 2500 times as stong as the GPS signal.
Don't think clouds are gonna attenuate such a weak signal to make much of a
difference anyway.
The point is, we have someone who has a perceived problem with their GPS
receiver. As I said before, the best solution is to better quantify the
problem and deduce the root cause using our noggins instead of our emotions.
It is HIGHLY unlikely clouds have anything to do with Bill's problem of loss
of coverage.
A friend of mine, Terry Schubert, had problems with his GPS 90 that turned
out to be a defective antenna. There could be other issues as well, such as
trying to "cold start" a GPS (i.e. download an almanac and self-initialize
present position, time and date) while it is in motion.
I have found most folks truly do not understand how their magic GPS's work.
Trimble used to have a neat book that explained the system in
easy-to-understand language. I believe it was called "The 9th Utility"....
Norm Howell
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dennis
O'Connor
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
Oh gee Norm, it's so nice to be dismissed... Since the signal is below the
noise level already another 20dB of loss ratio means nothing, I guess you
will have no problem recovering a C/No 33 dB-Hz from a now -172dBm
signal....
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: "Norman and Gretchen Howell" <testwest(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
>
> Sorry, Denny, I think you're the one off base.
>
> GPS uses a psuedorandom noise technique for signal propagation and
decoding.
> The signal strength is ALREADY below the level of the background noise.
That
> is why you sometimes hear of the various satellite signals referred to as
> "PRN"s. PRN is a neat way to make a weak signal difficult to jam.
>
> The only reason "clouds" may affect the performance is "maybe" some static
> buildup on the airframe. Personally, I would do some more investigating of
> the problem report rather than continue talking about clouds and GPS.
>
> Bill, contact me off list if you would. Let's see what we can deduce from
a
> more detailed examination of your squawk.
>
> Norm Howell
> Experimental Test Pilot
> Boeing (formerly Douglas), Long Beach
> building: Berkut 540, dual EI, fig Z-13
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: citabria triping overvoltage relay |
>
>
>A good thing to do would be to get a portable oscilloscope and take a look
>at the battery voltage to see how clean it is. A bad alternator with some
>diodes blown will cause ripple in the voltage which can trip the overvoltage
>relay.
>
>Steve Johnson
>building RV-8
Damaged alternators should not be a source of nuisance trips
in the ov protection system. The period of the ripple frequency
from an alternator is on the order of .5 to 5 milliseconds. The
time constant of a 14V ov module for a step function from 14 to
20 volts should be on the order of 50-100 milliseconds.
While an open diode may cause a working regulator to increase
field current to compensate for the reduced alternator output,
it's doubtful that waveform peaks will be of sufficient
magnitude and duration to trip off the ov protection. Diode
failure could be the last straw in a series of conditions
like ov trip point drifted down, regulator setpoint drifted
up -AND- the alternator lost a diode . . . but that's stacking
multiple problems up pretty deep . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Brame <charleyb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Alternator weights |
Interested in either the B&C L-60 or L-40 alternator. The L-60 may be
overkill, but might be nice if its size and weight are close to the
L-40. I cannot find any reference to weight on the B& C sites.
Does anyone know what the L-60 and the L-40 alternators weigh.
Charlie Brame
RV-6A N11CB
San Antonio
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Alternator weights |
| From: | Walter Casey <mikec(at)caseyspm.com> |
Hi Charlie,
I called them with that very question today and told them that the data
should be on their web site. They agreed.
As I recall the L-60 is 8.5 lbs and the L-40 is 6 lbs.
Best wishes,
Walter
On Tuesday, December 31, 2002, at 04:23 PM, Charles Brame wrote:
>
>
> Interested in either the B&C L-60 or L-40 alternator. The L-60 may be
> overkill, but might be nice if its size and weight are close to the
> L-40. I cannot find any reference to weight on the B& C sites.
>
> Does anyone know what the L-60 and the L-40 alternators weigh.
>
> Charlie Brame
> RV-6A N11CB
> San Antonio
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-> _-
> ======================================================================
> _-
> ======================================================================
> _-
> ======================================================================
> _-
> ======================================================================
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Billie Lamb" <N254BL(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Fuse size vs Breaker size |
I thought I had seen this somewhere but can't find it in the book. When replacing
breakers with fuses do you replace with the same size?
My electronic ignition calls for a 3A resettable breaker. Is that the fuse size
I would use or would I use a higher rating because the breakers are slower to
operate?
Is there a rule of thumb to this sizing??
Bill Lamb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | two stage blower |
Happy New Year, Bob and all.
I have a cabin heat blower fan which draws 4.9 amps at 13v. I'd like to
create a "slow" switch setting where it would run at about half speed. Whats
the best way to do this? Put a resistor in the circuit for the slow speed?
What size resistor?
Regards,
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: two stage blower |
In a message dated 1/1/2003 10:53:57 AM Eastern Standard Time,
sladerj(at)bellsouth.net writes:
> Happy New Year, Bob and all.
>
> I have a cabin heat blower fan which draws 4.9 amps at 13v. I'd like to
> create a "slow" switch setting where it would run at about half speed.
> Whats
> the best way to do this? Put a resistor in the circuit for the slow speed?
> What size resistor?
> Regards,
> John Slade
>
>
John, Go to the auto salvage yard and rob a wreck for it's blower motor speed
dropping resistor assembly to experiment with. I just put a new one in my
neighbor's Toyota truck last month. I paid about $20 or $30 for it new.
This is the simplest and cheapest way out but it is also the most wasteful of
your electrical power. The resistor unit needs to be in the air stream to
keep it cool because it does get hot!
The really cool way is to wire in a variable DC to DC converter type of power
supply.
John P. Marzluf
Columbus, Ohio
Outback, (out back in the garage)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: two stage blower |
Look at: http://www.solorb.com/elect/solarcirc/
John P. Marzluf
Columbus, Ohio
Outback, (out back in the garage)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: two stage blower |
For DC fans it usually is a fairly linear relationship between current
and RPM, but not always... if it is, though, you can figure your fan has
a resistance of about 2.65 ohms (13/4.9); so a 2.65 ohm resistor in
series with the fan would cut the current in half.
Next you have to figure wattage; I
2*R is the equation, or 15.9 watts
(2.45*2.45*2.65). You generally want to oversize by at least 50-100%, so
you'd want a 25-30 watt resistor. Since you probably aren't going to
find 2.65 ohm resistors, you could put two 5-Ohm resistors in parallel
together (for 2.5 ohms), in series with the fan. So, two minimum 10-watt
(but preferably 15 or 20-watt) sandblock resistors from Radio Shack
ought to do the trick. They'll get hot; maybe mount them to the inlet
side of the fan so you can't accidentally touch them, but don't mount it
to plastic or anything that would be a high-temp hazard.
Or, you could do some kind of 12-volt motor speed controller or light
dimmer. Be careful you don't run it too slowly, I think some motors can
be damaged if not run at rated voltage range (but 6 volts should be OK
for a 12-volt fan motor).
-John R.
John Slade wrote:
>
> Happy New Year, Bob and all.
>
> I have a cabin heat blower fan which draws 4.9 amps at 13v. I'd like to
> create a "slow" switch setting where it would run at about half speed. Whats
> the best way to do this? Put a resistor in the circuit for the slow speed?
> What size resistor?
> Regards,
> John Slade
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CozyGirrrl(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: two stage blower |
Dear John,
Hey, Happy New Year!
Just a thought, I think some form of electronic control will be more
efficient.
...Chrissi
Cozy Mk-IV 13B Turbo
www.CozyGirrrl.com
Chrissi(at)BlueMountainAvionics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Neil Clayton <harvey4(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: two stage blower |
Hey Mate....happy new year!!!
Where did you put your blower? I was thinking of doing the same thing but
can't decide where to locate it.
I had a problem with the fan speed on my truck a while ago. I took the
beast apart and found a set of in-line resistors, selected by the fan speed
control, one of which had "blown". I experimented with different sized
resistors until I found one that seemed to make the fan speed about where I
needed it.
One thing though - the resistor "bank" was in the air flow, probably for
cooling. Might have to do the same thing with a plane installation?
Neil
At 10:50 AM 1/1/03, you wrote:
>
>Happy New Year, Bob and all.
>
>I have a cabin heat blower fan which draws 4.9 amps at 13v. I'd like to
>create a "slow" switch setting where it would run at about half speed. Whats
>the best way to do this? Put a resistor in the circuit for the slow speed?
>What size resistor?
>Regards,
>John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Lundquist <lundquist(at)ieee.org> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS Antennas |
After seeing this message I did some digging around in a few textbooks I had
here. I really wasn't able to find much and the little I did find seemed to
indicate that the attenuation due to rain or clouds at GPS frequencies
should be VERY small. Nothing even approaching a few dB. More like a few
hundreths of a dB which of course would have no real effect.
Now that I've started in on this I'd be curious if anybody else has any hard
info on the effect of clouds and water vapor. I'll keep looking and post
anything interesting I find.
Dave Lundquist
'77 C150
RV-6 Wings
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
>
> Bob, I have to take exception to your statement that clouds make no
> difference... A thick layer of clouds does absorb energy from the
satellite
> signals.. If you have a good antenna and therefore a good signal to noise
> ratio you will not notice it... But if your receiver s/n ratio is marginal
> for what ever reason, a few more dB of loss will make a difference...
>
> Denny
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <BobsV35B(at)aol.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
>
>
> >
> > In a message dated 12/30/02 7:36:06 PM Central Standard Time,
> > Whollo80(at)aol.com writes:
> >
> > > I'm using a Garmin 90 and sometimes lose coverage on cloudy days.
Would
> > > using
> > > one of the externally mounted antennas improve my coverage? Everything
> that
> > > I
> > > see in Aircraft Spruce is a little bit on the expensive side. Any
> thoughts?
> >
> > Good Evening Bill,
> >
> > The clouds should have absolutely nothing to do with your GPS coverage.
> > However, getting a full view of the sky is always a good idea. The 90
was
> a
> > good unit in it's day and still has the capability of providing useful
> > information, but the technology curve is still rising quite steeply on
> such
> > equipment. You might consider upgrading to something like the Garmin
196.
> >
> > Any remote antenna that will allow a better view of the sky will make
the
> 90
> > work a bit better. I don't know whether an active antenna will help
with
> the
> > 90 or not, but why don't you call the Garmin service number? I have
found
> > them to be easy to get hold of and full of good information.
> >
> > I added an active antenna for use with my Trimble 2000 Approach Plus.
> That
> > old antique had it's performance noticeably improved by the addition.
> >
> > Look up Garmin at: www.garmin.com
> >
> > They have data there as to the phone numbers to call.
> >
> > Happy Skies,
> >
> > Old Bob
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator weights |
>
>
>Interested in either the B&C L-60 or L-40 alternator. The L-60 may be
>overkill, but might be nice if its size and weight are close to the
>L-40. I cannot find any reference to weight on the B& C sites.
>
>Does anyone know what the L-60 and the L-40 alternators weigh.
>
>Charlie Brame
>RV-6A N11CB
>San Antonio
There is also a price difference. The largest, full-up
IFR continuous load I've calculated for a small airplane
is under 30A which makes the L-40 ideal. You might consider
putting the difference in cost into an SD-8 for standby
service.
Seems like the L-60 was just over 8 pounds while the
L-40 was about 6 pounds.
I'll bug Todd at B&C about getting some weights up
for the products . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: OV protection |
>
>
>Bob,
>
> I had the OVM module installed and put 644 hours on it in three years. Put
>it in service in 98 but purchased the OVM probably in 97. Early on it
>tripped a few times but then quit tripping and performed well for about 600
>hours. Then the plane sat for a year and I put a new engine and alternator
>in the plane. Same regulator etc.
