AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-dk
August 14, 2004 - August 25, 2004
I'm not picking on you Dave . . . just want it to be clear
for yourself and others that the 'Connection, the List and
the website are tailored for folks who want something better-
than-cookbook airplanes. The fact that you noticed the
"discrepancy" in the drawings demonstrates that you were
sufficiently attuned to some simple-ideas that the
variability was noticed and caused you to ask the question.
Good eye!
>Thanks
>
>Dave Clinchy
>
>RV7, Trying to learn how to keep the smoke in the wires!
Given that you bothered to post the question suggests
a high probability of success not just for keeping your
cockpit smoke-free but for having a very user/owner friendly
system for what should be years of enjoyment from your airplane.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Clear Heat Shrink |
McMaster Carr
http://www.mcmaster.com
)_( Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Records" <records(at)socal.rr.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Clear Heat Shrink
>
> Does anybody know of a source of clear heat shrink?
>
> Thanks
>
> David
> Europa XS Tri-Gear
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> sjhdcl(at)kingston.net
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Heat Shrink
>
>
> Bob,
>
> Do you prefer double walled heat shrink over single walled? I have used
> both and lean towards double walled.
>
> Do you know a source for double walled heat shrink in white?
>
> Steve
> RV7A
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Doble" <mark.doble(at)mddesigns.com> |
| Subject: | Electrical failure in flight.... |
Electrical failure in flight....e-bus works great.
I flew from north east Atlanta to Raleigh on Friday and had a weird
electrical problem. With all the bad weather about it was not a great time
dealing with my electrical issues and flying!
Every few minutes the transponder (Garmin GTX 327) and the engine monitor
(my design) would cycle on/off. Note the Garmin GNS430 never had a
problem..worked great the whole time. The ammeter showed normal load the
voltage @ 14.4 (or at least when I was looking...spent most of the time
trying to avoid weather as I was VFR).
I thought that I had some type of wire short or noise causing these
components to recycle....so once I was out from under class B...i switched
off the transponder and used the engine monitor occasionally to check out
the usual temps, etc...
I finally made it near Raleigh...about 30min out and the low voltage warning
light turned on.....i assume the alternator or voltage reg had failed....i
used my essential bus and shut off the master switch and all was fine. I
had plenty of juice for 2 hours at my ebus load.
What was strange is that I never expected a failure like
that....surges/noise/whatever on the bus for 2 hours and then a failure. I
also heard some static in the headset that got worse..until the total
failure.
The alternator is B&C L-60 and the voltage regulator is a LR3C-14. I'm
using essentially a Z1 electrical system.
What are some good tests to determine the if the voltage reg or alternator
failed....? I know the field voltage @2000rpm should be 4volts< field volt
<8volts.
Very much thanks in advance....
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ivorphillips" <ivor(at)ivorphillips.flyer.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Clear Heat Shrink |
Ivor Phillips
XS486 London UK
> Does anybody know of a source of clear heat shrink?
>
> Thanks
>
> David
> Europa XS Tri-Gear
>
> -----Original Message-----
B&C sell it
http://www.bandcspecialty.com/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?13X358218
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael D Crowe" <rv8a(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Clear Heat Shrink |
David,
Try http://www.steinair.com They have it. Nice guy too.
Mike Crowe
RV8A
Does anybody know of a source of clear heat shrink?
Thanks
David
Europa XS Tri-Gear
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com> |
| Subject: | Clear Heat Shrink |
B&C also have it in different sizes,
Franz
RV7
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Michael D Crowe
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Clear Heat Shrink
David,
Try http://www.steinair.com They have it. Nice guy too.
Mike Crowe
RV8A
Does anybody know of a source of clear heat shrink?
Thanks
David
Europa XS Tri-Gear
---
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alex Balic <alex157(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | RE: AeroElectric-List Digest: Silicone tape source |
Radio Shack sells it in orange....... Self bonding silicone tape
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Noise filter |
>
>
>Good afternoon all.
>
>I am having a problem with strobe noise in the
>headsets. I have searched the archives and tried all
>the fixes. Everything wired per AeroElectric
>Connection.
>
>I have decided to install a choke filter, but the one
>described in Bob's notes will only handle 2.0
>continuous amps. I need at least 8 amps for the
>ValCom 760 I'm using.
>
>Can anyone recommend the size, part numbers and
>supplier for parts to handle the 8 amps?
What tests have you run to demonstrate to yourself that
the noise is coming in through the +14v supply lead
to the ValCom radio? 8A seems pretty big for
the current draw on this radio. Where does that
number come from? Have you measured it yourself
to confirm?
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe supply question |
>
>Bob & Listers,
> Is there any "minimum" distance that one should keep between a strobe
>power supply and your intercom wiring? Is this a potential issue? All
>intercom and strobe wiring will be shielded.
If the strobe supply is capable of injecting noise into
adjacent wires, then it will be magnetically coupled and
shielding of the wires probably wouldn't matter. Most folks
can find places for strobe power supplies that are no where
near wires for any other potential vicitim system. Exactly
how close do you NEED to mount it?
I suspect there's no practical requirement for separation.
Give it a try using your current best-wishes situation. The
worst that can happen is that you have to move it later.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DonVS" <dsvs(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | FW: [SoCAL-RVlist] Fw: [lycoming] New Electronic Ignition |
System and Supplier
Bob,
Could you check on this device and comment? I am just about to order my
engine and am looking for input on ignitions. Thanks. Don
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Checkoway [mailto:dan(at)rvproject.com]
Subject: [SoCAL-RVlist] Fw: [lycoming] New Electronic Ignition System
and Supplier
http://emagair.com
This may be yet-another-EI, but I do like that the "brain" and coil(s) are
self-contained. It doesn't seem to get much easier to set up.
They even have a self-powered setup...best of both worlds?
http://emagair.com/P-MAGII.htm
)_( Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: "mahlon_r" <mahlon_russell(at)teledyne.com>
Subject: [lycoming] New Electronic Ignition System and Supplier
> Came across a new supplier of electronic ignition for aircraft engines.
> I am trying to get a system to evaluate but in the mean time I thought
> some of you might be interested in checking out their website:
> http://emagair.com/Intro.htm
> Good Luck,
> Mahlon
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/SyTolB/TM
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SoCAL-RVlist/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
SoCAL-RVlist-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe supply question |
Bob
Thanks for the info. I'd like to mount the power supply under my cockpit
floor for ease of access. It will be about 4 feet from the intercom head
and about 2 feet from the co-pilot's harness (at the nearest point).
Charlie
>
>
>
>
> >
> >Bob & Listers,
> > Is there any "minimum" distance that one should keep between a strobe
> >power supply and your intercom wiring? Is this a potential issue? All
> >intercom and strobe wiring will be shielded.
>
> If the strobe supply is capable of injecting noise into
> adjacent wires, then it will be magnetically coupled and
> shielding of the wires probably wouldn't matter. Most folks
> can find places for strobe power supplies that are no where
> near wires for any other potential vicitim system. Exactly
> how close do you NEED to mount it?
>
> I suspect there's no practical requirement for separation.
> Give it a try using your current best-wishes situation. The
> worst that can happen is that you have to move it later.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>---
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Listening to a knock sensor |
I'd like to have the option to listen to my knock sensor over the intercom.
I understand that a knock sensor is basically a condenser mike that's
attached to the engine.
I recently bought a CK154 amplifier from http://canakit.com which has the
following specs:
Based on two TBA810 Integrated Circuits
Input sensitivity: 100mV / 47K Ohm
Output power: 2 x 7W Max. / 4 Ohm
Frequency response: 40Hz to 18KHz (-3dB)
I have a mono intercom so I only need one channel for now to amplify my
Walkman CD player.
Could I use the other channel to for the knock sensor input?
I see that canakit also have a choice of microphone amplifiers. Would I be
better off with one of these? I suppose another option would be to feed it
to one of the passenger mike inputs in the intercom, but I'd like a volume
control.
Any thoughts?
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: FW: [SoCAL-RVlist] Fw: [lycoming] New Electronic |
Ignition System and Supplier
Bob,
I'm interested in your opinion on these E-Mag magneto replacements (
http://emagair.com/ ) as well...getting ready to put the Lyc O-235
engine in my Long EZ, and these would sure make for an easier/cleaner
installation...need to replace or repair my existing mags anyway...was
thinking of one of the other EI products (such as Lightspeed)...but
these are "cheaper" and a lot less time wiring and installing.
Harley Dixon
DonVS wrote:
> <>Bob,
> Could you check on this device and comment? I am just about to order my
> engine and am looking for input on ignitions. Thanks. Don
>
> http://emagair.com
>
> This may be yet-another-EI, but I do like that the "brain" and coil(s) are
> self-contained. It doesn't seem to get much easier to set up.
>
> They even have a self-powered setup...best of both worlds?
> http://emagair.com/P-MAGII.htm
>
> )_( Dan
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Penetration |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Bob - Any status on this project?
Thanks, John
>
> I'm working on a source for a heavy (.050") stainless
> weldment in sizes 1/2", 3/4" and 1" in right angle and
> straight versions. . . should know more after first of
> the year.
>
> Bob . . .
>> I would like to use something like your RAC stainless steel flanged
>> elbow fitting for firewall penetration of wires in my GlaStar.
>> Searches of the internet and marine hardware stores has not turned up
>> anything equivalent.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Sherman <msherman95632(at)yahoo.com> |
Bob.
I used another source (external battery) for the power
and the noise went away. It is only in the radio not
the intercom. All audio grounds are routed to one
connection on inside firewall. A components have a
separate ground, I didn't use an airframe ground for
anything. All grounds terminate at the ground block
on firewall.
After my original post I have measured the draw of the
radio and in the on mode it draws about 1.5 amps, in
transmit it draws about 3 amps. The manual calls for
a 10 amp fuse, I thought the draw would be much
larger.
Never the less, Radio Shack has discontinued the
270-030 filter choke. They only offer new electronic
versions, don't know if these will work the same or
not. I would like to confirm that the electronic type
will work or have part numbers for the choke and
capacitor from another vendor.
I also have another issue with my Grand Rapids EIS
Hall effect amp meter. When I transmit on the comm
radio it reads a draw of 50 amps. I know this isn't
actual because it would have smoked the 10 amp fuse
and the wires. I will take this up with them on
Monday.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Mark S.
CH701/Rotax 912ULS
Sherman
>
>
>Good afternoon all.
>
>I am having a problem with strobe noise in the
>headsets. I have searched the archives and
tried all
>the fixes. Everything wired per AeroElectric
>Connection.
>
>I have decided to install a choke filter, but
the one
>described in Bob's notes will only handle 2.0
>continuous amps. I need at least 8 amps for
the
>ValCom 760 I'm using.
>
>Can anyone recommend the size, part numbers and
>supplier for parts to handle the 8 amps?
What tests have you run to demonstrate to
yourself that
the noise is coming in through the +14v
supply lead
to the ValCom radio? 8A seems pretty big for
the current draw on this radio. Where does
that
number come from? Have you measured it
yourself
to confirm?
Bob . . .
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Listening to a knock sensor |
>I'd like to have the option to listen to my knock sensor over the intercom.
>I understand that a knock sensor is basically a condenser mike that's
>attached to the engine. Any thoughts?
>John Slade
John,
A knock sensor is a piezo-electric pick-up (not a microphone) that detects
the sharper (higher voltage) pulse that engine knock generates. When the
computer detects a knock it modifies the fuel mix, etc to prevent it.
It is highly doubtful if you would be happy listening to this cacophony over
the intercom.
([--time machine view--] Dear Bob, I purchased a homebuilt aircraft and
somebody apparently wired a knock sensor to the intercom! It's driving me
crazy. How can I remove it?)
Myself; I prefer listening to the slowly twisting techno-tribal segues of
Raoul Valve.
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 Johnson" <pinetownd(at)volcano.net> |
| Subject: | Thanks for Switch Reply |
>
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Question about Switches
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >Hi Bob,
> >
> >In a recent reply about switches, you said:
> >
> > My personal preference would be a 4 pole, progressive transfer,
> > three position toggle which can be wired to provide double-pole,
> > three position operation as described in Figure 11-16 of the
> > 'Connection (except you have two poles of circuit instead of
> > one). A good switch for this task is a ITT-Cannon/CK 7411SYZQE
> > which you can also find in Digikey's catalog at:
> >
> > http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T042/1005.pdf
> >
> >My question is how could you tell just by looking at the info in the
> >catalog that it is a progressive transfer switch? Are all 4 pole, three
> >position, switches progressive transfer? Unless a switch comes with your
> >standardized numbering system, I'm lost.
>
>
> Check out Chapter 11 on switches, specifically table 11-1 where
> I describe a convention for describing the action of toggle switches.
> The convention is a little different in the digikey listing but
> still obvious. A 2-10 option is cited as double pole, three position,
> on-on-on. The middle "on" implies the progressive transfer action as
> opposed to a synchronous transfer switch like a 2-7 where the description
> is on-off-on. Compare the 2-10 description with the functionality
> described in the switch listing in the Digikey catalog for a 7411
> switch.
>
> Digikey does their spring loaded positions a little different. I
> use parens around the momentary positions like for a 2-50 switch
> having on-on-(on) operation. This same action in a miniature C&K
> 7413 switch is described as on-on-mom.
>
> Does this help?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ---
Hi Bob,
Yes, that's a big help, thanks! At the risk of beating this subject to death,
would the ITT-Cannon/CK 7411SYZQE switch you mention above be functionally like
two 2-10 switches attached side-by-side with a single toggle handle? (The 7411SYZQE
switch is 4 pole, double throw while the 2-10 switch is 2 pole, double
throw.) If the answer is yes, then with your help I think I've cracked the
code!
Thanks,
Dennis Johnson
Lancair Legacy 15%
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
| Subject: | Firewall Penetration |
Try this link: http://www.epm-avcorp.com/tubeseal.html
They make high quality stainless penetrations and ship them along with a bit
of firesleeve and firestop putty. It seemed a little pricey, but I think it
does the job well. I would have been better off buying the larger size.
Terry
RV-8A finishing
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of John
Schroeder
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Firewall Penetration
Bob - Any status on this project?
Thanks, John
>
> I'm working on a source for a heavy (.050") stainless
> weldment in sizes 1/2", 3/4" and 1" in right angle and
> straight versions. . . should know more after first of
> the year.
>
> Bob . . .
>> I would like to use something like your RAC stainless steel flanged
>> elbow fitting for firewall penetration of wires in my GlaStar.
>> Searches of the internet and marine hardware stores has not turned up
>> anything equivalent.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard V. Reynolds" <rvreynolds(at)macs.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Jig for wiring a 25 pin D-Sub connector |
To wire the Stick switches, I used a Belkin 156462 Pro Series 6 ft PC Monitor
VGA/SVGA cable, High Density DB15 Male/Male. I cut the cable in half and wired
both sticks switches. You should be able to find a mating DB15 Female/Female
cable to continue your wiring or use a DB15 female connector with solder cups
(uhg!).
Richard Reynolds, Norfolk, VA, RV-6A flying
rd2(at)evenlink.com wrote:
>
> Richard, can you point me to the URL of these prewired connectors?
> Thanks
> Rumen
>
> _____________________Original message __________________________
> (received from Richard V. Reynolds; Date: 04:45 AM
>
>
> Neil,
>
> Go to the avionics wiring section of CompUSA and get a computer cable with the
> correct number of pins and male/female connectors. Cut the cable in half, use
> one end for the stick and the other to connect to your system
>
> Be careful, on some cables, not all the pins are wired. The small wires
> (usually
> 26 AWG) are just right for connecting to the stick switches.
>
> Richard Reynolds, Norfolk, VA, RV-6A flying
>
> .........................
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Thanks for Switch Reply |
>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>Yes, that's a big help, thanks! At the risk of beating this subject to
>death, would the ITT-Cannon/CK 7411SYZQE switch you mention above be
>functionally like two 2-10 switches attached side-by-side with a single
>toggle handle? (The 7411SYZQE switch is 4 pole, double throw while the
>2-10 switch is 2 pole, double throw.) If the answer is yes, then with
>your help I think I've cracked the code!
>
>Thanks,
>Dennis Johnson
>Lancair Legacy 15%
You got it. The 4-pole version would be a 4-10 in legacy Honeywell
parlance. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Switches/tl_series.pdf
in particular the progressive transfer switching diagrams on
page 123 and then the 3-position order guide on page 125.
Note that the 4TL1-10 is a 2x version of the 2TL1-10 cited
higher in the chart.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe noise |
>
>
>Bob.
>
>I used another source (external battery) for the power
>and the noise went away. It is only in the radio not
>the intercom. All audio grounds are routed to one
>connection on inside firewall. A components have a
>separate ground, I didn't use an airframe ground for
>anything. All grounds terminate at the ground block
>on firewall.
good fabrication policy, good detective work.
>After my original post I have measured the draw of the
>radio and in the on mode it draws about 1.5 amps, in
>transmit it draws about 3 amps. The manual calls for
>a 10 amp fuse, I thought the draw would be much
>larger.
aha! amazing what a little time and effort will
do in terms of deducing the REAL numbers for a load
analysis. I am mystified as to why manufacturers
make such outlandish statements/recommendations in
their published literature. It doesn't help anybody
to publish "conservative" or "better-safe-than-sorry"
numbers. we're all grown ups here and it's best to
have good data.
>Never the less, Radio Shack has discontinued the
>270-030 filter choke. They only offer new electronic
>versions, don't know if these will work the same or
>not. I would like to confirm that the electronic type
>will work or have part numbers for the choke and
>capacitor from another vendor.
I've not be able to locate a replacement
for the original part. Go ahead and try other
filters. do your own detective work to see how
much voltage drop you get thorough the filter.
Measure input and output voltages during transmit
and see what you get. then see how well it takes
care of your noise problem and report back to us.
>I also have another issue with my Grand Rapids EIS
>Hall effect amp meter. When I transmit on the comm
>radio it reads a draw of 50 amps. I know this isn't
>actual because it would have smoked the 10 amp fuse
>and the wires. I will take this up with them on
>Monday.
sounds like an RF interference problem. there's
no real good excuse for this. i'll be interested
in hearing what they have to say about it.
>Any help would be greatly appreciated.
if you find that an alternative part works and
has acceptable voltage drop, then we are indebted to
you for doing the legwork to find and verify a
suitable replacement. I see a 270-051
and 270-055 filter in the current website offerings
by Radio Shack. it would be useful to know about either
one or both of these products as they pertain to
your situation.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New Electronic Ignition System and Supplier |
>
>Bob,
>
>I'm interested in your opinion on these E-Mag magneto replacements (
>http://emagair.com/ ) as well...getting ready to put the Lyc O-235
>engine in my Long EZ, and these would sure make for an easier/cleaner
>installation...need to replace or repair my existing mags anyway...was
>thinking of one of the other EI products (such as Lightspeed)...but
>these are "cheaper" and a lot less time wiring and installing.
>
>Harley Dixon
Your note was the first time I'd heard of these folks. Their
hardware looks good and the marketing pitch is relatively free
of hyperbole. I think there's a high order of probability that
their product delivers what it promises. I'd sure give it
a try . . .
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tom Butler <tabranch(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Electronic tach hookup |
Does anyone have experience interfacing Lasar ignition to a U.M.A.
tach? My tach reads erratically and seems to go between the correct rpm
and twice that number. Both the tach and EI are 2 pulses per revolution.
Thanks,
Tom
N801TB
CH801 100% but no 1st flight.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Listening to a knock sensor |
> A knock sensor is a piezo-electric pick-up (not a microphone) that detects
> the sharper (higher voltage) pulse that engine knock generates. When the
> computer detects a knock it modifies the fuel mix, etc to prevent it.
Here's an article from someone that did this :
http://home.netcom.com/~bsundahl/knock/listen/listen.htm
> It is highly doubtful if you would be happy listening to this
> cacophony over the intercom.
I'm told that the race guys do it this way when testing on a dyno. This is
more for testing to find the limits rather than ongoing usage. Apparently
you can hear the onset of detonation if you approach it slowly. Best power
is just short of detonation.
> ([--time machine view--] Dear Bob, I purchased a homebuilt aircraft and
> somebody apparently wired a knock sensor to the intercom! It's driving me
> crazy. How can I remove it?)
Answer - turn down the volume on the knock sensor input.
> Myself; I prefer listening to the slowly twisting techno-tribal segues of
> Raoul Valve.
Haven't you heard the phrase "It's music to my ears". ? :)
Regards,
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
Received by mail server with no name
A friend was having problems with his tach output. If I remember right, his
problem was the pickup wire was neatly bundled with the ignition wires and
the tach was getting more info than it could handle. Route the pickup wire
away from the ignition wire I think was his solution.
Cy Galley - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair
Safety Programs Editor - TC
EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
| From: | "Tom Butler" <tabranch(at)yahoo.com> |
by mail server with no name
>
> Does anyone have experience interfacing Lasar ignition to a U.M.A.
> tach? My tach reads erratically and seems to go between the correct rpm
> and twice that number. Both the tach and EI are 2 pulses per revolution.
>
> Thanks,
> Tom
> N801TB
> CH801 100% but no 1st flight.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Schaefer" <dschaefer1(at)kc.rr.com> |
I'm still confused why my 'alternate' buss is being drained during starting,
when it should be completely isolated! The only time the two busses are
tied together is in the event of a failure or either alternator. That said,
the alternate buss should be completely separate and the electronics tied to
that buss unaffected by starting.
Thoughts?
David
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DonVS" <dsvs(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FW: [SoCAL-RVlist] Re: Fw: [lycoming] New Electronic |
Ignition System and Supplier
Bob,
This was what had me worried. I do not know enough to argue with this
engineer. Do you feel that his concerns are valid? Thanks for the input.
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Paisley [mailto:robert(at)protekperformance.com]
Subject: [SoCAL-RVlist] Re: Fw: [lycoming] New Electronic Ignition
System and Supplier
Some more commentary,
Speaking as an electrical engineer who made a living designing
electronic ignition systems for vehicles, the absolute worst thing
you can do in ignition design is put the coils next to the other
electronics of the system. Coils generate voltages in excess of
30,000 volts, microprocessors run on 5 volt busses, these two types
of devices cannot live in close proximity without serious compromise
of the system. You can look at the deisgn of any current automotive
system. The control electronics are in the passenger cabin, the
coils are in the engine area, with as much metal and space in
between as possible. This Emag system is fundamentally a REALLY bad
idea. Others have tried to bundle components like this before. All
previous products with this type of system architecture have failed
miserably. Personally, I wouldn't consider this type of ignition for
a land vehicle, let alone an airplane.
Robert Paisley
--- In SoCAL-RVlist(at)yahoogroups.com, Bill Marvel
wrote:
> I think Gary's comments are very worthwhile as I too have
reservations
> about the EI systems as they currently exist, primarily having to
do
> with reliability and redundancy issues.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/SyTolB/TM
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SoCAL-RVlist/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
SoCAL-RVlist-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe noise |
On Aug 15, 2004, at 11:43 AM, Mark Sherman wrote:
> Never the less, Radio Shack has discontinued the
> 270-030 filter choke. They only offer new electronic
> versions, don't know if these will work the same or
> not. I would like to confirm that the electronic type
> will work or have part numbers for the choke and
> capacitor from another vendor.
Since the value of the choke is not all that critical, if you need a
choke you can use one winding of a transformer. Use a transformer with
a secondary voltage something like 6.3VAC, 12VAC, or 24VAC. The higher
the voltage rating of the secondary, the greater the inductance. Make
sure that the current rating of the secondary is sufficient to carry
the load. Do not short the secondary winding or the inductance of your
ersatz choke will decrease.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: [lycoming] New Electronic Ignition |
<>
I disagree. While your sentiment has been widely assumed, the success of
the design depends more on the detail design of the system than the
proximity of the coil and the electronics. I have been building electronic
engine management systems for race cars for 20 years with this same concept,
many using that very same (Ford design) coil package. Some of those used GM
ignition coils mounted directly above the microprocessor, with the connector
pins as little as 0.1 inches from the micro. Most of the noise created by
an ignition coil is conducted (not radiated) caused by the voltage spike
reflected into the power supply and this has to be accounted for in any
system, closely coupled or not. Many of the GM ignition systems mount the
coils directly on the electronics, although I don't know if there is a
microprocessor in that package.
An equal worry is potential failure caused by vibration or temperature, but
that can also be accounted for in the design. I like the concept of this
new product. Unfortunately, a 6-cylinder package is a completely different
design challenge.
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sonex293(at)nc.rr.com |
| Subject: | LED / Strobe Position Lights |
While browsing through Barnstormers.com I came across some LED / Strobe wingtip
lights that look interesting. The site listed is
http://www.gs-air.com/
Has anyone had a chance to look at these wingtip lights? If they perform adequately,
it looks like they could fill a market missed by the current LED position
light offerings.
Michael Crowder
Sonex #293
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe noise |
On Aug 16, 2004, at 8:43 AM, Brian Lloyd wrote:
Oops.
>> Make
>> sure that the current rating of the secondary is sufficient to carry
>> the load. Do not short the secondary winding or the inductance of
>> your
>> ersatz choke will decrease.
>
> That should have read, "Do not short the *primary* winding..."
