AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-dg
June 04, 2004 - June 18, 2004
(with 10A
on the e-bus it would be 2.4%).
However, each should be happy with the system he wants to achieve, both
types are for sure a good choice, so it's up to you to decide.
My 2 cents
Werner (Glastar VFR)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <wernerschneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Drops
>
> Bob and Brian
>
> Points to consider
>
> Approximately 1/2V is not trivial depending on your wiring design. An
e-bus
> load thru a diode is a very common design. At a battery load of 2-10 amps
> you get more power out of your Xponder and or Com with 12v vs 11.5v and
your
> battery will be usable longer. Eventually the battery dies but its end of
> life voltage is always effectively 1/2V lower with the subject diode which
> can be significant time in flight duration depending on the load.
>
> Consider the data for an Odyssey battery. 1/2V is 40% of the total energy.
> From the Odyssey specifications the following.
>
> 12.3V = 60% state of charge
> 11.8V = 20% state of charge.
>
> Note the above voltages are for a battery that is unloaded and thus not
> directly applicable. Loaded voltages will be lower and load dependent. I
> reference this info to illustrate the point that 1/2V is not a small
> difference in usable energy at end of life voltage as noted later.
>
> As the data is nearly linear you get a 40% loss in usable capacity
> regardless of where you define end of life voltage. There is only 10% left
> at 11.7V plus what ever diode drop is in play. I do not know about the
rest
> of you, but I like the extra voltage to my com and xponder where the added
> voltage can (and typically does)increase power output and perhaps make the
> difference in being heard and "seen on the radar".
>
> With battery end of charge around 11.6V a "normal diode has dropped the
> e-bus voltage to below 11.0V. Even equipment that "meets" DO-160 may not
be
> required to below that V as DO-160 has no requirement for equipment to
even
> work below 11.0V unless it was specifically designed to do so and that is
> optional.
>
> So lets assume your com requires 11.0V minimum and that it does meet
DO-160.
> If you use a Radio shack diode vs a Schottky you can shorten your time to
> the end of life (11.0V e-bus ) with a 4.0 amp average load by 1/4 or more.
> Thats a lot!
>
> Sure none of us ever expect to be in a case where we need every drop of
> energy from a battery to make it safely to the airport, but why not design
a
> system that is simple (no extra switches to bypass diodes) KISS and use
the
> best part for the job not just what can be made to work under normal
usage.
>
> Also reducing the heat load (typically behind the panel) is not
> insignificant to me.
>
> It never ceases to amaze me that people will spend $50,000 on a avionics
> package and then quibble over the difference in the lowest cost battery or
a
> more expensive diode that improves emergency operations.
>
> Paul
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
>
>Bob and Brian
>
>Points to consider
>
>Approximately 1/2V is not trivial depending on your wiring design. An e-bus
>load thru a diode is a very common design. At a battery load of 2-10 amps
>you get more power out of your Xponder and or Com with 12v vs 11.5v and your
>battery will be usable longer. Eventually the battery dies but its end of
>life voltage is always effectively 1/2V lower with the subject diode which
>can be significant time in flight duration depending on the load.
. . . you're still missing the point. The manner in which an
e-bus normal feed diode is used never causes BATTERY energy to flow
through the diode to the E-bus.
The ONLY time the e-bus normal feed diode is expected to route power
to the e-bus is while the ALTERNATOR is functioning and the main bus
is operating at 13.8 or greater. Under these conditions, performance
differences for e-bus powered devices for 13.3 volts versus 12.8 volts
is indeed trivial. Further, when you have a 40A alternator providing
power (560 watts), then the difference between tossing off 5 watts
(Schottky diode) versus 10 watts (PN junction diode) is also trivial
and this assumes a 10A continuous duty load on the e-bus. If the e-bus
loads are on the order of 5A, then we're talking about a 2.5 watt
differential.
>It never ceases to amaze me that people will spend $50,000 on a avionics
>package and then quibble over the difference in the lowest cost battery or a
>more expensive diode that improves emergency operations.
You can use any diode you wish for EMERGENCY operations, I prefer to
use NO diodes during BATTERY-ONLY operations. The whole idea of
the e-bus is to keep an EMERGENCY situation from existing. This was
the thrust of Chapter 17. The AOPA dark-n-stormy-night story featured
in the 'Connection could have and should have been a non-story except
for the short-sightedness of both the OEM and regulatory community
in controlling the design of light aircraft electrical systems.
The diode bridge rectifier was chosen because of its ease of mounting
(has mounting hole, needs no electrical insulation from airframe) and
ease of connection (fast-on terminals). The selection wasn't based on
electrical performance . . . electrical performance was not
significant. This product was selected because it was inexpensive,
readily available from dozens of off-the-shelf sources, and easy to
mount. This device has a very high order probability of
successful implementation by the neophyte airplane builder. If there
were a Schottky based product available in the same package, it would
indeed be more attractive if one wished to "quibble" over a 5-watt
differential under operating conditions where the system has plenty
of watts to burn. However, since "watts" are not significant, it seems
more practical to concentrate on mechanical features that made it easy
for the OBAM aircraft builder to implement an e-bus in his project with a
minimum cost and risk.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rocker Switch Problems-Followup |
>
>
> I checked out the "TP" switches. They would require a major
> rework of my
>panel. Looks like I will have the operators re-engraved on the upper half
>and live with it. Thanks again. Scott
One last note. The part number you quoted has an "FBA" phrase
which indicates no lamp installed. If you want some 12 lamps
installed, you'll need the "FBC" series switches.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmfpublic(at)comcast.net |
(Aeroelectric-List)
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
Listers,
This topic just illustrates how difficult it is to discuss OBAM electrical systems.
There are so many ways of operating the system, and so many choices to make.
I'm with Bob on this thread, as the power drop through the diode while on
alternator power is, to me, negligible. Recall that Bob wrote the 'Connection
over a period of years, and Schottky diodes have been rare until recently.
As he pointed out above, the e-bus sees no diode drop on battery power because
the pilot turns on the battery to e-bus switch. Thus, calculating the "lost"
available power while on battery only operation is not applicable, as there
is _no_ diode drop at this time.
Of course, after safety, there is aesthetics for those with the time and inclination.
The OBAM aircraft lets you make these choices, and you are more likely
to understand how to use your craft in an emergency having participated in this
thought process.
Jim Foerster J400, ready to wire.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Will all those aeroelectric-listers who had the nickname "Mr. Brain" in
school please raise their hands?
Regards,
Eric M. Jones (Mr. Brain)
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mr. Brain OT |
Sorry...I was "Wizard" ...
Harley Dixon
Eric M. Jones wrote:
>
>Will all those aeroelectric-listers who had the nickname "Mr. Brain" in
>school please raise their hands?
>
>Regards,
>Eric M. Jones (Mr. Brain)
>www.PerihelionDesign.com
>113 Brentwood Drive
>Southbridge MA 01550-2705
>Phone (508) 764-2072
>Email: emjones(at)charter.net
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Glauser" <david.glauser(at)xpsystems.com> |
Heh. "Dr. Dave".
dg
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Harley
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Mr. Brain OT
-->
Sorry...I was "Wizard" ...
Harley Dixon
Eric M. Jones wrote:
>-->
>
>Will all those aeroelectric-listers who had the nickname "Mr. Brain" in
>school please raise their hands?
>
>Regards,
>Eric M. Jones (Mr. Brain)
>www.PerihelionDesign.com
>113 Brentwood Drive
>Southbridge MA 01550-2705
>Phone (508) 764-2072
>Email: emjones(at)charter.net
>
>
>
>
==
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Drops
> The point that your xpdr and comm will transmit with higher power is a
good one. Since you will directly connect your e-buss to the battery in the
case of alternator failure, the end-point voltage relative to diode drop is
a non-issue.
>
Why would I need to do that. Its an extra switch possibly a CB and its a
direct battery connection that needs to be special wiring etc.
Use the right diode and there is no reason for such an extra switch. Also
then one needs to rememner its a direct connection to the battery and one
more thing to be sure is off when shutting down.
In my design I do nothing beyond diverting to the closest airport in the
case of an alternator failure. No special switches to fool with, no
additional cockpit load.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Robinson <crj(at)lucubration.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mr. Brain OT |
Eric M. Jones wrote:
>
> Will all those aeroelectric-listers who had the nickname "Mr. Brain" in
> school please raise their hands?
What about nerd?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
> . . . you're still missing the point. The manner in which an
> e-bus normal feed diode is used never causes BATTERY energy to flow
> through the diode to the E-bus.
In your latest design but not in many designs including mine.
> The diode bridge rectifier was chosen because of its ease of mounting
> (has mounting hole, needs no electrical insulation from airframe) and
> ease of connection (fast-on terminals). The selection wasn't based on
> electrical performance . . . electrical performance was not
> significant. This product was selected because it was inexpensive,
> readily available from dozens of off-the-shelf sources, and easy to
> mount. This device has a very high order probability of
> successful implementation by the neophyte airplane builder. If there
> were a Schottky based product available in the same package,
But it is available in a simple bolt down no insulation and bolt on lugs Not
exactly the same package but very simple to do.
> it would
> indeed be more attractive if one wished to "quibble" over a 5-watt
> differential under operating conditions where the system has plenty
> of watts to burn. However, since "watts" are not significant, it seems
> more practical to concentrate on mechanical features that made it easy
> for the OBAM aircraft builder to implement an e-bus in his project
with a
> minimum cost and risk.
Again you presume a design where additional switch(s) are needed to switch
over to direct battery feed. Hopefully you will agree that lower cockpit
pilot load and fewer connections and switches to throw is better and more
reliable in a real world situation where automatic power routing is more
likely to happen than manual thinking in a rare emergency.
Two truely independent batteries each feeding the e-bus thru a Schottky
diode provides switchless reliable (more reliable than extra wiring and a
switch in my opinion) e-bus power at minimal voltage loss and more
importantly its automatic. IE no pilot work load.
I am not "quibbling" over 5 watts. I am "quibbling" over the basic design
approach that seems to need a direct electrical connection to the battery
and bypassing the battery master contactor simply because of the
availability of a low v drop diode.
There was a long and thread about the need for keeping the current draw low
the the in any direct battery connections.
But why debate it, let each person decide for themselves. There are several
good solutions to every problem and we should direct our attention to the
many bad ones rather than try to justify one above other good solutions.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
From: <jmfpublic(at)comcast.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Drops
Recall that Bob wrote the 'Connection over a period of years, and Schottky
diodes have been rare until recently. As he pointed out above, the e-bus
sees no diode drop on battery power because the pilot turns on the battery
to e-bus switch. Thus, calculating the "lost" available power while on
battery only operation is not applicable, as there is _no_ diode drop at
this time.
I have had the power schottky diode I am discussing for at least 5 years and
it was not a new design then and in distributor stock at that time. So I
disagree that good and easy to use parts were rare even 5 years ago and more
likely 10 years ago. It does take some time to see what is out there which
is harder to do than going to RS and picking a part off the shelf.
If you go back further Schottky stud diodes have been avaiulable for many
many years and a simple thru hole insulated mount is simple and also off the
shelf. Hardly difficult to do.
As for turning on the e-bus switch consider that with the RS bridge such a
switch is needed.
With a proper Schottky diode there is no need for such a switch or the need
for the pilot to remember to turn it on. Or off later
I have not looked the latest designs in the "Book" but hopefully the
alternator failing does not cause power on the e-bus to fail and the only
reason for such a switch is to get the last of the power from the battery.
BY the way, Hopefully this is not a contest where people take sides and the
most votes wins. It should be open to all ideas and rather than pick at new
ideas consider are that is it just different or is there real advantages. I
would pick a simple no mechanical switch with no addl wiring approach that
was automatic over the switch. This does mean a different design than that
supported by the "Book"
I am not suprised (but disappointed) at the flack this thread is getting. I
was hoping that anything that simplified the electrical design and pilot
work load was an advantage, even if it required some fresh thinking at the
existing aproach.
Comments from many seem to zero in on "because the pilot throws a switch in
an existing design there is no advantage"... and miss the bigger picture
there is no need for the switch in a different, and I submit, better design.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phil Birkelbach" <phil(at)petrasoft.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
What kind of architecture are you talking about? If you plan to simply
divert then it seems to me that you don't need the e-buss or the diode at
all.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Panel
http://www.myrv7.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Drops
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl(at)lloyd.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Drops
>
>
> > The point that your xpdr and comm will transmit with higher power is a
> good one. Since you will directly connect your e-buss to the battery in
the
> case of alternator failure, the end-point voltage relative to diode drop
is
> a non-issue.
> >
>
> Why would I need to do that. Its an extra switch possibly a CB and its a
> direct battery connection that needs to be special wiring etc.
>
> Use the right diode and there is no reason for such an extra switch. Also
> then one needs to rememner its a direct connection to the battery and one
> more thing to be sure is off when shutting down.
>
> In my design I do nothing beyond diverting to the closest airport in the
> case of an alternator failure. No special switches to fool with, no
> additional cockpit load.
>
> Paul
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Robinson <crj(at)lucubration.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Digital Music in the Cockpit |
frequent flyer wrote:
>
> Let me reveal my age and my lack of knowledge. just
> exactly what is an ipod? How does it differ from a PDA
> or a palm pilot? How do you transfer music to it?
http://www.apple.com/ipod/
http://www.apple.com/ipod/specs.html
An iPod is a 4"x2.5"x.75" (largest unit) device that weighs about 6oz. and can
store about 4,000 songs. Depending on how much music you have in your
collection this could in many cases be your entire library. Units with more
storage capacity are also available for music freaks that want to "take it all
with them" (like me, although I use a different player).
The basic concepts and some photos are all in the URLs above. If your music is
on CDs you can use "ripping" software to copy it onto the iPod. You can also
download music from various sources, with various legal implications depending
on where you go. I suspect you don't plan any illegal music downloads; if you
don't know what an Ipod is you probably don't know where to go to GET illegal
music. =) Anything that you own and is on your shelf is fair game, so don't
worry too much about that bit.
If your music is in tape or other "analog" format you have to do a bit more
work - basically you hook your stereo up to your computer and record the items
you want to transfer. The benefit of doing this is that you have a digital
backup at that point that won't deteriorate over time.
The benefits for travel are also fairly significant - one small, lightweight
device can hold an enormous amount of music. Unlike a CD player/changer you
can slice/dice the music various ways using a tool called "playlists" so you
can have song collections to fit various moods or the people you're with.
The iPod is not the only such device. The name for this class of product is
"MP3 Player" and there are dozens of options on the market now. Aside from
car-focused products like the Empeg/Rio (which I use, but it's almost a
dinosaur now; my wife, who has an iPod, snickers at me because I'm still a Rio
fan) and the Phatbox, the iPod is probably the most expensive
consumer-oriented MP3 player on the market. It sells because it has a very
easy-to-use user interface, has a highly-rated tool for loading the player
with songs, is reliable, etc. That doesn't mean you shouldn't consider other
options, but if you have the cash and you don't know what you're doing you may
as well buy quality.
Regards,
Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl(at)lloyd.com>
>To:
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Drops
>
>
> > The point that your xpdr and comm will transmit with higher power is a
>good one. Since you will directly connect your e-buss to the battery in the
>case of alternator failure, the end-point voltage relative to diode drop is
>a non-issue.
> >
>
>Why would I need to do that. Its an extra switch possibly a CB and its a
>direct battery connection that needs to be special wiring etc.
I guess it depends on how far you have to go to get to the airport. If the
airport is close, then it doesn't make any difference. But if you have a
fair ways to go you will want to shed the Main Bus loads to allow longer
battery duration, which means that the feed through the diode is no longer
functioning.
>Use the right diode and there is no reason for such an extra switch. Also
>then one needs to rememner its a direct connection to the battery and one
>more thing to be sure is off when shutting down.
Normally, the E-bus alternate feed would not have been selected, so this
isn't a consideration.
>In my design I do nothing beyond diverting to the closest airport in the
>case of an alternator failure. No special switches to fool with, no
>additional cockpit load.
There are a lot of parts of the world where you could be more than an hour
from the closest airport. How long will you battery last if you are
running all your loads? It is easier to flip two switches to select the
E-bus alternate feed and deselect the battery contactor than it is to
manually shed main bus loads. Plus it is nice to shed the battery
contactor load if you have lost the alternator.
Kevin Horton
RV-8 (Finishing Kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmfpublic(at)comcast.net |
(Aeroelectric-List)
| Subject: | Re: Re: Power Diode Drops |
Paul Messinger wrote in response to Bob:
> . . . you're still missing the point. The manner in which an
> e-bus normal feed diode is used never causes BATTERY energy to flow
> through the diode to the E-bus.
"In your latest design but not in many designs including mine."
Paul, recall that this discussion started on May 31 with Arthur Treff noting that
he had a 1 volt drop to his e-bus through his silicon diode. Arthur noted
that he used diagram Z13, the "all electrical system on a budget." With this
system, if I recall, alternator failure is announced via a low voltage alarm.
The pilot then turns off the battery master contactor, saving that power and
simultaneously cutting off non-essential lighting and loads that can be abandoned.
He also turns on the e-bus to battery switch, maintaining the desired list
of items necessary to complete the flight to the destination.
If you change the architecture, i.e. the schematic, then operation will be different.
I believe that some of us in this discussion thought you were still referring
to the Z13 diagram.
Of course you are right that the Schottky is the desirable choice for battery only
operation where the power goes through the diode. I, too, would prefer that
the pilot not need to throw a switch to maintain the e-bus. However, if you
use two independent batteries to power the e-bus, you would need to have an
avionics master switch that would need to be turned off at the end of the flight,
and also represents a single point of failure. Or have you figured out a
more clever arrangement?
Also, thanks for your measurements of the diode voltage drops at various currents.
Your work with the "load dump" issue is appreciated,too.
Jim Foerster J400, 80%...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 32 Msgs - 06/03/04 |
>I now have an Apple iPod. This is the most fantastic device for playing
music
in the cockpit I have ever found. My entire record and CD collection fits
on
the thing with plenty of room left over for more music in the future. I
don't
need to fumble around with cassettes, CDs, minidisks, or memory cards. Not
only
that but the song you want is always right there. I highly recommend this
as the best solution for portable music in the cockpit.
I think I like the idea of having a lot of music on one device but I can't
see me sitting for hours loading this thing full of music--or is there a
better way? How much time do you have putting your entire collection on
your iPod? Also is there a good website for picking out one of these
devices? I have tried a search for this but end up running in circles.
Dave Ford
RV6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | frequent flyer <jdhcv(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Digital Music in the Cockpit |
Chad, Great info. Thanks for the reply.
Jack
--- Chad Robinson wrote:
> Robinson
>
>
> http://www.apple.com/ipod/
> http://www.apple.com/ipod/specs.html
>
> An iPod is a 4"x2.5"x.75" (largest unit) device that
> weighs about 6oz. and can
> store about 4,000 songs.
__________________________________
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | richard(at)riley.net |
| Subject: | Re: Digital Music in the Cockpit |
The IPOD hard disk tends to head crash above 10,000 feet with just a touch
of turbulence. I found out the hard way
"
Environmental requirements
* Operating temperature: 32 to 95 F (0 to 35 C)
* Non operating temperature: -4 to 113 F (-20 to 45 C)
* Relative humidity: 5% to 95% noncondensing
* Maximum operating altitude: 10,000 feet (3000 m)
At 03:20 PM 6/4/04, you wrote:
>
>frequent flyer wrote:
> >
> > Let me reveal my age and my lack of knowledge. just
> > exactly what is an ipod? How does it differ from a PDA
> > or a palm pilot? How do you transfer music to it?
>
>http://www.apple.com/ipod/
>http://www.apple.com/ipod/specs.html
>
>An iPod is a 4"x2.5"x.75" (largest unit) device that weighs about 6oz. and
>can
>store about 4,000 songs. Depending on how much music you have in your
>collection this could in many cases be your entire library. Units with more
>storage capacity are also available for music freaks that want to "take it
>all
>with them" (like me, although I use a different player).
>
>The basic concepts and some photos are all in the URLs above. If your
>music is
>on CDs you can use "ripping" software to copy it onto the iPod. You can also
>download music from various sources, with various legal implications
>depending
>on where you go. I suspect you don't plan any illegal music downloads; if you
>don't know what an Ipod is you probably don't know where to go to GET illegal
>music. =) Anything that you own and is on your shelf is fair game, so don't
>worry too much about that bit.
>
>If your music is in tape or other "analog" format you have to do a bit more
>work - basically you hook your stereo up to your computer and record the
>items
>you want to transfer. The benefit of doing this is that you have a digital
>backup at that point that won't deteriorate over time.
>
>The benefits for travel are also fairly significant - one small, lightweight
>device can hold an enormous amount of music. Unlike a CD player/changer you
>can slice/dice the music various ways using a tool called "playlists" so you
>can have song collections to fit various moods or the people you're with.
>
>The iPod is not the only such device. The name for this class of product is
>"MP3 Player" and there are dozens of options on the market now. Aside from
>car-focused products like the Empeg/Rio (which I use, but it's almost a
>dinosaur now; my wife, who has an iPod, snickers at me because I'm still a
>Rio
>fan) and the Phatbox, the iPod is probably the most expensive
>consumer-oriented MP3 player on the market. It sells because it has a very
>easy-to-use user interface, has a highly-rated tool for loading the player
>with songs, is reliable, etc. That doesn't mean you shouldn't consider other
>options, but if you have the cash and you don't know what you're doing you
>may
>as well buy quality.
>
>Regards,
>Chad
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | B&C LR-3C question |
Would putting the resistor in the circuit (or the two 220 ohm resistors as
Bob suggests) stop the current leak to the point where there is no battery
drain when hangered?
Marty
From: "James Redmon" <james(at)berkut13.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: B&C LR-3C question
All,
I was working with B&C on this, but the gentleman is out of pocket for a
couple weeks and thought one of you might know the answer.
I am using a LED instead of an incandescent lamp for the OV light. The
issue I discussed with B&C was that the LED never goes out...it stays on
(dimly) even when the regulator is turned off. When I turn on the regulator
(battery only) the LED does blink properly. He mentioned that the regulator
bleeds a little current on the lamp pin all the time - not enough to
illuminate a lamp, but a LED still glows slightly.
He mentioned a fix of placing a 520-ohm resistor between Pin 5 (the lamp
lead) and another pin on the regulator. I have misplaced my notes and can
not remember specifically which other pin to connect the resistor to.
Does someone happen to know which one I should use? If not, I can always
wait a
couple of weeks until Tim gets back.
Thanks!
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
http://www.berkut13.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Robinson <crj(at)lucubration.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 32 Msgs - 06/03/04 |
Dave Ford wrote:
> I think I like the idea of having a lot of music on one device but I can't
> see me sitting for hours loading this thing full of music--or is there a
> better way? How much time do you have putting your entire collection on
> your iPod? Also is there a good website for picking out one of these
> devices? I have tried a search for this but end up running in circles.
Well, that's a somewhat loaded question. If you only have one CD, if you
download my favorite ripping tool (CDex, a free application that will even
look up and name your files for you), if you don't make a lot of playlists, in
10-15 minutes you could have that disc on your iPod. Add a few minutes more
for each additional disc once you get the hang of it.
So it all depends on:
* How much music can FIT on your player. Some players like the iPod use
hard drives and can store thousands of files. That would take a while
to transfer, perhaps hours if you did it all at once. Some players,
like the more portable armband-style Flash-based units can only fit
10-20 songs, so they're not much more than small, light, skip-free CD
player replacements. Those wouldn't take long at all to load.
* How much music you have. If you just bought your first CD, it won't
take long at all. =) Also, although I suggested earlier that it's
possible to convert old analog (tape and phono) sources I don't
generally recommend doing this unless you're a stereophile and
comfortable with the signal side of things. These sources generally
need quite a bit of cleaning up to be usable.
* Your level of comfort with computers. There's no shame in admitting
inexperience here. If this is the case you should definitely consider
a product with a highly-rated user interface, like the iPod. I also
recommend buying from a local store rather than online because it's
easier to return if you decide you don't like it.
* How much you really CARE about aesthetics. I use my MP3 player
constantly, so I spent a lot of time tweaking playlists, song
title, artist, genre, etc. information, and so on. I spent WEEKS
doing this, but I chose to - it wasn't actually necessary. If you're
the type who rarely even takes the CD booklet out of the jewel case
to see what's inside, you can skip this process.
How much time? Well, I own over 600 CDs, all legally. I have spent HUNDREDS of
hours ripping, categorizing, and manipulating these songs for use on four
different MP3 players through the years. My wife has spent probably 20 hours
on her iPod, and a buddy of mine spent about 10 minutes - dragged-and-dropped
a few files, and walked away while they copied over.
By the way, if you do go this route there's a hidden benefit. I keep all my
files in a shared folder on my home network. I haven't touched a CD (except to
import new purchases) in several years. They're all sitting in boxes in the
attic. CDs are HUGE! I've seen people with enormous shelving units for them.
All that disappeared for me.
In terms of device selection, I always drop by http://www.epinions.com and
http://www.amazon.com to read reviews before I buy consumer electronics (or
other things!) You have to take reviews with a grain of salt - people with
problems tend to be more vocal than those without. But, at least it gives you
a general feeling for what you might expect, battery lifetimes, quality of
support options, etc. http://www.pricewatch.com is a good place to go for
price comparisons, too.
Regards,
Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Power diode drops |
Please help educate those of us less gifted on the electronics. Paul, you
wrote in part below as follows:
"> Look at the minimum voltages required for some avionics and then look at
the
> Amp hours available in a battery with a 0.5V lower end of useful life
> voltage. 0.5 volts can be a significant increase in useful life, when you
> must run on battery power alone."
When using Nuckoll's wiring, I maybe wrong -- when running from the e-buss
with the alternate feed activated ( due to alternator failure for instance )
that the diode that normally is used to power the e-buss is bypassed and it
is no longer a factor and we do not need be concerned about the voltage
drop. I understand the Schottky power diode has less voltage drop, but does
that really matter since our alternators produce more than we really need
anyway?
Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp "SunSeeker"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Power diode drops
>
> Just ran some real tests. (Power supply in constant current mode. (TEK PS
> 2511 Programmable Power Supply), 'In calibration' for the curious :-)
>
> A "typical" Diode bridge (25A rated) V drop at 7 amps is 0.81V (0.76V at 2
> amps) and a Schottky power diode is 0.31V (0.25V at 2 amps), Both at room
> temp.
>
> The extra 0.5V (usable) you get (with Schottky) can be a lot of extra
> battery life.
>
> Look at the minimum voltages required for some avionics and then look at
the
> Amp hours available in a battery with a 0.5V lower end of useful life
> voltage. 0.5 volts can be a significant increase in useful life, when you
> must run on battery power alone.
>
> I am using a 160CMQ045 that is insulated from the case and has 3/16" (#10)
> boltable lugs. So while not inexpensive (just under $30 in ones), its very
> easy to mount and wire. Use www.findchips.com to locate stock.
> (Currently in stock at Digikey.)
>
> Useful for both "avionics bus" etc and also for charging a backup battery
> where the V drop of "normal" bridge diodes would prevent a full charge
(not
> to mention the heat sink required during a high current chargeing period.
>
> The secret to low V drop with Schottky diodes, besides the technology, is
a
> large die size IE high current rating. The above part is two diodes
> internally connected as a full wave rectifier rated at 160 amps each. Thus
> its very close to a drop in replacement for the diode bridge Electrically
> direct replacement and mechanically "no insulation" bolt down mounting.
>
> Plus nearly 2/3 fewer watts lost in heat you must sink.
>
> There are lots of other Schottky diodes available but few with as simple
> mechanical and electrical mounting.
>
> Paul
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Yamokoski" <yamokosk(at)lakemichigancollege.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Comm receiver overload |
Hi Brian,
Thanks for the response. I do have noise filters at both the radio and intercom
d-sub connectors, but you've given me other good thoughts to pursue.
The problem doesn't seem to be dependant on frequency or headset. In addition
to buying a new radio I re-wired the entire system using shielded wire whenever
possible and moving all communication wires as far away from other wires
as I could. This has only been vexing me for a year and a half now....I'm about
ready to throw the whole mess away and motor on happily just using the handheld.
Anyway, thanks again for the input.
Bill Yamokoski
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Main Bus Feed |
This is just a shot in the dark from a newbie, but why not tap your main bus
feed into the #2 wire just aft of the firewall? Sort of a "tee" junction.
I don't know what type of hardware would work best for that (i.e. some big
robust guarded "terminal strip" type of thing?). I'm sure Bob or one of the
other guys will chime in with a hardware pointer if this suggestion is
valid.
This way, you avoid the "lose your main bus in the event of a FWF fire"
issue, you probably can use the shortest possible run & smallest gauge, etc.
Let me know if I'm on crack, and good luck.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Stone" <jrstone(at)insightbb.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Main Bus Feed
>
> Hi Guys,
> I'm building a Harmon Rocket II and have two 17ah batts in the baggage
compartment each with their own battery contactor. From the contactor, I
ran #2 wire fwd thru the firewall, some ten feet or so, to the starter
contactor.
> My Main and Endurance busses will be located on the cockpit side of the FW
which is a very short distance from the starter contactor and main battery
wire.
>
> Question 1: Would it be better to home run another large wire (#4 or 6
awg) from the battery contactor as shown in dwg 11 to the main bus, or pick
up the shortest route, directly from the starter contactor (hot side of
course), using a much smaller wire (8 awg or so). The main potential
problem with connecting to the starter contactor is it is on the engine side
of the FW and in the event of a fire, I would loose my feed to the Main bus
as the wire burns. By the way, the main batt wires both + and - run thru a
stainless steel handrail 90 deg fitting on the FW so there is no bolt thru
the FW for the + battery lead.
> Question 2: If I go with the home run method, do you recommend using a
different route for the wire within the aircraft or run it along side the #2
+and- wires?
>
> Thanks,
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 32 Msgs - 06/03/04 |
In a message dated 6/5/04 10:19:16 AM Central Daylight Time,
dan(at)rvproject.com writes:
The update process usually takes about 30 seconds, and you can do other
things while it happens. I use the firewire that came with the ipod. It
can also do USB. I presume both are roughly equivalent in speed. I think
the first time I connected it, and that first time iTunes had to load 2800
songs onto the ipod, it took about 20 minutes or so. That's a one-time hit
that you never have to endure again, doing incremental updates of songs
you've added, removed, moved, etc.
Regardless of custom playlists, the ipod sorts everything for you
automatically by artist, album, song name, genre, etc. Usually when I hit
play on the ipod, I'm navigating to a particular album that I want to hear.
I only use playlists on occasion.
Anyway, all this info is probably on Apple's site. I hate sounding like I'm
doing a sales pitch...
Good Morning Dan,
I know I am coming into this conversation late, but isn't the iPod
restricted to use at a maximum altitude of ten thousand feet? I have heard tales
of
them crashing, in fact, destroying themselves in even very light turbulence
when at higher altitudes.
Any knowledge or experience along that line?
Long range flights are the ones where I would most like to have music, but
they are generally flown at fifteen to eighteen thousand feet. The iPod would
appear to be useless for those flights.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 6/5/04 10:19:16 AM Central Daylight Time,
dan(at)rvproject.com writes:
The update process usually takes about 30 seconds, and you can do other
things while it happens. I use the firewire that came with the ipod. It
can also do USB. I presume both are roughly equivalent in speed. I think
the first time I connected it, and that first time iTunes had to load 2800
songs onto the ipod, it took about 20 minutes or so. That's a one-time hit
that you never have to endure again, doing incremental updates of songs
you've added, removed, moved, etc.
Regardless of custom playlists, the ipod sorts everything for you
automatically by artist, album, song name, genre, etc. Usually when I hit
play on the ipod, I'm navigating to a particular album that I want to hear.
I only use playlists on occasion.
Anyway, all this info is probably on Apple's site. I hate sounding like I'm
doing a sales pitch...