>
> The tripping started immediately. I swapped regulators and alternators with
>no change. Still got the tripping. Checked wiring etc and still no
>resolution. Last thing to change was the module itself. That did the job.
>Also note went back to the original alternator I got with the new engine and
>the same regulator that I have now had for many years. This was in Nov and
>now 50 hours later not one trip.
Hmmm . . . sorry you went through these gyrations without
bringing the problem to my attention.
> I just assumed the OVM went bad. BTW, I have the vision system that records
>min and max voltages and the voltage was not going above 14.6 when the
>tripping was occurring, so there was never a voltage spike unless it was too
>fast for the Vision to capture.
There is a characteristic of the silicon controlled rectifiers
used in the crowbar ovm that makes it sensitive to very fast rise
time spikes of moderate amplitude and extremely low energy. Too
small and fast to be observed with normal instrumentation.
We had to reduce the gate to cathode tie down resistor from
220 ohms to 10 ohms to fix this problem in the Bonanzas and
the same change was propagated across the product line.
It's a fairly easy thing to do on older versions of the OVM
and we've been doing the modification without charge for
the very few individuals who have the problem. If you still
have your old module, I'd be happy to update it for you . .
you could keep it around as a spare.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuse size vs Breaker size |
>
>I thought I had seen this somewhere but can't find it in the book. When
>replacing breakers with fuses do you replace with the same size?
>
>My electronic ignition calls for a 3A resettable breaker. Is that the fuse
>size I would use or would I use a higher rating because the breakers are
>slower to operate?
>
>Is there a rule of thumb to this sizing??
It's rare that any given system would prefer the slower
operating breaker in favor of a faster fuse due to momentary
inrush or operating current "spikes" during normal operations.
The 3A fuse substitute is a 99+% probability of a reasonable
thing to do.
Do I presume correctly that this fuse will be on a battery
bus?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | Alternator weights |
> There is also a price difference. The largest, full-up
> IFR continuous load I've calculated for a small airplane
> is under 30A which makes the L-40 ideal. You might consider
> putting the difference in cost into an SD-8 for standby
> service.
Bob's estimate is pretty close - I noticed the other day while flying
into the evening my alternator load was 31 amps. This is with strobes,
nav, landing (two RMD halogens), panel lights, Garmin 430, 327, 340,
engine instruments, King 97A, etc. all running. Pitot is about 8 amps
more, although the landing lights and pitot heat would likely not be on
simultaneously, although that would also work. Radio transmitting would
briefly debit the battery, but utterly insignificantly.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 247 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | two stage blower |
> Hey, Happy New Year!
Hey! Happy New year Back to ya.
> Just a thought, I think some form of electronic control will be more
> efficient.
Right. I just wanted to keep it simple. Blowing 30 watts of heat into the
back of the panel area doesnt seem like a good idea. Turn the blower down,
and I get radiant heat instead. :)
Regards,
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | two stage blower |
> Hey Mate....happy new year!!!
Same to you.
> Where did you put your blower? I was thinking of doing the same thing but
> can't decide where to locate it.
Everything fits nicely in the nose. See
http://www.kgarden.com/cozy/chap23g.htm
> a set of in-line resistors
I'd rather avoid making heat in a resistor, so there seem to be two options.
Simple option - live with on and off for now
Complex option - get a voltage diode type dimmer
Regards,
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Wilson <pwilson(at)climber.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator weights |
>
>
>>
>>
>>Interested in either the B&C L-60 or L-40 alternator. The L-60 may be
>>overkill, but might be nice if its size and weight are close to the
>>L-40. I cannot find any reference to weight on the B& C sites.
>>
>>Does anyone know what the L-60 and the L-40 alternators weigh.
>>
>>Charlie Brame
>>RV-6A N11CB
>>San Antonio
>
> There is also a price difference. The largest, full-up
> IFR continuous load I've calculated for a small airplane
> is under 30A which makes the L-40 ideal. You might consider
> putting the difference in cost into an SD-8 for standby
> service.
>
> Seems like the L-60 was just over 8 pounds while the
> L-40 was about 6 pounds.
>
> I'll bug Todd at B&C about getting some weights up
> for the products . . .
>
> Bob . . .
=====
Here is a quick answer since the documents are in front of me.
The B&C data sheets (below) and the flyer they mail out have the
weights. L60=8.5, L40=6.1, 200G=3.4, SD20=5.75, SD8=2.9
see
http://www.bandcspecialty.com/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?2X358218
Paul
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Billie Lamb" <N254BL(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuse size vs Breaker size |
Yes it will be on the battery bus.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fuse size vs Breaker size
>
> >
> >I thought I had seen this somewhere but can't find it in the book. When
> >replacing breakers with fuses do you replace with the same size?
> >
> >My electronic ignition calls for a 3A resettable breaker. Is that the
fuse
> >size I would use or would I use a higher rating because the breakers are
> >slower to operate?
> >
> >Is there a rule of thumb to this sizing??
>
> It's rare that any given system would prefer the slower
> operating breaker in favor of a faster fuse due to momentary
> inrush or operating current "spikes" during normal operations.
>
> The 3A fuse substitute is a 99+% probability of a reasonable
> thing to do.
>
> Do I presume correctly that this fuse will be on a battery
> bus?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Alternator rating |
| From: | Walter Casey <mikec(at)caseyspm.com> |
I wish to ask a general question about how an alternator is rated. To
do this I will give a specific example:
The SD-20 Alternator is rated at 20 Amps at 3500 alternator RPM.
If a Lycoming IO-360 200HP engine is turning at 2000 RPM what is the
alternator RPM?
Walter
********************************************
* Walter Casey
*
* 6528 S. Oneida Ct. *
* Englewood, CO 80110-4617 USA *
* *
* Phone (303) 771-0815 *
* FAX (303) 220-1477 *
* eMail mikec(at)caseyspm.com *
********************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Wilson <pwilson(at)climber.org> |
| Subject: | Re: second alternator |
Bob,
Thanks for jogging my brain. A rear pulley would be much easier than
a front. pulley. Do you remember how to contact any one who has done
this conversion. I do not remember any on the aero.. list?
Can any body on the list point me to some one who has added the 2nd
alternator to the rear of the Rotax 912?
Thanks, Paul
==============
>> Lots of discussion on alternators over the years. I would like to
>>get help for my 912 Kitfox. For 10 to 12 amps slightly less than
>>the Rotax, the L40/SD20 and SD8/200G seen on the B&C web page. The
>>vacuum drive while being handy is expensive due to the
>>modifications required for the Rotax to get the gears installed. So
>>I am looking at two alternators and adding a belt drive unit.
>> I probably can modify the Accessory drive B&C alternators to add a
>>pulley and mounting provisions. The PM units are slightly smaller
>>and lighter (2.9 vs 5.7 pounds).
>>
>> Question: Is the SD8 an acceptable alternative to the SD20? The
>>cost is less for the SD8 and it uses a less expensive regulator. I
>>wonder what I would give up with the SD8.
>> What is the heritage of the SD8?
>
> If you're considering going to the trouble to add
> ANY" kind of alternator, I'll suggest a ND 40A belt
> driven machine running from a pulley on the rear
> of the crankshaft. This has been done by a number of
> builders and I've not been made aware of any problems.
>
> This will let you configure a REAL electrical system
> for your airplane and use the stock 18A alternator
> as a backup . . . Figure Z-13 describes a whippy
> architecture for this combination of alternators.
>
> Bob . . .
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator rating |
The ratio is 1.3 (pad) to 1 (crankshaft) for all O-360 and IO-360 models.
So the alternator would be spinning at 2600 RPM.
To hit 3500 RPM, the crank has to spin at 2692 RPM...or just say red line.
8
)
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Walter Casey" <mikec(at)caseyspm.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Alternator rating
>
> I wish to ask a general question about how an alternator is rated. To
> do this I will give a specific example:
>
> The SD-20 Alternator is rated at 20 Amps at 3500 alternator RPM.
> If a Lycoming IO-360 200HP engine is turning at 2000 RPM what is the
> alternator RPM?
>
> Walter
>
> ********************************************
> * Walter Casey
> *
> * 6528 S. Oneida Ct. *
> * Englewood, CO 80110-4617 USA *
> * *
> * Phone (303) 771-0815 *
> * FAX (303) 220-1477 *
> * eMail mikec(at)caseyspm.com *
> ********************************************
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Alternator rating |
| From: | Walter Casey <mikec(at)caseyspm.com> |
Thanks Dan,
I took the Alternator Performance data form B & C and plotted a graph.
It appears that at 2600 alternator RPM the output is close to zero amps.
We must have something wrong since I am sure that the SD-20 provides
more than a nose weight.
Walter
On Wednesday, January 1, 2003, at 11:29 AM, Dan Checkoway wrote:
>
>
> The ratio is 1.3 (pad) to 1 (crankshaft) for all O-360 and IO-360
> models.
> So the alternator would be spinning at 2600 RPM.
>
> To hit 3500 RPM, the crank has to spin at 2692 RPM...or just say red
> line.
> 8
> )
>
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Walter Casey" <mikec(at)caseyspm.com>
> To:
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Alternator rating
>
>
>>
>>
>> I wish to ask a general question about how an alternator is rated. To
>> do this I will give a specific example:
>>
>> The SD-20 Alternator is rated at 20 Amps at 3500 alternator RPM.
>> If a Lycoming IO-360 200HP engine is turning at 2000 RPM what is the
>> alternator RPM?
>>
>> Walter
>>
>> ********************************************
>> * Walter Casey
>> *
>> * 6528 S. Oneida Ct. *
>> * Englewood, CO 80110-4617 USA *
>> * *
>> * Phone (303) 771-0815 *
>> * FAX (303) 220-1477 *
>> * eMail mikec(at)caseyspm.com *
>> ********************************************
>>
>>
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-> _-
> ======================================================================
> _-
> ======================================================================
> _-
> ======================================================================
> _-
> ======================================================================
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | L-60 Alternator rating |
| From: | Walter Casey <mikec(at)caseyspm.com> |
This belt driven 60A alternator has an output of 25A at 3000 alternator
RPM and 60A at 10,000 alternator RPM.
So the question is, when a Lycoming IO-360 is turning 2000 RPM what is
the RPM of the alternator?
Best wishes,
Walter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: two stage blower |
>
>Happy New Year, Bob and all.
>
>I have a cabin heat blower fan which draws 4.9 amps at 13v. I'd like to
>create a "slow" switch setting where it would run at about half speed. Whats
>the best way to do this? Put a resistor in the circuit for the slow speed?
>What size resistor?
>Regards,
>John Slade
The simplest way is to emulate the speed controls used
on cars . . . add a resistor in series of the appropriate
size to achieve desired speed reduction. This may be difficult
to do in advance of final installation so one can hedge their
bets by using an adjustable resistor.
You can purchase such a device from Digikey as described at
http://info.digikey.com/T023/V5/0675-0679.pdf
I think the AVT50-3 would be a safe bet. Wire it up
per . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/2speed.gif
When the installation is completed and the system
can be powered up, adjust slider on resistor
to get desired low speed.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: two stage blower |
>
>Dear John,
>Hey, Happy New Year!
>Just a thought, I think some form of electronic control will be more
>efficient.
One could do a variable duty cycle controller. Build
one for cabin vent blower on King Air about 20 years
ago. Quite efficient compared to resistor (this was an
18-20 amp motor at full speed). However, the critter
generated so much noise that filtering became an
issue. We whipped it but parts count, volume and
cost was pretty high . . . it did have the advantage
of offering a knob for variable speed selection by
the pilots but if you can afford a King Air, perhaps
cost of the feature isn't so important in the overall
scheme of things. For little airplanes, and particularly
at this lower current/voltage application, the stone-age
resistor seems pretty attractive.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: two stage blower |
>
>Look at:
This is similar to the King Air project I cited earlier.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator rating |
>
>I wish to ask a general question about how an alternator is rated. To
>do this I will give a specific example:
>
>The SD-20 Alternator is rated at 20 Amps at 3500 alternator RPM.