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | echristley(at)nc.rr.com |
| Subject: | Re: LED / Strobe Position Lights |
----- Original Message -----
From: sonex293(at)nc.rr.com
Date: Monday, August 16, 2004 9:11 am
Subject: AeroElectric-List: LED / Strobe Position Lights
sonex293(at)nc.rr.com
>
> While browsing through Barnstormers.com I came
across some LED /
> Strobe wingtip lights that look interesting. The
site listed is
>
> http://www.gs-air.com/
>
> Has anyone had a chance to look at these wingtip
lights? If they
> perform adequately, it looks like they could fill
a market missed
> by the current LED position light offerings.
>
> Michael Crowder
> Sonex #293
You can't tell much from the picture, but unless
they have an LED product which is much brighter than
what I've seen made available in a T05 package (a
VERY likely possibility), then I think this product
would likely be very disappointing.
I've been reworking my taillight design and webpage
after discussions in a previous thread here. I
think I've done a fairly good job of explaining what
is necessary to get what is needed from the standard
T05 packaged LEDs, and the best I could do was 37
lamps for the tailight alone. I still have a few
pictures to create, but it should be online 'real
soon now' (TM).
BTW, I just picked up my engine last week, so a lot
of other work I was doing slowed to a crawl 8*)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Where do I start? |
> Bob,
> Reading your book and other scamatics I suppose should be easy, but
> without an appendix, and index in picture form what all these symbles
> represent, I am spending (wasting) a lot of time. Help me out here will
> you, please? Where can I go for help here? A special book? Tell me, I'll
> buy it!
Other than Tony B's books, I'm unaware of any 'cook-book' approaches
to system architecture and fabrication. The 'Connection is the recommended
starting point. The drawing "seminar.dwg" found on the CD cited below
has a lot of your wiring diagram already drawn . . . ready for you to
keep, modify, discard or add to as you see fit.
> Can you recommend a cheap software for me to use to create my own
> electrical system documentation? One which might have all these symbles I
> could just drop in? I don't want to spend a fortune on some 3D Cad
> system, please.
The CD we offer contains an image of my website before the parts
business was transferred to B&C several years ago. Most of the parts
in the drawings are illustrated in figures and descriptions of the parts
catalog.
The CD also has three CAD programs that will open, edit and print
drawings included on the CD. There's a wirebook in progress that
probably has 90% of the work for your wirebook already done. Feel
free to use these materials in any way useful to you. My personal
preference of the three CAD programs
is AutoCAD LT 1.0 for windows. You need 4 clean floppies. Execute
"makeset.bat"
from the CD and the program will generate 4 pristine install disks for
the software. The price is hard to beat . . . if you have a high
speed Internet connection, you can download the CD at no charge from:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/CD/AEC8_0.zip
I think you're suffering a malady common to first time builders.
It's a sort of can't see the "trees for the forest" syndrome.
Looking at the whole task makes it difficult to sort out the
dozens of simple-ideas that get stacked up like Tinker-Toys
and Legos to configure the system of your dreams. The starting
point must be to acquire an understanding of the Tinker-Toys.
I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
share the information with as many folks as possible.
A further benefit can be realized with membership on
the list. There are lots of technically capable folks
on the list who can offer suggestions too. You can
join at . . .
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
In the final analysis, if you don't find any of our offerings
to be of value to you, just let me know. I'll refund your money
and you can keep the book.
Regards,
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------
( Knowing about a thing is different than )
( understanding it. One can know a lot )
( and still understand nothing. )
( C.F. Kettering )
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jaye and Scott Jackson" <jayeandscott(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: [lycoming] New Electronic Ignition |
The Electroair electronic ignition has the coils mounted right on top of the
little bits......
Scott in VAncouver
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Fw: [lycoming] New Electronic Ignition
>
> < electronic ignition systems for vehicles, the absolute worst thing
> you can do in ignition design is put the coils next to the other
> electronics of the system. Coils generate voltages in excess of
> 30,000 volts, microprocessors run on 5 volt busses, these two types
> of devices cannot live in close proximity without serious compromise
> of the system. You can look at the design of any current automotive
> system....Robert Paisley>>
>
> I disagree. While your sentiment has been widely assumed, the success of
> the design depends more on the detail design of the system than the
> proximity of the coil and the electronics. I have been building
electronic
> engine management systems for race cars for 20 years with this same
concept,
> many using that very same (Ford design) coil package. Some of those used
GM
> ignition coils mounted directly above the microprocessor, with the
connector
> pins as little as 0.1 inches from the micro. Most of the noise created by
> an ignition coil is conducted (not radiated) caused by the voltage spike
> reflected into the power supply and this has to be accounted for in any
> system, closely coupled or not. Many of the GM ignition systems mount the
> coils directly on the electronics, although I don't know if there is a
> microprocessor in that package.
>
> An equal worry is potential failure caused by vibration or temperature,
but
> that can also be accounted for in the design. I like the concept of this
> new product. Unfortunately, a 6-cylinder package is a completely
different
> design challenge.
>
> Gary Casey
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe noise |
>
>On Aug 15, 2004, at 11:43 AM, Mark Sherman wrote:
>
> > Never the less, Radio Shack has discontinued the
> > 270-030 filter choke. They only offer new electronic
> > versions, don't know if these will work the same or
> > not. I would like to confirm that the electronic type
> > will work or have part numbers for the choke and
> > capacitor from another vendor.
>
>Since the value of the choke is not all that critical, if you need a
>choke you can use one winding of a transformer. Use a transformer with
>a secondary voltage something like 6.3VAC, 12VAC, or 24VAC. The higher
>the voltage rating of the secondary, the greater the inductance. Make
>sure that the current rating of the secondary is sufficient to carry
>the load. Do not short the primary winding or the inductance of your
>ersatz choke will decrease.
I considered this alternative. Problem is that filter
chokes like the one offered in the 270-030 kit have
air-gaps in the core to prevent core saturation. AC
transformers don't have or need the air-core . . . they'll
saturate as some level of DC current flow that could
degrade the filtering effects if not render it useless.
I'll try to do some bench testing on specific parts
from Radio Shack to quantify their usefulness.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Stenson <cjstenson(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Radio problem SOLVED! |
Thank you to everyone who posted possible fixes for my radio problem. To solve
the problem, I ended up making a floating ground plane and attaching the antenna
to that. The ground plane/antenna are isolated entirely from any metal part
of the airframe. Worked like a charm yesterday. I'm picking up clear transmissions
from air traffic 70+ miles away now at only 1000'AGL. This was all
done with my backup handheld radio since my Vertex Standard radio had to be sent
in to the shop. Their tech said that the squelch needed to be realigned.
Don't know what that means.
I do have another question though. When I turn my GPS on with the remote antenna
mounted to the windshield, it creates a terrible interference with the com
radio. If I disconnect the remote antenna, it's fine. Any thoughts? This problem
is only occuring with my Icom radio, I never had a problem with the Vertex,
so it may be a moot point. Still curious what could be causing this though.
Thanks again.
chad
Sent through e-mol. E-mail, Anywhere, Anytime. http://www.e-mol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starting Power |
>
>
>I'm still confused why my 'alternate' buss is being drained during starting,
>when it should be completely isolated! The only time the two busses are
>tied together is in the event of a failure or either alternator. That said,
>the alternate buss should be completely separate and the electronics tied to
>that buss unaffected by starting.
>
>
>Thoughts?
>
>
>David
I presume you're talking about a figure Z-14 system.
If you have electronics that are not designed to live in the
real world of aircraft electrical systems that require
isolated battery support during engine cranking . . . then
you'll have to design a system with a main battery sized for
cranking. The aux battery can be same size or much smaller
because you DON't close the crossfeed contactor for cranking.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | New Electronic Ignition System - Being part of the |
solution
(See leading comments appended below)
Gary Casey addressed physics of issue most elegantly . . . the key
to a successful design is to understand and deal with all the
problems from a standpoint of understanding. It's all simple-ideas.
We've been putting sensitive electronics in the same box with
ugly electronics for years. Yes, there ARE potential interference
problems that must be addressed . . . so we put the engineer hats
on and get it done.
Any solution's complexity or cost might drive the product
out of the market . . . that's the other side of the coin
for bringing a product to market. The most successful manufacturer's
have achieved a balanced approach between what features are
provided and what consumers will pay for those features.
Let us consider the mechanism of advancing state-of-our-art . . .
The folks at emagair.com have elected to offer a system featuring
a one-piece, drop-in electronic replacement for a mag. To paint
their product with the broad-brush of "the worst thing you can
do" philosophy is unfair and ignores the demonstrable achievements
of creative engineers everywhere. The question is, "have they
solved all the problems?" Certainly they must think so or the
product wouldn't be available for sale. Should we be skeptical?
You betcha! Do just like we did when Klaus brought his first
offerings to the market in 1985 . . . make the new kid on the
block run along side ol' grandpa magneto (or ANY other different
system) and PROVE himself worthy.
I'll suggest the real "worst thing we can do" is wade into discussions
swinging hammers-n-chains because our personal knowledge
and experience suggests that the product is not worthy of
attention. If guys like Gates and Jobs had not hunkered down
in their garages sorting though personal collections of simple-ideas,
the world's best offering for personal computing might still
fill up a room, be programmed on punch-cards and cost as much
as your house.
Emag is one of the most exciting new ideas to come along in OBAM
aircraft ignition systems in 10 years. If I owned an OBAM
aircraft, I'd put ONE of these critters on order right now.
I've e-mailed a few folks directly asking them to consider
this product for their currently-flying aircraft. Inquiring
minds want to know . . .
Let's put him under the magnifying glass but without
discouraging or disparaging his efforts and vision. Whether
his product is win, loose or draw . . . we can all participate
in the considered evaluation facts to the benefit
of everyone INCLUDING the manufacturer. If there are problems
with his product, let's help him identify them and provide
a platform for proving the solutions.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is something that CANNOT happen
in certified aircraft. Powers-that-be make it extremely difficult
to advance the state of the art in certified ships. Let's
give this guy all the support we can to assist and assure his success.
Bob . . .
>
>Bob,
>This was what had me worried. I do not know enough to argue with this
>engineer. Do you feel that his concerns are valid? Thanks for the input.
>Don
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Robert Paisley [mailto:robert(at)protekperformance.com]
>To: SoCAL-RVlist(at)yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [SoCAL-RVlist] Re: Fw: [lycoming] New Electronic Ignition
>System and Supplier
>
>
>Some more commentary,
>Speaking as an electrical engineer who made a living designing
>electronic ignition systems for vehicles, the absolute worst thing
>you can do in ignition design is put the coils next to the other
>electronics of the system. Coils generate voltages in excess of
>30,000 volts, microprocessors run on 5 volt busses, these two types
>of devices cannot live in close proximity without serious compromise
>of the system. You can look at the deisgn of any current automotive
>system. The control electronics are in the passenger cabin, the
>coils are in the engine area, with as much metal and space in
>between as possible. This Emag system is fundamentally a REALLY bad
>idea. Others have tried to bundle components like this before. All
>previous products with this type of system architecture have failed
>miserably. Personally, I wouldn't consider this type of ignition for
>a land vehicle, let alone an airplane.
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe supply question |
>
>Bob
> Thanks for the info. I'd like to mount the power supply under my cockpit
>floor for ease of access. It will be about 4 feet from the intercom head
>and about 2 feet from the co-pilot's harness (at the nearest point).
>Charlie
Bolt 'er down. Probability of difficulty is very remote.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Multiple power feed wiring problem . . . |
>Comments/Questions: Hi Bob, I just read all your notes about
>wiring aircraft. I'm building an RV6 in Australia. I have a
>question. As per Vans diagram I'm trying to put all my engine gauges onto
>1 CB but it totals 7 wires and their 7 ring terminals wont all fit onto
>the CB screw.
>
>Shall I get a longer screw or will a connector do better? If so what size
>wire will i need to go from the CB to the connector?
>
>thank you
I've expanded an article I did on the website so that
it speaks specifically to your question. If it were
my airplane, I'd use a PIDG splice to fan out the
single power feed wire to seven instruments as shown
here:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/multiplewires/multiplewires.html
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | echristley(at)nc.rr.com |
| Subject: | Re: Multiple power feed wiring problem . . . |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Date: Monday, August 16, 2004 1:21 pm
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Multiple power feed
wiring problem . . .
> I've expanded an article I did on the website
so that
> it speaks specifically to your question. If it were
> my airplane, I'd use a PIDG splice to fan out the
> single power feed wire to seven instruments as
shown
> here:
>
>
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/multiplewires/multiplewires.html
>
> Bob . . .
>
Bob, you may already be aware of it, but this
month's Sport Aviation has an article on aircraft
wiring. The method you demonstrate so eloquently in
the article is specifically called out as likely to
cause problems.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Peter Laurence <dr.laurence(at)mbdi.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe noise |
The Shack has a filter (770-0055) which has a .7 uH inductor with two
caps.as opposed to the (270-030A). which has a 1.9uH inductor.
If I can't find one left on the shelf, I'm going to try the 770-0055 on a
noisy electric HSI..
Let you know how it turns out.
Peter
RV9A
waiting for wings
> >On> >
> > > Never the less, Radio Shack has discontinued the
> > > 270-030 filter choke. They only offer new electronic
> > > versions, don't know if these will work the same or
> > > not. I would like to confirm that the electronic type
> > > will work or have part numbers for the choke and
> > > capacitor from another vendor.
> >
> >Since the value of the choke is not all that critical, if you need a
> >choke you can use one winding of a transformer. Use a transformer with
> >a secondary voltage something like 6.3VAC, 12VAC, or 24VAC. The higher
> >the voltage rating of the secondary, the greater the inductance. Make
> >sure that the current rating of the secondary is sufficient to carry
> >the load. Do not short the primary winding or the inductance of your
> >ersatz choke will decrease.
>
> I considered this alternative. Problem is that filter
> chokes like the one offered in the 270-030 kit have
> air-gaps in the core to prevent core saturation. AC
> transformers don't have or need the air-core . . . they'll
> saturate as some level of DC current flow that could
> degrade the filtering effects if not render it useless.
>
> I'll try to do some bench testing on specific parts
> from Radio Shack to quantify their usefulness.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ---
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joa Harrison <flyasuperseven(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | ACS switch issues for Rotax 912S |
Ok, I traced it down to the ACS ignition switch (P/N A-510-2). When I switch to
the left side ("R") it will cut out sometimes. Not very often but if I do it
just right then off she goes. The switch only had been used about 40 hours
when this started showing up.
It appears that it is grounding, or at least partially grounding, inadvertently
when switched over to that "mag".
Could it have to do with the diode issue that ACS mentions with regards to impulse
coupled mags?
FWIW I've wired according to Bob's notes with the shield acting as the ground.
I was very very careful when wiring and so far this is the only electrical problem
I've had.
I've also wiggled all the wires around behind the switch (and also the engine)
and it doesn't seem to be any of the wires. I'm guessing it's internal to the
switch or something to do with a spike of some sort.
Any other ideas before I pull the switch out and send it back to ACS? Anybody
else had issues with this switch?
Joa
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
For the first time I noticed an intermittent ignition issue with my Rotax 912S.
The right ignition controller cut out several times when doing a "mag" check
(on the ground of course). I couldn't get it to duplicate again since though.
I carefully checked my wiring and also used an ohmmeter to check continuity to
see if there was a short causing that side to cut out. No joy.
Perhaps a problem with the starter switch (ACS unit)?
Anybody else with experience with this ignition and possibly some suggestions?
Thanks folks!
Joa
"who just *hates* intermittent electrical issues"
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Multiple power feed wiring problem . . . |
...and that's not the only erroneous information in that article in the
current issue of Sport Aviation.
Best regards,
Rob Housman
Europa XS Tri-Gear A070
Airframe complete
Irvine, CA
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
echristley(at)nc.rr.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Multiple power feed wiring problem . . .
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Date: Monday, August 16, 2004 1:21 pm
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Multiple power feed
wiring problem . . .
> I've expanded an article I did on the website
so that
> it speaks specifically to your question. If it were
> my airplane, I'd use a PIDG splice to fan out the
> single power feed wire to seven instruments as
shown
> here:
>
>
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/multiplewires/multiplewires.html
>
> Bob . . .
>
Bob, you may already be aware of it, but this
month's Sport Aviation has an article on aircraft
wiring. The method you demonstrate so eloquently in
the article is specifically called out as likely to
cause problems.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister(at)qia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LED / Strobe Position Lights |
Hi,
I purchased my wingtip LED lights and tail light from Eric Jones at
www.PerihelionDesign.com . They work very well and consume approximately 1/3
of the current of the incandescent type. I believe that these lights have
had a photometric survey performed on them to ensure that they meet the FAA
requirements.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Sherman <msherman95632(at)yahoo.com> |
Bob.
As we discussed before, Radio Shack has discontinued
the 270-030 choke filter. I thought I would try the
270-051 noise filter they offer now.
I couldn't help my self, I had to tear it open and see
what makes it tick. It's the same as the old 270-030
except they hook it all up for you and put it in a
nice plastic tube with all the parts inside insulated
with foam.
I installed it between the fuse buss and the ValCom
760 radio and all the strobe noise went away.
This noise filter is rated for 10 amps with a 0.4 vdc
drop at 10 amps.
They get $16.00 for it, I have seen what looks like
the same thing on line at Parts Express (I think) for
$6.00.
The issue with my Grand Rapids EIS of erroneous AMP
readings has yet to be fixed. GRT sent me to Radio
Shack to get a Ferrite Line Filter (part #273-105). A
little clamp on filter that goes around the wires
leading into the EIS unit. This helped but didn't
eliminate the problem. Waiting for a call back!
As always thanks for your help and support.
=====
Mark S.
CH-701/912ULS
N752MS reserved
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Multiple power feed wiring problem . . . |
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
>Date: Monday, August 16, 2004 1:21 pm
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Multiple power feed
>wiring problem . . .
>
> > I've expanded an article I did on the website
>so that
> > it speaks specifically to your question. If it were
> > my airplane, I'd use a PIDG splice to fan out the
> > single power feed wire to seven instruments as
>shown
> > here:
> >
> >
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/multiplewires/multiplewires.html
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
>
>
>Bob, you may already be aware of it, but this
>month's Sport Aviation has an article on aircraft
>wiring. The method you demonstrate so eloquently in
>the article is specifically called out as likely to
>cause problems.
Yeah . . . saw that article at OSH when I stopped by
the Homebuilder's Information building on the flight
line. They had a stack of August Sport Aviations
on the counter and I picked one up to leaf through
while the three guys behind the counter were busy
with customers. I stumbled across the article on
wiring. It's got just enough good stuff in it to
be credible . . . I'm considering doing a paragraph
by paragraph review for publication on my website.
It's sad that the flagship publication of EAA can't
rise to level of being a good teacher. At least they
could get peer review of articles before they put
ink to paper.
Another disappointment at the Homebuilders Info
center. I asked the first guy who walked up if they
had any suggestions for electrical system publications
or perhaps any forums they could recommend for a neophyte
builder on electrical systems. The guy suggested I
get Tony B's books from a store in the Fly-Market.
He dug out a listing of forums and pointed to a few
programs over the next few days . . . he missed my
listing for the following day.
Not trying to knock these guys . . . they're no doubt
volunteers. Just disappointed that for all the
opportunities these folks have to be helpful
during this 7 days out of 365 window-of-opportunity
don't really know much about what's going on. Whoever
is running the Homebuilders Info Center hasn't developed
any tools to help either.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ACS switch issues for Rotax 912S |
>
>
>
>Ok, I traced it down to the ACS ignition switch (P/N A-510-2). When I
>switch to the left side ("R") it will cut out sometimes. Not very often
>but if I do it just right then off she goes. The switch only had been
>used about 40 hours when this started showing up.
>
>It appears that it is grounding, or at least partially grounding,
>inadvertently when switched over to that "mag".
>
>Could it have to do with the diode issue that ACS mentions with regards to
>impulse coupled mags?
The diode was added to the starter contactor control circuit . . .
with totally bogus engineering behind it. See
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/spikecatcher.pdf
>FWIW I've wired according to Bob's notes with the shield acting as the
>ground. I was very very careful when wiring and so far this is the only
>electrical problem I've had.
>
>I've also wiggled all the wires around behind the switch (and also the
>engine) and it doesn't seem to be any of the wires. I'm guessing it's
>internal to the switch or something to do with a spike of some sort.
>
>Any other ideas before I pull the switch out and send it back to ACS?
Have you considered getting your money back and putting in toggle
switches? In my never humble opinion, key-switches suck.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Remi Khu <rkhu(at)kc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New Electronic Ignition System - Being part of |
the solution
I called E-Mag asking about the interference problem with the coil's
proximity to the controllers and was assured that it has been
addressed. There has been a flying model onboard a Christen Eagle
without any problem so far.
Unfortunately this product is not yet available for an O-470 but, once
again, work is in progress for a 6-cylinder version due for release
within a year.
Remi
On Aug 16, 2004, at 11:28 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
> (See leading comments appended below)
>
> Gary Casey addressed physics of issue most elegantly . . . the key
> to a successful design is to understand and deal with all the
> problems from a standpoint of understanding. It's all simple-ideas.
> We've been putting sensitive electronics in the same box with
> ugly electronics for years. Yes, there ARE potential interference
> problems that must be addressed . . . so we put the engineer hats
> on and get it done.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Schaefer" <dschaefer1(at)kc.rr.com> |
I'm really tired of hearing the 'REAL WORLD' excuse. It's precisely today's
real world designs that have forced the experimental population to build
their own much safer systems. The designers of current electrical systems
(which haven't changed in 50 years) in the spam cans should be held
accountable for the crap they are designing and forcing on the flying public
via STC and 'Certified' systems.
Additionally, I can assure you that my displays are designed for the "real
world". Greg and company at Grand Rapids didn't fall off a truck yesterday;
all were previously Boeing engineers and avid RV builders. Grand Rapids
doesn't care about the starting surge & 're-set' only I do from a WHY SHOULD
IT HAPPEN IN THE FIRST PLACE question.
I have a primary Concorde battery sized for the starter and a slightly
smaller Odyssey (600 amp) for my secondary system. Both are allegedly
isolated from each other when the cross-feed isn't thrown per Z-14 yet the
secondary electrical system is somehow being drawn down by the starting on
the primary which should allegedly not happen.
Thanks for the answer; I'll drop off this list & call B&C in the future.
David
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Starting Power
>
>
>I'm still confused why my 'alternate' buss is being drained during
starting,
>when it should be completely isolated! The only time the two busses are
>tied together is in the event of a failure or either alternator. That
said,
>the alternate buss should be completely separate and the electronics tied
to
>that buss unaffected by starting.
>
>
>Thoughts?
>
>
>David
I presume you're talking about a figure Z-14 system.
If you have electronics that are not designed to live in the
real world of aircraft electrical systems that require
isolated battery support during engine cranking . . . then
you'll have to design a system with a main battery sized for
cranking. The aux battery can be same size or much smaller
because you DON't close the crossfeed contactor for cranking.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe noise |
How about:
http://www.speakercity.com/xover/coils.shtml
I don't know if this is applicable to filters for DC power circuits, but
for years speaker manufacturers (low frequency AC signals) avoided iron
core inductors because of saturation concerns. Then testing got
sophisticated enough to determine that the iron core just needed to be
big enough & saturation problems could be avoided.
At any rate, there are air core inductors listed on this site. For more
results, Google 'speaker crossover components'.
Charlie
Peter Laurence wrote:
>
>The Shack has a filter (770-0055) which has a .7 uH inductor with two
>caps.as opposed to the (270-030A). which has a 1.9uH inductor.
>
>If I can't find one left on the shelf, I'm going to try the 770-0055 on a
>noisy electric HSI..
>
>Let you know how it turns out.
>
>
>Peter
>RV9A
>waiting for wings
>
>
>
>
>>>On> >
>>>
>>>
>>>>Never the less, Radio Shack has discontinued the
>>>>270-030 filter choke. They only offer new electronic
>>>>versions, don't know if these will work the same or
>>>>not. I would like to confirm that the electronic type
>>>>will work or have part numbers for the choke and
>>>>capacitor from another vendor.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Since the value of the choke is not all that critical, if you need a
>>>choke you can use one winding of a transformer. Use a transformer with
>>>a secondary voltage something like 6.3VAC, 12VAC, or 24VAC. The higher
>>>the voltage rating of the secondary, the greater the inductance. Make
>>>sure that the current rating of the secondary is sufficient to carry
>>>the load. Do not short the primary winding or the inductance of your
>>>ersatz choke will decrease.
>>>
>>>
>> I considered this alternative. Problem is that filter
>> chokes like the one offered in the 270-030 kit have
>> air-gaps in the core to prevent core saturation. AC
>> transformers don't have or need the air-core . . . they'll
>> saturate as some level of DC current flow that could
>> degrade the filtering effects if not render it useless.
>>
>> I'll try to do some bench testing on specific parts
>> from Radio Shack to quantify their usefulness.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>---
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Alexander" <Dalexan48(at)dslextreme.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 17 Msgs - 08/15/04 |
Hello John,
My second job is with a company called Balco. It is a division of Snap-on
Tools. I write troubleshooting info for automotive techs to use while
diagnosing vehicles. One of the tests that we list in our product called
Vantage is for Knock Sensors. What we (and several manufactures) look for is
not only a voltage to reach a certain value, but a certain frequency as
well. Toyota for example lists resonant frequencies of 7,000, 7,100 and
7,600 Hz depending on which engine is being monitored. So one needs to be
careful that the sensor characteristics are matched to the engine or you may
never find the correct signal to input to your amplifier or it may not reach
a level to be of any use.
