AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-cx

February 10, 2004 - February 24, 2004



      
      Dave Morris
      
      
      At 05:44 AM 2/10/2004, you wrote:
      
      >
      >I'm seriously considering manufacturing a small annunciator panel
      >from Stanley LED light bars.  These are the ones with part numbers
      >like MU04-2101 sold by Digikey, etc.  I am wondering what options I
      >would have to put legends on the face of the light bars.  What looks
      >good and lasts a long time?  I am also looking for ideas on how to
      >package the resistors, etc needed to limit the current.  Does anyone
      >have any pictures they could point me too?
      >
      >Thanks,
      >--
      >Kevin Horton         RV-8 (finishing kit)
      >Ottawa, Canada
      >http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
      >
      >
      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Speedy11(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 10, 2004
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 29 Msgs - 02/09/04
In a message dated 2/10/04 2:56:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes: << For $300 and 4 pounds you can have a SECOND engine driven > power source. > > Bob . . . I think you mean a Third source. (Battery =1, Alt =2, Second Alt = 3) >> Key word is "engine-driven." It would be the second source and an important one. Stan ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
Subject: Re: LED light bar annunciator panel?
From: John Schroeder <jschroeder(at)perigee.net>
Kevin - Drop Mark Phillips an email. He has a great design for a panel and used these LED's in his annunciator panel. We plan to use them too, but are not sure how to do the lettering. There is an outfit that will custom-make a backlit plexi panel. If we can get it a little more customized, we may go that route. Mark: Mark Phillips Backlit panels: http://www.aircraftsimulators.com/products.html Cheers, John ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: Mag/E.I. switches
Date: Feb 10, 2004
> Hmmm . . . at ANY > RPM? What happens when you do ignition system checks by turning > them off and on one at a time to observe operation of each system > independently? At low RPM (Below 1700) it doesn't seem to effect it. Besides, if you turn off the magneto to check the E.I.& plugs and turn it back on there is little sense in turning off the E.I. system when you see the RPM increase when the magneto is switched on. If the magneto side is fouling plugs running them is a way to "hopefully" clean an dismiss and carbon deposits. I usually turn off the E.I. system at 1000 rpm only for a moment and right back on just after start up. A smooth idle verify's the magneto plugs are firing and at run-up the mag is switched of to check the amount of RPM drop. In reality were checking not only magneto operations but just as much sparkplug operation. With an E.I. system all your checking is plugs unless you have a variable advance in which case you -Could- check that too. Flying the same plane all the time allows a "feel" for engine smoothness and EGT/CHT numbers then back up the feeling. Those different shaped switches also make it easier to "feel" for the switch whether light or dark. Electronics can do alot but they can fail at the point of "when the engineer didn't think of that." I don't like to be dependant on electronics 100%. They fail and can't adjust withoput adding more weight to the system. When I fail - I usually loose a little weight and hopefully I can adjust... And quickly :-)) Regards, Dale Martin Lewiston, ID LEZ-235 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
Subject: Re: RE: Load dump protection
Date: Feb 10, 2004
I agree that careless owners need protection. There is no way we can protect against all loose or broken connections but we can add the simple and low cost Diode (low cost in 'do it your self ' or $30 for a pre made up diode with lugs attached). The loose/ broken connection is the first fault and our designs should protect against that fault from causing additional damage like the Alternator, or worse, avionics/engine systems etc. Thus boaters have solved the problem but that requires action to impliment as you note. However I was referring to the add on Load dump diode mentioned in an earlier post (or the one I suggested that is already tested and qualified for that purpose) . With that diode added there is protection against what you say. Currently that ""switch"" is the fault and that fault propagates to the alternator and depending on the wiring design to the main electrical bus etc. The Load Dump diode stops the propagation There is a simple solution but as you say its not "stock". The designer(s) need to research the issue and provide the external FIX NOT provided by "off the shelf alternators". My point is acft have the same problem and the same solution is available and has been for decades but has been overlooked in most designs. Load dump protection exists as an add on and why are we beating it to death when there is an existing simple proven fix. On a related subject I had a frayed starter cable (at the starter end so hard to see). It finally broke and during starting sparked as the engine torques. This was back before TVS was used on that auto. I destroyed 3 discrete electronic modules that were on the main battery bus from the HV transients. NONE of the electronics modules that were on the accessory bus were damaged as they were disconnected by the IGN switch during starting. AS far as autos are concerned sure the same can happen but I stand by my statement there are millions of autos with stock electrical systems and they all depend on a solid battery connection for protection. I should have said while Load Dump is a concern in autos, the MFGR's are not concerned about it enough to do anything as the battery is normally connected solidly at least during the warranty period. Adding a $1 device or changing a design of a regulator is very costly and that money is not spent lightly. Finally as you point out the energy in the alternator windings is already there and the regulator can only stop new energy not what is already there so Load dump can be a real concern with external regulators also. Even OVP do not address current energy just future energy. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Load dump protection > > < autos, as in > autos the "B" lead is always directly wired to the battery. Thus there is no > "switch" to be accidentally opened to cause load dump action. Also there is > no OVP included as its rare and not a concern in the auto mfgrs mind. At > least a couple of years ago I was unable to find ANY auto mfgr alternator > that protected against load dump...I do not understand the need for > additional testing in this case. The > Boaters have long since solved the problem and so why are we still > investigating it??>> > > Load dump protection in autos is still a real thing. There is a "switch" > between the alternator and the battery and it is the battery terminal > itself. The worst case, that is mostly worried about by boat manufacturers, > is a loose connection on the battery terminal that vibrates, repeatedly > opening and closing. The electronics builders for boats find that it has > not been "solved" as you imply, but is almost a normal situation. The usual > scenario is that the boater stores his boat over the winter, then finds the > battery is dead. He removes the battery and charges it for 10 minutes (the > family is waiting) and then puts it in the boat and just pushes the battery > cable on. The loose cable vibrates, the battery is accepting maximum charge > and the voltage transients are incredible - and repeated many times a > second. Also, the battery doesn't have to be disconnected to have a load > dump. Any time a large load is shut off the alternator has to instantly > reduce its output, which it can't do because of the inductance of the field > windings. Of course, having the battery there tames the load dump to a very > manageable amplitude. > > Gary Casey > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Load dump issues
> >I have watched this discussion and am concerned that the >issue/facts/solution is going off track a little. > >Load dump is NOT unique to internally regulated alternators. ANY alternator >can and will exhibit load dump when wired such that the load can be removed >from the "B" lead when the alternator is generating power. IE >internal/external/new/old/rebuilt are all the SAME with regard to Load Dump >concerns. That's not what was said. The problem is load-dump tolerance of the REGULATORS internal to rebuilt alternators Van's sells vis-a-vis regulators in OEM alternators which MAY be more resistant. Regulator chips advertised by Onsemi and others call out "load dump protection." I mentioned in a post last week that the externally regulated Bonanza alternators are wired in a way that I could manually generate a "load-dump" event by manipulation of switches. >All alternators, regardless of design, need protection or they can dump >damaging loads either back to the alternator or to the expensive avionics >depending on what opened and where. Correct. We've had this discussion before. The risk is predicated on battery contactor failure (or pilot operation of the contactor at inappropriate times) while the battery is being charged. After that, the duration and amplitude of the event is dependent upon many system variables. >Designs that disconnect the "B" lead when OVP is detected are great as long >as there are Zero false trips. Bob has said many times that his OVP can and >does (while very rare) false trip. This can result in alternator damage due >to a false trip and not acceptable to me. Correct . . . and the goal of this activity is to make it acceptable to you and the rest of the OBAM aircraft community. But it doesn't seem to be happening except for a limited population of alternators which at the moment are all Van's rebuilts. We'll be testing some factory fresh ND alternators in a few weeks. The working hypothesis of the moment is that it's zero risk to airplane and strong risk only to those alternators with regulators built with technology falling short of what ND might do for a factory fresh product. The same experiments offer an opportunity to put the 'scope on and gather some real-time, real-life data. >Alternator damage with a real OVP trip is not an issue as the alternator has >already failed. True >There are more modern OVP I/C's that have provision for not false tripping >on narrow spikes as they have adjustable delay to trip times. I suggest that >this design approach be used to prevent a OVP protection device from >causing damage from a not quite perfect design. The OVM-14 and derivatives used in the B&C's products are all adjustable for trip response. After our experience with the super-noisy Bonanza's I belive nuisance tripping from dv/dt effects of very low energy, narrow spikes has been resolved. Thousands of those devices were in service with successful service histories until Bonanza came along . . . and I believe we've slain that dragon as well. The only kind of nuisance trip we expect to see now will be an true overshoot of the regulator/alternator combination . . . over which we have no control when our OVM-14 is purchased for combination with other hardware. Nuisance tripping is not a component of the current discussion. >The Linear LTC1696 is inexpensive and is designed to provide reliable OVP >with minimal additional parts. > >Eric Jones has such a OVP design and I highly recommend it IF you are >concerned about False trips. It's already designed and available to us. False trips are not the issue. It's manually generated trips caused by persons at the controls deliberately opening the alternator control switch while the alternator is loaded. >http://www.periheliondesign.com/ > >If the alternator is generating say 50 amps and 40 amps are going to the >battery and 10 amps to the rest of the system and the battery is >disconnected the alternator output voltage (and the acft system bus) will >rise until the 40 amp excess is loaded. This can result in a high voltage >spike that is not stopped with OVP devices that shut off the regulator (too >late action). Thus potential damage to avionics etc is likely if there is a >large enough load dump. The damaging current is already there and thus its >too late for a working regulator with or without OVP design to stop the >energy pulse. >Bob has suggested that NEW alternators have such protection and so Bob >please let us know specifically which NEW alternators have such protection >built in so we can consider them for our use. I have said no such thing . . . you have mis-characterized my words. I'm not setting myself up as the great arbiter of suitable and unsuitable alternators. >Then there are comments about rebuilt alternators being inferior. Perhaps >some are but then many are just as good as the original NEW alternator in >all respects. This is the working HYPOTHESIS as to why some alternators are failing and others do not. There was never a blanket statement made to imply that all rebuilt alternators are inferior in this regard. >As for testing and evaluation of TVS devices for load dump protection and >getting your stamp of approval why do it?? Nobody needs or is recommended to wait for my stamp of approval for anything. It is my intention to do the repeatable experiment and deduce the science upon which I can make recommendations. I and several others have been looking over the 'net on the topic and you can find a few rational pieces but plenty more built on poor or no measurements. I'm interested in the energy dissipated by a TVS connected across a 60A alternator experiencing a load-dump event. I am also interested in current magnitudes and wave-shapes. If you have measured data you can share that speaks to this event, I'd appreciate having access to it. I'm also going to see how brand new ND alternators behave in this situation. You mentioned a fat capacitor across the b-lead as an alternative technique. Interesting . . . a 22,000 uF cap impressed with a 60A constant current pulse rises at 2700 volts/second. So if we wanted to limit the load/battery-dump event to 24 volts max, then the event duration could not exceed about 3.6 milliseconds. Hmmmm . . . sounds reasonable. I'm going to look at that too. >There are such devices available that are designed, tested and industry >approved for this specific application and rated for the largest alternator >likely to be found on any acft. The ST LDP24A is one and rated for 500amp. That 500A figure is completely meaningless when cited out of context. ALL TVS devices will carry 500A for some duration. This is a dynamic total energy study where current, voltage and duration all contribute to the understanding. I object to phrases like "industry approved" . . . industry is only slightly more useful than government in bestowing its blessings on things. Processes and techniques explained with the building blocks that are simple-ideas of science will stand by themselves and do not gain value when "approved" by anyone. >I do not understand the need for additional testing in this case. The >Boaters have long since solved the problem and so why are we still >investigating it?? One member of the list noted that the boaters were being offered a 70-cent TVS for $29.95 . . .that's why. If you have data from an experiment that tells us whether or not the 70-cent TVS has been properly sized and you can share it, then I won't have to do it . . . or can you point me to a published paper that describes the experiment? >With all due respect my comments are intended to be helpful. Factual but off-point. Nuisance trips and damage therefrom are not the problem that started this thread. The phenomenon pops up on what we've observed is a limited population of alternators wired per Z-24 and only when used in a manner outside the normal operating envelope for aircraft alternators. The testing is not intended to confirm or deny need for the TVS. I want to understand the event and validate the selection of a suitable component. The catalogs list hundreds of TVS parts each obviously suited to some kind of task. The LDF24A is just one of many such parts and may well be the holy grail of load dump defense but I'd like to know the details. In the mean time, your recommendations are welcome and can be operated upon by anyone on the list as they see fit. Cook-book engineering suffices for 99.9% of the system design work going on in the world. We're studying application of a circuit seldom needed but EXTREMELY useful when it is needed. I'd like to understand more than what the books choose to tell us. For example, I'm working a problem right now where a high quality, 4 amp, Honeywell SM series Microswitch is failing OPEN after a few hundreds of cycles. The contacts drive a pair of #327 lamps (0.04A each). The switches are clean and not overly stressed from an environmental perspective. I'm discovering an ELECTRICALLY driven phenomenon that I've not seen mentioned in any text to date (that doesn't mean it hasn't been written about . . . only that I can usually re-discover the problem faster than I can scan through all of the print literature). Every time this happens in the airplane, it generates a $kilo$ maintenance event. Have another problem where a mil-spec relay is sticking CLOSED after a relatively short service life in the airplane. Interestingly enough, BOTH of these cases seem to be related to the same phenomenon. I'll know more in a couple of weeks. The knowledge to be gathered is coming off the workbench. This event also generates a $1,000+ cost to return the aircraft to service. I can also tell you that I've had experts from the manufacturers of these products set across the table from me and suggest that I must be using their product in a manner outside their specified operating envelopes . . . but to a person, not one could describe the experiment to confirm or refute the hypothesis. What I think I'm zeroing in on is a phenomenon that few folks bother to control in the design and specification of switch contacts. I'm not recommending or suggesting that anyone wait on me for anything in their decision making processes. I'm only saying that right now, I don't have enough data to offer an explanation of the simple-ideas that will ultimately support any recommendation I might offer in the future. In the mean time, a very easy answer to the problem is don't turn the alternator off while the engine is running except for the obvious case of malfunction. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
From: Jerzy Krasinski <krasinski(at)direcway.com>
Subject: Re: Compass shielding
hollandm wrote: I'm getting interference between an electric turn coordinator and a compass (about 2 degrees). Before I start moving things around I was wondering if it would be possible to shield the compass by surrounding it with some copper screening or the like, sort of mu-metal chamber approach. Has anyone tried this and if so did it work? Thanks Do not bother with shielding the compass, it will not work. The compass MUST be exposed to external magnetic field, this is how it finds directions. Two degrees is a very small deviation. Do you always hold your heading with two degrees precision? The question is if this deviation is caused by the presence of the turn coordinator, or is it caused by switching the coordinator on. If it is caused by the current make sure that you do not have a current loop, i.e. use two twisted wires (power and ground) to power the turn coordinator, rather than one wire and ground next to the coordinator. If you use two twisted wires and still get the deviation, you could put a magnetic screen around the turn coordinator. The best would be miumetal or European permalloy. If you cant get these use a soft iron sheet wrapped around the coordinator. Cooper would not work. If the deviation is not current related you have no problem. Even a bigger deviation would be within the compass compensator limits. The compensating screws are somewhere on the compass and are described E-W and N-S. If your compass does not have the compensation screws you should throw it away and replace by one with these screws. Here is one of possible compensation procedures: 1) Point the plane to exactly to the magnetic North using another external precise compass or or some other method. (Do not use the compass that you compensate to find North, that compass will most likely show some deviation.) Turn N-S screw with a brass screwdriver until the compass of your plane shows N, i.e. reduce the deviation to zero 2) Swing the plane to the magnetic East established by the external precise compass Turn E-W screw until compass shows East, i.e. reduce the deviation to zero 3) Swing the plane to the magnetic South. Read deviation of the compass. Turn N-S screw until the deviation is reduced to 1/2 of the original deviation. 4) Swing the plane to the magnetic West. Read deviation of the compass. Turn E-W screw until the deviation is reduced to 1/2 of the original deviation. Go back to point 1) and repeat the whole procedure again. Pay attention to the size of the corrections, now they should be much smaller than those during the first swing. Go back to point 1) . Swing it around again. This time you should get almost stable situation. Go back to point 1) . Swing it around without touching the screws and write the deviation of the compass as a function of direction. Read it every 45 degrees. The deviations should be very small, but no compass in a plane with all the iron around would show exact directions. Make a graph of the deviation and glue it to the compass, or next to it. Jerzy > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 29 Msgs - 02/09/04
Date: Feb 10, 2004
Only to you Stan, How important in the engine driven power supply's when the engine quits? Maybe you have a use for two alternators right about then but I sure don't. A very good battery or will give my essential bus the power to do the required thing and maybe even restart the engine. Alternators have never started an engine for me yet. This is why a running dual E.I. systems is nuts to me. If you don't have enough energy to run the systems on battery power it is a special feeling to know the magneto is not dependant on an alternate source. Unless you have a big system it doesn't make sense to this systems designer. It all depends on the size of the project. No one system fits all. And here I am talking small 2 place airplanes, night flying capable with limited weather penetration ability. Systems which allow for a failure of the alternator and then plan for the pilot to land in the next 30 to 60 minutes are doable. Systems which allow you to make your desired destination are heavy and add cost. Dale Martin Lewiston, ID LEZ-235 ----- Original Message ----- From: <Speedy11(at)aol.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 29 Msgs - 02/09/04 > > In a message dated 2/10/04 2:56:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, > aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes: > > << For $300 and 4 pounds you can have a SECOND engine driven > > power source. > > > > Bob . . . > > I think you mean a Third source. (Battery =1, Alt =2, Second Alt = 3) >> > > Key word is "engine-driven." It would be the second source and an important > one. > Stan > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
From: Mark Steitle <msteitle(at)mail.utexas.edu>
Subject: Re: Capacitive Fuel Gauges
> > So, if you have a probe you like and a piece of shielded wire > picked to connect probe to electronics, the task is to mate the > electronics to the probe/cable combination. Jim's schematic includes > empty and full adjust pots. What you need to know is how close > the probe you have comes to the one Jim describes. His circuit > CAN be made to work with about ANY probe. > > Bob . . . Thanks Bob, I have contacted the manufacturer for this information. Will have to wait and see what they say. If that fails, I will have to find a way to measure it. Mark S. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
From: Charles Brame <charleyb(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Determining Speaker Requirements
I have a small, nice looking speaker that I would like to install in my OBAM. However, it has no markings indicating its impedance. My intercom system specifies a 4 ohm speaker. How does one determine the impedance of a speaker? Can I assume an ohmmeter between the speaker terminals will show the correct impedance? Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Fiveonepw(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 10, 2004
Subject: Re: LED light bar annunciator panel?
In a message dated 2/10/04 9:31:54 AM Central Standard Time, jschroeder(at)perigee.net writes: > We plan to use them too, but are not > sure how to do the lettering. There is an outfit that will custom-make a > backlit plexi panel. If we can get it a little more customized, we may go > that route. Hi John- If you got the AutoCad dwg of the circuit you can see the mask I used to label the annuciator- I just opened the drawing, selected a print window around the mask and printed on overhead projection sheets on a laser printer. It's just taped to the back of the overlay in the correct position. Works great in 7.4 hours of ACTUAL FLYING TIME so far! 8-) Best wishes- Mark (ripsteele is dead- long live fiveonepw(at)aol.com!) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Rotary Spreadsheet
Date: Feb 10, 2004
Mark Here is a spread sheet that will calculate engine parameters for a one, two, three or any (must change cell value to number of rotors you want} number of rotors. Ihave expanded the results sheet to show air flow in CFM and lbs/min as well as btu heat factors and other useful parameters. The engine calculations are within 2-5%. The cooling results are less valid but has shown good correlation with folks using evaporator cores Ed Ed Anderson RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered Matthews, NC ----- Original Message ----- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
From: Richard Tasker <retasker(at)optonline.net>
Subject: Re: Determining Speaker Requirements
No. Measuring with an ohmmeter will only give you the DC resistance of the speaker windings - this is NOT the rated impedance. There are ways of determining the rated impedance but it requires more than an ohmmeter for test equipment. A higher impedance speaker will not hurt your intercom - it will just make the maximum volume lower. It is unlikely that the speaker is much lower than 4 ohms. Dick Tasker, RV9A #90573 Charles Brame wrote: > >I have a small, nice looking speaker that I would like to install in my >OBAM. However, it has no markings indicating its impedance. My intercom >system specifies a 4 ohm speaker. > >How does one determine the impedance of a speaker? > >Can I assume an ohmmeter between the speaker terminals will show the >correct impedance? > >Charlie > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Rotary Spreadsheet
Date: Feb 10, 2004
Sorry, Folks. Hit the send button before engaging brain Ed Anderson RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered Matthews, NC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Rotary Spreadsheet > > Mark > > Here is a spread sheet that will calculate engine parameters for a one, two, > three or any (must change cell value to number of rotors you want} number of > rotors. Ihave expanded the results sheet to show air flow in CFM and > lbs/min as well as btu heat factors and other useful parameters. The engine > calculations are within 2-5%. The cooling results are less valid but has > shown good correlation with folks using evaporator cores > > Ed > > Ed Anderson > RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered > Matthews, NC > ----- Original Message ----- > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Z12 e-bus questions
> >Hi all (Bob), > >I'm planning on using a Z-12 type system on my Rocket. One battery, two >alternators. > >I notice the e-bus alternate feed is through a 7 A (fuse?) via a 16 AWG wire. > >Two questions: For peace of mind would a breaker be the best way to go >here? >I'm thinking that I can easily overload the 7 amps just with the e-bus as >described in Z-11. The plane will be outfitted for night flying, and needs a >fuel booster pump. So if I end up with more than 7 A (which either I will >have, or be very close to) when I loose the main power (assuming two dead >alternators), and throw the switch, at least I can get smart, shed load and >reset the breaker. For the most part though, I plan on using fuses, >because I >too have never reset a breaker were there wasn't a problem that resetting the >breaker actually helped, and I plan on having each circuit with it's own fuse. > >Second question: Why only 7 amp protection device off the batter bus? The >wire should be able to handle 12 amps? So why not use the protection >device to >protect the wire, since each of the devices coming off the e-bus will be >protected on it's own? > >Thanks in advance, and also for all the past advice. The Z-figures are intended to define the ART of system design. This is where you pick through the big box of Erector-Set, Tinker-Toy, and Lego parts to see how they best fit together in a system that supports your project's mission. The Z-figures should NOT be taken as verbatim of the SCIENCE which dictates component selection. When you "assuming two dead alternators", you're getting ready to address a REALLY bad day. The likelihood of dual failures in any single tank of fuel is extremely remote. Any piece of wire more than 6" long taking a feed from a bus with high fault current capability (your battery may well deliver upwards of 500-1000 amps in a hard fault), then we say it needs protection. If you're e-bus, e-bus alternate feed and battery bus can be all wired up with 6" pieces of wire, you don't need any fuse or fusible link. If the wires are longer, then . . . well, shucks. Now, if you need an e-bus alternate feed exceeding 5A from the battery (or battery bus) then using a relay as shown in: http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/E-BusFatFeed.gif seems prudent. This architecture provides a low power version of a battery contactor to provide at-the-battery control of a feeder. The same caveat exists for all feeders from the battery whether e-bus alternate feed or feeders to goodies that support an electrically dependent engine. You mentioned a fuel pump . . . I wouldn't drive this from the e-bus but directly from the battery bus via it's 5A or less fuse and no relay or a 7A+ fuse and a relay. The VERY FIRST documents you need to craft in your electrical system design are a tabular listing of each feeder that comes off each bus. The system that feeder supplies, the size of protection be it a Lego fuse or Tinker-Toy breaker, size of the wire, then draw 7 columns where you're going to deduce and add up the current draw on each feeder under the following headers, (1) preflight, (2) taxi, (3) takeoff/climb, (4) vfr cruise, (5) ifr cruise, (6) approach to landing and (7) alternator-out. Go get this document: http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/LoadAnalysisHandOut.pdf The first page is an example of how to start this task. The second page is blank so you can fill in what fits for your project. You need one page for each bus. Note that this document becomes a list of all the goodies in your airplane, how much energy each combination takes for operation. It can also be an index for your page-per-system documents that will ultimately record how your airplane is wired. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeffrey W. Skiba" <jskiba(at)icosa.net>
Subject: LED light bar annunciator panel?
Date: Feb 10, 2004
I would like the AutoCAD file for the Label of the annuciator please. Thanks Jeff. -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fiveonepw(at)aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: LED light bar annunciator panel? In a message dated 2/10/04 9:31:54 AM Central Standard Time, jschroeder(at)perigee.net writes: > We plan to use them too, but are not > sure how to do the lettering. There is an outfit that will custom-make a > backlit plexi panel. If we can get it a little more customized, we may go > that route. Hi John- If you got the AutoCad dwg of the circuit you can see the mask I used to label the annuciator- I just opened the drawing, selected a print window around the mask and printed on overhead projection sheets on a laser printer. It's just taped to the back of the overlay in the correct position. Works great in 7.4 hours of ACTUAL FLYING TIME so far! 8-) Best wishes- Mark (ripsteele is dead- long live fiveonepw(at)aol.com!) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: For Bob, Comment?