>If a Lycoming IO-360 200HP engine is turning at 2000 RPM what is the
>alternator RPM?
Vacuum pump pads step up from crankshaft speeds by
1.3 to 1.5 to 1 depending on engine make and model.
So at cruise RPM, the SD-20 delivers rated output.
The SD-20 is a 40A frame . . . run it faster and
you can get up to and including 40A out of it. The
device is de-rated to 20A due to speed and/or
cooling limits.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | two stage blower |
> One could do a variable duty cycle controller. Build
> one for cabin vent blower on King Air about 20 years
> ago....
Bob,
What about using one of the dimmers you ship with the goose neck light to
provide variable voltage?
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | two stage blower |
>
> > Hey Mate....happy new year!!!
>Same to you.
>
> > Where did you put your blower? I was thinking of doing the same thing but
> > can't decide where to locate it.
>Everything fits nicely in the nose. See
>http://www.kgarden.com/cozy/chap23g.htm
>
> > a set of in-line resistors
>I'd rather avoid making heat in a resistor, so there seem to be two options.
>
>Simple option - live with on and off for now
>Complex option - get a voltage diode type dimmer
If the controlling device is passive . . i.e. resistor,
zener diode, transistor (like our dimmers) then there is
energy to be dumped out in heat and that energy is a constant
for any given blower speed irrespective of the controlling
device. One can opt for a hard-switched, variable
duty cycle device if you want to wrestle with additional
parts count and the need to filter the noise. I suspect that
your blower might draw 3A at say 8 volts in low speed
for an output power draw of 24 watts. This can be supplied
with a switch-mode power supply of modest size but it
is a more complex device that you would probably have
to build from scratch.
Try the resistor first . . . after you've got 50 hours
or so on the airplane, you may find that you never or
seldom want the low speed mode or you may find that
a full-range variable speed mode is attractive.
I'll suggest that your airplane wont be "finished"
until perhaps 100 hours after first flight . . .
I wouldn't spend a lot of time wrestling with the
kinds of details that have strong possibility of
being revised later anyhow. Get the airplane
airworthy with high value features fully debugged
first. Bells and whistles are easy to deal with
later.
Bob . . .
>Regards,
>John
>
>
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: | Alternator weights |
>
>
> > There is also a price difference. The largest, full-up
> > IFR continuous load I've calculated for a small airplane
> > is under 30A which makes the L-40 ideal. You might consider
> > putting the difference in cost into an SD-8 for standby
> > service.
>
>
>Bob's estimate is pretty close - I noticed the other day while flying
>into the evening my alternator load was 31 amps. This is with strobes,
>nav, landing (two RMD halogens), panel lights, Garmin 430, 327, 340,
>engine instruments, King 97A, etc. all running. Pitot is about 8 amps
>more, although the landing lights and pitot heat would likely not be on
>simultaneously,
. . . nor would strobes and nav lights. The only time you need
pitot heat is in the clouds and you don't want any exterior
lights on then.
> although that would also work. Radio transmitting would
>briefly debit the battery, but utterly insignificantly.
Not if you have the 10A of charging head room offered
by a 40A alternator. After you've replaced energy used
to crank the engine (which happens in the first few
minutes of flight) then ALL of the alternator is available
for powering systems. If your max continuous plus transient
loads exceed 40A, then it may be that you have too much stuff
in your airplane.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Monster battery for Walter M601 . . . |
>: Hi Bob,
>
>Building a Turbine Legend with Walter M601 engine. The M601 engine has a
>high current starting requirement -- a single 24v battery doesn't have
>enough capacity.
>
>I am planning to use four B&C 12 volt 25AHour batteries -- two 12v
>batteries connected in series for the 24 volt requirement, with two of
>these in paralles. B&C indicates no problem with this setup, but I wanted
>to get your opinion if you would be so kind to comment on the pros and
>cons. Thanks.
That's been done and will function. This combo
could produce a battery array on the order of
100 pounds and total capacity of 50 a.h.
Have you considered perhaps two batteries like
http://www.panasonic.com/industrial/battery/oem/images/pdf/Panasonic_VRLA_LC-X1265P.pdf
for a total weight of 88 pounds, fewer parts
to install and a capacity of 65 a.h?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Monster battery for Walter M601 . . . |
>: Hi Bob,
>
>Building a Turbine Legend with Walter M601 engine. The M601 engine has a
>high current starting requirement -- a single 24v battery doesn't have
>enough capacity.
>
>I am planning to use four B&C 12 volt 25AHour batteries -- two 12v
>batteries connected in series for the 24 volt requirement, with two of
>these in paralles. B&C indicates no problem with this setup, but I wanted
>to get your opinion if you would be so kind to comment on the pros and
>cons. Thanks.
That's been done and will function. This combo
could produce a battery array on the order of
100 pounds and total capacity of 50 a.h.
Have you considered perhaps two batteries like
http://www.panasonic.com/industrial/battery/oem/images/pdf/Panasonic_VRLA_LC-X1265P.pdf
for a total weight of 88 pounds, fewer parts
to install and a capacity of 65 a.h?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: cockpit backup batteries |
>bob, thanks for your detailed response. i am
>considering an alternator conversion and would
>probably go with the b and c. do you know what type of
>modifications i would have to make to the baffling of
>my aircraft or is it something that would fit in
>without any modification.
You need to talk to the folks at B&C about
it. They'll have first hand information.
>also, i had installed a magnaflite starter
>recently...what happens quite often is that when i
>engage the starter the starter turns the engine to top
>dead center then does not have the power to turn it
>over. i then release the starter button and reengage
>and the engine turns over and starts. what i found out
>after i had the starter installed is that these types
>of starters supposedly require about twice the power
>to operate as the old geared starter i replaced it
>with. in hindsight i wish i had the old starter back
>because it always turned the engine over.
>do you agree with this analysis and do you think the
>alternator conversion would eliminate this issue...
Going to an RG battery (if you haven't already done this)
would help. I'm not familiar with the particular starter
you cited but if it's a permanent magnet starter, it
is true that it probably doesn't deliver the torque
under limited battery conditions that a wound-field
starter provides. This is why B&C has stayed with
the wound field technology in spite of their
competition favoring with PM motors for lower
cost. B&C was unwilling to give up the performance
advantage.
The alternator installation would not help with
regard to cranking . . . attention to battery
technology and condition of wiring, components
and connections between battery and starter
are the critical issues.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: two stage blower |
"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
>
> I'll suggest that your airplane wont be "finished"
> until perhaps 100 hours after first flight . . .
How 'bout ~440 hrs and still "buildin' the plane"?? ;-)
Sam Buchanan (RV-6, probably never will be finished as long as I am
flying it)
"The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Monster battery for Walter M601 . . . |
how about the Optima line, 800 cca (1000 "marine cranking amp"?), 56 AH,
3 milliohms, 38 lbs each - http://www.dcbattery.com/optima_red.html or
http://www.dcbattery.com/optima_blue.html
-John
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>>: Hi Bob,
>>
>>Building a Turbine Legend with Walter M601 engine. The M601 engine has a
>>high current starting requirement -- a single 24v battery doesn't have
>>enough capacity.
>>
>>I am planning to use four B&C 12 volt 25AHour batteries -- two 12v
>>batteries connected in series for the 24 volt requirement, with two of
>>these in paralles. B&C indicates no problem with this setup, but I wanted
>>to get your opinion if you would be so kind to comment on the pros and
>>cons. Thanks.
>
>
> That's been done and will function. This combo
> could produce a battery array on the order of
> 100 pounds and total capacity of 50 a.h.
>
> Have you considered perhaps two batteries like
> http://www.panasonic.com/industrial/battery/oem/images/pdf/Panasonic_VRLA_LC-X1265P.pdf
> for a total weight of 88 pounds, fewer parts
> to install and a capacity of 65 a.h?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Lightweight Starters |
<>
Have a data sheet faxed by Electrosystems, maker of the Magnaflite
starter. Here is their comparison of the old MZ-4222 vs the Magnaflite
MZ-6222, exactly as on the sheet:
____
The following test results are based on 15 ft/lbs of torque
MZ-4222 12V 145A 0.89 HP 310 RPM
MZ-6222 12V 235A 1.65 HP 580 RPM
RPM is actual engine RPM
The Magnaflite starters weigh 7.8 lb compared to 17 lb for the standard
starter.
____
Large current draw is obvious, and goes to what Bob wrote about
condition of the current paths. The rest of the specs seem crazy. 15 ft/lb
torque? 580 RPM actual engine cranking speed? Some kind of lab rating
system maybe? I sent questions, but no response.
Skytec lists specs on their web page. The 149-12 (LS or PM) covers the
same applications as the MZ-6222. Here's their data:
_____
Power Output: Typical 2.03 Bhp @ 90% of rated battery voltage
Torque: Typical 230 ft/lb @ 112 RPM @ 90% of rated battery voltage
Current: Typical, cranking new IO-540 @ 160 RPM: 185A @42 ft/lb
_____
Dan Horton
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: L-60 Alternator rating |
>
>This belt driven 60A alternator has an output of 25A at 3000 alternator
>RPM and 60A at 10,000 alternator RPM.
>
>So the question is, when a Lycoming IO-360 is turning 2000 RPM what is
>the RPM of the alternator?
do the math. I seem to recall the ring gear
pulley on a Lyc is about 9" The pulley
on a B&C alternator is about 2.5" so
the ratio is about 3.6:1 step up . . .
it may be more. So you can expect nearly
full output out of the alternator at
taxi speeds.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: second alternator |
>
>Bob,
> Thanks for jogging my brain. A rear pulley would be much easier than
>a front. pulley. Do you remember how to contact any one who has done
>this conversion. I do not remember any on the aero.. list?
>
> Can any body on the list point me to some one who has added the 2nd
>alternator to the rear of the Rotax 912?
The ones that come to mind are Europa builders. You might
poke your head into one of their builder's groups and ask. . .
Saw one on a Dragonfly or Quickie last summer too . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | two stage blower |
>
> > One could do a variable duty cycle controller. Build
> > one for cabin vent blower on King Air about 20 years
> > ago....
>Bob,
>What about using one of the dimmers you ship with the goose neck light to
>provide variable voltage?
>John Slade
That would work. You need the DIM14-50
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Monster battery for Walter M601 . . . |
><jrourke@allied-computer.com>
>
>how about the Optima line, 800 cca (1000 "marine cranking amp"?), 56 AH,
> 3 milliohms, 38 lbs each - http://www.dcbattery.com/optima_red.html or
>http://www.dcbattery.com/optima_blue.html
>
>-John
Another appealing option. Thanks John. I'll forward it on to him.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sam Hoskins" <shoskins(at)Globaleyes.net> |
| Subject: | Perm magnet alternator & fuel pump trouble |
About 15 years ago I installed the B&C 14 amp PM alternator on my Quickie Q-200
powered by a Continental O-200. After I flew the aircraft a couple of years,
I found a wierd condition. My Facet fuel transfer pump would not pump while
airborne. It would seem to work on the ground, but not in the air. I replaced
the fuel pump but it still occurred. Finally, I replaced the battery (I do
not use a starter), and that corrected the problem. A couple of years later when
my battery again went bad, the same problem occurred. Installed a new battery
and the fuel pump worked fine.
This made me nervous (I really need that transfer pump) so when I had an opportunity
to swap out a standard O-200 alternator and regulator for the B&C unit (even
steven) I did it.