Hope this helps,
Dale Alexander
Velocity 173 Stealth Gullwing
>
> From: "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Listening to a knock sensor
>
>
> I'd like to have the option to listen to my knock sensor over the
intercom.
> I understand that a knock sensor is basically a condenser mike that's
> attached to the engine.
>
> Any thoughts?
> John Slade
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Strobe noise |
On 16 Aug 2004 at 19:23, Charlie England wrote:
Thanks Charlie,
they seem to have the replacement for the discontinued RadioSHOT part
Peter
>
>
> How about:
>
> http://www.speakercity.com/xover/coils.shtml
>
> I don't know if this is applicable to filters for DC power circuits,
> but for years speaker manufacturers (low frequency AC signals) avoided
> iron core inductors because of saturation concerns. Then testing got
> sophisticated enough to determine that the iron core just needed to be
> big enough & saturation problems could be avoided.
>
> At any rate, there are air core inductors listed on this site. For
> more results, Google 'speaker crossover components'.
>
> Charlie
>
> Peter Laurence wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >The Shack has a filter (770-0055) which has a .7 uH inductor with
> >two caps.as opposed to the (270-030A). which has a 1.9uH inductor.
> >
> >If I can't find one left on the shelf, I'm going to try the 770-0055
> >on a noisy electric HSI..
> >
> >Let you know how it turns out.
> >
> >
> >Peter
> >RV9A
> >waiting for wings
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>>On> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Never the less, Radio Shack has discontinued the
> >>>>270-030 filter choke. They only offer new electronic
> >>>>versions, don't know if these will work the same or
> >>>>not. I would like to confirm that the electronic type
> >>>>will work or have part numbers for the choke and
> >>>>capacitor from another vendor.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>Since the value of the choke is not all that critical, if you need
> >>>a choke you can use one winding of a transformer. Use a
> >>>transformer with a secondary voltage something like 6.3VAC, 12VAC,
> >>>or 24VAC. The higher the voltage rating of the secondary, the
> >>>greater the inductance. Make sure that the current rating of the
> >>>secondary is sufficient to carry the load. Do not short the
> >>>primary winding or the inductance of your ersatz choke will
> >>>decrease.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> I considered this alternative. Problem is that filter
> >> chokes like the one offered in the 270-030 kit have
> >> air-gaps in the core to prevent core saturation. AC
> >> transformers don't have or need the air-core . . . they'll
> >> saturate as some level of DC current flow that could
> >> degrade the filtering effects if not render it useless.
> >>
> >> I'll try to do some bench testing on specific parts
> >> from Radio Shack to quantify their usefulness.
> >>
> >> Bob . . .
> >>
> >>
> >>---
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
> advertising on the Matronics Forums.
> http://www.matronics.com/chat
> ====
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jrstone" <jrstone(at)insightbb.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Where do I start? |
Hey Bob Nuckolls,
I just downloaded you cd and the file with the cad programs in it didn't
include the one you like, auto cad lt. Can you tell me where you have that
program saved? It wasn't in the auto cad drawing file either.
Thanks,
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Where do I start?
>
>
> > Bob,
> > Reading your book and other scamatics I suppose should be easy, but
> > without an appendix, and index in picture form what all these symbles
> > represent, I am spending (wasting) a lot of time. Help me out here will
> > you, please? Where can I go for help here? A special book? Tell me, I'll
> > buy it!
>
> Other than Tony B's books, I'm unaware of any 'cook-book' approaches
> to system architecture and fabrication. The 'Connection is the
recommended
> starting point. The drawing "seminar.dwg" found on the CD cited below
> has a lot of your wiring diagram already drawn . . . ready for you to
> keep, modify, discard or add to as you see fit.
>
> > Can you recommend a cheap software for me to use to create my own
> > electrical system documentation? One which might have all these symbles
I
> > could just drop in? I don't want to spend a fortune on some 3D Cad
> > system, please.
>
> The CD we offer contains an image of my website before the parts
> business was transferred to B&C several years ago. Most of the parts
> in the drawings are illustrated in figures and descriptions of the
parts
> catalog.
>
> The CD also has three CAD programs that will open, edit and print
> drawings included on the CD. There's a wirebook in progress that
> probably has 90% of the work for your wirebook already done. Feel
> free to use these materials in any way useful to you. My personal
> preference of the three CAD programs
> is AutoCAD LT 1.0 for windows. You need 4 clean floppies. Execute
> "makeset.bat"
> from the CD and the program will generate 4 pristine install disks for
> the software. The price is hard to beat . . . if you have a high
> speed Internet connection, you can download the CD at no charge from:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/CD/AEC8_0.zip
>
> I think you're suffering a malady common to first time builders.
> It's a sort of can't see the "trees for the forest" syndrome.
> Looking at the whole task makes it difficult to sort out the
> dozens of simple-ideas that get stacked up like Tinker-Toys
> and Legos to configure the system of your dreams. The starting
> point must be to acquire an understanding of the Tinker-Toys.
>
> I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
> to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
> share the information with as many folks as possible.
> A further benefit can be realized with membership on
> the list. There are lots of technically capable folks
> on the list who can offer suggestions too. You can
> join at . . .
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
>
> In the final analysis, if you don't find any of our offerings
> to be of value to you, just let me know. I'll refund your money
> and you can keep the book.
>
> Regards,
>
> Bob . . .
>
> --------------------------------------------
> ( Knowing about a thing is different than )
> ( understanding it. One can know a lot )
> ( and still understand nothing. )
> ( C.F. Kettering )
> --------------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Multiple power feed wiring problem . . . |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
>>Date: Monday, August 16, 2004 1:21 pm
>>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Multiple power feed
>>wiring problem . . .
>>
>>
>>> I've expanded an article I did on the website
>>
>>so that
>>
>>> it speaks specifically to your question. If it were
>>> my airplane, I'd use a PIDG splice to fan out the
>>> single power feed wire to seven instruments as
>>
>>shown
>>
>>> here:
>>>
>>>
>>
>>http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/multiplewires/multiplewires.html
>>
>>> Bob . . .
>>>
>>
>>
>>Bob, you may already be aware of it, but this
>>month's Sport Aviation has an article on aircraft
>>wiring. The method you demonstrate so eloquently in
>>the article is specifically called out as likely to
>>cause problems.
>
>
> Yeah . . . saw that article at OSH when I stopped by
> the Homebuilder's Information building on the flight
> line. They had a stack of August Sport Aviations
> on the counter and I picked one up to leaf through
> while the three guys behind the counter were busy
> with customers. I stumbled across the article on
> wiring. It's got just enough good stuff in it to
> be credible . . . I'm considering doing a paragraph
> by paragraph review for publication on my website.
> It's sad that the flagship publication of EAA can't
> rise to level of being a good teacher. At least they
> could get peer review of articles before they put
> ink to paper.
I would really appreciate that review. And I will put my vote in for
peer review. I think it is the best thing they could possibly do. All
serious educational publication, ie scientific journals, have peer review.
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
alleviated by information and experience."
Veeduber
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Orear" <jorear(at)new.rr.com> |
List:
I am having trouble with my PS Engineering PMA 4000 audio panel in that I get no
side tone with either radio (Icom AC200 and Narco Escort II) that I have running
through it.
Intercom works fine, and I get indications on both radios (not at the same time)
that I am transmitting, as well as indication on the audio panel that either
com 1 or com 2 is transmitting.
I have also tried to increase the volume for the sidetone on the Narco Escort II,
but adjusting the pot makes no difference.
I have not mounted my antennae yet, but a temporary hookup does not produce a received
transmission on my handheld.
Also, when I have the PMA 4000 in failsafe (Off mode), I get a transmission indicator
on the radio without keying the PTT.
Could all this be the result of a relatively low voltage on the main buss? I am
getting a reading of 11.25 volts at present. I am wondering if this is some
sort of voltage saving feature of the audio panel?? My Icom handheld will still
receive on low voltage but will not transmit. Is this a similar thing for
the audio panel?
I have yet to charge up my Odyssey battery since its delivery. Worth a try before
I tear into my wiring harness??
Thanks for the help folks. Boy....do I feel helpless right now....
Regards,
Jeff Orear
RV6A N782P (reserved)
firewall forward etc
Peshtigo, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jaye and Scott Jackson" <jayeandscott(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | single antenna for Narco 140 |
Bob:
Thanks for the thoughtful answers to my previous posts regarding the dancing
ammeter, et al. I will replace the regulator 12V+ wire with a heavier one and
let you know how it works when I get the aircraft back together enough to run
it.
I purchased a used Narco 140 ADF without realizing that it came with a separate
sense antenna as well as the usual "boat hull" for the fuselage bottom.
Is there anyway to get the receiver/indicator to work without installing the
sense antenna?
Thanks again,
Scott in VAncouver
RV-6, 150 hours and holding
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Jurotich <mjurotich(at)hst.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Starting Power |
David's problem is real. If you power a device with a second battery to
keep that device working while cranking with a primary battery and the
voltage drops so low that the device resets then there is a real
problem. Let's try to help David diagnose the problem. I wan t to do the
same thing and I assumed Z14 would work. It appears David has a sneak
crossfeed problem. How do we help him?
Matthew M. Jurotich
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
Swales contractor to the
JWST ISIM Systems Engineer
m/c : 443
e-mail mail to:
phone : 301-286-5919
fax : 301-286-7021
JWST URL: <http://ngst1.gsfc.nasa.gov
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Redmon" <james(at)berkut13.com> |
I know this forum is more about routing elections, but I thought I might
ping the collective with another avionics question. (please recommend other
sources if applicable)
I've found another small anomaly in my system - specifically the KA-135
audio panel...I think. I have two com radios, the KA-135 has the two
mic/radio select buttons and several inputs for aux audio (NAV1, NAV2,
Marker, DME, etc.) - standard stuff, right.
I have the audio from the engine computer (audio alerts) piped into the
KA-135 on one of the 5 aux audio lines. With com1 mic switch pushed, all is
fine...everything loud and clear. Problem: when com2 switch is activated, I
can hear com2 audio just fine but ALL other audio inputs seem to have been
muted considerably. I can still hear them but they ALL are significantly
lower in volume. This also happens to all aux audio when the "both" button
is pressed as well. The result - when I'm monitoring com2, I can barely
hear the audio warnings....not good!
I have checked side tone adjustments on the both coms..no effect. The only
volume adjustment that the KA unit has is for the external speaker...it is
unaffected by the mic select button positions.
You can get a look at my panel here: http://www.berkut13.com/berkut22.htm
Can any of you KA-135 users out there verify that this is normal? Is there
any way to adjust or change this operation mode? There is noting the manual
that describes this behavior.
Thanks all,
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
http://www.berkut13.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Steitle <msteitle(at)mail.utexas.edu> 08/15/04 |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 17 Msgs - |
08/15/04
08/15/04
Dale,
Would you happen to know the frequency for the Mazda rotary engine?
Mark S.
> What we (and several manufactures) look for is
>not only a voltage to reach a certain value, but a certain frequency as
>well. Toyota for example lists resonant frequencies of 7,000, 7,100 and
>7,600 Hz depending on which engine is being monitored.
>Dale Alexander
>Velocity 173 Stealth Gullwing
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Starting Power |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
I am also very interested in this problem because we are just starting to
wire our Z-14 system. We also will have #1 battery sized for cranking (no
crossfeed). Most of the avionics are on #2 buss and the engine
instrumentation system (#2 buss) will be on for starting. The #2 battery
will be 17AH.
We do not have any other crossing of juice between #1 & #2 systems except
for crossfeed. First, I would ask if David has any Essential buss or
avionics buss and how it is tied into either system. If it is fed through
both systems via diodes/switches/relays, that is the first place I would
look.
Hope this helps,
John
> David's problem is real. If you power a device with a second battery to
> keep that device working while cranking with a primary battery and the
> voltage drops so low that the device resets then there is a real
> problem. Let's try to help David diagnose the problem.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | coil connections |
Klaus,
I contacted you back in late June with a problem with my Plasma II system.
One coil wasn't firing...I traced the problem to a broken (not fully, but
about to break) wire going to one of the coil fast-on connections. Turns
out I hadn't built enough strain relief into that wiring, and the wire was
getting tugged a bit when the engine shook on startup and shutdown. I
should have seen the potential for that, but it obviously slipped through.
I fixed that problem by re-wiring the coils and adding plenty of strain
relief, and additionally securing the wires so that any strain induced by
engine movement would not be focussed on the coil connections.
Things were fine for about 20 hours of flying after that, and then similar
problems started happening. I had intermittent problems on both
coils...sometimes one coil wouldn't be firing (I used EGTs to determine
which coil), and sometimes both coils wouldn't fire. I couldn't put my
finger on why the problem was occurring. I thought at first I was having
spark plug issues...because I would replace the plugs (they're cheap enough,
why not?), check all the wiring (everything *looked* fine), button the cowl
back up, and it would run great. But eventually, sometimes as soon as an
hour later, a coil problem would resurface.
I have finally figured out what the problem was. See the attached photo.
If it doesn't come through for some reason, the URL to the image is:
http://images.rvproject.com/images/2004/20040811_wear_marks.jpg
Over time, I believe the contact surface between the female fast-on
connectors and the male coil terminals was compromised. Either by physical
wear due to vibration (possibly caused earlier by the wires being allowed to
move), maybe slight oxidation?, heat-related expansion/contraction, possibly
the fast-on connectors "spreading" slightly, and/or by electrical arcing and
pitting, the connections were not making reliable contact. My theory is
that every time I "checked the wiring" when I was having the problem, I must
have wiggled the contacts just enough to reseat them to a new position where
they made contact.
Since discovering this, I "solved" the problem by (a) cleaning and smoothing
the coil terminals with Scotch Brite, and (b) replacing the female fast-on
connectors with higher quality connectors (ones that seem to have higher
clamping force). Since "restoring" these connections I haven't had a single
problem. Things are running perfectly.
Somebody saw the attached photo and my related comments on my web site and
emailed me. He's apparently a guy who worked for Bosch in Germany in the
80s. He saw my comment about how the voltage going through these coil
connectors is so low (12V) that I doubted that they could be arcing. His
response was that on ignition coils, the 12V side of the coils will see
about 300V after the coil fires, and that this is called "BACK EMF." Is
there any truth to this? It would explain the arcing/pitting I've seen if
so.
The only problems I have had with the Plasma II system have been centered
directly on these connections. I've had absolutely no other problems.
Hopefully I've got the issue licked at this point and now know what to look
for going forward...but I'm wondering if there are any different coils out
there that may have a more robust style of connector. I guess you could
argue that fast-on connectors are about as robust as they need to be...I'm
just curious what your thoughts are on this.
Thanks,
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Records" <records(at)socal.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Clear Heat Shrink |
Thanks to all who replied to my question about Clear Heat Shrink.
David
Europa XS Tri-Gear
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Franz
Fux
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Clear Heat Shrink
B&C also have it in different sizes,
Franz
RV7
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Michael D Crowe
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Clear Heat Shrink
David,
Try http://www.steinair.com They have it. Nice guy too.
Mike Crowe
RV8A
Does anybody know of a source of clear heat shrink?
Thanks
David
Europa XS Tri-Gear
---
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Never the less, Radio Shack has discontinued the |
Hi ! I'm from Australia. I had an electronic business for 30yrs but have
recently retired. I see you are looking for an old fashioned iron core
choke. Well Jaycar Electronics www.Jaycar.com.au I think probably still
sell one. It comes in the car sound section under catalogue No. AA3076. It
has a type no NF-20A on it. I have a new one left from my stock and just
pulled the bottom cover off to check it was indeed an iron core choke and it
is. It is however sold as 20amp car noise filter. The reason being is that
it's in this little plastic case with a circuit board and a 4,700uf 16vw
capacitor. Now if you wanted to use the capacitor I would change that to
63vw. That's simple and cheap, also very wise. The box is 3 1/2" [ inc
mounting lugs ] x 2 1/4" x 1 3/4" If you can't still get one I can sell you
this one. Hope this helps,
Rex.
rexjan(at)bigpond.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bobby Hester <bhester(at)hopkinsville.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wig Wag help on juliet |
Ken wrote:
> Hi Bobby
> I would indeed appreciate that NAPA number for the wig wag flasher
> whenever it is convenient.
> thanks
> Ken
>
Here is the info for the flasher that B&C sells.
NAPA has them: TRIDON EL13A-2
If they can not find them when they try to look it up, tell them they
are listed under NAPA line code NF
I think I paid about $20
The company that makes them is Trico
Here is link with info about it:
http://www.tricoproducts.com/brochure.cfm?brochure=289&location_id=606
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
RV7A Slowbuild wings-QB Fuse :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Clear Heat Shrink |
You can get heat shrink and Ti-Wraps (natural or black) for a reasonible
price from Altex Electronics.
http://www.altex.com/locations.php
jerb
>
>Thanks to all who replied to my question about Clear Heat Shrink.
>
>David
>Europa XS Tri-Gear
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Franz
>Fux
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Clear Heat Shrink
>
>
>
>
>B&C also have it in different sizes,
>Franz
>RV7
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
>Michael D Crowe
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Clear Heat Shrink
>
>
>
>
>David,
>
> Try http://www.steinair.com They have it. Nice guy too.
>
>Mike Crowe
>RV8A
>
>
>Does anybody know of a source of clear heat shrink?
>
>Thanks
>
>David
>Europa XS Tri-Gear
>
>
>---
>
>---
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>
>
>I'm really tired of hearing the 'REAL WORLD' excuse. It's precisely today's
>real world designs that have forced the experimental population to build
>their own much safer systems. The designers of current electrical systems
>(which haven't changed in 50 years) in the spam cans should be held
>accountable for the crap they are designing and forcing on the flying public
>via STC and 'Certified' systems.
Not all that is found in cans is Spam. Over the years there have been
thousands of person hours devoted to deduction, application and education
of the aviation engineering community in the simple-ideas that make
our jobs easier and our customers satisfied. One such effort discussed
here on the list is DO-160, a recommend set of standards which improve
a product's chances of survival in the hard-cold-cruel-world of customer
satisfaction.
One of the things DO-160 suggests is that we should EXPECT the brownout
conditions due to starter motor inrush draw and make some provisions
for graceful recovery if not immunity from such events. I do it, all my
associates here in Wichita don't seem to mind doing it. It's not a matter
of worship at the altar of certification, it's plain common sense
for doing the best we know how to do. I think it's applicable whether
my product gets bolted to an airplane or an automobile.
If I come off as cynical from time-to-time, please know that I'm more
disappointed than anything else. You guys are building the best airplanes
to have ever flown and I'm more than a little unhappy when suppliers
to this market choose to let their offerings fall short of that
which used to be routinely expected of performance in a whole lot
of products, not the least of which is certified airplanes.
>Additionally, I can assure you that my displays are designed for the "real
>world". Greg and company at Grand Rapids didn't fall off a truck yesterday;
>all were previously Boeing engineers and avid RV builders. Grand Rapids
>doesn't care about the starting surge & 're-set' only I do from a WHY SHOULD
>IT HAPPEN IN THE FIRST PLACE question.
>
>I have a primary Concorde battery sized for the starter and a slightly
>smaller Odyssey (600 amp) for my secondary system. Both are allegedly
>isolated from each other when the cross-feed isn't thrown per Z-14 yet the
>secondary electrical system is somehow being drawn down by the starting on
>the primary which should allegedly not happen.
>
>Thanks for the answer; I'll drop off this list & call B&C in the future.
>
>David
I agree, Greg and company are downright intelligent fellows and the
progress they've made is commendable. But they are either ignorant
of or choose to ignore the value offered by standards of performance
suggested in DO-160. Whatever the case, it's an inarguable fact
that this feature in their product does not speak well for their
choices when so many OTHER FOLKS in the aviation community seem
willing and able to rise to the occasion and have been doing
so for over 25 years.
You can shift your focus for assistance to B&C if you wish,
but guess what? They have a copy of DO-160 on the shelf too
and their products are equal to or better than what's suggested
for working in the "real world". If it makes you feel any
better, there are some certified FADEC and electronic ignition
systems that exhibit similar deficiencies in performance while
cranking.
If I were to take a wild guess at the simple-idea which is
driving your experience, I'll suggest that if your ship is
wired EXACTLY like figure Z-14 then you've installed a 2-50
switch which that deliberately closes the crossfeed contactor
during engine cranking.
You need to replace the 2-50 switch with a 1-3 switch wired
to control only the crossfeed contactor . . . and add a separate
pushbutton for starter control. Your problem will go away when
you leave the crossfeed contactor open while cranking the engine.
Alternatively, you can use a 2-5 switch. Wire one pole to
close the crossfeed contactor in the held position and
operate the starter only in the momentary position.
I'm sorry that my comments were mis-understood. It's easy to assume
that EVERYBODY on the list has tracked and understood EVERYTHING
that has been discussed here perhaps a dozen times or more over the
past 3-4 years. If Aerosance and Unison have been
let off the hook by the aviation community -AND- the FAA,
then what the heck . . . maybe I should quit beating up on
Greg and a few others. Once any standards of excellence start
to slide and the consumer base accepts it, perhaps it doesn't
matter any more.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Garmin series 400 installation manual ? |
Hi all,
Any kind soul around here got the Garmin series 400 installation
manual and is willing to send it to me ?
Two years ago I was able to find it hidden on the Garmin website and
so I could install a GPS 400 in our four seater. But I mismanaged my
hard disk and lost nearly all my data...
Thanks in advance,
Gilles Thesee
Grenoble, France
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tailgummer(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Garmin series 400 installation manual ? |
Here are pdfs of the GNS 430 wirebook and install manual. Hope this helps.
John D'Onofrio RV8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Sampson" <SSampson.SLN21(at)london.edu> |
Bob in most microphone wiring documentation including:
.....................\Aeroelectric\AeroElectric Connection - Aircraft
Microphone Jack Wiring.htm
the PTT is wired to the microphone jack plug.
In my layout I would much prefer the PTT was wired directly to the radio. Is
there any disadvantage in this approach?
Thanks, Steve.
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Sampson" <SSampson.SLN21(at)london.edu> |
| Subject: | Microair760 Radio and PM501 Intercom |
Can anyone point me to a wiring diagram showing how to wire up these two
units as one system? Thanks, Steve.
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
> ... . . . maybe I should quit beating up on
> Greg and a few others. Once any standards of excellence start
> to slide and the consumer base accepts it, perhaps it doesn't
> matter any more.
Good troll. OK, I'll bite. DO-160 seems to be something
that very few vendors actually use in their marketing,
so the average avionics consumer does not know much about it.
This is a shame, and forces us all to try to beat this
information out of the vendor. Which reminds me, I wanted
to ask Blue Mountain Avionics if they conform to the
recommendation.
Is there a list of companies that have committed to ensuring
that their products meet this "standard"?
Thanks,
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Alexander" <Dalexan48(at)dslextreme.com> |
| Subject: | Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary |
I just checked the RX-8 repair manual. The only mention was for minimum
voltage that the PCM needs to see, 1.2 volts and the resistance value,
120-280K ohms. Other than that, no additional info is given. I have never
seen frequency info in a Mazda manual for any of their products.
That being said, it really wouldn't be too much trouble to go out and
measure the frequency with DSO (digital storing oscilliscope). Just try and
find the knock sensor in an application that uses the engine that you have.
Dale Alexander
Velocity 173 Stealth Gullwing
>
>
> From: Mark Steitle <msteitle(at)mail.utexas.edu> 08/15/04
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 17 Msgs -
> 08/15/04
>
> 08/15/04
>
> Dale,
> Would you happen to know the frequency for the Mazda rotary engine?
>
> Mark S.
>
> > What we (and several manufactures) look for is
> >not only a voltage to reach a certain value, but a certain frequency as
> >well. Toyota for example lists resonant frequencies of 7,000, 7,100 and
> >7,600 Hz depending on which engine is being monitored.
> >Dale Alexander
> >Velocity 173 Stealth Gullwing
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Williams" <rwayne(at)gamewood.net> |
| Subject: | CH products stick grip |
I just got a CH Products stick grip. Its got a good feel and is
ambidextrous. It has 4 momentary switches and a coolie hat. I was surprised
to see "Permissible Load: 1mA 5VDC min, (resistive load). Is this enough to
allow a direct connection to my MAC servo relays and radio PTT? If not, what
would I need to do to connect these relays? Thanks!
Wayne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>
>
>
> > ... . . . maybe I should quit beating up on
> > Greg and a few others. Once any standards of excellence start
> > to slide and the consumer base accepts it, perhaps it doesn't
> > matter any more.
>
>Good troll. OK, I'll bite. DO-160 seems to be something
>that very few vendors actually use in their marketing,
>so the average avionics consumer does not know much about it.
>This is a shame, and forces us all to try to beat this
>information out of the vendor. Which reminds me, I wanted
>to ask Blue Mountain Avionics if they conform to the
>recommendation.
It's not something the consumer should have to be aware
of . . . it's pretty rudimentary stuff. It's sorta like
asking your surgeon if he/she knows how to tie sutures
and knows the difference between a vein and a tendon.
Folks who launch into mission critical systems design,
fabrication and marketing really need to be aware of
the environment in which their product is expected to
perform. When folks put "stuff" in gasoline to make it
perform better in one regard, they would do well to
understand the potential for unintended consequences
for other components of the system. This is called "systems
integration". It's just as important to make the gee-whiz
work seamlessly with all the surrounding systems as it
is to make it wash and dry dishes.