> > > > There is an upcoming program on Public Broadcasting: NOVA: The Deadly >It deals with an inflight fire caused by electrical arcing. > > >Have seen this program a couple of weeks ago, It make you wonder how a >commercial aircraft can have its wiring set up in such away that the pilots >were unable to isolate the entertainment system from the main cockpit Bus! >No breakers tripped to alleviate the problem, just smoke from behind >panelling, > >I find it hard to believe that circuits are shared without proper regards >too overload wire protection, Its criminal that so many folk lost their >lives due to a preventable wiring short circuit. It's a little more subtle than what you seem to perceive. The soft-fault condition in wiring has been a design issue for a number of folks for at least ten years if not longer. Irrespective of the type of wire (Kapton may be crappy but Tefzel can be mechanically damaged too) we can have openings in the insulation that promote the low current arc that doesn't draw enough current to trip the breaker. The higher the voltage goes, the bigger the problem becomes. This is a VERY hot (no pun intended) topic with the 42V car-guys. The fact that this particular fault happened in the entertainment system is irrelevant. It could have happened in any system. When the pilots were confronted with smoke, there was no way they could know nor would they care which system was having trouble . . . Eaton and others are working on smart circuit breakers that can detect the unique current signature of a soft-fault. They've perceived a really big market opportunity for replacing all the breakers in a panel . . . while expensive, it's probably cheaper than rewiring an airplane. This incident, typical of all accident scenarios, is a joining of links in the chain. Breaking any link would have averted the accident. (1) cracks in wires on (2) system voltage high enough to support a soft-fault arc (3) close proximity of combustible insulation (4) inaccessible to crew to fight fire (5) and so rare an event that the crew could not conceive how much trouble they were in. Had emergency condition behavior been initiated sooner, etc. There are probably other links in this deadly chain I've missed. While I've ranted as much as anyone about Kapton, we cannot ignore the fact that this single failure did not cause the accident without the assistance of numerous other conditions piling on too. There's plenty of blame to go around. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
From: Charlie & Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com>
Subject: Re: Determining Speaker Requirements
Charles Brame wrote: > >I have a small, nice looking speaker that I would like to install in my >OBAM. However, it has no markings indicating its impedance. My intercom >system specifies a 4 ohm speaker. > >How does one determine the impedance of a speaker? > >Can I assume an ohmmeter between the speaker terminals will show the >correct impedance? > >Charlie > If it's a typical voice coil type speaker (and it almost certainly will be) then DC resistance measured with an ohm meter will be about 60% to 80% of the actual impedance of the speaker. As long as the DC resistance is at least 2.5-3 ohms, you will be safe in hooking it up to your system. If it's an 8 or 16 ohm speaker, it will probably still work. It might not be quite as loud as a 4 ohm speaker, but there is so much variation in efficiency among various speakers that yours might end up being louder than any random 4 ohm speaker you might find. Charlie Audio/electronics tech in a previous life ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: RE: Load dump protection
> >Load dump protection exists as an add on and why are we beating it to death >when there is an existing simple proven fix. I'll suggest we're not "beating it to death." The standard approach to education is "put tab(A) in slot(B) and trust me it will work." It is incumbent upon anyone who aspires to the title of teacher to figure out ways to explain and better yet, demonstrate the underlying simple-ideas that support any design solution. All this discussion has been here before and will come around again under some new circumstances in the future. All of this "beating" is but a couple of weeks out of THIS semester, like the inimitable Arnie, it WILL "be back." I've been reluctant to sign up to "stick TVS(a) into system(b) and trust me it will work" because until the current discussion, there was no demonstrable need to protect every accessory in the airplane from demons not fully characterized. When the demonstrable need finally presented itself, it may well turn out to be vulnerability in a component where the manufacturer deliberately chose to ignore the risk! E.G. Microair says anything over 16v puts their radios at risk. Hmmm . . . even the lowly TVS won't help us here. If I were to dragon-proof the Microair radios, I'd have to design power conditioning EXTERNAL to the radio that Microair should have made INTERNAL to the radio. I agree that a TVS has a 99.9% probability of being the elegant fix to offset what may be a conscious decision on the part of a product designer to short- change his customers. I'd like to know the numbers. I'm not resisting the idea at all. But I will understand and be able to explain the simple-ideas and repeatable experiments that support it before I integrate it into the curriculum for my seminars. In the mean time, all this "beating" is healthy stirring of the floobydust from which we'll sift the science and elegant solutions. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
From: Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Dynon and EMI
Made an interesting discovery today while chasing down the source of EMI from my Dynon. Like many, I have a distinct noise in the headsets, which goes away when the Dynon is turned off. My electric system is the main bus/ essential bus, per Lectric Bob. Both the Dynon and Comm are on the essential bus. While futzing around, I turned the E bus switch on while leaving the power master on. The noise instantly decreased about 80%. The battery is getting rather tired from so much ground use, and the voltage at the Dynon was showing 10.4V. When the E bus was switched on, the voltage increased by 0.7V (the amount dropped by the diode feeding the E bus.) Intrigued, I hooked up the battery charger and tried it again. The voltage at the Dynon was now 12.5V with the E bus and battery switches on, and the remaining noise decreased by about half, to a level I consider pretty close to acceptable. In addition, the strobe noise I was experiencing also disappeared. For those experiencing EMI on the ground (not yet flying, like me) you may want to give this a try. I have not had a chance to test this with the engine running yet, perhaps in a day or two I will have time to do so. My theory as to why this is, and it is an uneducated SWAG- the noise filter circuits inside all of the boxes (Dynon, radio and strobe supplies) are not functioning because of the low voltage, while the units themselves appear to work. What does anyone think of that? Jeff Point RV-6 getting very close Milwaukee WI ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu>
Subject: Re: RE: Load dump protection
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > >>Load dump protection exists as an add on and why are we beating it to death >>when there is an existing simple proven fix. > > > > I'll suggest we're not "beating it to death." The standard > approach to education is "put tab(A) in slot(B) and trust > me it will work." FWIW, I've found the discussion very interesting and educational. I certainly didn't know much about the topic before this. Please, continue as necessary! :-) I've also learned why the switched labeled "alt cutoff" in the already-built experimental plane I bought does nothing once the engine is running. I have one of those internally regulated alternators that once it has power, continues to self-excite regardless of the cut-off switch. Which is why I am waiting with baited breath to see where this discussion goes, since I'll likely "fix" the issue. -Dj ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: Dynon and EMI
Date: Feb 10, 2004
I really appreciate that point as I am getting ready to purchase the Dynon EFIS. Wonder how it will be affected when the 24 volt battery is low. Hmmm..... Interesting. - Dale ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Point" <jpoint(at)mindspring.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dynon and EMI > > Made an interesting discovery today while chasing down the source of EMI > from my Dynon. Like many, I have a distinct noise in the headsets, > which goes away when the Dynon is turned off. My electric system is the > main bus/ essential bus, per Lectric Bob. Both the Dynon and Comm are > on the essential bus. While futzing around, I turned the E bus switch > on while leaving the power master on. The noise instantly decreased > about 80%. The battery is getting rather tired from so much ground use, > and the voltage at the Dynon was showing 10.4V. When the E bus was > switched on, the voltage increased by 0.7V (the amount dropped by the > diode feeding the E bus.) Intrigued, I hooked up the battery charger > and tried it again. The voltage at the Dynon was now 12.5V with the E > bus and battery switches on, and the remaining noise decreased by about > half, to a level I consider pretty close to acceptable. In addition, > the strobe noise I was experiencing also disappeared. > > For those experiencing EMI on the ground (not yet flying, like me) you > may want to give this a try. I have not had a chance to test this with > the engine running yet, perhaps in a day or two I will have time to do so. > > My theory as to why this is, and it is an uneducated SWAG- the noise > filter circuits inside all of the boxes (Dynon, radio and strobe > supplies) are not functioning because of the low voltage, while the > units themselves appear to work. What does anyone think of that? > > Jeff Point > RV-6 getting very close > Milwaukee WI > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "hollandm" <hollandm(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Compass shielding
Date: Feb 10, 2004
The disturbance occurs on switching on the TC and appears to be reproducible. Concerning the suggestion to obtain mumetal for shielding or permalloy, where would one obtain such materials? In the mean time I'll get some tin as Bob suggests and get back to the group. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
From: f1rocket(at)telus.net
Subject: Re: Z12 e-bus questions
Excellent, thanks. Just a couple more questions for the un-informed (me). See below. SNIP> If the wires are longer, then . . . well, shucks. Now, > if you need an e-bus alternate feed exceeding 5A from > the battery (or battery bus) then using a relay as shown > in: > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/E-BusFatFeed.gif > > seems prudent. This architecture provides a low power > version of a battery contactor to provide at-the-battery > control of a feeder. The same caveat exists for all > feeders from the battery whether e-bus alternate feed > or feeders to goodies that support an electrically > dependent engine. You mentioned a fuel pump . . . I > wouldn't drive this from the e-bus but directly from > the battery bus via it's 5A or less fuse and no relay > or a 7A+ fuse and a relay. In both cases you mention going larger than 5A a relay is required? Is this just because it is driving a motor (pump) or what am I missing here? I don't need to put a relay in for all loads larger than 5A do I? > > The VERY FIRST documents you need to craft in your > electrical system design are a tabular listing of each > feeder that comes off each bus. The system that feeder > supplies, the size of protection be it a Lego fuse or > Tinker-Toy breaker, size of the wire, then draw 7 columns > where you're going to deduce and add up the current draw > on each feeder under the following headers, (1) preflight, > (2) taxi, (3) takeoff/climb, (4) vfr cruise, (5) ifr cruise, > (6) approach to landing and (7) alternator-out. > > Go get this document: > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/LoadAnalysisHandOut.pdf I had almost done this, at least for the first three columns (I had one more column for switch required/type). I like your document better and looks as though it will guide me in a more analytical path. Jeff > > The first page is an example of how to start this task. > The second page is blank so you can fill in what fits for > your project. You need one page for each bus. > > Note that this document becomes a list of all the goodies > in your airplane, how much energy each combination takes > for operation. It can also be an index for your page-per-system > documents that will ultimately record how your airplane > is wired. > > Bob . . . > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2004
From: Jerzy Krasinski <krasinski(at)direcway.com>
Subject: Re: Compass shielding
Check Goodfellow at www.goodfellow.com. You need a thick foil. I think they have 0.125 mm. The problem is that they sell this stuff in rolls and you need much less. Ask them about distributors. Jerzy Jerzt You can find more at this damn long addressL http://search.netscape.com/ns/boomframe.jsp?query=mu-metal&page=1&offset=0&result_url=redir%3Fsrc%3Dwebsearch%26amp%3BrequestId%3D18de54f3a00ff8ca%26amp%3BclickedItemRank%3D1%26amp%3BuserQuery%3Dmu-metal%26amp%3BclickedItemURN%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.goodfellow.com%252Fcsp%252Factive%252Fstatic%252FA%252FNI03.HTML%26amp%3BinvocationType%3D-%26amp%3BfromPage%3DNSCPIndex&remove_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.goodfellow.com%2Fcsp%2Factive%2Fstatic%2FA%2FNI03.HTML hollandm wrote: > >The disturbance occurs on switching on the TC and appears to be reproducible. > >Concerning the suggestion to obtain mumetal for shielding or permalloy, where would one obtain such materials? > >In the mean time I'll get some tin as Bob suggests and get back to the group. > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org>
Subject: Compass shielding
Date: Feb 11, 2004
What brand is the T&B? (One of those Chinese knockoff I'll bet) Bruce www.glasair.org -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of hollandm Subject: AeroElectric-List: Compass shielding The disturbance occurs on switching on the TC and appears to be reproducible. Concerning the suggestion to obtain mumetal for shielding or permalloy, where would one obtain such materials? In the mean time I'll get some tin as Bob suggests and get back to the group. == == == == ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
Subject: Re: Load dump issues
Date: Feb 10, 2004
Embedded comments > > > > >I have watched this discussion and am concerned that the > >issue/facts/solution is going off track a little. > > > >Load dump is NOT unique to internally regulated alternators. ANY alternator > >can and will exhibit load dump when wired such that the load can be removed > >from the "B" lead when the alternator is generating power. IE > >internal/external/new/old/rebuilt are all the SAME with regard to Load Dump > >concerns. > > That's not what was said. The problem is load-dump tolerance > of the REGULATORS internal to rebuilt alternators Van's sells vis-a-vis > regulators in OEM alternators which MAY be more resistant. > Regulator chips advertised by Onsemi and others call out "load dump > protection." I was not saying you had said what I was saying. My point is that ALL alternators internal and external need to be addressed. The fact that Onsemi has a regulator with internal load dump does not mean the regulator of a 2004 alternator has load dump protection. The I/C mfgrs have been pushing load dump protection for at last 20 years that I am aware of with limited success until recently where modern autos can have thousands of dollars of electronics at risk. I have not seen any hard evidence that Van supplied regulators are of lesser quality, circumstantial perhaps but there may be other reasons. I was trying to point out that the problem may be very widespread (in potential)and its only recently that its showing up on Vans acft and perhaps there only because of pilot procedures and the large number of these experimentals. > > I mentioned in a post last week that the externally regulated > Bonanza alternators are wired in a way that I could manually > generate a "load-dump" event by manipulation of switches. Yes and I think that any design that allows of improper use of unguarded switches results in damage is unacceptable, at least my acft. I have a friend who has another spam can (high end acft) that blew an alternator when the master was pulled when smoke in the cockpit was noticed. The smoke cleared and the master was reset and the alternator was NG. Later shown to have several diodes shorted presumably due to load dump. There was an external reg that was unharmed. This acft was wired by the factory that way > >All alternators, regardless of design, need protection or they can dump > >damaging loads either back to the alternator or to the expensive avionics > >depending on what opened and where. > > Correct. We've had this discussion before. The risk is predicated > on battery contactor failure (or pilot operation of the contactor > at inappropriate times) while the battery is being charged. After > that, the duration and amplitude of the event is dependent upon many > system variables. I agree but a design that allows a pilot to simply throw the wrong switch and cause alternator or worse failure is a bad design. Even switch layout on the panel is not acceptable to me as we are dealing with Private pilots who can make mistakes. > >Designs that disconnect the "B" lead when OVP is detected are great as long > >as there are Zero false trips. Bob has said many times that his OVP can and > >does (while very rare) false trip. This can result in alternator damage due > >to a false trip and not acceptable to me. > > Correct . . . and the goal of this activity is to make it acceptable > to you and the rest of the OBAM aircraft community. > > But it doesn't seem to be happening except for a limited population > of alternators which at the moment are all Van's rebuilts. We'll be > testing some factory fresh ND alternators in a few weeks. The working > hypothesis of the moment is that it's zero risk to airplane and strong > risk only to those alternators with regulators built with technology > falling short of what ND might do for a factory fresh product. I hope you will test curent production ND NEW alternators to prove your theory > >There are more modern OVP I/C's that have provision for not false tripping > >on narrow spikes as they have adjustable delay to trip times. I suggest that > >this design approach be used to prevent a OVP protection device from > >causing damage from a not quite perfect design. > > The OVM-14 and derivatives used in the B&C's products are all > adjustable for trip response. After our experience with the > super-noisy Bonanza's I belive nuisance tripping from dv/dt > effects of very low energy, narrow spikes has been resolved. > Thousands of those devices were in service with successful service > histories until Bonanza came along . . . and I believe we've > slain that dragon as well. The following is from a recent post of yours and over the years has been repeated several times a year. This with regard to the OVP module design you have provided to all of us. The LTC1696 is specifically designed so you can set the trip pulse width time to avoid nuisance tripping from short spikes. This is not possible with your design per your supplied schematic. "Nuisance tripping of the crowbar ov module is rare but it HAS happened and at higher rates than real ov tripping.'' > > The only kind of nuisance trip we expect to see now will be an true > overshoot of the regulator/alternator combination . . . over which > we have no control when our OVM-14 is purchased for combination with > other hardware. Nuisance tripping is not a component of the current > discussion. Disagree as we should be addressing every application not just a matched set from B&C. As a nuisance trip with out load dump protection can fail the alternator and this should not only be addressed but mitigated. Failure of a protection device should never cause failure of the device being protected. Just as failure to use a specific switching procedure should not damage components. > >The Linear LTC1696 is inexpensive and is designed to provide reliable OVP > >with minimal additional parts. > > > >Eric Jones has such a OVP design and I highly recommend it IF you are > >concerned about False trips. It's already designed and available to us. > > False trips are not the issue. It's manually generated trips > caused by persons at the controls deliberately opening the > alternator control switch while the alternator is loaded. > > > >http://www.periheliondesign.com/ > > > >If the alternator is generating say 50 amps and 40 amps are going to the > >battery and 10 amps to the rest of the system and the battery is > >disconnected the alternator output voltage (and the acft system bus) will > >rise until the 40 amp excess is loaded. This can result in a high voltage > >spike that is not stopped with OVP devices that shut off the regulator (too > >late action). Thus potential damage to avionics etc is likely if there is a > >large enough load dump. The damaging current is already there and thus its > >too late for a working regulator with or without OVP design to stop the > >energy pulse. > > Then why not include every alternator in the discussion ?, not limit it to Vans rebuilt internal alternators > > > >Bob has suggested that NEW alternators have such protection and so Bob > >please let us know specifically which NEW alternators have such protection > >built in so we can consider them for our use. > > I have said no such thing . . . you have mis-characterized my words. > I'm not setting myself up as the great arbiter of suitable and > unsuitable alternators. Recent comment from you I was referring to. ""It is therefore my belief that the very popular 40 Amp Denso bought new from Niagra has a regulator which has dump logic in it. "" > You mentioned a fat capacitor across the b-lead as an alternative > technique. Interesting . . . a 22,000 uF cap impressed with a 60A > constant current pulse rises at 2700 volts/second. So if we wanted > to limit the load/battery-dump event to 24 volts max, then > the event duration could not exceed about 3.6 milliseconds. Hmmmm . . . > sounds reasonable. I'm going to look at that too. I was simply stating that without a battery some regulators are unstable and adding a capacitor has been proven to stabilize the regulator. If the battery charge current (the source of the load dump) is small when the battery is disconnected the capacitor will dampen the spike. It may not be of much help with a 50 amp Load dump. > >There are such devices available that are designed, tested and industry > >approved for this specific application and rated for the largest alternator > >likely to be found on any acft. The ST LDP24A is one and rated for 500amp. > > That 500A figure is completely meaningless when cited out of > context. ALL TVS devices will carry 500A for some duration. Its not meaningless IF you take the time to look at the data sheet which was my intent. I never intended to provide all the details, just the link. In this case the duration is specified at 0.2 second (more than long enough) and clearly longer with 1/10 the current we are dealing with vs. the rated 500 amps. Thank you for well thought out replies. Paul ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
Subject: Load dump protection
Date: Feb 10, 2004
> Perhaps I should have need more specific with my comment about "beating it > to death. The industry has decided that the solution to Load dump protection > is simply a TVS added to the regulator. Thus I was simply saying The only > decision is the specific TVS to add to our Alternators. > > While some "modern" internally regulated alternators may be protected from > load dump its unclear how ANY externally regulated alternator will control > load dump as the protection MUST be across the "B" lead to ground. > > As for testing, I am all for it but with the vast number of alternators and > regulator combinations internal and external (including the ever popular low > cost Ford) it would seem that there is no reasonable way to provide 100% > assurance. Not that that is a requirement. > > My basic point was and is that until proven innocent every alternator > (internal OR external regulator) needs a "B" lead load dump TVS. > > Another concern is the Load dump TVS voltage can be quite high relative to > 16V during the peak current of the load dump. Thus, equipment not rated for > something over 20V should be looked at carefully. As you have often > suggested not all equipment meets DO-160 but should. > > Paul > > > > > > > >Load dump protection exists as an add on and why are we beating it to > death > > >when there is an existing simple proven fix. > > > > > > I'll suggest we're not "beating it to death." The standard > > approach to education is "put tab(A) in slot(B) and trust > > me it will work." > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
Subject: Re: Load dump issues
Date: Feb 10, 2004
Embedded comments > > > > >I have watched this discussion and am concerned that the > >issue/facts/solution is going off track a little. > > > >Load dump is NOT unique to internally regulated alternators. ANY alternator > >can and will exhibit load dump when wired such that the load can be removed > >from the "B" lead when the alternator is generating power. IE > >internal/external/new/old/rebuilt are all the SAME with regard to Load Dump > >concerns. > > That's not what was said. The problem is load-dump tolerance > of the REGULATORS internal to rebuilt alternators Van's sells vis-a-vis > regulators in OEM alternators which MAY be more resistant. > Regulator chips advertised by Onsemi and others call out "load dump > protection." I was not saying you had said what I was saying. My point is that ALL alternators internal and external need to be addressed. The fact that Onsemi has a regulator with internal load dump does not mean the regulator of a 2004 alternator has load dump protection. The I/C mfgrs have been pushing load dump protection for at last 20 years that I am aware of with limited success until recently where modern autos can have thousands of dollars of electronics at risk. I have not seen any hard evidence that Van supplied regulators are of lesser quality, circumstantial perhaps but there may be other reasons. I was trying to point out that the problem may be very widespread (in potential)and its only recently that its showing up on Vans acft and perhaps there only because of pilot procedures and the large number of these experimentals. > > I mentioned in a post last week that the externally regulated > Bonanza alternators are wired in a way that I could manually > generate a "load-dump" event by manipulation of switches. Yes and I think that any design that allows of improper use of unguarded switches results in damage is unacceptable, at least my acft. I have a friend who has another spam can (high end acft) that blew an alternator when the master was pulled when smoke in the cockpit was noticed. The smoke cleared and the master was reset and the alternator was NG. Later shown to have several diodes shorted presumably due to load dump. There was an external reg that was unharmed. This acft was wired by the factory that way > >All alternators, regardless of design, need protection or they can dump > >damaging loads either back to the alternator or to the expensive avionics > >depending on what opened and where. > > Correct. We've had this discussion before. The risk is predicated > on battery contactor failure (or pilot operation of the contactor > at inappropriate times) while the battery is being charged. After > that, the duration and amplitude of the event is dependent upon many > system variables. I agree but a design that allows a pilot to simply throw the wrong switch and cause alternator or worse failure is a bad design. Even switch layout on the panel is not acceptable to me as we are dealing with Private pilots who can make mistakes. > >Designs that disconnect the "B" lead when OVP is detected are great as long > >as there are Zero false trips. Bob has said many times that his OVP can and > >does (while very rare) false trip. This can result in alternator damage due > >to a false trip and not acceptable to me. > > Correct . . . and the goal of this activity is to make it acceptable > to you and the rest of the OBAM aircraft community. > > But it doesn't seem to be happening except for a limited population > of alternators which at the moment are all Van's rebuilts. We'll be > testing some factory fresh ND alternators in a few weeks. The working > hypothesis of the moment is that it's zero risk to airplane and strong > risk only to those alternators with regulators built with technology > falling short of what ND might do for a factory fresh product. I hope you will test curent production ND NEW alternators to prove your theory > >There are more modern OVP I/C's that have provision for not false tripping > >on narrow spikes as they have adjustable delay to trip times. I suggest that > >this design approach be used to prevent a OVP protection device from > >causing damage from a not quite perfect design. > > The OVM-14 and derivatives used in the B&C's products are all > adjustable for trip response. After our experience with the > super-noisy Bonanza's I belive nuisance tripping from dv/dt > effects of very low energy, narrow spikes has been resolved. > Thousands of those devices were in service with successful service > histories until Bonanza came along . . . and I believe we've > slain that dragon as well. The following is from a recent post of yours and over the years has been repeated several times a year. This with regard to the OVP module design you have provided to all of us. The LTC1696 is specifically designed so you can set the trip pulse width time to avoid nuisance tripping from short spikes. This is not possible with your design per your supplied schematic. "Nuisance tripping of the crowbar ov module is rare but it HAS happened and at higher rates than real ov tripping.'' > > The only kind of nuisance trip we expect to see now will be an true > overshoot of the regulator/alternator combination . . . over which > we have no control when our OVM-14 is purchased for combination with > other hardware. Nuisance tripping is not a component of the current > discussion. Disagree as we should be addressing every application not just a matched set from B&C. As a nuisance trip with out load dump protection can fail the alternator and this should not only be addressed but mitigated. Failure of a protection device should never cause failure of the device being protected. Just as failure to use a specific switching procedure should not damage components. > >The Linear LTC1696 is inexpensive and is designed to provide reliable OVP > >with minimal additional parts. > > > >Eric Jones has such a OVP design and I highly recommend it IF you are > >concerned about False trips. It's already designed and available to us. > > False trips are not the issue. It's manually generated trips > caused by persons at the controls deliberately opening the > alternator control switch while the alternator is loaded. > > > >http://www.periheliondesign.com/ > > > >If the alternator is generating say 50 amps and 40 amps are going to the > >battery and 10 amps to the rest of the system and the battery is > >disconnected the alternator output voltage (and the acft system bus) will > >rise until the 40 amp excess is loaded. This can result in a high voltage > >spike that is not stopped with OVP devices that shut off the regulator (too > >late action). Thus potential damage to avionics etc is likely if there is a > >large enough load dump. The damaging current is already there and thus its > >too late for a working regulator with or without OVP design to stop the > >energy pulse. > > Then why not include every alternator in the discussion ?, not limit it to Vans rebuilt internal alternators > > > >Bob has suggested that NEW alternators have such protection and so Bob > >please let us know specifically which NEW alternators have such protection > >built in so we can consider them for our use. > > I have said no such thing . . . you have mis-characterized my words. > I'm not setting myself up as the great arbiter of suitable and > unsuitable alternators. Recent comment from you I was referring to. ""It is therefore my belief that the very popular 40 Amp Denso bought new from Niagra has a regulator which has dump logic in it. "" > You mentioned a fat capacitor across the b-lead as an alternative > technique. Interesting . . . a 22,000 uF cap impressed with a 60A > constant current pulse rises at 2700 volts/second. So if we wanted > to limit the load/battery-dump event to 24 volts max, then > the event duration could not exceed about 3.6 milliseconds. Hmmmm . . . > sounds reasonable. I'm going to look at that too. I was simply stating that without a battery some regulators are unstable and adding a capacitor has been proven to stabilize the regulator. If the battery charge current (the source of the load dump) is small when the battery is disconnected the capacitor will dampen the spike. It may not be of much help with a 50 amp Load dump. > >There are such devices available that are designed, tested and industry > >approved for this specific application and rated for the largest alternator > >likely to be found on any acft. The ST LDP24A is one and rated for 500amp. > > That 500A figure is completely meaningless when cited out of > context. ALL TVS devices will carry 500A for some duration. Its not meaningless IF you take the time to look at the data sheet which was my intent. I never intended to provide all the details, just the link. In this case the duration is specified at 0.2 second (more than long enough) and clearly longer with 1/10 the current we are dealing with vs. the rated 500 amps. Thank you for well thought out replies. Paul ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Speedy11(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 11, 2004
Subject: Only to you Dale
Dale, Guess I misunderstood the original statement. I happen to agree with you on the dual EI systems. Stan In a message dated 2/11/04 2:57:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes: << How important in the engine driven power supply's when the engine quits? Maybe you have a use for two alternators right about then but I sure don't. A very good battery or will give my essential bus the power to do the required thing and maybe even restart the engine. Alternators have never started an engine for me yet. This is why a running dual E.I. systems is nuts to me. If you don't have enough energy to run the systems on battery power it is a special feeling to know the magneto is not dependant on an alternate source. >> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Rodrian" <jim.rodrian(at)elsyn.com>
Subject: Re: Dynon and EMI
Date: Feb 11, 2004
Jeff, Properly designed and tested EMI filtering in a product will work from it's (the products) minimum to maximum specified operating voltage. The filters characteristics need to be matched to the characteristics of the internal active circuits. Every product I have designed, from a simple residential water softener control to industrial machine controls were / are tested to comply with stringent radiated and conducted emissions and susceptibility standards (EMC standards). These tests insure that the product will not interfere with other products and are not affected by radiation from other products. Typically, all connections, not just the power connections, to / from a product need filtering to meet the EMC standards. Months ago, Dynon indicated to me that they didn't have a formal EMC test program for their product. What you have observed may be a result of that policy. James A. Rodrian, P.E. (Defiant) Grafton, WI Microprocessor-based product development since 1977. Time: From: Jeff Point Subject: Dynon and EMI Made an interesting discovery today while chasing down the source of EMI from my Dynon. My theory as to why this is, and it is an uneducated SWAG- the noise filter circuits inside all of the boxes (Dynon, radio and strobe supplies) are not functioning because of the low voltage, while the units themselves appear to work. What does anyone think of that? Jeff Point RV-6 getting very close Milwaukee WI ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2004
Subject: Re: Load dump issues
From: Denis Walsh <denis.walsh(at)comcast.net>
I'm getting dizzy. > > I was not saying you had said what I was saying. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: Dynon and EMI
Date: Feb 11, 2004
Jim, When you say filtering - Is that synonymous for shielding? In your opinion - is the Dynon EFIS missing the mark here or is there a simple solution for a demanding builder? Dale Martin Lewiston, ID LEZ-235 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Rodrian" <jim.rodrian(at)elsyn.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Dynon and EMI > > Jeff, > > > Properly designed and tested EMI filtering in a product will work from it's (the products) > minimum to maximum specified operating voltage. The filters characteristics need to be matched > to the characteristics of the internal active circuits. > > > Every product I have designed, from a simple residential water softener control to industrial > machine controls were / are tested to comply with stringent radiated and conducted emissions and > susceptibility standards (EMC standards). These tests insure that the product will not > interfere with other products and are not affected by radiation from other products. > > > Typically, all connections, not just the power connections, to / from a product need filtering > to meet the EMC standards. Months ago, Dynon indicated to me that they didn't have a formal EMC > test program for their product. What you have observed may be a result of that policy. > > James A. Rodrian, P.E. (Defiant) > Grafton, WI > Microprocessor-based product development since 1977. > > > Time: > > > > From: > > Jeff Point > > > Subject: > > Dynon and EMI > > > > Made an interesting discovery today while chasing down the source of EMI > from my Dynon. > > My theory as to why this is, and it is an uneducated SWAG- the noise > filter circuits inside all of the boxes (Dynon, radio and strobe > supplies) are not functioning because of the low voltage, while the > units themselves appear to work. What does anyone think of that? > > Jeff Point > RV-6 getting very close > Milwaukee WI > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Load dump issues
> > That's not what was said. The problem is load-dump tolerance > > of the REGULATORS internal to rebuilt alternators Van's sells vis-a-vis > > regulators in OEM alternators which MAY be more resistant. > > Regulator chips advertised by Onsemi and others call out "load dump > > protection." > >I was not saying you had said what I was saying. My point is that ALL >alternators internal and external need to be addressed. The fact that Onsemi >has a regulator with internal load dump does not mean the regulator of a >2004 alternator has load dump protection. The I/C mfgrs have been pushing >load dump protection for at last 20 years that I am aware of with limited >success until recently where modern autos can have thousands of dollars of >electronics at risk. > >I have not seen any hard evidence that Van supplied regulators are of lesser >quality, circumstantial perhaps but there may be other reasons. Didn't say there was. this is the WORKING hypothesis that will have to be proved, disproved or discarded as irrelevant. >I was trying to point out that the problem may be very widespread (in >potential)and its only recently that its showing up on Vans acft and perhaps >there only because of pilot procedures and the large number of these >experimentals. The POTENTIAL is certainly widely spread. I don't think anyone ever said the risk was zero. It did not become a marketplace issue until Van's noted a demonstrable problem and published a 'fix' that was short on understanding and increased the risk of more expensive difficulties in terms of OV failures. > > > > I mentioned in a post last week that the externally regulated > > Bonanza alternators are wired in a way that I could manually > > generate a "load-dump" event by manipulation of switches. > >Yes and I think that any design that allows of improper use of unguarded >switches results in damage is unacceptable, at least my acft. > > I have a friend who has another spam can (high end acft) that blew an >alternator when the master was pulled when smoke in the cockpit was noticed. >The smoke cleared and the master was reset and the alternator was NG. Later >shown to have several diodes shorted presumably due to load dump. There was >an external reg that was unharmed. This acft was wired by the factory that >way Yup, that's the nature of the beast called an FAA certified flying machine. > > >All alternators, regardless of design, need protection or they can dump > > >damaging loads either back to the alternator or to the expensive avionics > > >depending on what opened and where. > > > > Correct. We've had this discussion before. The risk is predicated > > on battery contactor failure (or pilot operation of the contactor > > at inappropriate times) while the battery is being charged. After > > that, the duration and amplitude of the event is dependent upon many > > system variables. > >I agree but a design that allows a pilot to simply throw the wrong switch >and cause alternator or worse failure is a bad design. Even switch layout on >the panel is not acceptable to me as we are dealing with Private pilots who >can make mistakes. Goodness or badness can debated interminably. Risk however is readily studied and can be used to make considered decisions for both design and operation. It is a fact that ANY airplane, spam can or otherwise can generate the load-dump event by opening the master switch while the alternator is loaded. If putting guards over any switches makes someone feel better, so be it. > > >Designs that disconnect the "B" lead when OVP is detected are great as >long > > >as there are Zero false trips. Bob has said many times that his OVP can >and > > >does (while very rare) false trip. This can result in alternator damage >due > > >to a false trip and not acceptable to me. > > > > Correct . . . and the goal of this activity is to make it acceptable > > to you and the rest of the OBAM aircraft community. > > > > But it doesn't seem to be happening except for a limited population > > of alternators which at the moment are all Van's rebuilts. We'll be > > testing some factory fresh ND alternators in a few weeks. The working > > hypothesis of the moment is that it's zero risk to airplane and strong > > risk only to those alternators with regulators built with technology > > falling short of what ND might do for a factory fresh product. > >I hope you will test curent production ND NEW alternators to prove your >theory That's what I said. B&C uses factory fresh ND alternators as cores for their products. however, I'll suggest that my testing of these particular alternators will not PROVE my theory about Van's machines, only confirm that the present production NDs are relatively immune from damage by load-dump. The real meat of this test will be to know how much energy we're talking about and the form it takes. > > >There are more modern OVP I/C's that have provision for not false >tripping > > >on narrow spikes as they have adjustable delay to trip times. I suggest >that > > >this design approach be used to prevent a OVP protection device from > > >causing damage from a not quite perfect design. > > > > The OVM-14 and derivatives used in the B&C's products are all > > adjustable for trip response. After our experience with the > > super-noisy Bonanza's I belive nuisance tripping from dv/dt > > effects of very low energy, narrow spikes has been resolved. > > Thousands of those devices were in service with successful service > > histories until Bonanza came along . . . and I believe we've > > slain that dragon as well. > >The following is from a recent post of yours and over the years has been >repeated several times a year. This with regard to the OVP module design you >have provided to all of us. The LTC1696 is specifically designed so you can >set the trip pulse width time to avoid nuisance tripping from short spikes. >This is not possible with your design per your supplied schematic. > >"Nuisance tripping of the crowbar ov module is rare but it > HAS happened and at higher rates than real ov tripping.'' Excuse me? How is the current design not adjustable for delay? The RC time constant of the voltage sense circuit can be adjusted for increased or decreased response time. The LTC1696 is a nice chip. It starts a timer based on excursions past a threshold and resets the timer if voltage falls below the threshold before timeout. I've implemented that function several times for customers using a non-integrating front end detector driving a fixed time delay later. The aircraft industry likes to embrace Mil-STD-704 notions about OV events where integrating the sensed signal up front makes the ov sensing both TIME and AMPLITUDE sensitive. They expect to see the ov trip time go down as the fault voltage goes up. The LTC1696 doesn't work this way. However, EITHER philosophy can be used to fabricate an effective ov protection system. The only nuisance tripping we've experienced in about 10+ years was a marked dv/dt event that first cropped up in production Bonanzas. We now believe that the few cases of nuisance tripping we observed before the Bonanza mod program were similarly generated. Since that time, I've had no conversation with anyone where their "nuisance trip" was not ultimately confirmed to be a true ov condition or overshoot due to poor regulator performance. > > > > The only kind of nuisance trip we expect to see now will be an true > > overshoot of the regulator/alternator combination . . . over which > > we have no control when our OVM-14 is purchased for combination with > > other hardware. Nuisance tripping is not a component of the current > > discussion. > > Disagree as we should be addressing every application not just a matched >set from B&C. You put words in my mouth again. I said poor combinations of alternator and regulator. In these cases, I'm talking about regulators that shouldn't be used on any machine . . . has nothing to do with B&C's products. These were regulators that would overshoot so badly on real load-dump (battery still connected) that they tripped the ov protection. >As a nuisance trip with out load dump protection can fail the alternator and >this should not only be addressed but mitigated. Failure of a protection >device should never cause failure of the device being protected. Just as >failure to use a specific switching procedure should not damage components. No argument here. > > > > > >Then why not include every alternator in the discussion ?, not limit it to >Vans rebuilt internal alternators Who was proposing anything different? Again you mis-characterize my words. My goal is to publish a change to figure Z-24 that will be a recommended configuration for all installations. I don't have nor do I want to control the brand or source of alternator anyone chooses to use. Figure Z-24 is never going to say something like , "Use this configuration for Brand A but not for Brand X". It will be recommended for ALL internally regulated alternators. We'll probably add it to other Z-figures and discuss it in the chapter on ov protection. This activity will undoubtedly confirm the size and usefulness of a low cost mitigation philosophy that might as well be included in all systems . . . although our experience with both OBAM and certified aircraft has demonstrated this failure mode be a very low risk. I'll also present findings from this activity to my fellow sparkies at RAC. Whether or not anything happens there is problematical. Return on investment dollars will be tough to justify on such a rare and probably undocumented event. We're advancing the art in OBAM aircraft systems design at a rate that far outstrips the efforts in spam cans. > > >Bob has suggested that NEW alternators have such protection and so Bob > > >please let us know specifically which NEW alternators have such > > >protection built in so we can consider them for our use. > > > > I have said no such thing . . . you have mis-characterized my words. > > I'm not setting myself up as the great arbiter of suitable and > > unsuitable alternators. > >Recent comment from you I was referring to. > >""It is therefore my belief that the very popular 40 Amp Denso bought new >from Niagra has a regulator which has dump logic in it. "" Simply a statement of fact. Someone suggested that Niagra offered new ND machines and to date, I've not heard of anyone blowing a Niagra alternator wired per Z-24. It's true that we may hear of it tomorrow . . . but for the moment, a simple belief concerning features they may (or may not) contain. It's not intended to be a recommendation to anyone. Those will be fully defined when Z-24 is updated and I publish the article on the experiments. > > You mentioned a fat capacitor across the b-lead as an alternative > > technique. Interesting . . . a 22,000 uF cap impressed with a 60A > > constant current pulse rises at 2700 volts/second. So if we wanted > > to limit the load/battery-dump event to 24 volts max, then > > the event duration could not exceed about 3.6 milliseconds. Hmmmm . . >. > > sounds reasonable. I'm going to look at that too. > > I was simply stating that without a battery some regulators are unstable >and adding a capacitor has been proven to stabilize the regulator. If the >battery charge current (the source of the load dump) is small when the >battery is disconnected the capacitor will dampen the spike. It may not be >of much help with a 50 amp Load dump. Never can tell. Since you didn't refute or confirm my 3.6 millisecond hypothesis, we'll still go to the test bench and do the science. It's an interesting feature to explore. > > > > That 500A figure is completely meaningless when cited out of > > context. ALL TVS devices will carry 500A for some duration. > >Its not meaningless IF you take the time to look at the data sheet which was >my intent. I never intended to provide all the details, just the link. In >this case the duration is specified at 0.2 second (more than long enough) >and clearly longer with 1/10 the current we are dealing with vs. the rated >500 amps. Now you've qualified your 500A pronouncement in a useful way. The DATA SHEET for this or any other device offers us insight to an ability to manage energy. No alternator is going to produce a 500A surge to any protective device. The original statement suggested that this 500A device was suitable for any sized alternator. The number 500 is impressive but irrelevant when pulled out of context. >Thank you for well thought out replies. My pleasure sir. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2004