Good Morning Dan,
I know I am coming into this conversation late, but isn't the iPod
restricted to use at a maximum altitude of ten thousand feet? I have heard
tales of
them crashing, in fact, destroying themselves in even very light turbulence
when at higher altitudes.
Any knowledge or experience along that line?
Long range flights are the ones where I would most like to have music, but
they are generally flown at fifteen to eighteen thousand feet. The iPod
would
appear to be useless for those flights.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Coldenhoff <rv9a_000(at)deru.com> |
> I know I am coming into this conversation late, but isn't the iPod
> restricted to use at a maximum altitude of ten thousand feet? I have heard
> tales of
> them crashing, in fact, destroying themselves in even very light turbulence
> when at higher altitudes.
> Any knowledge or experience along that line?
I don't know how susceptible the iPod in particular is to
damage from altitude or G-force spikes, however this is a
general danger to ANY computer or other device with a hard
disk drive in it or that have a certain types of display.
The biggest problem with hard drives is the clearance between
the spinning disk and the head that reads/writes the data.
A sharp G force spike (like a firm landing) might cause what
is known as a "head crash" which means the head contacts the
disk and destroys the drive.
Devices that use FLASH memory or other solid state memory do not
suffer this problem of course, and you can get portable MP3
players that hold just a handful of songs on flash. You would
just have to load up the songs you want instead of having your
entire collection available.
I have also heard of issues with certain types of monitors or
LCD type displays that has to do with the the device failing
at high altitudes, but I am not certain of the details. Possibly
the lower pressure causes some kind of "blowout" in the screen.
I have flown laptops up to 17,500' with no problems, but they are
shutdown for takeoff and landing to prevent disk failures.
--
Tim Coldenhoff
#90338 - Finishing!
http://rv9a.deru.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Foerster" <jmfpublic(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | RE: B&C LR-3C question |
Marty asked:
No, the drain would be shunted via resistors. However, in the hangar, the contactor
is off, and thus the regulator is powered down. That is the beauty of the
master switch, as commony wired.
Jim Foerster
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mr. Brain OT |
Eric M. Jones wrote:
>
> Will all those aeroelectric-listers who had the nickname "Mr. Brain" in
> school please raise their hands?
It is funny now but it was a stigma then. I solved the problem by starting to
play Pop Warner football in 5th grade and then on the 'C' team in high school.
I had to beat up a couple of bullies too.
I suffered a setback in seventh grade when I won the California State Science Fair
with a home-grown infrared guidance system in a robot ladybug. I used one
of my mom's stainless-steel mixing bowls as the mold for the fiberglass body
and it looked like a ladybug to me so I painted it red with black spots. The
lead-sulphide sensors were at the prime focus of a couple of cheap flashlight
reflectors which made up the eyes. The chassis was galvanized sheet steel I scavenged
from a construction site. I used telephone wire I scavenged from the
same construction site. The amplifiers were darlington pairs made with germanium
transistors because I could scavenge them from discarded circuit boards.
Wheels were from model airplanes and the transmission was having the shafts of
the motors carefully touch the circumference of the drive wheels. I scavenged
the motors from old toys. Everything was pop-riveted together. No judge would
ever accuse an adult of having built it so I gue
ss I got a lot of points for originality.
I never really did live down the fact that our 7th and 8th grade science teacher
recorded my interview with Vin Scully and then played it for every science class
in the school or that one channel of the circuit went out so my robot would
only go in circles on TV.
Fortunately, when I got into High School girls were interested in getting into
good schools so the jocks weren't the only ones with girls interested in them.
Remember: the geek shall inherit the Earth. If you don't believe it, conside Bill
Gates.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
Paul Messinger wrote:
>>The point that your xpdr and comm will transmit with higher power is a
>> good one. Since you will directly connect your e-buss to the battery in the
>> case of alternator failure, the end-point voltage relative to diode drop is
>> a non-issue.
>
>
> Why would I need to do that. Its an extra switch possibly a CB and its a
> direct battery connection that needs to be special wiring etc.
Because the failure may be with your battery contactor and you need a second path
from the battery anyway.
> Use the right diode and there is no reason for such an extra switch. Also
> then one needs to remember its a direct connection to the battery and one
> more thing to be sure is off when shutting down.
I don't think you are playing enough "what if that breaks" games. You need to
point to each component in your electrical system and consider how it will break
and then what the result will be.
There need to be two completely separate paths from the battery to the e-buss so
that there is no single point of failure in your electrical system that will
take out your e-buss.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Digital Music in the Cockpit |
frequent flyer wrote:
>
> Let me reveal my age and my lack of knowledge. just
> exactly what is an ipod? How does it differ from a PDA
> or a palm pilot? How do you transfer music to it?
An iPod is a specific device made by Apple Computer that stores a large quantity
of music in a pocket-sized box about the size of a pack of cigarettes but only
about half the thickness. They are available with different storage capacities
ranging from about 10 gigabytes (about 3000 songs) to 60 gigabytes (about
18000 songs). It is a huge jukebox that fits in your pocket. It has a built-in
rechargeable Li-ion battery that will last about 8-10 hours between recharges.
I know that by that time I am most likely going to be out of the airplane
and somewhere I can recharge my iPod.
A Palm Pilot is a kind of a Personal Digital Assistant (PDA), a small hand-held
computer that stores information to which you wish to have access all the time.
Some PDAs also store and play music and therefore overlap with the function
of the iPod and iPod-like devices but they don't usually have the massive amount
of storage that the iPod has.
For example, my 20 GB iPod currently has my entire CD library of about 150 CDs
stored in it and it is not quite half full. I use the space that is unused for
music storage as a backup for what I consider to be important documents from
my computer.
The iPod connects to your computer using either a "Firewire" or USB interface.
The wire is used to both transfer data and to charge the iPod's battery. Apple
provides a free program called "iTunes" that acts as a database for your music.
It downloads your music or computer files into your iPod.
> See, now you know about me.
Hopefully this is helpful to you.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Digital Music in the Cockpit |
richard(at)riley.net wrote:
>
> The IPOD hard disk tends to head crash above 10,000 feet with just a touch
> of turbulence. I found out the hard way
Ahh, good point. I hadn't considered that but since the heads ride on an air cushion,
altitude is an issue. I regularly fly in the mid-teens.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
You are right, I assumed that it was clear that I was not talking about what
Bob has come up with as a design that is driven to some extent by the hi
diode drop and the more common contactor that uses one amp current.
Thus both the contactor load as well as the unacceptable diode voltage drop
have contributed to the current suggested design. Without these issues to
consider other designs are available that are simpler and avoid extra pilot
actions.
However common sense dictates that in the case of an alternator failure
where you need reliable electrical power to continue, you divert to the
nearest safe airport and not over fly one or more just to get to your
original destination.
I have an auto conversion so the engine needs electrical power to run.
Thus two independent electrical power systems, with only one alternator, as
there is no reasonable way to add a second alternator in my case. However
either system will power the acft for over one hour with reserve so
immediate diversion is not technically required but in my mind foolish not
to do.
I do not like the concept of direct connection of both batteries during
normal ops as its a single point of failure and or more complexity than
needed. I do not like the idea of more than a simple battery disconnect.
Having several separate switches to isolate the battery is not needed with a
different design.
The alternator charges the main battery and bus in a normal manner. I have a
power Schottky diode connected over to the second battery that keeps it
charged and the diode selected has a forward drop so that battery can be
fully charged, something not possible with "normal diodes". I use different
'low hold power' contactors so contactor power is 100 ma or so and not a
significant concern.
While there are dual independent electrical systems for engine power there
is only one xponder for example. Thus the need for what used to be called
the avionics bus that is powered by either electrical system. This is the
second Schottky diode usage. With its low V drop there is no need for a
direct battery connection etc. Either battery can automatically provide
power and the low diode V drop provides 11V to the equipment all the way
down to near zero charge state.
Bob has in the past advocated keeping the pilots load to a minimum and I
agree. In my case any single electrical system failure is kept isolated to
that system and the only pilots action is to note the "its failed" light and
note the clock is counting down and hopefully there is a nice airport within
100 miles to get to.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Birkelbach" <phil(at)petrasoft.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Drops
>
> What kind of architecture are you talking about? If you plan to simply
> divert then it seems to me that you don't need the e-buss or the diode at
> all.
>
> Godspeed,
>
> Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
> RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Panel
> http://www.myrv7.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 32 Msgs - 06/03/04 |
Dave Ford wrote:
> I think I like the idea of having a lot of music on one device but I can't
> see me sitting for hours loading this thing full of music--or is there a
> better way? How much time do you have putting your entire collection on
> your iPod? Also is there a good website for picking out one of these
> devices? I have tried a search for this but end up running in circles.
If you using the Apple "iTunes" program you just feed your CDs into it when you
have time. I did it over about a week. Whenever I was using the computer I
would feed it a couple of CDs while I was working. The program "rips" the songs
from the CD (copies, compresses) and stores the music on your computer's hard
disk. Whenever you plug your iPod into the computer to recharge the iPod's
battery it automagically downloads the changes to its memory without you having
to do anything specific.
As for names of songs, albums, and such, the iTunes program automatically searches
an on-line database for album information so you don't need to type in all
the information about each album and song. After that you can construct your
own "playlists", selections of song groupings which will also get downloaded
to the iPod when you plug it in.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Comm receiver overload |
William Yamokoski wrote:
>
> Hi Brian,
> Thanks for the response. I do have noise filters at both the radio and intercom
d-sub connectors, but you've given me other good thoughts to pursue.
> The problem doesn't seem to be dependant on frequency or headset. In addition
to buying a new radio I re-wired the entire system using shielded wire whenever
possible and moving all communication wires as far away from other wires
as I could. This has only been vexing me for a year and a half now....I'm
about ready to throw the whole mess away and motor on happily just using the
handheld.
> Anyway, thanks again for the input.
Make sure that the shield for your mic wiring is grounded only at your radio, intercom,
or audio panel. If you have a metal airplane make sure that the mic
jack is insulated from the airframe.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
Perhaps my earlier reply on this subject was missed or passed in the night
:-)
I have NO single failure point in my electrical system design (which is
extremely different from what you may have been accustomed to on this list,
including some suggested auto systems) that will stop my engine which
requires electrical pwer to run.
I have two batteries and two sources of power to the avionics. If both fail
I have a glider as my engine is an auto conversion with NO MAGS. Each
battery can independently run the engine and necessary avionics with any
failure of the other independent system. The system also auto detects nearly
all failures and automatically switches to the back up system and then warns
the pilot. Not that uard to do either.
A simple switch that adds com to my NOW glider is of little help. If a
contactor fails I simply rely on the other battery/contactor.
As for doing an FEMA you do not know my background or you would never
question my qualifications on perfotrming far more complex designs than this
simple design effort. To me this is a dirt simple task compared to a
spacecraft that cannot be repaired in orbit and must survive many failures
and still perform its mission. The FMEA etc is in principle the same, just
much less complex.
This might be a good place to point out that reliability and failure rates
were NEVER used except in the preliminary design concept stage as the
numbers game is based on a large uniform population and a few failures are
on little concern. Our design requirements were to be 100% failure tolerant
and depending on the system perhaps 2 or 3 failure tolerant. This includes
wiring connectors etc etc etc etc. This design approach was flight proven
over and over again for tens of years.
My original point is there are better and or equally as good designs out
there and it seems that every person who suggests a different design is
pounced on as violating the standard approach.
No intent to be abrupt but I am a slow typest and frustrated at the amount
of time this seems to being taking from more important things.
I think I have addressed your below comments basically as you do not have my
design in mind.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Drops
> Because the failure may be with your battery contactor and you need a
second path from the battery anyway.
>
> > Use the right diode and there is no reason for such an extra switch.
Also
> > then one needs to remember its a direct connection to the battery and
one
> > more thing to be sure is off when shutting down.
>
> I don't think you are playing enough "what if that breaks" games. You
need to point to each component in your electrical system and consider how
it will break and then what the result will be.
>
> There need to be two completely separate paths from the battery to the
e-buss so that there is no single point of failure in your electrical system
that will take out your e-buss.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Schottky availability |
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Schottky availability
> Excerpted from Bob's reply to my post
>
> > The diode bridge rectifier was chosen because of its ease of
mounting
> > (has mounting hole, needs no electrical insulation from airframe)
and
> > ease of connection (fast-on terminals). The selection wasn't based
on
> > electrical performance . . . electrical performance was not
> > significant. This product was selected because it was inexpensive,
> > readily available from dozens of off-the-shelf sources, and easy to
> > mount. This device has a very high order probability of
> > successful implementation by the neophyte airplane builder. If there
> > were a Schottky based product available in the same package, it
would
> > indeed be more attractive
>
> My initial reply
>
> ""I have had the power schottky diode I am discussing for at least 5 years
> and
> it was not a new design then and in distributor stock at that time. So I
> disagree that good and easy to use parts were rare even 5 years ago and
more
> likely 10 years ago. It does take some time to see what is out there which
> is harder to do than going to RS and picking a part off the shelf.""
>
> I researched my time line and found the date code on my diodes is 1999.
>
> They are listed in the mfgrs data book printed in 1992 (the one I have
here
> on hand). Likely not a new product even then. The "identical package
> comment" makes no sense to me.
>
> Im my application electrical performance is very significant not ass Bob
> says "" The selection wasn't based on electrical performance . . .
> electrical performance was not significant. "" . But I have different
> design requirements than any found in the "Book" either then when I was
> designing or even today"
>
> This part needs NO insulation, has lugs for #10 SCREWS etc.
>
> There are many other parts suitable that either are insulated or require a
> Very simple mount with insulator kit both readliiy available.
>
> I would worry about flying in an aircraft that was owner wired and the
owner
> had lacked the skills to properly install such a device.
>
> As for availability, such an item could be added to the list of other non
RS
> parts at Aeroelectric or B & C.
>
> With all due respect to disagree.
>
> Paul
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | battery capacity remaining |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)mtfind.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: battery capacity remaining
> Its a very simple hardware task but different batteries do need different
> data tables to have accurate readings.
>
> You need current in/out and bat temp as well as battery characteristics.
All
> of the above is readily available, just waiting for the need. However with
> all the different batteries being used its a problem with matching to a
> specific battery
>
> Eventually I may build one for my acft.
>
> Paul
>
>
> > One thing I have not seen discussed here are battery energy remaining
> meters. These are devices that tell you how much energy is remaining in
the
> battery and how long the battery will battery will provide power at the
> current drain.
> >
> > These are common devices in boats, RVs, and people living on alternative
> energy systems (solar and wind power). Why not in aircraft?
> >
> > --
> > Brian Lloyd
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | battery capacity remaining |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
Subject: Fw: AeroElectric-List: battery capacity remaining
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)mtfind.com>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 2:15 PM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: battery capacity remaining
>
>
> > Its a very simple hardware task but different batteries do need
different
> > data tables to have accurate readings.
> >
> > You need current in/out and bat temp as well as battery characteristics.
> All
> > of the above is readily available, just waiting for the need. However
with
> > all the different batteries being used its a problem with matching to a
> > specific battery
> >
> > Eventually I may build one for my acft.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> > > One thing I have not seen discussed here are battery energy remaining
> > meters. These are devices that tell you how much energy is remaining in
> the
> > battery and how long the battery will battery will provide power at the
> > current drain.
> > >
> > > These are common devices in boats, RVs, and people living on
alternative
> > energy systems (solar and wind power). Why not in aircraft?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Brian Lloyd
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
Paul Messinger wrote:
> My original point is there are better and or equally as good designs out
> there and it seems that every person who suggests a different design is
> pounced on as violating the standard approach.
I agree. I was making assumptions about your circuit topology. I apologize.
Your obvious understanding is the exception rather than the rule.
> No intent to be abrupt but I am a slow typest and frustrated at the amount
> of time this seems to being taking from more important things.
No problem. I responded without background information. It was in no way a comment
on your background or knowledge.
> I think I have addressed your below comments basically as you do not have my
> design in mind.
Right.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power diode drops |
I covered this in another post. MY design is not anything you can find on
Bob's stuff as I have different requirements and thus no need for a switch
when the proper diode is used.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Power diode drops
>
> Please help educate those of us less gifted on the electronics. Paul, you
> wrote in part below as follows:
>
> "> Look at the minimum voltages required for some avionics and then look
at
> the
> > Amp hours available in a battery with a 0.5V lower end of useful life
> > voltage. 0.5 volts can be a significant increase in useful life, when
you
> > must run on battery power alone."
>
> When using Nuckoll's wiring, I maybe wrong -- when running from the e-buss
> with the alternate feed activated ( due to alternator failure for
instance )
> that the diode that normally is used to power the e-buss is bypassed and
it
> is no longer a factor and we do not need be concerned about the voltage
> drop. I understand the Schottky power diode has less voltage drop, but
does
> that really matter since our alternators produce more than we really need
> anyway?
>
> Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp "SunSeeker"
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
> To:
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Power diode drops
>
>
>
> >
> > Just ran some real tests. (Power supply in constant current mode. (TEK
PS
> > 2511 Programmable Power Supply), 'In calibration' for the curious :-)
> >
> > A "typical" Diode bridge (25A rated) V drop at 7 amps is 0.81V (0.76V at
2
> > amps) and a Schottky power diode is 0.31V (0.25V at 2 amps), Both at
room
> > temp.
> >
> > The extra 0.5V (usable) you get (with Schottky) can be a lot of extra
> > battery life.
> >
> > Look at the minimum voltages required for some avionics and then look at
> the
> > Amp hours available in a battery with a 0.5V lower end of useful life
> > voltage. 0.5 volts can be a significant increase in useful life, when
you
> > must run on battery power alone.
> >
> > I am using a 160CMQ045 that is insulated from the case and has 3/16"
(#10)
> > boltable lugs. So while not inexpensive (just under $30 in ones), its
very
> > easy to mount and wire. Use www.findchips.com to locate stock.
> > (Currently in stock at Digikey.)
> >
> > Useful for both "avionics bus" etc and also for charging a backup
battery
> > where the V drop of "normal" bridge diodes would prevent a full charge
> (not
> > to mention the heat sink required during a high current chargeing
period.
> >
> > The secret to low V drop with Schottky diodes, besides the technology,
is
> a
> > large die size IE high current rating. The above part is two diodes
> > internally connected as a full wave rectifier rated at 160 amps each.
Thus
> > its very close to a drop in replacement for the diode bridge
Electrically
> > direct replacement and mechanically "no insulation" bolt down mounting.
> >
> > Plus nearly 2/3 fewer watts lost in heat you must sink.
> >
> > There are lots of other Schottky diodes available but few with as simple
> > mechanical and electrical mounting.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
Paul Messinger wrote:
> The alternator charges the main battery and bus in a normal manner. I have a
> power Schottky diode connected over to the second battery that keeps it
> charged and the diode selected has a forward drop so that battery can be
> fully charged, something not possible with "normal diodes". I use different
> 'low hold power' contactors so contactor power is 100 ma or so and not a
> significant concern.
Actually, the voltage settings for most aircraft alternator systems are incorrect
for most battery systems and even the 0.3V drop across the schottky diode will
ensure that your charging system will not properly charge your second battery.
The boat and RV (rolling land-yacht kind) markets have come up with a device called
a battery combiner. Basically it is a relay that closes to charge the house
and starting batteries together when the buss voltage rises to a point where
it is obvious that the alternator is on-line. When the alternator drops off
line and the voltage drops below 13V (26V), the relay opens and separates the
two batteries. This works only so long as both batteries are of identical types.
You can't mix flooded-cell, AGM, and gel-cell batteries if you want them
to last.
> While there are dual independent electrical systems for engine power there
> is only one xponder for example. Thus the need for what used to be called
> the avionics bus that is powered by either electrical system. This is the
> second Schottky diode usage. With its low V drop there is no need for a
> direct battery connection etc. Either battery can automatically provide
> power and the low diode V drop provides 11V to the equipment all the way
> down to near zero charge state.
I figured out that is what you are doing. I see where you are going and it makes
sense to me.
> Bob has in the past advocated keeping the pilots load to a minimum and I
> agree. In my case any single electrical system failure is kept isolated to
> that system and the only pilots action is to note the "its failed" light and
> note the clock is counting down and hopefully there is a nice airport within
> 100 miles to get to.
This is where something like an energy meter for the battery strikes me as a nice
thing to have.
BTW, my personal feeling is that I need to be able to complete my flight even if
I suffer an alternator failure. I have done a couple of Atlantic crossings
in my Comanche and may be as much as 6 hours from land so I need to make sure
I have enough "juice" to make it and still perform an instrument approach. I
have a dual-battery, single-alternator configuration in the Comanche. In my RV-4
I just made sure that the battery would carry the e-buss loads longer than
the fuel in the tanks would carry the airplane.
The electrical system in my Nanchang CJ6A will be very similar to the RV-4, i.e.
I will be able to power my e-buss longer than I will have fuel in the tank,
as I don't expect to do any hard-IFR flying in it.
I am going to explore the possibility with the FSDO of converting my Aztec to an
all-electric panel. That should be an enlightening experience. I once tried
to get the FSDO to give me an STC to put a 260 hp engine in my Comanche using
the exact same installation as in later model Comanches. Needless to say they
were far from helpful.
It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | battery capacity remaining |
Brian,
Look at the Pulsar 200 Engine monitor. Using the hall effect current sensors
on the main battery wire and one on the alternator you can see how much
current is going into the battery, how much power is being used by plane and
how much power is remaining in battery. You can also monitor just about
anything else you want from canopy switches to battery temperatures.
Regards,
Trampas Stern
Stern Technologies
4321 Waterwheel Dr
Raleigh NC 27606
919-832-8441 Ext. 12 (voice)
919-832-8441 (fax)
www.sterntech.com
tstern(at)sterntech.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Lloyd
Subject: AeroElectric-List: battery capacity remaining
One thing I have not seen discussed here are battery energy remaining
meters. These are devices that tell you how much energy is remaining in the
battery and how long the battery will battery will provide power at the
current drain.
These are common devices in boats, RVs, and people living on alternative
energy systems (solar and wind power). Why not in aircraft?
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Drops
>
> Paul Messinger wrote:
> > The alternator charges the main battery and bus in a normal manner. I
have a
> > power Schottky diode connected over to the second battery that keeps it
> > charged and the diode selected has a forward drop so that battery can be
> > fully charged, something not possible with "normal diodes". I use
different
> > 'low hold power' contactors so contactor power is 100 ma or so and not a
> > significant concern.
>
> Actually, the voltage settings for most aircraft alternator systems are
incorrect for most battery systems and even the 0.3V drop across the
schottky diode will ensure that your charging system will not properly
charge your second battery.
That has not been my experience on what I am using. Most regulators (that I
have inspected) are set somewhat high to get a rapid recharge. In any event
consider the following room temp info from Odyssey. But then each of us must
understand their aircraft needs and or fine some one who does.
The battery was discharged and then had a 5 ohm resistor placed across the
battery for 28 days. The battery was then charges at const V of 13.5V for 48
hours and achieved 97% of rated capacity.
13.5 plus 0.3V is 13.8V which is a commonly accepted minimum voltage for
charging. I have yet to see an alternator internal or external regulator not
set for at least 14.2V and most somewhat higher.
As my backup battery is not used for starting it starts each flight topped
off so the current from the alternator is not charging but used for the
backup engine systems some of which need to be always of for clean switching
over if needed. Both on is not requires for proper operation.
So my setup works well but others might not unless properly designed and
verified.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
Its my mistake by not pointing out my application is different. I do think
however there are useful applications of some of my design.
As one gets older the mind is still fast but the mouth (fingers as
appropriate) is lagging behind and some conversations start in mid thought.
BTW having another PEER reviewer on this list is nice. Glad you are aboard.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Drops
>
> Paul Messinger wrote:
>
>
> > My original point is there are better and or equally as good designs out
> > there and it seems that every person who suggests a different design is
> > pounced on as violating the standard approach.
>
> I agree. I was making assumptions about your circuit topology. I
apologize.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | LOAD DUMP TEST RESULTS #1 |
Creating the report is a huge task, for the few who will take the time to
read it. This is a result of (in part) evaluation of every part of a mocked
up aircraft electrical system and some surprises were found. Most have
simple solutions.
The basic test setup system consists of an alternator, main bus, and battery
bus with associated contactors.
Fixed and variable loads and filter caps as well as the OPV module (defined
by Bob) was included in appropriate tests. Lots of digital and hi speed
analog scope PIX were taken as well as test conditions and results etc.
I do not believe in isolated analysis, as has been suggested "just look at
protecting the alternator from load dump damage". Turns out there were
several system level interactions that were evaluated as needing attention.
I must point out that alternator load dump protection turned out to be a
relative small part of the overall test series.
This is a quick report and the real report is much more detailed with lots
of graphics etc. as well as real data that could be duplicated if one were
interested. ALL tests were repeated several times over a period of several
weeks to among other things show test repeatability.
There are a couple of items that need further evaluation before all the
recommendations can be made.
Perhaps a review of the use of the alternator in autos vs. aircraft is
appropriate here.
In an automobile, the alternator is hard wired to the battery so cases of
load dump and or operation with no battery are not design requirements. Also
if something fails "pull over and call AAA". In an aircraft both the
alternator and battery can be internationally or accidentally disconnected
from each other and the electrical load. The internally regulated alternator
was not designed for this application and there are potential concerns as a
result.
I have completed load dump testing at 10, 20, 30, and 40 amps and that is
the limit of my electrical power to power the alternator (the lab lights
dim) . However the results show extrapolation is reasonable for 50 and 60
amp load dumps. Thus I see no concerns for those who wish to protect against
load dumps as large as 60 amps with the design margins on the solution
selected parts.
Other than transients, there is no effect on the main busses IF there is a
battery on line during the load dump. Transients are addressed in another
post.
For those who have the impression that a large CAP, say 25,000 mfd is
adequate if the battery is off line, well its not adequate as far as
suppression of load dumps with the alternator on and the battery off line.
There is again a simple solution however, more later.
Protection of the alternator if it has an external regulator is simple and
reliable. An internally regulated alternator is a different can of worms
however. If the alternator was taken off line when it was "in specification"
there is a simple solution to its load dump voltage spike. If the alternator
was taken off line because its regulated voltage was under control but
slightly high and the OVP circuit put it off line its still a simple fix.
However if the internal regulator failed short (full power/voltage out) or
went to a somewhat higher voltage then there is no simple solution as it
becomes a self excited high power heater. They have been known to literally
burn up into a mass of aluminum - copper mess and the belt is toast. Rare
but not unknown. More later on this.
As specific concerns and solutions are addressed in detail I will provide
specific parts and sources for these parts.
The report will include my silent (till then) partner who has, is, and will
be providing peer review. Peer review is critical to any design and I have
personally experienced its lack on occasion in the past as well as seen
others fail to benefit from such review. However its not easy to find a peer
and harder if we are not co-located. Thus email telecons etc delay and add
days (weeks?) to the report completion.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bkuc1(at)tampabay.rr.com |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 16:16:52 -0400
From: bkuc1(at)tampabay.rr.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Drops
If I can try to get this straight, the diode is there so not to feed e-bus to the
main bus when the alternator quits.
You would have master on during normal time, and when the alternator quits, you
would turn on the e-bus switch and turn off the master switch, the diode is there
to supply power to the e-bus till then. Beside having an alternate path to
feed the e-bus during normal operation, could the following be used instead?
During startup check list, turn master switch on AND e-bus switch on..... During
low voltage situations, just turn off master switch. This would remove the
need for the diode all together.
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: battery capacity remaining |
Trampas wrote:
> Look at the Pulsar 200 Engine monitor.
It looks like an interesting box. I was considering a stand-alone engine monitor
like I had in my RV-4 (I had the Audio Flight Avionics AVA-10) but right now
I am leaning toward EFIS-1 from Blue Mountain Avionics for the CJ6A.
> Using the hall effect current sensors
> on the main battery wire and one on the alternator you can see how much
> current is going into the battery, how much power is being used by plane and
> how much power is remaining in battery. You can also monitor just about
> anything else you want from canopy switches to battery temperatures.
The problem is that the hall-effect sensors do not have the accuracy needed to
correctly monitor the energy left in the battery. You need a good shunt and about
14 bits of precision to properly integrate the amp-hours used and what is
left in the battery. You also need to know the amp draw very accurately in order
to do the calculation for Peukert's equation to know how much is really left.
This is probably not a big problem in an airplane because you are almost always
starting from a fully-charged battery. I have a 500AH 24V battery bank in my
boat whose energy content I need to track very accurately since I don't always
have the luxury of fully charging the battery every time I drain it partially.
I will probably post something on the care and feeding of batteries.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
Paul Messinger wrote:
>> incorrect for most battery systems and even the 0.3V drop across the
>> schottky diode will ensure that your charging system will not properly
>> charge your second battery.
>
> That has not been my experience on what I am using. Most regulators (that I
> have inspected) are set somewhat high to get a rapid recharge. In any event
> consider the following room temp info from Odyssey. But then each of us must
> understand their aircraft needs and or fine some one who does.
The problem with voltage regulators with single settings is that they are set too
low to properly charge the battery and too high to maintain the battery on
float charge. The result is a battery that is always either undercharged or overcharged.
Actually, the one good thing in aircraft is that, in flight the battery
tends to get cold and that favors a higher float voltage, thus preventing
damage to the battery from overcharge.
Flooded cell batteries withstand abuse better than sealed batteries. Gel-cells
seem to withstand overcharge a bit better than do AGMs. I have had especially
bad luck with sealed AGM batteries running from standard aircraft alternators.
I feel that, if you want your AGMs and gell-cells to give long life, you need
a regulator that will do a proper three-stage charge (bulk charge, absorption
charge, float).
> The battery was discharged and then had a 5 ohm resistor placed across the
> battery for 28 days. The battery was then charges at const V of 13.5V for 48
> hours and achieved 97% of rated capacity.
Fully discharging a lead-acid battery of any sort is a really bad thing. Go look
at the manufacturers white papers on number of charge/discharge cycles relative
to depth of discharge. Most batteries can only withstand a handful of total
discharge cycles.
Another bad thing about what you did is that not all the cells have the same capacity.
The cell with the lowest capacity is actually going to go into reverse
charge from the other cells when it goes totally flat and the voltage across
it from the other cells is reverse polarity. Not good.
If you want to deep cycle a battery for some reason, i.e. you want to measure remaining
capacity, stop the discharge at 1.75V per cell (10.5V for a 12V battery).
A simple comparator circuit that will open a relay and disconnect all loads
from the battery when the battery reaches that stage of discharge is a good
thing.
> 13.5 plus 0.3V is 13.8V which is a commonly accepted minimum voltage for
> charging. I have yet to see an alternator internal or external regulator not
> set for at least 14.2V and most somewhat higher.
Flooded-cell and AGM batteries want about 14.5-14.6 V for proper absorption charging.
Gell-cells want about 14.2V. Flooded-cell and AGM batteries want about
13.2V for float charging (battery maintenance) while gell-cells want about 13.6V.
And these values change with temperature, that is they go down as the temperature
goes up and vice-versa.
So most charging systems in aircraft actually abuse the batteries. Once I learned
that I was no longer surprised that the life of an AGM in my Comanche was
never more than 2 years. Flooded-cell batteries last a lot longer as they just
gas and you can replace the water they lose.
OTOH, batteries are relatively cheap and replacing them every year is cheap insurance
even if you do abuse them.
> As my backup battery is not used for starting it starts each flight topped
> off so the current from the alternator is not charging but used for the
> backup engine systems some of which need to be always of for clean switching
> over if needed. Both on is not requires for proper operation.
I would look for your backup battery to fail first as it is constantly being overcharged.
OTOH, the diode drop may be saving it from a really early death.
> So my setup works well but others might not unless properly designed and
> verified.
I hear you.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
I suggest you look at The ODYSSEY battery. Its very different in many
respects.
Embedded comments follow
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Drops
>
> Paul Messinger wrote:
>
> >> incorrect for most battery systems and even the 0.3V drop across the
> >> schottky diode will ensure that your charging system will not properly
> >> charge your second battery.