>Is there a list of companies that have committed to ensuring
>that their products meet this "standard"?
Companies that deliver to the certified world are FORCED
to conform by the FAA . . . except for the occasional
ringer like Lasar Ignitions and Aerosance FADECs. I'm
still scratching my head over those two.
It's not like it's a big secret either. Pick up the
installation manual for any certified product and there
will be a DO-160 compliance chart somewhere in the book
that describes how the product was tested and qualified.
I don't formally test OBAM aviation products to DO-160 but
I've had enough experience designing products that ARE
tested, I can offer new gizmos to customers with my own
personal confidence that they would pass certain tests
if I took the product to the test lab. I haven't
failed a qual test in 25 years . . . it's pretty
easy to design for compliance.
I received an e-mail from the Emag folks offering to
share some details of their product's design and
capabilities. I'll take them up on the offer with
a pot full of questions. If there are some answers
that might be improved upon, I'll point them out
and offer to help upgrade the product. This is the
true beauty with the OBAM aviation community. Things
get better and better because we're free to just do it.
Contrast this with certified aviation where
things get worse and worse because we're not allowed
to fix things except at great time and expense.
But in answer to your question, it never hurts to
ask the supplier if they're aware of DO-160 and if
they've taken advantage of any recommendations it contains.
The fact that they know what's in it and are prepared
to tell you what they comply with and what they let
go . . . along with a considered rational for their
decision says a lot about their understanding of
the market. Not complying with DO-160 for a marketable
reason is just fine with me. Not complying because
they haven't a clue is the worrisome part.
That's when the surgeon's knot comes loose after
he tied a tendon to a vein . . . oh well, what the heck.
Those two things didn't belong together anyhow.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Microair760 Radio and PM501 Intercom |
>
>
>Can anyone point me to a wiring diagram showing how to wire up these two
>units as one system? Thanks, Steve.
The instruction manual for our audio isolation amplifier has
some exemplar audio wiring diagrams. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9009/9009-700E.pdf
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Where do I start? |
>
>Hey Bob Nuckolls,
>I just downloaded you cd and the file with the cad programs in it didn't
>include the one you like, auto cad lt. Can you tell me where you have that
>program saved? It wasn't in the auto cad drawing file either.
>Thanks,
>Jim
It's in the directory called CAD_Programs and sub-directory called
AcadLT1_0
The file you're looking for in that directory is called "makeset.bat"
as described below:
Bob . . .
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
>To:
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Where do I start?
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > > Bob,
> > > Reading your book and other scamatics I suppose should be easy, but
> > > without an appendix, and index in picture form what all these symbles
> > > represent, I am spending (wasting) a lot of time. Help me out here will
> > > you, please? Where can I go for help here? A special book? Tell me, I'll
> > > buy it!
> >
> > Other than Tony B's books, I'm unaware of any 'cook-book' approaches
> > to system architecture and fabrication. The 'Connection is the
>recommended
> > starting point. The drawing "seminar.dwg" found on the CD cited below
> > has a lot of your wiring diagram already drawn . . . ready for you to
> > keep, modify, discard or add to as you see fit.
> >
> > > Can you recommend a cheap software for me to use to create my own
> > > electrical system documentation? One which might have all these symbles
>I
> > > could just drop in? I don't want to spend a fortune on some 3D Cad
> > > system, please.
> >
> > The CD we offer contains an image of my website before the parts
> > business was transferred to B&C several years ago. Most of the parts
> > in the drawings are illustrated in figures and descriptions of the
>parts
> > catalog.
> >
> > The CD also has three CAD programs that will open, edit and print
> > drawings included on the CD. There's a wirebook in progress that
> > probably has 90% of the work for your wirebook already done. Feel
> > free to use these materials in any way useful to you. My personal
> > preference of the three CAD programs
> > is AutoCAD LT 1.0 for windows. You need 4 clean floppies. Execute
> > "makeset.bat"
> > from the CD and the program will generate 4 pristine install disks for
> > the software. The price is hard to beat . . . if you have a high
> > speed Internet connection, you can download the CD at no charge from:
> >
> > http://www.aeroelectric.com/CD/AEC8_0.zip
> >
> > I think you're suffering a malady common to first time builders.
> > It's a sort of can't see the "trees for the forest" syndrome.
> > Looking at the whole task makes it difficult to sort out the
> > dozens of simple-ideas that get stacked up like Tinker-Toys
> > and Legos to configure the system of your dreams. The starting
> > point must be to acquire an understanding of the Tinker-Toys.
> >
> > I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
> > to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
> > share the information with as many folks as possible.
> > A further benefit can be realized with membership on
> > the list. There are lots of technically capable folks
> > on the list who can offer suggestions too. You can
> > join at . . .
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
> >
> > In the final analysis, if you don't find any of our offerings
> > to be of value to you, just let me know. I'll refund your money
> > and you can keep the book.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > ( Knowing about a thing is different than )
> > ( understanding it. One can know a lot )
> > ( and still understand nothing. )
> > ( C.F. Kettering )
> > --------------------------------------------
> >
> >
>
>
>---
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------------------
< Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition >
< of man. Advances which permit this norm to be >
< exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the >
< work of an extremely small minority, frequently >
< despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed >
< by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny >
< minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes >
< happens) is driven out of a society, the people >
< then slip back into abject poverty. >
< >
< This is known as "bad luck". >
< -Lazarus Long- >
<------------------------------------------------------>
http://www.aeroelectric.com
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Braly" <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
Bob,
I have the DO-160 compliance chart for the TCM FADEC. From memory, it appears to
me to cover most of the bases.
It is in the 2" thick installation manual.
I have not looked at it for a while, but I don't recall seeing the call out for
the minimal operating voltage... but I will look again, and report back.
But... it is true. The installation in the Bonanza requires a second battery located
under the rear seat to insure starting on cold days with difficult starting
conditions.
Total system weight is > 35 lbs.
Regards, George
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Starting Power
>
>
>
> > ... . . . maybe I should quit beating up on
> > Greg and a few others. Once any standards of excellence start
> > to slide and the consumer base accepts it, perhaps it doesn't
> > matter any more.
>
>Good troll. OK, I'll bite. DO-160 seems to be something
>that very few vendors actually use in their marketing,
>so the average avionics consumer does not know much about it.
>This is a shame, and forces us all to try to beat this
>information out of the vendor. Which reminds me, I wanted
>to ask Blue Mountain Avionics if they conform to the
>recommendation.
It's not something the consumer should have to be aware
of . . . it's pretty rudimentary stuff. It's sorta like
asking your surgeon if he/she knows how to tie sutures
and knows the difference between a vein and a tendon.
Folks who launch into mission critical systems design,
fabrication and marketing really need to be aware of
the environment in which their product is expected to
perform. When folks put "stuff" in gasoline to make it
perform better in one regard, they would do well to
understand the potential for unintended consequences
for other components of the system. This is called "systems
integration". It's just as important to make the gee-whiz
work seamlessly with all the surrounding systems as it
is to make it wash and dry dishes.
>Is there a list of companies that have committed to ensuring
>that their products meet this "standard"?
Companies that deliver to the certified world are FORCED
to conform by the FAA . . . except for the occasional
ringer like Lasar Ignitions and Aerosance FADECs. I'm
still scratching my head over those two.
It's not like it's a big secret either. Pick up the
installation manual for any certified product and there
will be a DO-160 compliance chart somewhere in the book
that describes how the product was tested and qualified.
I don't formally test OBAM aviation products to DO-160 but
I've had enough experience designing products that ARE
tested, I can offer new gizmos to customers with my own
personal confidence that they would pass certain tests
if I took the product to the test lab. I haven't
failed a qual test in 25 years . . . it's pretty
easy to design for compliance.
I received an e-mail from the Emag folks offering to
share some details of their product's design and
capabilities. I'll take them up on the offer with
a pot full of questions. If there are some answers
that might be improved upon, I'll point them out
and offer to help upgrade the product. This is the
true beauty with the OBAM aviation community. Things
get better and better because we're free to just do it.
Contrast this with certified aviation where
things get worse and worse because we're not allowed
to fix things except at great time and expense.
But in answer to your question, it never hurts to
ask the supplier if they're aware of DO-160 and if
they've taken advantage of any recommendations it contains.
The fact that they know what's in it and are prepared
to tell you what they comply with and what they let
go . . . along with a considered rational for their
decision says a lot about their understanding of
the market. Not complying with DO-160 for a marketable
reason is just fine with me. Not complying because
they haven't a clue is the worrisome part.
That's when the surgeon's knot comes loose after
he tied a tendon to a vein . . . oh well, what the heck.
Those two things didn't belong together anyhow.
Bob . . .
---
---
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Redmon" <james(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Re: KA-135 issue |
I have a major correction to make on my post. It is NOT the King audio
panel, it
is the Microair 760 radio - at least caused by it.
Several folks were on to something about the second com. I thought for sure
I had
tested the problem with the radio off...but I guess I had not. I
disconnected com2 and the problem went away. I re-connected it (with the
power off) and the problem was still gone. I turned on Com2....poof, I had
com 2 audio, but reduced aux audio. Com1 was unaffected by all modes, with
or without aux audio. The issues is isolated with com2's audio.
Any ideas how I can test this out and equalize the audio? I seem to
remember folks having problems with the Microair radio mixing with other
audio sources.
Thanks for the help!
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
http://www.berkut13.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Redmon" <james(at)berkut13.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: KA-135 issue
>
> I know this forum is more about routing elections, but I thought I might
> ping the collective with another avionics question. (please recommend
other
> sources if applicable)
>
> I've found another small anomaly in my system - specifically the KA-135
> audio panel...I think. I have two com radios, the KA-135 has the two
> mic/radio select buttons and several inputs for aux audio (NAV1, NAV2,
> Marker, DME, etc.) - standard stuff, right.
>
> I have the audio from the engine computer (audio alerts) piped into the
> KA-135 on one of the 5 aux audio lines. With com1 mic switch pushed, all
is
> fine...everything loud and clear. Problem: when com2 switch is activated,
I
> can hear com2 audio just fine but ALL other audio inputs seem to have been
> muted considerably. I can still hear them but they ALL are significantly
> lower in volume. This also happens to all aux audio when the "both"
button
> is pressed as well. The result - when I'm monitoring com2, I can barely
> hear the audio warnings....not good!
>
> I have checked side tone adjustments on the both coms..no effect. The
only
> volume adjustment that the KA unit has is for the external speaker...it is
> unaffected by the mic select button positions.
>
> You can get a look at my panel here: http://www.berkut13.com/berkut22.htm
>
> Can any of you KA-135 users out there verify that this is normal? Is
there
> any way to adjust or change this operation mode? There is noting the
manual
> that describes this behavior.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: CH products stick grip |
In a message dated 8/18/04 8:04:51 PM Central Daylight Time,
rwayne(at)gamewood.net writes:
> I just got a CH Products stick grip. Its got a good feel and is
> ambidextrous. It has 4 momentary switches and a coolie hat. I was surprised
> to see "Permissible Load: 1mA 5VDC min, (resistive load). Is this enough to
> allow a direct connection to my MAC servo relays and radio PTT?
>>>>>>>>>>
My CH stick easily controls the small relays (Z217-ND from Digi-key):
http://rocky.digikey.com/WebLib/Omron%20Web%20Data/G8P.pdf
for the servo and directly for the PTT(Microair 760). The relay coils are
rated for 77mA and have worked perfectly for over 100 hours. Not sure where the
1mA came from- is this in the literature with the stick? Kevin Williamson at
CH assured me they were plenty robust for the application- I'm pretty sure he
said the sticks he sells to us are upgraded from the game sticks in several
ways- maybe the 1mA is spec for the game version. Cool stick, huh? I love
pointing the nose right at the tower and squeezing off a volley: "51PW is right
downwind for one-nine, number 3 behind the Mitsubishi" while adding flaps with
throttle hand thumb & trimming with the hat switch, then waxing the Moo-Too
with a "cleared to land one-nine!" What fun! 8-)
FromThe PossumWorks in TN
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
On Aug 18, 2004, at 3:46 PM, Steve Sampson wrote:
>
>
> Bob in most microphone wiring documentation including:
>
> .....................\Aeroelectric\AeroElectric Connection - Aircraft
> Microphone Jack Wiring.htm
> the PTT is wired to the microphone jack plug.
>
> In my layout I would much prefer the PTT was wired directly to the
> radio. Is
> there any disadvantage in this approach?
On the surface, no, but do consider that most people choose to have a
voice-operated intercom in their aircraft. The PTT is not only used to
key the transmitter but to also indicate to the intercom which mic is
being used to transmit so that the intercom can cut off the audio from
the other microphones connected to the intercom.
So if you have an intercom with separate pilot and copilot inputs, you
need to wire the PTT on your stick/yoke to the appropriate PTT input on
the intercom. Also, you want the PTT line wired to the mic jack so
that, should your headset fail, you can plug in an old hand mic and
still have its PTT button work. Given all that, the simplest thing is
to route the PTT line from the stick/yoke to the appropriate mic jack
and then on to the corresponding input on the intercom. The PTT output
from the intercom then drives the audio panel's PTT input or the PTT
input of the radio should you not have an audio panel.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Systems analysis and unintended consequences |
Bob's comment on the Unison LASAR ignition system triggered my memory
of a quick-and-dirty analysis I did a couple years back. I was going
to convert one of my airplanes over to the LASAR system but decided to
figure out whether it would be financially advantageous. I used
Unison's projected fuel savings times the cost of fuel plus the cost of
the system itself and compared it to the cost of extra fuel I would use
plus the cost of needing two sets of Slick mags (one set when new and
another at around 1000 hours) to make it to TBO. The costs were about
the same.
So if I am not going to save money in the long run, why would I want to
add complexity to the aircraft and increase the possibility of failure?
Don't get me wrong, I really like the idea of a reliable electronic
ignition system with advance based on RPM and percent of power. I want
to get every ounce of energy out of all that precious fuel especially
with rising prices. But the whole thing has to make financial sense
too.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joel Jacobs" <jj(at)sdf.lonestar.org> |
| Subject: | Re: CH products stick grip |
Looks like that might be a minimum current rating unless that was a typo.
The arcing of switch contacts when they open and close keeps the contacts
clean. Some switches contacts will oxidize and fail if they don't switch
enough current to keep them clean. I see this allot on the tact switches
used on TVs and VCRs that are connected to microprocessor inputs. You get a
symptom that one of the buttons quits working or becomes intermittent. The
usual fix is to remove the switch and connect it to a current limited
supply - about 50ma and actuate it a few times.
Joel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne Williams" <rwayne(at)gamewood.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: CH products stick grip
>
> I just got a CH Products stick grip. Its got a good feel and is
> ambidextrous. It has 4 momentary switches and a coolie hat. I was
surprised
> to see "Permissible Load: 1mA 5VDC min, (resistive load). Is this enough
to
> allow a direct connection to my MAC servo relays and radio PTT? If not,
what
> would I need to do to connect these relays? Thanks!
>
> Wayne
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
>Bob,
>A while back your site had a download for an alternate to the Lightspeed
>RG58 to coil connection. I have a Lightspeed installed per instructions
>(RG58) and today found the center conductor insulation near the coil
>completely melted away. At 65 hours I was suprised, but I knew what I was
>looking at (thank you for that). I can understand the possible reasons
>for removing this download from your web site. If you can, would you tell
>me if you think your method was a bad idea, or was it removed for other
>reasons?
>Thanks!
I've had several queries about this article. Your note prompted me
to reconsider my position. I've added a narrative to beginning of
the article and re-posted it at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
Thank you for taking time to share your experience with me.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: CH products stick grip |
>
>Looks like that might be a minimum current rating unless that was a typo.
>The arcing of switch contacts when they open and close keeps the contacts
>clean. Some switches contacts will oxidize and fail if they don't switch
>enough current to keep them clean. I see this allot on the tact switches
>used on TVs and VCRs that are connected to microprocessor inputs. You get a
>symptom that one of the buttons quits working or becomes intermittent. The
>usual fix is to remove the switch and connect it to a current limited
>supply - about 50ma and actuate it a few times.
>Joel
Good call Joel. I've been considering the original posting
and I'd pretty much come to the same conclusion you did. There
no mechanically operated switch that isn't capable of handling
a hundred mA or so . . . but there are suggestions for lower
limits as you have described.
The switches described should be just fine driving relays
having coil currents on the order of 40 to 200 mA.
Bob . . .
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Wayne Williams" <rwayne(at)gamewood.net>
>To:
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: CH products stick grip
>
>
>
> >
> > I just got a CH Products stick grip. Its got a good feel and is
> > ambidextrous. It has 4 momentary switches and a coolie hat. I was
>surprised
> > to see "Permissible Load: 1mA 5VDC min, (resistive load). Is this enough
>to
> > allow a direct connection to my MAC servo relays and radio PTT? If not,
>what
> > would I need to do to connect these relays? Thanks!
> >
> > Wayne
> >
> >
>
>
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Warning light on SD-8 installation |
> Hi Bob, I'm buying parts for elec on a budget system. I'v ordered the
> B&C SD-8 with the 504-1 OV module. My question is: if I use a switch for
> the AUX alt and have it off - will the yellow light with the 504-1 be on
> all the time? If I understand the electrical schematic, I would only
> switch the Aux alt on when I had a failure of the primary alt. How do I
> handle this situation? Any suggestions would be appreciated.
> Thanks. P.S. I have your book and practically sleep with it. My wife
> will be glad when I'm finished with the electrical system. Terry Dilley.
Your analysis is correct. The "ALT OFF" light would be
illuminated any time the aux alternator was off . . .
whether due to OV trip -OR- switch in the OFF position.
The light is suggested only for situations where the
SD-8 is the primary alternator like Figure Z-16. Note
that I do not show this light on Figure Z-13 where
the SD-8 is a stand-by alternator and the airplane
is likely to be fitted with voltmeters and/or low-voltage
warning lights.
I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
share the information with as many folks as possible.
A further benefit can be realized with membership on
the list. There are lots of technically capable folks
on the list who can offer suggestions too. You can
join at . . .
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
Thanks!
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------
( Knowing about a thing is different than )
( understanding it. One can know a lot )
( and still understand nothing. )
( C.F. Kettering )
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | re: tapping a 24v battery to get 12v |
>Sorry to bug you, but would like to know re the question I posed below.
I'm working on it. But in a nutshell, it's been tried many times with
zero success . . .
I'll drop you a note with a link to an article shortly . . .
Bob . . .
> Bob; Have a situation where I have two 12V batteries in
>series for 24V output. However, I need some 12V power for some none
>essential use (blower for an ac unit) and I would like to take the 12V from
>the center point of the battery inter-connection. I know that I will get
>the 12V, but noticed somewhere about a report of their being a problem of
>the batteries maintaining even charge, and in fact one of the battery's
>could actually totally loose charge. Is that an issue? I am having trouble
>understanding the problem and how it develops.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>
>Bob,
>
>I have the DO-160 compliance chart for the TCM FADEC. From memory, it
>appears to me to cover most of the bases.
>
>It is in the 2" thick installation manual.
>
>I have not looked at it for a while, but I don't recall seeing the call
>out for the minimal operating voltage... but I will look again, and report
>back.
>
>But... it is true. The installation in the Bonanza requires a second
>battery located under the rear seat to insure starting on cold days with
>difficult starting conditions.
>
>Total system weight is > 35 lbs.
>
>Regards, George
Yup. I spent quite a bit of time working with Lancair to get this
system to run in several factory installations. They couldn't use
the dual-battery cranking feature described in Figure Z-14. The
auto-crossfeed for cranking had to be disabled so that one battery
would support the FADEC while the other battery did ALL the cranking.
One of the nice features of Z-14 was being able to use a pair of LIGHT
batteries. The FADEC system had to be "protected" from going brain-dead
during the inrush transient.
I had a "band-aid" black box that put a 3v boost on FADEC supply
power a few milliseconds before the starter contactor closed. I
brass-boarded the thing on the bench and it would have "solved"
the problem . . . but I never built one. It just rubbed me the wrong
direction to add weight, cost, complexity and reduced reliability to
a system that was already too heavy, too expensive and had too many
parts in it.
I have a hard time figuring out the return on investment for either
Aerosance's FADEC or the Lasar ignition system. They offer only marginally
improved performance for large increases weight, parts count and cost.
On the other hand, Emag's size, weight, and cost promises
performance EXACTLY what we're looking for. It's cheaper, better
performing, and offers seamless system integration. Now if they can
just deliver on the promise. I'll sure offer whatever support I can
to see them realize their goals. Aerosance and Unison were interesting
but in my never humble opinion, marching off in the wrong direction
to the beat of a really big drummer (read FAA).
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: single antenna for Narco 140 |
>
>
>Bob:
> Thanks for the thoughtful answers to my previous posts regarding the
> dancing ammeter, et al. I will replace the regulator 12V+ wire with a
> heavier one and let you know how it works when I get the aircraft back
> together enough to run it.
Great. I'll be pleased to hear about what you find.
> I purchased a used Narco 140 ADF without realizing that it came with a
> separate sense antenna as well as the usual "boat hull" for the fuselage
> bottom.
> Is there anyway to get the receiver/indicator to work without
> installing the sense antenna?
>Thanks again,
Hmmm . . . sorry. The sense antenna is a critical component of the
direction finding function. Modern ADF's have sense antennas built
into the loop housing . . . but anecdotal information I'm getting
from other builders in Canada suggests that these radios don't
perform as well as radios of the good ol' days.
It's really too bad that so many of our brothers in Canada are
compelled to install these radios. Even the cheapest GPS receiver
will let you shoot tighter approaches than the best ADF.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sjhdcl(at)kingston.net |
Bob,
My IFR setup consists of GNC300XL GPS/COM, GNS430 GPS/COM/NAV. I also have
an iPAQ 5550 using a GPS antenna as well.
So I have 3 GPS antennas! No thanks. My question is can I hook up the
300XL and the 430 to the same GPS antenna. I've tried talking to Garmin
but I frequenctly get conflicting answers. Whats your take on this?
Assuming the various units demand the GPS code in the same format that is.
Steve
Rv7A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Jurotich <mjurotich(at)hst.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Starting Power |
I recall a long discussion about this with reference to lightspeed
ignitions. One of the solutions proposed was a large capacitor. Did this
require a blocking diode or ?? so the capacitor would last for a few seconds?
By the way, BlueMountain is very clear about needing a second battery to
prevent a reset during starting if you want the engine gauges built into
the EFIS One immediately upon start up. Would this capacitor trick work
with their 3 amp requirement?
Matthew M. Jurotich
e-mail mail to:
phone : 301-286-5919
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: re: tapping a 24v battery to get 12v |
On Aug 19, 2004, at 11:30 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>> Sorry to bug you, but would like to know re the question I posed
>> below.
>
> I'm working on it. But in a nutshell, it's been tried many times
> with
> zero success . . .
Bob: you are right that you cannot use the center tap to provide 12V
and expect reasonable battery life. The "upper" battery will
consistently overcharge while the "lower" battery will consistently
undercharge.
OTOH I use this approach now with 100% success. The key is a gadget
called a battery equalizer. It is essentially a switching supply that
keeps the center-tap of the batteries at exactly 1/2 the voltage of the
whole string. It works really well in situations where you
periodically need a lot of amps from the 12V side but most of the time
don't. It wires up like this:
,------+----------> 24V
| |
| B2 (12v)
| |
E------+----------> 12V
| |
| B1 (12V)
| |
`------+----------> gnd
The one I use is an 80A unit from Sure Power. See:
http://www.surepower.com/Products/dc2dc.asp. They make both equalizers
and DC-DC converters. On my boat I use an equalizer as my engines use
12V for starting and I have some 12V lighting and instrumentation. If
I didn't have the big loads I would use a 28V-to-14VDC converter to
power my 12V loads.
>
> I'll drop you a note with a link to an article shortly . . .
>
> Bob . . .
>
>> Bob; Have a situation where I have two 12V batteries in
>> series for 24V output. However, I need some 12V power for some none
>> essential use (blower for an ac unit) and I would like to take the
>> 12V from
>> the center point of the battery inter-connection. I know that I will
>> get
>> the 12V, but noticed somewhere about a report of their being a
>> problem of
>> the batteries maintaining even charge, and in fact one of the
>> battery's
>> could actually totally loose charge. Is that an issue? I am having
>> trouble
>> understanding the problem and how it develops.
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: single antenna for Narco 140 |
On Aug 19, 2004, at 12:05 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>> Is there anyway to get the receiver/indicator to work without
>> installing the sense antenna?
>> Thanks again,
>
> Hmmm . . . sorry. The sense antenna is a critical component of the
> direction finding function. Modern ADF's have sense antennas built
> into the loop housing . . . but anecdotal information I'm getting
> from other builders in Canada suggests that these radios don't
> perform as well as radios of the good ol' days.
Actually the King KR-87 works really well with the integrated
loop/sense antenna but most people are not willing to pay as much for
an ADF as for a good VFR panel-mount GPS and it has been around for at
least 20 years. The venerable KR-86 works better with the external
wire sense antenna.
> It's really too bad that so many of our brothers in Canada are
> compelled to install these radios. Even the cheapest GPS receiver
> will let you shoot tighter approaches than the best ADF.
True but it is a lot more difficult to navigate with GPS when someone
is jamming the signal. It is a lot harder to jam an ADF and even
harder still to jam LORAN-C.