From: Dave Morris <dave(at)davemorris.com>
Subject: Twisted pair cable
Bob, do you have a favorite shielded twisted pair cable that can be used for various things ahead of the firewall and behind it? Do you like the Belden 82729 or is there something better? Thanks, Dave Morris ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Noobie Questions
Date: Feb 11, 2004
From: "Metcalfe, Lee, AIR" <Lee.Metcalfe(at)jocogov.org>
I have a Lancair 320 that I bought from the builder. I am planning to re-wire the electrical system this spring to update it (12 years old) and replace some amateurish workmanship. I attended Bob's seminar last weekend and learned a lot, but I still have a lot of questions. I'm sure I'll be back with more questions as I plan the new system, but here are my first three... > None of Bob's Z-figures show any circuit protection in the battery contactor control circuit (BAT master to battery contactor solenoid). Is this an oversight or is protection not needed? > I see no provision for an avionics fan on any of the bus drawings. Should not the avionics fan be connected to the main bus (or e-bus if you have one) via circuit protection? The current set-up in my plane is the avionics fan is hard-wired to a power source (haven't found it yet) with no circuit protection (confirmed by pulling all circuit breakers and it still runs with the BAT master on). > I am planning on using B&C's LR-3 alternator controller. Do I still need circuit protection on the B-lead, which will be tied to the switched side of the battery contactor (it is currently tied to the main (and only) bus through a 35A breaker). All advice appreciated! Lee Metcalfe Flying Lancair 320 (500+ hrs.) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Compass shielding
Date: Feb 11, 2004
Jerzy- >Do not bother with shielding the compass, it will not work. The compass >MUST be exposed to external magnetic field, this is how it finds >directions. According to my friends in the HUD manufacturing business, your statement about shielding the compass rendering it useless is incorrect, at least with respect to mu metal. I suppose this could be different with flashing material, but IIRC shielding damps dynamic magnetic fields such as EMI, while the earth's magnetic field is static from the compass' frame of reference. Having said that, it still makes more sense from the theoretical perspective to shield the antagonist rather than the victim. Most likely from the practical application perspective, also. Glen Matejcek aerobubba(at)earthlink.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2004
Subject: Re: Noobie Questions
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
Hi Lee, Some good questions. I took a stab at answering them below. > > > I have a Lancair 320 that I bought from the builder. I am planning to > re-wire the electrical system this spring to update it (12 years old) > and replace some amateurish workmanship. I attended Bob's seminar last > weekend and learned a lot, but I still have a lot of questions. I'm > sure I'll be back with more questions as I plan the new system, but here > are my first three... > >> None of Bob's Z-figures show any circuit protection in the battery > contactor control circuit (BAT master to battery contactor solenoid). Is > this an oversight or is protection not needed? One side of the master contactor is made hot from by the very short run to the big lug on the contactor. No protection needed there. The other side of the contactor, which gets connected to the master switch, provides a ground path for the contactor to be activated. If this wire is faulted somewhere, the worst thing that can happen is that the master contactor stays on all of the time. > >> I see no provision for an avionics fan on any of the bus drawings. > Should not the avionics fan be connected to the main bus (or e-bus if > you have one) via circuit protection? The current set-up in my plane is > the avionics fan is hard-wired to a power source (haven't found it yet) > with no circuit protection (confirmed by pulling all circuit breakers > and it still runs with the BAT master on). Maybe (hopefully) there is an in-line fuse to a connection to a battery bus? Never the less, I like your idea of running any required avionics fan onto the main bus. I would only connect it to the e-bus if something on the e-bus actually requires cooling. If an essential piece of equipment does require supplemental cooling, I would consider that as a strike against it. It would be nice to shed the load imposed by fans when on a limited power budget. > >> I am planning on using B&C's LR-3 alternator controller. Do I still > need circuit protection on the B-lead, which will be tied to the > switched side of the battery contactor (it is currently tied to the main > (and only) bus through a 35A breaker). If you are going to stick with a single battery, single alternator system, I would wire it up like Z-11. The alternator B-lead protection is in the form of an ANL close to the alternator. In Z-11, the (maybe) long run from the battery contactor to the engine area is shared between the starter and the alternator. An elegant setup. > > All advice appreciated! > > Lee Metcalfe > Flying Lancair 320 (500+ hrs.) > Sounds like a good project. Matt- N34RD ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2004
From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org>
Subject: GPS Data port wiring
Hello Learned Listers, I am trying to put a 9 pin serial connector under my panel for the purpose of allowing a serial (RS-232) connection that comes out of a GPS (a Garmin 196 in this case) so that a laptop can update its map info. The laptop only has USB ports (they are both USB version 2.0), so I need to get a USB-to-RS232 converter cable to make the connection. Two questions: 1. should the 9 pin connector be male or female, and, 2. should the the tx and rx leads be reversed on the connector, or is that already done in the USB cable? If someone has already wired this and could let me know in advance of getting the cable and installing the 9 pin connector, and doing my own experiments, I would appreciate it. Thanks, Gary Liming ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2004
From: Chad Robinson <crobinson(at)rfgonline.com>
Subject: Re: GPS Data port wiring
Gary Liming wrote: > > > Hello Learned Listers, > > I am trying to put a 9 pin serial connector under my panel for the purpose > of allowing a serial (RS-232) connection that comes out of a GPS (a Garmin > 196 in this case) so that a laptop can update its map info. > > The laptop only has USB ports (they are both USB version 2.0), so I need to > get a USB-to-RS232 converter cable to make the connection. > > Two questions: > > 1. should the 9 pin connector be male or female, and, > > 2. should the the tx and rx leads be reversed on the connector, or is that > already done in the USB cable? > > If someone has already wired this and could let me know in advance of > getting the cable and installing the 9 pin connector, and doing my own > experiments, I would appreciate it. The USB cable creates a port identical to what you would have on the laptop if you had a real serial port. That is, a 9-pin male DTE (terminal side) port. Your GPS device almost certainly provides a 9-pin female DCE (communications side, such as a modem) port. The best option would thus be a 9-pin female connector, assuming you're creating your own. Wire it straight through, pin for pin, because the mapping is generally done in the device, not the cable. If it doesn't work, try a null modem adapter, and if that makes it work it's usually a simple enough matter to swap pins 2 and 3 so you don't need the adapter anymore. No reason to lose sleep over it. Be careful with these USB cables. There are different quality devices, and some of them are really only designed to connect serial mice to a PC, not any other type of serial device. That is, they don't actually create serial ports. Devices based on FTDI's chipset, which you can find dozens of on eBay on an average day, are a good bet - these provide a device driver that actually creates a virtual serial port that your map software can talk to. Regards, Chad ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Noobie Questions
> > >I have a Lancair 320 that I bought from the builder. I am planning to >re-wire the electrical system this spring to update it (12 years old) >and replace some amateurish workmanship. I attended Bob's seminar last >weekend and learned a lot, but I still have a lot of questions. I'm >sure I'll be back with more questions as I plan the new system, but here >are my first three... > > > None of Bob's Z-figures show any circuit protection in the battery >contactor control circuit (BAT master to battery contactor solenoid). >Is this an oversight or is protection not needed? Not needed. There's no way you can put that wire at risk. > > I see no provision for an avionics fan on any of the bus drawings. >Should not the avionics fan be connected to the main bus (or e-bus if >you have one) via circuit protection? The current set-up in my plane is >the avionics fan is hard-wired to a power source (haven't found it yet) >with no circuit protection (confirmed by pulling all circuit breakers >and it still runs with the BAT master on). The Z-drawings are intended only to convey architecture . . . not details as to what gets powered from which bus or with which size fuse/breaker. The first documents you need to complete are the load analysis documents for each bus. See: http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/Load_Analysis.pdf Here is where you account for nearly every device in the airplane, where it gets power from, under what conditions it is used and how much power it takes. Your current fan may be protected with an in-line fuse. > > I am planning on using B&C's LR-3 alternator controller. Do I still >need circuit protection on the B-lead, which will be tied to the >switched side of the battery contactor (it is currently tied to the main >(and only) bus through a 35A breaker). The convention is to put a current limiter (fat fuse) in series with the b-lead to protect the rest of the airplane from the hazards of shorted diodes in the alternator. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------- ( Experience and common sense cannot be ) ( replaced with policy and procedures. ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ----------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "AI Nut" <ainut(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: GPS Data port wiring
Date: Feb 11, 2004
That depends upon which converter you get. Take note of the gender on the laptop, and on the Garmin, then go to a computer store that has gender matchers, the converter, and cables with different kinds of ends. Make it if you can't buy it, it isn't hard. HTH, AI Nut ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Liming" <gary(at)liming.org> Subject: AeroElectric-List: GPS Data port wiring > > > Hello Learned Listers, > > I am trying to put a 9 pin serial connector under my panel for the purpose > of allowing a serial (RS-232) connection that comes out of a GPS (a Garmin > 196 in this case) so that a laptop can update its map info. > > The laptop only has USB ports (they are both USB version 2.0), so I need to > get a USB-to-RS232 converter cable to make the connection. > > Two questions: > > 1. should the 9 pin connector be male or female, and, > > 2. should the the tx and rx leads be reversed on the connector, or is that > already done in the USB cable? > > If someone has already wired this and could let me know in advance of > getting the cable and installing the 9 pin connector, and doing my own > experiments, I would appreciate it. > > Thanks, > > Gary Liming > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2004
From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org>
Subject: Re: GPS Data port wiring
> >That depends upon which converter you get. Take note of the gender on the >laptop, and on the Garmin, then go to a computer store that has gender >matchers, the converter, and cables with different kinds of ends. Make it >if you can't buy it, it isn't hard. Thanks for the help so far, but has anyone wired this up? The Garmin only provides Tx, Rx, and ground pins on its own round 4 pin connector that also provides power to the unit, so it is not possible to say if its DTE or DCE (which determines DSR/DTR and RTS/CTS behavior) or to determine the connector gender. Presumably this means one does need to connect Rx on the Garmin to Tx on the 9 pins side of the USB cable as well, but I was hoping not to get it right the first time. I am not so much concerned about the ruggedness of the USB cable, since it is only used to update the GPS data (or unload data to the laptop) while on the ground. Thanks again, Gary Liming ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "AI Nut" <ainut(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: GPS Data port wiring
Date: Feb 11, 2004
DTE and DCE only refer to which direction the data flows on which line. Other (control) lines do various jobs that apparently the Garmin doesn't need or support. Gender of the connectors refers merely to whether there are pins (male) or holes (female.) Purely a mechanical issue. Very basically, get connectors that will mate the male to the female ends. Then, connect the tx line from one device to the rx line on the other device, and vice versa. Ground to ground. Done. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Liming" <gary(at)liming.org> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS Data port wiring > > > > >That depends upon which converter you get. Take note of the gender on the > >laptop, and on the Garmin, then go to a computer store that has gender > >matchers, the converter, and cables with different kinds of ends. Make it > >if you can't buy it, it isn't hard. > > Thanks for the help so far, but has anyone wired this up? The Garmin only > provides Tx, Rx, and ground pins on its own round 4 pin connector that also > provides power to the unit, so it is not possible to say if its DTE or DCE > (which determines DSR/DTR and RTS/CTS behavior) or to determine the > connector gender. Presumably this means one does need to connect Rx on the > Garmin to Tx on the 9 pins side of the USB cable as well, but I was hoping > not to get it right the first time. > > I am not so much concerned about the ruggedness of the USB cable, since it > is only used to update the GPS data (or unload data to the laptop) while on > the ground. > > Thanks again, > > Gary Liming > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "hollandm" <hollandm(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Compass shielding
Date: Feb 11, 2004
The TC may well be Chinese, who can say these days, but it claims to be manufactured by mid continent, model 1394T100-7Z. I haven't been able to scratch up any galvanized tin yet and still searching for a few square inches of mu-metal. The electrical separation idea is a no-brainer, unfortunately there are no available places, within my field of vision where that is possible. Did try twisting the feed line, no effect. It is definitely related to the electical field generated by gyro motor since it only shows an effect on the compass when switched on. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: Compass shielding
Date: Feb 11, 2004
What kind of airplane is it in.... Just curious. -Dale ----- Original Message ----- From: "hollandm" <hollandm(at)pacbell.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Compass shielding > > The TC may well be Chinese, who can say these days, but it claims to be manufactured by mid continent, model 1394T100-7Z. > > I haven't been able to scratch up any galvanized tin yet and still searching for a few square inches of mu-metal. > > The electrical separation idea is a no-brainer, unfortunately there are no available places, within my field of vision where that is possible. > > Did try twisting the feed line, no effect. > > It is definitely related to the electical field generated by gyro motor since it only shows an effect on the compass when switched on. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2004
From: Jerzy Krasinski <krasinski(at)direcway.com>
Subject: Re: Compass shielding
Glen Matejcek wrote: > >Jerzy- > > > >>Do not bother with shielding the compass, it will not work. The compass >>MUST be exposed to external magnetic field, this is how it finds >>directions. >> >> > >According to my friends in the HUD manufacturing business, your statement about shielding the compass rendering it useless is incorrect, at least with respect to mu metal. I suppose this could be different with flashing material, but IIRC shielding damps dynamic magnetic fields such as EMI, while the earth's magnetic field is static from the compass' frame of reference. Having said that, it still makes more sense from the theoretical perspective to shield the antagonist rather than the victim. Most likely from the practical application perspective, also. > > > > Magnetic compass has a very long time constant. Practically, only static component of the field can move it. Magnetic compass with high inertia disregards fast changing fields of EMI no matter if you attenuate them or not. The magnetic shield attenuates the total magnetic field. The shield can not care less if the field comes from the Earth or from a current loop. Both components are attenuated equally. The compass reacts to the TOTAL static magnetic field, and it can not care less if the source of the magnetic field is a loop with current or the field of the Earth. If there was a current loop nearby, the compass would point a wrong direction. If you put a compass in a thin magnetic shield, you reduce the total field and make the compass sluggish. For the case where a part of the field comes from a current loop, the shielding would preserve the ratio of these two fields, and the compass would still sluggishly point (the same as before) wrong direction. So in such a case the sluggish compass is even less useful, comparing it to the case without the shield. If you put a compass into a thick magnetic shield, you would kill all the external magnetic field, including the field from the current loop and the field from the Earth. The compass in a thick shield would be blind, it would have have no idea about external field and it would point in a random direction. In this case the compass is totally useless. Your last comment is correct, but it is not only a theoretical rule, it is very practical. Practically, it is better to organize a ZOO with wild animals in cages, while in principle one could make an inverse ZOO with viewers in cages and free running wild animals. Jerzy ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Bus Load Analysis
Date: Feb 11, 2004
Bob and All, Bob ask me in a personal response a couple months back if I had done a system analysis of the new electrical system. Well, I had not. Compiling all the things that consume power is what began this quest to update everything. My question to the group is - what do we consider essential equipment... Bob had some advise but I did not right it down. Is it possible for us to compile a few lists for the VFR and the IFR birds from all the great minds amoung us? This may have been addressed in the newer updates to the Connection that I am delinquent in renewing by only 3 years :-( It would be a good thing to put in the Zeee Options pages :-) (Pun intended) It has taken two weeks just to trace down a few operating amperages for some equipment. Is this reasonable? Dale Martin Lewiston, ID LEZ-235 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net>
Subject: Compass shielding
Date: Feb 11, 2004
> > Did try twisting the feed line, no effect. > > It is definitely related to the electical field generated by > gyro motor since it only shows an effect on the compass when > switched on. > Easiest fix for the magnetic compass is to not look at it. Most planes have gps, use that. While taxiing out, set the DG to match the gps track. Alex Peterson Maple Grove, MN RV6-A N66AP 436 hours www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 11, 2004
From: Jim Corner <jcorner(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: GPS Data port wiring
Gary I use the RS232 Cable that came with my GPSMAP 295. To connect with the USB port you may need a cable such as shown at http://www.gpscity.com/gps/brados/517.1.12685021404219988172/usb4adapter.htm l and software to match the USB speeds to the RS232 baud rates of your GPS. Hope this helps Jim Hello Learned Listers, I am trying to put a 9 pin serial connector under my panel for the purpose of allowing a serial (RS-232) connection that comes out of a GPS (a Garmin 196 in this case) so that a laptop can update its map info. The laptop only has USB ports (they are both USB version 2.0), so I need to get a USB-to-RS232 converter cable to make the connection. Two questions: 1. should the 9 pin connector be male or female, and, 2. should the the tx and rx leads be reversed on the connector, or is that already done in the USB cable? If someone has already wired this and could let me know in advance of getting the cable and installing the 9 pin connector, and doing my own experiments, I would appreciate it. Thanks, Gary Liming ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis
> >Bob and All, > >Bob ask me in a personal response a couple months back if I had done a >system analysis of the new electrical system. > >Well, I had not. Compiling all the things that consume power is what began >this quest to update everything. > >My question to the group is - what do we consider essential equipment... There shouldn't be any ESSENTIAL equipment . . . at least not in the sense that if one item in the airplane stops performing that you break a sweat. >Bob had some advise but I did not right it down. Is it possible for us to >compile a few lists for the VFR and the IFR birds from all the great minds >amoung us? What you're looking for is a list of commonly used or most useful items under the various flight conditions. Begin with a list of all the goodies . . . use a pencil and fill out load-analysis forms from http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/Load_Analysis.pdf You need one form for each bus. Take a best guess at which bus you'll run everything from and write it down in pencil. Then publish your work here on the list. It's not a big task and you can quickly type out the items on each of three or four busses. Also list the flight conditions under which you'll consider that item useful/necessary Folks here will help you decide whether or not any given item is on the right bus and help gauge its level of necessity. Then we'll explore what stuff you plan to carry in you flight bag to back up any items for which there is great utility but no panel mounted backup. Doing this in pencil lets you shuffle things around as the task moves forward. When this is completed, then you're ready to fill in the squares with load currents and begin to draw your page-per-system. Note on the example sheet that your finished document becomes a planning guide for what goes on each bus, what protection size it gets (the drawings show breakers but if you're using fuses, just put the protection size on and "think" fuses), wire size, name of system, page of your wirebook where that system's wiring will be depicted and finally, demands that system puts on your battery/alternator combination in each phase of flight. This is the single most important planning document for your system. Next comes the power distribution diagram where you'll decided just how power is generated, stored, and distributed to the busses. THEN you can begin knock each system's wiring off one-page- at-a-time. It's sorta like eating an elephant . . . one bite at a time. But you gotta cook him first. That happens on the load analysis pages and distribution pages. After that, get out your spoon. It's all little bites from there on. >This may have been addressed in the newer updates to the Connection that I >am delinquent in renewing by only 3 years :-( > >It would be a good thing to put in the Zeee Options pages :-) (Pun intended) > >It has taken two weeks just to trace down a few operating amperages for some >equipment. > >Is this reasonable? . . . maybe not. If you have the installation manuals for equipment items, they should be able to give you current draw. You can call the manufacturer too. Another option is to power the item up from a battery or power supply on the bench and measure its current draw. But having a number to put in the box is not nearly so important now as getting it listed as an action item and assigning it to the most useful bus. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: Walter Tondu <walter(at)tondu.com>
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis
On 02/11 7:45, Dale Martin wrote: > Bob ask me in a personal response a couple months back if I had done a > system analysis of the new electrical system. > > Well, I had not. Compiling all the things that consume power is what began > this quest to update everything. > > My question to the group is - what do we consider essential equipment... > Bob had some advise but I did not right it down. Is it possible for us to > compile a few lists for the VFR and the IFR birds from all the great minds > amoung us? > > This may have been addressed in the newer updates to the Connection that I > am delinquent in renewing by only 3 years :-( > > It would be a good thing to put in the Zeee Options pages :-) (Pun intended) > > It has taken two weeks just to trace down a few operating amperages for some > equipment. Excellent Idea! How about a spreadsheet with know values for some of the standard equipment out there. I'll even volunteer to manage it. This would be a huge timesaver for current and future builders who aspire to follow the Mr. K route of electronics design. Perhaps those of you who have completed their system analysis could forward their information we could compile the list in short order. -- Walter Tondu http://www.tondu.com/rv7 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu>
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > There shouldn't be any ESSENTIAL equipment . . . at least not in the > sense that if one item in the airplane stops performing that you > break a sweat. That would be that big fan out front that keeps the pilot cool. When it stops performing, you can actually see the pilot start to sweat... *wink* -Dj -- Dj Merrill Thayer School of Engineering ThUG Sr. Unix Systems Administrator 8000 Cummings Hall deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu - N1JOV Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755 "On the side of the software box, in the 'System Requirements' section, it said 'Requires Windows 95 or better'. So I installed Linux." -Anonymous ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com>
Subject: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea
Date: Feb 12, 2004
I am sure someone else has thought of this but here goes ... Bob's comments (see SNIP below) got me to thinking that it would be nice if we didn't all have to run out and track down manuals for stuff we probably have not even purchased yet before we do planning. So, I think it would be a real service if someone with webspace and capability could keep a running table of current draw on various items. Maybe Doug Reeves could set up another one of his databases on http://www.vansairforce.net or maybe Bob has some extra space on his new system (hate to be asking anymore of Bob as he gives way too much already). The table (database/spreadsheet/whatever) could have the headings ,mentioned in the Europa worksheet (from Bobs reference http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/Load_Analysis.pdf) with the addition of "Vendor" and "model #". It would not be the definitive answer but one could look there and get a good enough to size things answer. As more people research additonal items, the database could grow and at some point probably capture 90%+ of what we all are using these days. Whadday'all think??? James [SNIP] > > . . . maybe not. If you have the installation manuals for equipment > items, they should be able to give you current draw. You can call the > manufacturer too. Another option is to power the item up from > a battery > or power supply on the bench and measure its current draw. But having > a number to put in the box is not nearly so important now as getting > it listed as an action item and assigning it to the most useful bus. > > Bob . . . > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis
Date: Feb 12, 2004
Great, I was amazed to find out that the 12 volt Fuel pump (interrupter type) only requires 3/4 of an amp. That seems low. For 17 plus years it has enjoyed a 5 amp breaker on the 28v system I use. Cool - Smaller/lighter wire. Dale ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walter Tondu" <walter(at)tondu.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bus Load Analysis > > On 02/11 7:45, Dale Martin wrote: > > > Bob ask me in a personal response a couple months back if I had done a > > system analysis of the new electrical system. > > > > Well, I had not. Compiling all the things that consume power is what began > > this quest to update everything. > > > > My question to the group is - what do we consider essential equipment... > > Bob had some advise but I did not right it down. Is it possible for us to > > compile a few lists for the VFR and the IFR birds from all the great minds > > amoung us? > > > > This may have been addressed in the newer updates to the Connection that I > > am delinquent in renewing by only 3 years :-( > > > > It would be a good thing to put in the Zeee Options pages :-) (Pun intended) > > > > It has taken two weeks just to trace down a few operating amperages for some > > equipment. > > Excellent Idea! How about a spreadsheet with know values for some of > the standard equipment out there. I'll even volunteer to manage it. > This would be a huge timesaver for current and future builders who aspire > to follow the Mr. K route of electronics design. Perhaps those of you > who have completed their system analysis could forward their information > we could compile the list in short order. > -- > Walter Tondu > http://www.tondu.com/rv7 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis
Date: Feb 12, 2004
Dj, What do you mean the fan in front??? Fan in the back where it belongs!!! :-) Dale ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dj Merrill" <deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bus Load Analysis > > Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > There shouldn't be any ESSENTIAL equipment . . . at least not in the > > sense that if one item in the airplane stops performing that you > > break a sweat. > > That would be that big fan out front that keeps the pilot cool. > When it stops performing, you can actually see the pilot start to sweat... > *wink* > > -Dj > > > -- > Dj Merrill Thayer School of Engineering > ThUG Sr. Unix Systems Administrator 8000 Cummings Hall > deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu - N1JOV Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755 > > "On the side of the software box, in the 'System Requirements' section, > it said 'Requires Windows 95 or better'. So I installed Linux." -Anonymous > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu>
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis
Dale Martin wrote: > > Dj, What do you mean the fan in front??? Fan in the back where it > belongs!!! :-) > > Dale Hey, I've never tried to sit backwards in my plane. That must be interesting! *grin* -Dj -- Dj Merrill Thayer School of Engineering ThUG Sr. Unix Systems Administrator 8000 Cummings Hall deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu - N1JOV Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755 "On the side of the software box, in the 'System Requirements' section, it said 'Requires Windows 95 or better'. So I installed Linux." -Anonymous ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: klehman(at)albedo.net
Subject: alternator switch
Hi Gary I have indeed considered such an approach complete with an ov relay that automatically turns on an electric windshield defroster for some additional load. I don't think I'd get any reasonable kind of load sharing with one battery though. Both my alternators have non adjustable regulators and it sounds like even adjustable regulators are not a good solution to load sharing. I'd like to keep at least a moderate load on my permanent magnet alternator rather than just wasting that energy heating up the regulator. Might be interesting to see if I can arrange to fully load the 20 amp pm alternator and get stable operation with the 40 amp ND unit topping up any extra load. With that scenario, the pm alternator would not be capable of an ov and if the ND went ov, the pm alternator should drop off line after some (possibly significant) transients. I'm starting to lean towards Bob's approach for ov protection on the 40 amp ND and two small batteries in a modified Z14 system rather than more experimenting with this right now. Ken > < need for an alternator switch. I am referring to an internal vr > alternator.>> > > Here's an idea along those lines. If you have a single large (normal size) > battery and 2 alternators, make one be of very modest output, like 40 amps, > and the other a reasonable backup, like 8 or 20 amps. The failure mode will > be one of them going "ov." At that low capacity you will have plenty of > warning and will be able to increase the load (in my case 160W of landing > lights, pitot heat, vent blower) to reduce or even eliminate the excess > charge current to the battery. I'm not sure I'm recommending it, but it > does seem like a reasonable approach. > > Gary Casey ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: Walter Tondu <walter(at)tondu.com>
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea
If there are no issues I will begin to compile a list of known values for the Bus Load Analysis. This should help builders save a great deal of time searching. If you have done the analysis and research and you would like to provide your input please email the following information for each accessory; BUS, ACCESSORY, VENDOR, MODEL #, WIRE-GUAGE, FUSE, PRE-FLIGHT, PRE-TAXI, TAKEOFF/CLIMB, VFR-CRUISE, IFR-CRUISE, APPRCH/LNDG, EMERG If you have completed the Bus Load Analysis form and would like to send it to me that would be great. We'll get this tabulated and then uploaded, hopefully to vansairforce.net. -- Walter Tondu http://www.tondu.com/rv7 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com>
Subject: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea
Date: Feb 12, 2004
Walter, I recall there was a person who was doing a Lancair that did a LOT of data gathering as he had a lot of (nice) toys in that plane. If he is still monitorong the list, he might send his spreadsheet (I seem to recall he had built one). This would be a good starting point for "pre-loading" the file. Also, THANKS for agreeing to gather this. James > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Walter > Tondu > Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 2:27 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea > > > If there are no issues I will begin to compile a list of known values > for the Bus Load Analysis. This should help builders save a great deal > of time searching. > > If you have done the analysis and research and you would like to provide > your input please email the following information for each accessory; > > BUS, ACCESSORY, VENDOR, MODEL #, WIRE-GUAGE, FUSE, PRE-FLIGHT, > PRE-TAXI, TAKEOFF/CLIMB, VFR-CRUISE, IFR-CRUISE, APPRCH/LNDG, EMERG > > If you have completed the Bus Load Analysis form and would like to send it > to me that would be great. > > We'll get this tabulated and then uploaded, hopefully to > vansairforce.net. > > -- > Walter Tondu > http://www.tondu.com/rv7 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: Larry Colley <larry(at)grrok.com>
Subject: Dual Battery, Single Alternator System
I am planning an all electric system with two batteries and a single alternator. My issue is how can I verify that both the Battery Contactor and the Aux Battery Contactor have closed. Looking at Figure Z-30. The starter contactor and the main bus are powered as soon as the first battery contactor closes. If the second contactor does not close, it is isolated from the charging system but all busses are fully powered. This can be detected with a simple light if the cause of the problem is in the contactor coil circuit but how can you detect the problem if contacts simply do not close. Applying a low voltage monitor to each Battery Bus would detect this problem during flight but there must be a more direct method that would detect the problem during pre-flight. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Dual Battery, Single Alternator System
I suppose this can be done during the pre-flight check. Bat 1 ON - volt check Bat 2 ON, Bat 1 Off - volt check Bat 1 ON Michel --- Larry Colley wrote: > Colley > > I am planning an all electric system with two > batteries and a single > alternator. My issue is how can I verify that both > the Battery Contactor > and the Aux Battery Contactor have closed. > > Looking at Figure Z-30. The starter contactor and > the main bus are powered > as soon as the first battery contactor closes. If > the second contactor > does not close, it is isolated from the charging > system but all busses are > fully powered. This can be detected with a simple > light if the cause of > the problem is in the contactor coil circuit but how > can you detect the > problem if contacts simply do not close. > > Applying a low voltage monitor to each Battery Bus > would detect this > problem during flight but there must be a more > direct method that would > detect the problem during pre-flight. > > > > - > Contributions > any other > Forums. > > http://www.matronics.com/chat > > http://www.matronics.com/subscription > http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm > http://www.matronics.com/archives > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists > > > > > ===== ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD, C-GZGQ http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby __________________________________ http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Rodrian" <Jim.Rodrian(at)elsyn.com>
Subject: Re: Dynon and EMI
Date: Feb 12, 2004
Dale, =93Filtering=94 usually involves incorporation of capacitors, ferrite beads, and inductors at appropriated places on the product schematic and circuit board. (A =93filter=94 can be shown on the schematic but located improperly on the circuit board and it will not have the intended affect of reducing EMI problems.) Shielded wires may help but not always. Shielded wires won=92t help if the electrical noise is =93common mode=94 and found on the ground (shield) wire as well as the power / signal wire. Use of filter components external to a product may reduce EMI problems. The final solution will probably be simple. However, if compliance with EMC requirements was not a requirement from =93day one=94 of a product development project, it can takes weeks of engineering effort and testing to bring a product into compliance. Since Jeff Point is geographically close to me, I am willing to look at his installation to evaluate the situation. Jim Grafton, WI Defiant Jim, When you say filtering - Is that synonymous for shielding? In your opinion - is the Dynon EFIS missing the mark here or is there a simple solution for a demanding builder? Dale Martin Lewiston, ID LEZ-235 --- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Dual Battery, Single Alternator System
> >I am planning an all electric system with two batteries and a single >alternator. My issue is how can I verify that both the Battery Contactor >and the Aux Battery Contactor have closed. > >Looking at Figure Z-30. The starter contactor and the main bus are powered >as soon as the first battery contactor closes. If the second contactor >does not close, it is isolated from the charging system but all busses are >fully powered. This can be detected with a simple light if the cause of >the problem is in the contactor coil circuit but how can you detect the >problem if contacts simply do not close. > >Applying a low voltage monitor to each Battery Bus would detect this >problem during flight but there must be a more direct method that would >detect the problem during pre-flight. Turn one battery on, see that bus comes up. You should also hear the battery contactor "click". Turn on the second battery. You won't normally see any change on the bus but you should hear the second click. Turn the first battery off and see that the bus stays hot. Turn the first battery back on. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: alternator switch
> >Hi Gary > >I have indeed considered such an approach complete with an ov relay that >automatically turns on an electric windshield defroster for some >additional load. I don't think I'd get any reasonable kind of load >sharing with one battery though. Both my alternators have non adjustable >regulators and it sounds like even adjustable regulators are not a good >solution to load sharing. I'd like to keep at least a moderate load on >my permanent magnet alternator rather than just wasting that energy >heating up the regulator. Not sure what kind of PM alternator you have . . . if it's an SD-8, that system uses a series-pass regulator that does not waste unused energy from the alternator. Not sure about other manufacturers but I think Ducati regulators for Rotax are series-pass also. There's no good reason to run a parallel-shunt regulator any more. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea
> > >I am sure someone else has thought of this but here goes ... > >Bob's comments (see SNIP below) got me to thinking that it would be nice if >we didn't all have to run out and track down manuals for stuff we probably >have not even purchased yet before we do planning. > >So, I think it would be a real service if someone with webspace and >capability could keep a running table of current draw on various items. >Maybe Doug Reeves could set up another one of his databases on >http://www.vansairforce.net or maybe Bob has some extra space on his new >system (hate to be asking anymore of Bob as he gives way too much already). Would be pleased to post anything you have to offer. Got LOTS of server space since I own half of it. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis
> >Great, > >I was amazed to find out that the 12 volt Fuel pump (interrupter type) only >requires 3/4 of an amp. That seems low. For 17 plus years it has enjoyed a >5 amp breaker on the 28v system I use. Cool - Smaller/lighter wire. 22AWG is smallest recommended wire, it can be nicely protected with a 5A breaker. I still have a Facet pump on my bench that's awaiting time to do some energy studies on it. True, these pulsed pumps take a hefty peak current compared to their average currents. The 3/4A average you cite doesn't seem out of line at all but I wouldn't be surprised to see 3A peak. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea
Date: Feb 12, 2004
Walt, It will be WIRE GAUGE / VOLTAGE. I use much smaller wire then the 14 volt folks and there are others using 28 volt equipment. - Dale ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walter Tondu" <walter(at)tondu.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea > > If there are no issues I will begin to compile a list of known values > for the Bus Load Analysis. This should help builders save a great deal > of time searching. > > If you have done the analysis and research and you would like to provide > your input please email the following information for each accessory; > > BUS, ACCESSORY, VENDOR, MODEL #, WIRE-GUAGE, FUSE, PRE-FLIGHT, PRE-TAXI, TAKEOFF/CLIMB, VFR-CRUISE, IFR-CRUISE, APPRCH/LNDG, EMERG > > If you have completed the Bus Load Analysis form and would like to send it > to me that would be great. > > We'll get this tabulated and then uploaded, hopefully to vansairforce.net. > > -- > Walter Tondu > http://www.tondu.com/rv7 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Z12 e-bus questions
> >Excellent, thanks. Just a couple more questions for the un-informed (me). >See below. > >SNIP> If the wires are longer, then . . . well, shucks. Now, > > if you need an e-bus alternate feed exceeding 5A from > > the battery (or battery bus) then using a relay as shown > > in: > > > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/E-BusFatFeed.gif > > > > seems prudent. This architecture provides a low power > > version of a battery contactor to provide at-the-battery > > control of a feeder. The same caveat exists for all > > feeders from the battery whether e-bus alternate feed > > or feeders to goodies that support an electrically > > dependent engine. You mentioned a fuel pump . . . I > > wouldn't drive this from the e-bus but directly from > > the battery bus via it's 5A or less fuse and no relay > > or a 7A+ fuse and a relay. > >In both cases you mention going larger than 5A a relay is required? Is this >just because it is driving a motor (pump) or what am I missing here? I don't >need to put a relay in for all loads larger than 5A do I? Yup, assuming you subscribe to conventions. The goal is to have no feeders fused at more than 5A that cannot be shut down from the pilots position. We COULD shut down the whole battery bus but that makes everything on the battery bus vulnerable to a single point of failure on one of the most unreliable electo-mechanical devices there is . . . a relay. > > > > The VERY FIRST documents you need to craft in your > > electrical system design are a tabular listing of each > > feeder that comes off each bus. The system that feeder > > supplies, the size of protection be it a Lego fuse or > > Tinker-Toy breaker, size of the wire, then draw 7 columns > > where you're going to deduce and add up the current draw > > on each feeder under the following headers, (1) preflight, > > (2) taxi, (3) takeoff/climb, (4) vfr cruise, (5) ifr cruise, > > (6) approach to landing and (7) alternator-out. > > > > Go get this document: > > > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/LoadAnalysisHandOut.pdf > >I had almost done this, at least for the first three columns (I had one more >column for switch required/type). I like your document better and looks as >though it will guide me in a more analytical path. >Jeff Sounds like you're out of the gate and running . . . Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: Walter Tondu <walter(at)tondu.com>
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea
On 02/12 1:53, Dale Martin wrote: > > Walt, > > It will be WIRE GAUGE / VOLTAGE. I use much smaller wire then the 14 volt > folks and there are others using 28 volt equipment. Right you are! BUS, ACCESSORY, VENDOR, MODEL #, WIRE-GUAGE/VOLTS, FUSE, PRE-FLIGHT, PRE-TAXI, TAKEOFF/CLIMB, VFR-CRUISE, IFR-CRUISE, APPRCH/LNDG, EMERG -- Walter Tondu http://www.tondu.com/rv7 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: For Bob, Comment?