> >
> > That has not been my experience on what I am using. Most regulators
(that I
> > have inspected) are set somewhat high to get a rapid recharge. In any
event
> > consider the following room temp info from Odyssey. But then each of us
must
> > understand their aircraft needs and or fine some one who does.
>
> The problem with voltage regulators with single settings is that they are
set too low to properly charge the battery and too high to maintain the
battery on float charge. The result is a battery that is always either
undercharged or overcharged. Actually, the one good thing in aircraft is
that, in flight the battery tends to get cold and that favors a higher float
voltage, thus preventing damage to the battery from overcharge.
True in a perfect world however autos have batteries that last for many
years and they have a single level reg.
> Flooded cell batteries withstand abuse better than sealed batteries.
Gel-cells seem to withstand overcharge a bit better than do AGMs. I have
had especially bad luck with sealed AGM batteries running from standard
aircraft alternators. I feel that, if you want your AGMs and gell-cells to
give long life, you need a regulator that will do a proper three-stage
charge (bulk charge, absorption charge, float).
The type of regulator is simply not practicle in an aircraft not needed in
my opinion. I do agree that if you have a boat or RV with huge battery banks
its a different story.
>
> > The battery was discharged and then had a 5 ohm resistor placed across
the
> > battery for 28 days. The battery was then charges at const V of 13.5V
for 48
> > hours and achieved 97% of rated capacity.
>
> Fully discharging a lead-acid battery of any sort is a really bad thing.
Go look at the manufacturers white papers on number of charge/discharge
cycles relative to depth of discharge. Most batteries can only withstand a
handful of total discharge cycles.
True but ODYSSEY is different ( they spec hundreds of total discharg
cycles), You would do well to find and download their publication
ODY-BR-101. Sorry no longer have the link but google works well.
I did not do the above test, I was quoting from ODYSSEY.
Things of interest. very low self discharge of up to two years. I have a
couple that were stored for 6 months and needed 15 min at 1 amp to top off.
They are rated at 400 discharge cycles to 100% DOD and 500 at 80%.
I would not use anything else in my aircraft and tried to have a discussion
some time ago and was shot down by Bob and others as the cheepest battery
annually replaced was deemed better. I disagree on that along with replacing
annually and putting the OLD battery in the backup spot. Frankly If I needed
a backup battery I would want the best and newest one not the old one that
was replaced on age.
Also there are simple methods (with no special equipment) to determine if
there has been significant loss of capacity on an annual basis so why change
the battery if its still like new. Not accurate enough for you perhaps but a
great indication of any significant problems
>
> Another bad thing about what you did is that not all the cells have the
same capacity. The cell with the lowest capacity is actually going to go
into reverse charge from the other cells when it goes totally flat and the
voltage across it from the other cells is reverse polarity. Not good.
Again I only quoted
>
> If you want to deep cycle a battery for some reason, i.e. you want to
measure remaining capacity, stop the discharge at 1.75V per cell (10.5V for
a 12V battery). A simple comparator circuit that will open a relay and
disconnect all loads from the battery when the battery reaches that stage of
discharge is a good thing.
Odyssey specs zero usefull charge at 11.6V 25C open circuit.
>
> > 13.5 plus 0.3V is 13.8V which is a commonly accepted minimum voltage for
> > charging. I have yet to see an alternator internal or external regulator
not
> > set for at least 14.2V and most somewhat higher.
>
> Flooded-cell and AGM batteries want about 14.5-14.6 V for proper
absorption charging. Gell-cells want about 14.2V. Flooded-cell and AGM
batteries want about 13.2V for float charging (battery maintenance) while
gell-cells want about 13.6V. And these values change with temperature, that
is they go down as the temperature goes up and vice-versa.
Agree but so what, and ODYSSEY is different from above. Regulators are made
including one designed by Bob and sold widely that has an temp sensor option
to adjust the voltage.
Again you seem to be a a purest where its not needed or possible.
Of course I went and got a AGM concord battery years ago when Bob was
pushing them and it failed in 6 months just being treated still on the shelf
etc. Bad cell one day.
> So most charging systems in aircraft actually abuse the batteries. Once I
learned that I was no longer surprised that the life of an AGM in my
Comanche was never more than 2 years. Flooded-cell batteries last a lot
longer as they just gas and you can replace the water they lose.
>
> OTOH, batteries are relatively cheap and replacing them every year is
cheap insurance even if you do abuse them.
That is your choice natch.
> > As my backup battery is not used for starting it starts each flight
topped
> > off so the current from the alternator is not charging but used for the
> > backup engine systems some of which need to be always of for clean
switching
> > over if needed. Both on is not required for proper operation.
>
> I would look for your backup battery to fail first as it is constantly
being overcharged. OTOH, the diode drop may be saving it from a really
early death.
I again you suggest looking at the subject battery. Also I seem to not win
no matter what. First my diode prevents full charge and now its being over
charged??? :-)
I have friends with large bus conversion RV's and gave up on one and the
other had to spend a couple of k bucks on batteries before I convinced him
to invest in the type of charger you suggest above. But its a very different
case in a small aircraft. and typically used less than 100 hours per year
and most flights around 1-2 hours.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve & Denise" <sjhdcl(at)kingston.net> |
"RV List"
| Subject: | Transponder not working |
Today my transponder quit working. I have a GTX327 and an A-30 encoder wired using
Approach Avionics hub.
The transponder still shows the reply being carried out but ATC could not pick
me up.
The antenna is located far enough away from the comm antenna.
I have checked the BNC connector on antenna.
I'm going to order a different antenna and try that. The antenna I have is the
normal rod type with the ball on the end.
I've seen this problem with Microair transponders before and it turned out to be
a problem with the unit. I've never heard
of a problem with the 327.
I do let the encoder warm up. On this mornings flight it was intermittent and ATC
commented that I came in and out when
I maneuvered. Can't really prove this as ot doesn't happen all the time. Then after
flying for 1.5 hours I returned to the airport
and ATC never received my transponder at all. No position, no altitude.
Any other ideas of how to trouble shot this?
Thanks
Steve Hurlbut
RV7A
90 hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Odyssey battery (was: Power Diode Drops) |
Paul Messinger wrote:
>
> I suggest you look at The ODYSSEY battery. Its very different in many
> respects.
I have looked at it and, actually, it's not that different. It is an AGM battery
using the spiral-wound construction technique. This type of battery was designed
for UPS applications and has very low internal resistance right down to
final discharge allowing UPS's to use much smaller and lighter batteries than
they might otherwise need. The UPS designers don't expect them to get used much
so they accept a design that represents a high level of abuse to the battery.
Even though it has very low internal resistance it is still an AGM battery. It
is subject to the same chemistry as other AGM batteries and operates at the same
voltages. It has the same failure modes as well. Its big advantage is its
huge plate area due to the spiral-wound foil construction.
Now don't get me wrong; the Odyssey battery is quite nice and I will probably use
a pair of them in my CJ6A if I don't go with gell-cells. (I have no big starting
loads as the M14P engine uses compressed air to start.) But it is still
an AGM battery and subject to the foibles of all AGM batteries.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Wiegenstein" <n727jw(at)hellerwiegenstein.com> |
| Subject: | ICOM A200 Transmit Probelm Solved: Deformed Molex |
Pin
After many hours of troubleshooting, I found the problem discussed in my
earlier post on this issue. The ground controller verified that I was
transmitting carrier only, as Brian Lloyd suspected in his helpful post to
my original message. I went over - again - all of the wiring between the
ICOM, the mic jacks, the Flightcom 403, etc. etc. and could not find
anything wrong. In the course of that process I verified continuity from
the "comm audio output" of the 403 to the "mic audio in" pin for the ICOM,
so the problem can't be there, can it? Oh yes it can. I later pulled the
Molex-type pin for this wire out of the ICOM's connector to verify that a
strand of shielding had not found its way up against the pin. No sign of
that, but on close inspection the "springy" portion of the pin that contacts
the radio's PCB edge connector seemed a bit squashed down into the pin body.
Hmmmmm . . . I sprung it back out, reinstalled, and VOILA! Loud and
clear transmission. I then followed Brian Lloyd's good suggestions for
dialing in the mic gain and sidetone level (factory setting for sidetone was
a bit high) and am all squared away.
This was a hard problem to track down because there's no way to test for the
physical contact between the Molex pin and the PCB at the back of the radio.
Earlier in my troubleshooting, with the radio out I looked in and could see
all the pins in place, and they were all in the right spot and looked to be
positioned correctly to make good contact with the PCB, so I did not pursue
that avenue further. But it turns out hat looks can be deceiving :-( I
don't know if this pin was bad from the start or if I damaged it in some way
in the original installation. I think Bob has mentioned before that these
type of pin and connector systems are somewhat more process-sensitive than,
say, a D-sub, and provide more opportunities for problems. It seems to me
that if a D-sub connector goes together physically then by definition you
MUST have solid electrical contact at all pins, whereas in the Molex type
connector on the ICOM you can have proper mechanical seating of the device
and yet NOT have electrical contact.
Oh well, now I know a lot more about the insides of my ICOM, and am doubly
sure that all my wiring is correct. I felt kind of dumb spending so much
time chasing so many theories/possibilities when it was a simple case of "no
connection" the whole time, but maybe this will save someone else a similar
waste of time. Brian, thanks too for your comments and feedback.
John Wiegenstein
Hansville, WA
RV-6 N727JW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rd2(at)evenlink.com |
| Subject: | antenna adapter ? |
In a C-172 I inherited an already installed little box that I don't know
the exact purpose of. It sits on the column near the handheld mike.
The box looks aftermarket and is labeled as "KX99 Antenna Adapter".
It has 2 BNC inputs labeled "Radio" and "Antenna" on the back and a 3.5 mm
jack on the front.
I thought it's an antenna-interrupt feed to a handheld, but neither
plugging in a 3.5 mm plug nor unplugging the Radio or Antenna BNC's does
affect the operation of the panel radios. I haven't yet checked, if the 3.5
mm jack can be used as an antenna feed to a handheld (got to make up a BNC
to 3.5 mm cable for the purpose). Any hints as to what that box could be or
do?
Thanks
Rumen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey battery (was: Power Diode Drops) |
Me thinks you have the wrong battery. The ones I am talking about are
designed for starting, lighting and ignition and have an outstanding track
record. not spiral wound either.
go a google search on PC 680
In any event I have spent far too much time on this.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Odyssey battery (was: Power Diode Drops)
>
> Paul Messinger wrote:
> >
> > I suggest you look at The ODYSSEY battery. Its very different in many
> > respects.
>
> I have looked at it and, actually, it's not that different. It is an AGM
battery using the spiral-wound construction technique. This type of battery
was designed for UPS applications and has very low internal resistance right
down to final discharge allowing UPS's to use much smaller and lighter
batteries than they might otherwise need. The UPS designers don't expect
them to get used much so they accept a design that represents a high level
of abuse to the battery.
>
> Even though it has very low internal resistance it is still an AGM
battery. It is subject to the same chemistry as other AGM batteries and
operates at the same voltages. It has the same failure modes as well. Its
big advantage is its huge plate area due to the spiral-wound foil
construction.
>
> Now don't get me wrong; the Odyssey battery is quite nice and I will
probably use a pair of them in my CJ6A if I don't go with gell-cells. (I
have no big starting loads as the M14P engine uses compressed air to start.)
But it is still an AGM battery and subject to the foibles of all AGM
batteries.
>
> --
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
> brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
> http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
> +1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
>
> There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
> A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Load dump report comment |
I have a major choice to make.
Say nothing for 1-2 MONTHS while the report is completed and polished or put
out preliminary emails. This is after a volunteer effort. I need to get back
to personal projects and create the report in a strictly my time available
basis.
I feel that some will never be convinced of some of the conclusions and many
will be unwilling to change for many reasons.
I am trying to put out preliminary details as the report is drafted. 90-95%
of the entire effort in man hours is the documentation conversion phase from
notes and raw data to polished publication. Thus the hard proof is not
available to the detractors and defenders of the current status.
I will try the preliminary report again but IF the results are like before
(on diodes and batteries) I will likely shut up, publish the report later in
the year after the great flying season is over.
I am wondering if my choice is the best one considering all the discussions
what seems to be to be a "simple better choice" has brought in many cases.
Remember the Schottky diode thread and how long it was. The comments were
not "its a better part and/or do I need it"; But 'what I have is better' and
we do not need your part because 'a switch and special wiring' is better
than an 'automatic no pilot intervention' needed design.
The Battery thread was long in the past and has again restarted.
The informed have gravitated to the subject battery due to widespread usage
data that its a far superior part for the job. Good enough may be ok if a
battery failure is only an inconvenience but not for an electrically
dependent aircraft and or flight in solid IFR. There I want the best and not
shop price alone. But the lowest cost item that works got us to the moon.
Each takes a lot of time to reply to what I feel are incorrect conclusions
to my comments. Then there is the widespread Not invented here (NIH)
syndrome we all have in defending our past choices to any comments that
might reflect on past decisions.
Everyone needs to remember that I took on this testing even when I have way
too much to do and expected to gain nothing for my own personal use. I have
made ZERO design changes to my own electrical system but now have repeatable
test proof of the short comings of some other components and popular
designs. I do now have documentation of why I chose to do things somewhat
differently than what has been established herein.
Perhaps the biggest benefit to me was when Bob provided the DO-160 details
to me for reference use. Its a lot easier to test against established
standards than what "seems" appropriate.
There was a "demand" that any data be from a repeatable test as well as well
document. Reasonable but lots of additional work and frankly in this case
many details that seemed to me to be clear cut on inspection.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Digital Music in the Cockpit |
>
>richard(at)riley.net wrote:
>
>>
>> The IPOD hard disk tends to head crash above 10,000 feet with just a touch
>> of turbulence. I found out the hard way
>
>Ahh, good point. I hadn't considered that but since the heads ride
>on an air cushion, altitude is an issue. I regularly fly in the
>mid-teens.
All the hard disk equipped MP3 players would be susceptible to this
same issue. You can't cheat on the laws of physics.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com> |
| Subject: | ICOM A200 Molex Connector |
Has anyone a source for the
pins and Molex connector that are peculiar to the
ICOM A200 radio? I've been looking and cannot
seem to find a source for these parts. The install
manual only alludes to their presence.
Larry McFarland
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Robinson <crj(at)lucubration.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Digital Music in the Cockpit |
Kevin Horton wrote:
>
>>
>>richard(at)riley.net wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> The IPOD hard disk tends to head crash above 10,000 feet with just a touch
>>> of turbulence. I found out the hard way
>>
>>Ahh, good point. I hadn't considered that but since the heads ride
>>on an air cushion, altitude is an issue. I regularly fly in the
>>mid-teens.
>
>
> All the hard disk equipped MP3 players would be susceptible to this
> same issue. You can't cheat on the laws of physics.
Good point. If you're going to be flying this high in an unpressurized cockpit
you're best off with a Flash-based player. There are plenty of them out there,
and there are no hard drives to crash.
Regards,
Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "qcbccgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: ICOM A200 Molex Connector |
I would start with local Radio Shack. If they don't have it do a google
search for Molex. Might go to Local Radio shop and ask Tim. He might have
one or can get one. Another source is Newark. Warren Radio on 23rd ave
Moline in the old Anderson Bike building probably could help. Since one can
pull the radio and take it in you have at least 1/2 of the connector. You
could also e-mail Tom Henry Tomhenry3(at)aol.com who used to work at Elliott's
and works for me at Oshkosh. If you have a number it would help as I have an
old Newark Catalog. You can find DigiKey and they might have what you need.
If none of these don't pan out. ask again. Bet I can come up with more.
Cy Galley - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair
Safety Programs Editor - TC
EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: ICOM A200 Molex Connector
>
> Has anyone a source for the
> pins and Molex connector that are peculiar to the
> ICOM A200 radio? I've been looking and cannot
> seem to find a source for these parts. The install
> manual only alludes to their presence.
>
> Larry McFarland
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "qcbccgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: antenna adapter ? |
Hopefully you haven't transmitted with the panel radio disconnected. Your
last statement is the purpose of the antenna box. One can plug in a KX-99
or other handheld and use it to transmit and receive using the same antenna
as your panel radio. I believe that it disconnects the panel radio so you
aren't transmitting into the panel radio with your handheld.
Using an external antenna with your hand held works great.
Cy Galley - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair
Safety Programs Editor - TC
EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: <rd2(at)evenlink.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: antenna adapter ?
>
> In a C-172 I inherited an already installed little box that I don't know
> the exact purpose of. It sits on the column near the handheld mike.
> The box looks aftermarket and is labeled as "KX99 Antenna Adapter".
> It has 2 BNC inputs labeled "Radio" and "Antenna" on the back and a 3.5 mm
> jack on the front.
> I thought it's an antenna-interrupt feed to a handheld, but neither
> plugging in a 3.5 mm plug nor unplugging the Radio or Antenna BNC's does
> affect the operation of the panel radios. I haven't yet checked, if the
3.5
> mm jack can be used as an antenna feed to a handheld (got to make up a BNC
> to 3.5 mm cable for the purpose). Any hints as to what that box could be
or
> do?
> Thanks
> Rumen
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ICOM A200 Molex Connector |
Thanks Cy.
The Molex address worked, now for a supplier.....tomorrow.
Mac
----- Original Message -----
From: "qcbccgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: ICOM A200 Molex Connector
>
> I would start with local Radio Shack. If they don't have it do a google
> search for Molex. Might go to Local Radio shop and ask Tim. He might have
> one or can get one. Another source is Newark. Warren Radio on 23rd ave
> Moline in the old Anderson Bike building probably could help. Since one
can
> pull the radio and take it in you have at least 1/2 of the connector. You
> could also e-mail Tom Henry Tomhenry3(at)aol.com who used to work at
Elliott's
> and works for me at Oshkosh. If you have a number it would help as I have
an
> old Newark Catalog. You can find DigiKey and they might have what you
need.
> If none of these don't pan out. ask again. Bet I can come up with more.
>
> Cy Galley - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair
> Safety Programs Editor - TC
> EAA Sport Pilot
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
> To:
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: ICOM A200 Molex Connector
>
>
>
> >
> > Has anyone a source for the
> > pins and Molex connector that are peculiar to the
> > ICOM A200 radio? I've been looking and cannot
> > seem to find a source for these parts. The install
> > manual only alludes to their presence.
> >
> > Larry McFarland
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Redmon" <james(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ICOM A200 Molex Connector |
Sure do! And more...
http://www.berkut13.com/extractor.htm
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
http://www.berkut13.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: ICOM A200 Molex Connector
>
> Has anyone a source for the
> pins and Molex connector that are peculiar to the
> ICOM A200 radio? I've been looking and cannot
> seem to find a source for these parts. The install
> manual only alludes to their presence.
>
> Larry McFarland
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Foerster" <jmfpublic(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Load dump report comment |
Paul,
Unless you want to deal with many comments from the listers here, just say nothing
until the report is done. You already have the unnamed peer to help you,
so our comments might not add much. Many of us enjoy the running discourse, but
you have time limitations, and this is a volunteer effort on your part. No
need to feel that you must do interim reports unless you want feedback, and the
inevitable misunderstandings!
Thanks,
Jim Foerster
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | LOAD DUMP report #2 |
Here are the filtered out parts of DO-160 that apply to 14V systems.
A: Normal Operating conditions:
SYSTEM BUS Voltage
Max 15.1
Nominal 13.8
Minimum 11.0
B: Momentary power interruptions. 50 ms drop out.
C: BUS voltage variations
Increase to 20V for 30 ms and reduce to 7.5 volts for 30 ms.
D: Abnormal voltages steady state
Max 16.1
Nom 13.8
Min 10.0
E: Abnormal surge voltage
20V dc for one second.
F: Voltage spike
41.4V peak with a 50 ohm source impediance
Pulse Rise time 2 micro sec max and total pulse is 10 micro second
minimum.
Basically there is no requirement to operate below 11.0 Volts nor above 15.1
Volts
The equipment must survive with out damage 10.0 Volts to 16.1 Volts. and as
a added requirement survive without damage 20V for one second.
The 20V for one second is tough but the 41.4 spike is also a big energy
spike to deal with. The rise time requirement results in very high frequency
energy that does not follow low frequency filtering approaches well. It can
go right past a filter cap if one is not careful in picking the part.
The 50 ohm source impedance means that if you have a 50 ohm resistor across
the spike the voltage across the resistor is cut in 1/2. Well 1/2 is still
large and that assumes you have a input impedance of 50 ohms or less at the
50-100 MHZ spike fundamental rise frequency. Not all that easy to do.
I am still working on a spike generator as its not trivial to do to the
stated wave form requirements. Easy to overkill as the fall time has no
specified max duration. Rise time is tough due to the equivalent frequency
of the leading edge.
Its called build and test a special pulse generator. :-(
The 20V for one second is really forever to most electronics.
I have left out the battery system voltages during starting as its really a
case by case issue.
The above is a fast look as there are lots of pages to review plus my typos
and missing item. The final report will be carefully reviewed for
completeness and accuracy
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Load dump report comment |
>
>I have a major choice to make.
>
>Say nothing for 1-2 MONTHS while the report is completed and polished or put
>out preliminary emails. This is after a volunteer effort. I need to get back
>to personal projects and create the report in a strictly my time available
>basis.
>
>I feel that some will never be convinced of some of the conclusions and many
>will be unwilling to change for many reasons.
. . . I'm mystified by any perception of resistance to change for
the sake of resisting change. This is an anathema to the whole
way. If a builder doesn't like the way some part of his
project is behaving, he's ENCOURAGED to change it for the better
and do it tomorrow without waiting on anyone's permission.
>I am trying to put out preliminary details as the report is drafted. 90-95%
>of the entire effort in man hours is the documentation conversion phase from
>notes and raw data to polished publication. Thus the hard proof is not
>available to the detractors and defenders of the current status.
Perhaps I've missed reading all the posts on the subject but
I'm aware of no "detractors" . . . The issues as I perceive them
are:
(1) There's no argument that an alternator will produce an overshoot
transient when it's relieved of a load. The magnitude of that transient
is a function of RPM, alternator design, and the size of the current's
step function at the onset of the transient event.
(2) There are many suggestions in-the-wild for components suited to
to soak up the excess energy. Obviously, sizing the component depends
on transient characteristics from (1) above and design goals for
limiting ultimate voltage developed by the alternator overshoot.
>I will try the preliminary report again but IF the results are like before
>(on diodes and batteries) I will likely shut up, publish the report later in
>the year after the great flying season is over.
Don't think I saw the "first" preliminary . . . the
report needs to come in two pieces: (1) here's what we did,
here's what we measured and (2) here's what is recommended based
upon those measurements.
The first part is the repeatable experiment which is
subject to critical review taking into consideration the
test setup, measurement methods and measurement accuracy.
The second part is also subject to review to gage efficacy
of the recommendations with respect to meeting design
goals.
Common understanding of design goals was what we were missing
when you were making an argument for Schottky diodes with
application calling for use during battery-only ops. My
vision was for normal-ops with a design goal of minimizing
cost, time and risk for the neophyte user in a sitution
where power-loss was the least significant of the considerations.
>I am wondering if my choice is the best one considering all the discussions
>what seems to be to be a "simple better choice" has brought in many cases.
>
>Remember the Schottky diode thread and how long it was. The comments were
>not "its a better part and/or do I need it"; But 'what I have is better' and
>we do not need your part because 'a switch and special wiring' is better
>than an 'automatic no pilot intervention' needed design.
We were getting wrapped around the axle of deducing whether
tossing off 5 watts vis-a-vis 10 watts was a "good" thing
to do in an isolation diode. It took a number of exchanges
for me to become aware that the way you decided to use diodes
in your design had nothing to do with the way the diode was
used in designs I recommended. I was not aware that you
had incorporated didoes that were in service during
battery-only ops. Further, the architecture of the system
in your project was not one of those illustrated in Appendix Z.
The confusion was understandable. You were talking apples, I
was talking oranges and the differences in design goals were not
part of the discussion. This is nothing new . . . I see $millions$
dumped down the drain for similar reasons in the certified world
every year.
>The Battery thread was long in the past and has again restarted.
>The informed have gravitated to the subject battery due to widespread usage
>data that its a far superior part for the job.
I'm not sure I'm seeing all the list-threads. What's going on
with batteries? The AeroElectric-List traffic to my e-mail box
is a trickle of what I was getting a month ago . . .
> Good enough may be ok if a
>battery failure is only an inconvenience but not for an electrically
>dependent aircraft and or flight in solid IFR. There I want the best and not
>shop price alone. But the lowest cost item that works got us to the moon.
>
>Each takes a lot of time to reply to what I feel are incorrect conclusions
>to my comments. Then there is the widespread Not invented here (NIH)
>syndrome we all have in defending our past choices to any comments that
>might reflect on past decisions.
Not that I'm aware of . . . much of what's being done differently
today than in 1960 has evolved based on new components and
technologies that didn't exist then. These new opportunities came
about only because the OBAM aircraft community was free
of crippling regulations that carved the certified ships into
bureaucratic stone. I fully expect what's being done today will
appear just as quaint and out-of-step with the materials and ideas
available just a few years hence.
>Everyone needs to remember that I took on this testing even when I have way
>too much to do and expected to gain nothing for my own personal use. I have
>made ZERO design changes to my own electrical system but now have repeatable
>test proof of the short comings of some other components and popular
>designs. I do now have documentation of why I chose to do things somewhat
>differently than what has been established herein.
It was never clear to me in what way you were doing stuff that was so
different. Tell you what. Let's do a Z-Figure to describe your
architecture and publish it in Rev 11 along with the supporting
notes to describe the design goals. The 'Connection was never
intended to be the gospel according to Bob Nuckolls but rather
a gathering place for the best we know how to do.
>Perhaps the biggest benefit to me was when Bob provided the DO-160 details
>to me for reference use. Its a lot easier to test against established
>standards than what "seems" appropriate.
>
>There was a "demand" that any data be from a repeatable test as well as well
>document. Reasonable but lots of additional work and frankly in this case
>many details that seemed to me to be clear cut on inspection.
I don't recall anyone making demands of anybody to do anything. I
do recall a suggestion that useful conclusions are based on
data taken in a manner that anyone can repeat the experiment and
confirm good data and debunk bad data. Remember the "cold fusion"
flooby dust that circulated around the media a few years ago? Also keep
in mind that the same Chicken-Littles squawking about global
warming today were wringing their hands over a forecasted new
ice age just thirty or so years ago.
Take your time with the report . . . experience with 200,000+
airplanes over the past 55 or so years suggests that nobody's
airplane is going to come spiraling out of the sky shedding
parts and trailing smoke because of a load-dump event.
I've said this before Paul, if we do our jobs right, what we
and our contemporaries publish now will have significance to those who
read our words long after we're too senile to pound a keyboard.
Given that the current flagship publications don't know the difference
between good data and trash, then I'll suggest that the 'Connection
is the only bright star on the horizon for electrical systems.
This is not a contest but a sifting of chaos for useful
simple-ideas. A minor but learned philosopher who departed us
just a few days ago suggested that, "Good ideas are always simple,
but few are easy."
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LOAD DUMP report #2 |
>
>Here are the filtered out parts of DO-160 that apply to 14V systems.
>
>A: Normal Operating conditions:
>
> SYSTEM BUS Voltage
> Max 15.1
> Nominal 13.8
> Minimum 11.0
These numbers are consistent with max lead-acid charging voltages at
very cold temperatures See page 15 of
http://www.concordbattery.com/products/technical_info/owner%20manual.pdf
(from which one may deduce that going flying with a battery that's
cold soaked to -10F or lower is NOT a good idea) and battery
state of charge (see page 17 of same document).
>B: Momentary power interruptions. 50 ms drop out.
This covers things like the momentary interruptions of battery
voltage we were talking about a few months ago . . . seems a tap of
a wrench would open the power path of about ANY contactor. See
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/CH10V.jpg (Cole-Hersee dropout)
and
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/RS10V.jpg (RBM-Stancore dropout)
>C: BUS voltage variations
> Increase to 20V for 30 ms and reduce to 7.5 volts for 30 ms.
"Load dump" and "starter motor inrush brownout"
>D: Abnormal voltages steady state
> Max 16.1
> Nom 13.8
> Min 10.0
>
> E: Abnormal surge voltage
> 20V dc for one second.
>
> F: Voltage spike
>
> 41.4V peak with a 50 ohm source impediance
> Pulse Rise time 2 micro sec max and total pulse is 10 micro second
>minimum.
I believe you're quoting Section 17 here where the 2/10 uSec
spike from a 50-ohm source is 600 volts open circuit for category
A in 28 volt systems . . . and 1/2 that value or 300 volts open
circuit for 14 volt systems.
This turns out to be a rather low energy pulse. I built the spike
generator about 25 years ago and used it one time on a certification
program. Seems that a 10 uf tantalum capacitor across the input supply
voltage to the unit under test completely wiped out the effects of this
stress.
After whipping the dragon in the first test, it didn't seem useful
to test again after a stock solution was deduced. That pulse generator
might still be laying around out at Electromech . . . if you want it
I'll see if I can pry it out of the dust.
>Basically there is no requirement to operate below 11.0 Volts nor above 15.1
>Volts
paragraph 16.5.2.1 calls for functionality down to 9.0 volts
in emergency conditions . . . of course, OBAM aircraft are never
going to suffer a 9.0 volt EMERGENCY so I don't place much
significance on this suggested benchmark.
>The equipment must survive with out damage 10.0 Volts to 16.1 Volts. and as
>a added requirement survive without damage 20V for one second.
>
>The 20V for one second is tough but the 41.4 spike is also a big energy
>spike to deal with. The rise time requirement results in very high frequency
>energy that does not follow low frequency filtering approaches well. It can
>go right past a filter cap if one is not careful in picking the part.
Figure 16-6 speaks to high energy surges. Note that category Z for
28 volt systems calls for 80 volts and 100 milliseconds and 40 volts
for about 1.5 seconds. There is no category Z graphed for 14 volt
systems but as our design goals pegged the 14 volt tests at 1/2
the 28 volt values of 40 volts for 100 milliseconds and 20-24 volts
for 1 to 1.5 seconds depending on category of the test one embraces.
>The 50 ohm source impedance means that if you have a 50 ohm resistor across
>the spike the voltage across the resistor is cut in 1/2. Well 1/2 is still
>large and that assumes you have a input impedance of 50 ohms or less at the
>50-100 MHZ spike fundamental rise frequency. Not all that easy to do.
The 50-ohm source impedance applies only to Section 17 spikes
which are intended to mimic un-bridled inductive components
like contactors and is very low energy, easy to deal with
as described elsewhere.
>I am still working on a spike generator as its not trivial to do to the
>stated wave form requirements. Easy to overkill as the fall time has no
>specified max duration. Rise time is tough due to the equivalent frequency
>of the leading edge.
>
>Its called build and test a special pulse generator. :-(
>
>The 20V for one second is really forever to most electronics.
Been doing it for years . . . piece of cake.
>I have left out the battery system voltages during starting as its really a
>case by case issue.
Nope, that's what paragraphs 16.5.2.4 and 16.5.2.5 speak to. Anything
less than
a 50 mS drop out needs to be handled by the momentary interruptions testing.
Brownouts are addressed in the paragraphs cited above. Also note the suite
of brownout test conditions specific to digital equipment cited in Table
16-1.
Finally, I'd point out Figure 16-1 AC voltage modulation on the DC power
(alternator ripple) that quite often trips up the neophyte designer.
>The above is a fast look as there are lots of pages to review plus my typos
>and missing item. The final report will be carefully reviewed for
>completeness and accuracy.
I'm wondering how much of DO-160 you're stirring into the
pot for picking a suitable component to stand off the load
dump-event on a 60A alternator. Load-dump stresses are
bounded by abnormal surge requirements of 16.5.4.4
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rd2(at)evenlink.com |
| Subject: | Re: antenna adapter ? |
Thanks Cy.
No, I haven't X-mitted with the antenna disconnected.