But don't forget that you can listen to Rush Limbaugh on your ADF.
Let's see you try that with your GPS receiver!
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Tasker <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: CH products stick grip |
My two CH sticks came with a printout specifying the current and voltage
limitations - same as your limitations.
I guess I will check with him again to check this out, although when I
received them I asked then.
Dick Tasker
Fiveonepw(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>In a message dated 8/18/04 8:04:51 PM Central Daylight Time,
>rwayne(at)gamewood.net writes:
>
>
>
>>I just got a CH Products stick grip. Its got a good feel and is
>>ambidextrous. It has 4 momentary switches and a coolie hat. I was surprised
>>to see "Permissible Load: 1mA 5VDC min, (resistive load). Is this enough to
>>allow a direct connection to my MAC servo relays and radio PTT?
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>My CH stick easily controls the small relays (Z217-ND from Digi-key):
>
>http://rocky.digikey.com/WebLib/Omron%20Web%20Data/G8P.pdf
>
>for the servo and directly for the PTT(Microair 760). The relay coils are
>rated for 77mA and have worked perfectly for over 100 hours. Not sure where the
>1mA came from- is this in the literature with the stick? Kevin Williamson at
>CH assured me they were plenty robust for the application- I'm pretty sure he
>said the sticks he sells to us are upgraded from the game sticks in several
>ways- maybe the 1mA is spec for the game version. Cool stick, huh? I love
>pointing the nose right at the tower and squeezing off a volley: "51PW is right
>downwind for one-nine, number 3 behind the Mitsubishi" while adding flaps with
>throttle hand thumb & trimming with the hat switch, then waxing the Moo-Too
>with a "cleared to land one-nine!" What fun! 8-)
>
>FromThe PossumWorks in TN
>Mark
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary |
Knock sensor amplifier:
>http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/lm386.gif
Thanks, Marc
That brings me back to my original question.
Could someone who understand the squiggles and lines on this diagram tell me
if it matches the squiggles and lines in ck154 amplifier I already have
shown at http://canakit.com/Contents/Divisions/Div_4.asp
or do I need something like the CK008 shown at
http://canakit.com/Contents/Divisions/Div_25.asp
Thanks,
john
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: re: tapping a 24v battery to get 12v |
>
>
>On Aug 19, 2004, at 11:30 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >> Sorry to bug you, but would like to know re the question I posed
> >> below.
> >
> > I'm working on it. But in a nutshell, it's been tried many times
> > with
> > zero success . . .
>
>Bob: you are right that you cannot use the center tap to provide 12V
>and expect reasonable battery life. The "upper" battery will
>consistently overcharge while the "lower" battery will consistently
>undercharge.
>
>OTOH I use this approach now with 100% success. The key is a gadget
>called a battery equalizer. It is essentially a switching supply that
>keeps the center-tap of the batteries at exactly 1/2 the voltage of the
>whole string. It works really well in situations where you
>periodically need a lot of amps from the 12V side but most of the time
>don't. It wires up like this:
>
>
> ,------+----------> 24V
> | |
> | B2 (12v)
> | |
> E------+----------> 12V
> | |
> | B1 (12V)
> | |
> `------+----------> gnd
>
>The one I use is an 80A unit from Sure Power. See:
>http://www.surepower.com/Products/dc2dc.asp. They make both equalizers
>and DC-DC converters. On my boat I use an equalizer as my engines use
>12V for starting and I have some 12V lighting and instrumentation. If
>I didn't have the big loads I would use a 28V-to-14VDC converter to
>power my 12V loads.
I've seen variations on this theme over the years. Certainly
if one is willing to add some kind of electro-whizzy, the
hazards of battery-tapping can be reduced if not eliminated.
Indeed, one might simply add 28 to 14 volt down-converter to
the airplane. One can add a 14v battery to supply momentary
current draw conditions that overload the 14v down-converter.
We installed a similar system in Raython's AGATE Bonanza so that
the certified 14v system and 28v experimental systems could
be supported from a single 28v ground power jack.
Like all add-ons . . . parts-count, weight and occupied volume
in the airplane goes up. A condition that we try to avoid.
Thanks for the heads-up on Surepower . . . wasn't aware of them
before now.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS Antennas |
On Aug 19, 2004, at 1:12 PM, sjhdcl(at)kingston.net wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> My IFR setup consists of GNC300XL GPS/COM, GNS430 GPS/COM/NAV. I also
> have
> an iPAQ 5550 using a GPS antenna as well.
>
> So I have 3 GPS antennas! No thanks. My question is can I hook up the
> 300XL and the 430 to the same GPS antenna. I've tried talking to Garmin
> but I frequenctly get conflicting answers. Whats your take on this?
>
> Assuming the various units demand the GPS code in the same format that
> is.
The antenna is just that, an antenna. The signal code is what the
satellites transmit and it is the same for all receivers.
So the trick it to provide the signal to all the receivers. Most
antennas now are "active" in that they have a built-in preamplifier
that requires that DC power be injected on the coax. If you have a
power injector that will get 8VDC on the center conductor of the coax
to power the preamp you should be able to follow that with a 50ohm
splitter that will work at the 1.5 GHz frequency. High-quality
splitters from companies like Mini-Circuits are not cheap when
purchased new. Still, you can find a three-way power divider/combiner
that will work at 1.5 GHz for about $50 on the surplus market. You
will also need capacitive couplers to block the DC from the receiver
and you will need the DC power injector between the splitter and the
antenna.
Also consider that your antenna/splitter/injector combination becomes a
single point of failure for your GPS receivers. If that has a problem
you lose all your GPS info.
So it is certainly possible to do what you want to do but it will take
some doing. You may find that it is just less expensive and easier to
do to have multiple antennas.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com> |
| Subject: | 3-way connectors |
Hi guys,
In redoing a wiring schematic for a new dual ignition installation,
I found that I can buy an assortment package of 3-way all metal
connectors that have paired push-tabs and a spade socket
for connecting 3 wires or making a T-connection as needed
by tachometer feeds, ignition switch wires and capacitor connections.
Assuming the proper lash-down,
are these a sturdier means of connecting than "putting two 16-gage
wires into a blue spade socket and connecting a third" which
pretty much describes my current wiring?
Seems they would ease changing components if they hold
up and would be preferrable to what I've got.
Larry McFarland - 601HDS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: re: tapping a 24v battery to get 12v |
On Aug 19, 2004, at 2:42 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>> OTOH I use this approach now with 100% success. The key is a gadget
>> called a battery equalizer. It is essentially a switching supply that
>> keeps the center-tap of the batteries at exactly 1/2 the voltage of
>> the
>> whole string. It works really well in situations where you
>> periodically need a lot of amps from the 12V side but most of the time
>> don't. It wires up like this:
>>
>>
>> ,------+----------> 24V
>> | |
>> | B2 (12v)
>> | |
>> E------+----------> 12V
>> | |
>> | B1 (12V)
>> | |
>> `------+----------> gnd
>>
>> The one I use is an 80A unit from Sure Power. See:
>> http://www.surepower.com/Products/dc2dc.asp. They make both
>> equalizers
>> and DC-DC converters. On my boat I use an equalizer as my engines use
>> 12V for starting and I have some 12V lighting and instrumentation. If
>> I didn't have the big loads I would use a 28V-to-14VDC converter to
>> power my 12V loads.
>
> Indeed, one might simply add 28 to 14 volt down-converter to
> the airplane. One can add a 14v battery to supply momentary
> current draw conditions that overload the 14v down-converter.
The problem then is ensuring that the battery receive a proper charge
and it requires yet another battery. The equalizer will mirror the
charging voltage (1/2 input voltage) so you still control the charging
voltage from your main VR.
The equalizer is amazingly simple to add. And should the equalizer
fail, the 12V loads will continue to work but the batteries will fail
fairly quickly (months). Still, it fails "soft" and things will keep
working for a flight or two. It isn't a safety-of-flight issue.
> We installed a similar system in Raython's AGATE Bonanza so that
> the certified 14v system and 28v experimental systems could
> be supported from a single 28v ground power jack.
>
> Like all add-ons . . . parts-count, weight and occupied volume
> in the airplane goes up. A condition that we try to avoid.
I agree. These devices are small, lightweight, and operate at
something close to 90% efficiency. Not a lot of heat to get rid of.
My 80A unit is about the size of a KX-155 and weighs just about as
much. I doubt people would need one bigger than about 10A.
> Thanks for the heads-up on Surepower . . . wasn't aware of them
> before now.
Their stuff seems to be quite well made. Their 10A 24V-to-12V
equalizer is only 6.6"L X 4.5"W X 2.7"H. Not a lot of cubic there.
Here is the URL for the brochure on their equalizers and converters:
http://www.surepower.com/pdf/ebr_dcdc.pdf
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 3-way connectors |
>
>
>Hi guys,
> In redoing a wiring schematic for a new dual ignition installation,
>I found that I can buy an assortment package of 3-way all metal
>connectors that have paired push-tabs and a spade socket
>for connecting 3 wires or making a T-connection as needed
>by tachometer feeds, ignition switch wires and capacitor connections.
> Assuming the proper lash-down,
>are these a sturdier means of connecting than "putting two 16-gage
>wires into a blue spade socket and connecting a third" which
>pretty much describes my current wiring?
>Seems they would ease changing components if they hold
>up and would be preferrable to what I've got.
>
>
>Larry McFarland - 601HDS
I am cautiously skeptical of these. I just got an e-mail from
a builder that experienced fast-on terminal failure on the tabs
for his electronic ignition coils. I'm going to as if his fast-ons
were bona-fide PIDG terminals. The material from which these critters
are made is critical to their performance. 16AWG wires? What is
it that pushes so much current that these boss-hawg wires are necessary?
Are these shielded wires? If I understand your question right,
you're trying to get three circuits brought into the same blue
fast-on terminal . . . and some of the wires are too fat to fit
into the fast-on. Check out this picture:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Wire_treatment_3.jpg
The lap-soldered joint mimics the now commonplace solder sleeve
splices wherein two wires are simply over-lapped, soldered,
and covered with a heatshrink jacket. Solder sleeve jackets
are pretty stiff so you might put two layers of heatshink over
your poor-mans solder sleeve joints . . .
This would be a very tight way to get these wires into your
fast-on connection using low bulk, very high integrity
joints, and minimal parts count.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Garmin series 400 installation manual ? |
John,
Thank you for responding. I'm afraid this list doesn't allow
attachments.
Regards,
Gilles
---- Messages dorigine ----
De: Tailgummer(at)aol.com
Date: Mercredi, Aot 18, 2004 3:03 pm
Objet: Re: AeroElectric-List: Garmin series 400 installation manual ?
>
> Here are pdfs of the GNS 430 wirebook and install manual. Hope
> this helps.
>
>
>
> John D'Onofrio RV8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
Hi,
I'm planning on wiring my aileron and elevator trim
servos to a coolie hat on the stick grip.
The Ray Allen Company sells a "Relay Deck" for $35.00
but it seems like I can get the equivalent item from
Radio Shack (part number 275-249) for about $5.29.
Here are the links to the two items:
http://www.radioshack.com/ (enter 275-249 in search box)
http://www.rayallencompany.com/products/accessories.html
Are these two items essentially the same? The basic
goal is to convert a (on)/off/(on) switch to act like a
DPDT switch.
Thanks,
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ericruttan(at)chartermi.net" <ericruttan(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
>>Bob,
>>A while back your site had a download for an alternate to the Lightspeed
>>RG58 to coil connection. I have a Lightspeed installed per instructions
>>(RG58) and today found the center conductor insulation near the coil
>>completely melted away. At 65 hours I was suprised, but I knew what I was
>>looking at (thank you for that). I can understand the possible reasons
>>for removing this download from your web site. If you can, would you tell
>>me if you think your method was a bad idea, or was it removed for other
>>reasons?
>>Thanks!
> I've had several queries about this article. Your note prompted me
> to reconsider my position. I've added a narrative to beginning of
> the article and re-posted it at:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
>
> Thank you for taking time to share your experience with me.
> Bob . . .
Bob;
I really appreciate your work on our behalf. You must love what you do,
else I cant see you putting up with the foolishness you do.
http://www.magnecor.com/ is a small company that is to spark plug wires what
you are to OBAM electrical systems. Simple science and experience with no
marketing budget.
Their site is a technical information site discussing the silliness of many
in the electronic ignition marketing arena.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ericruttan(at)chartermi.net" <ericruttan(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
>>Bob,
>>A while back your site had a download for an alternate to the Lightspeed
>>RG58 to coil connection. I have a Lightspeed installed per instructions
>>(RG58) and today found the center conductor insulation near the coil
>>completely melted away. At 65 hours I was suprised, but I knew what I was
>>looking at (thank you for that). I can understand the possible reasons
>>for removing this download from your web site. If you can, would you tell
>>me if you think your method was a bad idea, or was it removed for other
>>reasons?
>>Thanks!
> I've had several queries about this article. Your note prompted me
> to reconsider my position. I've added a narrative to beginning of
> the article and re-posted it at:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
>
> Thank you for taking time to share your experience with me.
> Bob . . .
Bob;
I really appreciate your work on our behalf. You must love what you do,
else I cant see you putting up with the foolishness you do.
http://www.magnecor.com/ is a small company that is to spark plug wires what
you are to OBAM electrical systems. Simple science and experience with no
marketing budget.
Their site is a technical information site discussing the silliness of many
in the electronic ignition marketing arena.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 3-way connectors |
No Bob,
I was just trying to "double a connector" with these so that
the tachometer wire can join at the negative side of the coil
where the push-tab and spade-grip go together. On the positive
side of the coil, a capacitor, bolted to the control module and a
wire from the selector switch both join the wire at the coil.
Wires are shielded only between the distributor and modules.
Just a T-joint, but then modules could be changed out easier
when one goes south at some remote destination as they are prone
to do.
The tab doublers require a bit of fusable tape, but
I did like the interchange these parts might bring.
I've previously put two wires into a blue socket spade and
16-gage was to overcome the flex-strand breakage potential
for these few wires forward of the firewall. Perhaps this was overkill.
Larry
>
> I am cautiously skeptical of these. I just got an e-mail from
> a builder that experienced fast-on terminal failure on the tabs
> for his electronic ignition coils. I'm going to as if his fast-ons
> were bona-fide PIDG terminals. The material from which these critters
> are made is critical to their performance. 16AWG wires? What is
> it that pushes so much current that these boss-hawg wires are
necessary?
>
> Are these shielded wires? If I understand your question right,
> you're trying to get three circuits brought into the same blue
> fast-on terminal . . . and some of the wires are too fat to fit
> into the fast-on. Check out this picture:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Wire_treatment_3.jpg
>
> The lap-soldered joint mimics the now commonplace solder sleeve
> splices wherein two wires are simply over-lapped, soldered,
> and covered with a heatshrink jacket. Solder sleeve jackets
> are pretty stiff so you might put two layers of heatshink over
> your poor-mans solder sleeve joints . . .
>
> This would be a very tight way to get these wires into your
> fast-on connection using low bulk, very high integrity
> joints, and minimal parts count.
>
> Bob . . .
>
> -----------------------------------------
> ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
> ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Alexander" <Dalexan48(at)dslextreme.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary |
Oh, you can believe that the rotary engine will knock, even if you don't
hear it. In order to meet emission requirements and fuel economy, engines
these days are run on the ragged edge of combustion. Compression ratios are
up, engine speeds are up, the only thing that isn't up is fuel quality when
compared to the good old days. But the knock sensor circuit helps to keep
the engine running at that ragged edge where power is. A little leaner or a
little more advance and you have pistons (or rotors) that aren't even good
for ashtrays.
Want to have some fun? Cross the secondary ignition wires on a rotary and
listen to the marbles. Still runs, just noisy as all get out. Amazing motors
within their limitations.
And we don't have any knock sensors at our dealer for a rotary. We have them
for the 2.5L KL engine in the 626 and Millenia though, but that is for a
different issue concerned with water entering the harness and generating a
false code.
Dale Alexander
Velocity 173 Stealth Gullwing
> From: "John D. Heath" <alto_q(at)direcway.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary
>
>
> I don't see how a Wankle could knock. If it can A Mazda dealer is sure to
> have a knock sensor for it.
>
> John D.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
Aero electric people.
My plane is now flying. Thanks to Bob's book and ongoing input, all the
electrical gizmos are working and not interfering with each other, and the
smoke is staying in the boxes and wires.
I've asked what I though was a simple electronics question three times and
received no answer. Perhaps I've exhausted either the knowledge or the
patience of this exalted group.
Either way, I've been on this list 5 years and it's time to move on.
So long, and thanks for all the fish.
John Slade
Turbo Rotary Cozy IV
http://canardaviation.com/cozy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Slaughter" <willslau(at)alumni.rice.edu> |
| Subject: | Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
I'd like to second the endorsement of Magnecor. I have their wires on my
car, and they are truly beautiful. A high percentage of the high dollar
racing teams around the world use their products, yet they answer their
own phones, and shortened one of my leads for me at no cost. Nice guys,
great product, and tremendous customer service.
William Slaughter
200 BHP RV-8
500 BHP 1994 Camaro
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
ericruttan(at)chartermi.net
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed
systems
-->
>>Bob,
>>A while back your site had a download for an alternate to the
>>Lightspeed
>>RG58 to coil connection. I have a Lightspeed installed per
instructions
>>(RG58) and today found the center conductor insulation near the coil
>>completely melted away. At 65 hours I was suprised, but I knew what I
was
>>looking at (thank you for that). I can understand the possible
reasons
>>for removing this download from your web site. If you can, would you
tell
>>me if you think your method was a bad idea, or was it removed for
other
>>reasons?
>>Thanks!
> I've had several queries about this article. Your note prompted me to
> reconsider my position. I've added a narrative to beginning of the
> article and re-posted it at:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
>
> Thank you for taking time to share your experience with me.
> Bob . . .
Bob;
I really appreciate your work on our behalf. You must love what you do,
else I cant see you putting up with the foolishness you do.
http://www.magnecor.com/ is a small company that is to spark plug wires
what
you are to OBAM electrical systems. Simple science and experience with
no
marketing budget.
Their site is a technical information site discussing the silliness of
many
in the electronic ignition marketing arena.
==
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ozarkseller2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
In a message dated 8/19/2004 7:42:36 PM Central Daylight Time,
willslau(at)alumni.rice.edu writes:
> I'd like to second the endorsement of Magnecor. I have their wires on my
> car, and they are truly beautiful. A high percentage of the high dollar
> racing teams around the world use their products, yet they answer their
> own phones, and shortened one of my leads for me at no cost. Nice guys,
> great product, and tremendous customer service.
>
Beautiful on the car, but not good enough for the RV?
How much did the car set cost (web site seems to have a lot of hype, but no
prices)?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Koyich" <Ron(at)Koyich.com> |
| Subject: | So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
Would you have the energy to type out your simple question again, John,
so we can have one more stab at redeeming ourselves?
Is it the one about the co-ax oxidation?
Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Slaughter" <willslau(at)alumni.rice.edu> |
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Starting Power
Yup. I spent quite a bit of time working with Lancair to get this
system to run in several factory installations. They couldn't use
the dual-battery cranking feature described in Figure Z-14. The
auto-crossfeed for cranking had to be disabled so that one battery
would support the FADEC while the other battery did ALL the cranking.
One of the nice features of Z-14 was being able to use a pair of
LIGHT
batteries. The FADEC system had to be "protected" from going
brain-dead
during the inrush transient.
I had a "band-aid" black box that put a 3v boost on FADEC supply
power a few milliseconds before the starter contactor closed. I
brass-boarded the thing on the bench and it would have "solved"
the problem . . . but I never built one. It just rubbed me the wrong
direction to add weight, cost, complexity and reduced reliability to
a system that was already too heavy, too expensive and had too many
parts in it.
I have a hard time figuring out the return on investment for either
Aerosance's FADEC or the Lasar ignition system. They offer only
marginally
improved performance for large increases weight, parts count and
cost.
On the other hand, Emag's size, weight, and cost promises
performance EXACTLY what we're looking for. It's cheaper, better
performing, and offers seamless system integration. Now if they can
just deliver on the promise. I'll sure offer whatever support I can
to see them realize their goals. Aerosance and Unison were
interesting
but in my never humble opinion, marching off in the wrong direction
to the beat of a really big drummer (read FAA).
Bob . . .
While I can't argue with the too expensive and too many parts assessment
of Aerosance's FADEC system, there is one crucial element that seems to
be getting overlooked here. Unlike the LASAR, Emag, Lightspeed, et al,
the Aerosance system is not just an ignition system, but a complete
engine management system which incorporates electronic fuel injection.
The more fair comparison is too compare the price of the Aerosance
system to a brand new ignition system of your choice AND a complete
Bendix or Airflow Performance fuel injection system. The Aerosance is
still more expensive, but no longer by orders of magnitude. I did a lot
of number crunching and soul searching before purchasing mine! As far as
I know, pretty much every new car on the planet features digital
electronic engine management, including electronic fuel injection and
spark. I just couldn't bring myself to build a 21st century aircraft
with anything less. Just like the cars, the Aerosance system will
optimize the spark timing and fuel mixture for all conditions and
altitudes. While I certainly agree that it is pure foolishness to need
that second battery in order to start the engine, I'll be running an
SD-8 with a small 5 lb backup battery anyway, so I had to just let the
conceptual frustration go. I have every confidence that a single 17ah
battery will start my IOF-360 just fine, just as the one in my Wal-Mart
jump start pack starts any of my cars. Also, don't forget that the fuel
economy available through automated mixture control and optimized spark
advance represents more than just dollars saved, it represents available
range. I'm sure that there will eventually be much simpler and less
expensive electronic engine management systems available, I just don't
want to wait. In the meantime, I'll be saving some weight by leaving
that pesky mixture control lever out of the plane! The renaissance in
automotive performance made possible by computerized engine management
is what really made a believer out of me. My 1968 Camaro was
spectacularly powerful, but got 8 mpg. By the 1980's, Corvettes were
down to less than 200 bhp. Current high performance street cars can be
had with over 400, 500, even 600 bhp, yet are very civilized, and get
very respectable mileage (if you can keep your foot out of it). The
difference? Computerized engine management.
William Slaughter
IOF-360 RV-8
==
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Slaughter" <willslau(at)alumni.rice.edu> |
| Subject: | Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
I don't recall the exact price, but it was quite competitive with other
aftermarket ignition wire manufacturers. They don't make wires with
aviation spark plug connections. Just thought that those running
automotive spark plugs might be interested, and I make a point of trying
to acknowledge vendors who have treated me well. The lowest priced item
is rarely the best value.
William Slaughter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Ozarkseller2(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed
systems
In a message dated 8/19/2004 7:42:36 PM Central Daylight Time,
willslau(at)alumni.rice.edu writes:
> I'd like to second the endorsement of Magnecor. I have their wires on
> my car, and they are truly beautiful. A high percentage of the high
> dollar racing teams around the world use their products, yet they
> answer their own phones, and shortened one of my leads for me at no
> cost. Nice guys, great product, and tremendous customer service.
>
Beautiful on the car, but not good enough for the RV?
How much did the car set cost (web site seems to have a lot of hype, but
no
prices)?
==
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | erie <erie(at)shelbyvilledesign.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
Interestingly, wires from them for my Audi 200TQ list at $55+-,
OEM Bosch that I replace ever 3 yrs because I put waaay too many miles a
year
on it cost me $85 (wholesale). I'm going to give them a try next wire
change.
erie
William Slaughter wrote:
>
>I don't recall the exact price, but it was quite competitive with other
>aftermarket ignition wire manufacturers. They don't make wires with
>aviation spark plug connections. Just thought that those running
>automotive spark plugs might be interested, and I make a point of trying
>to acknowledge vendors who have treated me well. The lowest priced item
>is rarely the best value.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tailgummer(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Garmin series 400 installation manual ? |
I tried to send them to your e-mail address but it was returned. let me know
off list if I can help you.
John D'Onofrio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Sipp" <rsipp(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Systems analysis and unintended consequences |
Brian,
I agree completely with your financial analysis of the Lasar system.
There are however, other factors in addition to those relating to cost
return. I particularly like the smooth idle, improved starting and
mechanical backup to ANY type of electrical control failure. The Lasars run
like any other magneto system with the master switch off so I don't see
where there is added chance of failure. True, if the battery is so weak it
will barely crank the engine the mags may not fire the plugs on start up,
but, should you be flying with a battery this low anyway?
The fuel savings at altitude is in the neighborhood of .5 to 1.0 GPH. Flying
with a group of RVs I always use several bucks less fuel than anyone else on
the same leg, (yes, it is an 8.5 to 1.0 compression O-320 in a 4) but I look
at that as gravy on top of the overall improved operating characteristics of
the engine. While any of the electronic systems would no doubt provide the
same operational advantages, the Lasar is the only one I am aware of that
does not require electrical power for backup operation.
My constant speed propeller is probably not cost effective either, but I
sure enjoy the added performance of the airplane as a whole with it.
Dick Sipp
RV4 250DS
RV10 #40065
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Systems analysis and unintended consequences
>
> Bob's comment on the Unison LASAR ignition system triggered my memory
> of a quick-and-dirty analysis I did a couple years back. I was going
> to convert one of my airplanes over to the LASAR system but decided to
> figure out whether it would be financially advantageous. I used
> Unison's projected fuel savings times the cost of fuel plus the cost of
> the system itself and compared it to the cost of extra fuel I would use
> plus the cost of needing two sets of Slick mags (one set when new and
> another at around 1000 hours) to make it to TBO. The costs were about
> the same.