> > >> >> >> > There is an upcoming program on Public Broadcasting: NOVA: The Deadly >>It deals with an inflight fire caused by electrical arcing. > > > > > This incident, typical of all accident scenarios, is a joining > of links in the chain. Breaking any link would have averted the accident. > (1) cracks in wires on (2) system voltage high enough to > support a soft-fault arc (3) close proximity of combustible > insulation (4) inaccessible to crew to fight fire (5) and > so rare an event that the crew could not conceive how much > trouble they were in. Had emergency condition behavior > been initiated sooner, etc. There are probably other links > in this deadly chain I've missed. > > I don't disagree with most of what you said about the chain of events, but I have to take exception to the comment about the crew's reaction time being part of the chain. They were over the Atlantic Ocean. Halifax was the closest airport that had a runway anywhere close to long enough for them. The TSB investigation determined that even if the crew had done an emergency descent at MMO/VMO when they first smelled smoke that they could not have gotten on the ground before the aircraft became unflyable. I've studied the report in detail and spoken with the investigator who did that analysis, and I concluded that it was credible. The only way they could have gotten on the ground would been to have flown well in excess of MMO and VMO during the descent, and that is not a reasonable expectation given that could not have known how bad things were going to get. -- Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) Ottawa, Canada http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 12, 2004
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: For Bob, Comment?
> > >><buckaroo_banzai@the-pentagon.com> >> >>Quite often, the installers of a STC system try to take advantage of what's >>already in the aircraft without fully realizing that they may be >>circumventing the intent of the aircraft manufacturer. It's amazing that >>the FAA and JAA are willing to grant the STC at all! > > STC's generally cannot be grand-fathered to other airframes. > STC is exactly what the acronym implies . . . SUPPLEMENT > to a TYPE CERTIFICATE. These are not used as plug-n-play > across a range of aircraft. > > STC is EXACTLY what those-who-know-more-about-airplanes-than- > we-do like. Treat every installation like it's never been done > before and test the hell out of it. This keeps those who > don't understand what's happening from having to think or > learn anything. It makes sure that some wheels get invented > over and over again. The STC route is relatively low risk > but also expensive because common sense approaches are > neither encouraged or allowed. Everyone is expected to > read and respond to a rule book. Whether or not he/she > understands the system to which the rules are applied > no longer matters. > > I'm betting you are not a big fan of the Approved Model List STC for the Apollo CNX-80 Integrated Avionics System. That STC allows installation on pretty much every light single or twin just by using the Installation Manual. There doesn't seem to be any requirement to do any engineering analysis or specific testing. Approved Model List: http://www.garminat.com/dwnlds/cnxdoc/CNX80_AML.pdf STC docs, etc: http://www.garminat.com/cnx_docs.shtml -- Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) Ottawa, Canada http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis
Date: Feb 12, 2004
Bob and all, ******** Dale says, > >I was amazed to find out that the 12 volt Fuel pump (interrupter type) only > >requires 3/4 of an amp. That seems low. For 17 plus years it has enjoyed a > >5 amp breaker on the 28v system I use. Cool - Smaller/lighter wire. > ******* ********* Bob says, > 22AWG is smallest recommended wire, it can be nicely protected with > a 5A breaker. I still have a Facet pump on my bench that's awaiting > time to do some energy studies on it. True, these pulsed pumps take > a hefty peak current compared to their average currents. The 3/4A > average you cite doesn't seem out of line at all but I wouldn't be > surprised to see 3A peak. > ******** And this is the hardest thing for of non-EE's to figure out..... Meaning not proper test equipment or the lack of understanding of using test equipment to determine the amperage peak at the first flick of a switch or when under a very heavy load. Remembering back years ago - we used to hook up the entire required length, connect everything, and keep using smaller breakers until one popped when we threw the switch..... The old trial and fault method. It didn't account for variables such as temperature, changes in amperage..... We would just up the circuit breaker value by two numbers and call it good. Now that was science. Heh-heh... Now we just ask you :-) Dale Martin Lewiston, ID LEZ-235 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Speedy11(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 13, 2004
Subject: Re: Compass shielding
In a message dated 2/12/04 2:57:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes: << Easiest fix for the magnetic compass is to not look at it. Most planes have gps, use that. While taxiing out, set the DG to match the gps track. >> It is easiest - I certainly use it - but if you are being vectored by ATC, using GPS ground track is not what they are expecting of you. In many parts of the USA, true heading and mag heading will be the same number, but they will rarely match the GPS track. Am I splitting hairs - Yup. But, when ATC assigns a heading, they are expecting you to fly mag heading. Stan Sutterfield RV-8A Tampa, FL ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Compass shielding
> >In a message dated 2/12/2004 10:07:57 PM Mountain Standard Time, >Speedy11(at)aol.com writes: > > > > > > It is easiest - I certainly use it - but if you are being vectored by ATC, > > using GPS ground track is not what they are expecting of you. In many > parts > > of > > the USA, true heading and mag heading will be the same number, but they > will > > > > rarely match the GPS track. Am I splitting hairs - Yup. But, when ATC > > assigns a heading, they are expecting you to fly mag heading. If strictly true, then GPS is useless for complying with ATC instructions. GPS doesn't display heading (direction airplane is pointed) but course (direction airplane is going). Depending on winds, the difference between the two can be 10 degrees or more depending on speed of your airplane. An ATC controller used to live on our airport and I asked him about the "fly heading xx degrees" instruction. Since his radar display was based on course, not heading, does he do the mental gymnastics to account for winds. He said no. When I give you a "heading" of 90 degrees, I'm pointing you off into airspace well clear of other aircraft. If you in fact give me a course of 80 or 100 degrees, it mostly doesn't matter. If I don't get enough of an effect for my instructions, I may follow up with come right 10 degrees or a new heading of 100 degrees. It's like painting a portrait with a 4" brush. He opined that flying GPS course in response to an ATC instruction would probably make every controller happy . . . even if your magnetically slaved DG displayed something different due to winds. That should be a MAGNETIC course which is, I believe, available from most GPS receivers. >so ya just set your DG on your take off roll. Runway heading is as close as a > magnetic compass reading. Probably closer. Stan is right about the Mag >variation though. Here in Jackson Hole Wy the difference is 15 degrees, My GPS receivers will optionally display either magnetic or true. They contain a look-up table of variations that does the calculation for you. I fly with them set for Magnetic course display. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------- ( Experience and common sense cannot be ) ( replaced with policy and procedures. ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ----------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca>
Subject: Electrical current needs
Date: Feb 13, 2004
"Excellent Idea! How about a spreadsheet with know values for some of the standard equipment out there. I'll even volunteer to manage it. This would be a huge timesaver for current and future builders who aspire to follow the Mr. K route of electronics design. Perhaps those of you who have completed their system analysis could forward their information we could compile the list in short order. Walter Tondu http://www.tondu.com/rv7" I seem to recall a site on the web where someone has compiled a list of units and their current requirements..... Perhaps a reader on this net might remember and display the site? Ferg Europa A064 monowheel 914 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: For Bob, Comment?
> > > > > STC is EXACTLY what those-who-know-more-about-airplanes-than- > > we-do like. Treat every installation like it's never been done > > before and test the hell out of it. This keeps those who > > don't understand what's happening from having to think or > > learn anything. It makes sure that some wheels get invented > > over and over again. The STC route is relatively low risk > > but also expensive because common sense approaches are > > neither encouraged or allowed. Everyone is expected to > > read and respond to a rule book. Whether or not he/she > > understands the system to which the rules are applied > > no longer matters. > > > > > >I'm betting you are not a big fan of the Approved Model List STC for >the Apollo CNX-80 Integrated Avionics System. That STC allows >installation on pretty much every light single or twin just by using >the Installation Manual. There doesn't seem to be any requirement to >do any engineering analysis or specific testing. > >Approved Model List: >http://www.garminat.com/dwnlds/cnxdoc/CNX80_AML.pdf > >STC docs, etc: >http://www.garminat.com/cnx_docs.shtml This is a great example of how absurd the certification process has become. A type certificate is issued against a particular airframe to encompass all of the characteristics unique to that airframe. Anything which might affect performance must be scientifically considered and accounted for. When the first comm transceiver was attached to an airplane, it was well understood that the radio added to the empty weight of the airplane, had an electrical load requirement to be satisfied and MIGHT have some structural issues with respect to where you poked a hole in the skin for an antenna. Of course, the customer had an intense interest in achieving certain performance goals from the radio after installation. An AI, mechanic and customer worked together to see that these simple requirements were met. A logbook entry or at most a 337 form filled the regulatory requirements. The thrust of an STC is to amend the TC of an airplane to account for any ways in which installation of an accessory or new feature does not adversely affect the performance of the airplane. The installation of a GPS receiver has no greater potential for impact on the airframe than did the comm radios of 60 years ago. The documents cited above IMPLY that each of those airframes was evaluated for effects on performance based upon installation of the product per the instruction manual. I'll bet that the instruction manuals never address variability by citing something to be done or avoided on any particular aircraft based on model or type certificate. Instructions that don't speak to specific variability between models to avoid altering airframe performance are a demonstration of how the STC process was corrupted . . . They threw an appearance of valuable process at an installation for which the process was neither necessary nor did it add value to the final installation. The radio manufacturer pulled of a real coup in acquiring the documents . . . that probably couldn't have been achieved in other FAA regions. Instead of one piece of paper covering hundreds of aircraft, the manufacturer would need single pieces of paper for all TC's . . . but in neither case would the STC activity have added value. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net>
Subject: Re: Compass shielding
Date: Feb 13, 2004
> > > rarely match the GPS track. Am I splitting hairs - Yup. > But, when > > > ATC assigns a heading, they are expecting you to fly mag heading. Ok, ok. If one reads what I originally posted, to which the above was a reply, I said to use GPS to SET the DG, not to fly tracks. I was stating that I can't imagine using a magnetic compass anymore to set my DG. I prefer to use runway heading or the mag track output of my gps while taxiing to set the DG. Alex Peterson Maple Grove, MN RV6-A N66AP 437 hours www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2004
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea
From: John Schroeder <jschroeder(at)perigee.net>
Walter - I hope this rather long posting is taken as constructive and not in any way denigrating the effort, or your most generous offer to compile the list. I have agonized long hours over the same problems as we designed our system and chose the equipment to install. I think you will be getting too rigid and complicated with this much information. For example: 1. Why put buss in there? That will depend on the Z diagram being used, the aircraft, its mission etc. 2. Why "Wire gauge/Volts"? Again, that is influenced by a lot of other variables and choices - especially where the equipment will be located in the aircraft and what type. For example, we calculated a 44 foot round trip in a glass aircraft for the pitot tube. Others are shorter, some may be longer. Using Bob's formula in his paper on Wire Size Selection, one has to check their initial calculations on wire size to keep the % voltage drop under 5%. That could nullify any figure appended to a device sent in for the database. What about the heat dissipation if one chooses to run a wire in a bundle? 3. Why specify the size of the fuse? Often, the manufacturer specifies it and it has no relation whatsoever to the wire size you calculate. If you want to put the fuse size, it should only be the size recommended by the mfg. You could put an M after the size to denote this. 4. The various phases of flight? Again, these are subjective and will vary a lot with the aircraft and mission. Also, emergency is a very loose category. There are too many to list and each may or may not have an effect on the amperage total at the bottom of each sheet. It varies also with the Z diagram and any variation one chooses to make. One fellow remarked a long time ago that one should add a night and day category for all of the phases of flight because lighting becomes a major consideration. Bottom line on this is that your database would not be very helpful and be too big. 5. The elements of the database should be: Accessory, Manufacturer, Model #, Amps and Fuse. From there one can tailor the rest of the data based on their design, aircraft, missions and plain old preferences. There would be 3 codes to add to the data. Two would be for the amps and one for the fuse. One would add an "M" after the amps to denote actual measured load taken by the builder when the accessory is on. For a radio, there should be two lines of data: one for receive and one for transmit. Same for a fuel boost pump, if there is a high and a low mode. For something like a pitot tube, there would be two lines: one for steady state and one for surge during warmup. The second code for the amps would be an "S" to denote that it is a manufacturer's spec figure. If they have several figures, there should be one line per figure. The third code would be for the CB/fuzing. An "S" would be appended to denote a manufacturer's recommended size. If someone actually experimented to fine where a device nuisance tripped, they could add a figure and append an "M" The absence of a code in the amps cell would indicate caution to anyone using that figure. I would think that once the list is initially compiled and available to the community, there will be a refinement process and the end point would most likely be M's or S's after each amperage. That is the key figure we all need to make the calculations and do the design. I would also ask that anyone furnishing a line or lines of data for a device to state the source. I know that Panel Planner has some data and I would not want to rely on that in my calculations. There are also a lot of WAG's out there. Again, I hope this has been helpful. Drop me an email if you would like to discuss anything here. The idea is a wonderful one and the need is certainly there. Thank you for volunteering. Cheers, John Schroeder Lancair ES & Z-14 > > On 02/12 1:53, Dale Martin wrote: > > > > > > Walt, > > > > It will be WIRE GAUGE / VOLTAGE. I use much smaller wire then the 14 > volt > > folks and there are others using 28 volt equipment. > > Right you are! > > BUS, ACCESSORY, VENDOR, MODEL #, WIRE-GUAGE/VOLTS, FUSE, PRE-FLIGHT, > PRE-TAXI, > TAKEOFF/CLIMB, VFR-CRUISE, IFR-CRUISE, APPRCH/LNDG, EMERG > > -- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Compass shielding
Date: Feb 13, 2004
Hi Jerzy- Thanks for the amplification. It makes a lot of sense. I got back with the source of my info, and he stood by it although in a less adamant way. Sooo, I called a friend that does avionics development for uncle Sam, and he agrees with you. I now sit corrected! With regard to the inside out zoo reference, there are a couple of aquariums (aquaria?) that are basically one big tank that you traverse by walking along the bottom inside a lexan tube. Pretty cool! (insert grin thingy here) Glen MAtejcek aerobubba(at)earthlink.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: Compass shielding
Date: Feb 13, 2004
Alex has it right and is doing the right thing trying to shield his compass. Runway headings change with the earth magnetic field and runways headings are permitted to be off as much as 5. I mean if divisions for runway headings are every 10 there has to be some room for error. For one I don't like Speedy11's method and it doesn't comply with regs for VFR or IFR flight. I won't quote FAR Part 91 as looking it up ourselves is a part of continuing education we all need and if I were to tell you - you wouldn't remember it (As now?). All Gyro's precess and need correction including Slaved units. Relying on GPS for sole navigation 100% of the time is nuts and illegal in some cases. Further to use the "system" you are required to have the appropriate equipment on board. I recall an airliner which had the Mag compass behind both pilots but centered in the airplane and facing forward (not kidding) and to use it would look up at a mirror to see it. We had a similar discussion on the Canard-Aviators group last month about GPS ground track verses mag heading and the current and ex-ATC controls in the group spoke up and said if you turned to a heading and the controller didn't like he would add more correction to your course and if it upset him/her you would here - "Flight advisories/following is canceled - squawk VFR - Good day" Alex - You must have a forward hinged canopy on that RV-6A Dale Martin Lewiston, ID LEZ-235 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Compass shielding > > > > > rarely match the GPS track. Am I splitting hairs - Yup. > > But, when > > > > ATC assigns a heading, they are expecting you to fly mag heading. > > Ok, ok. If one reads what I originally posted, to which the above was a > reply, I said to use GPS to SET the DG, not to fly tracks. I was > stating that I can't imagine using a magnetic compass anymore to set my > DG. I prefer to use runway heading or the mag track output of my gps > while taxiing to set the DG. > > Alex Peterson > Maple Grove, MN > RV6-A N66AP 437 hours > www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2004
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu>
Subject: Re: Compass shielding
Alex Peterson wrote: > Ok, ok. If one reads what I originally posted, to which the above was a > reply, I said to use GPS to SET the DG, not to fly tracks. I was > stating that I can't imagine using a magnetic compass anymore to set my > DG. I prefer to use runway heading or the mag track output of my gps > while taxiing to set the DG. What about precession in your DG after flying for awhile? How do you check it in flight to make sure it is correct? I'm just curious, not trying to start anything... :-) -Dj ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Nellis" <mike(at)bmnellis.com>
Subject: Re: Compass shielding
Date: Feb 13, 2004
I don't know about anyone else, but my DG needs to be "reset" many time during a 2 hour flight. To set it once on the runway heading and then fly out to some airport without resetting the DG for two hours isn't going to work. Sure, I can just follow the GPS and adjust my track to get me there but then all the other functions of the GPS don't work without an accurate DG (wind direction, TAS etc.) Am I missing something here? Is there another way to accurately adjust your DG other than with a compass? Mike Nellis RV-6 Fuselage N699BM 1947 Stinson 108-2 NC9666K http://bmnellis.com *** Ok, ok. If one reads what I originally posted, to which *** the above was a *** reply, I said to use GPS to SET the DG, not to fly tracks. I was *** stating that I can't imagine using a magnetic compass *** anymore to set my *** DG. I prefer to use runway heading or the mag track output *** of my gps *** while taxiing to set the DG. *** *** Alex Peterson *** Maple Grove, MN *** RV6-A N66AP 437 hours *** www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson *** *** *** ============== *** ============== *** ============== *** http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-*** List.htm *** Search Engine: *** http://www.matronics.com/search *** *** http://www.matronics.com/browse/aeroelectric-*** list *** *** Browse Digests: *** http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list *** ============== *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2004
From: Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Dynon and EMI
Jim Rodrian wrote: >Since Jeff Point is geographically close to me, I am willing to look at his >installation to evaluate the situation. > >Jim >Grafton, WI >Defiant > Hi Jim, You're welcome to come over and have a look at my installation if you wish, but I believe I have solved the problem. Or more, accurately, there never was any problem, I just removed the artificial condition (low bus voltage) which was causing the appearance of a problem. I finally got my replacement mixture cable, and so have been able to test with the engine running. At 14.1 bus voltage, there is no discernable noise from the Dynon, strobes or any other source. I did use shielded cable for the remote compass module, located in the tail, which was run back there via a path all its own, away from any other wires. When Dynon comes out with their "solution" for the EMI problem, I will try it just for experimentation's sake, but I am quite happy with the installation as it is now. Jeff Point RV-6 getting close Milwaukee WI learning more about 'lectrics every day. > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2004
From: Walter Tondu <walter(at)tondu.com>
Subject: Re: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea
On 02/13 11:27, John Schroeder wrote: > I hope this rather long posting is taken as constructive and not in any > way denigrating the effort, or your most generous offer to compile the > list. I have agonized long hours over the same problems as we designed our > system and chose the equipment to install. Thanks for taking the time to really think this out. But I think we can come to an agreement that this project doesn't need to be this complicated. What we *Really* want to get out of this is the amperage draw for popular equipment during different phases of startup, taxi, flight and shutdown. Not all of the columns are 'required'. > I think you will be getting too rigid and complicated with this much > information. For example: > > 1. Why put buss in there? That will depend on the Z diagram being used, > the aircraft, its mission etc. Again, voluntary. Main, E-Bus, Battery are common. Any others noted and you can pretty much tell which Z-diagram they're using. Remember, the Z-diagrams are just a starting point, each builders makeing subtle changes. > 2. Why "Wire gauge/Volts"? Again, that is influenced by a lot of other > variables and choices - especially where the equipment will be located in > the aircraft and what type. For example, we calculated a 44 foot round > trip in a glass aircraft for the pitot tube. Others are shorter, some may > be longer. Using Bob's formula in his paper on Wire Size Selection, one > has to check their initial calculations on wire size to keep the % voltage > drop under 5%. That could nullify any figure appended to a device sent in > for the database. What about the heat dissipation if one chooses to run a > wire in a bundle? Most of the equipment that will be listed in the document is common to many aircraft, eg. in almost all cases the GPS will be on the panel and the wiring length won't vary too much, probably not enought to warrant a different guage. Volts used to indicate 12 or 24. > 3. Why specify the size of the fuse? Often, the manufacturer specifies it > and it has no relation whatsoever to the wire size you calculate. If you > want to put the fuse size, it should only be the size recommended by the > mfg. You could put an M after the size to denote this. I disagree. I'm not putting a fuse in there to protect the equipment which already has internal protection. I'm putting it in there to protect wiring. > 4. The various phases of flight? Again, these are subjective and will > vary a lot with the aircraft and mission. Also, emergency is a very loose > category. There are too many to list and each may or may not have an > effect on the amperage total at the bottom of each sheet. It varies also > with the Z diagram and any variation one chooses to make. One fellow > remarked a long time ago that one should add a night and day category for > all of the phases of flight because lighting becomes a major > consideration. Bottom line on this is that your database would not be very > helpful and be too big. Remember, this is about the accessories we put in the plane. Some may have differing amperage draws during different phases of flight. > 5. The elements of the database should be: Accessory, Manufacturer, Model > #, Amps and Fuse. From there one can tailor the rest of the data based on > their design, aircraft, missions and plain old preferences. Again, I'm going to compile per Bob's document. I think it is well thought-out. > There would be 3 codes to add to the data. Two would be for the amps and > one for the fuse. > > One would add an "M" after the amps to denote actual measured load taken > by the builder when the accessory is on. For a radio, there should be two > lines of data: one for receive and one for transmit. Same for a fuel boost > pump, if there is a high and a low mode. For something like a pitot tube, > there would be two lines: one for steady state and one for surge during > warmup. > > The second code for the amps would be an "S" to denote that it is a > manufacturer's spec figure. If they have several figures, there should be > one line per figure. > > The third code would be for the CB/fuzing. An "S" would be appended to > denote a manufacturer's recommended size. If someone actually experimented > to fine where a device nuisance tripped, they could add a figure and > append an "M" > > The absence of a code in the amps cell would indicate caution to anyone > using that figure. I would think that once the list is initially compiled > and available to the community, there will be a refinement process and the > end point would most likely be M's or S's after each amperage. That is the > key figure we all need to make the calculations and do the design. > > I would also ask that anyone furnishing a line or lines of data for a > device to state the source. I know that Panel Planner has some data and I > would not want to rely on that in my calculations. There are also a lot of > WAG's out there. > > Again, I hope this has been helpful. Drop me an email if you would like to > discuss anything here. The idea is a wonderful one and the need is > certainly there. Thank you for volunteering. I like the idea of the codes. But for those builders who have already completed their analysis I doubt they will want to go back and re-do it. I don't expect all the information received by builders to be homogenious. I do hope that information provided helps others save time. > Cheers, > > John Schroeder > Lancair ES & Z-14 > > > > > > > On 02/12 1:53, Dale Martin wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Walt, > > > > > > It will be WIRE GAUGE / VOLTAGE. I use much smaller wire then the 14 > > volt > > > folks and there are others using 28 volt equipment. > > > > Right you are! > > > > BUS, ACCESSORY, VENDOR, MODEL #, WIRE-GUAGE/VOLTS, FUSE, PRE-FLIGHT, > > PRE-TAXI, > > TAKEOFF/CLIMB, VFR-CRUISE, IFR-CRUISE, APPRCH/LNDG, EMERG > > > > > > > -- > > > > > -- Walter Tondu http://www.tondu.com/rv7 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Locating Switches
Date: Feb 13, 2004
Team, Need a favor..... I am looking for a good source for a Locking Lever Switch. The SPST type with ON-OFF positions. Full size - no mini's. Have one that says UR on the side. The top comes to more of a cone shape rather then the round dome shape that the micoswitch company makes. If you need a picture of the one I have I'll email the picture. Thanks in Advance, Dale Martin Lewiston, ID LEZ-235 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Locating Switches
Date: Feb 13, 2004
From: "I-Blackler, Wayne R" <wayne.r.blackler(at)boeing.com>
The only variety I'm aware of is the MS24659 series (-21A) from Flame Enterprises 20945 Osborne St Canoga Park, CA 91304 (818) 700-2905 The locking detents are available in a variety of positions. Check http://content.honeywell.com/sensing/prodinfo/environment/catalog/379.pdf These are not cheap, but really good for Ignition switches IMO. - Wayne Blackler IO-360 Long EZ Seattle, WA -----Original Message----- From: Dale Martin [mailto:niceez(at)cableone.net] Subject: AeroElectric-List: Locating Switches Team, Need a favor..... I am looking for a good source for a Locking Lever Switch. The SPST type with ON-OFF positions. Full size - no mini's. Have one that says UR on the side. The top comes to more of a cone shape rather then the round dome shape that the micoswitch company makes. If you need a picture of the one I have I'll email the picture. Thanks in Advance, Dale Martin Lewiston, ID LEZ-235 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Off line for a week . . .
Bob and almost-a-doctor Dee are off to the sunny beaches of Puerto Rico for a week. My old boss from RAC Missiles group has a condo there and has been inviting me down every winter for the past ten years . . . difference this year was that Dee heard the invitation too. The next question was, "Well, why not THIS year, dear?" Why not indeed. See you all on the 22nd. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------- ( Experience and common sense cannot be ) ( replaced with policy and procedures. ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ----------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2004
From: Dave Morris <dave(at)davemorris.com>
Subject: Re: Off line for a week . . .