The purpose stated was my first thought, but the thing is plugging a 3.5 mm
plug into the jack does not disconnect the antenna to anything in the
panel. I will have to check out the jack.
Rumen
_____________________Original message __________________________
(received from qcbccgalley; Date: 12:18 PM 6/6/2004
-0500)
Hopefully you haven't transmitted with the panel radio disconnected. Your
last statement is the purpose of the antenna box. One can plug in a KX-99
or other handheld and use it to transmit and receive using the same antenna
as your panel radio. I believe that it disconnects the panel radio so you
aren't transmitting into the panel radio with your handheld.
Using an external antenna with your hand held works great.
Cy Galley - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair
Safety Programs Editor - TC
EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: <rd2(at)evenlink.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: antenna adapter ?
>
> In a C-172 I inherited an already installed little box that I don't know
> the exact purpose of. It sits on the column near the handheld mike.
> The box looks aftermarket and is labeled as "KX99 Antenna Adapter".
> It has 2 BNC inputs labeled "Radio" and "Antenna" on the back and a 3.5 mm
> jack on the front.
> I thought it's an antenna-interrupt feed to a handheld, but neither
> plugging in a 3.5 mm plug nor unplugging the Radio or Antenna BNC's does
> affect the operation of the panel radios. I haven't yet checked, if the
3.5
> mm jack can be used as an antenna feed to a handheld (got to make up a BNC
> to 3.5 mm cable for the purpose). Any hints as to what that box could be
or
> do?
> Thanks
> Rumen
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Load dump report comment |
Embedded clipped and snipped :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Load dump report comment
>
> >
>> Don't think I saw the "first" preliminary . . . the
> report needs to come in two pieces: (1) here's what we did,
> here's what we measured and (2) here's what is recommended based
> upon those measurements.
>
> The first part is the repeatable experiment which is
> subject to critical review taking into consideration the
> test setup, measurement methods and measurement accuracy.
> The second part is also subject to review to gage efficacy
> of the recommendations with respect to meeting design
> goals.
My preliminary reports as posted on this group is not in the above format. I
am taking a component and commenting on preliminary results.
The real report is many pages long and will be posted on another web site
when done along with all the necessary details to support the test results.
> I recommended. I was not aware that you
> had incorporated didoes that were in service during
> battery-only ops. Further, the architecture of the system
> in your project was not one of those illustrated in Appendix Z.
Point taken and I apologized for the confusion however Schottky diodes have
been around in easy to use form for many years.
You have not addressed my needs in any of your "Z" drawings but I have
Bought your 'book' in the past. It was several years ago that I needed to
complete my design. I have an auto engine conversion where there is no
practical way of having a second alternator and the engine needs around 10A
to run the High pressure fuel pumps, IGN and Injection system. This and my
basic aversion to direct battery connections resulted in a somewhat
different approach.
> It was never clear to me in what way you were doing stuff that was so
> different. Tell you what. Let's do a Z-Figure to describe your
> architecture and publish it in Rev 11 along with the supporting
> notes to describe the design goals. The 'Connection was never
> intended to be the gospel according to Bob Nuckolls but rather
> a gathering place for the best we know how to do.
Perhaps some time in the future. but not now as I have way too much to do.
> I don't recall anyone making demands of anybody to do anything. I
> do recall a suggestion that useful conclusions are based on
> data taken in a manner that anyone can repeat the experiment and
> confirm good data and debunk bad data.
"Demand" was not said but it was clear that any testing that was to be taken
seriously needed to be properly done and that is just what I have done.
BTW I totally agree with the need to do proper testing, its just needing to
preovide detailed documentation that is a pain.
I did all the testing I needed for my design years ago but as i was the only
one who needed the results, I did not document the results such that a non
believer could be convinced.
>
> Take your time with the report . . . experience with 200,000+
> airplanes over the past 55 or so years suggests that nobody's
> airplane is going to come spiraling out of the sky shedding
> parts and trailing smoke because of a load-dump event.
No but I have tested and demonstrated that under specific conditions you can
get total unrecoverable electrical power failure from one component's
failure. Extreme case; I had though so but not so sure now. Rare and very
unlikely very much so. However I would not want to chance it. This case will
be discussed later. For one thing I will not discuss anything until My peer
and I have a tested solution to what we see as a needed change.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Fatwire Super-2-CCA |
Bob,
You should have a piece of this and I would welcome your testing it.
A couple of things: I had hoped the cable with insulation would come it at
under 3 oz/ft, but it is 3.08 oz/ft. But this is still far below the
lightest possible AWG 2 copper cable. On the other hand, quite remarkably,
the resistance came in MUCH lower than expected, at 0.134 milliohms per foot
*. Copper AWG 2 is 0.156 milliohms per foot. Even SILVER AWG 2 is 0.144
milliohm per foot.
We studied insulations for the wire. Some insulation would have made the
wire unaffordable. Other types were unsuitable for various reasons. In the
end only PVC made sense. I think it's time to say that PVC insulation is not
the same stuff they made in the 1950's and is superior in all the
characteristics that make good insulation. All the wiring in your house is
insulated with PVC. This insulation is rated VW-1 but is actually
self-extinguishing in the thickness used on the cable. It's environmentally
friendly and very good stuff.
We'll see how this goes.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
*The manufacturer measured a single strand and calculated up to the full
bundle, I performed the actual voltage drop/current measurement. The results
are the same within the measurement error. Physics is physics but a small
change in core-clad ratio or aluminum purity is probably responsible for
this.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LOAD DUMP report #2 |
First I was not questioning the contents of DO-160, just trying to take 20+
pages and cut it down to something the masses could easily read and see.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: LOAD DUMP report #2
>
> >
> >Here are the filtered out parts of DO-160 that apply to 14V systems.
> >
> > F: Voltage spike
> >
> > 41.4V peak with a 50 ohm source impediance
> > Pulse Rise time 2 micro sec max and total pulse is 10 micro second
> >minimum.
>
> I believe you're quoting Section 17 here where the 2/10 uSec
> spike from a 50-ohm source is 600 volts open circuit for category
> A in 28 volt systems . . . and 1/2 that value or 300 volts open
> circuit for 14 volt systems.
First Page 17-2 specifically specified cat B 2 x line voltage ac or dc or
200 which ever is less. Thus I do not see how you get 300V out of 2x times
13.8v
I do not see how any cat other than B applies to experimental aircraft
builders. I am not addressing what major avionics mfgrs might need to comply
with. However If we as a builder make and install some simple piece of
electrical equipment we need to at least be aware of what it might need to
be designed for.
Its not so much the total energy its the rise time that passes right thru
many caps. I recall comments last year about the use of a 10mfd electrolytic
which may or may not do the job. Its common industry practice to have a
10mfd bulk cap and also a 0.1 cap to supress noise in the frequency range of
the subject spike. Early IC designs specified this in great detail as their
parts could fail with just the bulk cap. Later designs in some cases
included internal protection so external caps were not needed.
>
> This turns out to be a rather low energy pulse. I built the spike
> generator about 25 years ago and used it one time on a certification
> program. Seems that a 10 uf tantalum capacitor across the input supply
> voltage to the unit under test completely wiped out the effects of
this
> stress.
> After whipping the dragon in the first test, it didn't seem useful
> to test again after a stock solution was deduced. That pulse generator
> might still be laying around out at Electromech . . . if you want it
> I'll see if I can pry it out of the dust.
No Thanks its just something not around most shops. I am in the process of
building one. Energy is relative, normal pulse generators do not address
anything close.
Again I see no cat Z applicability to our systems.
>
> >The 50 ohm source impedance means that if you have a 50 ohm resistor
across
> >the spike the voltage across the resistor is cut in 1/2. Well 1/2 is
still
> >large and that assumes you have a input impedance of 50 ohms or less at
the
> >50-100 MHZ spike fundamental rise frequency. Not all that easy to do.
>
> The 50-ohm source impedance applies only to Section 17 spikes
> which are intended to mimic un-bridled inductive components
> like contactors and is very low energy, easy to deal with
> as described elsewhere.
Which are around in mass if the diode supressor fails open for any reason
including mechanical.
> >I have left out the battery system voltages during starting as its really
a
> >case by case issue.
I left it out as there are many electronic ign/fuel systems that need better
voltage standards to operate and this is where the use of an isolated
battery has been discussed. Not every one has electronic engine controls and
the needs of the varous products are differrent. Thus there is NOT one size
fits all.
> Finally, I'd point out Figure 16-1 AC voltage modulation on the DC
power
> (alternator ripple) that quite often trips up the neophyte designer.
I agree and that is addressed and measured in the testing performed.
>
>
> >The above is a fast look as there are lots of pages to review plus my
typos
> >and missing item. The final report will be carefully reviewed for
> >completeness and accuracy.
>
>
> I'm wondering how much of DO-160 you're stirring into the
> pot for picking a suitable component to stand off the load
> dump-event on a 60A alternator. Load-dump stresses are
> bounded by abnormal surge requirements of 16.5.4.4
First I am not trying to sturr anything, just informing in simple terms
something that is often quoted as a 'tablet from on high'.
Second the above paragraph fails to cover what the real load dump is as
measured in my testing. (for 14V systems it specifies 30V for 100ms.)
Also who is to say that a 60V 50 ms pulse is less or more damaging?? Is it
the V; or the duration; or the total energy?? Well it depends on the design
to some extent. In the case of my suggested (load dump) solution I am
concerned with the total energy as that converts into device junction
heating which seems to be the design driver. Peak V and current are not a
concern.
AS for picking a part I am concerned about all of the above and in most
cases there is a simple solution.
I do appreciate your comments!
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: KT-71 Transponder |
>
>Hey all.
>
>I picked up a KT-71 transponder with no rack/connector. From what I can
>figure out from info available, this transponder will fit in the rack
>and connector for the KT-76a so I found one and bought it. I looked at
>the connector pin-out diagrams on Bob's site and the KT-71 is not
>listed. Does anybody happen to know if the KT-76a pin-outs are the same?
>or, does anybody happen to have the correct wiring diagram for this
>setup? It will be connected to an ACK-A30 Encoder.
>
>I thank you in advance.
Wiring for the KT-71 is not in my data base. Sorry I can't
help there.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LOAD DUMP report #2 |
>
>First I was not questioning the contents of DO-160, just trying to take 20+
>pages and cut it down to something the masses could easily read and see.
Understand. I posted a similar document a couple of years ago . . .
> >
> > I believe you're quoting Section 17 here where the 2/10 uSec
> > spike from a 50-ohm source is 600 volts open circuit for category
> > A in 28 volt systems . . . and 1/2 that value or 300 volts open
> > circuit for 14 volt systems.
>
>First Page 17-2 specifically specified cat B 2 x line voltage ac or dc or
>200 which ever is less. Thus I do not see how you get 300V out of 2x times
>13.8v
>
>I do not see how any cat other than B applies to experimental aircraft
>builders. I am not addressing what major avionics mfgrs might need to comply
>with. However If we as a builder make and install some simple piece of
>electrical equipment we need to at least be aware of what it might need to
>be designed for.
Category B, nor any other category "applies" to experimental
(or any specific class of certified ships for that matter). The
selection of applicable category is between the manufacturer and
the FAA on a case by case basis for certified ships and between the
manufacturer and the customer for OBAM aircraft. Selection of category
Z (600v/300v) for all of my designs is based on spikes that have been
observed to exist on very ordinary components under ordinary circumstances
See -300v spike illustrated in first figure of
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/spikecatcher.pdf
Category Z is a non-issue if one simply installs a modern tantalum
bypass capacitor across the 14v line. So whether one chooses to design
to Category B or category Z is a no-brainer. Put the cap on and
everybody is happy.
>Its not so much the total energy its the rise time that passes right thru
>many caps. I recall comments last year about the use of a 10mfd electrolytic
>which may or may not do the job. Its common industry practice to have a
>10mfd bulk cap and also a 0.1 cap to supress noise in the frequency range of
>the subject spike. Early IC designs specified this in great detail as their
>parts could fail with just the bulk cap. Later designs in some cases
>included internal protection so external caps were not needed.
You're talking about much stiffer spikes than those generated by
energy dumps from contactor coils. The spike generator has both a 50
ohm source impedance -AND- considerable inductance (hence the
2 uSec rise time). My first experience with this test showed
that the most plain vanilla tantalum would wash out the spike
delivered by the generator we constructed.
> >
> > This turns out to be a rather low energy pulse. I built the spike
> > generator about 25 years ago and used it one time on a certification
> > program. Seems that a 10 uf tantalum capacitor across the input supply
> > voltage to the unit under test completely wiped out the effects of
>this
> > stress.
> > After whipping the dragon in the first test, it didn't seem useful
> > to test again after a stock solution was deduced. That pulse generator
> > might still be laying around out at Electromech . . . if you want it
> > I'll see if I can pry it out of the dust.
>
>
>No Thanks its just something not around most shops. I am in the process of
>building one. Energy is relative, normal pulse generators do not address
>anything close.
>
>Again I see no cat Z applicability to our systems.
You can build to category B if you wish but I think your
repeat of my experiment will show that category Z compliance
is so easy that there's no reason not to embrace it.
> >
> > >The 50 ohm source impedance means that if you have a 50 ohm resistor
>across
> > >the spike the voltage across the resistor is cut in 1/2. Well 1/2 is
>still
> > >large and that assumes you have a input impedance of 50 ohms or less at
>the
> > >50-100 MHZ spike fundamental rise frequency. Not all that easy to do.
> >
> > The 50-ohm source impedance applies only to Section 17 spikes
> > which are intended to mimic un-bridled inductive components
> > like contactors and is very low energy, easy to deal with
> > as described elsewhere.
>
>Which are around in mass if the diode supressor fails open for any reason
>including mechanical.
>
> > >I have left out the battery system voltages during starting as its really
>a
> > >case by case issue.
>
>I left it out as there are many electronic ign/fuel systems that need better
>voltage standards to operate and this is where the use of an isolated
>battery has been discussed. Not every one has electronic engine controls and
>the needs of the varous products are differrent. Thus there is NOT one size
>fits all.
Of course not. DO-160 is not a requirement but a guide. Even big
boys like Unisom and Aerosance decided to ignore and/or remain ignorant
of what the document suggests and why. Further, somebody within the
FAA decided to bless their decisions. I'm suggesting that WE can
do better . . . MUCH better.
> > Finally, I'd point out Figure 16-1 AC voltage modulation on the DC
>power
> > (alternator ripple) that quite often trips up the neophyte designer.
>
>I agree and that is addressed and measured in the testing performed.
> >
> >
> > >The above is a fast look as there are lots of pages to review plus my
>typos
> > >and missing item. The final report will be carefully reviewed for
> > >completeness and accuracy.
> >
> >
> > I'm wondering how much of DO-160 you're stirring into the
> > pot for picking a suitable component to stand off the load
> > dump-event on a 60A alternator. Load-dump stresses are
> > bounded by abnormal surge requirements of 16.5.4.4
>
>First I am not trying to sturr anything, just informing in simple terms
>something that is often quoted as a 'tablet from on high'.
Don't know of any regulatory "tablets" worth the stone
they're carved out of. DO-160 is a guide which the tablet
carvers are fond of citing . . . but for the moment, the
OBAM community is free to embrace or reject all or any part
of it. Except for lightning, sand-dust, and fungus testing,
most of DO-160 is not difficult to do. It's not a 100% guarantee
that there won't be problems . . . but in my experience, it's
covered me 99.9% of the time for about 30 years.
>Second the above paragraph fails to cover what the real load dump is as
>measured in my testing. (for 14V systems it specifies 30V for 100ms.)
>Also who is to say that a 60V 50 ms pulse is less or more damaging?? Is it
>the V; or the duration; or the total energy?? Well it depends on the design
>to some extent. In the case of my suggested (load dump) solution I am
>concerned with the total energy as that converts into device junction
>heating which seems to be the design driver. Peak V and current are not a
>concern.
I would have predicted this. Tablet carvers are fond of tossing
numbers around as if they understood what they mean. Note that
except for radiated and conducted emissions, DO-160 is silent
on limiting antagonistic stresses. Actually, Mil-Std-704 speaks
to characteristics of power generation equipment. This is where
the tablet-carvers dropped the ball in applying DO-160 to
alternator installations (all they decided to look at was
conducted and radiated emissions - nobody picked up on the
fact that alternators had another capability for mischief).
Embracing DO-160 test parameters for alternators INFERS that we'll
install alternator systems that do not exceed the DO-160 values to
which potential victims are tested. Hence, except where
specific energy requirements were spelled out in Section 17
spike testing, all others speak only to voltage and duration.
It's up to us as responsible designers to see that any
prophylactic measures applied to an alternator are selected
with a goal of not exceeding limits of some category of
DO-160 qualified victim.
That's why we need to go test alternators as antagonists
to measure energy of the load dump transient and craft designs that
keep stresses inside safety margins suggested by the category
of victims crafted under DO-160.
>AS for picking a part I am concerned about all of the above and in most
>cases there is a simple solution.
Hear, hear!
>I do appreciate your comments!
My pleasure sir.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LOAD DUMP report #2 |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: LOAD DUMP report #2
>
> >
> >First I was not questioning the contents of DO-160, just trying to take
20+
> >pages and cut it down to something the masses could easily read and see.
>
> Understand. I posted a similar document a couple of years ago . . .
> Category B, nor any other category "applies" to experimental
> (or any specific class of certified ships for that matter). The
> selection of applicable category is between the manufacturer and
> the FAA on a case by case basis for certified ships and between the
> manufacturer and the customer for OBAM aircraft. Selection of category
> Z (600v/300v) for all of my designs is based on spikes that have been
> observed to exist on very ordinary components under ordinary
circumstances
>
> See -300v spike illustrated in first figure of
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/spikecatcher.pdf
>
Yes but what you are showing is the Negative spike from the inductor. Part
of my test series on the exact contactors I used includes similar waveforms.
Caps act differently with the polarity of the spike so in theory both
polarities need to be looked at.
However DO-160 specifies a positive going spike and sadly an incomplete
spike specification other than the peak. A max rise time with no minimum as
well as a minimum duration with no maximum is in my opinion inadequate.
Never would have got past review in aerospace at least where I worked.
> You're talking about much stiffer spikes than those generated by
> energy dumps from contactor coils. The spike generator has both a 50
> ohm source impedance -AND- considerable inductance (hence the
> 2 uSec rise time). My first experience with this test showed
> that the most plain vanilla tantalum would wash out the spike
> delivered by the generator we constructed.
First it was the likes of National semi not me discussing the need for
multiple types of bypass caps and second I have seen spikes on my test setup
from contact action where the coils were properly supressed.
In aerospace we always had R/C contact arc supressors across every contact.
I used to see them in the major dist catalogs but not lately.
Regardless, spike catcher diodes are needed in my opinion and your point is
taken. I always considered them a requirement. They do delay the opening of
the contactors I used by a great deal however.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com> |
| Subject: | ICOM edge card connector pins |
Thanks very much for the recent assist,
After an advised search, the pins and Molex connector used in the
A200 radio were found and ordered from Mouser.com The plan is to do
a complete reinstall of these in the radio case mount.
I've spent about several hours getting the fit and expansion of these little flex-nose
connectors just right for good contact, but just a little vibration of the wire
at the pin causes erratic loud or low volume. Doubling ground-contact
opposites on the edge card is likely as much for contact redundancy as electron
capacity
because only half each seems to work most of the time. So it's not good enough
for taxi in my airspace.
If anyone's a better idea, I'd like to hear about it and continue on to first flight.
Thanks again,
Larry McFarland - 601HDS @ www.macsmachine.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Maxwell" <wrmaxwell(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ICOM A200 Molex Connector |
They are carried as spare parts by Icom, at least here in Oz.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: ICOM A200 Molex Connector
>
> Has anyone a source for the
> pins and Molex connector that are peculiar to the
> ICOM A200 radio? I've been looking and cannot
> seem to find a source for these parts. The install
> manual only alludes to their presence.
>
> Larry McFarland
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | ICOM edge card connector pins |
| From: | "Bordelon, Greg" <gbordelon(at)hess.com> |
Larry,
I also suggest you gently rub the radio circuit board edge contacts with a green
scotch brite pad. This will remove any oils, oxidation, contamination, etc.
from the board. I did this to my transponder recently and it corrected an intermittent
mode C problem I had been experiencing. The keys words here are "gently
rub".
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [SMTP:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Larry McFarland
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 7:08 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: ICOM edge card connector pins
>
>
>
> Thanks very much for the recent assist,
> After an advised search, the pins and Molex connector used in the
> A200 radio were found and ordered from Mouser.com The plan is to do
> a complete reinstall of these in the radio case mount.
>
> I've spent about several hours getting the fit and expansion of these little
flex-nose
> connectors just right for good contact, but just a little vibration of the wire
> at the pin causes erratic loud or low volume. Doubling ground-contact
> opposites on the edge card is likely as much for contact redundancy as electron
capacity
> because only half each seems to work most of the time. So it's not good enough
> for taxi in my airspace.
>
> If anyone's a better idea, I'd like to hear about it and continue on to first
flight.
> Thanks again,
>
> Larry McFarland - 601HDS @ www.macsmachine.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)ashcreekwireless.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
Further, anyone running an e-bus load of
> more than 5 amps continuous through ANY diode may be running the wrong
> architecture.
I'm real curious as to the reasoning behind this statement. Why not 10
amps, or even more, to the E-buss if the wiring, diode and fuse, etc. at the
battery are all sized correctly. There are some pretty good reasons why 5
amps may not be enough to operate everything you might need on the E-buss.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Power Diode Drops
>
> >
> >My numbers are similar to Paul's, for the 276-1185 diode bridge I got
from
> >Radio Shack versus the IR 100BGQ-030 Schottky, the numbers are:
> >
> >Load Radio Shack Schottky
> >5A 0.86 Vf 0.32 Vf
> >10A 0.89 0.34
> >11A 0.91 0.35
> >16A 0.94 0.35
> >
> >At any point the Schottky ran far cooler than the RS diode.
> >
> >The energy left in the battery is extremely important. . .
>
>
> This is a moot point. The battery is never used to supply normal
> path current. The only time the diode is in service is while the
alternator
> is running and main bus voltage is 13.8 to 14.6 volts. People keep
> tossing around these gawd-awful power dissipations as significant
> to battery-only endurance when the diode carries no current during
> alternator-out operations. Further, anyone running an e-bus load of
> more than 5 amps continuous through ANY diode may be running the wrong
> architecture.
>
> > One of the techniques
> >that is now being used in battery operated devices is to use circuitry
that
> >jacks up the output voltage to whatever you want while it sucks the
> >batteries flat. Example---a single 1.5 Volt cell drives circuitry that
> >produces 9V in a transistor- battery-sized package with flat discharge
until
> >dead. MUCH greater capacity, MUCH lower cost. Cool....
>
> . . . completely inapplicable in this instance. Battery only ops tie
> all e-bus equipment directly to the battery. E-bus loads should provide
> useful operation down to 10.5 volts (battery capacity less than 5%).
Jacking
> up the parts count to squeeze that last 5% out of the battery is an
> confession to having undersized the battery and/or subjecting it
> to poor preventative maintenance.
>
>
> >So the Schottky can use much more of the energy contained in the battery.
> >That energy is sitting there at a great penalty in weight if you don't
use
> >it. Someone should figure this out--it's probably a pound or more.
> >
> >This is not a case of what Brian calls "angels dancing on the head of a
> >pin". This is not a subtle difference at all.
>
>
> Diode drop and wattage could be important if folks choose
> to use it in a manner for which it was never suggested or intended.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> |
| Subject: | ICOM edge card connector pins |
I recommend a pencil eraser instead. Again, lightly.
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Bordelon, Greg
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: ICOM edge card connector pins
Larry,
I also suggest you gently rub the radio circuit board edge contacts with a
green scotch brite pad. This will remove any oils, oxidation, contamination,
etc. from the board. I did this to my transponder recently and it corrected
an intermittent mode C problem I had been experiencing. The keys words here
are "gently rub".
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[SMTP:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry
McFarland
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 7:08 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: ICOM edge card connector pins
>
>
>
> Thanks very much for the recent assist,
> After an advised search, the pins and Molex connector used in the
> A200 radio were found and ordered from Mouser.com The plan is to do
> a complete reinstall of these in the radio case mount.
>
> I've spent about several hours getting the fit and expansion of these
little flex-nose
> connectors just right for good contact, but just a little vibration of the
wire
> at the pin causes erratic loud or low volume. Doubling ground-contact
> opposites on the edge card is likely as much for contact redundancy as
electron capacity
> because only half each seems to work most of the time. So it's not good
enough
> for taxi in my airspace.
>
> If anyone's a better idea, I'd like to hear about it and continue on to
first flight.
> Thanks again,
>
> Larry McFarland - 601HDS @ www.macsmachine.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Ziegler <jamescraigziegler(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ICOM edge card connector pins |
A pencil eraser works well for this also.
>
> From: "Bordelon, Greg" <gbordelon(at)hess.com>
> Date: 2004/06/08 Tue AM 10:08:51 EDT
> To:
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: ICOM edge card connector pins
>
>
--
jim Ziegler
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Power Diode Drops |
> Further, anyone running an e-bus load of
> > more than 5 amps continuous through ANY diode may be running the wrong
> > architecture.
>
> I'm real curious as to the reasoning behind this statement. Why not 10
> amps, or even more, to the E-buss if the wiring, diode and fuse, etc. at the
> battery are all sized correctly. There are some pretty good reasons why 5
> amps may not be enough to operate everything you might need on the E-buss.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'll take a stab- consider that many use a 17 Ah battery (mine is 20) and
carry around 40 gal. of gas burning 8 gal/hr (YMMV!). So starting with a
healthy, fully charged batt (which it won't be if you just cranked your engine)
and
full fuel on a four hour flight, you start out with about the same amount of
juice in gas and amp tanks both. Assume approx. 1 amp CONTINUOUS load on
average from stuff like comm, xpndr/enc., engine monitor etc. Now, if you lost
your amp replacer as soon as you get to altitude, you should be able to get to
original destination with minimum perspiration and no diversion. If IMC, better
amend your flight plan if you ain't packing the amps for it........
I did a lot of wrestling with what went on the E-buss (call it essential or
endurance, maybe should be called EE-buss!) for my day/nite VFR ship, but
considering the above rationale, it made the choices a whole lot easier. Nuckolls
repeats the mantra over and over in the Connection and here on the A-list, and
every time I'd try to do an end run around it I'd come back to the same
place. I devoted maybe 3 years total on my electrical system design and execution-
Bob has spent a lifetime doing them and I'm not smart enough to argue with
him! Maybe just smart enough to listen! 8-)
$.02 From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark -6A "Xpdnc", Z-11 (mostly), Lycoming on mags, flying 75 hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Sampson" <SSampson.SLN21(at)london.edu> |
| Subject: | the smoke is still in the wires but............... |
I have wired up the VANS supplied ND alternator as described in Z-24.
If I put the master to the position that would bring the alternator online
if the engine was running, the 5Amp OV breaker pops. Is it reasonable for
the field windings to draw more than 5 Amps when the altenator is not
turning? (The OV Protection module is not the culprit since if I pull the
plug with the excitation out of the altrernator, no problem.)
Thanks Steve.
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fatwire Super-2-CCA |
>
>Bob,
>
>You should have a piece of this and I would welcome your testing it.
>
>A couple of things: I had hoped the cable with insulation would come it at
>under 3 oz/ft, but it is 3.08 oz/ft. But this is still far below the
>lightest possible AWG 2 copper cable. On the other hand, quite remarkably,
>the resistance came in MUCH lower than expected, at 0.134 milliohms per foot
>*. Copper AWG 2 is 0.156 milliohms per foot. Even SILVER AWG 2 is 0.144
>milliohm per foot.
>
>We studied insulations for the wire. Some insulation would have made the
>wire unaffordable. Other types were unsuitable for various reasons. In the
>end only PVC made sense. I think it's time to say that PVC insulation is not
>the same stuff they made in the 1950's and is superior in all the
>characteristics that make good insulation. All the wiring in your house is
>insulated with PVC. This insulation is rated VW-1 but is actually
>self-extinguishing in the thickness used on the cable. It's environmentally
>friendly and very good stuff.
>
>We'll see how this goes.
>
>Regards,
>Eric M. Jones
>www.PerihelionDesign.com
>113 Brentwood Drive
>Southbridge MA 01550-2705
>Phone (508) 764-2072
>Email: emjones(at)charter.net
>
>*The manufacturer measured a single strand and calculated up to the full
>bundle, I performed the actual voltage drop/current measurement. The results
>are the same within the measurement error. Physics is physics but a small
>change in core-clad ratio or aluminum purity is probably responsible for
>this.
Eric,
Looks good. Have you considered discounting quantities to other
dealers? Stein Bruch at steinair.com sells a TON of wire and wiring
supplies. I think he also does custom cable assemblies. It wouldn't
hurt to drop him a note and introduce yourself. I've carbon-copied him
on this note.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Glasgow" <willfly(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Antenna Question |
I=92m an RV8 guy looking for a way to use the exterior comm antenna for my 300XL
as the antenna for my ICOM (handheld) should the 300XL comm fail.
I=92m wondering about using a BNC bulkhead connector under the panel, connecting
the antenna wire running directly from the main antenna to one side and connecting
the 300XL to the other. This would effectively, create a splice in the
main antenna wire with the BNC bulkhead connector.
In the event of a failure of the 300XL, I could disconnect the 300XL side and hook
up the ICOM (handheld) antenna in its place.
Would there be signal strength losses to 300XL?
Could this plan work?
Comments please!
Steve Glasgow
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Williams" <rwayne(at)gamewood.net> |
| Subject: | Transponder troubleshooting |
Can anyone suggest a procedure for troubleshooting a transponder? I have a
new Garmin GTX327 installed in an all metal airplane (RV8A) and everything
looks like it is working great, but ATC has trouble "seeing" it. I need to
be very close as if its a weak signal. The reply light is showing numerous
regular replies so the receiving end seems to be working fine. I've replaced
the coax and connectors. Suggestions?? Thanks!
Wayne Williams
RV8A
Danville, VA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
| Subject: | Antenna Question |
Steve,
Here's a link to Bob's article about a little box you can build to switch
the antenna to your hand-held:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/commtap/commtap.html
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Steve
Glasgow
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Antenna Question
I=92m an RV8 guy looking for a way to use the exterior comm antenna for my
300XL as the antenna for my ICOM (handheld) should the 300XL comm fail.
I=92m wondering about using a BNC bulkhead connector under the panel,
connecting the antenna wire running directly from the main antenna to one
side and connecting the 300XL to the other. This would effectively, create
a splice in the main antenna wire with the BNC bulkhead connector.
In the event of a failure of the 300XL, I could disconnect the 300XL side
and hook up the ICOM (handheld) antenna in its place.
Would there be signal strength losses to 300XL?
Could this plan work?
Comments please!
Steve Glasgow
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "steven dinieri" <capsteve(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Transponder troubleshooting |
I have the same transponder and experience intermittent complaints from
atc as well. Its in a 6A and I've checked everything 'cept sending the
unit out for repair.
Steve
Can anyone suggest a procedure for troubleshooting a transponder? I have
a
new Garmin GTX327 installed in an all metal airplane (RV8A) and
everything
looks like it is working great, but ATC has trouble "seeing" it. I need
to
be very close as if its a weak signal. The reply light is showing
numerous
regular replies so the receiving end seems to be working fine. I've
replaced
the coax and connectors. Suggestions?? Thanks!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Ziegler <jamescraigziegler(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Transponder troubleshooting |
Where is the antenna located on the aircraft?
>
> From: "Wayne Williams" <rwayne(at)gamewood.net>
> Date: 2004/06/08 Tue PM 08:58:02 EDT
> To:
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Transponder troubleshooting
>
>
--
jim Ziegler
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ICOM A200 Transmit Probelm Solved: Deformed |
Molex Pin
John Wiegenstein wrote:
> connection" the whole time, but maybe this will save someone else a similar
> waste of time. Brian, thanks too for your comments and feedback.