>
> So if I am not going to save money in the long run, why would I want to
> add complexity to the aircraft and increase the possibility of failure?
>
> Don't get me wrong, I really like the idea of a reliable electronic
> ignition system with advance based on RPM and percent of power. I want
> to get every ounce of energy out of all that precious fuel especially
> with rising prices. But the whole thing has to make financial sense
> too.
>
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
> brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
> +1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
In a message dated 8/19/04 11:04:16 PM Central Daylight Time,
echristley(at)nc.rr.com writes:
Why? Certainly he wouldn't go anywhere without his!
Good Evening Gentlemen,
Aren't these comments getting close to being personal?
I am with Ron, I wish I knew what his question is.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
John,
Have you heard of peak pressure detection, or megajolt? George
Braly could probably comment more, but basically, max horsepower
is made when the peak cylinder pressure is timed to between
15-20deg after top dead center. Knock sensors can only get you
close to this place because the only start to function when
the timing has been advanced too far.
Megajolt is the name of a roll your own ignition system which is
designed to, in real time, measure when the cylinder pressure
reaches its peak, and allow the timing to be adjusted such that
it happens optimally. Current can be passed through the ionized
gas left in the cylinder during the combustion process - after
the ignition event.
Good luck. Reading about your Cozy project has been exciting.
Regards,
Matt Prather
VE N34RD, C150 N714BK
>
>
> Aero electric people.
> My plane is now flying. Thanks to Bob's book and ongoing input, all the
> electrical gizmos are working and not interfering with each other, and
> the smoke is staying in the boxes and wires.
>
> I've asked what I though was a simple electronics question three times
> and received no answer. Perhaps I've exhausted either the knowledge or
> the patience of this exalted group.
>
> Either way, I've been on this list 5 years and it's time to move on.
>
> So long, and thanks for all the fish.
>
> John Slade
>
> Turbo Rotary Cozy IV
> http://canardaviation.com/cozy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Braly" <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
Bob,
What on earth was the starting problem with the 28 volt system???
You can see some rather low voltages during cranking on a 14 volt system, but why
should the 28 volt system have caused that???
Surly the FADEC was not resetting on low voltage with a 28 volt system???
You mention protection from the inrush. I assume you mean after the starter contactor
is released???
Regards, George
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Starting Power
>
>Bob,
>
>I have the DO-160 compliance chart for the TCM FADEC. From memory, it
>appears to me to cover most of the bases.
>
>It is in the 2" thick installation manual.
>
>I have not looked at it for a while, but I don't recall seeing the call
>out for the minimal operating voltage... but I will look again, and report
>back.
>
>But... it is true. The installation in the Bonanza requires a second
>battery located under the rear seat to insure starting on cold days with
>difficult starting conditions.
>
>Total system weight is > 35 lbs.
>
>Regards, George
Yup. I spent quite a bit of time working with Lancair to get this
system to run in several factory installations. They couldn't use
the dual-battery cranking feature described in Figure Z-14. The
auto-crossfeed for cranking had to be disabled so that one battery
would support the FADEC while the other battery did ALL the cranking.
One of the nice features of Z-14 was being able to use a pair of LIGHT
batteries. The FADEC system had to be "protected" from going brain-dead
during the inrush transient.
I had a "band-aid" black box that put a 3v boost on FADEC supply
power a few milliseconds before the starter contactor closed. I
brass-boarded the thing on the bench and it would have "solved"
the problem . . . but I never built one. It just rubbed me the wrong
direction to add weight, cost, complexity and reduced reliability to
a system that was already too heavy, too expensive and had too many
parts in it.
I have a hard time figuring out the return on investment for either
Aerosance's FADEC or the Lasar ignition system. They offer only marginally
improved performance for large increases weight, parts count and cost.
On the other hand, Emag's size, weight, and cost promises
performance EXACTLY what we're looking for. It's cheaper, better
performing, and offers seamless system integration. Now if they can
just deliver on the promise. I'll sure offer whatever support I can
to see them realize their goals. Aerosance and Unison were interesting
but in my never humble opinion, marching off in the wrong direction
to the beat of a really big drummer (read FAA).
Bob . . .
---
---
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Systems analysis and unintended consequences |
On Aug 19, 2004, at 11:39 PM, Richard Sipp wrote:
>
>
> Brian,
>
> I agree completely with your financial analysis of the Lasar system.
>
> There are however, other factors in addition to those relating to cost
> return. I particularly like the smooth idle, improved starting
A "shower of sparks" mag will provide that at lower cost.
> and
> mechanical backup to ANY type of electrical control failure.
As I recall, Klaus' system runs with a stock mag in second slot if you
wish to operate that way.
> The Lasars run
> like any other magneto system with the master switch off so I don't see
> where there is added chance of failure. True, if the battery is so
> weak it
> will barely crank the engine the mags may not fire the plugs on start
> up,
> but, should you be flying with a battery this low anyway?
>
> The fuel savings at altitude is in the neighborhood of .5 to 1.0 GPH.
> Flying
> with a group of RVs I always use several bucks less fuel than anyone
> else on
> the same leg, (yes, it is an 8.5 to 1.0 compression O-320 in a 4) but
> I look
> at that as gravy on top of the overall improved operating
> characteristics of
> the engine.
If you like what you get from it that is great. We all have put things
in our airplanes that serve no financial purpose but make us happier in
one way or another. Since I don't spend much time letting the engine
idle I don't consider that to be a good reason to have an electronic
ignition but again that is a matter of taste.
I looked at it from a financial and performance point of view. Down
low at high percentage power settings the LASAR system does not provide
any advantage over magnetos since the LASAR system then sets the timing
at 25deg BTDC just like the mag. Your advantage comes from advancing
the timing at higher altitudes and lower MAP. I agree that you will
pay a few dollars less to travel the same distance as an equivalent
aircraft without the LASAR system but you have to buy a LOT of fuel
before you break even.
The cost of the LASAR ignition system is substantial. It costs in
several ways:
1. when you buy it;
2. when you install it;
3. when it fails and you have to wait for parts that are not on the
shelf at your FBO.
I am a great proponent of KISS, i.e. Keep It Simple Sipp. (Sorry, I
couldn't resist.) The LASAR is neither as simple nor as inexpensive as
mags are. For the complexity I would want a significant performance
increase in some area of operation. If the LASAR system saved me money
that would be good. If it increased the aircraft performance
significantly, that would be good too. I can't see where it does
either hence my belief that it is not a cost-effective modification.
On an OBAM aircraft I would opt for some other ignition system.
> While any of the electronic systems would no doubt provide the
> same operational advantages, the Lasar is the only one I am aware of
> that
> does not require electrical power for backup operation.
>
> My constant speed propeller is probably not cost effective either, but
> I
> sure enjoy the added performance of the airplane as a whole with it.
IMHO the CS prop *DOES* offer a significant performance increase and
hence qualifies as an attractive modification. I had a wood prop on my
RV-4 but I was prepared to accept the compromise in performance. If I
were doing it again I would opt for a composite CS prop optimized for
the TAS range in which my RV operated most often. And, no, it would
not be cost effective for cruise operation but it would give me better
acceleration, ROC, and more drag with the throttle closed, all
advantageous for getting into and out of short fields.
But you like the LASAR system so you should have one. You are
justifiably proud of your airplane and the LASAR system provides you
with an acceptable return on investment based on personal preference.
I was looking at it financially and there I think the story is
different.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
>
>Aero electric people.
>My plane is now flying. Thanks to Bob's book and ongoing input, all the
>electrical gizmos are working and not interfering with each other, and the
>smoke is staying in the boxes and wires.
>
>I've asked what I though was a simple electronics question three times and
>received no answer. Perhaps I've exhausted either the knowledge or the
>patience of this exalted group.
John, I did a search on your name for messages in my
e-mail files and the only question I can find concerns
listening to the knock sensor. Is this the question you're
referring to?
>Either way, I've been on this list 5 years and it's time to move on.
>
>So long, and thanks for all the fish.
I've been on this list since day-one. I participated on
the AVSig group on Compuserve for years before that. What's
longevity have to do with utility of present participation?
I've noted over the years that if folks are not understanding
my contribution to a conversation (either questions, answers
or critical thought) then we're not speaking the same language.
The utterance of common words doesn't assure understanding.
Since it is impossible for folks to be aware the cause for your
frustration, it's incumbent upon you the frustrated to refine the
language . . . figure out another use of words that accurately
communicates your thoughts. Bailing out may assuage frustration
but it also breaks the path of sharing for simple-ideas.
How may we help you sir?
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>
>
>Bob,
>
>What on earth was the starting problem with the 28 volt system???
>
>You can see some rather low voltages during cranking on a 14 volt system,
>but why should the 28 volt system have caused that???
>
>Surly the FADEC was not resetting on low voltage with a 28 volt system???
That's what they gave me to understand. I was out
there for a weekend seminar and didn't have time
to put my hands on the hardware. It would have been
interesting to put some test equipment on it for some
confirmation and/or further enlightenment . . .
>You mention protection from the inrush. I assume you mean after the
>starter contactor is released???
No, due to "locked rotor" currents that flow in milliseconds
after initial closure of starter contactor. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/99_Saturn_SL1.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/99_Saturn_SL2.jpg
Here's a couple of traces taken from my wife's Saturn which I believe
uses a PM starter. The battery is about two years old. Note that
battery voltage falls below 9.0v for about 50 mS.
Then check out:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/95_GMC_Safari_1.gif
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/95_GMC_Safari_3.gif
This is off my GMC Safari. The starter is wound field,
the battery is bigger and less than 6 months old. Battery
voltage doesn't go below 10.0 volts during cranking.
The folks at Lancair stated that they could achieve reliable
starts under the full range of operating conditions
only when the FADEC was powered from it's own battery
which did not participate in supplying cranking power.
That's when we removed the auto-crossfeed feature in Z-14
and upsized the main battery to do all the cranking.
I'm told that this "solved the problem".
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Multiple power feed wiring problem . . . |
> >
> >
> > Yeah . . . saw that article at OSH when I stopped by
> > the Homebuilder's Information building on the flight
> > line. They had a stack of August Sport Aviations
> > on the counter and I picked one up to leaf through
> > while the three guys behind the counter were busy
> > with customers. I stumbled across the article on
> > wiring. It's got just enough good stuff in it to
> > be credible . . . I'm considering doing a paragraph
> > by paragraph review for publication on my website.
> > It's sad that the flagship publication of EAA can't
> > rise to level of being a good teacher. At least they
> > could get peer review of articles before they put
> > ink to paper.
>
>I would really appreciate that review. And I will put my vote in for
>peer review. I think it is the best thing they could possibly do. All
>serious educational publication, ie scientific journals, have peer review.
I've scanned the article. I'll filter it through the
sifter of simple-ideas as time permits.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe noise |
>
>
>
> >
> >On Aug 15, 2004, at 11:43 AM, Mark Sherman wrote:
> >
> > > Never the less, Radio Shack has discontinued the
> > > 270-030 filter choke. They only offer new electronic
> > > versions, don't know if these will work the same or
> > > not. I would like to confirm that the electronic type
> > > will work or have part numbers for the choke and
> > > capacitor from another vendor.
> >
> >Since the value of the choke is not all that critical, if you need a
> >choke you can use one winding of a transformer. Use a transformer with
> >a secondary voltage something like 6.3VAC, 12VAC, or 24VAC. The higher
> >the voltage rating of the secondary, the greater the inductance. Make
> >sure that the current rating of the secondary is sufficient to carry
> >the load. Do not short the primary winding or the inductance of your
> >ersatz choke will decrease.
>
> I considered this alternative. Problem is that filter
> chokes like the one offered in the 270-030 kit have
> air-gaps in the core to prevent core saturation. AC
> transformers don't have or need the air-core . . . they'll
> saturate as some level of DC current flow that could
> degrade the filtering effects if not render it useless.
>
> I'll try to do some bench testing on specific parts
> from Radio Shack to quantify their usefulness.
Got down to Radio Shack a couple days ago and bought some
filters. I dissected them for analysis of their construction
and performance. You can download an updated article on these
filters at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/filter/RS_Noise_Filters.pdf
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Birkelbach <phil(at)petrasoft.net> |
Micky,
I don't know if they are exactly the same or not. The drawback to using
one relay is that you have to take the motor current through the hat
switch (in this case not a big deal) and you will lose the braking
ablilty that comes from being able to ground both motor terminals when
not in use (again probably not a big deal). At least I couldn't figure
out a circuit that didn't have these characteristics, but that doesn't
mean that there's not one. :-)
The short answer is that you can use a small relay from Radio Crack to
get your trim to work, but it may not have all the advantages of
something else. Now the question is whether or not you care about those
advantages. I don't know what is inside the RAC relay deck but I
suspect they have two SPDT relays, and they are probably of much higher
quality than something from RS. Again this is just a guess.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Panel
http://www.myrv7.com
Mickey Coggins wrote:
>
>Hi,
>
>I'm planning on wiring my aileron and elevator trim
>servos to a coolie hat on the stick grip.
>
>The Ray Allen Company sells a "Relay Deck" for $35.00
>but it seems like I can get the equivalent item from
>Radio Shack (part number 275-249) for about $5.29.
>
>Here are the links to the two items:
>
>http://www.radioshack.com/ (enter 275-249 in search box)
>
>http://www.rayallencompany.com/products/accessories.html
>
>Are these two items essentially the same? The basic
>goal is to convert a (on)/off/(on) switch to act like a
>DPDT switch.
>
>Thanks,
>Mickey
>
>
>--
>Mickey Coggins
>http://www.rv8.ch/
>#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Sales and/or Technical Information |
>I am sorry but I don't have any of the wax string Bob talks about. I will
>send that to Bob too, and he will get back with you.
>
>Thanks,
>Todd Koerner
>B&C Specialty Products, Inc
>316-283-8000
>www.bandc.biz
Your looking for Mil-T-43435, Type II, Finish B string
(polyester or Dacron)
Here are a few 160 hits from a Google search . . .
http://www.brimelectronics.com/M43435.htm
http://www.dearborn-cdt.com/catalog/UT-LACING2.html
http://www.breydenproducts.com/WireHarnessingTapesTwinesBraidingYarns.htm
http://www.electrospec.com/wire/alpha_part.asp?link=158
http://www.versatileindustrial.com/gudebrod.html
http://www.alphawire.com/pages/158.cfm
http://www.advancedwire.com/military.html
http://www.daburn.com/general.html
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starting Power |
>
>
>I recall a long discussion about this with reference to lightspeed
>ignitions. One of the solutions proposed was a large capacitor. Did this
>require a blocking diode or ?? so the capacitor would last for a few seconds?
For most devices that don't tolerate cranking voltage brown-out,
duration of the brownout stress is just a few tens of milliseconds.
>By the way, BlueMountain is very clear about needing a second battery to
>prevent a reset during starting if you want the engine gauges built into
>the EFIS One immediately upon start up. Would this capacitor trick work
>with their 3 amp requirement?
Don't know without trying it or having more data on the details
of that products operation. Are you in a position to do some
experiments to explore it?
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
Thanks for the info. I also learned about another couple
of "relay decks":
http://f1-rocketboy.com/tcm.html
http://www.infinityaerospace.com/infgrip.htm#Trim_Relay
What do you mean by "lose the braking ability"?
Thanks,
Mickey
>I don't know if they are exactly the same or not. The drawback to using
>one relay is that you have to take the motor current through the hat
>switch (in this case not a big deal) and you will lose the braking
>ablilty that comes from being able to ground both motor terminals when
>not in use (again probably not a big deal). At least I couldn't figure
>out a circuit that didn't have these characteristics, but that doesn't
>mean that there's not one. :-)
>
>The short answer is that you can use a small relay from Radio Crack to
>get your trim to work, but it may not have all the advantages of
>something else. Now the question is whether or not you care about those
>advantages. I don't know what is inside the RAC relay deck but I
>suspect they have two SPDT relays, and they are probably of much higher
>quality than something from RS. Again this is just a guess.
>
>
>>I'm planning on wiring my aileron and elevator trim
>>servos to a coolie hat on the stick grip.
>>
>>The Ray Allen Company sells a "Relay Deck" for $35.00
>>but it seems like I can get the equivalent item from
>>Radio Shack (part number 275-249) for about $5.29.
>>
>>Here are the links to the two items:
>>
>>http://www.radioshack.com/ (enter 275-249 in search box)
>>
>>http://www.rayallencompany.com/products/accessories.html
>>
>>Are these two items essentially the same? The basic
>>goal is to convert a (on)/off/(on) switch to act like a
>>DPDT switch.
>>
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Birkelbach <phil(at)petrasoft.net> |
When you open the circuit feeding a largely inductive device like a
motor the magnetic field inside the device begins to collapse and that
keeps the motor running for a period of time (in this case probably
milliseconds). If you ground both motor leads you cause all this energy
to go straight to ground and the motor will stop. This is probably an
oversimplification but it is the way that I understand it.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Panel
http://www.myrv7.com
Mickey Coggins wrote:
>
>Thanks for the info. I also learned about another couple
>of "relay decks":
>
>http://f1-rocketboy.com/tcm.html
>
>http://www.infinityaerospace.com/infgrip.htm#Trim_Relay
>
>What do you mean by "lose the braking ability"?
>
>Thanks,
>Mickey
>
>
>
>
>>I don't know if they are exactly the same or not. The drawback to using
>>one relay is that you have to take the motor current through the hat
>>switch (in this case not a big deal) and you will lose the braking
>>ablilty that comes from being able to ground both motor terminals when
>>not in use (again probably not a big deal). At least I couldn't figure
>>out a circuit that didn't have these characteristics, but that doesn't
>>mean that there's not one. :-)
>>
>>The short answer is that you can use a small relay from Radio Crack to
>>get your trim to work, but it may not have all the advantages of
>>something else. Now the question is whether or not you care about those
>>advantages. I don't know what is inside the RAC relay deck but I
>>suspect they have two SPDT relays, and they are probably of much higher
>>quality than something from RS. Again this is just a guess.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>I'm planning on wiring my aileron and elevator trim
>>>servos to a coolie hat on the stick grip.
>>>
>>>The Ray Allen Company sells a "Relay Deck" for $35.00
>>>but it seems like I can get the equivalent item from
>>>Radio Shack (part number 275-249) for about $5.29.
>>>
>>>Here are the links to the two items:
>>>
>>>http://www.radioshack.com/ (enter 275-249 in search box)
>>>
>>>http://www.rayallencompany.com/products/accessories.html
>>>
>>>Are these two items essentially the same? The basic
>>>goal is to convert a (on)/off/(on) switch to act like a
>>>DPDT switch.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>--
>Mickey Coggins
>http://www.rv8.ch/
>#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | erie <erie(at)shelbyvilledesign.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Sales and/or Technical Information |
Wicks has it, lifetime supply for about $16...
erie
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>>I am sorry but I don't have any of the wax string Bob talks about. I will
>>send that to Bob too, and he will get back with you.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Todd Koerner
>>B&C Specialty Products, Inc
>>316-283-8000
>>www.bandc.biz
>>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
> the only question I can find concerns
> listening to the knock sensor. Is this the question you're
> referring to?
Yes. I was looking for information about amplification. Bryan answered it
last night. Thanks, Bryan.
> What's longevity have to do with utility of present participation?
Well, being somewhat electronically challenged I've been much more of a
taker than a giver. My ability to add to the sea of knowledge over here is
limited. I currently subscribe to the cozy list, the canard aviation forum
and the fly rotary list and the total message volume is fairly heavy. I need
to spend more time flying and less time reading.
> I've noted over the years that if folks are not understanding
Its not a matter of not understanding. I've read, listened and learned, and
I've successfully built and flown an airplane incorporating many of your
electronic teachings. In effect, I've graduated. :)
I WAS frustrated not to get a response to a simple question to which many on
here probably know the answer, but I have it now so no big deal.
> How may we help you sir?
Keep leading novices like me in the right direction for many years to come.
Regards and thanks,
John Slade
Turbo Rotary Cozy IV
http://canardaviation.com/cozy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary |
John,
I am not sure about the output of the knock sensor, but I am guessing you
will need something with a bit more gain than the ck154 for the knock
sensor. The CK008 will have this gain, but you may need to remove bias
resistor to get it working with the knock sensor.
Of course this all just a SWAG as that I do not have the schematics for the
two amplifiers nor do I know what the output of the knock sensor is.
Regards,
Trampas
www.sterntech.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John
Slade
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary
Knock sensor amplifier:
>http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/lm386.gif
Thanks, Marc
That brings me back to my original question.
Could someone who understand the squiggles and lines on this diagram tell me
if it matches the squiggles and lines in ck154 amplifier I already have
shown at http://canakit.com/Contents/Divisions/Div_4.asp
or do I need something like the CK008 shown at
http://canakit.com/Contents/Divisions/Div_25.asp
Thanks,
john
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Sampson" <SSampson.SLN21(at)london.edu> |
| Subject: | Microair760 Radio and PM501 Intercom |
Bob - I am getting 'file damaged' messages on that. Is it opening OK at your
end? Thanks, Steve.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert
L. Nuckolls, III
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Microair760 Radio and PM501 Intercom
>
>
>Can anyone point me to a wiring diagram showing how to wire up these two
>units as one system? Thanks, Steve.
The instruction manual for our audio isolation amplifier has
some exemplar audio wiring diagrams. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9009/9009-700E.pdf
Bob . . .
---
---
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Microair760 Radio and PM501 Intercom |
>
>
>Bob - I am getting 'file damaged' messages on that. Is it opening OK at your
>end? Thanks, Steve.
Yes. It's a big file. Some browser/acrobat combos barf on large
files if you left-click to download and open immediately. Try
right-clicking the link and tell your computer where to store
it on a hard drive. Don't try to open it until download is
complete.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rd2(at)evenlink.com |
| Subject: | Microair760 Radio and PM501 Intercom |
Steve, the file is ok, I had the same problem at first, this is how it got
solved: try downloading the file with right click (use "save target as")
instead of opening it in the browser; after it is downloaded and saved,
open it - if it indicates "damaged" again, try re-saving again.
Rumen
_____________________Original message __________________________
(received from Steve Sampson; Date: 08:15 AM 8/21/2004
+0100)
Bob - I am getting 'file damaged' messages on that. Is it opening OK at your
end? Thanks, Steve.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Sales and/or Technical Information |
>
>Wicks has it, lifetime supply for about $16...
I looked at the Wicks site and didn't find it the first time.
Thanks for the head's up. Here's a link to the item description
on Wicks:
http://www.wicksaircraft.com/catalog/product_detail.php/pid=8220~subid=2051/index.html
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>
>When you open the circuit feeding a largely inductive device like a
>motor the magnetic field inside the device begins to collapse and that
>keeps the motor running for a period of time (in this case probably
>milliseconds). If you ground both motor leads you cause all this energy
>to go straight to ground and the motor will stop. This is probably an
>oversimplification but it is the way that I understand it.
Close . . . but it's not "field collapse" that we're shorting
out but counter EMF of the motor which is acting like a generator
during the motor's spin down interval.
One can take a PM motor like those used in RAC actuators, mount
a set of anemometer cups on it, stick it up on the roof and hook
a voltmeter to the wires calibrated in wind speed. PM motors make
nice little generators by putting mechanical energy into the
shaft and taking electrical energy out of the wires.
When you release the trim switch the obvious first step is to
remove external electrical power that causes the motor to move.
Milliseconds later, it may be useful to throw a dead short
across the motor so that energy produced during motor spin down
is dumped into the short. Without this "dynamic braking" circuit,
only friction and load drag brings the motor's armature to a halt.
The dead short can dramatically improve stopping response in some
systems . . . but in the case the RAC servos, I suspect the
effect will be difficult to perceive.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starting Power |
On Aug 20, 2004, at 12:18 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>> By the way, BlueMountain is very clear about needing a second battery
>> to
>> prevent a reset during starting if you want the engine gauges built
>> into
>> the EFIS One immediately upon start up. Would this capacitor trick
>> work
>> with their 3 amp requirement?
>
> Don't know without trying it or having more data on the details
> of that products operation. Are you in a position to do some
> experiments to explore it?
Greg at Blue Mountain says that the problem only affects his stuff when
running on a 14V electrical system the voltage stays high enough with a
28V electrical system to not be a problem even during cranking.
Somewhat on topic: there are advantages to having an air-start system.
No high starting current. The Chinese aircraft use the Russian system
of high-pressure compressed air to turn the engine over so my starting
current is what is needed to pull in the air solenoid, about 6A. The
pneumatic system also actuates the gear, flaps, and brakes. The nice
thing about a pneumatic system is that, unlike hydraulics, even if you
have a leak you can keep making more of the working fluid.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gert <gert(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starting Power |
So what do you do when you have a leak and your teank pressure is too
low to facilitate a start??
it's my understanding, maybe wrong, that you need quite a few PSI to get
the engine started.
At least one can go to the store and get hydraulic fluid. getting a tank
filled to the pressures needed is a whole different ballgame
Gert
Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
> On Aug 20, 2004, at 12:18 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>>>By the way, BlueMountain is very clear about needing a second battery
>>>to
>>>prevent a reset during starting if you want the engine gauges built
>>>into
>>>the EFIS One immediately upon start up. Would this capacitor trick
>>>work
>>>with their 3 amp requirement?