Have fun! I'm envious! Dave Morris At 05:43 PM 2/13/2004, you wrote: > > >Bob and almost-a-doctor Dee are off to the sunny beaches >of Puerto Rico for a week. My old boss from RAC Missiles >group has a condo there and has been inviting me down >every winter for the past ten years . . . difference this >year was that Dee heard the invitation too. The next >question was, "Well, why not THIS year, dear?" > >Why not indeed. > >See you all on the 22nd. > > > Bob . . . > > ----------------------------------------- > ( Experience and common sense cannot be ) > ( replaced with policy and procedures. ) > ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) > ----------------------------------------- > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2004
From: richard(at)riley.net
Subject: FS: SL70 Transponder
I have one last piece of UPS avionics left - an SL-70 transponder. New and un-installed, full warrantee, full install kit. $1750 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "AI Nut" <ainut(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: round transponder recommendations
Date: Feb 13, 2004
Anyone have a recommendation for a round transponder to fit into the panel? Cheap is good! I've heard some bad news about the one from Austraila. Thanks, David price is always a consideration ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2004
From: klehman(at)albedo.net
Subject: alternator switch
Yes that makes a lot of sense. I think I was given some duff info on this. It's a John Deere unit like the one shown here. http://flyboybob.com/web_pages/kr2/electrical%20and%20instrument/dynamo2.htm Just from looking at the fin area and 280 watts of DC output, I think it indeed has to be a series-pass unit. thanks Ken > Not sure what kind of PM alternator you have . . . if it's > an SD-8, that system uses a series-pass regulator that does > not waste unused energy from the alternator. Not sure > about other manufacturers but I think Ducati regulators > for Rotax are series-pass also. There's no good reason > to run a parallel-shunt regulator any more. > > Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net>
Subject: Re: Compass shielding
Date: Feb 13, 2004
> > What about precession in your DG after flying for > awhile? How do you check it in flight to make sure it is > correct? I'm just curious, not trying to start anything... :-) > Dj, good question - I'm fortunate in that my HSI doesn't precess much, maybe 5 degrees in two hours. Obviously, one can compare it to the magnetic compass, it is just that in my case, the errors in reading the compass, particularly in rough air, are more than the precession of the DG. Dale, I'm not the one shielding anything, whoever started this thread is. Alex Peterson Maple Grove, MN RV6-A N66AP 437 hours www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2004
From: richard(at)riley.net
Subject: Re: round transponder recommendations
> >Anyone have a recommendation for a round transponder to fit into the panel? >Cheap is good! >I've heard some bad news about the one from Austraila. The only other one is the Becker. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2004
From: flmike <flmike2001(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Locating Switches
NKK has a locking version, but it only comes with solder lugs. Mouser carries them, about $10 ea. I stumbled across the NKK part while looking for something else the other day. There are probably others out there as well. http://www.nkkswitches.com/pdf/stogglesmedcap.pdf http://www.mouser.com/catalog/617/857.pdf __________________________________ http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve Sampson" <SSampson.SLN21(at)london.edu>
Subject: Z12 e-bus questions
Date: Feb 14, 2004
The thing that I never understand about this sort of analysis is why is it assumed that the transmit switch will not be activated in this example. I dont know the NAV/COM unit in the example below, but surely it will significantly increase the demand on the ebus and blow any associated fuse/breaker? Steve -----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: Z12 e-bus questions > >Hi all (Bob), > >I'm planning on using a Z-12 type system on my Rocket. One battery, two >alternators. > >I notice the e-bus alternate feed is through a 7 A (fuse?) via a 16 AWG wire. > >Two questions: For peace of mind would a breaker be the best way to go >here? >I'm thinking that I can easily overload the 7 amps just with the e-bus as >described in Z-11. The plane will be outfitted for night flying, and needs a >fuel booster pump. So if I end up with more than 7 A (which either I will >have, or be very close to) when I loose the main power (assuming two dead >alternators), and throw the switch, at least I can get smart, shed load and >reset the breaker. For the most part though, I plan on using fuses, >because I >too have never reset a breaker were there wasn't a problem that resetting the >breaker actually helped, and I plan on having each circuit with it's own fuse. > >Second question: Why only 7 amp protection device off the batter bus? The >wire should be able to handle 12 amps? So why not use the protection >device to >protect the wire, since each of the devices coming off the e-bus will be >protected on it's own? > >Thanks in advance, and also for all the past advice. The Z-figures are intended to define the ART of system design. This is where you pick through the big box of Erector-Set, Tinker-Toy, and Lego parts to see how they best fit together in a system that supports your project's mission. The Z-figures should NOT be taken as verbatim of the SCIENCE which dictates component selection. When you "assuming two dead alternators", you're getting ready to address a REALLY bad day. The likelihood of dual failures in any single tank of fuel is extremely remote. Any piece of wire more than 6" long taking a feed from a bus with high fault current capability (your battery may well deliver upwards of 500-1000 amps in a hard fault), then we say it needs protection. If you're e-bus, e-bus alternate feed and battery bus can be all wired up with 6" pieces of wire, you don't need any fuse or fusible link. If the wires are longer, then . . . well, shucks. Now, if you need an e-bus alternate feed exceeding 5A from the battery (or battery bus) then using a relay as shown in: http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/E-BusFatFeed.gif seems prudent. This architecture provides a low power version of a battery contactor to provide at-the-battery control of a feeder. The same caveat exists for all feeders from the battery whether e-bus alternate feed or feeders to goodies that support an electrically dependent engine. You mentioned a fuel pump . . . I wouldn't drive this from the e-bus but directly from the battery bus via it's 5A or less fuse and no relay or a 7A+ fuse and a relay. The VERY FIRST documents you need to craft in your electrical system design are a tabular listing of each feeder that comes off each bus. The system that feeder supplies, the size of protection be it a Lego fuse or Tinker-Toy breaker, size of the wire, then draw 7 columns where you're going to deduce and add up the current draw on each feeder under the following headers, (1) preflight, (2) taxi, (3) takeoff/climb, (4) vfr cruise, (5) ifr cruise, (6) approach to landing and (7) alternator-out. Go get this document: http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/LoadAnalysisHandOut.pdf The first page is an example of how to start this task. The second page is blank so you can fill in what fits for your project. You need one page for each bus. Note that this document becomes a list of all the goodies in your airplane, how much energy each combination takes for operation. It can also be an index for your page-per-system documents that will ultimately record how your airplane is wired. Bob . . . --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. --- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BUCSDDS(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 14, 2004
Subject: Re: FS: SL70 Transponder
Richard, If the transponder (SL-70 transponder) is still available, I'll take it off your hands. Marwin Goff bucsdds(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Locating Switches
Date: Feb 14, 2004
Of course you can use whatever switches you like but in my humble opinion, locking lever switches invite problems--- Here's why---standard toggle switch guards like MS25224 reliably prevent actuation and visually signal that the switch has been operated. Locking toggle-type switches can be and are broken by ham-fisted pilots, especially by someone not familiar with them. NOW you have a problem. The switch is broken AND you don't know if it has been actuated or not--and you can't do anything about it. Not good...! By the way--I used to sell F-16 V-max toggle switch guards on my website. I was buying them at $3.00 each. Then the wholesale price went to $40 each with a minimum buy of 50 pcs. One piece wholesale price $130. They hand paint them in France...I was told. M'aidez! By the way2--I had in my hands an actual real genuine (titanium) Space Shuttle Switch Guard, thanks to Historic Space Systems (www.space1.com) and with the magic of CNC and the original Rockwell blueprints they are on my website too (in hard anodized aluminum). Regards, Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge MA 01550-2705 Phone (508) 764-2072 Email: emjones(at)charter.net "When they say it's not about money, it's about money. When they say it's not about sex, it's about sex." --Dale Bumpers ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Fw: [f-AA] request for help
Date: Feb 14, 2004
Help for this forwarded message. Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh Editor, EAA Safety Programs cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org Always looking for articles for the Experimenter soon to be Sport Pilot ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Rodkey" <rodkey(at)westmont.edu> Subject: [f-AA] request for help > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 22:42:47 -0500 > From: Richard Dover <rdover(at)springmail.com> > To: aeronca-owner(at)westmont.edu > Subject: Messages > > John > > I have tried twice to send this message to the list, it never made it. Can you help? > > > Rick Dover > > > A friend is completing a Marquart Charger and ask me the following > question. > > I told him I would pose the question to the knowledgeable people on this > > great list. This is not about an Aeronca but is close (has wings). > > > > Rick (N2453E) which is a Champ > > > > > > Rick, > > Could you post the following question on the aviation website that you > > were referring to the other night. Thanks. > > > > Pat > > > > > > I recently purchased a rebuilt Lycoming O320 for my soon-to-be-completed > > Marquart Charger. The paperwork with the engine refers to the "new model > > 20 alternator" but no other info is provided. I can not find a > manufacture > > name on the alternator and cannot find info on the alternator locally. My > > problem is that I cannot figure out how to wire the alternator. It has a > > lug on the lower right that is designated "B" (No problem there) and what > > appears to be another lug at the upper right which has a notched insulator > > attached (not sure what this is for) and then it has an attachment for a > > three-connector socket (did not come with the engine). The tree prongs > are > > labeled "F" (I am assuming this is the field attachment point), "E" and > "N" > > (I am not familiar with these designations). Does anyone have any info > > that can solve my wiring dilemma. It would be greatly appreciated. > > _______________________________________________ > Aeronca mailing list > Aeronca(at)mail.westmont.edu > http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: George Braly <gwbraly(at)gami.com>
Subject: Load dump issues
Date: Feb 14, 2004
Bob, I have done a fair amount of testing a couple of years ago, working with the TVS devices, including the larger sized versions. In my experience, they have not been adequate, alone, to prevent over voltage spikes on load dumps, even from smaller alternators. They help. But I have blown some of them on load dumps. Regards, George --- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 14, 2004
From: Jerzy Krasinski <krasinski(at)direcway.com>
Subject: Re: Load dump issues
George Braly wrote: > > >Bob, > >I have done a fair amount of testing a couple of years ago, working with the >TVS devices, including the larger sized versions. > >In my experience, they have not been adequate, alone, to prevent over >voltage spikes on load dumps, even from smaller alternators. > >They help. But I have blown some of them on load dumps. > >Regards, George > > > > I am not surprised. Looking at the data for 1500W devices we find the maximum pulse is 1ms at half peak value current. That is much shorter than the expected alternator pulse. The non repeatable surge current is listed as 200A for 50 ms. Probably more likely peak current would be around 50A, so that would allow some extension of the pulse length. But that is for a nonrepeatable event. That shows that for the alternator full current application they are beaten at the the surge limits. Connecting TVS devices in parallel is a waste. Their characteristics differ enough so most of the current will go through one TVS, while others will just hang there. Maybe measuring them and selecting them in very similar bunches would work, but that requires building a nonstandard curve tracer for operation at rather high currents. Probably it can be done in a crude way discharging a capacitor through a few of them in parallel and observing the currents on a multichannel scope. One can easy increase the power to 3000W by connecting in series two 6.8V devices. Unfortunately, 6.8V is the lowest voltage TVS I found, and that increases power only by a factor of two. But if in your experiments they failed only sometimes, that factor of two might be everything we need. Jerzy > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: Locating Switches
Date: Feb 14, 2004
Eric, Thanks for you words and research. In this pilots case they are used for Magneto and Electronic Ignition switches. Everyone has there opinions about what to and what not use. I'm no exception. I have flown in air that was so ruff it took me over a minute to change radio frequencies and all I had to do was push the Flip-Flop button. Since I am changing my instrument panel (same plane -LEZ) and doing away with the side console where all the switches and C/B's were located this means all the switches will be on the left side of the panel. If I every experience that kind of turbulence again - I would rather the Locking lever feature prevent the unintended action of grounding the magneto or de-energizing the E.I. system. I have guarded switches on the head rest so the back seat person can shut both systems if I become unable to for any reason. However on the instrument panel they are bulky and for my pleasure, unwanted. Since I have flown 550+ hours using the key switch for the mag and the Locking switch for the E.I. without any damage the choice will be to stick with what has worked. Secondly, I don't let others that are ham-fisted fly the airplane and in 1000+ hours someone as PIC has only occur on one flight. Thirdly. If the switch breaks I reach into my helmet bag and pull out a new ON-OFF switch. Never hurts to carry one spare. I just may install the spare on the panel and run wires to a terminal block... Thanks Eric for stirring the pot, you've given me a great idea. Dale Martin Lewiston, ID LEZ-235 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Locating Switches > > > Of course you can use whatever switches you like but in my humble opinion, > locking lever switches invite problems--- > > Here's why---standard toggle switch guards like MS25224 reliably prevent > actuation and visually signal that the switch has been operated. Locking > toggle-type switches can be and are broken by ham-fisted pilots, especially > by someone not familiar with them. NOW you have a problem. The switch is > broken AND you don't know if it has been actuated or not--and you can't do > anything about it. Not good...! > > By the way--I used to sell F-16 V-max toggle switch guards on my website. I > was buying them at $3.00 each. Then the wholesale price went to $40 each > with a minimum buy of 50 pcs. One piece wholesale price $130. They hand > paint them in France...I was told. M'aidez! > > By the way2--I had in my hands an actual real genuine (titanium) Space > Shuttle Switch Guard, thanks to Historic Space Systems (www.space1.com) and > with the magic of CNC and the original Rockwell blueprints they are on my > website too (in hard anodized aluminum). > > Regards, > Eric M. Jones > www.PerihelionDesign.com > 113 Brentwood Drive > Southbridge MA 01550-2705 > Phone (508) 764-2072 > Email: emjones(at)charter.net > > "When they say it's not about money, it's about money. > When they say it's not about sex, it's about sex." > --Dale Bumpers > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chris Adkins" <ccadkins(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Sequential turn signals...OFF TOPIC
Date: Feb 14, 2004
I know, I know...this is TOTALLY off subject...BUT... What are all the "kiddies" using to pull off the "sequential turn signals" trick on their cars? I can remember the days when the only way to do it was with a geared dc motor driving a little cam which depressed some reed switches. I'm sure it's much more elegant than that NOW, and I'm just wondering if any of you guys know how it's done! (BTW, I have selfish reasons too...I want them on my '88 Buick Reatta, but don't wanna' pay $59 for the kit on Ebay). Chris ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt(at)inreach.com>
Subject: headset noise
Date: Feb 14, 2004
I am new to this list and would like to ask a question. I have mounted a video camera on my airplane with a fully articulated mount. Previously, for audio, I led a microphone from the earcup of my headset to the audio inpuut of the camera. This microphone was powered by a 1.5 v. battery and I have had trouble remembering to turn it on. - dead audio. I tried the checklist idea and it didn't work in this application. I have now an impedence compensating set-up - Aircraft Spruce and a pretty rough item, I think - that hard wires the headset audio to the audio input of the camcorder. Now instead of getting the muffled roar of the engine, I get a quite noticable alternator whine. Any ideas as to how to filter this out. I don't hear it in the headset. Loewll ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Troy Scott" <tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: special progressive
Date: Feb 15, 2004
Gentlemen, Is there a three-position progressive switch made so the upper two positions are progressive, but the bottom position is only on when the switch is in the bottom position? Like this: Top Position: middle and upper positions on Middle position: only the middle position is on Bottom position: only the bottom position is on Thanks! Troy tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Sequential turn signals...OFF TOPIC
Date: Feb 15, 2004
You can do it with two 555 timers. What happens is when the turn signal wire is activated, the first light is lit and the first 555 timer starts, when it times out the second light is lit and the second 555 timer starts, then when it times out the third light is lit. This is assuming the turn signal currently has a long enough "on" time. If it does not then, you can use another 555 as a flasher, which would enable you to set your on to off time. Personally, however, I would not use 555 timers, as that it is complicated. Instead I would use a cheap Microcontroller like the PIC. These microcontroller are almost as cheap as a 555 timer and gives you lots more flexibility. Regards, Trampas Stern -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Adkins Subject: AeroElectric-List: Sequential turn signals...OFF TOPIC I know, I know...this is TOTALLY off subject...BUT... What are all the "kiddies" using to pull off the "sequential turn signals" trick on their cars? I can remember the days when the only way to do it was with a geared dc motor driving a little cam which depressed some reed switches. I'm sure it's much more elegant than that NOW, and I'm just wondering if any of you guys know how it's done! (BTW, I have selfish reasons too...I want them on my '88 Buick Reatta, but don't wanna' pay $59 for the kit on Ebay). Chris ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 15, 2004
From: Chad Robinson <crobinson(at)rfgonline.com>
Subject: Re: special progressive
Troy Scott wrote: > > Gentlemen, > > Is there a three-position progressive switch made so the upper two positions > are progressive, but the bottom position is only on when the switch is in > the bottom position? Like this: > Top Position: middle and upper positions on > Middle position: only the middle position is on > Bottom position: only the bottom position is on I haven't seen one, but you can make it yourself with a SP3T or DP3T switch and a diode. Just put a diode between the top and middle position connectors with the band on the diode toward the middle connection. In the top position the diode will allow current to flow to both the top and middle wires. In the middle position the middle will be on, but the diode will block current from flowing to the top. And the bottom is the bottom. A Schottky diode of reasonable size is probably a wise idea if you plan to run any significant current from the MIDDLE position - the devices on the top and bottom don't affect this need. Regards, Chad ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
Subject: Re: Load dump issues
Date: Feb 15, 2004
George has made general comments and I am sure at least some of us would be interested in specific test results. I am NOT questioning what he has said, but I am interested in what he has tried that did not work. As for Jerry's comments consider the following. First I agree the use of a single 1,500W TVS is not enough for worst case load dump control, but the 5,000W units seem to be adequate (at least in terms of the TVS power rating) for a 50A single event load dump (and it is a single event dump producing a high voltage pulse that we are concerned with) Any long duration event is taken care of with the OVP unit. Thus the TVS and OVP devices work in combination to prevent systems damage from over voltage. I have tested 1,500 watt units and verified that they can load clamp 10 amps long enough to blow a 5 amp circuit breaker (much longer that a load dump event). Not sure all mfgrs of similar devices will do this but after 10 tests of the same part no damage or change in part charactericts were noted. A load dump event is NOT a failure of the alternator. Unlike the HI voltage from a failed regulator that is controlled by the OVP unit. Load dump is the result of: operator, circuit design, or contactor failure that allows the alternator to become suddenly unloaded. Operator error can be reduced with locking lever switches etc. Circuit design can prevent operator error but introduces other issues. Contactor failure is something that can happen and this is where something needs to be done so a single failure does not cause another failure. First failure is the contactor failing. The next failure is an uncontrolled load dump that damages one or more of the following devices, Alternator diodes, alternator regulator, and or avionics etc. on the connected busses in the aircraft. No single failure should cause secondary failure, if at all possible, thus the current discussion of load dump control. The TVS diodes are NOT intended to protect long HV events and in the case of long HV events the OVP unit will do the job by disconnecting the alternator in a few ms which is longer than the load dump event and is short enough to prevent damage to the Load dump TVS (in other cases where HV is produced) which reduces the load dump voltages while the OVP unit is disconnecting the alternator. The voltage does increase above the TVS rated voltage as the current increases. For example the 500amp unit designed for load dump I have mentioned has a voltage well over 50V during peak current conditions. While this is far less that a non-clamped voltage its too high for our equipment. So while the regulator in the alternator and the alternator diodes are protected our avionics are not. This is because the load dump condition passes thru the "B" lead to the main bus before the contactor in the "B" lead releases from the OVP device, for internal regulators, and removing field power on external regulators. As the load dump energy is already in the alternator and must go somewhere additional protection is needed. 5kw 18v TVS units are available and are rated at over 150 amp single event pulse. So perhaps putting several units in parallel is a practical solution. I agree that this is best done with matched devices but consider the following. The real conservative person decides that 3 units in parallel with be enough. Also for this discussion that the current being shunted by each unit has a current to voltage increase of 1V for every 10 amps of shunt current. These are not real values but used to make my point. So clamp voltage for each unit is assumed to be 18V, 19V, and 20V for the units. The first unit sees the load sump and starts clamping at 18v. As the load current voltage gets to 19v (10 amps) the second unit starts clamping. As the voltage still increases the third unit starts clamping. Now at 21V the first unit is clamping 30 amps, the second unit is clamping 20 amps and the third unit is clamping 10 amps and the bus voltage is clamped at 21v for a 60 amp load. No matching of devices was needed in the above example with available tolerance units. Use of an adjustable current limited power supply would allow matching at a current of say 1-10 amps which is within the current rating depending on the device for steady state currents and only a few seconds is really needed to measure the voltage at the test current. Buying 10 units (at under $1 each) is likely to produce several well matched units so the load sharing is much better than my example above. However the clamped voltage of 21V (in the above example) is higher than the OVP design of perhaps 16V and may be higher that the max rated voltage of the some avionics and either a different approach and or additional protection may be needed. The widely available 1,500w units can be used but will require more units to keep the voltage peak to the desired design limit with current sharing. The preceding is just one solution. However use of TVS devices must be done carefully to consider not just the power pulse rating but the peak suppressed voltage which is device and current dependent. Keeping the BUS voltage under 20V is not easy with a 50a load dump. The large capacitor I mentioned earlier is also a possible alternative IF the selected capacitor is designed for low internal resistance at hi frequency. Again some design is needed to see how well this may work. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerzy Krasinski" <krasinski(at)direcway.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Load dump issues > > > George Braly wrote: > > > > > > >Bob, > > > >I have done a fair amount of testing a couple of years ago, working with the > >TVS devices, including the larger sized versions. > > > >In my experience, they have not been adequate, alone, to prevent over > >voltage spikes on load dumps, even from smaller alternators. > > > >They help. But I have blown some of them on load dumps. > > > >Regards, George > > > > > > > > > > I am not surprised. Looking at the data for 1500W devices we find the maximum pulse is 1ms at half peak value current. That is much shorter than the expected alternator pulse. > > The non repeatable surge current is listed as 200A for 50 ms. Probably more likely peak current would be around 50A, so that would allow some extension of the pulse length. But that is for a nonrepeatable event. > > That shows that for the alternator full current application they are beaten at the the surge limits. > > Connecting TVS devices in parallel is a waste. Their characteristics differ enough so most of the current will go through one TVS, while others will just hang there. Maybe measuring them and selecting them in very similar bunches would work, but that requires building a nonstandard curve tracer for operation at rather high currents. Probably it can be done in a crude way discharging a capacitor through a few of them in parallel and observing the currents on a multichannel scope. > > One can easy increase the power to 3000W by connecting in series two 6.8V devices. Unfortunately, 6.8V is the lowest voltage TVS I found, and that increases power only by a factor of two. But if in your experiments they failed only sometimes, that factor of two might be everything we need. > > Jerzy ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 15, 2004
From: flmike <flmike2001(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: special progressive
The C&K 7211 might do what you want. It is a miniature toggle though. Mike __________________________________ http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Scott Hersha" <shersha(at)fuse.net>
Subject: Radio headset noise
Date: Feb 15, 2004
I've been working on eliminating noise in my headset, and here's what I found. I have a new RV-6 and I'm using the DC laodcenter bus system with the backup battery bus option. I had noise from my strobes, fuel pump, an alternator hum, and a low level hum from most anything that you turned on. This could be heard clearly using a noise canceling headset, not so clearly (except the strobe noise) using a passive headset. I built 3 noise filters described by Bob Nuchols on his site, two for my two strobe power supplies, and one for my audio panel amp, which I built myself using Radio Shack parts. I was able to determine most of the noise was coming from my bus, and not being picked up on my antenna systems(I have 2 COM radios). I installed the filters on the strobes first and I noticed a reduction in strobe noise. I could still hear it, but it wasn't as harsh. Then I installed the third filter on my audio amp and it became very silent. There is virtually zero noise. T! he only problem is there is very little volume left from my COM radio. With the volume all the way up at max, I can barely hear it. The question I have for anyone out there and Bob when he gets back is, would a smaller capacitor in the filter prevent losing so much gain on my radio? The plans Bob wrote call for a 10uf capacitor to be used with the inductor coil, but the kit from Radio Shack came with a 220uf capacitor. Will that have an affect on radio volume? I probably need to make another one with a smaller capacitor or maybe connect the filter to my radio/intercom instead of the audio amp. Looking for advice. > Scott Hersha > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Scott Hersha" <shersha(at)fuse.net>
Subject: headset noise
Date: Feb 15, 2004
I bought an alternator filter/capacitor from Aircraft Spruce. It was kind of expensive, about $39.00, but it worked for me. > Scott Hersha > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Speedy11(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 15, 2004
Subject: Re: Mag Headings
Okay, niceez, you've launched two unprovoked attacks on me so I intend to stand up for myself and, in the future, ask you to use restraint in your attacks. All of my comments here are in reference to your post which is shown below. Runway headings do change over time due to changes in the earth's magnetic field. Runway 12 at Houston's Hobby Airport has a mag heading of 129. When you say you don't like my method that is non-compliance with IFR and VFR regulations, I have no idea what "method" of mine you're talking about. I haven't suggested any method. And you can take your condescending tone (you need to look it up yourself so you'll remember it next time and I won't have to be bothered with you again) and shove it.. I haven't read any suggestions on this list that pilots should depend 100% on GPS for navigation. Personally, I will not permit students to use GPS until after their checkride. Then I will teach GPS. Since I charge nothing for instruction, I'm not just trying to gouge students for more money. I believe GPS is an aid to navigation that is incredibly valuable, but it is one which must be expendable. I missed your point (assuming there was one) when you pointed out that the DC-9 had a reverse view mag compass. Perhaps you're giving an example of required equipment. It was good to hear the gospel according to the Canard-Aviators group. I'd like to talk to the controllers in the group. I've never heard of a controller giving two headings and then, if upset, tell a pilot to "get lost," in so many words. Dale, you attempt to talk like an expert - in something - but I'm not convinced. I don't profess to be an expert in aviation, but some of my credentials are listed below. I'd appreciate it if you sent your attacks on me directly to me (speedy11(at)aol.com) instead of posting them on this list. I am more than willing to debate off list. From now on, if I have something to say to you, I won't use list time, I'll send it directly to you. I apologise to list members for this post, but I'll only turn the other cheek once. Stan Sutterfield, LtC Retired RV-8A Tampa F-4, F-5, F-16, B-737, too many experimental and light aircraft to list CFI In a message dated 2/15/04 2:57:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes: << Runway headings change with the earth magnetic field and runways headings > are permitted to be off as much as 5. I mean if divisions for runway > headings are every 10 there has to be some room for error. For one I don't > like Speedy11's method and it doesn't comply with regs for VFR or IFR > flight. I won't quote FAR Part 91 as looking it up ourselves is a part of > continuing education we all need and if I were to tell you - you wouldn't > remember it (As now?). > > All Gyro's precess and need correction including Slaved units. Relying on > GPS for sole navigation 100% of the time is nuts and illegal in some cases. > > Further to use the "system" you are required to have the appropriate > equipment on board. I recall an airliner which had the Mag compass behind > both pilots but centered in the airplane and facing forward (not kidding) > and to use it would look up at a mirror to see it. > > We had a similar discussion on the Canard-Aviators group last month about > GPS ground track verses mag heading and the current and ex-ATC controls in > the group spoke up and said if you turned to a heading and the controller > didn't like he would add more correction to your course and if it upset > him/her you would here - "Flight advisories/following is canceled - squawk > VFR - Good day" >> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Speedy11(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 15, 2004
Subject: Re: Toggle switches
Eric, I've been looking for the F-16 toggle switch guards. But I can't afford those prices! Guess I could make my own. They are so simple and lightweight I'm surprised someone (like you) hasn't been producing them. I'll take a look at your other switches. Stan In a message dated 2/15/04 2:57:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes: << By the way--I used to sell F-16 V-max toggle switch guards on my website. I was buying them at $3.00 each. Then the wholesale price went to $40 each with a minimum buy of 50 pcs. One piece wholesale price $130. They hand paint them in France...I was told. M'aidez! By the way2--I had in my hands an actual real genuine (titanium) Space Shuttle Switch Guard, thanks to Historic Space Systems (www.space1.com) and with the magic of CNC and the original Rockwell blueprints they are on my website too (in hard anodized aluminum). >> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Speedy11(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 15, 2004
Subject: Contactor replacement
Eric, What is the status of your 1280 Peak Amp Contactor "Powerlink". Still in testing, it will soon eliminate 5 pounds of those big hand-grenade-sized contactors.? Stan Sutterfield ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 16, 2004
From: "Alfred Buess" <Alfred.Buess(at)shl.bfh.ch>
Subject: Re: round transponder recommendations
There is an other option available: TRT600 or TRT800 from Filser. Not cheap, but Mode S capable (will soon be mandatory in Europe!) and integrated blind encoder. Have a look at http://www.filser.de/ Alfred Buess >>> richard(at)riley.net 02/14 3:28 >>> > >Anyone have a recommendation for a round transponder to fit into the panel? >Cheap is good! >I've heard some bad news about the one from Austraila. The only other one is the Becker. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Powerlink Contactor
Date: Feb 16, 2004
>Subject: Contactor replacement >Eric, >What is the status of your >1280 Peak Amp Contactor "Powerlink". Still in testing, it will soon eliminate >5 pounds of those big hand-grenade-sized contactors.? >Stan Sutterfield I'm sending one more of these out for test tomorrow. But only one is in an aircraft and flying. I'm not selling these yet, but I am making them on a limited basis for test. Frankly, how to proceed is a puzzle. I do not have the test equipment to realistically test this thing. Any suggestions? See: http://www.periheliondesign.com/powerlinkcontactormanual.pdf Finding someone to test this has been a chore and other projects are on the front burner. I am going slow and trying not to promise what is in prototype (Some of my customers and not happy waiting for promised stuff!). My website is being updated with lots of new stuff and will be up soon. Regards, Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge MA 01550-2705 Phone (508) 764-2072 Email: emjones(at)charter.net "The man who carries a cat by the tail learns something that can be learned in no other way." --Mark Twain ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Troy Scott" <tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Smart Glow Fuse
Date: Feb 16, 2004
You guys have probably already seen this: It's a version of the common plug-in plastic fuse. An internal LED glows to indicate a blown fuse. Auto Zone. Regards, Troy Scott tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Art/Sue Bertolina" <artbertolina(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Ground Com Switch
Date: Feb 16, 2004
can anyone explain a ground com switch, how it is used and the type of switch to purchase and a wiring diagram Thanks Art Bertolina ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tony Babb" <tonybabb(at)alejandra.net>
Subject: off topic - my car radio is driving me nuts !!
Date: Feb 17, 2004
I have had a problem with my car radio for the past several weeks and it's driving me nuts. Symptons: there's a clicking sound coming from it, sounds like about 4-5 clicks a second. There is no clicking with the engine turned off, the noise starts when the engine starts and stops when the engine stops, however the speed of clicking does not vary with engine revs. The volume of the clicks is not affected by the volume control, when I turn the volume way down so I can't hear the radio station I still hear the clicks at the same volume. I hear the clicks on AM and FM. The clicks always come from the right rear speaker. The car is fiberglass (Corvette). The problem started a few weeks ago and I found that if I turned the radio off and then on again the clicks went away, sometimes I had to turn it off and on a couple of times. Now the clicking sound is always there. Do any of you radio gurus have a suggestion as to where I should start looking? Thanks all, Tony ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: off topic - my car radio is driving me nuts !!