I now want to convert back to the B&C, and I will be using an RG battery. I never
did figure out exactly why this occurred. Could it have something to do with
filtering of the alternator output? In my new installation I will be installing
the B&C regulator, with the new addition of the crowbar OV protection and
the filtering capacitor.
Should this take care of it? What do you think?
Thanks! BTW, my O-200 alternator and regulator are for sale on eBay, right now.
Auction # 1876166436.
Sam
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS Antennas |
Dave, Norm is correct that cloud attenuation is a minor player in GPS,
however it is not a zero player, as he is wont to think, in a receiver with
minimal parallel processing going on, which was what started the thread...
I was making the point that if you already have a low signal to noise ratio
due to a poor antenna and a high temperature receiver front end (Teff), so
that you are near that -152dBm threshold, that a couple dB of rain
attenuation will be enough to push your signal integration time beyond the
number of receivers you have... (20 dB was just an irritation factor)
Certainly, you can add parallel receivers and make up for the worsened S/N
ratio, which is why the 12 channels in the higher end units perform
better... Indoor GPS units on your belt to provide personnel location
tracking within the building will soon be common because the units will have
massive parallel channel capability to make up for low S/N ratios...
Or, the building may have a local corrections transmitter... Who knows how
the market will shake out...
Anyway, cloud cover is not a benign as may be thought... I have done some
moon bounce in years past (ham radio) and heavy, wet clouds do interfere
significantly.. Also, the small TV dishes such as Dish Network, et. al.,
will lose signal lock in the presence of heavy precip... Ask any of your
friends who have one...
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Lundquist" <lundquist(at)ieee.org>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
>
> After seeing this message I did some digging around in a few textbooks I
had
> here. I really wasn't able to find much and the little I did find seemed
to
> indicate that the attenuation due to rain or clouds at GPS frequencies
> should be VERY small. Nothing even approaching a few dB. More like a few
> hundreths of a dB which of course would have no real effect.
>
> Now that I've started in on this I'd be curious if anybody else has any
hard
> info on the effect of clouds and water vapor. I'll keep looking and post
> anything interesting I find.
>
> Dave Lundquist
> '77 C150
> RV-6 Wings
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
>
>
>
> >
> > Bob, I have to take exception to your statement that clouds make no
> > difference... A thick layer of clouds does absorb energy from the
> satellite
> > signals.. If you have a good antenna and therefore a good signal to
noise
> > ratio you will not notice it... But if your receiver s/n ratio is
marginal
> > for what ever reason, a few more dB of loss will make a difference...
> >
> > Denny
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <BobsV35B(at)aol.com>
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antennas
> >
> >
> > >
> > > In a message dated 12/30/02 7:36:06 PM Central Standard Time,
> > > Whollo80(at)aol.com writes:
> > >
> > > > I'm using a Garmin 90 and sometimes lose coverage on cloudy days.
> Would
> > > > using
> > > > one of the externally mounted antennas improve my coverage?
Everything
> > that
> > > > I
> > > > see in Aircraft Spruce is a little bit on the expensive side. Any
> > thoughts?
> > >
> > > Good Evening Bill,
> > >
> > > The clouds should have absolutely nothing to do with your GPS
coverage.
> > > However, getting a full view of the sky is always a good idea. The 90
> was
> > a
> > > good unit in it's day and still has the capability of providing useful
> > > information, but the technology curve is still rising quite steeply on
> > such
> > > equipment. You might consider upgrading to something like the Garmin
> 196.
> > >
> > > Any remote antenna that will allow a better view of the sky will make
> the
> > 90
> > > work a bit better. I don't know whether an active antenna will help
> with
> > the
> > > 90 or not, but why don't you call the Garmin service number? I have
> found
> > > them to be easy to get hold of and full of good information.
> > >
> > > I added an active antenna for use with my Trimble 2000 Approach Plus.
> > That
> > > old antique had it's performance noticeably improved by the addition.
> > >
> > > Look up Garmin at: www.garmin.com
> > >
> > > They have data there as to the phone numbers to call.
> > >
> > > Happy Skies,
> > >
> > > Old Bob
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | FW: Over-voltage protection |
Pardon the repetition, but I didn't see my original message or any replies
on the list - It may not have gotten there.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Casey [mailto:glcasey(at)adelphia.net]
Subject: Over-voltage protection
In reading all the submissions about over-voltage protection I have come up
with a question. It is based on the assumption that the only failure that
can cause an over-voltage condition is that of the voltage regulator,
assuming that the regulator is external or otherwise not internally powered.
The typical over-voltage protection circuit is in series with the regulator
and disconnects the power feed to the field. I'm assuming that the
protection device could be on either side of the regulator. Question: Why
not just install a second regulator in series with the first? The second
one could be adjusted to a somewhat higher voltage than the first one and
could be designed to provide an output for a warning light if it came on
line. Therefore, a (primary) regulator failure would result in a system
voltage of, say, 15 volts instead of 14 and a warning indicator. Nothing
would have to be done by the pilot and he could complete his flight without
worry of running out of battery. This would seem like a more elegant
solution than to just kill the alternator if the voltage regulator fails,
which only replaces one emergency with another less urgent one.
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: two stage blower |
>
>
>"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
> >
>
>
> > I'll suggest that your airplane wont be "finished"
> > until perhaps 100 hours after first flight . . .
>
>
>
>How 'bout ~440 hrs and still "buildin' the plane"?? ;-)
>
>Sam Buchanan (RV-6, probably never will be finished as long as I am
>flying it)
Aren't you glad you don't own a 172? It's really
great when a useful tool can evolve with the
times, technology and acquisition of new ideas.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sam Hoskins" <shoskins(at)Globaleyes.net> |
| Subject: | Do I need a battery contactor? |
I have the traditional split rocker master switch. Do I need a contactor, or can
I get rid of it?
Armstrong starter.
Aircraft: Q-200
Powrplant: Continental O-200
Alternator: 200G
Devices:
Nav lights (rarely used)
Strobes (rarerly used)
Nav Comm
Transponder
Fuel transfer pump
T&B
Handheld GPS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Kellar" <rkellar(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | OV Module Problems |
What follows is my original e-mail to Bob through his web site, his answer and
questions, my response and finally at the bottom of the message is the new information
regarding the tripping of the breaker...
Comments/Questions: I am using your voltage regulator LR3B-14 in my
RV6. Purchased 2 years ago. Worked wonderfully until 2 months ago. On
multiple occasions the 5A fuse from the bus to the master switch to
terminal 6 blows.
This fuse should have been a circuit breaker . . . all of our
installation drawings show a breaker used with any form of
crowbar overvoltage protection.
When not blown the voltage regulator functions perfectly 20+ amps
charge then cycles down to less than 5 amps for flight. Usually the
fuse lasts for 1 hr or less and then with the next flight, as I take off the
fuse will blow and the blinking warning light comes on. Replace the
fuse and I can fly again for awhile. I have inspected everything in the
panel, wires, connections etc looking for a possible short or failure. My
question is...Is there anything internal to the unit that could cause
this intermittent failure? If not, I will continue my investigation of
all the wire out to the alternator looking for a possible intermittent
short.
Do you have a voltmeter in the airplane? What does it read
just before the ov system trips?
Thank you for your response and all the help provided on the net and
in your electical manual and diagrams.
>
> My pleasure sir.
>
> I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
> to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
> share the information with as many folks as possible.
> You can join at . . .
Thank you for you quick response. I missed the part about the breaker in
the instructions. I'll install a breaker and fly some more and then let you
know here on the list. Re: Voltage before the fuse blows...I am too busy
flying the takeoff to notice. I'll bring a passenger to monitor this value.
Bob Kellar
Jan 2, 03
Bob, After installing a 5 amp breaker, I went flying today with an observer with
the following results. Start up and taxi, runup all trouble free. I placed
various loads, lights radios, strobes etc. onto the bus without any problems.
Good charge at 13 + volts even during idle. Take off started and just about
at 100 ft. of altitude the breaker popped and the yellow blinking light came
on. The observer reported no change in the volt meter until the breaker popped
and it of course dropped to 10-12 volts. She noted that the amp meter had
suddenly flicked full to charge just before the breaker popped. I unloaded the
system bus completely, reset the breaker and then restarted to apply the load.
No problems at all. We flew for awhile and then landed, shut down, restarted
and took off, this time without any problems. Regualator and alternator continued
to work well for the 30 min. of additional flight. The unit was purchased
from you 5/4/99 with first flight 10/4/01. As I noted above I have about
100 hours on the airplane and no problems until the last 15 hours. Any suggestions
regarding diagnostics or fixes would be greately appreciated. Bob Kellar
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Kellar" <rkellar(at)attbi.com> |
What follows is my original e-mail to Bob through his web site, his answer and
questions, my response and finally at the bottom of the message is the new information
regarding the tripping of the breaker...
Comments/Questions: I am using your voltage regulator LR3B-14 in my
RV6. Purchased 2 years ago. Worked wonderfully until 2 months ago. On
multiple occasions the 5A fuse from the bus to the master switch to
terminal 6 blows.
This fuse should have been a circuit breaker . . . all of our
installation drawings show a breaker used with any form of
crowbar overvoltage protection.
When not blown the voltage regulator functions perfectly 20+ amps
charge then cycles down to less than 5 amps for flight. Usually the
fuse lasts for 1 hr or less and then with the next flight, as I take off the
fuse will blow and the blinking warning light comes on. Replace the
fuse and I can fly again for awhile. I have inspected everything in the
panel, wires, connections etc looking for a possible short or failure. My
question is...Is there anything internal to the unit that could cause
this intermittent failure? If not, I will continue my investigation of
all the wire out to the alternator looking for a possible intermittent
short.
Do you have a voltmeter in the airplane? What does it read
just before the ov system trips?
Thank you for your response and all the help provided on the net and
in your electical manual and diagrams.
>
> My pleasure sir.
>
> I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
> to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
> share the information with as many folks as possible.
> You can join at . . .
Thank you for you quick response. I missed the part about the breaker in
the instructions. I'll install a breaker and fly some more and then let you
know here on the list. Re: Voltage before the fuse blows...I am too busy
flying the takeoff to notice. I'll bring a passenger to monitor this value.
Bob Kellar
Jan 2, 03
Bob, After installing a 5 amp breaker, I went flying today with an observer with
the following results. Start up and taxi, runup all trouble free. I placed
various loads, lights radios, strobes etc. onto the bus without any problems.
Good charge at 13 + volts even during idle. Take off started and just about
at 100 ft. of altitude the breaker popped and the yellow blinking light came
on. The observer reported no change in the volt meter until the breaker popped
and it of course dropped to 10-12 volts. She noted that the amp meter had
suddenly flicked full to charge just before the breaker popped. I unloaded the
system bus completely, reset the breaker and then restarted to apply the load.
No problems at all. We flew for awhile and then landed, shut down, restarted
and took off, this time without any problems. Regualator and alternator continued
to work well for the 30 min. of additional flight. The unit was purchased
from you 5/4/99 with first flight 10/4/01. As I noted above I have about
100 hours on the airplane and no problems until the last 15 hours. Any suggestions
regarding diagnostics or fixes would be greately appreciated. Bob Kellar
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Perm magnet alternator & fuel pump |
trouble
>
>
>About 15 years ago I installed the B&C 14 amp PM alternator on my Quickie
>Q-200 powered by a Continental O-200. After I flew the aircraft a couple
>of years, I found a wierd condition. My Facet fuel transfer pump would
>not pump while airborne. It would seem to work on the ground, but not in
>the air. I replaced the fuel pump but it still occurred. Finally, I
>replaced the battery (I do not use a starter), and that corrected the
>problem. A couple of years later when my battery again went bad, the same
>problem occurred. Installed a new battery and the fuel pump worked fine.