>>
>> Don't know without trying it or having more data on the details
>> of that products operation. Are you in a position to do some
>> experiments to explore it?
>
>
> Greg at Blue Mountain says that the problem only affects his stuff when
> running on a 14V electrical system the voltage stays high enough with a
> 28V electrical system to not be a problem even during cranking.
>
> Somewhat on topic: there are advantages to having an air-start system.
> No high starting current. The Chinese aircraft use the Russian system
> of high-pressure compressed air to turn the engine over so my starting
> current is what is needed to pull in the air solenoid, about 6A. The
> pneumatic system also actuates the gear, flaps, and brakes. The nice
> thing about a pneumatic system is that, unlike hydraulics, even if you
> have a leak you can keep making more of the working fluid.
>
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
> brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
> +1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
On Aug 20, 2004, at 3:21 PM, John Slade wrote:
>
>
>> the only question I can find concerns
>> listening to the knock sensor. Is this the question you're
>> referring to?
> Yes. I was looking for information about amplification. Bryan answered
> it
> last night. Thanks, Bryan.
You are welcome. Let me know how it turns out.
> John Slade
> Turbo Rotary Cozy IV
> http://canardaviation.com/cozy
>
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Back EMF (was: trim relays) |
On Aug 21, 2004, at 9:15 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> When you open the circuit feeding a largely inductive device like a
>> motor the magnetic field inside the device begins to collapse and that
>> keeps the motor running for a period of time (in this case probably
>> milliseconds). If you ground both motor leads you cause all this
>> energy
>> to go straight to ground and the motor will stop. This is probably an
>> oversimplification but it is the way that I understand it.
>
> Close . . . but it's not "field collapse" that we're shorting
> out but counter EMF of the motor which is acting like a generator
> during the motor's spin down interval.
I had a really weird starting problem on my Comanche for a number of
years that turned out to be related to this. The problem started when
we replaced the engine and the new engine came equipped with a
retard-breaker magneto (shower of sparks). It seemed to me that the
engine was always harder to start now. We ended up replacing batteries
and starters in an attempt to remedy the problem to no avail.
Then I noticed one day that the engine didn't really start until
shortly AFTER I released the starter button. I found that I could get
relatively good starts by very short cranking intervals. Paying extra
close attention I noticed that, not only did it start after I released
the button is was like 1/2 second after releasing the start button that
it really started. Everything in the shower of sparks system tested
properly as did both running and starting ignition timing.
I then traced down the wiring and found that whoever had wired the
shower of sparks system had wired the retard relay to the starter side
of the starter solenoid. When the engine fired and kicked the Bendix
out, the starter spun up to a high speed. When I released the start
button the back EMF from the starter held the retard relay in keeping
left mag retarded and the right mag off until the starter spun down.
Of course it didn't run right. I then moved the power for the retard
relay from the output of the starter solenoid to the coil of the
starter solenoid (solenoid pulled in by application of 12V) and the
problem was solved. I tried to explain the problem and solution to the
A&P and IA who had been working on the airplane and they just looked at
me like I was speaking Swahili.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starting Power |
On Aug 21, 2004, at 1:27 PM, Gert wrote:
>
> So what do you do when you have a leak and your teank pressure is too
> low to facilitate a start??
Every system has its limitations, no?
Refill the tank. A SCUBA bottle, nitrogen bottle, or a strut pump work
wonders for an empty tank. Many of us have a small 20 cu-ft SCUBA
"pony" bottle plumbed into the system to use as "spare air". It will
completely refill the system three or four times.
Actually the Russian and Chinese radial engines can be coaxed to life
without any air if one is careful. We prime the engine while pulling
the prop through. You set one cylinder just past TDC and hit the start
button. Since the engine uses a retarded starting coil (think Ford
Model-T spark coil with its own vibrator) the plug gets a hot,
continuous spark. The mixture in the cylinder fires and kicks the
engine over. If you have primed it right it just keeps right on
running.
Of course you do this with the airplane tied down because, unless you
turn on the emergency air system, there is no pressure to operate the
brakes.
A few minutes of the engine running at a high idle suffices for the
compressor to fill the system up enough to make everything run
properly.
> it's my understanding, maybe wrong, that you need quite a few PSI to
> get
> the engine started.
A full tank is 750 PSI (50 atm) but you can get a good start with 300
PSI if you have primed the engine properly. Actually, I have
successfully gotten a good start with 175 PSI.
> At least one can go to the store and get hydraulic fluid. getting a
> tank
> filled to the pressures needed is a whole different ballgame.
It is not as hard as you might think. Most shops have a nitrogen
bottle for pumping up struts or have a strut pump to make 1000 PSI air.
Both work just dandy.
But all-in-all, I like the pneumatic start system. It has its
idiosyncrasies but it works well during those 40-below-zero Siberian
and Mongolian winters. If the pneumatic system does develop a link you
can turn off everything and let the compressor refill the tank. And
even if that is a problem there is an emergency bottle that will
operate the gear and brakes so you can get the airplane on the ground
in one piece.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gert <gert(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starting Power |
Hi brian
Thanks!!
I was not knocking the system, I think it is rather slick, happen to
talk to a yak driver at OSH who happen to mention he did not manage to
get a start on a scuba tank, no strutpump out there then appearantly.
I did hear about those stout russians handpropping them radials, wonder
how much vodka it took....
thanks for filling in some blanks.
Gert
Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 21, 2004, at 1:27 PM, Gert wrote:
>
>
>>
>>So what do you do when you have a leak and your teank pressure is too
>>low to facilitate a start??
>
>
> Every system has its limitations, no?
>
> Refill the tank. A SCUBA bottle, nitrogen bottle, or a strut pump work
> wonders for an empty tank. Many of us have a small 20 cu-ft SCUBA
> "pony" bottle plumbed into the system to use as "spare air". It will
> completely refill the system three or four times.
>
> Actually the Russian and Chinese radial engines can be coaxed to life
> without any air if one is careful. We prime the engine while pulling
> the prop through. You set one cylinder just past TDC and hit the start
> button. Since the engine uses a retarded starting coil (think Ford
> Model-T spark coil with its own vibrator) the plug gets a hot,
> continuous spark. The mixture in the cylinder fires and kicks the
> engine over. If you have primed it right it just keeps right on
> running.
>
> Of course you do this with the airplane tied down because, unless you
> turn on the emergency air system, there is no pressure to operate the
> brakes.
>
> A few minutes of the engine running at a high idle suffices for the
> compressor to fill the system up enough to make everything run
> properly.
>
>
>>it's my understanding, maybe wrong, that you need quite a few PSI to
>>get
>>the engine started.
>
>
> A full tank is 750 PSI (50 atm) but you can get a good start with 300
> PSI if you have primed the engine properly. Actually, I have
> successfully gotten a good start with 175 PSI.
>
>
>>At least one can go to the store and get hydraulic fluid. getting a
>>tank
>>filled to the pressures needed is a whole different ballgame.
>
>
> It is not as hard as you might think. Most shops have a nitrogen
> bottle for pumping up struts or have a strut pump to make 1000 PSI air.
> Both work just dandy.
>
> But all-in-all, I like the pneumatic start system. It has its
> idiosyncrasies but it works well during those 40-below-zero Siberian
> and Mongolian winters. If the pneumatic system does develop a link you
> can turn off everything and let the compressor refill the tank. And
> even if that is a problem there is an emergency bottle that will
> operate the gear and brakes so you can get the airplane on the ground
> in one piece.
>
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
> brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
> +1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: CH products stick grip |
This is a copy of the email I received from Kevin when I purchased my CH
sticks in Dec. 03:
"Hi Richard.
The switches in the sticks are momentary only, they are used for contact
only.
If you are using then for trim servos or speed brakes,flaps, or any
thing that uses more than 1 ma.
you must use a relay. ptt or radio controls are no problem. The ray
Allen co. has small relays made just for
this applications
If you have any questions please call. Kevin 760-598-2518.
Beat regards. "
Maybe they have changed the switches since then or maybe Kevin was
mistaken, but if the switches are really rated at 1mA max. for rated
switch life, running several tens of mA would drastically shorten their
life.
I will contact Kevin again to see if what he said earlier is still correct.
Dick Tasker
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>Looks like that might be a minimum current rating unless that was a typo.
>>The arcing of switch contacts when they open and close keeps the contacts
>>clean. Some switches contacts will oxidize and fail if they don't switch
>>enough current to keep them clean. I see this allot on the tact switches
>>used on TVs and VCRs that are connected to microprocessor inputs. You get a
>>symptom that one of the buttons quits working or becomes intermittent. The
>>usual fix is to remove the switch and connect it to a current limited
>>supply - about 50ma and actuate it a few times.
>>Joel
>>
>>
>
> Good call Joel. I've been considering the original posting
> and I'd pretty much come to the same conclusion you did. There
> no mechanically operated switch that isn't capable of handling
> a hundred mA or so . . . but there are suggestions for lower
> limits as you have described.
>
> The switches described should be just fine driving relays
> having coil currents on the order of 40 to 200 mA.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Wayne Williams" <rwayne(at)gamewood.net>
>>To:
>>Subject: AeroElectric-List: CH products stick grip
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>I just got a CH Products stick grip. Its got a good feel and is
>>>ambidextrous. It has 4 momentary switches and a coolie hat. I was
>>>
>>>
>>surprised
>>
>>
>>>to see "Permissible Load: 1mA 5VDC min, (resistive load). Is this enough
>>>
>>>
>>to
>>
>>
>>>allow a direct connection to my MAC servo relays and radio PTT? If not,
>>>
>>>
>>what
>>
>>
>>>would I need to do to connect these relays? Thanks!
>>>
>>>Wayne
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> -----------------------------------------
> ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
> ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: CH products stick grip |
There is a discussion ongoing on the Aerolectric list (to which I am
sending a copy of this email) regarding the ratings of the switches in
the CH control sticks..
In Dec of last year, when I purchased two sticks, I wrote you (email
below) to confirm that the switches in the control stick are really
rated at no more than 1 mA. Your answer was that that was correct and
that I should use some sort of isolator to switch any significant load
(which I am doing).
On the Aeroelectric list at least one user says that he is directly
controlling a relay that requires 77mA to actuate. This is way more
than the 1 mA limit that is specified on the data sheet that comes with
the sticks.
If the switches can really handle this much current without degrading
their life significantly, then I may be going overboard with my switch
interface board. If they cannot handle this current then some of the
users of your control sticks may be in for a rude awakening someday soon
when a switch fails.
Please comment so we will know the facts and what we can do with the
stick switches.
By the way, I am very happy with the sticks regardless of the actual
switch capability. If the limit is really 1 mA, that is easily handled
with a simple interface board, and if it is more, then the interface
board may not be needed.
Thanks,
Dick Tasker
Kevin Williamson wrote:
>
>> I see where the info that comes with the sticks say that the switches
>> must switch no more than 1 mA at no less than 5V.
>>
>> If I have them control TTL or CMOS gates at 5V is that okay or should
>> I make sure that I switch a higher voltage? Can I assume that
>> switching 12-15V is acceptable?
>>
>> Dick Tasker
>
>
> Hi Richard.
> The switches in the sticks are momentary only, they are used for
> contact only.
> If you are using then for trim servos or speed brakes,flaps, or any
> thing that uses more than 1 ma.
> you must use a relay. ptt or radio controls are no problem. The ray
> Allen co. has small relays made just for
> this applications
> If you have any questions please call. Kevin 760-598-2518.
> Beat regards.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starting Power |
On Aug 21, 2004, at 3:41 PM, Gert wrote:
>
> Hi brian
>
> Thanks!!
>
> I was not knocking the system, I think it is rather slick, happen to
> talk to a yak driver at OSH who happen to mention he did not manage to
> get a start on a scuba tank, no strutpump out there then appearantly.
Odd. There is a really active group from the Redstar Pilot's
Association (RPA - an umbrella group supporting eastern-bloc aircraft)
that was there. He should have had no problem. OTOH, he may have had
other problems because those radials if properly primed usually start
on the first blade.
>
> I did hear about those stout russians handpropping them radials, wonder
> how much vodka it took....
All of it.
>
> thanks for filling in some blanks.
You are welcome. They are great-flying airplanes once you get used to
the systems differences. The Yak-52 is probably the best deal on a
production airplane you can find these days.
The Nanchang CJ6A has absolutely the best handling characteristics and
control harmony of any airplane I have ever flown. My RV-4 was great
but my CJ6A is better. No airplane I have ever flown has given me such
a "good hands" feeling in all flight regimes. We even found the
original designer and paid his way to Oshkosh a couple years back. It
was very interesting to hear about the fledgling aircraft industry in
the People's Republic of China under Chairman Mao back in the 1950's.
BTW, one other thing different about these airplanes; they are designed
to a 100% overload factor. That means that, if the airframe is spec'd
to +6G/-3G (the CJ6A in this case), the airframe was tested to +12G/-6G
before failure. The Yak-52 is spec'd at +7G/-5G. They are pretty hard
to break.
I provide transition training in the Nanchang CJ6A and am setting up to
do it in the Yak-52. If you have any questions about the systems in
these aircraft I can probably answer.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles E. Brame" <charleyb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Antenna Question |
I am installing a Marker Beacon antenna in my right wing tip using
shielded single conductor cable as the antenna lead. I considered
Electric Bob's suggestion of just exposing the last 40 inches of the
lead, but I was about 20 inches short of antenna cable. So I pro-sealed
a 1/2 inch wide, 40 inch strip of .016 aluminum to the bottom of the
fiberglass wing tip as the antenna.
Question: Does the antenna lead have to connect to the end of the
aluminum strip or can it be connected anywhere along its length? (It
would be most convenient to connect the lead about 15 inches from one
end, if such an installation will work.)
Charlie Brame
RV-6A N11CB
San Antonio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Alexander" <Dalexan48(at)dslextreme.com> |
| Subject: | Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
Well John,
I was going to send you a picture of a waveform for a knock sensor, but I'm
not sure I like the swarmy-assed way you take Bob to task for something as
valuable as his advice (which like the credit card...is priceless). I myself
work too many hours a week and sometimes...I forget to get back to things.
So since advice is free, I will tell you WHERE you can purchase the
information. Go to your local Toyota dealer and order a late model service
manual. Fair enough? Enjoy your fish.
Dale Alexander
Velocity 173 RG Stealth Gullwing.
>
>
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: So long, and thanks for all the fish!
>
>
>
> >
> >Aero electric people.
> >My plane is now flying. Thanks to Bob's book and ongoing input, all the
> >electrical gizmos are working and not interfering with each other, and
the
> >smoke is staying in the boxes and wires.
> >
> >I've asked what I though was a simple electronics question three times
and
> >received no answer. Perhaps I've exhausted either the knowledge or the
> >patience of this exalted group.
>
> John, I did a search on your name for messages in my
> e-mail files and the only question I can find concerns
> listening to the knock sensor. Is this the question you're
> referring to?
>
>
> >Either way, I've been on this list 5 years and it's time to move on.
> >
> >So long, and thanks for all the fish.
>
> I've been on this list since day-one. I participated on
> the AVSig group on Compuserve for years before that. What's
> longevity have to do with utility of present participation?
>
> I've noted over the years that if folks are not understanding
> my contribution to a conversation (either questions, answers
> or critical thought) then we're not speaking the same language.
> The utterance of common words doesn't assure understanding.
> Since it is impossible for folks to be aware the cause for your
> frustration, it's incumbent upon you the frustrated to refine the
> language . . . figure out another use of words that accurately
> communicates your thoughts. Bailing out may assuage frustration
> but it also breaks the path of sharing for simple-ideas.
>
> How may we help you sir?
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
In my experiences I usually find that all problems can be solved, however
you will have to pick two of the following three items to solve the problem:
good, fast, and/or cheap.
Once people realize they can only get two of the three attitudes tend to
change.
For example you can not expect good, free advice to be fast.
Regards,
Trampas
www.sterntech.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dale
Alexander
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish!
Well John,
I was going to send you a picture of a waveform for a knock sensor, but I'm
not sure I like the swarmy-assed way you take Bob to task for something as
valuable as his advice (which like the credit card...is priceless). I myself
work too many hours a week and sometimes...I forget to get back to things.
So since advice is free, I will tell you WHERE you can purchase the
information. Go to your local Toyota dealer and order a late model service
manual. Fair enough? Enjoy your fish.
Dale Alexander
Velocity 173 RG Stealth Gullwing.
>
>
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: So long, and thanks for all the fish!
>
>
>
> >
> >Aero electric people.
> >My plane is now flying. Thanks to Bob's book and ongoing input, all the
> >electrical gizmos are working and not interfering with each other, and
the
> >smoke is staying in the boxes and wires.
> >
> >I've asked what I though was a simple electronics question three times
and
> >received no answer. Perhaps I've exhausted either the knowledge or the
> >patience of this exalted group.
>
> John, I did a search on your name for messages in my
> e-mail files and the only question I can find concerns
> listening to the knock sensor. Is this the question you're
> referring to?
>
>
> >Either way, I've been on this list 5 years and it's time to move on.
> >
> >So long, and thanks for all the fish.
>
> I've been on this list since day-one. I participated on
> the AVSig group on Compuserve for years before that. What's
> longevity have to do with utility of present participation?
>
> I've noted over the years that if folks are not understanding
> my contribution to a conversation (either questions, answers
> or critical thought) then we're not speaking the same language.
> The utterance of common words doesn't assure understanding.
> Since it is impossible for folks to be aware the cause for your
> frustration, it's incumbent upon you the frustrated to refine the
> language . . . figure out another use of words that accurately
> communicates your thoughts. Bailing out may assuage frustration
> but it also breaks the path of sharing for simple-ideas.
>
> How may we help you sir?
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | PeterHunt1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | DC Power Master Switch |
Bob/Others
I am confused and need help. In Figure Z-13 (utilizing SD-8 alternator) the
DC power master switch is a 2-10. In Figure Z-12 (utilizing SD-20 alternator)
the DC power master switch is a 2-3. Why the difference? Is it that with
the 2-10 switch the engine is to be started with this switch in the center
position? Is it that with the 2-10 switch the regulator can be disconnected from
the bus for some reason, perhaps testing?
The reason I am asking is I initially planned to install the SD-8 alternator
and wired my panel accordingly (Figure Z-13) with the 2-10 master power
switch. I have since decided to install the SD-20 which takes me to Figure Z-12
which calls for a 2-3 master power switch. Is it important that I change out my
2-10 master power switch with a 2-3 switch? If not, what is the purpose for
the center position on the 2-10 switch?
A little help would be appreciated. Thanks.
Pete Hunt
Clearwater, FL
RV-6, Wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna Question |
The short answer: If you want the best performance you must connect it
to the end. The 40" was chosen with the frequency of the marker beacon
in mind, so connecting the coax somewhere in the middle will not work
well at all. On the other hand, the 1/2" wide aluminum will resonate at
a lower frequency than a thin wire, so you could get away with a shorter
length (connected at the end). I do not remember what the equations are
for calculating this so maybe someone else can chime in here...
Dick
Charles E. Brame wrote:
>
>I am installing a Marker Beacon antenna in my right wing tip using
>shielded single conductor cable as the antenna lead. I considered
>Electric Bob's suggestion of just exposing the last 40 inches of the
>lead, but I was about 20 inches short of antenna cable. So I pro-sealed
>a 1/2 inch wide, 40 inch strip of .016 aluminum to the bottom of the
>fiberglass wing tip as the antenna.
>
>Question: Does the antenna lead have to connect to the end of the
>aluminum strip or can it be connected anywhere along its length? (It
>would be most convenient to connect the lead about 15 inches from one
>end, if such an installation will work.)
>
>Charlie Brame
>RV-6A N11CB
>San Antonio
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gert <gert(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starting Power |
Didn't happen in OSH, just happen to talk to the guy there.
Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 21, 2004, at 3:41 PM, Gert wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Hi brian
>>
>>Thanks!!
>>
>>I was not knocking the system, I think it is rather slick, happen to
>>talk to a yak driver at OSH who happen to mention he did not manage to
>>get a start on a scuba tank, no strutpump out there then appearantly.
>
>
> Odd. There is a really active group from the Redstar Pilot's
> Association (RPA - an umbrella group supporting eastern-bloc aircraft)
> that was there. He should have had no problem. OTOH, he may have had
> other problems because those radials if properly primed usually start
> on the first blade.
>
>
>>I did hear about those stout russians handpropping them radials, wonder
>>how much vodka it took....
>
>
> All of it.
>
>
>>thanks for filling in some blanks.
>
>
> You are welcome. They are great-flying airplanes once you get used to
> the systems differences. The Yak-52 is probably the best deal on a
> production airplane you can find these days.
>
> The Nanchang CJ6A has absolutely the best handling characteristics and
> control harmony of any airplane I have ever flown. My RV-4 was great
> but my CJ6A is better. No airplane I have ever flown has given me such
> a "good hands" feeling in all flight regimes. We even found the
> original designer and paid his way to Oshkosh a couple years back. It
> was very interesting to hear about the fledgling aircraft industry in
> the People's Republic of China under Chairman Mao back in the 1950's.
>
> BTW, one other thing different about these airplanes; they are designed
> to a 100% overload factor. That means that, if the airframe is spec'd
> to +6G/-3G (the CJ6A in this case), the airframe was tested to +12G/-6G
> before failure. The Yak-52 is spec'd at +7G/-5G. They are pretty hard
> to break.
>
> I provide transition training in the Nanchang CJ6A and am setting up to
> do it in the Yak-52. If you have any questions about the systems in
> these aircraft I can probably answer.
>
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
> brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
> +1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna Question |
On Aug 21, 2004, at 8:47 PM, Richard E. Tasker wrote:
>
>
> The short answer: If you want the best performance you must connect it
> to the end. The 40" was chosen with the frequency of the marker beacon
> in mind, so connecting the coax somewhere in the middle will not work
> well at all. On the other hand, the 1/2" wide aluminum will resonate
> at
> a lower frequency than a thin wire, so you could get away with a
> shorter
> length (connected at the end). I do not remember what the equations
> are
> for calculating this so maybe someone else can chime in here...
I am too lazy to go look it up now but it is only a few percent,
nothing like the 50% you need.
OTOH, one of the best ways to find anything out is to try it. Lash up
your short antenna and go fly over a marker beacon transmitter and see
how it works. You may find it is just fine. It doesn't take much
antenna to be able to hear a several watt transmitter 2000
line-of-sight feet away.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bobby Hester <bhester(at)hopkinsville.net> |
| Subject: | Re: DC Power Master Switch |
PeterHunt1(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>Bob/Others
>
>I am confused and need help. In Figure Z-13 (utilizing SD-8 alternator) the
>DC power master switch is a 2-10. In Figure Z-12 (utilizing SD-20 alternator)
>the DC power master switch is a 2-3. Why the difference? Is it that with
>the 2-10 switch the engine is to be started with this switch in the center
>position? Is it that with the 2-10 switch the regulator can be disconnected from
>the bus for some reason, perhaps testing?
>
>The reason I am asking is I initially planned to install the SD-8 alternator
>and wired my panel accordingly (Figure Z-13) with the 2-10 master power
>switch. I have since decided to install the SD-20 which takes me to Figure Z-12
>which calls for a 2-3 master power switch. Is it important that I change out
my
>2-10 master power switch with a 2-3 switch? If not, what is the purpose for
>the center position on the 2-10 switch?
>
>A little help would be appreciated. Thanks.
>
>Pete Hunt
>Clearwater, FL
>RV-6, Wiring
>
>
I not sure if this will help you but, I do know that with a 2-10 switch
the center is for the battery and the top for the alternator.
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
RV7A Slowbuild wings-QB Fuse :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Brian LLoyd - airstarts |
Brian,
Interested to see the WW II methods of Red squadrons is
perpetuated in the Yaks etc. I read of these procedures in sum-ups of Russki
methods in the forties and forgot all about 'em. I wondered how you became
so acquainted until of course I saw you had a sample.
The method was superb for operating a fighter squadron in a
snowy farmer's field in winter with one truck, which made compressed air,
kept the gathered oil warm, housed the overnight batteries AND provided
warmth for sleeping both pilots and crew.
How that would echo in NA was a mystery to me. The advantage was
airborne weight I am told, but what is the weight cost of the air turbine
starter (?) and the compressed air tank and piping? .....and hoiw would it
compare to present fuel system starters?
Cheers, Ferg
Europa A064
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Architecture for 2 batteries and 1 alternator |
> >> My question is:
> >> what kind of failure could occur which would NOT trigger the LV
> >> warning, but
> >> could drain the batteries?
> >
> > None
>
>There is always failure of the LV warning itself.
But it's pre and in-flight testable. The LV warning light is
the first thing to come to life when you turn on the battery
master. Due notice of the LV warning light activity should
be a part of a pre-flight checklist. The ONLY time a LV warning
light gets exercised, is when the alternator is off or failed . . .
which is a very low percentage of total operating time . . . i.e.,
the warning light system is very low operating stress and most
use LEDs so they have very long projected service life. Last,
for LV warning failure to participate in a tense situation
while airborne requires a DOUBLE failure . . . that of the LV
warning light followed by failure of the alternator.