Date: Feb 17, 2004
Loose wire? Regards, Trampas -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tony Babb Subject: AeroElectric-List: off topic - my car radio is driving me nuts !! I have had a problem with my car radio for the past several weeks and it's driving me nuts. Symptons: there's a clicking sound coming from it, sounds like about 4-5 clicks a second. There is no clicking with the engine turned off, the noise starts when the engine starts and stops when the engine stops, however the speed of clicking does not vary with engine revs. The volume of the clicks is not affected by the volume control, when I turn the volume way down so I can't hear the radio station I still hear the clicks at the same volume. I hear the clicks on AM and FM. The clicks always come from the right rear speaker. The car is fiberglass (Corvette). The problem started a few weeks ago and I found that if I turned the radio off and then on again the clicks went away, sometimes I had to turn it off and on a couple of times. Now the clicking sound is always there. Do any of you radio gurus have a suggestion as to where I should start looking? Thanks all, Tony ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 17, 2004
From: jamesbaldwin(at)attglobal.net
Subject: Re: Ground Com Switch
My experience with a ground com switch was in a turbine aircraft where it was used to power the number 1 com radio. It was used to obtain the ATIS, get clearances, monitor the company freq, etc. You didn't have to turn the master on so it was a simple single throw switch wired to the hot battery bus. Art/Sue Bertolina wrote: > >can anyone explain a ground com switch, how it is used >and the type of switch to purchase and a wiring diagram >Thanks >Art Bertolina > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Subject: RE: off topic - my car radio is driving me nuts !!
Date: Feb 17, 2004
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com >[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tony Babb >clicking 4-5 clicks a second. no clicking with the engineoff, the >speed of clicking does not vary with engine revs. >The volume of the clicks not affected by the volume control >clicks on AM and FM. >clicks always come from the right rear >speaker. >Tony Procedure: Swap right and left rear speakers (or replace right rear). If clicks follow speaker--The speaker is bad (hope it's that). If not, the wiring to the radio output or the output channel is bad--usually a leaky capacitor in the output stage. Eric ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WHigg1170(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 17, 2004
Subject: Turn Coordinator wiring info.
Hello IM ready to wire up my RC Allen turn coordinator and i don't have a wire diagram for it. the T/C has the three pin connection on the back (Amphenol MS3106A10SL-3S) The turn coordinator is a RCA82A-11. The Pins on the Amphenol Connector are marked A-B and C any help would be appreciated. Thanks Bill Higgins Pembroke Ma ________________________________________________________________________________
From: N27160(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 17, 2004
Subject: Narco Nav-121 Needle Dead
I have a Narco Nav 121. Receives ok, To/From Flag works, but the needle doesnt move off center. Any advice? (Other than garbage can?) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Battery Vs bench power supply
Date: Feb 17, 2004
Hi Bob and listers, I'm ready to smoke test the wiring and was planning on buying a power supply but I hate to spend $80 for something I'm going to use once. I have a fairly simple day vfr panel with dual batterys that I plan to just replace one per year so I've always got a fresh battery plus one that is only 1 to 2 years old. So I'm thinking of just buying a new battery now and using it to check out the system. A year or so when I'm ready to fly I'll buy another new one and I'll begin my planned rotation of batterys. Is there any reason that this won't be as effective a way to smoke test the system as with a power supply? Thanks for your opinion, Rick Fogerson RV3 wiring Boise, ID ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Transponder arial location
Date: Feb 17, 2004
Hi Bob, I've got a xpdr arial question for you. I have installed that little 3 inch long arial with a ball (B&C) belly just aft of the firewall between the exhaust pipes. The arial would be shielded some in the forward direction by the portion of the lower cowl where cooling air exits and the exhaust pipes emerge from the engine compartment. That wasn't a problem when I was going to install the standard frp cowl but now I thinking of trying to build an aluminum cowl. How much of a problem do you think this would be? Thanks, Rick Fogerson RV3 Boise, ID ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Speedy11(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 18, 2004
Subject: Samlex Power Supply
I am an absolute beginner when it come to electrical wiring, but based on advice from this list I bought a Samlex 1223 Power Supply ($99) to use for bench testing avionics and for testing electrical systems in the aircraft. The power supply has no instructions. There are two screw terminals on the back of the supply. What is the best method of getting power from the supply to whatever I want to power? Are there cables I can buy? Do I have to make some? What should the guage of the wire be? What type of connector should be on the ends? In advance, thanks for your help. Stan Sutterfield RV-8A Tampa, FL ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)ashcreekwireless.com>
Subject: Re: Narco Nav-121 Needle Dead
Date: Feb 18, 2004
Call Narco and see if they still service the 121. They haven't worked on the NAV-11 for about 10 years. I suspect that you have a bad left/right meter movement possibly. Of course it could be other things. I don't know if the 121 is worth spending much money on repair. Cliff ----- Original Message ----- From: <N27160(at)aol.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Narco Nav-121 Needle Dead > > I have a Narco Nav 121. Receives ok, To/From Flag works, but the needle > doesnt move off center. Any advice? (Other than garbage can?) > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Joel Harding <cajole76(at)ispwest.com>
Subject: Re: Samlex Power Supply
Date: Feb 18, 2004
Stan, I just bought one of those also, and I ended up using some extra 16-2 shielded wire I had laying around. I used both wires together in each of the connectors on the power supply and doubled them over to better fit the connector. I put ring terminals on the ends, and hooked one to the B lead terminal on the alternator, and the other on the ground bolt coming through the fire wall. It powers the main bus as if the alternator was running. It has worked well. Joel Harding On Feb 18, 2004, at 7:48 AM, Speedy11(at)aol.com wrote: > > I am an absolute beginner when it come to electrical wiring, but based > on > advice from this list I bought a Samlex 1223 Power Supply ($99) to use > for bench > testing avionics and for testing electrical systems in the aircraft. > > The power supply has no instructions. There are two screw terminals > on the > back of the supply. What is the best method of getting power from the > supply > to whatever I want to power? Are there cables I can buy? Do I have > to make > some? What should the guage of the wire be? What type of connector > should be > on the ends? > > In advance, thanks for your help. > Stan Sutterfield > RV-8A > Tampa, FL > > > _- > ======================================================================= > _- > ======================================================================= > _- > ======================================================================= > _- > ======================================================================= > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: LJoh896239(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 18, 2004
Subject: VLM-14 Field Volts Hookup
I have Bob's VLM-!4 and am hooking up the field volts wire to the Denso internally regulated alternator, which has two connections labeled IG and L. Does it go to one of these or someplace else? Thanks for any input. Lance Johnson RV-8A Salt Lake City ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 18, 2004
Subject: Re: VLM-14 Field Volts Hookup
From: Denis Walsh <denis.walsh(at)comcast.net>
On my Denso, the ig is the one. The L is the warning light. This is all covered in the data sheet enclosed, which is mainly in Japanese. > From: LJoh896239(at)aol.com > Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:24:37 EST > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: VLM-14 Field Volts Hookup > > > I have Bob's VLM-!4 and am hooking up the field volts wire to the Denso > internally regulated alternator, which has two connections labeled IG and L. > Does > it go to one of these or someplace else? Thanks for any input. > > Lance Johnson > RV-8A > Salt Lake City > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 19, 2004
From: "hausding, sid" <sidh(at)charter.net>
Subject: Smart Glow Fuse
Could you send the link please? Sid ----------------------------- You guys have probably already seen this: It's a version of the common plug-in plastic fuse. An internal LED glows to indicate a blown fuse. Auto Zone. Regards, Troy Scott tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 19, 2004
From: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch>
Subject: Re: Favorite "switch feel"?
Hi, Here is a bit of information for you: http://www.intertechnique.fr/us/groupe/filiales/ece/index.htm Let us know if you find something cool! Mickey >I was flipping a switch from a Falcon 20 the other day which made me say, >"Wow -- that's a REALLY nice switch action! I'd like to have that switch in >my RV." Unfortunately, it's made by ECE, a French company ("L'Equipement et >la Construction Electrique SA"), and I don't have any ordering information. >(The specific switch in question was provided directly by the Falcon factory >for this simulator, so I have no way to order one on my own.) -- Mickey Coggins http://www.rv8.ch/ #82007 QB Wings/Fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Subject: RE: Favorite "switch feel"?
Date: Feb 19, 2004
>>Does anyone have a favorite brand of switch that they prefer to use, based >>on its tactile feel and smoothness of switch action? Now there's a man after my own heart. If there were switches that felt like the shutter button of a Leica M3, I'd buy them. Hewlett Packard thought switch "feel" in calculators was incredibly important; they provide important tactile feedback. Same with IBM. No matter what computer I use I take my own IBM/AT keyboard to use. I once complained to a switch manufacturer that a potentiometer felt "cheap" and was told by the manufacturer that they can make it feel any way at all by changing the silicone grease. So I ordered per their suggestion XYZ grease and everyone was happy. High-priced audio equipment makers specialize in this art. But I suspect that most corporate bean-counters are not interested in this, and many manufacturers just stumble across it accidentally. Everything feels good in a glob of grease. Regards, Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge MA 01550-2705 Phone (508) 764-2072 Email: emjones(at)charter.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 19, 2004
Subject: Whats the name of this stuff?
From: cecilth(at)juno.com
I need some stuff that I call 'potting stuff'. Its the stuff used to pour over electronics to harden the item from moisture shaking, etc. I want to be able to walk into Fries Electronics and tell them what I want. Whats the name of this stuff? Thanks, Cecil ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Whats the name of this stuff?
Date: Feb 19, 2004
>I need some stuff that I call 'potting stuff'. >Its the stuff used to pour over electronics to harden the item from >moisture shaking, etc. >I want to be able to walk into Fries Electronics and tell them what I want. >Whats the name of this stuff? >Thanks, >Cecil Cecil, Potting stuff comes in many flavors-- Urethanes, Silicones, Epoxies, etc. depends on what you want to do. Sometimes the potted electronics must be repairable. Sometimes great thermal conductivity is needed. Sometimes it must be clear, sometimes colored. Sometimes very viscous, sometimes not. Sometimes flexible, sometimes like ceramic. You can use regular epoxy or urethane if the job has no particular requirements. Silicones sometimes eat up fine PCB traces unless you get electronic grade. Just coating the circuit with clear epoxy has its "adherents". (I am so easily amused...) Like everything else---just Google it. Loctite and 3M make lots of the stuff. Regards, Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge MA 01550-2705 Phone (508) 764-2072 Email: emjones(at)charter.net "People don't really appreciate how very difficult it is to be a princess." --Princess Diana ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 19, 2004
From: Dave Morris <dave(at)davemorris.com>
Subject: Re: RE: Favorite "switch feel"?
I can relate to the need for good switch feel. I hate clunky switches that are too hard to flip. But gadzooks Eric, I absolutely hated the IBM keyboards, so I don't know what the HECK you're talking about! LOL! Anyway, I was in Altex, an electronics store in Dallas today and flipped all the switches they had on a display board there. Didn't really like any of them. The metal ones are usually too "hard", and the ones with plastic bat handles are usually too "soft" and easy to accidentally flip. I did luck out with the switch panels I had built by Aircraft Simulators (www.AircraftSimulators.com), because they feel "just right". They are made by "Chili" and rated at 10A. Dave Morris At 04:03 PM 2/19/2004, you wrote: > > >>Does anyone have a favorite brand of switch that they prefer to use, based > >>on its tactile feel and smoothness of switch action? > >Now there's a man after my own heart. > >If there were switches that felt like the shutter button of a Leica M3, I'd >buy them. Hewlett Packard thought switch "feel" in calculators was >incredibly important; they provide important tactile feedback. Same with >IBM. No matter what computer I use I take my own IBM/AT keyboard to use. > >I once complained to a switch manufacturer that a potentiometer felt "cheap" >and was told by the manufacturer that they can make it feel any way at all >by changing the silicone grease. So I ordered per their suggestion XYZ >grease and everyone was happy. > >High-priced audio equipment makers specialize in this art. But I suspect >that most corporate bean-counters are not interested in this, and many >manufacturers just stumble across it accidentally. > >Everything feels good in a glob of grease. > >Regards, >Eric M. Jones >www.PerihelionDesign.com >113 Brentwood Drive >Southbridge MA 01550-2705 >Phone (508) 764-2072 >Email: emjones(at)charter.net > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 20, 2004
From: Jerzy Krasinski <krasinski(at)direcway.com>
Subject: Re: RE: Favorite "switch feel"?
All of that reminds me a discussion I once read in a gun journal. Someone discussed parameters of several guns, and in addition to usual parameters like weight, caliber, velocity of projectile, etc. he included also the "feel" - whatever that means, because he never defined that parameter. Strange thing, the most expensive guns scored the highest in that "feel" competition. I guess, it feels good to have something expensive (Hewlet Packard?) or rare (French?). A switch made of unobtainium probably would beat anything else in that competition. Jerzy Dave Morris wrote: > >I can relate to the need for good switch feel. I hate clunky switches that >are too hard to flip. But gadzooks Eric, I absolutely hated the IBM >keyboards, so I don't know what the HECK you're talking about! LOL! > >Anyway, I was in Altex, an electronics store in Dallas today and flipped >all the switches they had on a display board there. Didn't really like any >of them. The metal ones are usually too "hard", and the ones with plastic >bat handles are usually too "soft" and easy to accidentally flip. > >I did luck out with the switch panels I had built by Aircraft Simulators >(www.AircraftSimulators.com), because they feel "just right". They are >made by "Chili" and rated at 10A. > >Dave Morris > >At 04:03 PM 2/19/2004, you wrote: > > > >> >> >> >>>>Does anyone have a favorite brand of switch that they prefer to use, based >>>>on its tactile feel and smoothness of switch action? >>>> >>>> >>Now there's a man after my own heart. >> >>If there were switches that felt like the shutter button of a Leica M3, I'd >>buy them. Hewlett Packard thought switch "feel" in calculators was >>incredibly important; they provide important tactile feedback. Same with >>IBM. No matter what computer I use I take my own IBM/AT keyboard to use. >> >>I once complained to a switch manufacturer that a potentiometer felt "cheap" >>and was told by the manufacturer that they can make it feel any way at all >>by changing the silicone grease. So I ordered per their suggestion XYZ >>grease and everyone was happy. >> >>High-priced audio equipment makers specialize in this art. But I suspect >>that most corporate bean-counters are not interested in this, and many >>manufacturers just stumble across it accidentally. >> >>Everything feels good in a glob of grease. >> >>Regards, >>Eric M. Jones >>www.PerihelionDesign.com >>113 Brentwood Drive >>Southbridge MA 01550-2705 >>Phone (508) 764-2072 >>Email: emjones(at)charter.net >> >> >> >> > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 20, 2004
From: flmike <flmike2001(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Favorite "switch feel"?
Otto, Otto, Otto. IMO, Otto Engineering has the best pushbutton switches out there. They have a rolling sleeve action that gives a silky smooth push to a tactile, crisp snap followed by a "drop-through". There is no doubt when you have actuated the switch. Grab any "real" military stick or throttle grip and you're probably pushing Otto switches. They also make some smaller styles that are just as nice. Top shelf stuff. Next in line would probably be ITW for push buttons. For toggles, I prefer the MS3505x style for panel applications. I think they feel robust and positive. As someone else said, it's like the difference between a fine gun trigger and a crappy one. Once you've experienced a fine one you're spoiled for life. Mike __________________________________ http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: RE: Favorite "switch feel"?
Date: Feb 20, 2004
I thought switch feel was cured by using push button switches? For me the nice sharp manly click of a military bat switch is the best. Arrrgh...Arrrgh... Arrgh... Arrrgh!!! I always think the soft ones are going to break. I have used 7 Potter-Brumfield circuit-breaker - switches called "combination switches" and they perform flawlessly. They seem to cost a little less then the standard switch by itself. I like saving weight and even though Bob promotes fuses it seems inefficient to use a fuse and a switch when the combination switch will do the work perfectly and only requires one (1) wire out to the item requiring power and that also reduces wiring and I don't notice weight increase verses the standard switch. Each to there own I guess but after 1,100 of VFR/IFR flying in the LEZ the combination switches have never given me a problem and the wiring simplicity is something to be enjoyed. They also have the sharp click and as most bat switches you can tell by looking if they're on or off. -Dale ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Morris" <dave(at)davemorris.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: Favorite "switch feel"? > > I can relate to the need for good switch feel. I hate clunky switches that > are too hard to flip. But gadzooks Eric, I absolutely hated the IBM > keyboards, so I don't know what the HECK you're talking about! LOL! > > Anyway, I was in Altex, an electronics store in Dallas today and flipped > all the switches they had on a display board there. Didn't really like any > of them. The metal ones are usually too "hard", and the ones with plastic > bat handles are usually too "soft" and easy to accidentally flip. > > I did luck out with the switch panels I had built by Aircraft Simulators > (www.AircraftSimulators.com), because they feel "just right". They are > made by "Chili" and rated at 10A. > > Dave Morris > > At 04:03 PM 2/19/2004, you wrote: > > > > > >>Does anyone have a favorite brand of switch that they prefer to use, based > > >>on its tactile feel and smoothness of switch action? > > > >Now there's a man after my own heart. > > > >If there were switches that felt like the shutter button of a Leica M3, I'd > >buy them. Hewlett Packard thought switch "feel" in calculators was > >incredibly important; they provide important tactile feedback. Same with > >IBM. No matter what computer I use I take my own IBM/AT keyboard to use. > > > >I once complained to a switch manufacturer that a potentiometer felt "cheap" > >and was told by the manufacturer that they can make it feel any way at all > >by changing the silicone grease. So I ordered per their suggestion XYZ > >grease and everyone was happy. > > > >High-priced audio equipment makers specialize in this art. But I suspect > >that most corporate bean-counters are not interested in this, and many > >manufacturers just stumble across it accidentally. > > > >Everything feels good in a glob of grease. > > > >Regards, > >Eric M. Jones > >www.PerihelionDesign.com > >113 Brentwood Drive > >Southbridge MA 01550-2705 > >Phone (508) 764-2072 > >Email: emjones(at)charter.net > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 20, 2004
From: Carlos Sa <carlosfsa(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Favorite "switch feel"? - Otto
Lots of good info on their site: http://www.ottoeng.com/ (Photos, specs, distributors, etc.) --- flmike wrote: > > Otto, Otto, Otto. > IMO, Otto Engineering has the best pushbutton switches > out there. They have a rolling sleeve action that > gives a silky smooth push to a tactile, crisp snap > followed by a "drop-through". There is no doubt when > you have actuated the switch. Grab any "real" > military stick or throttle grip and you're probably > pushing Otto switches. They also make some smaller > styles that are just as nice. Top shelf stuff. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: George Braly <gwbraly(at)gami.com>
Subject: Load dump issues
Date: Feb 14, 2004
I was using the 5000W devices. -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jerzy Krasinski Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Load dump issues George Braly wrote: > > >Bob, > >I have done a fair amount of testing a couple of years ago, working with the >TVS devices, including the larger sized versions. > >In my experience, they have not been adequate, alone, to prevent over >voltage spikes on load dumps, even from smaller alternators. > >They help. But I have blown some of them on load dumps. > >Regards, George > > > > I am not surprised. Looking at the data for 1500W devices we find the maximum pulse is 1ms at half peak value current. That is much shorter than the expected alternator pulse. The non repeatable surge current is listed as 200A for 50 ms. Probably more likely peak current would be around 50A, so that would allow some extension of the pulse length. But that is for a nonrepeatable event. That shows that for the alternator full current application they are beaten at the the surge limits. Connecting TVS devices in parallel is a waste. Their characteristics differ enough so most of the current will go through one TVS, while others will just hang there. Maybe measuring them and selecting them in very similar bunches would work, but that requires building a nonstandard curve tracer for operation at rather high currents. Probably it can be done in a crude way discharging a capacitor through a few of them in parallel and observing the currents on a multichannel scope. One can easy increase the power to 3000W by connecting in series two 6.8V devices. Unfortunately, 6.8V is the lowest voltage TVS I found, and that increases power only by a factor of two. But if in your experiments they failed only sometimes, that factor of two might be everything we need. Jerzy > > --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. --- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Stone" <jrstone(at)insightbb.com>
Subject: Essential bus alternate feed from two batteries
Date: Feb 20, 2004
I have a two battery one alternator RV and would like to be able to use the power in both batteries in the event of alternator failure. I am using Bob's Z-11 (Generic Light A/C) drawing with the Aux battery added. Do I need two separate essential bus alternate feed switches in order to keep the batteries isolated? Thanks Jim ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne Berg" <wfberg(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Essential bus alternate feed from two batteries
Date: Feb 20, 2004
No. Read chapter 17 in The Aero Electric Connection. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Stone Subject: AeroElectric-List: Essential bus alternate feed from two batteries I have a two battery one alternator RV and would like to be able to use the power in both batteries in the event of alternator failure. I am using Bob's Z-11 (Generic Light A/C) drawing with the Aux battery added. Do I need two separate essential bus alternate feed switches in order to keep the batteries isolated? Thanks Jim ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net>
Subject: jack for charging battery
Date: Feb 21, 2004
There was previously a thread about using a smaller guage wire to a battery for charging purposes and having a jack to plug in a charging source. What kind of jack would be best for this? Dave Ford RV6 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Scott Hersha" <shersha(at)fuse.net>
Subject: Re: jack for charging battery
Date: Feb 21, 2004
I use an automotive cigar lighter type power plug protected with a 3amp inline fuse(5 amp would work also), both mounted on the instrument panel. That gives me a hot battery power source for a light or something and allows me to trickle charge my battery very easily. Just connect the positive lead to the (+) side of the battery and the (-) side to a ground bus or use the instrument panel as ground(the plug base is grounded when mounted to metal). Any automotive store will have a selection. It's probably not a good idea to fast charge (10amps or more) your battery while it is in the airplane. Scott Hersha ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: jack for charging battery > > There was previously a thread about using a smaller guage wire to a battery for charging purposes and having a jack to plug in a charging source. What kind of jack would be best for this? > > Dave Ford > RV6 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Stone" <jrstone(at)insightbb.com>
Subject: Essential bus alternate feed from two batteries
Date: Feb 21, 2004
Done that, don't see it. Can you be a bit more specific? Bob's 17-6 drawing does not allow for both batteries to power the essential bus (during alt out ops and both battery contactors open). Perhaps a 2-10 switch would do nicely here (off-on-both). Jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wayne Berg Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Essential bus alternate feed from two batteries No. Read chapter 17 in The Aero Electric Connection. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Stone Subject: AeroElectric-List: Essential bus alternate feed from two batteries I have a two battery one alternator RV and would like to be able to use the power in both batteries in the event of alternator failure. I am using Bob's Z-11 (Generic Light A/C) drawing with the Aux battery added. Do I need two separate essential bus alternate feed switches in order to keep the batteries isolated? Thanks Jim == == == == ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Wiegenstein" <n727jw(at)hellerwiegenstein.com>
Subject: Stereo Hookup to Flightcom Intercom
Date: Feb 21, 2004
Just about done with wiring and panel, and have 1 issue to iron out: how to connect my IPAQ (or other stereo device, such as a portable CD player) to the intercom? The Flightcom 403 intercom shows 2 wires going to a .125" jack for stereo input, and I've wired that up. Presumably these are for L and R channel music source. But I'm thinking that on the output side of the stereo music source, you've gotta have 3 lines: L and R source plus a common or "ground". With just 2 lines hooked up to the source, I can hear music thru the intercom but its "incomplete" and has a kind of echo-like, distant sound to it (hard to describe). I'm betting I need a third wire between the source and the .125 jack, and to then gound the (currently unused) third contact on the jack. Can anyone help here? I'm sure there's a simple answer that I'm missing, ands that this has been solved many times before by others. Maybe my brain is getting mooshy after crimping all those Fast-Ons and D-subs . . . . TIA John Wiegenstein Hansville, WA RV-6 N727JW (reserved) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ken Anderson" <ken(at)peggyking.com>
Subject: Re: Essential bus alternate feed from two batteries
Date: Feb 21, 2004
I am considering using the Aero'lectric aux bat system for my RV-9A, and am also interested in how others have done this. I am also interested in where the aux bat was located. My main thought is to have a "stand-by" bat to replace the internal bat in the Dynon EFIS. Ken Anderson RV-9A fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 2004
From: Tammy and Mike Salzman <arrow54t(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Otto Eng products
Carlos, Try this: http://www.ottoeng.com/ottocontact.htm Otto Engineering, Inc. 2 East Main Street Carpentersville, IL 60110 Phone: 847-428-7171 Fax: 847-428-1956 Email: info(at)ottoeng.com Mike Salzman Fairfield, CA LNCE --- Carlos Sa wrote: > Does anybody know where you can buy Otto Eng products? > > Carlos ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 2004
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Turn Coordinator wiring info.
> >Hello IM ready to wire up my RC Allen turn coordinator and i don't have a >wire diagram for it. the T/C has the three pin connection on the >back (Amphenol >MS3106A10SL-3S) >The turn coordinator is a RCA82A-11. The Pins on the Amphenol Connector are >marked A-B and C any help would be appreciated. Thanks > >Bill Higgins > >Pembroke Ma I needed the same info today, so I spent twenty minutes on Google. All I could find was: http://www.wingsandwheels.com/page22.htm Then I picked up my turn and bank, and noted that it had a very nice label which said: PIN A - POS PIN B - ACGT GND PIN C - NOT USED Have fun, -- Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) Ottawa, Canada http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Turn Coordinator wiring info.
Date: Feb 21, 2004
The Turn Coordinator the flys on my desk also has the same pin out printed on the back. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Horton" <khorton01(at)rogers.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Turn Coordinator wiring info. > > > > >Hello IM ready to wire up my RC Allen turn coordinator and i don't have a > >wire diagram for it. the T/C has the three pin connection on the > >back (Amphenol > >MS3106A10SL-3S) > >The turn coordinator is a RCA82A-11. The Pins on the Amphenol Connector are > >marked A-B and C any help would be appreciated. Thanks > > > >Bill Higgins > > > >Pembroke Ma > > I needed the same info today, so I spent twenty minutes on Google. > All I could find was: > > http://www.wingsandwheels.com/page22.htm > > Then I picked up my turn and bank, and noted that it had a very nice > label which said: > > PIN A - POS > PIN B - ACGT GND > PIN C - NOT USED > > Have fun, > -- > Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) > Ottawa, Canada > http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/ > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gerry MacDonald ( VE6QLT)" <Gerry182(at)telusplanet.net>
Subject: ICOM A-22
Date: Feb 22, 2004
Would anybody have a schematic for anICOM A-22 portable, that could answer a question. thanks Gerry ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DAVID REEL" <dreel(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: ICOM A-22
Date: Feb 22, 2004
"Would anybody have a schematic for anICOM A-22 portable, that could answer a question. thanks I'd buy stock in a company that could make a schematic that understands english. :) Dave Reel - RV8A ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> batteries
Subject: Essential bus alternate feed from two
batteries batteries > >Done that, don't see it. Can you be a bit more specific? Bob's 17-6 >drawing does not allow for both batteries to power the essential bus >(during alt out ops and both battery contactors open). Perhaps a 2-10 >switch would do nicely here (off-on-both). You need two batteries only where there are separate tasks for each to perform during alternator out operations. Usually, the second battery supports and electrically dependent engine while the first supports panel mounted stuff. If you don't have an electrically dependent engine, then just put in one, fatter battery. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: SD-8 Overheat Prevention
Date: Feb 22, 2004
I spoke with Tim at B&C for a good period on Friday discussing the potential of the SD-8 regulator overheating when in continuous use over 3 amps. I must say, after being on the RV-List for 9 years and following Bob's "All Electric on a Budget" when building my RV-6A, I was disheartened during the conversation. He said that he was unaware that Bob was recommending this alternator be used as a backup with essential buss loads of 8 amps until fairly recently. After going through all the stages of grieving, I asked what the fix was. Since the PM, SD-8 regulator needs to shed the excess loads via heat, the only fix is to cool it. I went to the local custom computer place and bought a heat sink and cooling fan made by Intel to cool CPU's. I attached this to the top of the regulator via a aluminum strap and JB Weld. It is switched to come on when I turn on the SD-8. I have no way of telling if it going to be a fix or just prolong the fatal event. My hope is that I will only need it for 30 min or so while I get down after a main alternator failure. Ross Mickey N9PT ________________________________________________________________________________
From: KahnSG(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 2004
Subject: Microair products
Bob: What is the status of the Microair products? Are the comm and the transponder going to be available through you? Steve ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> batteries
Subject: Re: Essential bus alternate feed from two
batteries batteries > > >I am considering using the Aero'lectric aux bat system for my RV-9A, and am >also interested in how others have done this. I am also interested in where >the aux bat was located. My main thought is to have a "stand-by" bat to >replace the internal bat in the Dynon EFIS. If your EFIS will run from the endurance-bus, I'm not sure as to the value of adding an aux battery to your system just to support the EFIS system. It may be that you just need to size the main battery such that you have sufficient capacity to support the e-bus for all loads needed to extend your alternator-out endurance sufficiently to allow use of fuel aboard. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: VLM-14 Field Volts Hookup
> >On my Denso, the ig is the one. The L is the warning light. This is all >covered in the data sheet enclosed, which is mainly in Japanese. > > > From: LJoh896239(at)aol.com > > Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > > Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:24:37 EST > > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > > Subject: AeroElectric-List: VLM-14 Field Volts Hookup > > > > > > I have Bob's VLM-!4 and am hooking up the field volts wire to the Denso > > internally regulated alternator, which has two connections labeled IG > and L. > > Does > > it go to one of these or someplace else? Thanks for any input. > > > > Lance Johnson > > RV-8A > > Salt Lake City Field voltage measurement feature in the VLM-14 can only be used with externally regulated alternators. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Transponder arial location
> >Hi Bob, >I've got a xpdr arial question for you. I have installed that little 3 >inch long arial with a ball (B&C) belly just aft of the firewall between >the exhaust pipes. The arial would be shielded some in the forward >direction by the portion of the lower cowl where cooling air exits and the >exhaust pipes emerge from the engine compartment. That wasn't a problem >when I was going to install the standard frp cowl but now I thinking of >trying to build an aluminum cowl. How much of a problem do you think this >would be? >Thanks, >Rick Fogerson >RV3 >Boise, ID It will be fine where you've installed it. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Battery Vs bench power supply
> >Hi Bob and listers, >I'm ready to smoke test the wiring and was planning on buying a power >supply but I hate to spend $80 for something I'm going to use once. I >have a fairly simple day vfr panel with dual batterys that I plan to just >replace one per year so I've always got a fresh battery plus one that is >only 1 to 2 years old. > >So I'm thinking of just buying a new battery now and using it to check out >the system. A year or so when I'm ready to fly I'll buy another new one >and I'll begin my planned rotation of batterys. Is there any reason that >this won't be as effective a way to smoke test the system as with a power >supply? That works too. I've often suggested that folks run their airplanes from a car or marine battery and battery charger while under construction and don't put the real ship's battery in until first-flight so it's new and fresh. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Ground Com Switch
Why not install an e-bus and put the com radio on it? You can bring the e-bus up before the main bus to get your pre-flight communications covered . . . this needs to be done anyhow so that the e-bus alternate feed path is tested during preflight. Bob . . . > >My experience with a ground com switch was in a turbine aircraft where >it was used to power the number 1 com radio. It was used to obtain the >ATIS, get clearances, monitor the company freq, etc. You didn't have >to turn the master on so it was a simple single throw switch wired to >the hot battery bus. > >Art/Sue Bertolina wrote: > > > > > >can anyone explain a ground com switch, how it is used > >and the type of switch to purchase and a wiring diagram > >Thanks > >Art Bertolina > > > > > > > > > > Bob . . . ----------------------------------------- ( Experience and common sense cannot be ) ( replaced with policy and procedures. ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ----------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2004
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: SD-8 Overheat Prevention
> >I spoke with Tim at B&C for a good period on Friday discussing the potential >of the SD-8 regulator overheating when in continuous use over 3 amps. I >must say, after being on the RV-List for 9 years and following Bob's "All >Electric on a Budget" when building my RV-6A, I was disheartened during the >conversation. He said that he was unaware that Bob was recommending this >alternator be used as a backup with essential buss loads of 8 amps until >fairly recently. After going through all the stages of grieving, I asked >what the fix was. Since the PM, SD-8 regulator needs to shed the excess >loads via heat, the only fix is to cool it. I went to the local custom >computer place and bought a heat sink and cooling fan made by Intel to cool >CPU's. I attached this to the top of the regulator via a aluminum strap and >JB Weld. It is switched to come on when I turn on the SD-8. I have no way >of telling if it going to be a fix or just prolong the fatal event. My hope >is that I will only need it for 30 min or so while I get down after a main >alternator failure. > >Ross Mickey >N9PT Something really doesn't add up here. B&C markets this alternator and regulator combination as being rated at 8 amps. They don't say that there is any time limit for the 8 amp output, nor do they specify a lower continuous rating. If this thing is only good for 3 amps continuous, why are they marketing it as an 8 amp device? I'm really looking forward to the results of Bob's testing. My regulator is bolted to an aluminum airframe, and I'm really hoping that will provide enough of a heat sink. I'm going to get some little stick-on temperature witness thingies and do a long duration, fully loaded test of my SD-8 before I decide I can count on it for my IFR backup electrical power. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: fuse accessability
>Comments/Questions: Bob: >What is your understanding of the FAA regs re location of fuses and >circuit breakers? All I find in Part 91 is a statement pertaining to SPARE >fuses (which must be accessible to the pilot). At least one RV I know of >that received an Airworthiness certificate recently has all its fuses >located in a compartment between instrument panel and engine (completely >inaccessible to pilot in flight. >We have a new Amateur-built Designated Inspector who may be quite tough on >details, so I want to be prepared. There are no requirements that apply to your airplane in this regard and few that apply to certified ships. Fuse access speaks to articles "critical" to safe flight. Given that there are many ways that any piece of equipment can fail and NOT blow a fuse, it seems logical that any piece of equipment truly REALLY critical to safe flight should have a back-up system making the fuse accessibility issue moot. Whether or not a bureaucrat will understand this is always a risk. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------- ( Experience and common sense cannot be ) ( replaced with policy and procedures. ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ----------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Stone" <jrstone(at)insightbb.com>
Subject: Essential bus alternate feed from two batteries
Date: Feb 22, 2004
The reason I went with two batteries is two fold. First, I have one mag and one electronic ignition (not a electrically dependant engine). During start I thought I would use the main battery for cranking engine, the aux battery for powering the electronic ignition (to avoid any possibility of kick back in the event main battery voltage drops below min required for electronic ignition). The second reason is your recommended battery replacement plan of once a year, I will always have one new battery and one no more than two years old. So with that said, don't you agree that having the ability to use both batteries to power the essential bus to is a good idea? If so, is the solution a 2-10 switch? Thanks, Jim -----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 batteries Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Essential bus alternate feed from two batteries batteries > >Done that, don't see it. Can you be a bit more specific? Bob's 17-6 >drawing does not allow for both batteries to power the essential bus >(during alt out ops and both battery contactors open). Perhaps a 2-10 >switch would do nicely here (off-on-both). You need two batteries only where there are separate tasks for each to perform during alternator out operations. Usually, the second battery supports and electrically dependent engine while the first supports panel mounted stuff. If you don't have an electrically dependent engine, then just put in one, fatter battery. Bob . . . == == == == ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WHigg1170(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 2004
Subject: Re: Turn Coordinator wiring info.