Thanks. It is nice to know that this "blind hog" occasionally finds an acorn.
:-)
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Digital Music in the Cockpit |
Chad Robinson wrote:
>>All the hard disk equipped MP3 players would be susceptible to this
>>same issue. You can't cheat on the laws of physics.
>
>
> Good point. If you're going to be flying this high in an unpressurized cockpit
> you're best off with a Flash-based player. There are plenty of them out there,
> and there are no hard drives to crash.
But I can't get 10GB flash cards ... yet. I really like having ALL my music.
My iPod spent 7.5 hours at 12,500' yesterday. It performed flawlessly.
And anyone contemplating a trip down to the Virgin Islands, I recommend stopping
for fuel in Great Inagua, Bahamas, instead of Providenciales, Turks & Caicos.
There are two reasons:
1. They didn't charge me any customs or handling fees in Great Inagua. Last time
I went to Provo they charged me about $100 extra. They also charged me less
for fuel than does the FBO in Provo.
2. The Department of Homeland Security allows you to go from the US to the Bahamas
without a "wavier", something that takes 2 weeks to get for a trip to/from
the Turks & Caicos.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William" <wschertz(at)ispwest.com> |
I am having difficulty with something that I thought would be easy, namely
determining the current draws of avionics, so I could size the alternator.
I find that the spec sheets on the web for an SL-30, or transponder , etc.
tell me every thing but how much current they use steady state. Can anyone
steer me to a place that can provide that information?
Bill Schertz
KIS Cruiser # 4045
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Schlotthauer" <rv7maker(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | lectrical planning per Aeroelectric |
Hi All,
I thought that I had my electrics all layed out, and mostly installed until
I started wondering about my e-bus architecture. Per Aeroelectric figure
Z-11, Bob puts a s*&% load of stuff on the e-bus and runs it all off a 7A
fuse. What the heck? And the feed from the main bus, through the diode is
on 16 GA wire (11A max). What am I missing? My layout is more like Z-11 for
the all electric variety, but I would think that I need to size wire, fuses,
switches, and diode for a situation where everything is on. Is this a
difference in fuse ratings and actual loads?
Thanks,
Ross Schlotthauer
www.experimentalair.com
RV-7 wiring (head scratching)
http://join.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Williams" <rwayne(at)gamewood.net> |
I have the antenna at aircraft centerline just behind the baggage area near
the front of the tailcone on the bottom. It's well away from the landing
gear and comm antennae.
Thanks.
Wayne
From: Jim Ziegler <jamescraigziegler(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Transponder troubleshooting
Where is the antenna located on the aircraft?
>
> From: "Wayne Williams" <rwayne(at)gamewood.net>
> Date: 2004/06/08 Tue PM 08:58:02 EDT
> To:
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Transponder troubleshooting
>
>
--
jim Ziegler
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: lectrical planning per Aeroelectric |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Most of the items on the e-bus in z-11 are of the much-less-than-1A
variety (voltmeter, intercom, gps, turn coordinator, com (1.2A when
transmitting) and txp). If you pick LED's for the panel flood, that's less
than 500mA. The only item that has potential to be a hog is the boost
pump.
Matt-
N34RD
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I thought that I had my electrics all layed out, and mostly installed
> until I started wondering about my e-bus architecture. Per
> Aeroelectric figure Z-11, Bob puts a s*&% load of stuff on the e-bus
> and runs it all off a 7A fuse. What the heck? And the feed from the
> main bus, through the diode is on 16 GA wire (11A max). What am I
> missing? My layout is more like Z-11 for the all electric variety, but
> I would think that I need to size wire, fuses, switches, and diode for
> a situation where everything is on. Is this a difference in fuse
> ratings and actual loads?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ross Schlotthauer
> www.experimentalair.com
> RV-7 wiring (head scratching)
>
> http://join.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | F1Rocket(at)comcast.net |
Can someone send me a copy of the Garmin 400 Series Installation manual? You can
send it direct to f1rocket(at)comcast.net.
Thank you.
Randy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: lectrical planning per Aeroelectric |
>
>The only item that has potential to be a hog is the boost
>pump.
>
>Matt-
>N34RD
>
But, for most aircraft, the electric boost pump isn't needed to
complete the flight. So, it probably doesn't need to be on the
E-bus. The probability of an main alternator failure and an
engine-driven fuel pump failure on the same flight is very low. If
you have the very bad luck to have both those failures on the same
flight you could bring the main bus back on line to get power for the
boost pump and then do manual load shedding by turning off unneeded
items.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eric Schlanser <eschlanser(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Voltage regulator problem? |
Can someone help me with an answer to this fellow's regulator problem? I think
he is on the right path but am not certain.
Thanks in advance, Eric Schlanser, Kalamazoo, MI. Just starting the electrical
system in my Wittman Tailwind W-10 project with Lyc O-320.
Eric:
I own a 1958 Piper Comanche 250.
Before engine start, the "Battery Charge" voltmeter on the instrument
panel
reads 12.6 Volts.
After starting the engine, the "Battery Charge" voltmeter on the
instrument
panel reads 14.1 Volts.
In flight, the "Battery Charge" voltmeter will increase up to 14.9
Volts
(almost in the red).
Is 14.9 Volts too high? Should I try to correct this situation? Could
the
Voltage Regulator be bad, or possibly Alternator putting out too much
voltage?
Thanks,
John
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Voltage regulator problem? |
Eric Schlanser wrote:
> I own a 1958 Piper Comanche 250.
>
> Before engine start, the "Battery Charge" voltmeter on the instrument
> panel reads 12.6 Volts.
>
> After starting the engine, the "Battery Charge" voltmeter on the
> instrument panel reads 14.1 Volts.
Normal.
> In flight, the "Battery Charge" voltmeter will increase up to 14.9
> Volts (almost in the red).
Not normal.
> Is 14.9 Volts too high?
Probably but read on.
> Should I try to correct this situation?
> Could the Voltage Regulator be bad, or possibly Alternator putting
> out too much voltage?
First determine that you really are seeing 14.9 volts. Get a known-good voltmeter
and put it on the bus to read the voltage and check the calibration of the
aircraft's voltmeter.
The interesting thing is that I see exactly the same problem in my 1960 PA-24-250
but only when the gear is in-transit. I suspect a connection with too much
voltage drop downstream of the alternator to the gear motor and that the VR is
sampling the bus voltage downstream also. In an attempt to keep the voltage
where it should be at the sense point the VR drives the output of the alternator
too high. I have even had the OV protection relay kick out when the bus is
fully loaded and I dropped the gear. OTOH it could just be a load-dumping event
when the gear completes its cycle.
45 year-old wiring probably is not the best. I suspect that cleaning and repairing
all the old connections would go a long way toward solving the problem.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Malcolm Thomson" <mdthomson(at)attglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Battery orientation... |
Bob, is it important which way (orientation) the 17AH batteries are
mounted. I.E. Do terminal have to be on top?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery orientation... |
Malcolm Thomson wrote:
>
> Bob, is it important which way (orientation) the 17AH batteries are
> mounted. I.E. Do terminal have to be on top?
Gells: any orientation is OK;
AGM: not upside-down, i.e. vents not facing down;
flooded-cells: yes, they must be right-side up.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery orientation... |
>
>Malcolm Thomson wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Bob, is it important which way (orientation) the 17AH batteries are
> > mounted. I.E. Do terminal have to be on top?
>
>Gells: any orientation is OK;
>
>AGM: not upside-down, i.e. vents not facing down;
>
>flooded-cells: yes, they must be right-side up.
Brian is mostly correct . . . but only some manufacturers
recommend against upside-down for their AGM or RG batteries.
For example, Concord's batteries begin life as a flooded
battery and one of the last manufacturing steps is to pour
out all loose liquid before the caps are installed. These batteries
are MORE than saturated and MIGHT contain some loose liquid that MIGHT
poof out if the battery cells vent . . . but it's just
a few drops and will be captured inside the battery case by glass
mat sponges that Concord installs over the vent caps.
A starved electrolyte versions (like Enersys, hawker, and
some others) are less than 100% saturated and will never
vent liquid and could be operated upside down with great
confidence if it's useful to do so.
Everybody's RG batteries run just fine on their sides which
makes the 17 a.h. critters easier to mount. That's the way
I would do it. Build a tray to capture the footprint and
strap it down with a couple of Velcro strips.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve & Denise" <sjhdcl(at)kingston.net> |
"RV List" ,
"Aeroelectric List"
| Subject: | Transponder problem found |
I few days ago I asked for suggestions concerning my GTX327 having intermittent
transmissions as ATC calls it.
After replacing the BNC connectors and the antenna I decided to still get it bench
tested.
After finding a decent shop (not easy) the problem was located. The unit would
pump out 30W instead of the minimum
125W. Tech commented that max range would be 60 nm. I found it to be more like
30 nm at 6000 ft. Not good enough.
The cost to get these things fixed is not cheap. Garmin has a flat rate for each
individual unit and the 327 is $250USD.
Plus I got it looked at locally that cost be $160. Plus FedEx shipping a few times.
You can also get a free loner if you talk
to the Garmin dealer where you bought it. The only cost is shipping. I'll post
the total cost when I get it back. Somewhere
around $600USD. Ouch.
So if you're transponder is intermittent, get it tested. It is rarely the antenna
and BNC connectors problem. But hey its
the easiest thing to trouble shoot.
Steve Hurlbut
RV7A
Flying (no class B for a while)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tinne maha" <tinnemaha(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | LightWeight Cable |
Hello Bob List,
I have been absent the list for quite a while can only be here for a short while
now but have a couple of pressing questions I would like some help with.
I just purchased some copper clad aluminum wire from Eric Jones would like
your guidance on a couple of things. I will use about 34 ft of the cable in my
0-235 powered kitfox - battery in the tail.
#1) I just measured the weight of my super 2 CCA the AWG copper that it is to
replace: Found out the real weight savings for the insulated CCA is only about
19% over the insulated copper, whereas Eric originally advertised a weight
savings of about 45%. As I believe most of difference is in the
insulation, I am considering using 3M FP-301 shrink tubing (Polyolefin, thinner
walled than the Polyvinyl insulation sold by Eric) as insulation instead. What
are your thoughts on this?
#2) There are ~14.5' between my ground bus my battery. My electrical system
will be bonded to the steel tubing fuselage. My + cable will be the super 2 CCA
cable. What is the smallest cable I can use for t
he ground?
Any input will be greatly appreciated. Thank You,
Grant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | klehman(at)albedo.net |
| Subject: | Re: ICOM edge card connector pins |
FWIW there is a liquid semi-conductor called Stabilant 22A that seems to
be effective for eliminating suspected intermittant high resistance
connections in multicontact connectors such as computer connections. As
I understand it, this stuff is an insulator but it becomes a conductor
when squeezed tightly between terminals and an electric potential is
applied. Never seems to hurt and sometimes seems to help a lot...
Ken
Bordelon, Greg wrote:
>
> Larry,
>
> I also suggest you gently rub the radio circuit board edge contacts with a green
scotch brite pad. This will remove any oils, oxidation, contamination, etc.
from the board. I did this to my transponder recently and it corrected an intermittent
mode C problem I had been experiencing. The keys words here are "gently
rub".
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [SMTP:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Larry McFarland
>>Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 7:08 PM
>>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: AeroElectric-List: ICOM edge card connector pins
>>
>>
>>
>>Thanks very much for the recent assist,
>>After an advised search, the pins and Molex connector used in the
>>A200 radio were found and ordered from Mouser.com The plan is to do
>>a complete reinstall of these in the radio case mount.
>>
>>I've spent about several hours getting the fit and expansion of these little
flex-nose
>>connectors just right for good contact, but just a little vibration of the wire
>>at the pin causes erratic loud or low volume. Doubling ground-contact
>>opposites on the edge card is likely as much for contact redundancy as electron
capacity
>>because only half each seems to work most of the time. So it's not good enough
>>for taxi in my airspace.
>>
>>If anyone's a better idea, I'd like to hear about it and continue on to first
flight.
>>Thanks again,
>>
>>Larry McFarland - 601HDS @ www.macsmachine.com
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Ziegler <jamescraigziegler(at)adelphia.net> |
Can I use M22759/11 instead of M22759/16?
M22759/11:
Conductor: Stranded Silver-Plated Copper
Insulation: Extruded TFE Teflon
Temperature Rating: 200 Deg. C.
Voltage Rating: 600 Volts
M22759/16:
Conductor: Stranded Tin-Plated Copper
Insulation: Extruded ETFE Tefzel
Temperature Rating: 150 Deg. C.
Volatage Rating: 600 Volts
All the /11 specs seem as good or better than /16,
except for the Tefzel vs Teflon.
--
jim Ziegler
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dean Psiropoulos" <deanpsir(at)easystreet.com> |
Before Garmin merged with UPS Aviation technologies (formerly Tommorrow) I
purchased a complete UPS AT Avionics Stack for my RV-6A. In that purchase I
included a GX-65 GPS/COM. This is the non IFR version as, at the time, I
knew WAAS was coming and didn't want to pay the $5000.00 UPS was asking for
the TSO-C129 version (the GX-60 model). So I bought the GX-65 for $2900.00
thinking that I'd upgrade to a WAAS receiver later. Well it's later and the
UPS AT (now Garmin AT) CNX-80 is here and I'm just starting to do my
instrument panel work. Consequently, I'm thinking that if I upgrade now and
sell the GX-65 I won't have to fiddle with my panel later to install WAAS
capability. Anyone interested in a brand new still-in-the-box (panel mount)
GPS/COM for $2200.00?
Dean Psiropoulos
RV-6A 24907
Waiting for my TMX-360
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Daniels <jwdanie(at)comcast.net> |
> Consequently, I'm thinking that if I upgrade now and
> sell the GX-65 I won't have to fiddle with my panel later to install
> WAAS
> capability.
Another possibility is the notice that came in the mail a week or two
ago from Garmin offering a trade-in program for all GX series owners.
They will give you $2000 for your GX65. Unfortunately, like most of
these offers, you can probably do much better on the CNX80 price than
the full list $11,995 that Garmin bases the deal on.
Here are the numbers:
CNX80 $11,995
GX55 $1500 credit
GX65 $2000 credit
GX50 $2500 credit
GX60 $3000 credit
"Limited offer ends soon" - they don't say when "soon" is though.
Jim Daniels
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Sampson" <SSampson.SLN21(at)london.edu> |
| Subject: | Alternator problem....help please. |
I posted this the other day and got no replies so I will try
again...............
I have wired up the VANS supplied internally regulated ND alternator as
described in Z-24.
If I put the master to the position that would bring the alternator online
if the engine was running, the 5Amp OV breaker pops. Is it reasonable for
the field windings to draw more than 5 Amps when the altenator is not
turning? (The OV Protection module is not the culprit since if I pull the
plug for the excitation out of the altrernator, no problem.)
Thanks Steve.
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Backup alternator orientation |
Fellow tron listers,
I am installing my backup alternator (SB20) on the vacuum pump pad on my Lalonde-built
O360.
The best I can figure is that the alternator output stud's best position is at
4 O'clock when looking at the back of the engine. Also, with the pad provided
- it seems to stick out quite a bit to the rear of the engine.
I have taken photos if anyone needs additional explanation.....
I sure do......Is this what everyone else with this setup has ended up with?
Thanks,
Ralph Capen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe Dubner <jdubner(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator problem....help please. |
Steve,
About a month ago we experienced a similar situation with a Van's
internally regulated alternator for an RV-4 I was helping with. It
"felt like" a short in the wiring but it wasn't; the alternator's
control terminal measured very low resistance (<2 ohms) to ground.
A call to Van's very savvy customer support electrical guy (Ben)
confirmed a bad alternator and Van's quickly got another one on its way
to us. The new one doesn't trip the breaker.
--
Joe
Long-EZ 821RP
Clarkston, WA
On 12-Jun-04 13:00 Steve Sampson wrote:
>
> I posted this the other day and got no replies so I will try
> again...............
>
> I have wired up the VANS supplied internally regulated ND alternator as
> described in Z-24.
>
> If I put the master to the position that would bring the alternator online
> if the engine was running, the 5Amp OV breaker pops. Is it reasonable for
> the field windings to draw more than 5 Amps when the altenator is not
> turning? (The OV Protection module is not the culprit since if I pull the
> plug for the excitation out of the altrernator, no problem.)
>
> Thanks Steve.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Lightweight cable |
I note the suggestion to use4 welding cable as more
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Lightweight cable |
I note the idea of substituting welding cable as more flexible than its
sister size in AWG - however, have you heard of the flexible cable the
numbnutters are putting in their souped-up Civics for kilowatt FM amps?
Locally here, the car stereo stores are stocking #00 and #4 cable in
clear flexible insulation - which I am told meets transport specs for fire
(?) I have checked it and it certainly seems to meet flex needs.
Cheer, ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Foerster" <jmfpublic(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight cable |
Fergus Kyle wrote:
Unless one were to use a conduit for this automotive cable, the insulation is not
likely to pass a DAR inspection.
John Rourke did some testing of Tefzel, auto, and welding cable. Here is a partial
quote from this Feb 22, 2002 post:
"I also, once upon a time, compared automotive battery cable to welding
cable and Tefzel (22759-xx) in a 700+ degree solder pot and also with
flame tests; the automotive cable burned immediately, made thick oily
smoke and sustained a flame after the source was removed; the Tefzel
smelled fairly nasty but would not burn right away (and would not
sustain a flame at all); the welding cable gave off kind of a "hot
rubbery smell" which wasn't irritationg at all, and would not burn or
melt, but did swell just a bit."
Until someone does some testing of this auto sound cable which establishes that
it can withstand heat and abrasion, we should avoid this stuff.
Fergus, while searching the archives on this topic, your post about weighing welding
cable came up. Something like 55 grams per foot for #4. Did you weigh
the clear insulated auto cable by any chance? I'm curious why you brought this
wire to our attention and am looking for some possible advantage.
Jim Foerster, J400, wiring.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Sampson" <SSampson.SLN21(at)london.edu> |
| Subject: | Alternator problem....help please. |
Joe - thanks! Steve.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Joe
Dubner
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator problem....help please.
Steve,
About a month ago we experienced a similar situation with a Van's
internally regulated alternator for an RV-4 I was helping with. It
"felt like" a short in the wiring but it wasn't; the alternator's
control terminal measured very low resistance (<2 ohms) to ground.
A call to Van's very savvy customer support electrical guy (Ben)
confirmed a bad alternator and Van's quickly got another one on its way
to us. The new one doesn't trip the breaker.
--
Joe
Long-EZ 821RP
Clarkston, WA
On 12-Jun-04 13:00 Steve Sampson wrote:
>
> I posted this the other day and got no replies so I will try
> again...............
>
> I have wired up the VANS supplied internally regulated ND alternator as
> described in Z-24.
>
> If I put the master to the position that would bring the alternator online
> if the engine was running, the 5Amp OV breaker pops. Is it reasonable for
> the field windings to draw more than 5 Amps when the altenator is not
> turning? (The OV Protection module is not the culprit since if I pull the
> plug for the excitation out of the altrernator, no problem.)
>
> Thanks Steve.
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight Cable |
Welding cable is undoubtedly flexible. It is also heavy and the insulation
may or may not be suitable for use in aircraft. (Neoprene is Chlorinated
Polyolefin, and is usually flammable). The clear stuff the Fast and Furious
types uses is heavier yet. But be careful, some weights published are
without insulation.
I designed and built the Super-2-CCA Fatwire to provide the advantage of an
AWG 2 copper cable without the weight. What I got (on a huge spool) is cable
that is much lighter than any possible copper cable with a low resistance
far better than SILVER. True, I was expecting (and calculated) that the wire
would be a bit lighter. But...
Welding cable typically is 277 lbs/1000 feet or 0.277 lbs/foot or 4.43
Ounces per foot. and 90 degC. Super-2-CCA is 69% of this weight with good
flexibility and better 105 degG insulation and enormously better
conductivity (16% better than copper! Holy Moley!).
Anyone who wants a piece of Super-2-CCA for examination for free. Please
email me. I'll send along a piece of RG+142 too. Free!
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Lightweight Cable |
| From: "James Foerster" <jmfpublic(at)comcast.net>
| Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Lightweight cable
| Fergus Kyle wrote:|
|
| Unless one were to use a conduit for this automotive cable, the insulation
is not likely to pass a DAR inspection. John Rourke did some testing of
Tefzel, auto, and welding cable. Here is a partial quote from this Feb 22,
2002 post:
"I also, once upon a time, compared automotive battery cable to welding
| cable and Tefzel (22759-xx) in a 700+ degree solder pot and also with
| flame tests; the automotive cable burned immediately, made thick oily
| smoke and sustained a flame after the source was removed; the Tefzel
| smelled fairly nasty but would not burn right away (and would not
| sustain a flame at all); the welding cable gave off kind of a "hot
| rubbery smell" which wasn't irritationg at all, and would not burn or
| melt, but did swell just a bit."
| Until someone does some testing of this auto sound cable which establishes
that it can withstand heat and abrasion, we should avoid this stuff.
| Fergus, while searching the archives on this topic, your post about
weighing welding cable came up. Something like 55 grams per foot for #4.
Did you weigh the clear insulated auto cable by any chance? I'm curious why
you brought this wire to our attention and am looking for some possible
advantage.
| Jim Foerster, J400, wiring.
Jim,
If I said it was 55gm/foot for #4, I sure hope that's so......
I'm not where I can check. No, I didn't do that as didn't sample any but
just dropped into the car stereo store to see it and any similar bits. The
suggestion came from a fellow ham whose kid was into the hobby of blowing
out brains in a car.
Sorry for any false tip - I was just wondering if any had
preceded me.
Cheers, Ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | PeterHunt1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Backup Alternator Orientation |
Ralph
I have my SB20 backup alternator mounted as you describe (the electrical
connections at 4 o'clock while looking at the back of the engine). I have 2
inches of clearance from the firewall. I am not flying yet, but this arrangement
looks fine to me.
Pete, Clearwater
RV-6, finishing engine installation
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight Cable |
>
>
>| From: "James Foerster" <jmfpublic(at)comcast.net>
>| Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Lightweight cable
>| Fergus Kyle wrote:|
>| | | | < Locally here, the car stereo stores are stocking #00 and #4 cable in
>| |
If this is the stuff I'm familiar with, it sure is sexy looking but
not very practical for stressful environments. Insulation melts
at relatively low temperatures and I suspect will not be very
fire friendly.
>| Unless one were to use a conduit for this automotive cable, the insulation
>is not likely to pass a DAR inspection. John Rourke did some testing of
>Tefzel, auto, and welding cable. Here is a partial quote from this Feb 22,
>2002 post:
>"I also, once upon a time, compared automotive battery cable to welding
>| cable and Tefzel (22759-xx) in a 700+ degree solder pot and also with
>| flame tests; the automotive cable burned immediately, made thick oily
>| smoke and sustained a flame after the source was removed; the Tefzel
>| smelled fairly nasty but would not burn right away (and would not
>| sustain a flame at all); the welding cable gave off kind of a "hot
>| rubbery smell" which wasn't irritationg at all, and would not burn or
>| melt, but did swell just a bit."
>
>| Until someone does some testing of this auto sound cable which establishes
>that it can withstand heat and abrasion, we should avoid this stuff.
I am CERTAIN that this genre` of wire is unsuitable for
aircraft.
>| Fergus, while searching the archives on this topic, your post about
>weighing welding cable came up. Something like 55 grams per foot for #4.
>Did you weigh the clear insulated auto cable by any chance? I'm curious why
>you brought this wire to our attention and am looking for some possible
>advantage.
>| Jim Foerster, J400, wiring.
>
>Jim,
> If I said it was 55gm/foot for #4, I sure hope that's so......
>I'm not where I can check. No, I didn't do that as didn't sample any but
>just dropped into the car stereo store to see it and any similar bits. The
>suggestion came from a fellow ham whose kid was into the hobby of blowing
>out brains in a car.
> Sorry for any false tip - I was just wondering if any had
>preceded me.
Of three suitable choices we've discussed most here on the
list, welding cable is the heaviest and the least expensive.
I've tested its insulation and it's no worse than Tefzel for
smoke and it's self extinguishing for fire resistance. It's
VERY user friendly being the most flexible of the choices.
Tefzel insulated #4 or #2 is quite suitable for any fat-wire
runs. See page 8-6 in the 'Connection.
If you have LONG runs from rear-mounted battery(ies) or a canard-
pusher where battery and engine are on opposite ends of the airplane,
there is an opportunity to save significant weight by taking advantage
of Eric Jones' copper-clad, aluminum wire which runs about one
ounce per foot less than 2AWG Tefzel. Two 16' runs from nose to
tail on a canard-pusher would come in at about 4 pounds lighter than
Tefzel and about 5 pounds lighter than welding cable.
If you're wiring a tractor aircraft with the battery on the firewall,
the total length of fat-wire runs don't justify anything larger
than 4AWG wire. When the ship's total compliment of fat wires totals
less than 6 feet of wire, then there is very little return on
investment for spending more on wire than the cost of welding
cable. Total weight savings is on the order of a half pound.
Irrespective of the material choice for the longest runs of fat-wire, I'd
still recommend short 4AWG welding cable jumpers from battery(+) and
battery(-) terminals to the rest of the system. This wire style
is the least likely to induce mechanical over-stress to battery
connections.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Lightweight cable |
Eric Jones and all else,
That settles it for me. Boomboom cable is out. However, in the
copperclad aluminum line Eric, does the cable 'creep' per the failed
household alu wiring of yore? What steps are taken to avoid this quality of
alu? - I'm sure you've already described this, but I'm lazy and see your
alternative as the way to save weight on a rearmount battery.
Ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight cable |
>Eric Jones and all else,
>That settles it for me. Boomboom cable is out. However, in the
>copperclad aluminum line Eric, does the cable 'creep' per the failed
>household alu wiring of yore? What steps are taken to avoid this quality of
>alu? - I'm sure you've already described this, but I'm lazy and see your
>alternative as the way to save weight on a rearmount battery.
>Ferg
Hi Ferg--A sample is on it's way to you.
I have several notes on this sort of thing on my website
www.PerihelionDesign.com and stuff I've published here.
"Copper clad aluminum wiring has no known history of the types of problems
of aluminum wire." (Coyle Inspection Engineers, Inc
Indeed there does not seem to have been a problem with copper clad aluminum
EVER. A Google search shows that this seems to be true.
The reason aluminum is so difficult to use as wiring is that the bare
aluminum oxidizes and this oxide layer does not conduct electricity (copper
oxides DO conduct well). Nor can you reasonably solder it. Furthermore, the
oxide tends to break up and absorb water and swell. There are technical
solutions to this but why bother?...there's lots of this stuff in commercial
airplanes. Airbus uses this exact same CCA material in many different sizes
INCLUDING small gauges. (And NO they won't sell it to you!)
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dennis Haverlah <clouduster(at)austin.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight Cable |
I'll be building my fusalage on my RV-7A this summer. Please send me a
sample of your wire.
Thanks,
Dennis Haverlah
706 Breakaway Rd.
Cedar Park, Tx. 78613
Eric M. Jones wrote:
>
>Welding cable is undoubtedly flexible. It is also heavy and the insulation
>may or may not be suitable for use in aircraft. (Neoprene is Chlorinated
>Polyolefin, and is usually flammable). The clear stuff the Fast and Furious
>types uses is heavier yet. But be careful, some weights published are
>without insulation.
>
>I designed and built the Super-2-CCA Fatwire to provide the advantage of an
>AWG 2 copper cable without the weight. What I got (on a huge spool) is cable
>that is much lighter than any possible copper cable with a low resistance
>far better than SILVER. True, I was expecting (and calculated) that the wire
>would be a bit lighter. But...
>
>Welding cable typically is 277 lbs/1000 feet or 0.277 lbs/foot or 4.43
>Ounces per foot. and 90 degC. Super-2-CCA is 69% of this weight with good
>flexibility and better 105 degG insulation and enormously better
>conductivity (16% better than copper! Holy Moley!).
>
>Anyone who wants a piece of Super-2-CCA for examination for free. Please
>email me. I'll send along a piece of RG+142 too. Free!
>
>Regards,
>Eric M. Jones
>www.PerihelionDesign.com
>113 Brentwood Drive
>Southbridge MA 01550-2705
>Phone (508) 764-2072
>Email: emjones(at)charter.net
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Re Odyssey battery charging |
Hi ! Guys, I have a Rotax 582 in a Kitfox. The current battery is a normal
wet cell motorcycle battery and it is useless. Was only good for a couple of
months at the most. It has now died to all intents and purposes at a grand
old age of about 7 months. So I have ordered an Odyssey PC625. We will see
if this copes with the deep cycling and several weeks standing at a time
better situation.
However I am wondering if anyone can enlighten me as to the suitability of
the charging system. It is the 264 870 rectifier-regulator. Does anyone know
if it has a limit to the output voltage and if so what that limit is. I am
worried about overcharging on long trips.
By the way just a hint for anyone looking at buying an Odyssey battery. I
live in Australia and the best price I could get here was $230AU delivered
to my Post Office box. I have ordered it from Batteriesforeverything in the
US. It is coming via the slow method and will take 4 to 6 weeks. The cost of
shipping this way was about $35US but a quicker way was double. Anyway the
real point is that it will land at my Post Office box for only $135 AU. My
first quote for local supply was $265AU and that wasn't delivered. So unless
you are in the US you might want to take note re pricing. I found also
prices in the US varied too. Batteriesforeverything was $57.42US whereas
most common price was $89US. Batteriesforeverything was also the most
helpfull. I am not trying to advertise for them just trying to give you an
idea of the situation. Others might be even better perhaps, I just didn't
find them.
Regards Rex
Australia.
rexjan(at)bigpond.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Diffenbaugh" <diff(at)foothill.net> |
| Subject: | Avionics mounting problems |
My local avionics shop has just completed the bench top wiring of a full
GARMIN-AT IFR stack into my RV7A panel subassembly. The panel was CNC cut
and all trays mounted flush and square with the front face of the panel.
The side attachment supports are .063 extruded aluminum angles. All racks
are tied together with additional side straps as well as a full surround
support at the rear subpanel (the 3 firewall braces are installed as well).
The assembly appears to be very solid.
THE PROBLEM: When any individual device is installed with no other devices
installed, that device works fine. When another device is installed as
well, intermittent problems begin to occur. With all 5 devices installed,
lots of problems. The shop explained this is very common and that ever so
slight twisting or pressure exerted by installing several devices at a time
will cause this to happen, and that once the assembly is mounted in the
plane, I will need to manipulate each tray by filing the panel openings,
loosening and retightening mounting screws, bracing, etc., until all devices
work together. Since this seemed incredulous to me, I checked with the
Garmin technical service rep who confirmed this is an everyday occurrence.
The trays must be "tweaked" so that all of the rear pin connectors line up
perfectly.
THE QUESTION: Can anyone share their experiences in dealing with this
"common occurrence" and best way to proceed before I start hacking away?
Thank you,
Scott Diffenbaugh RV7A
diff(at)foothill.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Russell Johnson <entec1(at)pld.com> |
| Subject: | You`ve got 1 VoiceMessage! |
Dear Customer!
You`ve got 1 VoiceMessage from voicemessage.com website!
You can listen your Virtual VoiceMessage at the following link:
http://virt.voicemessage.com/index.listen.php2=35affv
or by clicking the attached link.
Send VoiceMessage! Try our new virtual VoiceMessage Empire!
Best regards: SNAF.Team (R).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Load dump testing etc. |
What started out as a study of alternator load dump and how to mitigate it
has become a full blown end to end system study of a simple aircraft
electrical power system.
Why do you ask, well it turns out that in the process of putting a test
system together and starting to run tests there were problems, lots of
problems to say the least.
Nothing I have found would I ground an aircraft for, but nothing I would
want on my aircraft either.