>
>This made me nervous (I really need that transfer pump) so when I had an
>opportunity to swap out a standard O-200 alternator and regulator for the
>B&C unit (even steven) I did it.
>
>I now want to convert back to the B&C, and I will be using an RG
>battery. I never did figure out exactly why this occurred. Could it have
>something to do with filtering of the alternator output? In my new
>installation I will be installing the B&C regulator, with the new addition
>of the crowbar OV protection and the filtering capacitor.
>
>Should this take care of it? What do you think?
>
>Thanks! BTW, my O-200 alternator and regulator are for sale on eBay,
>right now. Auction # 1876166436.
I suspect the pump (which I believe is solid state
electronics to control motor coil) may be sensitive
to the severe ripple voltage that is present with
the permanent alternators. If install the recommended
filter capacitor and change the battery out regularly
this should not be a problem.
If you didn't use the battery for cranking, then I
suspect it was a rather small battery that was getting
beat up pretty badly with the ripple current from the
alternator. A 17 a.h. battery should be able to put up
with this abuse pretty well but periodic capacity checks
or yearly change-out is very much in order . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Perm magnet alternator & fuel pump trouble |
<>
Bob, can you expand on the subject of PM alternator ripple? Didn't
realize that, nor the part about an old battery not being able to smooth
things for the system.
Thanks
Dan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Robinson" <jbr(at)hitechnetworks.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-Pulse charger |
Bob
There was a thread awhile back on battery chargers that helped
desulfonate a battery to prolong it's life. I wonder what was found
out regarding the units. Do they work as stated? Are they worth
buying? any suggestions as to brands/ sources?
Jim Robinson
Glasair 79R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vincent Welch" <welchvincent(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Music Connection |
Hey Guys, I have a question for those of you that have or are planning to
have music in your cockpit. I currently have a PS Engineering PMA4000 Audio
Panel. The panel is mono (which doesn't bother me) and has one input marked
as music jack. I have a Sony AM/FM/MP3 player with front and rear left and
right speakers. I am assuming that I will only connect one set, but which,
front or rear? Also, with only one music input, how do in connect the left
and right?
I called PS Engineering tech support and they said that maybe I should tie
the two speaker outputs together through a 10K resistor but they weren't
sure.
How have others done this?
Vince Welch
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Music Connection |
In a message dated 1/3/2003 1:09:30 PM Central Standard Time,
welchvincent(at)hotmail.com writes:
> Hey Guys, I have a question for those of you that have or are planning to
> have music in your cockpit. I currently have a PS Engineering PMA4000
> Audio
> Panel. The panel is mono (which doesn't bother me) and has one input
> marked
> as music jack. I have a Sony AM/FM/MP3 player with front and rear left and
>
> right speakers. I am assuming that I will only connect one set, but which,
>
> front or rear? Also, with only one music input, how do in connect the left
>
> and right?
>
>
Vince:
Does your Sony player have a had phone jack? If it does it most likely
has tied these channels together already and you can use this source a signal
for your audio panel. If not and/or you desire to go the other route, I
suggest using the front speakers using a Radio Shack stereo to mono adapter.
If your MP3 has the 5.1 digital format for surround sound, only about 20% of
signal goes to the rear speakers. I don't know if this helps, but this is
where I would start.
Ed Silvanic
N823MS
Lancair ES
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Harold Kovac" <kayce(at)sysmatrix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: toggle spacing |
Hi all, just to let you know I received a virus with this message, my
Norton antivirus intercepted it and deleted it.The details they listed were:
( width.exe W32dotklezdotHatsymbolmm
Remove the 2 dot & atsymbol , replace with 2 periods--and @symbol to see
what I received
I hope everyone has their virus protection up to date
kayce
Original Message -----
From: <CBFLESHREN(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: toggle spacing
>
> In a message dated 12/30/2002 9:04:02 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> robert@thenews-journal.com writes:
>
>
> > >What are you folks using for toggle switch spacing on your panels?
>
> Hi Robert, assuming you are not in dire need of EVERY square
millimeter
> of your panel space, the most relevant affect dictating minimum spacing
> (since you're not building a Certificated A/C) on the front of the panel
is
> your finger size/length. Unless you want to make the concerted effort of
> using only the tip of your index finger & thumb, locate your switches at
> least far enough apart so you can comfortably cycle the switches without
> cycling it's neighbor . You can "slot" a piece of scrap material, install
> three switches in the slot, chuck it up in your vice & cycle the middle
> switch in a comfortable manner. Try left & right hands. At least a few
hairs
> greater distance than it takes to not disturb switches 1 and 3 is your
> minimum clearance. Obviously switch type can limit spacing behind the
panel
> (i.e. a typical 4 pole toggle switch is 1.5" wide). Rocker type switches
are
> typically smaller & selected with just a finger tip so they are often the
> choice for tighter spacing. Wire routing & the way the wires attach to the
> switch can also influence spacing. At a minimum the switches should never
> touch each other behind the panel.
>
> > Also, anyone want to comment on how and why they grouped their
> switches?
>
> In turbulence you don't want to have to actually read what a given
switch's
> function is. If you have 12 similar switches in a row , you will have a
hard
> time actually counting "5" from either end. So! Grouping "choices" are
only
> limited by your imagination. Landing, taxi, strobe and nav (position)
lights
> would be a logical "group" separated from a continuing "row" by at least
one
> switch hole spacing being blank. Longer "rows" of switches are dealt with
by
> occasionally installing a switch with a differently designed lever or any
one
> of a variety switch guards or at least a different color. This way you can
> quickly count 2 from the right of "this" switch or 3 from the left of that
> switch . Obviously never include batt master or buss switches or fuel
boost
> or transfer pump switches where they could possibly be confused with
anything
> else !
>
> I have not checked lately but I'm sure Bob addresses all of this
somewhere
> in the "Connection" publication. I think that's where I learned it ! Hope
my
> 2 cent's worth is helpful .
>
> Good luck Robert & Happy New Year ! Chris Fleshren
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry2DT(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 7 Msgs - 01/02/03 |
Hey guys...
I know zip about electronics, that's why I follow this list, trying to learn
something. Just read and reread Mr. Nuckolls' excellent book. I've been
working on my panel, and couldn't wait for my backup GPS any longer, so when
the Garmin196 came out, I grabbed one off eBay... JA Aircenter. Excellent to
do business with JA , btw.
Anyway, I have it in my car, while I make airplane sounds, and it never fails
to get a lock almost instantly, in cloud-and rain-covered western Oregon. Do
you think there would be ever a time when this unit would not perform, even
with the thickest clouds?
Jerry Cochran
RV6a 75/65
In a message dated 1/2/03 11:58:59 PM, aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com
writes:
<<
Dave, Norm is correct that cloud attenuation is a minor player in GPS,
however it is not a zero player, as he is wont to think, in a receiver with
minimal parallel processing going on, which was what started the thread...
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS Antennas |
>
>Anyway, cloud cover is not a benign as may be thought... I have done some
>moon bounce in years past (ham radio) and heavy, wet clouds do interfere
>significantly.. Also, the small TV dishes such as Dish Network, et. al.,
>will lose signal lock in the presence of heavy precip... Ask any of your
>friends who have one...
>
The effect of clouds or rain on a radio signal will vary depending on
the frequency of the signal. So results on one type of system (i.e.
TV dish) may not be relevant to another type of system.
Civil GPS uses frequencies around 1.6 Ghz (approximately). The info
I can find on Direct Broadcast Satellite TV is that it uses
frequencies around 12 Ghz. Big difference. What frequency were you
using when you did the moon bounce stuff?
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (baffles, induction air, oil cooler)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Stucklen" <wstucklen1(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Mic & Phone Jack Insulators |
Listers,
Anybody know where I might obtain the insulators for microphone and headset
jacks. These are the special fiber washers that insulate the microphone & headset
jacks from the panel. They are required by most intercom/radio installations.
They did not come with my SL10SM (UPS) audio panel.....
Fred Stucklen
RV-6A
Wiring the instrument panel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
| Subject: | Mic & Phone Jack Insulators |
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/wiring.html#s890-1
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
2003: The year of flight!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On
> Behalf Of Fred Stucklen
> Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 5:46 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; RV-List
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Mic & Phone Jack Insulators
>
>
> -->
>
>
> Listers,
>
> Anybody know where I might obtain the insulators for
> microphone and headset jacks. These are the special fiber
> washers that insulate the microphone & headset jacks from the
> panel. They are required by most intercom/radio
> installations. They did not come with my SL10SM (UPS) audio panel.....
>
> Fred Stucklen
> RV-6A
> Wiring the instrument panel
>
>
> ==========
> Matronics Forums.
> ==========
> List members.
> ==========
> ==========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mic & Phone Jack Insulators |
You can find them on the Aeroelectric's web site.
Another way of doing this is to mount the jacks on
those black boxes sold at Radio-Shack. See below the
panel on each side how I mounted mine:
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/images/DCP01821.JPG
Michel
--- Fred Stucklen wrote:
> Stucklen"
>
>
> Listers,
>
> Anybody know where I might obtain the insulators
> for microphone and headset jacks. These are the
> special fiber washers that insulate the microphone &
> headset jacks from the panel. They are required by
> most intercom/radio installations. They did not come
> with my SL10SM (UPS) audio panel.....
>
> Fred Stucklen
> RV-6A
> Wiring the instrument panel
>
>
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Duane Bentley" <dbentley(at)fuse.net> |
| Subject: | Antenna Electronics |
Maybe I have some new, defective antennas or I don't understand the
electronics. I've read Bob's chapter on antenna theory, but don't readily
see the answer to my questions.
I'm installing the various nav & com antennas on my RV6 and decided to do a
continuity check on them before connecting the cables. On the Aeroelectric
transponder antenna, at the connector, the inner pin is insulated from the
outer, and the inner has continuity with the shaft, all as I would expect.
On my Comant VOR/LOC/GS cat wiskers, the ohm meter says the inner pin and
outer connector are hooked together somewhere inside and have complete
continuity, but the two "whiskers" are insulated from everything.
The Comant marker beacon antenna also has continuity between the inner pin
and the outer connector shell, but the actual antenna is buried inside the
housing and I can't check that out.
The bent whip Com antenna is different from the rest. The inner pin and
outer shell are insulated from each other, but there is also no continuity
between the inner pin and the whip.
So, are the electronics correct, or do I have some defective antenna?
Thanks
Duane Bentley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
I have wire runs going to the empannage area for three things: trim
servo, Pointer ELT, and rudder position/strobe combo light. The ELT and
strobe wires are shielded. (The ELT itself and its antennea are both
beneath the VS.)
Should there be any problems bundling all three of these wire runs
together?
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
2003: The year of flight!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | richard(at)riley.net |
| Subject: | FS: Bendex electric AI |
I have ended up with a spare electric AI. The bad news is that it's 110v
400hz 3 phase. The good news is that the inverters are available from
http://freespace.virgin.net/andy.wright617/ for $160.
The one I have is a Bendex#1978130-1, cageable with a full ball
display. Removed as serviceable and kept as a serviceable spare with a
yellow tag, sealed with desiccant and caged. I'm told it's mounted in an
ATI-3 rack.
I have $550 in it, I'll sell it for the same.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Location of mike and headphone jacks |
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Fred Stucklen"
.....skip......These are the special fiber washers that insulate the
microphone & headset jacks from the panel....skip..... Fred Stucklen RV-6A
Wiring the instrument panel>>
1/5/2002
Hello Fred, Just a comment on the best location for mike and headphone jacks
for side by side cockpits arrived at after over 40 years plus of flying many,
many different aircraft / jack configurations.