Thanks for the info I just wired up the T/C and powered it up, works good! PIN A - POS PIN B - ACGT GND PIN C - NOT USED Bill Higgins Pembroke Ma ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Fiveonepw(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 2004
Subject: Flap motor overload?
Howdy list! I've blown the fuse on my flaps when they reach the full up position (Van's unit in my -6A) twice now in 2 days (5 amp first, tried 7.5 & still blew- yes wire is fat enough!) and I can't find anything wrong, linkage binding, wires worn etc. Only thing that is unusual is that the motor seems to be trying somewhat harder at the fully extended position (flaps up) than it does fully retracted where it seems to freewheel more easily. Should it be freewheeling easily at both ends, and shouldn't 5 amps be plenty of fuse for this? I don't recall where I got the load value, but it's wired with 18ga. Thanks! Mark Phillips -6A N51PW - 37.4 hours in 3 weeks! What an awesome machine! 8-) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Sam Hoskins" <shoskins(at)mchsi.com>
Subject: LSE electronic ignition installation
Date: Feb 22, 2004
Greetings Bob and all, I have been off this list for several months. I wanted to stop back to ask a question, and glean other's experience with installing the LSE ignition. Klaus says to pull the 14v power supply directly from the battery, run it through a pullable 5 amp breaker, maybe through a switch, then to the control box. Likewise, he says to run the ground directly to the battery. My preference would be to connect the 14v line to my endurance bus, protected by a 5a fuse. I have a 16 awg fusible link between the battery and the endurance bus, as well as the essential bus switch. Likewise, I would like to connect the ground to my firewall bus. Do any of you have experience with installing the LSE ignition onto the endurance and ground buses? What was the result? Thanks! Sam Hoskins Q-200 with ~1,350 hrs. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: LSE electronic ignition installation
Date: Feb 22, 2004
From: "David Chalmers" <David(at)ChalmersFamily.com>
Sam, when I first installed my LSE ignition I wired it to the regular ground and power bus. I have long #4 cables to the battery and the engine would crank but wouldn't fire until the start switch was released - it wasn't getting enough volts. I wired the LSE ground and power directly to the battery via a fuse and have had no more problems. Dave Chalmers Redmond, WA -----Original Message----- From: Sam Hoskins [mailto:shoskins(at)mchsi.com] Subject: AeroElectric-List: LSE electronic ignition installation Greetings Bob and all, I have been off this list for several months. I wanted to stop back to ask a question, and glean other's experience with installing the LSE ignition. Klaus says to pull the 14v power supply directly from the battery, run it through a pullable 5 amp breaker, maybe through a switch, then to the control box. Likewise, he says to run the ground directly to the battery. My preference would be to connect the 14v line to my endurance bus, protected by a 5a fuse. I have a 16 awg fusible link between the battery and the endurance bus, as well as the essential bus switch. Likewise, I would like to connect the ground to my firewall bus. Do any of you have experience with installing the LSE ignition onto the endurance and ground buses? What was the result? Thanks! Sam Hoskins Q-200 with ~1,350 hrs. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2004
From: Hi There <rv90619(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: LSE electronic ignition installation
I was thinking of wiring my LSE the same way Sam was going to. I'm surprised that the voltage from the buss is less than the battery. Why is this? I went throught the voltage loss calcs and don't see where the volts are going. It seems that running the power off of the battery buss and running a seperate wire is basically the same thing. My battery is very close to the battery bus, I have an RV, so the wires are very short. What am I missing??? Cam David Chalmers wrote: Sam, when I first installed my LSE ignition I wired it to the regular ground and power bus. I have long #4 cables to the battery and the engine would crank but wouldn't fire until the start switch was released - it wasn't getting enough volts. I wired the LSE ground and power directly to the battery via a fuse and have had no more problems. Dave Chalmers Redmond, WA -----Original Message----- From: Sam Hoskins [mailto:shoskins(at)mchsi.com] Subject: AeroElectric-List: LSE electronic ignition installation Greetings Bob and all, I have been off this list for several months. I wanted to stop back to ask a question, and glean other's experience with installing the LSE ignition. Klaus says to pull the 14v power supply directly from the battery, run it through a pullable 5 amp breaker, maybe through a switch, then to the control box. Likewise, he says to run the ground directly to the battery. My preference would be to connect the 14v line to my endurance bus, protected by a 5a fuse. I have a 16 awg fusible link between the battery and the endurance bus, as well as the essential bus switch. Likewise, I would like to connect the ground to my firewall bus. Do any of you have experience with installing the LSE ignition onto the endurance and ground buses? What was the result? Thanks! Sam Hoskins Q-200 with ~1,350 hrs. --------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Keeping flash tubes nice
> > >I'm interested in this too...though I think it's really the gozillion >joules of energy that we're sending through 'em..... > >-----Original Message----- >From: "Lawson, Michael" <mikel(at)SSD.FSI.com> >To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Keeping flash tubes nice > > >I am in the process of wiring my (Whelen) strobes up, and I noticed how nice >and clear they look when new. Last time I walked around Oshkosh, I noticed >that many flash tubes on experimentals seem to have a darkened, brownish >look, almost like they've been overheated. > >Is this indeed caused by overheating, by having the tube enclosed behind a >plexi lens and not exposed to the air stream for cooling, or is it just a >natural degradation of the flash tube over time? They do darken the inside surface of the glass over time. A flash tube's life is rated in numbers of flashes before it's light output drops to some pre-selected level, usually 1/2 of original light output. The harder the tube is "pushed" (joules per flash) the faster the darkening and the shorter the service life. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Speedy11(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 2004
Subject: Spirellcell Technology
Bob, I saw a Sears ad today that advertised a new battery technology, Spirellcell Technology. It says - tightly compressed spiral wound cells with absorbed glass-mat separators hold electrolyte like a sponge to eliminate acid spilling. Have you heard of this? Is it something of value to OBAMs? Stan Sutterfield RV-8A Tampa ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Z12 e-bus questions
> > >The thing that I never understand about this sort of analysis is why is it >assumed that the transmit switch will not be activated in this example. I >dont know the NAV/COM unit in the example below, but surely it will >significantly increase the demand on the ebus and blow any associated >fuse/breaker? The LOAD analysis is an ENERGY study first . . . do you have enough battery/alternator capacity to produce the desired endurance . . . and a PROTECTION study second to decide fuse/breaker and wire sizes. As you have noted, the transmitter side of a transceiver takes some higher, momentary current flows that set fuse and wire size but is generally ignored for endurance since the transmit duty cycle is very low. Both conditions have to be accommodated in the final configuration. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Spirellcell Technology
> >Bob, >I saw a Sears ad today that advertised a new battery technology, Spirellcell >Technology. It says - tightly compressed spiral wound cells with absorbed >glass-mat separators hold electrolyte like a sponge to eliminate acid >spilling. > >Have you heard of this? Is it something of value to OBAMs? Don't think so. The jelly-roll cell is the first of the RG batteries patented by Gates about 25 years ago. Optima bought the tooling from Gates when it decided to get out of the battery business. See http://www.optimabatteries.com/index.asp where you'll see "Spiralcell" used to describe Optima's product. Hawker bought the Gates prismatic (rectangular cells) line which became the Genesis series Hawkers and others . . . It's a good battery but nothing new. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------- ( Experience and common sense cannot be ) ( replaced with policy and procedures. ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ----------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jerry2DT(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 23, 2004
Subject: Re: Flap Motor
Mark... Our RV6a has had a failed flap motor twice in the last 40 hours. Both times, motor gave hint of trouble with intermittent hesitation, then complete failure, both times in "up" position, refusing to extend. Fortunately, RV lands just fine without flaps, just need a tad more speed. In each case, inspection revealed "gunk" between brushes and commutator, and upon thorough cleaning, worked fine. In your case, I'd sure take a look at those brushes. Clean them up with some contact cleaner and a Q-Tip. I've been told by knowledgable Van's employee that full extension at 100 mph might overload motor, causing this phenom, so currently drop half flaps at 100, rest at 80. We'll see if this improves situation. In researching, found several instances of same problem on "RV-List". Hope this helps. Jerry Cochran Wilsonville,OR In a message dated 2/22/2004 11:57:06 PM Pacific Standard Time, aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes: From: Fiveonepw(at)aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Flap motor overload? Howdy list! I've blown the fuse on my flaps when they reach the full up position (Van's unit in my -6A) twice now in 2 days (5 amp first, tried 7.5 & still blew- yes wire is fat enough!) and I can't find anything wrong, linkage binding, wires worn etc. Only thing that is unusual is that the motor seems to be trying somewhat harder at the fully extended position (flaps up) than it does fully retracted where it seems to freewheel more easily. Should it be freewheeling easily at both ends, and shouldn't 5 amps be plenty of fuse for this? I don't recall where I got the load value, but it's wired with 18ga. Thanks! Mark Phillips -6A N51PW - 37.4 hours in 3 weeks! What an awesome machine! 8-) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Sam Hoskins" <shoskins(at)mchsi.com>
Subject: LSE electronic ignition installation
Date: Feb 23, 2004
I hand prop my Q-200, so loss of voltage will cranking will not be an issue. -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Chalmers Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: LSE electronic ignition installation Sam, when I first installed my LSE ignition I wired it to the regular ground and power bus. I have long #4 cables to the battery and the engine would crank but wouldn't fire until the start switch was released - it wasn't getting enough volts. I wired the LSE ground and power directly to the battery via a fuse and have had no more problems. Dave Chalmers Redmond, WA -----Original Message----- From: Sam Hoskins [mailto:shoskins(at)mchsi.com] Subject: AeroElectric-List: LSE electronic ignition installation Greetings Bob and all, I have been off this list for several months. I wanted to stop back to ask a question, and glean other's experience with installing the LSE ignition. Klaus says to pull the 14v power supply directly from the battery, run it through a pullable 5 amp breaker, maybe through a switch, then to the control box. Likewise, he says to run the ground directly to the battery. My preference would be to connect the 14v line to my endurance bus, protected by a 5a fuse. I have a 16 awg fusible link between the battery and the endurance bus, as well as the essential bus switch. Likewise, I would like to connect the ground to my firewall bus. Do any of you have experience with installing the LSE ignition onto the endurance and ground buses? What was the result? Thanks! Sam Hoskins Q-200 with ~1,350 hrs. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: ICOM A-22
Date: Feb 23, 2004
My experience with ICOM America is that they are pretty easy to deal with and accomodating. I have two of the panel mount A-200's and an A-22 hand-held. Why not contact them directly? I dont't have their number handy, but you can find their phone number on the website. Just do a 'Google' search.... Good luck, Jack Lockamy Camarillo, CA ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Scott Hersha" <shersha(at)fuse.net>
Subject: Headset noise
Date: Feb 23, 2004
Bob, I built and installed the noise filter you describe from Radio Shack, except it came with a 220uf capacitor rather than the 10uf suggested in your plans. It filtered out all the noise.....even most of the radio volume. With the volume on max I can barely hear it. If I use a 10uf, will I get my volume back and still filter out the noise? I had it connected to the power line to my audio amp and it filtered everything, alternator, strobes, fuel pump, very effectively. Just turning off my com radio also stops all the noise. Should I try putting the filter on the radio power line? Scott Hersha ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: LSE electronic ignition installation
> > > >Sam, when I first installed my LSE ignition I wired it to the regular >ground and power bus. I have long #4 cables to the battery and the engine >would crank but wouldn't fire until the start switch was released - it >wasn't getting enough volts. I wired the LSE ground and power directly to >the battery via a fuse and have had no more problems. > >Dave Chalmers >Redmond, WA the key word here is "long" . . . when your battery is someplace other than on the firewall close to the engine, #2 wire is indicated. Also, do a load test of the battery to see that it doesn't drop below 9 volts after 15 seconds load at 300A. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: LSE electronic ignition installation
> >Greetings Bob and all, I have been off this list for several months. I >wanted to stop back to ask a question, and glean other's experience with >installing the LSE ignition. > > >Klaus says to pull the 14v power supply directly from the battery, run it >through a pullable 5 amp breaker, maybe through a switch, then to the >control box. Likewise, he says to run the ground directly to the battery. > > >My preference would be to connect the 14v line to my endurance bus, >protected by a 5a fuse. I have a 16 awg fusible link between the battery >and the endurance bus, as well as the essential bus switch. > > >Likewise, I would like to connect the ground to my firewall bus. This SHOULD work fine. The only thing I would do different is run the ignition system from 5A fuse on battery bus. You can have the panel completely dark and still not affect the engine. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Flap motor overload?
> >Howdy list! > >I've blown the fuse on my flaps when they reach the full up position (Van's >unit in my -6A) twice now in 2 days (5 amp first, tried 7.5 & still blew- yes >wire is fat enough!) and I can't find anything wrong, linkage binding, wires >worn etc. Only thing that is unusual is that the motor seems to be trying >somewhat harder at the fully extended position (flaps up) than it does fully >retracted where it seems to freewheel more easily. Should it be >freewheeling easily >at both ends, and shouldn't 5 amps be plenty of fuse for this? I don't >recall where I got the load value, but it's wired with 18ga. A motor that draws only 3-5A will draw 10-20A inrush during startup. It would be very useful to get some current measurements from your flap system while in flight. When your flyoff is done and you can carry an assistant, it would be pretty easy to do and share this data with the list. Post a note when you're ready and let's talk about the setup. In the mean time try a 10A fuse. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: SD-8 Overheat Prevention
> > > > > >I spoke with Tim at B&C for a good period on Friday discussing the potential > >of the SD-8 regulator overheating when in continuous use over 3 amps. I > >must say, after being on the RV-List for 9 years and following Bob's "All > >Electric on a Budget" when building my RV-6A, I was disheartened during the > >conversation. He said that he was unaware that Bob was recommending this > >alternator be used as a backup with essential buss loads of 8 amps until > >fairly recently. After going through all the stages of grieving, I asked > >what the fix was. Since the PM, SD-8 regulator needs to shed the excess > >loads via heat, the only fix is to cool it. I went to the local custom > >computer place and bought a heat sink and cooling fan made by Intel to cool > >CPU's. I attached this to the top of the regulator via a aluminum strap and > >JB Weld. It is switched to come on when I turn on the SD-8. I have no way > >of telling if it going to be a fix or just prolong the fatal event. My hope > >is that I will only need it for 30 min or so while I get down after a main > >alternator failure. > > > >Ross Mickey > >N9PT > >Something really doesn't add up here. B&C markets this alternator >and regulator combination as being rated at 8 amps. They don't say >that there is any time limit for the 8 amp output, nor do they >specify a lower continuous rating. If this thing is only good for 3 >amps continuous, why are they marketing it as an 8 amp device? > >I'm really looking forward to the results of Bob's testing. My >regulator is bolted to an aluminum airframe, and I'm really hoping >that will provide enough of a heat sink. I'm going to get some >little stick-on temperature witness thingies and do a long duration, >fully loaded test of my SD-8 before I decide I can count on it for my >IFR backup electrical power. I agree. I've NOT heard anything about continuous duty operation limits on the SD-8 before. I know the SD-8 regulator has been through some evolutionary changes over the years but Never had the impression that the critter wasn't good for 8A continuous . . . and in recent years, I was told that it would deliver 10A at 12.5 (but that wasn't being offered as an increase in continuous duty rating). I've not been able to make an accurate deduction of cooling capability of the stock SD-8 regulator with bench testing. It's a potted device. I've asked Todd to see if the supplier will share technical details of the product with me. In the mean time, I've forwarded a copy of this posting to Todd and will suggest that they do some testing in-house on various sizes of heat sink to see what it takes to "cook" a stock SD-8 regulator. I'd like to participate in this but right now, I've got too many things on my plate. None-the-less, this is B&C's product . . . they should know more about it than anyone else. If they don't have ready answers to customer questions, it's their duty to deduce and supply them. The question of the hour is, "What heat-sinking and/or ambient temperature limits are recommended for 8 amps or more of continuous duty output from the SD-8 with it's present regulator?" In the mean time, if any of you are in a position to do some constructive experimentation, you might check with your John Deere dealer about a p/n AM101406 regulator that is cited in this article: http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/corvair/dynamo.html In this housing and with the cooling fins, it seems a much more likely candidate for service at 10 Amps plus than does the stock B&C regulator. The schematic in the article suggests that it's a drop-in replacement for the SD-8 regulator. It's not a bad price at $67.00 either. It would be valuable information for someone to give it a try on their existing SD-8 installation and report back to us with the results. Last November, David Carter offered this information to us on the List: From: "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> Subject: Re: Future replacement for Rotax Date: Nov 18, 2003 Bob, about testing a John Deere PM alternator and regulator. Here's the info I've looked up and shared with others. A look at one of these by you would be a great thing. I've attached the spreadsheet as a pdf file to this e-mail - but think attachments get stripped off. So, will copy and paste here: Output Alternator Regulator Weight Amps P/N P/N LBS 20 AM877557 AM101406 4 35 AM877957 AM101406 4? (Same alternator with internal changes, uses same regulator) John Deere PM alternator info - researched at Deere dealer by David Carter I'd like to use the 35 amp if can keep loads down enough for IFR & night Otherwise, I'll probably use the 85 amp - I want a PM alternator. (RV-6 with Mazda rotary engine) I think it's clear that the 101406 regulator is CONSIDERABLY more robust than the regulators offered by either B&C for the SD-8 and by Rotax for the 912/914 engines. Personally, unless there are features of the AM101406 as yet unrevealed to us, it seems a very attractive alternative. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Microair products
> >Bob: > >What is the status of the Microair products? >Are the comm and the transponder going to be available through you? > >Steve I've discontinued that offering. I'm going to concentrate on product development that is unique to the AeroElectric Connection. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan(at)chartermi.net>
Subject: Re: Flap motor overload?
Date: Feb 23, 2004
You may carry a flight engineer during your flyoff. > >I've blown the fuse on my flaps when they reach the full up position (Van's > >unit in my -6A) twice now in 2 days (5 amp first, tried 7.5 & still blew- yes > A motor that draws only 3-5A will draw 10-20A inrush during > startup. It would be very useful to get some current measurements > from your flap system while in flight. When your flyoff is > done and you can carry an assistant, it would be pretty easy > to do and share this data with the list. Post a note when > you're ready and let's talk about the setup. In the mean time > try a 10A fuse. > > Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)ashcreekwireless.com>
Subject: Re: Flap Motor
Date: Feb 23, 2004
> Our RV6a has had a failed flap motor twice in the last 40 hours. Both times, > motor gave hint of trouble with intermittent hesitation, then complete > failure, both times in "up" position, refusing to extend. Fortunately, RV lands just > fine without flaps, just need a tad more speed. In each case, inspection > revealed "gunk" between brushes and commutator, and upon thorough cleaning, worked > fine. I don't have an RV but I was talking recently with a couple friends of mine who do and who have had flap motor problems. It seems that it is due to brush and commutator contamination from oil or more likely grease that has "melted" and drained out of the bearing that is above the commutator. I gather the RV-8 does not have the problem because the motor is mounted "upside down" or the opposite way and the bearing is beneath the commutator. Cliff A&P/IA ----- Original Message ----- From: <Jerry2DT(at)aol.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Flap Motor > > Mark... > > Our RV6a has had a failed flap motor twice in the last 40 hours. Both times, > motor gave hint of trouble with intermittent hesitation, then complete > failure, both times in "up" position, refusing to extend. Fortunately, RV lands just > fine without flaps, just need a tad more speed. In each case, inspection > revealed "gunk" between brushes and commutator, and upon thorough cleaning, worked > fine. > > In your case, I'd sure take a look at those brushes. Clean them up with some > contact cleaner and a Q-Tip. > > I've been told by knowledgable Van's employee that full extension at 100 mph > might overload motor, causing this phenom, so currently drop half flaps at > 100, rest at 80. We'll see if this improves situation. In researching, found > several instances of same problem on "RV-List". Hope this helps. > > Jerry Cochran > Wilsonville,OR > > In a message dated 2/22/2004 11:57:06 PM Pacific Standard Time, > aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes: > From: Fiveonepw(at)aol.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Flap motor overload? > > > Howdy list! > > I've blown the fuse on my flaps when they reach the full up position (Van's > unit in my -6A) twice now in 2 days (5 amp first, tried 7.5 & still blew- yes > wire is fat enough!) and I can't find anything wrong, linkage binding, wires > worn etc. Only thing that is unusual is that the motor seems to be trying > somewhat harder at the fully extended position (flaps up) than it does fully > retracted where it seems to freewheel more easily. Should it be freewheeling > easily > > at both ends, and shouldn't 5 amps be plenty of fuse for this? I don't > recall where I got the load value, but it's wired with 18ga. > > Thanks! > > Mark Phillips -6A N51PW - 37.4 hours in 3 weeks! What an awesome machine! > 8-) > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2004
From: Steve Thomas <lists(at)stevet.net>
Subject: Re: Flap motor overload?
Hello Eric, Monday, February 23, 2004, 6:36:42 AM, you wrote: ER> You may carry a flight engineer during your flyoff. What is the definition of a "flight engineer"? -- Best regards, Steve -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- iQA/AwUBQDoV9MxYYrZi8xi9EQLpUgCg/H9DxfmPxkhupa7yg4VV/hcprIcAnRFQ QjYNFwLEH+lCjJ+xqdSetc+U =m4T9 -----END PGP MESSAGE----- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
Subject: Re: Flap motor overload?
Date: Feb 23, 2004
> > You may carry a flight engineer during your flyoff. NO you can not. This is a very wide spread opinion that is a misinterpretation of one of the paragraphs in the regs and is only second, in popularity, allows a flight instructor during the fly off. Lots of wishful thinking that is completely incorrect. I attended the Washington Aviation Conference on Feb 21, 2004. I personally discussed this subject with the FAA reps and they said absolutely not allowed. I also discussed it with my Insurance Broker and he said the owners and acft insurance would also be voided. The above was the result of a heated debate in the local EAA chapter as both reasons were being used by several members to justify 2 in the cockpit during the 40 hours. Bob's right on this. Paul EAA Tech Coun, Flight Advsor ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Flap motor overload?
Date: Feb 23, 2004
Having a second person in the cockpit is strictly prohibited by FARs for our amateur Built planes. Could generate a lot of problems both with the FAA and the insurance company. Cy Galley Editor, EAA Safety Programs cgalley(at)qcbc.org or sportpilot(at)eaa.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan(at)chartermi.net> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Flap motor overload? > > You may carry a flight engineer during your flyoff. > > > >I've blown the fuse on my flaps when they reach the full up position > (Van's > > >unit in my -6A) twice now in 2 days (5 amp first, tried 7.5 & still blew- > yes > > > A motor that draws only 3-5A will draw 10-20A inrush during > > startup. It would be very useful to get some current measurements > > from your flap system while in flight. When your flyoff is > > done and you can carry an assistant, it would be pretty easy > > to do and share this data with the list. Post a note when > > you're ready and let's talk about the setup. In the mean time > > try a 10A fuse. > > > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com>
Subject: Flap motor overload?
Date: Feb 23, 2004
Here's what Advisory Circular 20-27F, Certification and Operation of Amateur Built Aircraft says about it taking someone along during the flight test period: 13. PHASE 1 FLIGHT TESTING. e. Restrictions (1) Carrying Passengers. You may not carry passengers while you are restricted to the flight test area or during any portion of your Phase I flight test program. We suggest you use a tape or video recorder for recording readings and other similar tasks. If you need an additional crewmember for a particular flight test, specify that in your application program letter for the airworthiness certificate. We will list this need in your operating limitations. (2) Flight Instruction. You may not receive flight instruction during your flight test. Terry You may carry a flight engineer during your flyoff. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Electric fuel pump circuit
Date: Feb 23, 2004
Bob & Listers, I am currently modifying your Z-11 drawing for my specific RV-8A. I recall that you recently recommended the use of relays for circuits drawing over 5 amps. My Airflow Performance electric fuel pump draws about 5 - 6 amps in rush. Once running, it draws 3.5 to 4 amps. Do I need a relay on this circuit? Would you recommend installing this circuit on the main, endurance or battery bus? I have an engine with 1 magneto and 1 Jeff Rose electronic ignition. Charlie Kuss RV-8A wiring Boca Raton, Fl. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Phil Birkelbach" <phil(at)petrasoft.net>
Subject: Re: Flap motor overload?
Date: Feb 23, 2004
That motor is only supposed to pull 3A with a 100lb load on it. When moving the flaps on my 7 it pulls less than 1A (no flying loads yet). Make sure that your are not stalling the motor. It should start freewheeling just as the flaps tuck up under the wing. You may need to readjust your pushrods. Oh and congrats on getting your bird flying. Godspeed, Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Baffles / Cowling http://www.myrv7.com ----- Original Message ----- From: <Fiveonepw(at)aol.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Flap motor overload? > > Howdy list! > > I've blown the fuse on my flaps when they reach the full up position (Van's > unit in my -6A) twice now in 2 days (5 amp first, tried 7.5 & still blew- yes > wire is fat enough!) and I can't find anything wrong, linkage binding, wires > worn etc. Only thing that is unusual is that the motor seems to be trying > somewhat harder at the fully extended position (flaps up) than it does fully > retracted where it seems to freewheel more easily. Should it be freewheeling easily > at both ends, and shouldn't 5 amps be plenty of fuse for this? I don't > recall where I got the load value, but it's wired with 18ga. > > Thanks! > > Mark Phillips -6A N51PW - 37.4 hours in 3 weeks! What an awesome machine! > 8-) > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Phil Birkelbach" <phil(at)petrasoft.net>
Subject: Re: LSE electronic ignition installation
Date: Feb 23, 2004
It depends on where you take the power off for the main buss. The current in the Big wire from the battery is very high during starting. The further downstream on that Big wire that you take the main buss feed, the lower the voltage will be. I suspect from his post that he has a battery located far from the starter and probably has his main buss tied into the battery contactor that may have several feet of Big wire between it and the battery. If your's looks like mine and there is only a few inches of 2AWG wire beween the + post of the battery and the batt side of the master contactor then you probably don't have to worry about it. That being said I intend to feed my LSE from the battery buss, and my battery buss is fed straight from the battery post. Godspeed, Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Baffles / Cowling http://www.myrv7.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hi There" <rv90619(at)yahoo.com> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: LSE electronic ignition installation > > I was thinking of wiring my LSE the same way Sam was going to. I'm surprised that the voltage from the buss is less than the battery. Why is this? I went throught the voltage loss calcs and don't see where the volts are going. It seems that running the power off of the battery buss and running a seperate wire is basically the same thing. My battery is very close to the battery bus, I have an RV, so the wires are very short. What am I missing??? > > Cam > > > David Chalmers wrote: > > > Sam, when I first installed my LSE ignition I wired it to the regular ground and power bus. I have long #4 cables to the battery and the engine would crank but wouldn't fire until the start switch was released - it wasn't getting enough volts. I wired the LSE ground and power directly to the battery via a fuse and have had no more problems. > > Dave Chalmers > Redmond, WA > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sam Hoskins [mailto:shoskins(at)mchsi.com] > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: LSE electronic ignition installation > > > Greetings Bob and all, I have been off this list for several months. I > wanted to stop back to ask a question, and glean other's experience with > installing the LSE ignition. > > > Klaus says to pull the 14v power supply directly from the battery, run it > through a pullable 5 amp breaker, maybe through a switch, then to the > control box. Likewise, he says to run the ground directly to the battery. > > > My preference would be to connect the 14v line to my endurance bus, > protected by a 5a fuse. I have a 16 awg fusible link between the battery > and the endurance bus, as well as the essential bus switch. > > > Likewise, I would like to connect the ground to my firewall bus. > > > Do any of you have experience with installing the LSE ignition onto the > endurance and ground buses? What was the result? > > > Thanks! > > > Sam Hoskins > > Q-200 with ~1,350 hrs. > > > --------------------------------- > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Fw: Transponder arial location
Date: Feb 23, 2004
----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Fogerson Subject: Transponder arial location Hi Bob, I've got a xpdr arial question for you. I have installed that little 3 inch long arial with a ball (B&C) on the belly just aft of the firewall and between the exhaust pipes. The arial would be shielded some in the forward direction by the portion of the lower cowl where cooling air exits and the exhaust pipes emerge from the engine compartment. The lower part of the cowl is about even with the arial ball. That wasn't a problem when I was going to install the standard frp cowl but now I thinking of trying to build an aluminum cowl. How much of a problem do you think this would be? Thanks, Rick Fogerson RV3 Boise, ID ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: LSE electronic ignition installation
> > >It depends on where you take the power off for the main buss. The current >in the Big wire from the battery is very high during starting. The further >downstream on that Big wire that you take the main buss feed, the lower the >voltage will be. I suspect from his post that he has a battery located far >from the starter and probably has his main buss tied into the battery >contactor that may have several feet of Big wire between it and the battery. > >If your's looks like mine and there is only a few inches of 2AWG wire beween >the + post of the battery and the batt side of the master contactor then you >probably don't have to worry about it. That being said I intend to feed my >LSE from the battery buss, and my battery buss is fed straight from the >battery post. that's the way to do it! Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Headset noise
> >Bob, > I built and installed the noise filter you describe from Radio Shack, > except it came with a 220uf capacitor rather than the 10uf suggested in > your plans. The 10uf is what used to come with it. Pleased to see something bigger being supplied now. > It filtered out all the noise.....even most of the radio volume. With > the volume on max I can barely hear it. If I use a 10uf, will I get my > volume back and still filter out the noise? The filter is intended for use only in the power supply lead . . . it should have nothing to do with the intensity of desired signals. Sounds like you've wired it into one of your audio leads instead of the power lead. > I had it connected to the power line to my audio amp and it filtered > everything, alternator, strobes, fuel pump, very effectively. Just > turning off my com radio also stops all the noise. Should I try putting > the filter on the radio power line? That's a reasonable thing to try. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Dual fuel pumps
>Mark: Assuming that you will be flying a low-wing (i.e.: NOT gravity-fed >fuel) I personally would not fly with you in a plane like that. You would >obviously have these two Facet pumps on completely different electrical >systems - but you may end up having your face stuck in the cockpit looking >for switches while your plane staggers to hold itself above stall on a short >field take-off. Sounds like a statistic. You can make it work - but not >simply. Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. If you have the option >of using an engine-driven fuel pump (e.g.: Lyc. or Continental) I would use >it - backed up by a Facet electrical pump for take-off and landings. I can >also provide back-up with my solenoid Primer for manually supplying three >cylinders, in an emergency. This sounds like you believe that an engine driven fuel pump (cam operated, center-flexed diaphragm with hot engine oil on one side and hydrocarbon-solvent (fuel) on the other all of which is subject to the vibration and temperature variables of being bolted to the engine) is somehow more reliable than an electrically driven fuel pump with one moving part that is not a diaphragm. There are lots of electrically dependent engines flying as well as driving. Lost the single fuel pump in my van a few weeks ago and had to have the car towed for repairs in a shop 150 miles from home. Over the years I've also had diaphragms go south on two engine driven fuel pumps with similar show-stopping results. I'm not sure I'm prepared to say that one pump is x-times better or worse than another pump . . . fact is, either one can and will fail. This is just the fuel delivery side . . . one could have dual electronic ignition systems as well. There's nothing magic about the engine driven fuel pump as a means for warding off evil spirits that strangle engines. The solution is failure tolerance. Design so that no single failure brings down the house. A few years ago, a Long-Ez builder and I concocted this all-electric fuel system with no valves (and no fuel plumbing in the cockpit). http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/All-Elect-Fuel.jpg Combining this plumbing architecture with a reliable power supply (ND alternator combined with less than year-old battery works) provides a level of reliability (few fittings to leak; no valves to jam) that is hard to equal much less beat in any certified configuration I'm aware of. His airplane had sight gages that let him manage fuel transfer. In an RV I think I'd install a photo optical level sensor in the right tank to light a light when the tank was down to 1/3rd and a second to show 2/3rds. When the right side light came on at 1/3, I'd turn on the transfer pump to get the 2/3rds light to come back on. After the second transfer, I'd leave the left tank at 1/3 for duration of flight or until it was absolutely needed for approach to landing. By setting the needle valve in the 4-port primer system to deliver fuel flow of 60-65% power, you have a completely independent means by which you stay airborne after suffering any number of failures in the main fuel delivery system. A couple of years later, John D hit the water after discovering an unanticipated shortcoming in the airplane's fuel system design. Three switches an a couple of lights on the panel sure would have been nice. The Facet pumps, unlike their Bendix thump-thump ancestors are all solid state for controlling solenoid current and have very simple mechanical designs. Further, when they do quit, they don't provide an open hole by which you fill your crankcase with fuel. This system was used to augment an engine driven fuel pump, hence the label "Fuel Boost" on the pump to the carburetor. Should I sense loss of the engine driven pump, I think I would opt to descend on the primer-port system to avoid the possibility of diluting the oil and/or overflowing the crankcase with fuel. I think there's reason to belive this system would perform as well or better with no engine driven fuel pump at all. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Load dump issues
> > >Bob, > >I have done a fair amount of testing a couple of years ago, working with the >TVS devices, including the larger sized versions. > >In my experience, they have not been adequate, alone, to prevent over >voltage spikes on load dumps, even from smaller alternators. > >They help. But I have blown some of them on load dumps. Have you taken any energy measurements on the load (battery)-dump phenomenon? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Scott Hersha" <shersha(at)fuse.net>
Subject: Re: Flap motor overload?