From major contact bounce on widely used contactors, to transients, to OVP
problems, to many other issues there were issues to investigate to determine
if the problem was in the test setup or real in a real aircraft.
In any event I am done (finally) as finding a problem is the easy part.
Recommending a solution and actually building and testing the solution can
take longer. This is 99.99% completed as of today and the report is
progressing.
Then there is the issue of a solution that will work for example, with major
contact bounce and the results of the bounce on other parts of the system
etc.
Assuming that everyone has built a system of the recommended parts except
for one and thus that part only needs to work with the ideal system is not
realistic.
I have repeatable results that show some widely used components either
produce system "transients" outside DO-160 or fail when subjected to DO-160
or even a "missing" requirement in DO-160.
In any event I will be renaming the report to reflect its wider subject.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: Avionics mounting problems |
Hi Scott,
Don't know if it is common or not, but like you, I think
it smacks of bad workmanship somewhere, sounds like with
Garmin.
Reminds me of the 70s when we were all accustomed to cars
just not working right all the time. Some competitors
showed up and taught us that we can have reliable wheels.
Hopefully this will happen in the avionics biz.
Mickey
>The trays must be "tweaked" so that all of the rear pin connectors line up
>perfectly.
>
> THE QUESTION: Can anyone share their experiences in dealing with this
>"common occurrence" and best way to proceed before I start hacking away?
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Foerster" <jmfpublic(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Audel clamps and tinnerman nuts |
Has anyone had experience with tinnerman nuts in place of the nut, lockwasher,
and plain washer for an Audel clamp used to hold the wiring? I was perusing AC43-13,
and it was mentioned in the section on nuts that the tinnerman nut could
be used on Audel clamps. The section on Audel clamps did not say this, and
only gave the 'standard' hardware. As the tinnerman is inherently self-locking,
and is fewer parts, is there any reason to not standardise on this method?
I will be using the appropriate blunt-nose screw, the so-called type B, also
known as the AN530. The tinnerman flat type nuts are the AN446, and the 'U'
type, which might fit better and eliminate holding anything but the screw, is
the NAS 395. Aircraft Spruce catalog has the pictures of these items is you wish
to look. I'd appreciate opinion and experience.
Jim Foerster, J400, wiring the engine compartment--no nylon lock nuts allowed.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Avionics mounting problems |
>THE PROBLEM: When any individual device is installed with no other devices
>installed, that device works fine. When another device is installed as
>well, intermittent problems begin to occur. With all 5 devices installed,
>lots of problems.
>THE QUESTION: Can anyone share their experiences in dealing with this
>"common occurrence" and best way to proceed before I start hacking away?
>Scott Diffenbaugh RV7A
Wow--Bad design is everywhere. I know little about radio stacks but my guess
is the design is hanging onto an old design idiom common to tube radio
stacks where they had to be swapped a lot.
Certainly the rear socket has to float dimensionally X-Y to align with the
radio. Could this be accomplished simply by hacking the rear out and
plugging in the rear plug to the radio? Maybe add a security cable while
you're at it?
Making the structural support more rigid is just the wrong way to go.
Eric
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Audel clamps and tinnerman nuts |
>
>
>Has anyone had experience with tinnerman nuts in place of the nut,
>lockwasher, and plain washer for an Audel clamp used to hold the
>wiring? I was perusing AC43-13, and it was mentioned in the section on
>nuts that the tinnerman nut could be used on Audel clamps. The section on
>Audel clamps did not say this, and only gave the 'standard' hardware. As
>the tinnerman is inherently self-locking, and is fewer parts, is there any
>reason to not standardise on this method? I will be using the appropriate
>blunt-nose screw, the so-called type B, also known as the AN530. The
>tinnerman flat type nuts are the AN446, and the 'U' type, which might fit
>better and eliminate holding anything but the screw, is the NAS
>395. Aircraft Spruce catalog has the pictures of these items is you wish
>to look. I'd appreciate opinion and experience.
>
>Jim Foerster, J400, wiring the engine compartment--no nylon lock nuts allowed.
"Tinnerman" nuts (Like "Xerox" and "Adel" - trade name of a specific
manufacturer adopted to replace the generic name for a common device) have
be used in aircraft ever since I can remember. I don't recall seeing them
at Boeing on the B-52 but they're used on everything smaller that I've
worked on for 45+ years. I've seen the MISUSED where a fine thread
machine screw was threaded into the nut. However, when used with either
sharp or blunt ended "sheet metal" threaded screws, they'll get a
hell-of-a-grip on things. I don't recall seeing one of these things
shake loose. They're quite commonly used to mount the MS21919DG style
clamps, non-structural closeouts, light weight accessories (light fixtures,
etc).
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Avionics mounting problems |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Hi Scott,
Comments embedded...
>
>
> My local avionics shop has just completed the bench top wiring
> of a full
> GARMIN-AT IFR stack into my RV7A panel subassembly. The panel was CNC
> cut and all trays mounted flush and square with the front face of the
> panel. The side attachment supports are .063 extruded aluminum angles.
> All racks are tied together with additional side straps as well as a
> full surround support at the rear subpanel (the 3 firewall braces are
> installed as well). The assembly appears to be very solid.
Sounds like a good setup. I am envious. :)
>
> THE PROBLEM: When any individual device is installed with no
> other devices
> installed, that device works fine. When another device is installed as
How is the fit of the each devices within its respective tray? Do they
slide in nicely, or do the require significant force to install? Does the
amount of force required to install a device change appreciably depending
on how many other devices are already in the rack?
> well, intermittent problems begin to occur. With all 5 devices
> installed, lots of problems.
What kinds of problems?
> The shop explained this is very common and
> that ever so slight twisting or pressure exerted by installing several
> devices at a time will cause this to happen, and that once the assembly
> is mounted in the plane, I will need to manipulate each tray by filing
> the panel openings, loosening and retightening mounting screws, bracing,
> etc., until all devices work together. Since this seemed incredulous to
> me, I checked with the Garmin technical service rep who confirmed this
> is an everyday occurrence. The trays must be "tweaked" so that all of
> the rear pin connectors line up perfectly.
This sounds like hogwash to me. If the rack is made to reasonable tolerance
such that components can be installed/removed without excessive force, the
electrical end should be good.
This sounds more like an EMI/RFI or power supply problem. Do you have a
good, stout supply to run the power bus from (fully charged battery)?
Does the
behavior of any of the devices change depending on how many other devices
are turned on at the same time, or is it strictly a mechanical issue?
>
> THE QUESTION: Can anyone share their experiences in dealing
> with this
> "common occurrence" and best way to proceed before I start hacking away?
>
I wish I had some real data to share with you.
> Thank you,
>
> Scott Diffenbaugh RV7A
> diff(at)foothill.net
>
>
Please keep us posted with what you find.
Regards,
Matt-
N34RD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hal / Carol Kempthorne <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Avionics mounting problems |
Problems is what you should expect from professional workers. Amateurs,
like me, have no such problems.
I just finished rebuilding my panel and installing a Dynon EFIS and Trio
autopilot and a Narco VOR receiver with indicator. I did not have to tweak
anything more than a miswired low oil pressure warning light and a swap of
antenna cables.
Fix it then sue the shop that stole your money.
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK - Three trips to OSH now.
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Avionics mounting problems |
In a message dated 6/15/04 2:08:31 PM Central Daylight Time,
mprather(at)spro.net writes:
>
> THE QUESTION: Can anyone share their experiences in dealing
> with this
> "common occurrence" and best way to proceed before I start hacking away?
>
I wish I had some real data to share with you.
> Thank you,
>
> Scott Diffenbaugh RV7A
> diff(at)foothill.net
Good Afternoon Scott,
Just as a datapoint, I recently installed a set of RadioRax brand mounting
rails in my spam can. They aren't cheap, but seemed to work quite well. It
really makes mounting the sleeves very easy, but some of the sleeves had to
have their mounting holes slightly modified to take maximum advantage of the
RadioRax performance capability.
I expect the advantage to come whenever I have to make any changes.
One other benefit. No rear supports are needed when the sleeves are mounted
as RadioRax directs.
Check them out at: _http://www.radiorax.com/_ (http://www.radiorax.com/)
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Audel clamps and tinnerman nuts |
Bob; the sharp and blunt end screws are not intended to be interchangable as
the thread dims are slightly different. While they may seem to work its not
a good idea to mismatch.
Perhaps I mis-understood your comments as the "tinnerman" nuts are available
for type A or B or even machine screw. Matching nut to screw type can be, at
times, hard as all are not marked outside original package.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Audel clamps and tinnerman nuts
>
> >
> >
> >Has anyone had experience with tinnerman nuts in place of the nut,
> >lockwasher, and plain washer for an Audel clamp used to hold the
> >wiring? I was perusing AC43-13, and it was mentioned in the section on
> >nuts that the tinnerman nut could be used on Audel clamps. The section
on
> >Audel clamps did not say this, and only gave the 'standard' hardware. As
> >the tinnerman is inherently self-locking, and is fewer parts, is there
any
> >reason to not standardise on this method? I will be using the
appropriate
> >blunt-nose screw, the so-called type B, also known as the AN530. The
> >tinnerman flat type nuts are the AN446, and the 'U' type, which might fit
> >better and eliminate holding anything but the screw, is the NAS
> >395. Aircraft Spruce catalog has the pictures of these items is you wish
> >to look. I'd appreciate opinion and experience.
> >
> >Jim Foerster, J400, wiring the engine compartment--no nylon lock nuts
allowed.
>
> "Tinnerman" nuts (Like "Xerox" and "Adel" - trade name of a specific
> manufacturer adopted to replace the generic name for a common device)
have
> be used in aircraft ever since I can remember. I don't recall seeing
them
> at Boeing on the B-52 but they're used on everything smaller that I've
> worked on for 45+ years. I've seen the MISUSED where a fine thread
> machine screw was threaded into the nut. However, when used with
either
> sharp or blunt ended "sheet metal" threaded screws, they'll get a
> hell-of-a-grip on things. I don't recall seeing one of these things
> shake loose. They're quite commonly used to mount the MS21919DG style
> clamps, non-structural closeouts, light weight accessories (light
fixtures,
> etc).
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul <pwilson(at)climber.org> |
| Subject: | 2 batteries, 1 alternator |
Bob,
Here is my proposed charging battery system. I will operate on one battery. When
the LV light comes on I will switch to the other battery and proceed on the
backup battery with an endurance load until I land.
My design is pretty simple but I need to have some things clarified. If what I
propose is feasible then I will proceed with sizing the batteries.
Single alternator. Assume it is undersized.
Two RG batteries
Mechanical battery power switch with positions A, B, both, off
* What part do I order for OV protection for an internal regulator?
* What part do I order for OV protection for an external regulator?
* What part do I order for low volts indication?
* When operating on battery A what scheme can I use to keep B charged? or vice
versa? Just hook them both up to the alternator in parallel?
* Do I need 2 LV devices?
* 1 volt meter?
* What are the chances that my system will kill the alternator since I will be
operating at max output most all the time? This question applies to two kinds
of alternators -
Rotax external regulation
Generic Ford internal regulation.
Load Dump:
* When operating with significant electrical load and turn off the power switch
then I will likely ruin the alternator. Correct?
* Does the OV device also create a "Load Dump" if it sees the high voltage with
significant load?
Thanks for your help,
Paul
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 batteries, 1 alternator |
Paul wrote:
> * When operating on battery A what scheme can I use to keep B charged? or vice
versa? Just hook them both up to the alternator in parallel?
This is a common problem in boats and RVs where you have a starting battery and
a "house" battery (a deep-cycle battery to provide power when the alternator
isn't running). There are two "standard" approaches used:
1. a dual-diode type battery isolator;
2. a relay-type battery combiner.
The former is bad because the diode drop prevents the batteries from properly charging
unless you put the VR sense lead on the battery side of the isolator.
This works for external regulators but not for internal regulators unless someone
has modified them to use an external sense lead (actually this is pretty
easy to do and I did that for my alternators on my boat before switching to an
external regulator). You also must be careful to use the same type of battery
for both batteries.
The relay-type is better in that it connects both batteries to the bus for charging
when the bus voltage gets up to charging voltage when the alternator is on-line.
When the alternator goes away the relay opens and the batteries are isolated.
I prefer something different. See: http://www.amplepower.com/products/elim/index.html
This device is a proper three-stage charge controller for ensuring that something
like your backup battery is always properly charged. It is a 5A charger that
runs off of an 11V-15V input and implements a proper charging regimen for its
client battery, i.e. constant-current bulk charge, constant-voltage absorption
charge, constant-voltage float charge after the absorption charge completes
and the battery is at 100% charge. It is also temperature compensated to ensure
that the absorption and float charge voltages are correct for the type of
battery; i.e. flooded, AGM, or gell; regardless of temperature.
I use this device on my boat to keep maintain the generator start battery from
the main house battery bank. This ensures that my gen-set will always start even
if something kills my house batteries. Once the gen-set starts my house batteries
charge from the gen-set. My propulsion engines also charge the house
batteries from their alternators as well. I don't like single-points of failure
on my boat either.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | interesting source of information for high-reliability |
DC power systems
I highly recommend Ample Power (http://www.amplepower.com) as a source of information for high-reliability DC power systems. Their information and products are primarily aimed at the marine and RV market but they are just as applicable to OBAM aircraft. Their philosophy seems to dovetail well with Bob's although they do differ in some respects.
Still, they are a good source of information and quality products. I am probably
going to use one of their alternator charge controllers in my aircraft instead
of something else. They can be adjusted to control the duty cycle on the
alternator to ensure that you do not exceed the rating of the alternator. This
is less of a problem in aircraft or boats where you are charging big battery
banks but still, if you want to protect your alternator ...
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Avionics mounting problems |
On my stack, I had a difficult problem with my S-TEC autopilot. Eventually,
I found that the front panel was not letting the connectors seat fully. By
filing the panel so the unit could slide all the way in, I eliminated the
problem.
Jim Oberst
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Avionics mounting problems
>
> Hi Scott,
>
> Comments embedded...
>
> >
> >
> > My local avionics shop has just completed the bench top wiring
> > of a full
> > GARMIN-AT IFR stack into my RV7A panel subassembly. The panel was CNC
> > cut and all trays mounted flush and square with the front face of the
> > panel. The side attachment supports are .063 extruded aluminum angles.
> > All racks are tied together with additional side straps as well as a
> > full surround support at the rear subpanel (the 3 firewall braces are
> > installed as well). The assembly appears to be very solid.
>
> Sounds like a good setup. I am envious. :)
>
> >
> > THE PROBLEM: When any individual device is installed with no
> > other devices
> > installed, that device works fine. When another device is installed as
>
> How is the fit of the each devices within its respective tray? Do they
> slide in nicely, or do the require significant force to install? Does the
> amount of force required to install a device change appreciably depending
> on how many other devices are already in the rack?
>
> > well, intermittent problems begin to occur. With all 5 devices
> > installed, lots of problems.
>
> What kinds of problems?
>
> > The shop explained this is very common and
> > that ever so slight twisting or pressure exerted by installing several
> > devices at a time will cause this to happen, and that once the assembly
> > is mounted in the plane, I will need to manipulate each tray by filing
> > the panel openings, loosening and retightening mounting screws, bracing,
> > etc., until all devices work together. Since this seemed incredulous to
> > me, I checked with the Garmin technical service rep who confirmed this
> > is an everyday occurrence. The trays must be "tweaked" so that all of
> > the rear pin connectors line up perfectly.
>
> This sounds like hogwash to me. If the rack is made to reasonable
tolerance
> such that components can be installed/removed without excessive force, the
> electrical end should be good.
>
> This sounds more like an EMI/RFI or power supply problem. Do you have a
> good, stout supply to run the power bus from (fully charged battery)?
> Does the
> behavior of any of the devices change depending on how many other devices
> are turned on at the same time, or is it strictly a mechanical issue?
>
> >
> > THE QUESTION: Can anyone share their experiences in dealing
> > with this
> > "common occurrence" and best way to proceed before I start hacking away?
> >
>
> I wish I had some real data to share with you.
>
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Scott Diffenbaugh RV7A
> > diff(at)foothill.net
> >
> >
>
> Please keep us posted with what you find.
>
> Regards,
>
> Matt-
> N34RD
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Ripper" <rwripper(at)Prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Permanent Magnet Alternator question |
I have a John Deere Permanent Magnet Alternator and JD solid-state Regulator that
I'm trying to wire up on my Corvair powered Midget Mustang.
What protective devices should be installed and where in the circuit?? The JD schematic
shows a fusible link tween the ignition switch and starter solenoid (where
the Reg/Rec lead lands) and nothing on the two leads tween the alternator
and Reg/Rec.
Thanks, Dick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerzy Krasinski" <krasinski(at)provalue.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Permanent Magnet Alternator question |
Dick,
Could you email me a copy of the schematic? I got the controller on ebay
with no documentation and I have few clues how to get it connected.
Thank you,
Jerzy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dick Ripper" <rwripper(at)Prodigy.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Permanent Magnet Alternator question
>
> I have a John Deere Permanent Magnet Alternator and JD solid-state
Regulator that I'm trying to wire up on my Corvair powered Midget Mustang.
>
> What protective devices should be installed and where in the circuit?? The
JD schematic shows a fusible link tween the ignition switch and starter
solenoid (where the Reg/Rec lead lands) and nothing on the two leads tween
the alternator and Reg/Rec.
>
> Thanks, Dick
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Permanent Magnet Alternator question |
>
>I have a John Deere Permanent Magnet Alternator and JD solid-state
>Regulator that I'm trying to wire up on my Corvair powered Midget Mustang.
>
>What protective devices should be installed and where in the circuit?? The
>JD schematic shows a fusible link tween the ignition switch and starter
>solenoid (where the Reg/Rec lead lands) and nothing on the two leads tween
>the alternator and Reg/Rec.
>
>Thanks, Dick
PM alternator systems have the same generic architecture. Wild frequency,
unregulated PM alternator driving a triggered SCR variable-pass regulator.
A typical system offered by Rotax is illustrated in Figure Z-16 of this
document.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev10/z10.pdf
I suspect your proposed combination of components can be wired in
a similar fashion to provide pilot controls plus overvoltage
protection common to most aircraft.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Permanent Magnet Alternator question |
>
>
>Dick,
>
>Could you email me a copy of the schematic? I got the controller on ebay
>with no documentation and I have few clues how to get it connected.
>
>Thank you,
>
>Jerzy
Dick,
If you're going to scan and e-mail this information to Jerzy, I'd
like to see a copy too. Thanks!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 batteries, 1 alternator |
>Paul wrote:
>
> > * When operating on battery A what scheme can I use to keep B charged?
> or vice versa? Just hook them both up to the alternator in parallel?
You can operate as many batteries as your system design dictates
by simply tying them in parallel to the bus during normal operations
an separating them during times of alternator failure so that they
can attend to separate tasks. These techniques are described in detail
in literature you can download at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/bat_iso2.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev10/z10.pdf (see figure Z-30
for details on adding a second battery to any existing single
battery system)
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9005/9005-701B.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/LVWarn-ABMM.html
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/9021-620.pdf
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 batteries, 1 alternator |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> You can operate as many batteries as your system design dictates
> by simply tying them in parallel to the bus during normal operations
> an separating them during times of alternator failure so that they
> can attend to separate tasks.
Here is how you do this automatically:
http://www.yandina.com/c150Info.htm
But I have found that in the case of having two batteries, you probably want them
to behave differently. One battery will be to start your engine and needs
to be a flooded-cell or AGM. Your standby battery probably needs to be a high-capacity
deep-cycle device which implies a gell-cell. These batteries need to
charge differently with FC/AGM batteries wanting a higher absorption charge
voltage and a lower float charge voltage than do gel-cells.
This is where something like the EL512 from Ample Power (http://www.amplepower.com/products/elim/index.html) is so nice. It will do the right thing for your gel-cell and keep it happy. The biggest problem sealed batteries have is overcharging, especially when it is warm.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | vexing comm problem |
6/16/2004
Hello Brian Lloyd, and Other Willing Experts, I have a vexing problem with the
VHF comm portion of my Garmin 430 installed in my KIS TR-1 that I'd like some
help with. Here is the fundamental problem scenario:
1) Start engine, talk to ground control (121.8) using Lightspeed headset, pilot's
push to talk button, and pilot's headset jacks. Everything works normally
so taxi out and make engine run up.
2) Engine run up complete, switch to tower (133.1), try to talk using same arrangement
as in 1). The result is a machine gun like sound when I key the transmitter
-- impossible to transmit coherently. (Rapid intermittent making and breaking
of ground contact for PTT?). Receiver works OK.
3) Put on copilot's headset (David Clark) which is plugged into copilot's jacks,
use copilot's push to talk button and transmit clearly to tower to request and
receive take off clearance.
4) On some rare occasions (tower is familiar with the problem) I get take off clearance
without going to step 2), I take off, switch to departure control (120.82
or 124.65)and have clear communications both directions with departure control
using the equipment in 1).
5) Upon return to home field at the end of a flight where the equipment in 1) above
has worked fine on other frequencies I switch to 133.1 and get the machine
gun effect again when I key the transmitter -- impossible to transmit coherently.
I can solve the problem by using step 3).
Here is what has been tried in the way of trouble shooting or problem solving.
A) Switched headsets between pilot's and copilot's jacks -- problem remains.
B) Extensively worked over pilot's headset jacks to eliminate any intermittent
problems that might exist.
C) Extensively worked over pilots PTT circuit (not button itself) to ensure good
continuity.
The baffling thing seems to be that the only two common items that don't go away
or can not be changed are the frequency of 133.1 and the pilot's PTT button.
When ever these two are combined regardless of what ever else is changed this
machine gun transmit problem may, but not in every instance, exist.
VHF comm antenna is a Bob Archer antenna mounted inside the fuselage side aft of
the copilot's seat.
Any thoughts? Thanks for your help.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - 11/17/03
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | NiMh battery testing |
Bob: I recently re-read your landmark article, "Just How Bad Can a Flashlight
Battery Be?" and it got me to thinking about the less-than-stellar performance
I have gotten from the "2250 mAh" NiMh batteries I ordered from an eBay supplier
this year. Although they seem to work okay for ANC headset and small GPS
use, the kids are complaining that they only last 20 minutes in their CD players,
etc, and I am seeing an immediate low battery warning using freshly-charged
cells in my Icom A-5 Sport due to the nominal cell voltage of 1.2v.
I decided to replicate your battery-killer experiment to determine just how many
electrons are in these little critters. While I do not have access to computerized
A/D voltage / time plots, I was able to rig a 5 ohm load (3 15-ohm gold
band 5% 1/4w resistors in parallel across a single AA cell, with a Radio Shack
DVM across the load resistor to track voltage.) Some problems were apparent
with this test fixture, namely, inaccurate Ohm's law calculations for the measured
parameters. I measured a nominal under-load V of 1.254v, with a series
current measurement of 181 mA into a load that should be 5 ohms +/- 5%, and measures
5.2 ohms on the digital meter. These I and R values yield a claculated
current of 261 mA, so some aspect of the Radio Shack meter is clearly out of
spec. I suspect the voltage meaasurement is the most accurate, and I trust the
color codes and tolerances on these new metal film resistors, so maybe it's
the current function on the meter that is "off." I can try to measure that independently
at a later date. Right now I do not have access to a Wheatstone
bridge for accurate R measurement.
I "killed" my first NiMh last night (the second one is under test as I write).
The depletion from 1.306 volts to 1 volt took just under 6 hours. Figuring a
1.2 volt average (for the flat portion of the curve) and a current of 240 mA
calculated (181 mA measured), it delivered at best 1440 of its rated 2250 mAh.
Very disappointing, but I don't know if that is due to the mAh rating being
derrived at a different discharge rate, or if it's what one should expect from
a Chinese battery sold new on eBay. Its markings are "Powerizer" "professional
for digital camera" 2250mAh 1.2 v NiMH.
Is this congruent with your experience? Further experiments with different load
resistances are planned; I will post them when available.
-Bill Boyd
RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: vexing comm problem |
bakerocb(at)cox.net wrote:
> switch to tower (133.1), try to talk using same arrangement as in 1).
> The result is a machine gun like sound when I key the transmitter --
> impossible to transmit coherently. (Rapid intermittent making and
> breaking of ground contact for PTT?). Receiver works OK. ...
>
> VHF comm antenna is a Bob Archer antenna mounted inside the fuselage
> side aft of the copilot's seat.
>
> Any thoughts? Thanks for your help.
This sounds like the classic problem of RF feedback into the mic circuit. Here
are some questions that will help verify the problem:
1. If you tune to some frequency near 133.1 (but unused so you don't interfere
with the tower) and key the transmitter with the headset unplugged, do you still
have the problem? (Use a handheld to listen to your own signal.)
2. Do you still have the problem if you plug an old hand-mic in to the pilot's
side?
3. Do you still have the problem if you switch headsets?
If the problem stays with your lightspeed headset, you should look to solving the
problem there. If the problem stays with the pilot's side no matter what you
plug in you need to deal with shielding, bypassing, and other interference
suppression techniques.
So here are the ways to try to fix the problem:
1. add ferrite beads to the mic audio and PTT lines;
2. add .01 uF capacitors from mic audio and PTT lines to ground at both ends of
the mic-to-transmitter line;
3. move the transmitting antenna.
It would also probably help to get your antenna farther away. How hard would it
be to move the comm antenna into the vertical stab or at least farther away
in the empenage?
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Permanent Magnet Alternator question |
These are available at
http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/corvair/dynamo.html
Ken
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>Dick,
>>
>>Could you email me a copy of the schematic? I got the controller on ebay
>>with no documentation and I have few clues how to get it connected.
>>
>>Thank you,
>>
>>Jerzy
>>
>>
>
>
> Dick,
>
> If you're going to scan and e-mail this information to Jerzy, I'd
> like to see a copy too. Thanks!
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Jordan" <mkejrj(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Starter engaged warning light |
2.0 DATE_IN_FUTURE_06_12 Date: is 6 to 12 hours after Received: date
I would like to incorporate a warning light on my panel which will light up when
my Sky Tec starter is engaged.My initial thought was to use an LED light as
sold by E.I. instruments, and to connect this to the # 6 AWG power output from
my Starter Solenoid.
Questions :
Is the hookup ( as above ) correct ?
Size of wire from the Solenoid to the LED ?
Use Fusible link or no ?
Will LED light hold up ?
Am I missing something ?
Any info you fellows can provide this electron challenged builder is appreciated.
Thanks,
Dick Jordan
RV 8 Finishing
N 888BZ Reserved
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | F1Rocket(at)comcast.net |
| Subject: | Re: Starter engaged warning light |
Dick,
Refer to the wiring diagrams on my website. I have a LED that is on when the starter
is engaged. You need a resistor and a diode in the circuit. My diagrams
for "Starter" and "Power" show the completed circuit. In short, you need a
220 OHM, 1/2 watt resistor at the lead wire where it connects to your starter
solenoid to protect the wire. You also need a 1 AMP, 30 AMP surge type diode
across the LED leads to protect the LED. Pay attention to the orientation of
the diode in relation to the anode and cathode leads of the LED.
http://f1rocket.home.comcast.net/WiringDiagrams.html
Randy
F1 Rocket
>
> I would like to incorporate a warning light on my panel which will light up when
> my Sky Tec starter is engaged.My initial thought was to use an LED light as sold
> by E.I. instruments, and to connect this to the # 6 AWG power output from my
> Starter Solenoid.
>
> Questions :
> Is the hookup ( as above ) correct ?
> Size of wire from the Solenoid to the LED ?
> Use Fusible link or no ?
> Will LED light hold up ?
> Am I missing something ?
>
> Any info you fellows can provide this electron challenged builder is
> appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Dick Jordan
> RV 8 Finishing
> N 888BZ Reserved
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: NiMh battery testing |
SportAV8R(at)aol.com wrote:
> I "killed" my first NiMh last night (the second one is under test as
> I write). The depletion from 1.306 volts to 1 volt took just under 6
> hours. Figuring a 1.2 volt average (for the flat portion of the
> curve) and a current of 240 mA calculated (181 mA measured), it
> delivered at best 1440 of its rated 2250 mAh. Very disappointing,
My experience is that these NiMH batteries are all over the map. Many do not seem
to meet their published specs while others are very good. I think you need
to cook up a test jig to test actual capacity and then build up batteries out
of individual cells with similar capacities.
You might also want to run them through several charge/discharge cycles to see
if their capacity increases. My experience with NiMH battery packs in handheld
radios is that they don't reach full capacity until you go through several full
charge/discharge cycles.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
I just posted a message about battery types and the Matronics SPAM filter sent
it back saying it was SPAM. (It wasn't.) This is a test to see if perhaps my
email address is blocked now for some reason.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>Comments/Questions: Hey Bob I was introduced to Adel Clamps in 1940. At
>that time they were so well established that this type of clamp was then
>called "Adel".
>Must of started some time in the thirtys or before.
According to their website, they've been around since
1938. See http://www.adelwiggins.com/ProdDtlPrint.cfm?pid=108
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "James Foerster"
<>
6/16/2004
Hello Jim, Here is a faster more elegant, attractive, efficient, effective, durable,
and a bit more expensive solution:
1) Purchase some stainless steel 10 X 32 hex socket drive cap screws either 3/4 or one inch long from Microfasteners. <<http://www.microfasteners.com/>>
2)Purchase some AN363C-1032 stainless steel all metal stop nuts from Aircraft Spruce.
3) Buy one of the small Chapman tool sets that has all the hex insert sizes, handles,
extensions, ratchets, etc. that makes using hex socket drive screws an
absolute joy. A cordless screwdriver only adds to the pleasure.
4) Use a small, long needle nose Vise Grip pliers to hold the Adel clamp ends together
while you insert the cap screws and get the nuts started.
OC (Hating Phillips head screws for the last 54 years)
PS: Once you have experienced working with hex socket head drive cap and button
head screws with the proper tools you will never be happy using Phillips head
screws again. If you are in need of stainless steel, flat head, 100 degree countersink,
6 lobe (Torx) drive screws, then Microfasteners can provide those too.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: NiMh battery testing |
>
>You might also want to run them through several charge/discharge
>cycles to see if their capacity increases. My experience with NiMH
>battery packs in handheld radios is that they don't reach full
>capacity until you go through several full charge/discharge cycles.
>
The Motorola NiMH batteries in my cell phone had very little
perceived capacity when I first got the phone. I almost returned the
phone, as I was extremely disappointed with the battery life. But
the batteries' perceived capacity increased about four-fold after
several discharge-charge cycles.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Adel Clamp Help |
My experience with hex drive button head screws leads me to passing on
another view. I have found them to be VERY unreliable and that they strip out
with
annoying regularity. When they do strip out, they are the Devils own to
replace with a FAR MORE RELIABLE Phillips.
10X32 cap screws are fine. Anything smaller, or button heads, NOT ON MY
AIRPLANE!
Stick to the industry standard. You will have less sweat on your brow.
LRE
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Ripper" <rwripper(at)Prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Permanent Magnet Alternator question |
Ken/Bob,
I used "c" terminal of the switch connected to the starter solenoid. Reg/rec
has very small numbers on the terminals.
Let me know what you decide on how to protect it?
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken" <klehman(at)albedo.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Permanent Magnet Alternator question
>
> These are available at
> http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/corvair/dynamo.html
>
> Ken
>
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>Dick,
> >>
> >>Could you email me a copy of the schematic? I got the controller on ebay
> >>with no documentation and I have few clues how to get it connected.
> >>
> >>Thank you,
> >>
> >>Jerzy
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Dick,
> >
> > If you're going to scan and e-mail this information to Jerzy, I'd
> > like to see a copy too. Thanks!
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ammeter shunts for EI VA-1 with dual alternators |
>Comments/Questions: Bob,
>
>I'm planning to employ your Z-13 architecture for my RV-8A, and Z-13 shows
>two shunts: one to monitor each alternator (in my case, a B&C L-40 and an
>SD-8). I have an Electronics International (EI) VA-1 instrument
>calibrated to an EI S-50 external shunt (50 amp, 50mv).