Put the pilot's jacks behind the seat of the co pilot where the pilot can see
and reach them. Put the co pilot's jacks behind the seat of the pilot where
the co pilot can see and reach them. A slight head turn and a short reach
across the cockpit gives instant visibility and accessibility -- also no
cords dangling across the knees or laps and no plugs to bang with your knees
while seated or feet when getting in or out.
Sorry if this info is too late for you to implement.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sam Hoskins" <shoskins(at)Globaleyes.net> |
| Subject: | Bob - Terminals on Contactors |
Most battery contactors I've seen have the two large lugs and the smaller one for
the master switch.
The one you feature has two smaller terminals. http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/switch/s701-1l.jpg
What is the second one for? I'm talking about the terminal straddling the fusible
link and the diode.
Regards,
Sam
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Bob - Terminals on Contactors |
Sam Hoskins wrote:
>
>
> Most battery contactors I've seen have the two large lugs and the smaller one
for the master switch.
>
> The one you feature has two smaller terminals. http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/switch/s701-1l.jpg
>
> What is the second one for? I'm talking about the terminal straddling the fusible
link and the diode.
>
> Regards,
>
> Sam
The two small terminals are the two ends of the contactor coil. The one end is
connected to the
battery via the red wire shown on the web page you cite above, the other end is
grounded via the
master switch to energize the contactor. The diode shorts the reverse current flow
induced when the
coil is switched off. Hope this helps clarify.
--
Bob McC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Harrington" <kmrc(at)bellsouth.net> |
Anyone had experience with using a 12V / 10A car battery charger and building a
voltage doubler so you could use it with a 28V battery?
Thanks in advance.
Mike
'46 Swift
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: AeroElectric-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 01/05/03 |
| From: | <max.johansson(at)nokia.com> |
Mike,
the easiest way to do voltage doubling is to connect two similar cheap 12 volt
chargers in serial.
Another way is to open up the charger and have a look. If the rectifying circuit
is using a center tap transformer, you can easily rewire the circuit for double
voltage, at least if you add a bridge rectifier in case the original circuit
used single diodes. But look out for capacitors that can not take the new 32
volts output voltage and of course your fuse protection should be halved.
Any method using capacitive voltage doubling is not really feasible at these currents,
and using a step-up transformer 110 to 220 volt in front of the charger
is dangerous for many reasons.
Max, Helsinki, Finland
> From: "Mike Harrington" <kmrc(at)bellsouth.net>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery Charger
>
>
>
> Anyone had experience with using a 12V / 10A car battery
> charger and building a
> voltage doubler so you could use it with a 28V battery?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Mike
> '46 Swift>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 7 Msgs - 01/02/03 |
The 196 has more parallel receivers than the unit that started the
discussion... It should always lock up quickly no matter the weather as
long as it is near a window...
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: <Jerry2DT(at)aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 7 Msgs - 01/02/03
>
> Hey guys...
>
> I know zip about electronics, that's why I follow this list, trying to
learn
> something. Just read and reread Mr. Nuckolls' excellent book. I've been
> working on my panel, and couldn't wait for my backup GPS any longer, so
when
> the Garmin196 came out, I grabbed one off eBay... JA Aircenter. Excellent
to
> do business with JA , btw.
> Anyway, I have it in my car, while I make airplane sounds, and it never
fails
> to get a lock almost instantly, in cloud-and rain-covered western Oregon.
Do
> you think there would be ever a time when this unit would not perform,
even
> with the thickest clouds?
>
> Jerry Cochran
> RV6a 75/65
>
> In a message dated 1/2/03 11:58:59 PM,
aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com
> writes:
>
> <<
> Dave, Norm is correct that cloud attenuation is a minor player in GPS,
> however it is not a zero player, as he is wont to think, in a receiver
with
> minimal parallel processing going on, which was what started the thread...
> >>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Neil McLeod" <neilmcleod(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | Re: FS: Bendex electric AI |
I'm interested, can you send a photo, imensions etc?
Neil McLeod
----- Original Message -----
From: <richard(at)riley.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: FS: Bendex electric AI
>
> I have ended up with a spare electric AI. The bad news is that it's 110v
> 400hz 3 phase. The good news is that the inverters are available from
> http://freespace.virgin.net/andy.wright617/ for $160.
>
> The one I have is a Bendex#1978130-1, cageable with a full ball
> display. Removed as serviceable and kept as a serviceable spare with a
> yellow tag, sealed with desiccant and caged. I'm told it's mounted in an
> ATI-3 rack.
>
> I have $550 in it, I'll sell it for the same.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Charger |
In my mind it would be easier and cheaper to just to get a second charger
and put the battery leads in series (just like stacking flashlight
batteries) so that you get 28 volts across the two outside leads... If
you first run the charger leads to an output buss, you can effectively wind
up with charging station with battery clamps for two 14 volt charge stations
and a 28 volt charge station - at minimal cost...
There are other issues with aircraft/RG/gelled/whatever batteries such as
constant current charge, etc.. But that can be another thread...
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Harrington" <kmrc(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery Charger
>
> Anyone had experience with using a 12V / 10A car battery charger and
building a voltage doubler so you could use it with a 28V battery?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Mike
> '46 Swift
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Monster battery for Walter M601 . . . |
Lancair is using two Concorde RG24-15 batteries which weigh 28lb each in
their Walter powered Lancair IV. They are able to get good starts with
these batteries by initiating the start with the batteries in parallel
and then transitioning them to series part way through the start. This
provides a quicker, cooler start than is possible with the conventional
setup even if huge batteries are used in the conventional setup.
David Swartzendruber
Wichita
>
> >: Hi Bob,
> >
> >Building a Turbine Legend with Walter M601 engine. The M601 engine
has a
> >high current starting requirement -- a single 24v battery doesn't
have
> >enough capacity.
> >
> >I am planning to use four B&C 12 volt 25AHour batteries -- two 12v
> >batteries connected in series for the 24 volt requirement, with two
of
> >these in paralles. B&C indicates no problem with this setup, but I
> wanted
> >to get your opinion if you would be so kind to comment on the pros
and
> >cons. Thanks.
>
> That's been done and will function. This combo
> could produce a battery array on the order of
> 100 pounds and total capacity of 50 a.h.
>
> Have you considered perhaps two batteries like
>
http://www.panasonic.com/industrial/battery/oem/images/pdf/Panasonic_VRL
A_
> LC-X1265P.pdf
> for a total weight of 88 pounds, fewer parts
> to install and a capacity of 65 a.h?
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Lightweight Starters |
I'm sure the Magnaflite data given below was acquired on a starter test
stand, not an engine. The data is only useful for comparing the two
starters, not for determining how fast it will crank your engine. When
it says RPM is actual engine RPM, it means they've already accounted for
the gear ratio between the starter and ring gear. The starter is
turning at the RPM that would be required to turn the engine at the RPM
listed.
David Swartzendruber
Kelly Aerospace
Wichita
>
> Have a data sheet faxed by Electrosystems, maker of the
Magnaflite
> starter. Here is their comparison of the old MZ-4222 vs the
Magnaflite
> MZ-6222, exactly as on the sheet:
> ____
>
> The following test results are based on 15 ft/lbs of torque
> MZ-4222 12V 145A 0.89 HP 310 RPM
> MZ-6222 12V 235A 1.65 HP 580 RPM
> RPM is actual engine RPM
>
> The Magnaflite starters weigh 7.8 lb compared to 17 lb for the
standard
> starter.
> ____
>
> Large current draw is obvious, and goes to what Bob wrote about
> condition of the current paths. The rest of the specs seem crazy. 15
> ft/lb
> torque? 580 RPM actual engine cranking speed? Some kind of lab
rating
> system maybe? I sent questions, but no response.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight Starters |
<>
Thanks Dave. Ok, listed amperage is for a lightly loaded, high-speed
condition on the starter bench (MZ-6222, 12V, 235A, 1.65 HP, 580 RPM, 15
ft/lbs torque
). Would amps would be higher when loaded to a more realistic level, ie
slower speed, higher torque? Hard to imagine spinning an engine at 580 RPM.
Dan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Lightweight Starters |
Dan,
Yes, loading the starter more will result in increased amperage and
decreased RPM.
David Swartzendruber
Wichita
>
> Thanks Dave. Ok, listed amperage is for a lightly loaded, high-
> speed
> condition on the starter bench (MZ-6222, 12V, 235A, 1.65 HP, 580 RPM,
15
> ft/lbs torque
> ). Would amps would be higher when loaded to a more realistic level,
ie
> slower speed, higher torque? Hard to imagine spinning an engine at
580
> RPM.
>
>
> Dan
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Battery Charger |
| From: | "MATTHEW PRATHER" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
This MIGHT work, but there is one thing that I would check before attempting
it. Take your handy multimeter and check for continuity between the negative
output of the charger, and the neutral or ground pin on the charger's wall
plug.
If they are connected, I suspect you may have trouble with this scheme. I
haven't tried it, however. You may be able to use an isolationg
transformer to
'float' one charger from the other.
Matt Prather
N34RD
>
>
> In my mind it would be easier and cheaper to just to get a second
> charger and put the battery leads in series (just like stacking
> flashlight batteries) so that you get 28 volts across the two outside
> leads... If you first run the charger leads to an output buss, you
> can effectively wind up with charging station with battery clamps for
> two 14 volt charge stations and a 28 volt charge station - at minimal
> cost...
> There are other issues with aircraft/RG/gelled/whatever batteries such
> as constant current charge, etc.. But that can be another thread...
>
> Denny
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Harrington" <kmrc(at)bellsouth.net>
> To:
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery Charger
>
>
>
>>
>> Anyone had experience with using a 12V / 10A car battery charger and
> building a voltage doubler so you could use it with a 28V battery?
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Mike
>> '46 Swift
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Charger |
Ummm Matt... It didn't occur to me that any manufacturer would so brain dead
as to take an isolated transformer secondary and tie it back into the
primary...
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: "MATTHEW PRATHER" <mprather(at)spro.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery Charger
>
> This MIGHT work, but there is one thing that I would check before
attempting
> it. Take your handy multimeter and check for continuity between the
negative
> output of the charger, and the neutral or ground pin on the charger's wall
> plug.
> If they are connected, I suspect you may have trouble with this scheme. I
> haven't tried it, however. You may be able to use an isolationg
> transformer to
> 'float' one charger from the other.
>
> Matt Prather
> N34RD
>
> >
> >
> > In my mind it would be easier and cheaper to just to get a second
> > charger and put the battery leads in series (just like stacking
> > flashlight batteries) so that you get 28 volts across the two outside
> > leads... If you first run the charger leads to an output buss, you
> > can effectively wind up with charging station with battery clamps for
> > two 14 volt charge stations and a 28 volt charge station - at minimal
> > cost...
> > There are other issues with aircraft/RG/gelled/whatever batteries such
> > as constant current charge, etc.. But that can be another thread...
> >
> > Denny
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mike Harrington" <kmrc(at)bellsouth.net>
> > To:
> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery Charger
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Anyone had experience with using a 12V / 10A car battery charger and
> > building a voltage doubler so you could use it with a 28V battery?
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance.
> >>
> >> Mike
> >> '46 Swift
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong(at)xs4all.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: FW: Over-voltage protection |
Is there no opinion on this at all among participants? I would be interested
too. The proposal sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
Jan de Jong
Gary Casey wrote:
>
> Pardon the repetition, but I didn't see my original message or any replies
> on the list - It may not have gotten there.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gary Casey [mailto:glcasey(at)adelphia.net]
> To: Aeroelectric-List
> Subject: Over-voltage protection
>
> In reading all the submissions about over-voltage protection I have come up
> with a question. It is based on the assumption that the only failure that
> can cause an over-voltage condition is that of the voltage regulator,
> assuming that the regulator is external or otherwise not internally powered.