Date: Feb 23, 2004
I guess it depends on your local FSDO. Mine says that you can carry someone with you if that person is required as a part a the phase I flight test. For example, you need someone to record flight test data that you are unable to record because of workload requirements while flying a particular maneuver, or you need someone to look out for traffic while you are simulating (hood) IFR flight while certifying the installation of an IFR panel. Read the regulation. It's not open to interpretation and it's fairly clearcut. Scott Hersha ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Flap motor overload? > > > > > > You may carry a flight engineer during your flyoff. > > > NO you can not. > > This is a very wide spread opinion that is a misinterpretation of one of the > paragraphs in the regs and is only second, in popularity, allows a flight > instructor during the fly off. Lots of wishful thinking that is completely > incorrect. > > I attended the Washington Aviation Conference on Feb 21, 2004. I personally > discussed this subject with the FAA reps and they said absolutely not > allowed. > > I also discussed it with my Insurance Broker and he said the owners and acft > insurance would also be voided. > > The above was the result of a heated debate in the local EAA chapter as both > reasons were being used by several members to justify 2 in the cockpit > during the 40 hours. > > Bob's right on this. > > Paul > EAA Tech Coun, Flight Advsor > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Scott Hersha" <shersha(at)fuse.net>
Subject: Re: Flap motor overload?
Date: Feb 23, 2004
If your insurance company will cover you to fly your first flight, then they should cover you when you need a second person to validate, record, or whatever phase I flight test. That other person doesn't have to be a pilot, in fact, that other person cannot function as a pilot on any phase I flight test flight. He/she is only there to record data or perform some other required function(look out for traffic while you are under the hood) that is required for you to perform while conducting your phase I flight test. That person cannot give instruction. If you need instruction, it has to be accomplished under part 91 and part 61 either in a certified airplane, or an experimental airplane operating in phase II, but not for hire. The FAA will not allow you to give rides in phase I, however, if for safety reasons, you need a second person for the above mentioned reasons, it is permitted under the regulations. Scott Hersha ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Flap motor overload? > > Having a second person in the cockpit is strictly prohibited by FARs for our > amateur Built planes. Could generate a lot of problems both with the FAA and > the insurance company. > > Cy Galley > Editor, EAA Safety Programs > cgalley(at)qcbc.org or sportpilot(at)eaa.org > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan(at)chartermi.net> > To: > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Flap motor overload? > > > > > > > You may carry a flight engineer during your flyoff. > > > > > >I've blown the fuse on my flaps when they reach the full up position > > (Van's > > > >unit in my -6A) twice now in 2 days (5 amp first, tried 7.5 & still > blew- > > yes > > > > > A motor that draws only 3-5A will draw 10-20A inrush during > > > startup. It would be very useful to get some current measurements > > > from your flap system while in flight. When your flyoff is > > > done and you can carry an assistant, it would be pretty easy > > > to do and share this data with the list. Post a note when > > > you're ready and let's talk about the setup. In the mean time > > > try a 10A fuse. > > > > > > Bob . . . > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Scott Hersha" <shersha(at)fuse.net>
Subject: Re: Flap motor overload?
Date: Feb 23, 2004
My operating limitations did not list anybody specifically for my phase I flight test. However, I was allowed to carry someone if required as a part of my phase I flight test, not a passenger, as long as that person was necessary for the testing being done. Scott Hersha ----- Original Message ----- From: "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Flap motor overload? > > Here's what Advisory Circular 20-27F, Certification and Operation of Amateur > Built Aircraft says about it taking someone along during the flight test > period: > > 13. PHASE 1 FLIGHT TESTING. > e. Restrictions > (1) Carrying Passengers. You may not carry passengers while you are > restricted to the flight test area or during any portion of your Phase I > flight test program. We suggest you use a tape or video recorder for > recording readings and other similar tasks. If you need an additional > crewmember for a particular flight test, specify that in your application > program letter for the airworthiness certificate. We will list this need in > your operating limitations. > (2) Flight Instruction. You may not receive flight instruction during your > flight test. > > Terry > > > > > You may carry a flight engineer during your flyoff. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Scott Hersha" <shersha(at)fuse.net>
Subject: Re: Headset noise
Date: Feb 23, 2004
Bob, I connected the filter between the bus and the power lead to my #1 COM and it worked like a charm. This was a new filter with a 10uf capacitor. I also wired the other filter I made with the 220uf capacitor the same way to my #2 COM. It works just as well as #1. I can't tell any difference. I now have a quiet, clear headset with no noise...Yea!!! Scott Hersha ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Headset noise > > > > >Bob, > > I built and installed the noise filter you describe from Radio Shack, > > except it came with a 220uf capacitor rather than the 10uf suggested in > > your plans. > > The 10uf is what used to come with it. Pleased to see something > bigger being supplied now. > > > > It filtered out all the noise.....even most of the radio volume. With > > the volume on max I can barely hear it. If I use a 10uf, will I get my > > volume back and still filter out the noise? > > The filter is intended for use only in the power supply > lead . . . it should have nothing to do with the intensity > of desired signals. Sounds like you've wired it into one > of your audio leads instead of the power lead. > > > I had it connected to the power line to my audio amp and it filtered > > everything, alternator, strobes, fuel pump, very effectively. Just > > turning off my com radio also stops all the noise. Should I try putting > > the filter on the radio power line? > > That's a reasonable thing to try. > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Load dump issues
Date: Feb 23, 2004
From: "George Braly" <gwbraly(at)gami.com>
IA0KDQpCb2IsICBJIGhhdmUgbm90IHRyaWVkIHRvIG1lYXN1cmUgdGhlIGVuZXJneSBpbiB0aGUg bG9hZCBkdW1wIGV2ZW50LiAgV2hlbiBJIHN0YXJ0ZWQgb2JzZXJ2aW5nIHNvbWUgY29tcG9uZW50 IGRhbWFnZSwgSSBzdGFydGVkIHRvIHRyeSB0byBjb250cm9sIGl0LiAgICBUaGlzIHdhcyB3aXRo IGFuIGFsdGVybmF0b3IgcHVsbGluZyBhYm91dCAzNSB0byA0MCBhbXBzLg0KDQpJIHRyaWVkIHRo ZSBlYXN5IHN0dWZmIGZpcnN0LCAgYW5kIHRoZSA1S1dhdHQgVFZTIGRldmljZSB3YXMgbXkgc2Vj b25kIGVmZm9ydCBhZnRlciB0aGUgMS41Sy4NCg0KUmVnYXJkcywgIEdlb3JnZQ0KDQogDQoNCg0K DQpBdCAxMDo1MSBBTSAyLzE0LzIwMDQgLTA2MDAsIHlvdSB3cm90ZToNCj4tLT4gQWVyb0VsZWN0 cmljLUxpc3QgbWVzc2FnZSBwb3N0ZWQgYnk6IEdlb3JnZSBCcmFseSA8Z3dicmFseUBnYW1pLmNv bT4NCj4NCj4NCj5Cb2IsDQo+DQo+SSBoYXZlIGRvbmUgYSBmYWlyIGFtb3VudCBvZiB0ZXN0aW5n IGEgY291cGxlIG9mIHllYXJzIGFnbywgd29ya2luZyB3aXRoIHRoZQ0KPlRWUyBkZXZpY2VzLCAg aW5jbHVkaW5nICB0aGUgbGFyZ2VyIHNpemVkIHZlcnNpb25zLg0KPg0KPkluIG15IGV4cGVyaWVu Y2UsIHRoZXkgaGF2ZSBub3QgYmVlbiBhZGVxdWF0ZSwgYWxvbmUsIHRvIHByZXZlbnQgb3Zlcg0K PnZvbHRhZ2Ugc3Bpa2VzIG9uIGxvYWQgZHVtcHMsIGV2ZW4gZnJvbSBzbWFsbGVyIGFsdGVybmF0 b3JzLg0KPg0KPlRoZXkgaGVscC4gIEJ1dCBJIGhhdmUgYmxvd24gc29tZSBvZiB0aGVtIG9uIGxv YWQgZHVtcHMuDQoNCiAgIEhhdmUgeW91IHRha2VuIGFueSBlbmVyZ3kgbWVhc3VyZW1lbnRzIG9u IHRoZSBsb2FkIChiYXR0ZXJ5KS1kdW1wDQogICBwaGVub21lbm9uPw0KDQogICBCb2IgLiAuIC4N Cg0KDQo ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: Dual fuel pumps
Date: Feb 23, 2004
For the record a mechanical fuel pump on an airplane has two diaphragms and if the fuel side diaphragm ruptures it pumps fuel out of a vent that should be vented overboard. I am not certain every aircraft engine has a pump with this feature but they do have dual diaphragms specifically so they will not fill the engine block with fuel. Engine driven pumps do fail but usually only because they are used beyond there normal service life that being 3000 hours. Seems that I had an in-tank electric fuel pump fail on two cars before 105,000 miles which is roughly equal to 2100 hours. The problem with electric fuel pumps in cars is the fuel contamination from the everyday pump gas. Much more so then aviation fuel. The electric pump has a sock filter and when it gets dirty it causes the pump to continually work harder until it fails. I have consider doing the submerged pump in each tank or making a central sump with easy access for maintenance because pushing fuel eliminates most vapor lock stories. Two electric pumps may be a good way to go but it is hard to beat a pump that does not rely on electric power. Redundancy speaks loudly to this airman. Dale Martin Lewiston, ID LEZ-235 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Dual fuel pumps > > > >Mark: Assuming that you will be flying a low-wing (i.e.: NOT gravity-fed > >fuel) I personally would not fly with you in a plane like that. You would > >obviously have these two Facet pumps on completely different electrical > >systems - but you may end up having your face stuck in the cockpit looking > >for switches while your plane staggers to hold itself above stall on a short > >field take-off. Sounds like a statistic. You can make it work - but not > >simply. Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. If you have the option > >of using an engine-driven fuel pump (e.g.: Lyc. or Continental) I would use > >it - backed up by a Facet electrical pump for take-off and landings. I can > >also provide back-up with my solenoid Primer for manually supplying three > >cylinders, in an emergency. > > This sounds like you believe that an engine driven fuel pump > (cam operated, center-flexed diaphragm with hot engine oil > on one side and hydrocarbon-solvent (fuel) on the other all > of which is subject to the vibration and temperature variables > of being bolted to the engine) is somehow more reliable than an > electrically driven fuel pump with one moving part that > is not a diaphragm. > > There are lots of electrically dependent engines flying as well > as driving. Lost the single fuel pump in my van a few weeks ago > and had to have the car towed for repairs in a shop 150 miles from > home. Over the years I've also had diaphragms go south on two engine > driven fuel pumps with similar show-stopping results. I'm not sure > I'm prepared to say that one pump is x-times better or worse than > another pump . . . fact is, either one can and will fail. This > is just the fuel delivery side . . . one could have dual electronic > ignition systems as well. There's nothing magic about the engine > driven fuel pump as a means for warding off evil spirits > that strangle engines. > > The solution is failure tolerance. Design so that no single failure > brings down the house. A few years ago, a Long-Ez builder and I > concocted this all-electric fuel system with no valves (and no > fuel plumbing in the cockpit). > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/All-Elect-Fuel.jpg > > Combining this plumbing architecture with a reliable > power supply (ND alternator combined with less than > year-old battery works) provides a level of reliability > (few fittings to leak; no valves to jam) that is hard > to equal much less beat in any certified configuration > I'm aware of. > > His airplane had sight gages that let him manage fuel > transfer. In an RV I think I'd install a photo optical > level sensor in the right tank to light a light > when the tank was down to 1/3rd and a second to show > 2/3rds. When the right side light came on at 1/3, I'd > turn on the transfer pump to get the 2/3rds light > to come back on. After the second transfer, I'd > leave the left tank at 1/3 for duration of flight > or until it was absolutely needed for approach to > landing. > > By setting the needle valve in the 4-port primer > system to deliver fuel flow of 60-65% power, you have > a completely independent means by which you stay airborne > after suffering any number of failures in the main fuel > delivery system. > > A couple of years later, John D hit the water after > discovering an unanticipated shortcoming in the airplane's > fuel system design. Three switches an a couple of lights > on the panel sure would have been nice. > > The Facet pumps, unlike their Bendix thump-thump ancestors > are all solid state for controlling solenoid current > and have very simple mechanical designs. Further, when > they do quit, they don't provide an open hole by which you > fill your crankcase with fuel. This system was used to augment > an engine driven fuel pump, hence the label "Fuel Boost" > on the pump to the carburetor. Should I sense loss of the > engine driven pump, I think I would opt to descend on the > primer-port system to avoid the possibility of diluting the > oil and/or overflowing the crankcase with fuel. I think there's > reason to belive this system would perform as well or better > with no engine driven fuel pump at all. > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Benford2(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 23, 2004
Subject: Re: Flap motor overload?
In a message dated 2/23/2004 9:18:07 AM Mountain Standard Time, cgalley(at)qcbc.org writes: > > Having a second person in the cockpit is strictly prohibited by FARs for our > amateur Built planes. Could generate a lot of problems both with the FAA and > the insurance company. > > Cy Galley > Editor, EAA Safety Programs > cgalley(at)qcbc.org or sportpilot(at)eaa.org > > Some of these homebuilts get kinda complex and a second person would be a safety factor. Tell me, What does Boeing do on their first flights of new and unproven designs??? Is there just one pilot??? After all they all start life as a homebuilt... Ben Haas N801BH. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net>
Subject: Two alternators-using total rated combined output
Date: Feb 23, 2004
Bob, going way back to last August - you suggested it was "not simple" and "probably not cost effective" to install, for example, 2ea 20 amp alternators and plan on loading them up for near 40 amps steady load - that "balancing" and not "causing 1 to produce output over its rated value" was a big deal. (I'm paraphrasing & summarizing from the e-mail which is quoted below this.) I was just thinking today of installing two John Deere PM 20 amp alternators, using 2 different belts, so as to have a more fault tolerant system requiring 32 to 35 amp steady load, total. I have roughly analyzed my night/IFR system to be running about 32 amps, steady, under heaviest loads. Without asking you to design the system for me - I respect the work load you already have - could you give a quick tutorial to guide me thru the design and test of such a system? (or persuade me it's too hard to do with my lack of knowledge and test equip)? Sounds like 1) the "magic" has to be in the "voltage regulator(s)", not just how the system is wired up; and 2) the most serious problem is 1 "20 amp RATED alternator" actually having the ability to put out much more, but at the expense of running over its "rating" and thus overheating and suffering a "stress" it was not designed for - probably the same for the REGULATOR that is also rated for 20 amps. - What is the "simplest" way to a) have the two identical regulators and alternators each share roughly 1/2 of the load, whatever it is, or, b) allow 1 alternator to go up to its rated output and then have any subsequent increase in load be picked up by the other alternator? Are there other "approaches" to this? David Carter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Alternator > > > > >Tom, > > > >This is an answer Bob gave just a few days ago: > > > >That is exactly what happens in certified ships. Figure Z-12 > > is not recommended for new design. It's an easy fix to add a > > second alternator to an existing airplane. This this case, both > > alternators are ON but the aux alternator regulator is set > > for about 1 volt below normal bus voltage. Soooo . . . with > > the main alternator working, the aux alternator relaxes. > > > > If the main alternator quits, the bus voltage sags, the > > aux alternator comes alive automatically. The SB-1 reglator > > is fitted with a circuit to illuminate an "AUX ALT LOADED" > > warning light and flash it if the aux alternator output > > is higher than 20A . . . reduce load until light stops > > flashing. > > > > > >Terry > > > > > > > > I've been trying to understand what would happen if both BC 40amp and BC20 > >amp where on at the same time. Would this give you 60 amp capicity or would > >one sleep because the alt 's set point are not ever precisely the same. > > Thanks Tom Reading RV7 wiring > > When you parallel alternators with an intent to load them > simultaneously, getting them to share total load is > possible but not trivial and, in my not so humble opinion, > not cost effective. > > I would resist the notion that by having both a 40A > and 20A alternator tied together that one has a 60A > total capacity. This is strictly true only in a case of > regulators designed to distribute load properly between > two alternators. > > One might argue that should one alternator become > overloaded, it's output sags so that the remaining > alternator will pick up the difference thus making > the 40+20=60 anyhow. True . . . as long as the current > limit on both alternators is imposed by magnetic limits > of the respective machines. For example, the SD-20 as > installed in the Bonanza is rated at 20A . . . but being > a 40A machine at heart, it WILL put out more if you > load it up. However, COOLING is limited in this > installation and operation above the 20A rating will > put it at risk of letting all its smoke out. > > I've encountered VERY few cases where it made sense > to add capacity of two alternators to justify > loading a system to a value greater than either > alternator will support. If you think you really need > to do this, let's discuss the finer details and > make sure you're not going to be disappointed. > > Further, be aware that to do it right suggests > a regulator designed to truly parallel two > machines. The Cessna 303 is the only airplane I > am familiar with that had that capability. Lost > the contract on that regulator system by less than > $10 a regulator . . . the one they ended up with > didn't work very well. > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeffrey W. Skiba" <jskiba(at)icosa.net>
Subject: Garmin 430 install manual
Date: Feb 24, 2004
I seem to remember that there was somewhere to download the install manual for garmin products in particular the 430? But I can not find it on there site, Anybody know where I can download this ?? Thanks Jeff. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "ivorphillips" <ivor(at)ivorphillips.flyer.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Garmin 430 install manual
Date: Feb 24, 2004
I can send it as a PDF file if you want? let me know regards Ivor Phillips XS486 London UK CM Installed,working on rudder cables, trial fit top and wings ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey W. Skiba" <jskiba(at)icosa.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430 install manual > > I seem to remember that there was somewhere to download the install manual > for garmin products in particular the 430? But I can not find it on there > site, Anybody know where I can download this ?? > > Thanks > Jeff. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeffrey W. Skiba" <jskiba(at)icosa.net>
Subject: Garmin 430 and Diplexer/splitter
Date: Feb 24, 2004
Quick question, On a Garmin 430 or 530 for that matter is a Diplexer/splitter required if you have Bob Archer (like the one found at http://www.vansairforce.net/articles/vorwingtipantenna/plans24bit.jpg ) Wing tip NAV antennas ?? One in each wing tip Total of TWO. I am trying to get a hold of an install manual to confirm this for my self but a recent contestation brought up the topic and would like answer faster than I will probably have my hands on an install manual Thanks Jeff. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Garmin 430 and Diplexer/splitter
Date: Feb 24, 2004
> > Quick question, > > On a Garmin 430 or 530 for that matter is a Diplexer/splitter > required if you have Bob Archer (like the one found at > http://www.vansairforce.net/articles/vorwingtipantenna/plans24 bit.jpg ) Wing tip NAV antennas ?? One in each wing tip Total of TWO. Is the second nav antenna for a second nav radio? If so, you need one coax from one nav antenna brought to a splitter near the 430, then a splitter to feed the nav/loc and gs portions of the 430. I got my splitter from my local avionics guy. Alex Peterson Maple Grove, MN RV6-A N66AP 442 hours http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Headset noise
> >Bob, > I connected the filter between the bus and the power lead to my #1 COM >and it worked like a charm. This was a new filter with a 10uf capacitor. I >also wired the other filter I made with the 220uf capacitor the same way to >my #2 COM. It works just as well as #1. I can't tell any difference. I >now have a quiet, clear headset with no noise...Yea!!! >Scott Hersha Success is always gratifying and I'm pleased that you're pleased. The nagging question concerns why you needed to install these filters in the first place. Unfortunately, the answer lays in detailed analysis of the differences between your system before filters were installed and other systems that do not need filters. Not trying to spotlight your efforts here Scott, but your experience is perhaps illustrative of the value in "doing a lot of things that have never been done in 200,000+ certified ships" without demonstrable reasons. We often field questions about suggestions printed in the 'Connection with respect to architecture and techniques. Folks ask why they should go to all that trouble when their C-172 doesn't have it and "it works just fine." It would be interesting to see how the variables in your project stacked up to force adding filters to the radios but it's probably not a practical effort. The main thing is that your airplane's utility, performance and comfort levels are now satisfactory to your needs. We'll have to save the harvesting of knowledge for another time and airplane. A lot of my work at RAC involves harvesting knowledge on designs already in production . . . some for 30 years or more. In these cases, fixes to problems are retrofitted to hundreds of aircraft and it's never easy or cheap. There's a plaque I saw on the wall of an engineer at one of our suppliers a few years ago that read: "If you don't have time to do it right the first time, how will you ever find the time to do it over?" Here's hoping that the remaining efforts to get your project completed are easy and cheap! Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Fiveonepw(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 24, 2004
Subject: Flap motor testing
Thanks to all for your thoughts on the flap fuse failure fiasco- lot's of good info... The following is long, tedious and boring (unless you're an electrical masochist!) so delete now if so inclined............ Test results using Fluke 87 MM (10 amps max. current) connected at fuse block. Flap motor (motion brand) is wired direct through a quality NKK DPDT switch of the proper rating (no relays) using 18ga. My meter does have an "analog" scale along the bottom of the display that responds very quickly, and it did go off-scale the instant the switch is first turned on indicating over 10a on start. This was also confirmed (If I did it correctly) by the min/max function that records for 100 msec. which indicated "OL" or "out of range" for the instrument. This confirms Bob's statement about inrush current. Below are my readings, as best as I could tell while watching altimeter, airspeed, MM, and an occasional glance for traffic (darn, no dang "required crew member"!) This is all done with 10 amp fuse installed. On the ground, engine off- cycled flaps repeatedly in both directions trying to get a failure. Even held switch after full travel many times for as much as 5 seconds with motor freewheeling, no failure, up or down. Traveling Down: .8a Freewheeling Down: 1.9a Traveling Up: .9a Freewheeling Up: 1.7a (anyone know if this would indicate that the motion actuator has a a friction clutch in it?) Same values with engine running (LVWM off) at idle. Tested again at runup (1700 rpm) and Down required .9 indicating harder work against propwash. Up netted .8 for same reason- looks like we're getting good data... Climbed to 3000', trimmed for 100 mph indicated. Naturally these readings are dynamic as the flaps change angle and airspeed falls, and the meter display lags a little, but after repeated attempts, the values are as close as I could get them by timing the extension/retraction - I'd release the switch while watching the meter and verify flap had stopped at proper position- if not, I'd re-do it. (again, no extra crewman!) Traveling Down at 20 degrees: 2.0a Traveling Up at 20 degrees: .7a Trimmed for 90 mph. Traveling Down at 40 degrees: 3.4a Traveling Up at 40 degrees: .7a Switch held in Up position with flaps Up in flight (motor freewheeling) 1.3a (don't know why this is different than when sitting on ground) One interesting thing I did notice was that when fully extending the flaps at 80-90mph to the point that the motor was freewheeling, or about 43 degrees on my plane, the current would rise continuously until the end of travel, going just over 5a at full extension, then as the motor began to freewheel, the current dropped to 1.2 until I released the switch- not sure how the actuator is constructed, but the air load is obviously not held by motor power alone... Flaps performed flawlessly throughout this regimen, as did the rest of the plane (omigawd what an awesome machine! - can you tell I like it?!) Now here's the clincher. I had a little time to kill before dark and did some T&G's. The first was pretty darn acceptable, flaps raised before taking off again and extended normally on approach. On the second T&G I let the bottom fall out a few feet up and got a bounce. Again raised the flaps before taking off, all is normal. On downwind I hit the flap switch at 100 mph and NOTHING! Fuse blown again! Same as both times before. Open for all ideas at this point! Mark Phillips - N51PW - ONLY 1.9 HOURS TIL I GET OUT OF MY CAGE!!!!! 8-) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Phil Birkelbach" <phil(at)petrasoft.net>
Subject: Re: Two alternators-using total rated combined output
Date: Feb 24, 2004
> - What is the "simplest" way to a) have the two identical regulators > and alternators each share roughly 1/2 of the load, whatever it is, or, b) > allow 1 alternator to go up to its rated output and then have any subsequent > increase in load be picked up by the other alternator? Are there other > "approaches" to this? > > David Carter The simplest way would be to simply split the loads. Have two electrical systems. Put Comm 1 on buss 1 and Comm 2 on buss 2, put the taxi light on one side the landing light on the other. Two smaller batteries and a crossover contactor for starting, and for single alternator operations. Put a load meter on each one so you know what is going on and you've got it. This also builds in a level of redundancy. I think Bob has a 2 alternator, 2 battery system in the Z diagrams somewhere. There are probably some voltage regulators out there that can handle the load sharing but I doubt that any of it would be 'simple'. Godspeed, Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Baffles / Cowling http://www.myrv7.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2004
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Electric fuel pump circuit
> >Bob & Listers, > I am currently modifying your Z-11 drawing for my specific RV-8A. I > recall that you recently recommended the use of relays for circuits > drawing over 5 amps. My Airflow Performance electric fuel pump draws > about 5 - 6 amps in rush. Once running, it draws 3.5 to 4 amps. Do I need > a relay on this circuit? Would you recommend installing this circuit on > the main, endurance or battery bus? I have an engine with 1 magneto and 1 > Jeff Rose electronic ignition. Does your fuel pump run all the time or is it a backup for an engine driven pump? Bob . . . ----------------------------------------- ( Experience and common sense cannot be ) ( replaced with policy and procedures. ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ----------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Flap motor testing
Date: Feb 24, 2004
From: "Nightingale Michael" <NightingaleMichaelV(at)JohnDeere.com>
Possible heat build up in fuse from first two T&G's. Is the fuse cartridge a SLO-BLOW or a standard link type? Mike 90259 wiring -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Fiveonepw(at)aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Flap motor testing Thanks to all for your thoughts on the flap fuse failure fiasco- lot's of good info... The following is long, tedious and boring (unless you're an electrical masochist!) so delete now if so inclined............ Test results using Fluke 87 MM (10 amps max. current) connected at fuse block. Flap motor (motion brand) is wired direct through a quality NKK DPDT switch of the proper rating (no relays) using 18ga. My meter does have an "analog" scale along the bottom of the display that responds very quickly, and it did go off-scale the instant the switch is first turned on indicating over 10a on start. This was also confirmed (If I did it correctly) by the min/max function that records for 100 msec. which indicated "OL" or "out of range" for the instrument. This confirms Bob's statement about inrush current. Below are my readings, as best as I could tell while watching altimeter, airspeed, MM, and an occasional glance for traffic (darn, no dang "required crew member"!) This is all done with 10 amp fuse installed. On the ground, engine off- cycled flaps repeatedly in both directions trying to get a failure. Even held switch after full travel many times for as much as 5 seconds with motor freewheeling, no failure, up or down. Traveling Down: .8a Freewheeling Down: 1.9a Traveling Up: .9a Freewheeling Up: 1.7a (anyone know if this would indicate that the motion actuator has a a friction clutch in it?) Same values with engine running (LVWM off) at idle. Tested again at runup (1700 rpm) and Down required .9 indicating harder work against propwash. Up netted .8 for same reason- looks like we're getting good data... Climbed to 3000', trimmed for 100 mph indicated. Naturally these readings are dynamic as the flaps change angle and airspeed falls, and the meter display lags a little, but after repeated attempts, the values are as close as I could get them by timing the extension/retraction - I'd release the switch while watching the meter and verify flap had stopped at proper position- if not, I'd re-do it. (again, no extra crewman!) Traveling Down at 20 degrees: 2.0a Traveling Up at 20 degrees: .7a


February 10, 2004 - February 24, 2004

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-cx