>
> From reading your FAQs, it appears that I will need to purchase a second
> S-50, and a switch, in order to monitor either the L-40 or the SD-8 separately.
Correct
> I won't be able to monitor the combined, total load of both alternators
> on my single VA-1, if they are both enabled.
Why would you enable them both? The main alternator should be able to carry
100% of system continuous loads plus some headroom for charging a battery.
The only time you'd need to run the SD-8 is when the big alternator is
not available.
> Is this correct, or is there possibly a way to use a single S-50 shunt
> to monitor both alternators (48 amp total), or a 40-amp shunt plus a
> 10-amp shunt connected in some way to a single VA-1?
I'd use two shunts and a switch . . . and if you SHOULD run them
both, just add the two values together. Since the VA-1 reads 50A
at 50 mv, you need to stay with a 50A shunt for BOTH alternators
so that the instrument reads correctly for either alternator.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: Adel Clamp Help |
I've never tried the hex drives, but the torx heads
really work well. I can't figure out why people use
phillips heads any more. Torx are very popular in
Europe, and you can find them used in lots of applications
that used to be the domain of phillips head screws.
Besides not stripping, ever, is the super advantage
of not having to put pressure on the screw along
the longitudinal axis when inserting or removing
the screw.
I have purchased a bunch of torx screws from microfasteners
and use them everywhere. Unfortunately they only
have a pretty limited range of lengths.
Mickey
>My experience with hex drive button head screws leads me to passing on
>another view. I have found them to be VERY unreliable and that they strip out
with
>annoying regularity. When they do strip out, they are the Devils own to
>replace with a FAR MORE RELIABLE Phillips.
> 10X32 cap screws are fine. Anything smaller, or button heads, NOT ON MY
>AIRPLANE!
>Stick to the industry standard. You will have less sweat on your brow.
> LRE
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Adel Clamp Help |
> I have purchased a bunch of torx screws from microfasteners
> and use them everywhere. Unfortunately they only
> have a pretty limited range of lengths.
Go with McMaster Carr -- http://www.mcmaster.com Enter "machine screws" or
"socket head cap screws" in to the search box, and you can use their
"wizard" to narrow down what you want. Torx screws from McMaster come in
lengths from 1/8" to 3".
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Battery types (Was: 2 batteries, 1 alternator) |
SportAV8R(at)aol.com wrote:
> Brian, I predict you are about to hear how a starved electrolyte RG battery will
serve well in both applications. Okay, I just fulfilled my own prediction,
didn't I? ;-)
Guess what, a gel-cell is also a "starved electrolyte RG battery." I remember
someone telling me that AGMs were common and when one got a "gel-cell" it was
really most likely an AGM battery. I have since learned that this is not the
case and there really are some substantial differences between the various types
of lead-acid battery.
All these batteries are variations of the venerable lead-acid rechargeable battery.
The most common is the type with an excess of liquid electrolyte. This
is known as the flooded-cell battery. The plates are either made up of lead-antimony
or lead-calcium. The former is often found in "deep cycle" batteries
but uses more water and must be topped up regularly. It also suffers from a greater
level of self-discharge (it slowly goes dead by itself). The latter is
used in "maintenance free" batteries used in cars. They don't use as much water
but they don't like deep discharge.
At some point in time someone got the idea to add a binder to the electrolyte that
turns it into a jelly-like substance. That formed the basis of the gel-cell.
The problem with gel-cells is that ions do not travel quite as well through
the jelly so you cannot charge or discharge these cells as rapidly without
damage as you can the flooded-cell batteries.
Later on someone got the idea of using a fine fiberglass separator between the
plates of the battery and adding just enough electrolyte to fill the spaces in
the fiberglass separator/insulator. Capillary action keeps the electrolyte trapped
between the plates. This became known as the Absorbed Glass Mat (AGM)
or "starved electrolyte" battery. They have some of the characteristics of both
gel-cell and flooded-cell batteries and make a good compromise between the
two.
Both gel-cell and AGM batteries are recombinant gas (RG) batteries. This means
that the hydrogen and oxygen gas created by electrolysis at the end of the charging
cycle (think about the bubbles in a flooded-cell battery when it is almost
fully charged) recombine back into water inside the battery. This means the
batteries can be sealed and will never need you to add water ... as long as
you don't abuse them by overcharging. (More on this later.)
Flooded-cell batteries can take a lot of overcharging abuse before they fail.
Gel-cell and AGM batteries cannot take much abuse. If you overcharge a flooded-cell
battery, it just converts more of the water into gas, a problem solved
by simply adding more water to the battery. If you overcharge either a gel-cell
or AGM battery the gasses cannot recombine into water fast enough so the pressure
in the cell rises until the overpressure valve pops off letting the gas
escape (and thus keeping the battery from exploding). That is water needed by
the cell to function and it is never replaced. Your battery is on its way to
an early death when this happens.
Remember also that lead-acid batteries can get too hot during heavy charge and
discharge cycles. Again, flooded-cell batteries have lots of liquid that can
circulate and help carry the heat away from the plates. Gel-cell and AGM batteries
can't do that. The hot plates can warp and cause the cell to fail early.
This is more of a problem with gel-cells than with AGMs.
And speaking of heat, there is also the problem of thermal runaway. As you warm
up a lead-acid battery it will accept more current from its charging source.
If you have a constant-voltage charger such as we have in our airplanes (the
output voltage of the alternator is kept constant by the voltage regulator) then
when the battery warms up it will take more current. Consider what happens
on a hot summer day as you crank and crank your fuel-injected engine during
a hot-start and give the battery a deep discharge as well as let it get hot from
all the starting current passing through it. The battery may be very hot after
that and then you throw 50A or 100A at it from that big alternator you have
up there. The battery is going to be damaged by this and can even catch fire.
This is very high on my "things you don't want to have happen while flying"
list.
So how many life cycles can you expect out of your batteries and how do you charge them safely? I don't know what batteries you have but here is some data for the AGM and gel-cell batteries from Deka (East Penn Manufacturing), the company that supplies the 225AH AGM batteries I use on my boat (I have four of them). Deka has a very comprehensive white paper on the care and feeding of their "Valve Regulated Lead Acid (VRLA)" sealed batteries. You can find this paper at http://www.eastpenn-deka.com/products/pdfs/0139.pdf.
Looking at page 10 of their white paper there is a chart of battery life vs. depth-of-discharge
for the two types of battery. I reproduce it here:
Typical VRLA Battery Cycling Ability vs. Depth of Discharge
Typical Life Cycles
Capacity Withdrawn Gel AGM
100% 450 150
80% 600 200
50% 1000 370
25% 2100 925
10% 5700 3100
What is apparent from this chart is that if you are cycling your cells deeply,
gel-cells will last a lot longer than will AGMs. That is why you want to get
gel-cells to power things when they must often run on battery power and the battery
will be significantly discharged.
How Improper Charging Kills Batteries
As I said before, it is easy to damage a sealed battery by overcharging it. It
can give off gas faster than it can recombine into water. It is also easy to
damage it by undercharging. In that case the plates develop a sulphate coating
that prevents the plate from delivering all its charge thus leading to a steady
degradation of the battery. (Does this sound familiar?)
With flooded-cell batteries you just overcharge them a bit. OK, they outgas a
lot and you have to add water but they seem to last pretty well. This is what
the average aircraft charging system does to your battery in the summer. In
the winter the electrical system does not have a high enough voltage to properly
charge a battery so these batteries end up perennially undercharged in the
winter. The plates suffer from sulphation and battery capacity slowly goes away.
In summer they come back a bit by overcharging them but this kind of abuse
still leads to a shot battery after about 4 years.
Now if you have a VRLA battery, either AGM or gel-cell, the summer overcharging
kills them very quickly. I remember being so happy when Concorde and others
started making sealed AGM batteries available for aircraft. I was actually excited
by the prospect of no more cleaning corrosion out of my battery boxes.
The problem was, the batteries went bad after a little over a year in the airplane.
I think one went two years before failing. I was not a happy camper.
Now I know why the problem occurs. The standard aircraft alternator/VR combo
kills sealed batteries.
How to properly charge Lead-Acid Batteries
The problem stems from the fact that the voltage needed to charge a battery properly
is too high to keep the battery from overcharging. If you drop the voltage
to a proper maintenance level to prevent damage, the battery won't charge.
Add to that the fact that the proper voltages change with temperature and you
can see why these batteries die an early death.
To properly charge and maintain a battery you need to do it in three steps. They
are:
* Bulk charge
* Absorption charge
* float charge
When a battery is seriously depleted, it needs to go through the bulk charge phase.
This is usually a constant current that puts back most of the charge in
the battery. The bulk charge phase gets the battery to about 80% of full charge.
As the battery goes through the bulk charge phase its voltage will continue to
rise. When it reaches a certain voltage the charger needs to switch to constant
voltage charging at the absorption voltage. In your airplane this is the regulator
setpoint. At this point the voltage stays constant and the current drops
until the battery is fully charged. The battery will be fully charged when
the charging current drops to about 5% of the battery's rating. For example,
for a 20Ah battery this would be 1A.
But what happens now? If you leave the battery on this charge voltage it will
now begin to overcharge and generate too much gas. Keeping the voltage at this
set point will now start to destroy the battery. What needs to happen is to
drop the charge voltage low enough that the battery will neither charge nor discharge.
This is the float charge phase of the charging cycle. Keeping the
battery at this float voltage will ensure it stays charged but won't be damaged.
Here are the values for absorption and float voltages for different temperatures
for the Deka AGM and Gel-Cell batteries:
AGM Charge and Float Voltages
at Various Temperature Ranges
Temp. Charge Float Temp.
F Optimum Maximum Optimum Maximum C
>120 13.60 13.90 12.80 13.00 >49
110 120 13.80 14.10 12.90 13.20 43 49
100 110 13.90 14.20 13.00 13.30 38 43
90 100 14.00 14.30 13.10 13.40 32 38
80 90 14.10 14.40 13.20 13.50 27 32
70 80 14.30 14.60 13.40 13.70 21 27
60 70 14.45 14.75 13.55 13.85 16 21
50 60 14.60 14.90 13.70 14.00 10 16
40 50 14.80 15.10 13.90 14.20 4 10
<40 15.10 15.40 14.20 14.50 <4
Gel Charge and Float Voltages
at Various Temperature Ranges
Temp. Charge Float Temp.
F Optimum Maximum Optimum Maximum C
>120 13.00 13.30 12.80 13.00 >49
110 120 13.20 13.50 12.90 13.20 44 48
100 109 13.30 13.60 13.00 13.30 38 43
90 99 13.40 13.70 13.10 13.40 32 37
80 89 13.50 13.80 13.20 13.50 27 31
70 79 13.70 14.00 13.40 13.70 21 26
60 69 13.85 14.15 13.55 13.85 16 20
50 59 14.00 14.30 13.70 14.00 10 15
40 49 14.20 14.50 13.90 14.20 5 9
<40 14.50 14.80 14.20 14.50 <4
Three things to notice right away:
1. the proper charging voltages for AGM and Gel-Cell batteries are very different;
2. the proper charging voltages vary greatly with temperature;
3. there is a big difference between the absorption charge and float voltages.
The approach taken by automotive and aircraft electrical systems is to pick an
average value that will charge the battery but not overcharge it too much and
will be good for the average temperature in which the battery will operate. This
works after a fashion for flooded-cell batteries. Still, you can make your
battery last longer by adjusting the voltage set point of your voltage regulator
depending on the temperature. The B&C alternator controller that Bob designed
does this and is a big win over standard voltage regulators. In my not-so-humble-opinion
the temperature compensation option is a necessity, not a luxury.
But even that is not enough. You really need a regulator that will switch to a
lower voltage once the battery has been recharged. The only saving grace is
that people usually don't fly long enough to let the battery seriously overcharge.
Long cross country flights in summer down low where the battery gets warm
are real killers unless you turn the charge voltage down to the proper float
voltage.
Unfortunately most regulators in cars and aircraft do NOT offer this feature.
This feature *has* become standard in aftermarket external voltage regulators
for the marine and RV markets. I happen to have chosen Ample Power's Smart Alternator
Regulator V3 (SAR-V3-24P) for my boat since it will drive dual alternators
(I have two engines) and properly charge my battery bank. I will probably
use this regulator in my all-electric CJ6A also. When the alternator fails
I want the batteries to be healthy.
And with regard to AGM vs. Gel-Cell, I made the mistake of choosing AGM for my
boat's battery bank. They won't last as long in deep-cycle service. Still, that
is what I have and I try not to discharge them too deeply. When they finally
reach the end of their life they will be replaced with Gel-Cell batteries.
OTOH they are 2 years old and showing no signs of losing their capacity. I
am hoping to get 6-7 years of good use out of them before having to replace them.
And at $400 apiece, I don't want to have to replace them very often.
So now to get back to the original comment of AGMs vs. Gel-Cells, I think I can
safely say they are NOT the same. Still, both can serve very well if treated
properly.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Z-14 Dual Alternators |
| From: | John Schroeder <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Bob -
We have a 70 amp alternator and will put a B&C SD-20 on the vacuum pad for
the second system of the Z-14. The questions are shunts and ANL current
limiters.
1. Since B&C does not carry a 70 amp shunt, we ordered a 75 amp. Is this
OK?
2. Since B&C does not have a 20 or a 70 amp ANL, we ordered a 40 to use
on the 20 amp alternator and a 60 to use for the 70 amp alternator. Are
these OK?
3. Or should we try to obtain them elsewhere?
4. Are there any operational cautions to bear in mind using these
mismatches in components for the alternators?
Many thanks,
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Adel Clamp Help |
| From: | John Schroeder <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Mickey -
We are also using the ss torx drive screws everywhere. Keep spreading the
gospel and maybe John at Micro Fasteners will order a few more lengths. We
bought double the amount we need because we feared he would not carry them
past the first mfg. run!!
Cheers,
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CardinalNSB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: running power and ground through dsub connectors |
Hello. The manual calls out for two 18awg power wires for my Garmin 300xl,
and they give oversized pins for 18 awg. The manual only calls out for a 10
amp breaker, so why the overkill on two power wires. (14 volt system)
I understand the dsub pins are generally rated for 6 amps each, so two with
20 awg should be protected by a 10 amp breaker? Is this standard avionics
wiring practice?
I can only think this is in case one wire falls out of the crimp?
I was planning to run the power and ground through the dsubs for all my
avionics, should I use double wire in the regular pins, even though my other
breakers are 5 amp or less?
Are there any issues (other than current draw) I should be aware of, or any
other reasons not to run the power and ground through the dsubs?
Should the power and ground wires be twisted or simplly wired like in a
bundle?
Where can I easily get more oversized pins and sockets for 18awg?
Thank you all, Skip Simpson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery types (Was: 2 batteries, 1 alternator) |
I have never liked using an automotive V.R. designed for a flooded cell
battery on a small RG battery. As a cheap band-aid, I have occasionally
wondered about using a diode to drop the voltage going to the battery on
those long summer cruises. There are several possible ways of doing
that and of course several potential problems. No I've never tried this;
I'm NOT recommending it, and yes obviously the correct external VR is
the real solution. I'm merely throwing out an idea to see what
discussion it might generate.
Eventually perhaps I'll try something for the PM alternator half of my
modified Z-14 architecture (no conventional battery contactors) after
I see what the real voltages and RG battery life turn out to be.
25 years ago I built a linear VR for my old farm tractor with much more
temperature compensation than normal. A different compromise, but I
think it helps extend battery life in that particular application (often
10 years of combination car and tractor service) before sulfation kills
that flooded cell battery.
Ken
Brian Lloyd wrote:
>>snip
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery types (Was: 2 batteries, 1 alternator) |
To each his own.
It very common for a MFGR to compare his product to some other inferior
product.
However in this case the data is very misleading as the Odyssey batty is a
AGM type and has the ability to handle 400-500+ very deep cycles and Does
not need to be attended to for more than a year due to extremely low self
discharge. IE no need to have a trickle / maintaner charger on the battery
for the winter months.
Further its intended to be for starting. All of the above are commonly said
to be NOT typical of AGM.
Here is a link where you can download the info on this brand of battery.
http://www.batterymart.com/pdf_files/odyssey_guide.pdf
If you go to the factory web site there is more info.
http://www.odysseyfactory.com/
Charging is simple in an aircraft; put them in parallel (per Bob) and or use
the Schottky Diode I have recommended in the past. NOT a diode that you
might find in RS or boat or RV stores that I have seen.
I do not like putting them in parallel for reasons beyond this post but not
because it is not a good way to charge. In fact Odyssey suggests that method
is OK. Even with different depth of discharge its ok.
This diode allows 100% FULL charge while isolating the back up battery. At
least with the charging systems on every auto and aircraft have ever heard
of using normal voltage settings.
Paul
> Typical VRLA Battery Cycling Ability vs. Depth of Discharge
>
> Typical Life Cycles
> Capacity Withdrawn Gel AGM
> 100% 450 150
> 80% 600 200
> 50% 1000 370
> 25% 2100 925
> 10% 5700 3100
>
> What is apparent from this chart is that if you are cycling your cells
deeply, gel-cells will last a lot longer than will AGMs. That is why you
want to get gel-cells to power things when they must often run on battery
power and the battery will be significantly discharged.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Battery types (Was: 2 batteries, 1 alternator) |
Brian; that was lengthy and very informative. Much of it I knew, some learned
the hard way from experience in the 80's with a gel cell battery on float charge
in the ham shack. What you did not address (I think) is the suitability of
the AGM's for aircraft cranking service; I still don't believe, based on my good
experience with the small AGM ("625") turning the Sky-Tec starter in my RV
for over two years now, that a flooded battery or gel cell is _significantly_
better suited for this duty, as I think was implied in the original post. If
that's not what you said, forgive me.
-BB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery types (Was: 2 batteries, 1 alternator) |
Ken wrote:
>
> I have never liked using an automotive V.R. designed for a flooded cell
> battery on a small RG battery.
The problem is not the VR. It just sets the voltage. It depends on how much current
you try to source to the battery when it is discharged.
Normally your alternator is your current limiter and the battery is not seriously
discharged so it goes right into the absorption charge (constant voltage) stage
and current falls off very quickly.
> As a cheap band-aid, I have occasionally
> wondered about using a diode to drop the voltage going to the battery on
> those long summer cruises.
The will drop the voltage but resetting your VR to the proper voltage or getting
a temperature compensated VR is a much better answer.
> Eventually perhaps I'll try something for the PM alternator half of my
> modified Z-14 architecture (no conventional battery contactors) after
> I see what the real voltages and RG battery life turn out to be.
The numbers I provided are from Deka for their batteries but you will find more
similarity than differences between AGMs across the various manufacturers.
Has anyone considered building a boost/buck high-frequency switching regulator
for the PM alternators, one that will optimize the operating point? People are
starting to do that for solar panels and getting an extra 10% out of the panels
by optimizing their operating point. Of course, that assumes that the PM
alternators (dynamos actually) can operate at 100% for long periods of time.
> 25 years ago I built a linear VR for my old farm tractor with much more
> temperature compensation than normal. A different compromise, but I
> think it helps extend battery life in that particular application (often
> 10 years of combination car and tractor service) before sulfation kills
> that flooded cell battery.
Right. The guy who started Ample Power is going on 12 years for his gel-cell "house"
battery bank. There is no need for batteries to die an early death.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery types (Was: 2 batteries, 1 alternator) |
Paul Messinger wrote:
> It very common for a MFGR to compare his product to some other inferior
> product.
If you look at what I posted, Deka was comparing their own AGM to their own Gel-Cell.
The batteries are designed for different applications. One does not use
gel-cells in short-term high-load applications such as starting engines. AGMs
are ideal for that. OTOH, AGMs are inferior to gel-cells for low-rate, long-term,
deep-cycle applications. Deka makes both and they cost about the same.
They don't care which one you buy from them. They do care if they fail during
the warantee period so they want you to pick the right one and use it properly.
A particular AGM might be superior to a particular gel-cell for a particular low-rate,
deep-cycle application but *IN* *GENERAL* gel-cells excel at this particular
application. If you read my posting again you will see that I say that
the AGM is a good compromise.
> However in this case the data is very misleading
No, it is not misleading in the least and I resent this comment. It is the data
that Deka provides for the proper operation of their battery for best life.
It does not compare itself to any other battery other than to try to explain
the application differences between their AGM and their gel-cell batteries. I
chose to use this particular manufacturer's data because they make both types
of battery and have presented an application note that helps people choose which
is right for their application.
> as the Odyssey batty is a
> AGM type and has the ability to handle 400-500+ very deep cycles and Does
> not need to be attended to for more than a year due to extremely low self
> discharge. IE no need to have a trickle / maintaner charger on the battery
> for the winter months.
Batteries differ in performance. Clearly you think that the Odyssey battery is
the be-all and end-all of batteries. I admit that it looks pretty good. Still,
the point of my posting was to talk about the generic differences between
VRLA, RG, AGM, sealed, gel-cell, or whatever else they get called. I find that
a lot of people are confused about how to choose a battery and then how to treat
it to get good life out of it. I was *NOT* trying to sell anyone on a particular
brand of battery.
> Further its intended to be for starting. All of the above are commonly said
> to be NOT typical of AGM.
I find that AGMs tend to be a good compromise between a starting and deep-cycle
battery. You may note that I *like* AGM batteries.
> Here is a link where you can download the info on this brand of battery.
> http://www.batterymart.com/pdf_files/odyssey_guide.pdf
Too bad this does not give complete information on properly charging the batteries.
> If you go to the factory web site there is more info.
>
> http://www.odysseyfactory.com/
Good. People need to go look at the manufacturer's recommendations for the proper
care of their battery. They should set up their charging system according
to the manufacturer's recommendations for their battery.
> Charging is simple in an aircraft; put them in parallel (per Bob) and or use
> the Schottky Diode I have recommended in the past. NOT a diode that you
> might find in RS or boat or RV stores that I have seen.
And charging lead-acid batteries is never simple. Batteries die an early death
because they are mistreated, primarily when recharging. That was the other point
of my posting.
> I do not like putting them in parallel for reasons beyond this post but not
> because it is not a good way to charge. In fact Odyssey suggests that method
> is OK. Even with different depth of discharge its ok.
Yes, you can charge two batteries in parallel if they are at different states of
charge as the more discharged battery will hog the current and prevent the more-charged
battery from overcharging. It isn't usually a problem.
But there is a caveat here: both batteries must be of the same type. Doing this
with a gel-cell and an AGM is asking for an early death from one of them.
> This diode allows 100% FULL charge while isolating the back up battery. At
> least with the charging systems on every auto and aircraft have ever heard
> of using normal voltage settings.
All lead-acid batteries, including Odyssey, benefit from a proper three-stage charging
regimen where the charge and float voltages are properly set for the temperature
of the battery. Off-hand settings and off-hand diode drops are not
going to get you optimum life and performance from your battery bank.
But maybe someone doesn't care if they replace their battery every 1-2 years.
It is cheap insurance and batteries aren't all that expensive. In my case I want
to treat the battery as nicely as I can so it doesn't surprise me with an
early failure at the least opportune moment.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery types (Was: 2 batteries, 1 alternator) |
SportAV8R(at)aol.com wrote:
> Brian; that was lengthy and very informative. Much of it I knew, some learned
the hard way from experience in the 80's with a gel cell battery on float charge
in the ham shack. What you did not address (I think) is the suitability
of the AGM's for aircraft cranking service; I still don't believe, based on my
good experience with the small AGM ("625") turning the Sky-Tec starter in my
RV for over two years now, that a flooded battery or gel cell is _significantly_
better suited for this duty, as I think was implied in the original post.
If that's not what you said, forgive me.
If you want to use a compact battery for engine cranking, AGMs are superior to
both gel-cells and flooded-cell batteries. Just be sure you are getting an AGM
battery because the terms VRLA, "starved electrolyte", "sealed", etc., get thrown
around a lot for both AGM and gel-cell batteries. Many people don't know
the difference and end up with the wrong battery.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery types (Was: 2 batteries, 1 alternator) |
I did not intend to offend however the entire discussion seems very off the
track for an aircraft.
First; If I ever have a significant depth of discharge, its because of a
Failure of the electrical system. I would not fly again until I have
determined the reason for the failure and corrected it including redesign or
use of different parts.
This includes the need for prolonged attempts to start the engine. If it
takes more than a very few blades or 10 seconds there is a problem that
needs fixing.
Thus depth of discharge cycles is a non issue.
The average pilot fly's under 100 hours per year and even one flight per day
is way less than even the ability of the battery recommended by this group
IE the Panasonic or equivalent widely available 12V 18 AH battery where its
common usage is standby in UPS etc. (Many brands around that are equivalent)
and they have been used for at least 10 years in experimental acft with
multi year life using the "Horrible" alternators hi V and overcharging
ability.
In the purest case I totally agree with what you are saying about the proper
way to care for a battery however in the real world what you suggest is lots
of weight, cost and complexity to implement and I can see no reason to even
consider it for an ACFT. On the other hand in a boat or RV; I would insist
on that methods. But we are comparing the cost per year from under $50 on an
aircraft using Bob's recommendation to many hundreds of $$ for Boat or RV.
We are not running off the battery in an aircraft, we are running off the
alternator and USING the battery as a huge filter cap. Isolate the battery
in any way from this solid essentially zero ohm connection and your
electrical system can turn into a non operation system under transient loads
noise etc. My "load dump" tests demonstrate that even 25,000mfd and no
battery is not safe.
There is abundant info on the proper care and feeding of batteries all over
the web. Its great to be informed on how to care for your battery so it will
last years and years.
It is not so useful however to apply this info to the average acft owner.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl(at)lloyd.com>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Phillips head screws |
Cheers,
I came across this astounding sequence:
"My experience with hex drive button head screws leads me to passing on
another view. I have found them to be VERY unreliable and that they strip
out
with annoying regularity. When they do strip out, they are the Devils own
to
replace with a FAR MORE RELIABLE Phillips."
The sole quality approaching Reliability is its ability either
to strip its slots or to strip the fins of a properly-mated screwdriver. I
must have a dozen rounded-off drivers lying around as awls.
"10X32 cap screws are fine. Anything smaller, or button heads, NOT ON MY
AIRPLANE! .......................... You will have less sweat on your brow.
"
Even the 3-fin screws discrete to Lockheed L-1011 have more
surface area and greater holding strength.
"Stick to the industry standard."
The "industry standard" which Phillips acquired was as a result
of Henry Ford refusing to use the far-finer Robertson ("square head") screws
from Canada - designed before 1910. When Henry couldn't buy out the
'foreign' plant [Robertson was just as obstinate as Hank), he refused to use
them and instead sought out the Phillips-head. When Army-Navy sought a
standard, the US gubmint chose Phillips over Robertson. So much for
science in 1930's. Of course WW II only hardened the calumny.
Show me a Phillips screwdriver that will hold a screw inverted
with one hand and I'll show you a tool system that is still inferior in
tortional strength, ease of manufacture and cost............
Ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
Good Afternoon All,
I have suddenly been presented with a project that needs a lot of rewiring.
It would be nice if I could duplicate the labeling that was done at the
factory.
Are wire labeling devices available at prices we amateurs can afford?
Or, is there another way to accomplish the same result?
I do believe there were a few questions on this subject some time back.
Anybody have a ready source which I could look at for an education?
I did try google, but my research capabilities leave an awful lot to be
desired.
Any suggestions appreciated.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
Do an ebay search with the key word 'Kroy'. I have the Kroy TM600 that I
purchased on ebay for $80. It prints directly onto shrink tube.
FMI, www.kroy.com
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
BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Wire Marking
Good Afternoon All,
I have suddenly been presented with a project that needs a lot of
rewiring.
It would be nice if I could duplicate the labeling that was done at the
factory.
Are wire labeling devices available at prices we amateurs can afford?
Or, is there another way to accomplish the same result?
I do believe there were a few questions on this subject some time back.
Anybody have a ready source which I could look at for an education?
I did try google, but my research capabilities leave an awful lot to be
desired.
Any suggestions appreciated.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Sundberg" <davesund(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Z-11 Main Battery Bus |
I'm using Z-11 as the basis for wiring my RV-7A and have a question pertaining
to the Main Battery Bus. The plan calls for a 16AWG of 6" max. from the batt
side of the Batt Contactor to the Batt Bus, but for various reasons my Batt Bus
is located about 30" from the Batt Contactor. I'm thinking of using either
an 8AWG for the connection or a 14AWG with a 15AMP in-line fuse located 6" from
the Batt Contactor. The only heavy load would come from a power plug where
I may plug in a battery charger.
My preference is to go with the 8AWG so the fuse would not be a concern. Am I
missing something here? Is one option better than the other, or is neither good?
Thanks for the input....................
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BTomm <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Phillips head screws |
Unfortunately, Robertson head screws are one of Canada's best kept secrets.
Bevan
RV7A
On Thursday, June 17, 2004 11:09 AM, Fergus Kyle [SMTP:VE3LVO(at)rac.ca] wrote:
>
> Cheers,
> I came across this astounding sequence:
> "My experience with hex drive button head screws leads me to passing on
> another view. I have found them to be VERY unreliable and that they strip
> out
> with annoying regularity. When they do strip out, they are the Devils own
> to
> replace with a FAR MORE RELIABLE Phillips."
> The sole quality approaching Reliability is its ability either
> to strip its slots or to strip the fins of a properly-mated screwdriver. I
> must have a dozen rounded-off drivers lying around as awls.
>
> "10X32 cap screws are fine. Anything smaller, or button heads, NOT ON MY
> AIRPLANE! .......................... You will have less sweat on your brow.
> "
> Even the 3-fin screws discrete to Lockheed L-1011 have more
> surface area and greater holding strength.
>
> "Stick to the industry standard."
> The "industry standard" which Phillips acquired was as a result
> of Henry Ford refusing to use the far-finer Robertson ("square head") screws
> from Canada - designed before 1910. When Henry couldn't buy out the
> 'foreign' plant [Robertson was just as obstinate as Hank), he refused to use
> them and instead sought out the Phillips-head. When Army-Navy sought a
> standard, the US gubmint chose Phillips over Robertson. So much for
> science in 1930's. Of course WW II only hardened the calumny.
> Show me a Phillips screwdriver that will hold a screw inverted
> with one hand and I'll show you a tool system that is still inferior in
> tortional strength, ease of manufacture and cost............
> Ferg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wire Marking |
Good Afternoon Bruce,
Thanks for the information. That will probably work, but I was wondering if
anyone made a device to print the numbers directly on the wire as is done by
the airframe manufacturers. It would sure be nice to be able to delve into
a bundle and find out just which wires are there. Having the number repeated
every few inches is a tremendous boon.
It would also be nice to not have to add the extra thickness of the shrink
tubing.
I thought I had seen a hand operated version of such a wire printer many
years ago. Since it does not seem to be readily available, I guess it didn't
work!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Foerster" <jmfpublic(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re:Adel Clamp Help |
Does anyone know of a source for "type B" sheet metal screws with Torx or Torx
Plus drive? Or hex head? The tinnerman nuts that I ordered from Aircraft Spruce
require the type B screw with its own pitch and its nice blunt but tapered
point. Aircraft Spruce only carries Philips and slotted head (they say to use
on "antiques"). Their catalog does list both truss head and round head screws:
I'm not sure which one to use on Audel clamps, so I ordered both. Experimental
aircraft are supposed to be educational, right?
Hmm. I just remembered that I didn't check McMaster-Carr for this. It is
so easy to order from Aircraft Spruce that I get lazy.
Jim Foerster, J400 and wiring slooowly.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
I've seen them. Big bucks!
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
BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wire Marking
Good Afternoon Bruce,
Thanks for the information. That will probably work, but I was
wondering if
anyone made a device to print the numbers directly on the wire as is
done by
the airframe manufacturers. It would sure be nice to be able to delve
into
a bundle and find out just which wires are there. Having the number
repeated
every few inches is a tremendous boon.