> The typical over-voltage protection circuit is in series with the regulator
> and disconnects the power feed to the field. I'm assuming that the
> protection device could be on either side of the regulator. Question: Why
> not just install a second regulator in series with the first? The second
> one could be adjusted to a somewhat higher voltage than the first one and
> could be designed to provide an output for a warning light if it came on
> line. Therefore, a (primary) regulator failure would result in a system
> voltage of, say, 15 volts instead of 14 and a warning indicator. Nothing
> would have to be done by the pilot and he could complete his flight without
> worry of running out of battery. This would seem like a more elegant
> solution than to just kill the alternator if the voltage regulator fails,
> which only replaces one emergency with another less urgent one.
>
> Gary Casey
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
I've got electric elevator and aileron trim in my RV-7. Put 'em on the
e-buss or on the main buss?
I was thinking that since they're used so intermittently at most, I could
put 'em on the e-buss. It will be nice to be able to trim on an approach as
speed changes, for example, without having to muck around with flipping the
master back on, etc.
What's the general feeling about trim being powered by the e-buss?
Thanks in advance,
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | FW: Over-voltage protection |
A failure of the regulator could be caused by a problem somewhere else
in the aircraft such as a partially shorted field winding, or
intermittently shorting field wire. This could fail both regulators in
the same manner and then leave you with an over-voltage condition and no
protection other than the pilot noticing it and turning off the
alternator. Bob's OV module would provide the necessary OV protection
in this situation.
There are other reasons why I would not choose the two regulators in
series approach, but I believe the one above is enough.
David Swartzendruber
Wichita
>
> In reading all the submissions about over-voltage protection I have
>come
>up
> with a question. It is based on the assumption that the only failure
>that
> can cause an over-voltage condition is that of the voltage regulator,
> assuming that the regulator is external or otherwise not internally
>powered.
> The typical over-voltage protection circuit is in series with the
>regulator
> and disconnects the power feed to the field. I'm assuming that the
> protection device could be on either side of the regulator. Question:
>Why
> not just install a second regulator in series with the first? The
>second
> one could be adjusted to a somewhat higher voltage than the first one
>and
> could be designed to provide an output for a warning light if it came
>on
> line. Therefore, a (primary) regulator failure would result in a
>system
> voltage of, say, 15 volts instead of 14 and a warning indicator.
> Nothing
> would have to be done by the pilot and he could complete his flight
> without
> worry of running out of battery. This would seem like a more elegant
> solution than to just kill the alternator if the voltage regulator
> fails,
> which only replaces one emergency with another less urgent one.
>
> Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Trim on e-buss? |
Dan,
I'd agree with your rationale - only occasional current drain on the
battery. Mine is manual.
Richard Dudley
-6A FWF
Dan Checkoway wrote:
>
>
> I've got electric elevator and aileron trim in my RV-7. Put 'em on the
> e-buss or on the main buss?
>
> I was thinking that since they're used so intermittently at most, I could
> put 'em on the e-buss. It will be nice to be able to trim on an approach as
> speed changes, for example, without having to muck around with flipping the
> master back on, etc.
>
> What's the general feeling about trim being powered by the e-buss?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Radio Master Switch |
Hi Bob;
I just finished reading the following article written by Tom Rogers, the
Avionics Editor for AVweb. In it he insists that a Master switch is required
to protect our expensive avionics from the infamous "Spike." I know your
position on the matter and just thought you would be interested in seeing
what this expert has to say. It appears that Tom is also the owner of
Avionics West and says he will install an average avionics master
switch-breaker for $60.00 plus labor.
http://www.avweb.com/news/avionics/182015-1.html
Ron Smith
N566U(at)aol.com
RV 8A working on panel
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Radio Master Switch |
I'm not Bob, but check out his already-written response at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/avmaster.pdf
Robert Dickson
RV-6A electrical
----------
>From: N566u(at)aol.com
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Radio Master Switch
>Date: Mon, Jan 6, 2003, 5:24 PM
>
>
> Hi Bob;
>
> I just finished reading the following article written by Tom Rogers, the
> Avionics Editor for AVweb. In it he insists that a Master switch is required
> to protect our expensive avionics from the infamous "Spike." I know your
> position on the matter and just thought you would be interested in seeing
> what this expert has to say. It appears that Tom is also the owner of
> Avionics West and says he will install an average avionics master
> switch-breaker for $60.00 plus labor.
>
>
HREF="http://www.avweb.com/news/avionics/182015-1.html">http://www.avweb.com
/news/avi
> onics/182015-1.html
>
>
> Ron Smith
> N566U(at)aol.com
> RV 8A working on panel
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "robert watson"<bob1629r(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Trim on e-buss? |
Dan put trims on main buss this way if you have a runaway trim you can
remove with master and still have e-buss
> Richard Dudley
>
> Dan,
> I'd agree with your rationale - only occasional
> current drain on the
> battery. Mine is manual.
>
> Richard Dudley
> -6A FWF
>
> Dan Checkoway wrote:
> >
> Checkoway"
> >
> > I've got electric elevator and aileron trim
> in my RV-7. Put 'em on the
> > e-buss or on the main buss?
> >
> > I was thinking that since they're used so
> intermittently at most, I could
> > put 'em on the e-buss. It will be nice to be
> able to trim on an approach as
> > speed changes, for example, without having to
> muck around with flipping the
> > master back on, etc.
> >
> > What's the general feeling about trim being
> powered by the e-buss?
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > )_( Dan
> > RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
> > http://www.rvproject.com
> >
>
>
> Forum -
> the Contributions
> ads or any other
> Forums.
> latest messages.
> other List members.
> aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> Digests:http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Trim on e-buss? |
> Dan put trims on main buss this way if you have a runaway trim you can
> remove with master and still have e-buss
Hm. Given that I'll have a pullable circuit breaker for the trims (for that
very reason), do you still think the main buss is where they belong?
)_( Dan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Aucountry(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Radio Master Switch |
In a message dated 01/06/03 06:36:36 PM, bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
> I was at Cessna when the avionics master was born, and
> we thought we had a good reason . . . . over the years
> the reasoning, experience and technology upon which
> the decision was made are long since gone the way of
> the buggy whip.
>
The problem, as I see it, is not whether or not an Avionics Master has any
virtues. The problem is, add-ons in airplanes are like entropy, growing
without bounds.
The local Avionics shop told me, "I love the Avionics Master. I get paid
$500-$600 to install something airplane owners don't need and it only takes=20a
few hours. When they leave, they think their plane's avionics system is
more modern. It doesn't matter if it's any good or not. We're both
happy."
Personally, I'm a minimalist. If it isn't absolutely needed for my intended
flight, it isn't in the airplane.
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <WernerSchneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Radio Master Switch |
>
> Yup . . . I've seen it, and others like it for
> years. I can't remember if I wrote to this particular
> author or not. I used to attempt contact with everyone who
> published articles touting the virtues of an avionics
> master with respect to protecting radios from airplane
> gremlins. My question has always been, "Please identify
> for me the source, duration and magnitude of any
> transient that might endanger the health and well-being
> of any piece of electronics.
>
.
>
> Bob . . .
>
Just started installing my "things" and I have a used Insight engine monitor
GEM 602 in the installation instructions (Version 3.0 May 1996) Page 6
.....If the aircraft installation does not include an Avionics Master switch
circuit or bus, we recommend that one be installed or a separate switch
provided to remove power from the Display during engine starts.
Should I really follow the separate switch way (tube display) or just ignore
(Bob, do you want the notes in pdf form for asking them =(;o))
Werner (VFR all electric)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "willfly" <willfly(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Trim on e-buss? |
I would say the real answer would be determined by the total load you are planning
for the E Bus. The heavy load items will be the com/transmitter and transponder.
I'm not flying yet but currently have the following on my E Bus;
GNC 300XL Nav/Com, GTX 327 transponder, VLM, Elevator Trim, Auto Pilot, AH, DG
and EIS system. I plan to limit transponder and com transmissions during E BUS
only operation.
Steve Glasgow
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 10204 Simpkins |
> Bob:
>
>Thanks for your excellent publication and advice. I've been stewing over a
>dual-alternator dual-bus Rotax 914 system for a pusher,
>and am appalled at how the the hideous current drain of the battery
>contactor solenoid eats up the capacity of the standard 914
>generator. Though it would be tolerable for a momentary actuator to have
>a high solenoid current, the battery (and crossfeed) contactor is a prime
>candidate for improvement. I'm somewhat suprised that with all the
>advances in power controllers there isn't a low trigger current (or
>voltage) solid-state alternative to the battery contactor.
>The only reasons I can think of for this is:
> 1. the on resistance is still way too high
> 2. the starter currents could fry the solid state contactor
> 3. the market is for higher bus voltages
> 4. a solid state unit would cost 5 times as much
> 5. not enough volume for anybody to be interested
>Have you come across a possible replacement, or have you some cautionary
>thoughts
>on the matter?
As you've discovered, such devices exist and have for a number of years.
There are high current contactors that use stepped power management
to supply fast actuation with low sustaining current but they are not
cheap. My question to you is, what features of your load analysis
tell you that "power wasteful" contactors are driving your
design up to the ragged edge of practicality?
What is your second alternator? If it's at least a 40A belt
driven machine, then the 18A alternator built onto the back
of the Rotax can be treated as if it were an SD-8 or SD-20
pad driven alternator on the back of a Lycoming. You should
have gobs of energy to do everything the airplane needs to
do an still toss off 20-30 watts for closing less-than-ideal
contactors which are more readily acquired and much less
expensive.
I'd recommend you wire things up using Figure Z-13 where the
smaller alternator on the Rotax is used for back-up only.
In this configuration, even with dual batteries, the ugly
contactors are close only while the big alternator is operating
and you have power to burn. If the big alternator is off line,
the only relay you need to keep close is the ov protection relay
on the smaller alternator which only wastes about 1.5 watts.
I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
share the information with as many folks as possible.
You can join at . . .
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
Thanks!
Bob . . .
|---------------------------------------------------|
| A lie can travel half way around the world while |
| the truth is till putting on its shoes . . . |
| -Mark Twain- |
|---------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Trim on e-buss? |
>
>I would say the real answer would be determined by the total load you are
>planning for the E Bus. The heavy load items will be the com/transmitter
>and transponder.
>
>I'm not flying yet but currently have the following on my E Bus;
>
>GNC 300XL Nav/Com, GTX 327 transponder, VLM, Elevator Trim, Auto Pilot,
>AH, DG and EIS system. I plan to limit transponder and com transmissions
>during E BUS only operation.
Since you are all electric, do you have a second alternator
planned? If you have two alternators, which of the architectures
have you selected for wiring things up . . . Z-12, Z-13, or Z-14?
Transponder and comm loads are the smallest of loads. The comm in
receive mode should be .5A or less, the transponder will run about
an amp or so with moderate reply rates.
What have you calculated as the total running loads for your
present e-bus architecture and why don't you have any lighting
and/or turn coordinator on the e-bus?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
<>
To analyze the situation we need to evaluate all failure modes that would
cause an uncommanded full excitation of the alternator field. Yes, I
suppose it is possible for the positive side of the field to become shorted
to battery voltage, but how would that happen? The wiring is not close to
each other, not even internally to the alternator. And if it did short like
that any OV system that disconnected the power wouldn't work anyway. If the
field had an internal short it would either be a short between windings or a
short to ground. In either case the alternator output goes down and doesn't
require an over-voltage action. If it did short to ground it presumably
will blow the fuse in the field supply, possibly taking the regulator with
it. In either case the charging system won't work again until repaired. If
the primary regulator had an internal short to ground the fuse will again
blow and the secondary regulator would be helpless - still no over-voltage
condition. On the other hand, if the voltage regulator sense lead opened,
or a number of devices in the regulator failed the regulator output could
turn full on, creating an over-voltage. In this case the second regulator
would behave as though it were a "proportional" over-voltage module and
limit the current to the field. The second regulator should, of course,
have a completely independent voltage sense connection. I suppose the
failure mode left is a very short duration, single event short to ground,
which could cause the output devices in both regulators to fail shorted, but
still not blow the in-line fuse. But I think that specific failure mode is
very, very rare.