It would also be nice to not have to add the extra thickness of the
shrink
tubing.
I thought I had seen a hand operated version of such a wire printer many
years ago. Since it does not seem to be readily available, I guess it
didn't
work!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wire Marking |
In a message dated 6/17/04 5:23:18 PM Central Daylight Time,
Bruce(at)glasair.org writes:
I've seen them. Big bucks!
Bruce
Hi Bruce,
Yep, I guess I either ring out the circuits or use shrink wrap!
Thanks to all for the information.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <jimk36(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wire Marking |
Bob--
Ring out the wires even if you mark them every 2 inches. Don't ask how I
know.
Jim kaser
----- Original Message -----
From: <BobsV35B(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wire Marking
>
>
> In a message dated 6/17/04 5:23:18 PM Central Daylight Time,
> Bruce(at)glasair.org writes:
>
> I've seen them. Big bucks!
>
> Bruce
>
>
> Hi Bruce,
>
> Yep, I guess I either ring out the circuits or use shrink wrap!
>
> Thanks to all for the information.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Airpark LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8502
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerzy Krasinski" <krasinski(at)provalue.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Phillips head screws |
What is Robertson head screw? Do you have a picture?
Jerzy
----- Original Message -----
From: "BTomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Phillips head screws
>
> Unfortunately, Robertson head screws are one of Canada's best kept
secrets.
>
> Bevan
> RV7A
>
> On Thursday, June 17, 2004 11:09 AM, Fergus Kyle [SMTP:VE3LVO(at)rac.ca]
wrote:
> >
> > Cheers,
> > I came across this astounding sequence:
> > "My experience with hex drive button head screws leads me to passing on
> > another view. I have found them to be VERY unreliable and that they
strip
> > out
> > with annoying regularity. When they do strip out, they are the Devils
own
> > to
> > replace with a FAR MORE RELIABLE Phillips."
> > The sole quality approaching Reliability is its ability
either
> > to strip its slots or to strip the fins of a properly-mated screwdriver.
I
> > must have a dozen rounded-off drivers lying around as awls.
> >
> > "10X32 cap screws are fine. Anything smaller, or button heads, NOT ON
MY
> > AIRPLANE! .......................... You will have less sweat on your
brow.
> > "
> > Even the 3-fin screws discrete to Lockheed L-1011 have more
> > surface area and greater holding strength.
> >
> > "Stick to the industry standard."
> > The "industry standard" which Phillips acquired was as a
result
> > of Henry Ford refusing to use the far-finer Robertson ("square head")
screws
> > from Canada - designed before 1910. When Henry couldn't buy out the
> > 'foreign' plant [Robertson was just as obstinate as Hank), he refused to
use
> > them and instead sought out the Phillips-head. When Army-Navy sought a
> > standard, the US gubmint chose Phillips over Robertson. So much for
> > science in 1930's. Of course WW II only hardened the calumny.
> > Show me a Phillips screwdriver that will hold a screw
inverted
> > with one hand and I'll show you a tool system that is still inferior in
> > tortional strength, ease of manufacture and cost............
> > Ferg
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Phillips head screws |
Square drive hole.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerzy Krasinski" <krasinski(at)provalue.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Phillips head screws
>
> What is Robertson head screw? Do you have a picture?
>
> Jerzy
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "BTomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net>
> To:
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Phillips head screws
>
>
> >
> > Unfortunately, Robertson head screws are one of Canada's best kept
> secrets.
> >
> > Bevan
> > RV7A
> >
> > On Thursday, June 17, 2004 11:09 AM, Fergus Kyle [SMTP:VE3LVO(at)rac.ca]
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > I came across this astounding sequence:
> > > "My experience with hex drive button head screws leads me to passing
on
> > > another view. I have found them to be VERY unreliable and that they
> strip
> > > out
> > > with annoying regularity. When they do strip out, they are the Devils
> own
> > > to
> > > replace with a FAR MORE RELIABLE Phillips."
> > > The sole quality approaching Reliability is its ability
> either
> > > to strip its slots or to strip the fins of a properly-mated
screwdriver.
> I
> > > must have a dozen rounded-off drivers lying around as awls.
> > >
> > > "10X32 cap screws are fine. Anything smaller, or button heads, NOT
ON
> MY
> > > AIRPLANE! .......................... You will have less sweat on your
> brow.
> > > "
> > > Even the 3-fin screws discrete to Lockheed L-1011 have more
> > > surface area and greater holding strength.
> > >
> > > "Stick to the industry standard."
> > > The "industry standard" which Phillips acquired was as a
> result
> > > of Henry Ford refusing to use the far-finer Robertson ("square head")
> screws
> > > from Canada - designed before 1910. When Henry couldn't buy out the
> > > 'foreign' plant [Robertson was just as obstinate as Hank), he refused
to
> use
> > > them and instead sought out the Phillips-head. When Army-Navy sought a
> > > standard, the US gubmint chose Phillips over Robertson. So much for
> > > science in 1930's. Of course WW II only hardened the calumny.
> > > Show me a Phillips screwdriver that will hold a screw
> inverted
> > > with one hand and I'll show you a tool system that is still inferior
in
> > > tortional strength, ease of manufacture and cost............
> > > Ferg
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Off to California . . . |
Dee and I are packing for the Long Beach weekend seminar. Be
back on-line Monday. It's not too late to join us! Just walk
in Saturday morning and we'll find a place for you.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Phillips head screws |
To add just a bit more info Robertson head screws have a square hole that is
progressively tapered toward the bottom of the hole. In Canada they are
commonly found holding manufactured goods such as washers and driers
etc.together. They are also extensively used in the building trades.
In use they are less likely to strip out the head.
If put on the screw driver to reach into tight quarters they will stay put
some what better.
They come in a full range of screw fastener types and sizes including
drywall wood and machine screw applications.
I can send you a picture as this email is much less than a thousand words.
{[g-)!
Jim in Kelowna the smoke devils stayed in the wires! Yeah !!
----- Original Message -----
From: "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Phillips head screws
>
> Square drive hole.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jerzy Krasinski" <krasinski(at)provalue.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Phillips head screws
>
>
>
> >
> > What is Robertson head screw? Do you have a picture?
> >
> > Jerzy
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "BTomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net>
> > To:
> > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Phillips head screws
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, Robertson head screws are one of Canada's best kept
> > secrets.
> > >
> > > Bevan
> > > RV7A
> > >
> > > On Thursday, June 17, 2004 11:09 AM, Fergus Kyle [SMTP:VE3LVO(at)rac.ca]
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > I came across this astounding sequence:
> > > > "My experience with hex drive button head screws leads me to passing
> on
> > > > another view. I have found them to be VERY unreliable and that they
> > strip
> > > > out
> > > > with annoying regularity. When they do strip out, they are the
Devils
> > own
> > > > to
> > > > replace with a FAR MORE RELIABLE Phillips."
> > > > The sole quality approaching Reliability is its ability
> > either
> > > > to strip its slots or to strip the fins of a properly-mated
> screwdriver.
> > I
> > > > must have a dozen rounded-off drivers lying around as awls.
> > > >
> > > > "10X32 cap screws are fine. Anything smaller, or button heads, NOT
> ON
> > MY
> > > > AIRPLANE! .......................... You will have less sweat on
your
> > brow.
> > > > "
> > > > Even the 3-fin screws discrete to Lockheed L-1011 have
more
> > > > surface area and greater holding strength.
> > > >
> > > > "Stick to the industry standard."
> > > > The "industry standard" which Phillips acquired was as a
> > result
> > > > of Henry Ford refusing to use the far-finer Robertson ("square
head")
> > screws
> > > > from Canada - designed before 1910. When Henry couldn't buy out the
> > > > 'foreign' plant [Robertson was just as obstinate as Hank), he
refused
> to
> > use
> > > > them and instead sought out the Phillips-head. When Army-Navy sought
a
> > > > standard, the US gubmint chose Phillips over Robertson. So much
for
> > > > science in 1930's. Of course WW II only hardened the calumny.
> > > > Show me a Phillips screwdriver that will hold a screw
> > inverted
> > > > with one hand and I'll show you a tool system that is still inferior
> in
> > > > tortional strength, ease of manufacture and cost............
> > > > Ferg
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul <pwilson(at)climber.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Phillips head screws |
>
>Square drive hole.
====
Like the ones I buy at Home Depot for wood/decks/drywall
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
<>
6/17/2004
Hello LRE, There is some truth to what you say, but please let me add a few words.
Cap screws come in the normal cylinder head shape (frequently with knurled exterior)
and the less common button head shape. For a given size cap screw the cylinder
head screw will have a larger size hex socket than the button head screw.
This means the smaller hex drive socket in the button head screw cannot handle
as much torque as the cylinder head screw. So unless the situation demands
a button head shaped screw one should favor the cylinder head shaped screw.
Also socket stripping tends to be a problem in only the smaller sized screws, #4
and #6. (I generally avoid #4 screws where ever possible). Realize also that
these screws are not intended for structural use so high torques are not really
expected or appropriate. It is also important that one use good quality and
not worn out hex inserts. Once a hex insert has stripped out a screw head the
condition of the insert itself should be highly suspect and a quick toss to the
trash can may save further aggravation. I favor inserts over tools with built
on handles because of the natural reluctance to throw away a whole good tool.**
Over the past 54 years as a US Navy mechanic, A&P mechanic, Aeronautical Engineer,
pilot and amateur builder I have installed, removed, and, when needed drilled
and extracted, thousands of Phillips head screws. In my current homebuilt
I doubt if there are more than a dozen Phillips head screws -- and only when they
cannot be avoided. In my engine compartment alone I have a hundred or more
hex socket head cap screws, both cylinder and button heads, fastening in engine
baffles and baffle seals and holding Adel clamps. These screws were threaded
into metal stop nuts. Stripping out screw sockets during installation was never
a big issue.
OC
**PS: My father-in-law bought cheap tools and he never threw a tool away. When
he set out to do a home handy man act involving screws the first thing he did
was ruin the screw slot with a worn out screwdriver. After he passed away I threw
away almost every tool that he had owned.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Koyich" <Ron(at)Koyich.com> |
>> Since it does not seem to be readily available, I guess it didn't
work!<<
Hey, Bob - they worked well - I used to have on in my avionics shop.
Turn the crank, the wire was pulled through the machine and the hot stamp
came down onto the film with the heat sensitive ink which was transferred
to the wire.
For now I can't remember the name of the company that made them.
Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Redmon" <james(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Off to California . . . |
Geez...you all should stay for Rutan's flight into space! 6:30am Monday
morning - Mojave airport! www.scaled.com
-James
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Off to California . . .
>
> Dee and I are packing for the Long Beach weekend seminar. Be
> back on-line Monday. It's not too late to join us! Just walk
> in Saturday morning and we'll find a place for you.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> -----------------------------------------
> ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
> ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> -----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Anglin" <jlanglin44(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Garmin/Navaid interface |
I am having trouble figuring out which pin goes to which pin to navigate
with input from my Garmin GNC 300XL to my Navaid autopilot. If anyone out
there has some positive input I will listen. I have the Smart Coupler in my
autopilot if that helps.
Jim Anglin
HR II
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Robinson <crj(at)lucubration.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wire Marking |
jimk36(at)comcast.net wrote:
>
> Bob--
>
> Ring out the wires even if you mark them every 2 inches. Don't ask how I
> know.
What does ring out the wires mean? It sounds suspiciously like something that
works well for me.
Basically, I use colored Sharpie markers and one black one to make four bands
every now and then on my wires, like "black red green blue". The black starts
the sequence so I can't read it the wrong direction. I keep a chart mapping
the color codes out and it makes it really easy to find the right wire. There
are two added benefits.
1. If you lose your chart it's no big deal because you can simply walk around
looking at wire terminations and writing down their color codes.
2. The Sharpie is basically indelible EXCEPT to alcohol, which makes it easy
to change an incorrect marking. It's hard to do that with shrink wrap once the
wire is installed because the shrink wrap must be slid over the entire wire to
its position. If the incorrect marking is in the middle... forget it. I don't
exactly mark my wires incorrectly all the time, but once in a while it can
happen, and more important this addresses repurposing a wire from an unused
device to another conneciton.
It only takes a few seconds to make each marking - faster than the shrink-wrap
methods, and your only cost is a few bucks for the markers.
Be aware that not all colors show up well or contrast with one another. I find
black, red, blue, green, purple, lime, and teal are all recognizable. If you
can't find as many colors you can buy them online, or just add a stripe or two
to your code to get more "digits".
It's almost like having a completely color-coded wiring harness, like in a car.
Regards,
Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wire Marking |
In a message dated 6/18/04 7:59:58 AM Central Daylight Time,
crj(at)lucubration.com writes:
What does ring out the wires mean? It sounds suspiciously like something
that
works well for me.
Good Morning Chad,
Not quite the same type of ring!
Your method sounds great. However, I was hoping to mark the wires so that
they would still have the same numbers on them that were used by the factory.
That way, the original aircraft wiring manual information would still be
valid.
"Ringing Out The Wires" refers to the procedure of hooking a multimeter, or
other continuity checking device, to one end of a wire and checking all the
far away ends to determine which wire is which.
It is my understanding that early electricians would run a batch of wires
through a home or other structure. In order to determine the continuity, they
would hook up a battery powered door bell between the wire and ground, then
check the far ends to ground. When they found the correct wire, the door bell
would ring. Thus the term, "ring out the wire."
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
"Ring out the wires" means taking a continuity meter (tone emitter in
the old telephone days) and testing each wire at their respective ends
until all wires were identified. Resulted in a lot of tones, hence the
term "Ring out the wires".
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 Chad
Robinson
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wire Marking
jimk36(at)comcast.net wrote:
>
> Bob--
>
> Ring out the wires even if you mark them every 2 inches. Don't ask how
I
> know.
What does ring out the wires mean? It sounds suspiciously like something
that
works well for me.
Basically, I use colored Sharpie markers and one black one to make four
bands
every now and then on my wires, like "black red green blue". The black
starts
the sequence so I can't read it the wrong direction. I keep a chart
mapping
the color codes out and it makes it really easy to find the right wire.
There
are two added benefits.
1. If you lose your chart it's no big deal because you can simply walk
around
looking at wire terminations and writing down their color codes.
2. The Sharpie is basically indelible EXCEPT to alcohol, which makes it
easy
to change an incorrect marking. It's hard to do that with shrink wrap
once the
wire is installed because the shrink wrap must be slid over the entire
wire to
its position. If the incorrect marking is in the middle... forget it. I
don't
exactly mark my wires incorrectly all the time, but once in a while it
can
happen, and more important this addresses repurposing a wire from an
unused
device to another conneciton.
It only takes a few seconds to make each marking - faster than the
shrink-wrap
methods, and your only cost is a few bucks for the markers.
Be aware that not all colors show up well or contrast with one another.
I find
black, red, blue, green, purple, lime, and teal are all recognizable. If
you
can't find as many colors you can buy them online, or just add a stripe
or two
to your code to get more "digits".
It's almost like having a completely color-coded wiring harness, like in
a car.
Regards,
Chad
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery types (Was: 2 batteries, 1 alternator) |
Paul Messinger wrote:
>
> I did not intend to offend however the entire discussion seems very off the
> track for an aircraft.
No, it is not. I have suffered numerous failures of AGM batteries in standard
aircraft. If I had needed to rely on my battery to power my avionics under instrument
conditions, I would have been screwed. My research into the charging
of these batteries has led me to understand the nature of the failure and how
it is caused by currently accepted best practices in aircraft electrical system
design.
The *ONLY* person I have ever seen who works on aircraft electrical systems who
even had a clue about this is Bob Nuckolls. He added temperature compensation
to his linear alternator controller. That is a huge win.
But even that is not enough. You need to step the charging voltage down to the
proper float voltage after the battery is fully charged.
> First; If I ever have a significant depth of discharge, its because of a
> Failure of the electrical system. I would not fly again until I have
> determined the reason for the failure and corrected it including redesign or
> use of different parts.
Wrong. These problems affect battery life even when you are not discharging the
battery.
> This includes the need for prolonged attempts to start the engine. If it
> takes more than a very few blades or 10 seconds there is a problem that
> needs fixing.
I guess you have never started a fuel-injected engine. I know my fuel injected
engines like the back of my hand but sometimes it takes even me more than a few
blades to get them to start when they are hot.
> Thus depth of discharge cycles is a non issue.
For the most part, yes. But understanding the characteristics of the different
batteries is still a good thing, don't you think?
> The average pilot fly's under 100 hours per year and even one flight per day
> is way less than even the ability of the battery recommended by this group
> IE the Panasonic or equivalent widely available 12V 18 AH battery where its
> common usage is standby in UPS etc. (Many brands around that are equivalent)
> and they have been used for at least 10 years in experimental acft with
> multi year life using the "Horrible" alternators hi V and overcharging
> ability.
So doing things wrong even tho' they seem to work for the most part is OK, eh?
Why are we on this list then? Heck, by that logic we should stick with the tried-'n-true
electrical system designs foised upon us by the spam-can manufacturers
for 50 years. They seem to work pretty well, don't they? They FAA thinks
they are OK. :-)
> In the purest case I totally agree with what you are saying about the proper
> way to care for a battery however in the real world what you suggest is lots
> of weight, cost and complexity to implement and I can see no reason to even
> consider it for an ACFT.
Huh? The three-stage alternator controller I use on my boat weighs in at about
a pound. It wires in like a standard VR and works with a standard externally-regulated
alternator. OK, it has a thermistor that bolts to the battery positive
terminal to measure temperature but that doesn't seem like a lot of complexity
to me. It even has the ability to limit max current from the alternator
so you can't exceed its ratings. (I have mine dialed for 75% since my alternators
aren't rated for 100% duty cycle.) I am very sensitive to weight in an aircraft
as I like to play ACM and want every advantage I can get.
> On the other hand in a boat or RV; I would insist
> on that methods. But we are comparing the cost per year from under $50 on an
> aircraft using Bob's recommendation to many hundreds of $$ for Boat or RV.
Why are you spending all this time to run down my posting? Did I lie or something?
Gee whiz, I was just trying to make some information available that has
turned out to be very useful to me and it seems like I have stepped on your toes.
> We are not running off the battery in an aircraft, we are running off the
> alternator and USING the battery as a huge filter cap. Isolate the battery
> in any way from this solid essentially zero ohm connection and your
> electrical system can turn into a non operation system under transient loads
> noise etc. My "load dump" tests demonstrate that even 25,000mfd and no
> battery is not safe.
And what does that have to do with what I posted? I am not sure you even read
my post. I was talking about two things:
1. what are the differences between AGMs and gel-cells;
2. how do you charge them so that they live as long as possible.
Where in any of this do you get a suggestion that there is anything but a direct
connection from the alternator to the battery?
> There is abundant info on the proper care and feeding of batteries all over
> the web. Its great to be informed on how to care for your battery so it will
> last years and years.
>
> It is not so useful however to apply this info to the average acft owner.
Thank you Paul. I will remember this and refrain from posting anything on batteries
or charging systems in the future.
To everyone else on the list, you need to listen to Paul. He knows what is best
for you.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Robinson <crj(at)lucubration.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wire Marking |
BobsV35B(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 6/18/04 7:59:58 AM Central Daylight Time,
> crj(at)lucubration.com writes:
>
> What does ring out the wires mean? It sounds suspiciously like something
> that
> works well for me.
>
>
> Good Morning Chad,
>
> Not quite the same type of ring!
>
> Your method sounds great. However, I was hoping to mark the wires so that
> they would still have the same numbers on them that were used by the factory.
> That way, the original aircraft wiring manual information would still be
> valid.
>
> "Ringing Out The Wires" refers to the procedure of hooking a multimeter, or
> other continuity checking device, to one end of a wire and checking all the
> far away ends to determine which wire is which.
>
> It is my understanding that early electricians would run a batch of wires
> through a home or other structure. In order to determine the continuity, they
> would hook up a battery powered door bell between the wire and ground, then
> check the far ends to ground. When they found the correct wire, the door bell
> would ring. Thus the term, "ring out the wire."
Thanks for the description, Bob, guess I'm showing my age. Us new kids has
these things they call tone generators if'n ya want to get fancy. =)
Nothing beats a DMM. It'll be part of my on-board toolkit.
Regards,
Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Walter Tondu <walter(at)tondu.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Off to California . . . |
On 06/17 9:00, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> Dee and I are packing for the Long Beach weekend seminar. Be
> back on-line Monday. It's not too late to join us! Just walk
> in Saturday morning and we'll find a place for you.
I'll be attending. Any one else on this list scheduled to attend?
I've been postponing most of my wiring until after the seminar.
--
Walter Tondu
http://www.tondu.com/rv7
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Ripper" <rwripper(at)Prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Still have Permanent Magnet Alternator Question |
I understand Bob is away but wonder if anyone can advise a non-computer guy how to access http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev10/z10.pdf
For some reason I can't get through to it. Thanks, Dick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Denis Walsh <denis.walsh(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Still have Permanent Magnet Alternator Question |
Some times you have to clip some of the address? It is working for me
today.
Anyway I will send you a copy as atch to email.
Good luck
On Jun 18, 2004, at 10:27 AM, Dick Ripper wrote:
>
>
> I understand Bob is away but wonder if anyone can advise a
> non-computer guy how to access
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev10/z10.pdf
>
> For some reason I can't get through to it. Thanks, Dick
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Still have Permanent Magnet Alternator Question |
Dick Ripper wrote:
>
> I understand Bob is away but wonder if anyone can advise a non-computer guy how to access http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev10/z10.pdf
>
> For some reason I can't get through to it. Thanks, Dick
The file is there and I was able to view it. You need to install Adobe Acrobat Viewer to look at the file. If you haven't already done so, go to http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html and download the version appropriate to the type of computer you are using.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery types (Was: 2 batteries, 1 alternator) |
John Schroeder wrote:
> I, for one, deeply appreciate your postings. Rarely do I read threads like
> this because neither of the protagonists demonstrate enough logic and
> knowledge to make it worth my while. Not so for this one. I've read all of
> this one because I respect your record of solid postings and information
> on this forum.
Thank you John. I appreciate the message. I was trying to present useful information
and I like to hear that someone else feels that I have hit the mark.
So much of what we get in email is "noise" that I don't want to contribute to
the problem.
> Thank you again for taking time to share with us.
You are welcome. Thanks again for the positive feedback.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jon Finley" <Jon(at)finleyweb.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Still have Permanent Magnet Alternator Question |
It opens ok for me Dick. Do you have Adobe Reader on your machine? If not, you'll
have to go to Adobe.com, download the free reader, and install it.
Otherwise, it might be the size. It is not small. Do you have a high-speed connection
or dial-up. If dial-up, it may take awhile.
Jon
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Dick Ripper" <rwripper(at)Prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 12:27:35 -0400
>
>I understand Bob is away but wonder if anyone can advise a non-computer guy how to access http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev10/z10.pdf
>
>For some reason I can't get through to it. Thanks, Dick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Robertson screws etc |
Cheers,
......just another small twist. Robertson refused to sell out to
Henry Ford and just as stubbornly fought through the loss of business,
producing a range of products which slowly gained recognition (except upon
the ignorant).
Eventually time caught up with him and he sold the firm and the
factory (about 10 miles from here) to a company in Toronto - which was
reluctant to spar with big money for acceptance as an AN part. So they don't
make the particular steels that aircraft specs demand and concentrate on
furniture and big appliances - with great success. Nevertheless they are
often tested and used for many other purposes.
The corker?..........it's an American company.
Ferg
Europa A064
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Koyich" <Ron(at)Koyich.com> |
>>Nothing beats a DMM. It'll be part of my on-board toolkit.<<
Well, when peaking or nulling a circuit, an analog meter beats a DMM. And
a Sonalert mounted on a battery is much cheaper than a DMM for 'ringing
out' wires.
Don't get me wrong - wouldn't give up any of my new tech gadgetry, but
just like the Garmin 430 in the plane, the new stuff is not necessarily
always more effective than the old.
Looking but not feeling older at times - Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery types (Was: 2 batteries, 1 alternator) |
Brian
I'm also paying attention to your posts as I have chosen small Dekka
ETX9 batteries and it seems clear that small AGM batteries will not
tolerate as much overcharging abuse as large flooded batteries. I didn't
know that 3 state VR's existed before your post although I did know that
was the preferred charging method. Unfortunately it seems they are more
expensive than my alternators and batteries combined so I will monitor
my batteries carefully and perhaps try a few simple things once I get
flying. I suspect that proper care and feeding of these critters will
become a bigger concern as they become more common and we start taking
advantage of smaller lighter batteries. I was aware of the Dekka white
paper but your reports of battery failures are more telling in terms of
real world results. Perhaps you'd care to elaborate on the failures such
as time to failure and average trip times during service... This thread
reminds me of the car that we put a dashboard knob on to adjust the
voltage and stop the rapid electrolyte loss on long summer trips. That
was with a mechanical regulator with no temperature compensation at all.
Modern internal VR's have at least some air temperature compensation and
I suspect that there is some benefit to mounting the battery on the cool
side of the firewall so it can tolerate a higher than ideal voltage in
cruise. Worst case is perhaps an external mechanical VR and the battery
on the hot side of the firewall.
I don't have a clue whether the John Deere PM alternator regulator on my
second battery has any temperature compensation in it yet.
My powerplant is a multi port EFI Subaru. Occasionally I'm
misinterpreted here as my perspective is not necessarily from a Lycoming
background.
Ken
Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
>Paul Messinger wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>I did not intend to offend however the entire discussion seems very off the
>>track for an aircraft.
>>
>>
>
>No, it is not. I have suffered numerous failures of AGM batteries in standard
aircraft. If I had needed to rely on my battery to power my avionics under instrument
conditions, I would have been screwed. My research into the charging
of these batteries has led me to understand the nature of the failure and how
it is caused by currently accepted best practices in aircraft electrical system
design.
>
>The *ONLY* person I have ever seen who works on aircraft electrical systems who
even had a clue about this is Bob Nuckolls. He added temperature compensation
to his linear alternator controller. That is a huge win.
>
>But even that is not enough. You need to step the charging voltage down to the
proper float voltage after the battery is fully charged
>
snip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Torx Drive Screws |
<dan@rvproject.
com>
> I have purchased a bunch of torx screws from microfasteners
> and use them everywhere. Unfortunately they only
> have a pretty limited range of lengths.
Go with McMaster Carr -- http://www.mcmaster.com Enter "machine screws" or
"socket head cap screws" in to the search box, and you can use their
"wizard" to narrow down what you want. Torx screws from McMaster come
in lengths from 1/8" to 3".)_( Dan RV-7 N714D)
http://www.rvproject.com>>
6/18/2004
Hello Dan, Not so fast. I dont want to alienate the electrical types by needlessly
perpetuating this screw drive thread in their list, but what you recommend
is not workable in all instances. Here is why:
If one is using cap screws with normal cylinder shaped heads or button shaped heads,
and putting them into an amateur built experimental airplane, the source
doesnt really matter provided the builder is satisfied with the type of drive
(hex socket, Torx, Torx Plus, or other), quality, material, strength, and dimensions
of the screws.
But if one is using flat head countersunk cap screws the source matters greatly.
Here is why. The flat head countersunk screws that you get from McMaster Carr
or your local hardware store will have an 82 degree counter sink angle. The
flat head countersunk aviation screws, such as the MS24694 screws, that you purchase
from Aircraft Spruce or Wicks or other aviation sources will have a 100
degree countersink angle. This is the standard for aircraft hardware.
What is the big deal you ask? Well if you start putting some 82 degree counter
sink screws into holes that have been counter sunk to 100 degrees or vice versa
you will have a significant contact mismatch (read weakness) between the screw
head and the material that was countersunk. Also if you start putting 100 degree
countersunk Tinnerman aviation washers under 82 degree counter sunk screw
heads you will have a significant mismatch.
That is why the flat head, 100 degree counter sink, stainless steel, Torx drive
screws from Microfasteners are such a huge break through. I spent years (and
a fair amount of money) trying to find some non Phillips drive, flat head, 100
degree countersunk screws, preferably in stainless steel. Finally John Fleisher
of Microfasteners agreed to have some made we are greatly in his debt.
Some screw drive comments: There are many different screw drives available. Some
have been developed for the aerospace industry and can be found on modern spacecraft
and aircraft. The designers were looking for something better than the
Phillips drive so was I. But I wasnt in a position to be choosey or buy in
bulk like Boeing or Lockheed. I tend to agree with Fergus Kyle that the Robertson
square drive would have been ideal (there are many imitators, particularly
in the furniture business), but that was pretty much a non starter. Robertson
was non cooperative (they still think there is something special / proprietary
about their square drive shape) and the image of the square drive was definitely
dorky and non aerospace in nature.
So with my encouragement John Fleisher went for the 6 lobe drive (the word Torx
is still copyrighted even though the patent has expired and any one can build
6 lobe drive screws) and we are the great beneficiaries.
OC
PS: It would be possible / permissible to build an amateur built experimental aircraft
using flat head, 82 degree hardware store countersunk screw and matching
82 degree countersunk holes throughout, but some DAR or FAA inspector may take
exception to that practice and I dont know of any source for 82 degree Tinnerman
type washers. I would not recommend going that route.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Robinson <crj(at)lucubration.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wire Marking |
BobsV35B(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 6/18/04 5:15:30 PM Central Daylight Time, Ron(at)Koyich.com
> writes:
>
> Well, when peaking or nulling a circuit, an analog meter beats a DMM. And
> a Sonalert mounted on a battery is much cheaper than a DMM for 'ringing
> out' wires.
>
>
> On top of that, nothing looks nicer sitting on the bench than a Simpson 260.
A Simpson what? Isn't that a TV show? =)
Yeah, yeah, analog meters have their place, I'm not THAT old. But if you
already own a DMM the "cheaper" argument for wire tracing doesn't work so well.
-Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery types (Was: 2 batteries, 1 alternator) |
Sorry again; but I still do not understand your insistence on perusing the
conversation with lack of specifics. For example exactly how does one know
how much current is going into any battery on the aircraft with only Bob's
load meter.
Alternator current is not battery current. I agree that battery temp is
important if you want to avoid overcharging the battery. But how much and
for how long is the issue I am trying to get to. How does the smart charger
/ regulator know how much current is going where given the assumed design of
only a load meter and no battery current sensor per Bob's designs of late.
I can go on and on but how about providing a specific application including
a schematic of how this smart charger figures out what the battery is
receiving and the alternator is outputting to the bus when they must be tied
together. IE the battery and the alternator "B" lead and the acft bus are
all one solid junction. Also lets get specific about the parts you are
suggesting with usable links to the product specifications.
I simply do not see how the smart charger/regulator or what ever can tell
about the battery state of charge without looking at the battery in a stand
alone mode or at least measuring the input current to the battery. You say
only the battery temp is needed.
Clearly I am missing something as the systems I have looked at that include
this multi stage charging setup assume the battery is independent and ant
loads go back thru the charge controller.
More embedded comments follow.
> No, it is not. I have suffered numerous failures of AGM batteries in
standard aircraft. If I had needed to rely on my battery to power my
avionics under instrument conditions, I would have been screwed. My
research into the charging of these batteries has led me to understand the
nature of the failure and how it is caused by currently accepted best
practices in aircraft electrical system design.
Other than Concord (that I would not near my aircraft) I have not heard of
significant battery problems.
> > First; If I ever have a significant depth of discharge, its because of a
> > Failure of the electrical system. I would not fly again until I have
> > determined the reason for the failure and corrected it including
redesign or
> > use of different parts.
>
> Wrong. These problems affect battery life even when you are not
discharging the battery.
Never said they did not Just that the average persons flying time per year
is far short of what I have seen as damaging. This does assume the Alt reg
is set to a reasonable voltage, and many are set to high.
>
> > This includes the need for prolonged attempts to start the engine. If it
> > takes more than a very few blades or 10 seconds there is a problem that
> > needs fixing.
June 04, 2004 - June 18, 2004
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-dg