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Avionics Masters |
<>
Just as a point of reference, my Cardinal apparently was equipped with an
"avionics master relay" which was a normally closed relay between the main
buss and the avionics buss. The coil was connected to the starter terminal
on the ignition switch so that when the starter was engaged the avionics
were turned off. It either only showed up in the service manual, never
being installed, or had been removed at some point in its life. Another
single point of failure.
As far as I can tell there are very minor voltage transients that occur
during cranking. The first is when the starter is engaged and the battery
voltage takes a virtually instantaneous drop to some lower voltage. During
cranking the battery voltage will smoothly rise and fall with each
compression stroke, accompanied by a ripple voltage from starter commutator
segments. When the starter is released the voltage will step back to a
no-load condition, not overshooting. The inductive surge from the starter
exists on the STARTER side of the contactor and doesn't exist at the main
buss. Car systems shut off some of the electronics during cranking because
they only need to shut off the heater blower and the electronics were just
hooked to the same switch terminal because it was there.
It would be tempting, I suppose, to hook the starter contactor directly to
the battery and leave the master off during cranking. But then there would
be no way to disconnect the starter if the contactor welded.
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Dual regulator OV protection |
The failure mode you mention below is one of the ones I was trying to
describe. I was not talking about any shorting of the field wire to bus
voltage. The other failure mode I was thinking of was shorting of the
field winding to itself which would decrease the field resistance, and
increase the field current. The pass transistor in the regulator could
potentially fail as a result of higher than normal field current, yet
not high enough to trip the breaker.
You are right about these being somewhat rare, but any OV condition is
rare. My preference would be to provide OV protection that didn't have
the same failure mode as the regulator. If the regulator is so
unreliable that a backup regulator is desired, I would prefer to put it
in parallel to the first with the ability to switch between them. Each
one would also have OV protection. This still doesn't provide the
reliability that one might expect because a fault in the aircraft could
take out the first regulator, and then when you switch in the second, it
goes too. Also, there are still other single point failures that could
take out the alternator system.
A second, completely separate alternator system would be my choice if
the one alternator, one regulator system was not reliable enough. I
believe that one can find a regulator that is as reliable as other parts
of the alternator system. Trying to provide redundancy for some
components of the system, but not others which are just as likely to
fail, seems to be increasing parts count and complexity without the
increase in reliability needed to justify it.
David Swartzendruber
Wichita
> I suppose the
> failure mode left is a very short duration, single event (or
intermittent) short to ground,
> which could cause the output devices in both regulators to fail
shorted,
> but
> still not blow the in-line fuse. But I think that specific failure
mode
> is
> very, very rare.
>
> Gary Casey
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 10198 Clabots |
>Below is the result of your inquiry. It was submitted by
>Gerald Clabots (gclabots(at)execpc.com) on Saturday, January 4, 2003 at 18:59:39
>
>Saturday, January 4, 2003
>
>Gerald Clabots
>
>,
>Email: gclabots(at)execpc.com
>Comments/Questions: I plan on ordering you fuse block and fuses, My
>question is my pitot tube draws 8.5 amps. Is a 10 amp fuse to small? That
>would be 85% of rating. What is a recommended loading of fuses?
Pitot heaters are unique in that they have a rather long duration
warm-up inrush current. For an 8A pitot heater, I would fuse it
at 15A and wire the circuit with 14AWG wire. Every other
system in the airplane will be fine with a fuse rated only
slightly higher than running current for the device.
>Thanks
>Gerry
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: Antenna Electronics |
>
>Maybe I have some new, defective antennas or I don't understand the
>electronics. I've read Bob's chapter on antenna theory, but don't readily
>see the answer to my questions.
>
>I'm installing the various nav & com antennas on my RV6 and decided to do a
>continuity check on them before connecting the cables. On the Aeroelectric
>transponder antenna, at the connector, the inner pin is insulated from the
>outer, and the inner has continuity with the shaft, all as I would expect.
>
>On my Comant VOR/LOC/GS cat wiskers, the ohm meter says the inner pin and
>outer connector are hooked together somewhere inside and have complete
>continuity, but the two "whiskers" are insulated from everything.
>
>The Comant marker beacon antenna also has continuity between the inner pin
>and the outer connector shell, but the actual antenna is buried inside the
>housing and I can't check that out.
>
>The bent whip Com antenna is different from the rest. The inner pin and
>outer shell are insulated from each other, but there is also no continuity
>between the inner pin and the whip.
>
>So, are the electronics correct, or do I have some defective antenna?
As a general rule, antennas cannot always be "tested" with an ohmmeter.
Some antennas may have matching networks consisting of various
inductors and capacitors that will make continuity measurements
confusing or meaningless. Active testing by exciting the antenna
with a source at the frequency of interest and measuring resistive
and reactive components (SWR) is the only effective means for
testing an antenna.
As a general rule also, antennas are quite rugged. I cannot
recall ever having to replace an antenna that did not suffer
some catastrophic damage (collision, lighting stroke, etc).
So if your coax feedlines check out, go ahead and stick everything
together. If you find performance lacking after every thing is installed,
it is MORE likely that you have a problem with a radio but it's
easy to test the antenna as installed with test equipment that
will be in the possession of every decent avionics shop.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Need some help . . . |
We've set a date for the annual weekend seminar in Ft. Worth.
It's a rather short coupled date (Mar 22/23). I'd really
appreciate it if folks who frequent other list servers would
make an announcement for me (assuming list-manager would not
dis-approve).
Link to the Ft. Worth page is
http://www.aeroelectric.com/seminars/Ft.Worth.html
Thanks guys . . .
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: Emp wire bundle |
>
>I have wire runs going to the empannage area for three things: trim
>servo, Pointer ELT, and rudder position/strobe combo light. The ELT and
>strobe wires are shielded. (The ELT itself and its antennea are both
>beneath the VS.)
>
>Should there be any problems bundling all three of these wire runs
>together?
>
>-
Risks are quite low . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Perm magnet alternator & fuel pump |
trouble
>
><motor coil) may be sensitive to the severe ripple voltage that is present
>with the permanent alternators. >>
>
> Bob, can you expand on the subject of PM alternator ripple? Didn't
>realize that, nor the part about an old battery not being able to smooth
>things for the system.
>
>
>Thanks
>Dan
PM alternators in general are single phase devices with
an unfiltered ripple voltage equal to full output from the
device. 3-phase alternators on the other hand have only
about 5% pk-pk ripple after rectification.
All of our diagrams show a hefty filter capacitor on
each PM alternator installation . . . which should be
replaced every 4-5 years. We also recommend periodic
battery replacement for the purposes of maintaining
both battery capacity and battery filtering effectiveness.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-Pulse charger |
>
>
>Bob
>There was a thread awhile back on battery chargers that helped
>desulfonate a battery to prolong it's life. I wonder what was found
>out regarding the units. Do they work as stated? Are they worth
>buying? any suggestions as to brands/ sources?
>Jim Robinson
>Glasair 79R
I have a sample product that's supposed to recover
lost capacity in a battery due to sulfation . . . the
limited testing I've been able to conduct haven't been
conclusive in support of the claims. I wasn't able
to recover a battery that was pulled from service
after it failed to start a car . . . I did see some
increase in battery capacity for a few cycles of testing.
I let the battery sit on the shelf for a month with the
de-sulfater installed . . . took it down and attempted
to charge and retest . . . battery wouldn't accept any
significant charge and it's capacity had dropped to
a few percent of new.
If it were my airplane, I'd still have to opt for
the new-battery-every-year technique for making sure
I was carrying the expected reserve capacity.
Dave S. You guys were looking at some de-sulfator
type products, any new info on that program?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Avionics Masters |
| From: | Walter Casey <mikec(at)caseyspm.com> |
Does anyone remember vacuum tube radios in automobiles. The vacuum
tubes required high voltage (over 90V) and to get this voltage the 6V
DC had to be converted to AC an run through a transformer. The DC to AC
converted was called vibrator and worked like an electric door bell.
When you turned on the radio the first thing you heard was the hum of
the vibrator. The vibrator was quite prone to failure due to contacts
sticking. As I understood it, it was to prevent the contact sticking
that the starter button was removed and replaced by the key
switch/starter which prevented the radio from being on while the car
was started.
Old habits die hard.
Best wishes,
Walter Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Antenna Electronics |
I would agree that an "open circuit" as shown with an ohmmeter is
entirely possible in a properly functioning antenna, but if it shows a
dead short of 0 ohms from the shielding to the center conductor, I can't
think of any way that antenna could function properly.
If that is the case, I wouldn't want to initiate any transmission test
until the short is found - although I guess today's transceivers can
handle that, it still just doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Am I wrong?
-John R.
P.S.: Other than an RF power/SWR meter, what test equipment ought we to
have to run such tests?
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Maybe I have some new, defective antennas or I don't understand the
>>electronics. I've read Bob's chapter on antenna theory, but don't readily
>>see the answer to my questions.
>>
>>I'm installing the various nav & com antennas on my RV6 and decided to do a
>>continuity check on them before connecting the cables. On the Aeroelectric
>>transponder antenna, at the connector, the inner pin is insulated from the
>>outer, and the inner has continuity with the shaft, all as I would expect.
>>
>>On my Comant VOR/LOC/GS cat wiskers, the ohm meter says the inner pin and
>>outer connector are hooked together somewhere inside and have complete
>>continuity, but the two "whiskers" are insulated from everything.
>>
>>The Comant marker beacon antenna also has continuity between the inner pin
>>and the outer connector shell, but the actual antenna is buried inside the
>>housing and I can't check that out.
>>
>>The bent whip Com antenna is different from the rest. The inner pin and
>>outer shell are insulated from each other, but there is also no continuity
>>between the inner pin and the whip.
>>
>>So, are the electronics correct, or do I have some defective antenna?
>
>
> As a general rule, antennas cannot always be "tested" with an ohmmeter.
> Some antennas may have matching networks consisting of various
> inductors and capacitors that will make continuity measurements
> confusing or meaningless. Active testing by exciting the antenna
> with a source at the frequency of interest and measuring resistive
> and reactive components (SWR) is the only effective means for
> testing an antenna.
>
> As a general rule also, antennas are quite rugged. I cannot
> recall ever having to replace an antenna that did not suffer
> some catastrophic damage (collision, lighting stroke, etc).
> So if your coax feedlines check out, go ahead and stick everything
> together. If you find performance lacking after every thing is installed,
> it is MORE likely that you have a problem with a radio but it's
> easy to test the antenna as installed with test equipment that
> will be in the possession of every decent avionics shop.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Lundquist" <lundquist(at)ieee.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna Electronics |
It is entirely possible that a perfectly good antenna can be either open or
a dead short when checked with an ohm meter. The ohm meter is only useful
if you know what the antenna is supposed to be.
Dave Lundquist
lundquist(at)ieee.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Rourke" <jrourke@allied-computer.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Antenna Electronics
<jrourke@allied-computer.com>
>
> I would agree that an "open circuit" as shown with an ohmmeter is
> entirely possible in a properly functioning antenna, but if it shows a
December 17, 2002 - January 07, 2003
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-bm