All things considered, the lowly LV warning light offers a
very robust, active notification of alternator failure that's
about as reliable as any architecture I can think of.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: DC Power Master Switch |
>
>
>PeterHunt1(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> >
> >Bob/Others
> >
> >I am confused and need help. In Figure Z-13 (utilizing SD-8 alternator)
> the
> >DC power master switch is a 2-10. In Figure Z-12 (utilizing SD-20
> alternator)
> >the DC power master switch is a 2-3. Why the difference? Is it that with
> >the 2-10 switch the engine is to be started with this switch in the center
> >position? Is it that with the 2-10 switch the regulator can be
> disconnected from
> >the bus for some reason, perhaps testing?
> >
> >The reason I am asking is I initially planned to install the SD-8
> alternator
> >and wired my panel accordingly (Figure Z-13) with the 2-10 master power
> >switch. I have since decided to install the SD-20 which takes me to
> Figure Z-12
> >which calls for a 2-3 master power switch. Is it important that I
> change out my
> >2-10 master power switch with a 2-3 switch? If not, what is the purpose
> for
> >the center position on the 2-10 switch?
> >
> >A little help would be appreciated. Thanks.
> >
> >Pete Hunt
> >Clearwater, FL
> >RV-6, Wiring
> >
> >
>I not sure if this will help you but, I do know that with a 2-10 switch
>the center is for the battery and the top for the alternator.
Close but it's a little more complicated than that. Alternators generally
do not run well without also having a battery on line. Early electrified
aircraft used generators which would come on line and deliver useful,
relatively
clean energy without a battery. When generators were removed from
certified ships
and replaced with alternators, powers-that-be deduced a need to make
sure that
an alternator could not be left on-line without the battery . . . and that
the battery was on-line before the alternator was brought up.
This design philosophy gave birth to the infamous "split rocker" master
switch that has been part-and-parcel of the majority of single engine
aircraft
architectures for nearly 40 years. I've seen many OBAM aircraft where the
builder wanted to use some whippy looking switches on the panel but had
a Cesssna style split rocker switch enshrined in a place of honor.
The 2-10, progressive transfer switch can provide the same action without
having to resort to the over-priced split rocker. The 2-10 looks like its
brothers and cousins and mounts in the same nice round hole.
Full down turns both battery -AND- alternator OFF. Mid position turns only
the battery ON. Upper position leaves the battery ON and turns the
alternator
ON too. If one doesn't want to spend the dollars and take the time to
label a three-position, progressive transfer 2-10 switch, the 2-3 is a
completely acceptable substitute. In this case, battery and alternator
are brought on and off together . . . an entirely satisfactory mode
of operation also. When one uses a pullable breaker for the crowbar
OV protection, there's a panel mounted control that permits an alternator
to be taken off line for battery only ground operations (usually for
maintenance) -OR- to take the alternator off line should it become unstable
in flight. If it were my airplane, I'd probably use a 2-3 switch. It's
inexpensive and spares can be acquired from lots of sources.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna Question |
>
>
>On Aug 21, 2004, at 8:47 PM, Richard E. Tasker wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > The short answer: If you want the best performance you must connect it
> > to the end. The 40" was chosen with the frequency of the marker beacon
> > in mind, so connecting the coax somewhere in the middle will not work
> > well at all. On the other hand, the 1/2" wide aluminum will resonate
> > at
> > a lower frequency than a thin wire, so you could get away with a
> > shorter
> > length (connected at the end). I do not remember what the equations
> > are
> > for calculating this so maybe someone else can chime in here...
>I am too lazy to go look it up now but it is only a few percent,
>nothing like the 50% you need.
Right . ..
>OTOH, one of the best ways to find anything out is to try it. Lash up
>your short antenna and go fly over a marker beacon transmitter and see
>how it works. You may find it is just fine. It doesn't take much
>antenna to be able to hear a several watt transmitter 2000
>line-of-sight feet away.
Exactly. A receiver with a wet noodle for an antenna would
hear a marker beacon transmitter during a typical approach. The
need for high sensitivity marker beacon performance went away
with the AN Range stations and what was called "airway markers"
back in the good ol' days.
In the final analysis, the repeatable experiment rules. Why
not start with 40' of wire and then make progressive tests
with progressive cuts of, say 2" each time. It would be interesting
to note just how LITTLE your antenna can be and still get the
lights to illuminate at some constant height over a selected
transmitter.
Write up your experiment with details on the setup and procedure
and post on the List for everyone to know and if possible, try
for themselves to confirm, deny or refine the data . . .
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna Question |
>
>
>I am installing a Marker Beacon antenna in my right wing tip using
>shielded single conductor cable as the antenna lead. I considered
>Electric Bob's suggestion of just exposing the last 40 inches of the
>lead, but I was about 20 inches short of antenna cable. So I pro-sealed
>a 1/2 inch wide, 40 inch strip of .016 aluminum to the bottom of the
>fiberglass wing tip as the antenna.
>
>Question: Does the antenna lead have to connect to the end of the
>aluminum strip or can it be connected anywhere along its length? (It
>would be most convenient to connect the lead about 15 inches from one
>end, if such an installation will work.)
On the end . . .
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
Message Previously Posted by Brian Lloyd
<< > Close . . . but it's not "field collapse" that we're shorting
> out but counter EMF of the motor which is acting like a generator
> during the motor's spin down interval.
I had a really weird starting problem on my Comanche for a number of
years that turned out to be related to this. The problem started when
we replaced the engine and the new engine came equipped with a
retard-breaker magneto (shower of sparks). It seemed to me that the
engine was always harder to start now. We ended up replacing batteries
and starters in an attempt to remedy the problem to no avail.
Then I noticed one day that the engine didn't really start until
shortly AFTER I released the starter button. I found that I could get
relatively good starts by very short cranking intervals. Paying extra
close attention I noticed that, not only did it start after I released
the button is was like 1/2 second after releasing the start button that
it really started. Everything in the shower of sparks system tested
properly as did both running and starting ignition timing.
I then traced down the wiring and found that whoever had wired the
shower of sparks system had wired the retard relay to the starter side
of the starter solenoid. When the engine fired and kicked the Bendix
out, the starter spun up to a high speed. When I released the start
button the back EMF from the starter held the retard relay in keeping
left mag retarded and the right mag off until the starter spun down.
Of course it didn't run right. I then moved the power for the retard
relay from the output of the starter solenoid to the coil of the
starter solenoid (solenoid pulled in by application of 12V) and the
problem was solved. I tried to explain the problem and solution to the
A&P and IA who had been working on the airplane and they just looked at
me like I was speaking Swahili. Brian Lloyd >>
8/22/2004
Hello Brian, I think that you may have identified a similar problem for me many
thanks in advance if we can confirm this.
Here is the situation: I have built and am flying a KIS TR-1 amateur built experimental
airplane with a TCM IO-240 B9B engine in it. It has a B&C starter that
uses an on-starter solenoid to both complete the electrical circuit to the starter
motor and engage a pinion gear. Electricity gets to the starter via a conventional
starter contactor which is activated by a push button on the instrument
panel that sends 12 volts to the coil of the starter contactor. On the starter
output side of the starter contactor I have a single electrical connection
going to a 5 amp fuse then splitting to go to both a starter engaged light
on the instrument panel and to the voltage input pin of a Unison solid state
SlickSTART starting vibrator.
During cranking the retard breaker points of the left magneto feed rapid high voltage
pulses from the starting vibrator to the four upper sparkplugs slightly
after piston top dead center. Also during cranking the normal 26 degrees before
top dead center points of the left and right magneto are grounded out by internal
functioning of the starting vibrator and my right magneto switch on the
instrument panel which is off during cranking.
My engine does not start cleanly it seems to stumble around for awhile after it
initially fires and I have taken my finger off the starting switch. Based on
your experience above I now suspect that the starting vibrator may continue to
keep only the top four plugs firing at slightly after top dead center even after
my finger is off the start switch for some period of time because the starting
vibrator is getting some counter EMF input current from the starter motor
as it winds down. Once that input current dies down the engine runs normally
because the left magneto upper plugs start to fire at 26 degrees before top dead
center and, if I have switched the right magneto on by that time, the lower
plugs also will be firing at that point.
I am now contemplating rewiring in order to feed the starting vibrator from the
starting contactor coil input terminal via a 5 amp fuse and leave the starter
engaged light connected to the starter contactor output terminal via its own
fuse.
What is your assessment of the situation? Thanks again for all that you contribute
to this list I have learned a tremendous amount from your inputs.
OC
PS: The written instructions from Unison do call for the input to the SlickSTART
to come from the output side of the starter contactor. As a side note I had
a very difficult time wiring the SlickSTART into my plane. All of the written
guidance from Unison was couched in cook book terms of how to replace an existing
starting vibrator on a type certificated aircraft with theirs. Reverse engineering
from a known system was the only way to figure out how 3 of the 5 pins
(other than voltage in and ground) were supposed to be connected. Initial queries
to Unison yielded a marketing answer that was completely wrong and led to
miswiring. Fortunately through some personal trouble shooting and persistent
contacts with Unison technical types I was eventually able to break the code.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Garmin series 400 installation manual ? |
---- Messages dorigine ----
De: Tailgummer(at)aol.com
Date: Vendredi, Aot 20, 2004 5:11 am
Objet: Re: AeroElectric-List: Garmin series 400 installation manual ?
>
> I tried to send them to your e-mail address but it was returned.
> let me know
> off list if I can help you.
>
>
> John D'Onofrio
>
Dear John,
Thanks for your help. Unfortunately my mail server doesn't handle
large attachments. For the moment I'm stuck, except if one can put the
files on a web server where I could download them.
Thanks again,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Garmin series 400 installation manual ? |
If you can send me the file, John, I can put it on my website for Gilles
and he can download it from there when he gets a chance.
Harley Dixon
www.agelesswings.com
Thesee Gilles wrote:
>Objet: Re: AeroElectric-List: Garmin series 400 installation manual ?
>
>
>
>>
>>I tried to send them to your e-mail address but it was returned.
>>let me know
>>off list if I can help you.
>>
>>
>>John D'Onofrio
>>
>>
>>
>
>Dear John,
>
>Thanks for your help. Unfortunately my mail server doesn't handle
>large attachments. For the moment I'm stuck, except if one can put the
>files on a web server where I could download them.
>
>Thanks again,
>Gilles
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: bob nuckolls is on a roll |
>
>dude, you've been on a pretty good clip lately with the good goods! Did you
>discover Starbucks triple shots or something :-)
Naw . . . opportunity, enthusiasm and inspiration come in waves not unlike
what is popularly called biorhythms. On days when your ying, yang and
the dew point are all in phase with each other, amazing things may
pour forth . . . but like biorythms, don't look for it to happen every
other week.
>I like the radio shack piece myself. Thanks a lot for looking into that but
>please don't burn out...we need you now AND in the future. ;-)
Thank you for the kind words and thoughts of concern . . . but not
to worry. In my other life, things like that are my job. Tomorrow
morning I'm going to try to convince management types at RAC that
we need to disassemble some outside supplied products and evaluate
exactly how they fail to work in our airplanes. There's a move afoot
to simply trash the existing product and go searching for a new one.
Been there, done that . . . and while we made things better, we didn't
fix the problem 100% . . . because we didn't understand what the REAL
problem was.
We'll see how it goes. It can be a tough sell. After all . . . our
core competency is hanging power plants and systems on piles of
aluminum that we fabricate. My task will be to convince powers-that-
be that just because we don't BUILD a particular item doesn't
mean we shouldn't UNDERSTAND it intimately.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: incident with fuse holder |
>Hello Bob,
>
>I had an incident with one of the fuuseholders bought from B&C. The landing
>light 10 A fuse did not go off, but the landing light was no longer working,
>The fuse had melted on the side where the cable of the landing light is
>coming from the switch.
>
>I would like to send you some pictures of the fuse, just tell me to what
>email address.
>
>It looks like part of the fuseholder was also melted (black spots on teh
>fuse, would you recommend to replace the whole holder?
Yes. I've been aware of one other incident like this. In the other case,
the grip tension of the fuse clip was getting damaged by occasional
contact with passenger's foot while ingressing/egressing the airplane.
Your situation may be different but I think the potential root cause
is still the same.
>I'm also wondering what caused this incident, I had originaly a Philips 100W
>landing light in there but as the bulb was only good for 25h I did replace
>it with a motorbike light with a replaceable halogen bulb (however just 55W
>currently).
>
>I do send this to you directly instead of the list as I do not know if it
>makes sense.
Sure . . . it makes sense. Call Todd at B&C tommorow and ask him
for a new fuse holder. Tell him you and I have discussed this and
that he can charge the new holder to me. I'd like for you to send me
the old holder and fuse as intact as possible for the condition they
were in right after the failure.
I'll post this to the List so folks are aware of what's going on.
>Thanks for your help
My pleasure sir.
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------------------
< Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition >
< of man. Advances which permit this norm to be >
< exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the >
< work of an extremely small minority, frequently >
< despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed >
< by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny >
< minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes >
< happens) is driven out of a society, the people >
< then slip back into abject poverty. >
< >
< This is known as "bad luck". >
< -Lazarus Long- >
<------------------------------------------------------>
http://www.aeroelectric.com
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | OV protection for PM alternators |
on juliet
All the Z diagrams show the overvoltage disconnect relay wired to the
output of the voltage regulator on permanent magnet alternators. Given
that the most likely cause of an over voltage is probably a regulator
failure, wouldn't it make more sense to disconnect the input to the VR
just in case the VR decided to overheat and make smoke? This would
require a two pole relay to disconnect the AC input but that should not
be a major problem since I was going to use a "40" amp rated automotive
relay with my 20 amp John Deere VR and alternator. I'm assuming that the
fusible link (actually a circuit breaker on my machine) would disconnect
the VR from battery current in case the VR shorted - but that might be a
bad assumption???
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "glaesers" <glaesers(at)wideopenwest.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Architecture for 2 batteries and 1 alternator |
I have another failure mode question for Bob and the group to ponder:
The Eggenfeller Subaru Engine electrical architecture, described in their
on-line installation manual, has a single 4PDT switch which is used for the
engine Master Bus Switch - powers pumps and ignition from either the Main or
Aux battery It also has a single 4PDT Fuel Pump Select switch. (see
http://www.wideopenwest.com/~glaesers/RV7-Electrical-Architecture.html -
bottom figure OR: http://www.jlc.net/~fcs/EAA_IG/Emotor1of7.jpg and
http://www.jlc.net/~fcs/EAA_IG/Emotor2of7.jpg)
These two switches are both potential single points of failure. If either
fails, lots of silence. On the plus side (?), both Main and Aux positions
of both switches should be tested before each flight, and once in their
normal positions, neither would be moved inflight unless an abnormal
situation occurs (some failure the switch is supposed to solve!)
So, how risky do you consider this design? Can you suggest a more robust
design? Any alternatives I've dreamed up so far just add complexity and
potential for switch mis-management.
Or am I just looking for problems that aren't there? I'm not looking to
nit-pick their design, but if there is a more robust solution, I'm certainly
interested (and I suspect others will be as well).
Thanks,
Dennis Glaeser
> >> My question is:
> >> what kind of failure could occur which would NOT trigger the LV
> >> warning, but
> >> could drain the batteries?
> >
> > None
>
>There is always failure of the LV warning itself.
But it's pre and in-flight testable. The LV warning light is
the first thing to come to life when you turn on the battery
master. Due notice of the LV warning light activity should
be a part of a pre-flight checklist. The ONLY time a LV warning
light gets exercised, is when the alternator is off or failed . . .
which is a very low percentage of total operating time . . . i.e.,
the warning light system is very low operating stress and most
use LEDs so they have very long projected service life. Last,
for LV warning failure to participate in a tense situation
while airborne requires a DOUBLE failure . . . that of the LV
warning light followed by failure of the alternator.
All things considered, the lowly LV warning light offers a
very robust, active notification of alternator failure that's
about as reliable as any architecture I can think of.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>
>Message Previously Posted by Brian Lloyd
>
><< > Close . . . but it's not "field collapse" that we're shorting
> > out but counter EMF of the motor which is acting like a generator
> > during the motor's spin down interval.
>
>I had a really weird starting problem on my Comanche for a number of
>years that turned out to be related to this. The problem started when
>we replaced the engine and the new engine came equipped with a
>retard-breaker magneto (shower of sparks). It seemed to me that the
>engine was always harder to start now. We ended up replacing batteries
>and starters in an attempt to remedy the problem to no avail.
>
>Then I noticed one day that the engine didn't really start until
>shortly AFTER I released the starter button. I found that I could get
>relatively good starts by very short cranking intervals. Paying extra
>close attention I noticed that, not only did it start after I released
>the button is was like 1/2 second after releasing the start button that
>it really started. Everything in the shower of sparks system tested
>properly as did both running and starting ignition timing.
>
>I then traced down the wiring and found that whoever had wired the
>shower of sparks system had wired the retard relay to the starter side
>of the starter solenoid. When the engine fired and kicked the Bendix
>out, the starter spun up to a high speed. When I released the start
>button the back EMF from the starter held the retard relay in keeping
>left mag retarded and the right mag off until the starter spun down.
>Of course it didn't run right. I then moved the power for the retard
>relay from the output of the starter solenoid to the coil of the
>starter solenoid (solenoid pulled in by application of 12V) and the
>problem was solved. I tried to explain the problem and solution to the
>A&P and IA who had been working on the airplane and they just looked at
>me like I was speaking Swahili. Brian Lloyd >>
Excellent example of this phenomenon. Another example is the pinion gear
retraction delay experienced by folks who try to wire PM motor starters
from Skytec exactly like the wound field motor starters from B&C. Voltage
generated by the motor during spin-down keeps the pinion gear engaged for
several seconds after the starter button is released.
>Here is the situation: I have built and am flying a KIS TR-1 amateur built
>experimental airplane with a TCM IO-240 B9B engine in it. It has a B&C
>starter that uses an on-starter solenoid to both complete the electrical
>circuit to the starter motor and engage a pinion gear. Electricity gets to
>the starter via a conventional starter contactor which is activated by a
>push button on the instrument panel that sends 12 volts to the coil of the
>starter contactor. On the starter output side of the starter contactor I
>have a single electrical connection going to a 5 amp fuse then splitting
>to go to both a starter engaged light on the instrument panel and to the
>voltage input pin of a Unison solid state SlickSTART starting vibrator.
>
>During cranking the retard breaker points of the left magneto feed rapid
>high voltage pulses from the starting vibrator to the four upper
>sparkplugs slightly after piston top dead center. Also during cranking the
>normal 26 degrees before top dead center points of the left and right
>magneto are grounded out by internal functioning of the starting vibrator
>and my right magneto switch on the instrument panel which is off during
>cranking.
>
>My engine does not start cleanly it seems to stumble around for awhile
>after it initially fires and I have taken my finger off the starting
>switch. Based on your experience above I now suspect that the starting
>vibrator may continue to keep only the top four plugs firing at slightly
>after top dead center even after my finger is off the start switch for
>some period of time because the starting vibrator is getting some counter
>EMF input current from the starter motor as it winds down. Once that input
>current dies down the engine runs normally because the left magneto upper
>plugs start to fire at 26 degrees before top dead center and, if I have
>switched the right magneto on by that time, the lower plugs also will be
>firing at that point.
>
>I am now contemplating rewiring in order to feed the starting vibrator
>from the starting contactor coil input terminal via a 5 amp fuse and leave
>the starter engaged light connected to the starter contactor output
>terminal via its own fuse.
>
>What is your assessment of the situation? Thanks again for all that you
>contribute to this list I have learned a tremendous amount from your inputs.
>
>OC
>
>PS: The written instructions from Unison do call for the input to the
>SlickSTART to come from the output side of the starter contactor. As a
>side note I had a very difficult time wiring the SlickSTART into my plane.
>All of the written guidance from Unison was couched in cook book terms of
>how to replace an existing starting vibrator on a type certificated
>aircraft with theirs. Reverse engineering from a known system was the only
>way to figure out how 3 of the 5 pins (other than voltage in and ground)
>were supposed to be connected. Initial queries to Unison yielded a
>marketing answer that was completely wrong and led to miswiring.
>Fortunately through some personal trouble shooting and persistent contacts
>with Unison technical types I was eventually able to break the code.
Taking power to run the SlickSTART or Shower-of-Sparks should NOT come
from main starter power path downstream of the starter contactor for
exactly the reasons people are discovering in stories cited above.
Here's an article I did some years ago on Shower-of-Sparks
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Shower-of-Sparks/ShowerOfSparks.pdf
which details how to control the ignition boost system from the same fuse
or breaker that energizes the starter contactor. This approach maintains
isolation between the ignition power and eliminates any possiblity that
starter motor counter-emf will upset the ignition system. I'm amazed that
Unison wouldn't know better.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dean Psiropoulos" <deanpsir(at)easystreet.com> |
| Subject: | Antenna Placement. |
I read the antenna section of Lectric Bob's book but didn't see anything
about proper placement of them. I purchased commercially available antennas
for Transponder, Marker Beacon and a combination VOR/LOC/Glideslope. I want
to install the VOR/LOC/Glideslope on the bottom of the fuselage below the
horizontal stabilizer of my RV-6A. I'm thinking this should not be a
problem and when you're in the air it would seem like the optimum place for
it! But I'm no antenna expert so is this a good place to put it? Or is
there a better one? Do I need a splitter to separate LOC/VOR signals from
Glideslope (read something about this in Lectric Bob's book but not quite
sure if I need it)? Also, I've heard that one should separate receive
antennas from transmit antennas like comm and transponder. How far from
other antennas should communication and transponder antennas be placed? If
two comm. antennas are installed, how far apart from each other should they
be? How far from transponder antenna should the comm. antenna be placed?
Any other words of wisdom on antenna placement? Thanks.
Dean Psiropoulos
RV-6A N197DM
Panel and wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <wernerschneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: incident with fuse holder |
Hello Bob,
thanks a lot for the fast response
> >It looks like part of the fuseholder was also melted (black spots on teh
> >fuse, would you recommend to replace the whole holder?
>
> Yes. I've been aware of one other incident like this. In the other case,
> the grip tension of the fuse clip was getting damaged by occasional
> contact with passenger's foot while ingressing/egressing the airplane.
> Your situation may be different but I think the potential root cause
> is still the same.
>
Hm, I do undesrtand, as mechanical damage can get loose contacts, however,
my fuseholders are all built in behind the panel on top of the glove box and
can not be touched without lowering the panel first or open the glareshield
and this fuse was in the 67 hrs my plane has meanhwile just once removed. It
will be intersting to see if you can find out anything, I did remove the
fuse with a pair of plyers, but as soon as I can replace the block I will
send you the two parts!
Werner
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Garmin series 400 installation manual ? |
---- Messages dorigine ----
De: Harley
Date: Lundi, Aot 23, 2004 0:15 am
Objet: Re: AeroElectric-List: Garmin series 400 installation manual ?
>
> If you can send me the file, John, I can put it on my website for
> Gilles
> and he can download it from there when he gets a chance.
>
> Harley Dixon
>
> www.agelesswings.com
Hi Harley and all,
Thanks a lot for your help !
Best regards,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> alternator |
| Subject: | Re: Architecture for 2 batteries and 1 |
alternator
alternator
Hi Dennis,
I agree completely. I'm not planning on using the
4PDT switches. Here's where I am with the fuel pumps:
http://www.rv8.ch/article.php?story=20040725003830181
For the ECM, I've got this:
http://www.rv8.ch/article.php?story=20040406145425120
I'm not going to have any more single points of failure
in my system than possible, and I plan to evaluate and
understand the remaining SPOFs as carefully as I can.
Mickey
>The Eggenfeller Subaru Engine electrical architecture, described in their
>on-line installation manual, has a single 4PDT switch which is used for the
>engine Master Bus Switch - powers pumps and ignition from either the Main or
>Aux battery It also has a single 4PDT Fuel Pump Select switch. (see
>http://www.wideopenwest.com/~glaesers/RV7-Electrical-Architecture.html -
>bottom figure OR: http://www.jlc.net/~fcs/EAA_IG/Emotor1of7.jpg and
>http://www.jlc.net/~fcs/EAA_IG/Emotor2of7.jpg)
>
>These two switches are both potential single points of failure. If either
>fails, lots of silence. On the plus side (?), both Main and Aux positions
>of both switches should be tested before each flight, and once in their
>normal positions, neither would be moved inflight unless an abnormal
>situation occurs (some failure the switch is supposed to solve!)
>
>So, how risky do you consider this design? Can you suggest a more robust
>design? Any alternatives I've dreamed up so far just add complexity and
>potential for switch mis-management.
>
>Or am I just looking for problems that aren't there? I'm not looking to
>nit-pick their design, but if there is a more robust solution, I'm certainly
>interested (and I suspect others will be as well).
>
>Thanks,
>
> Dennis Glaeser
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | copper clad aluminum wire |
>Hi again Bob,
>
>Now I am at the stage of installing connectors to the copper clad
>aluminum cable & would like some advice. Eric recommends 'dimpling' the
>connector in one place with a 3/8" rounded drift & then soldering with
>rosin core solder. I have found an electrical distributor house that will
>rent me their large crimping tool, so I would think that to be
>superior. Do you agree?
The "dimpling" procedure is recommended to "close up the joint"
such that a minimum of solder is required to complete the installation.
I prefer copper wedges as described in the article at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/big_term.pdf
The goal is to achieve a snug fit of terminal on strands of
wire before solder is applied.
Either crimping or soldering is acceptable.
>Any advice on how to guage the 'tightness' of the crimp so as to avoid
>cold flow?
Don't understand what you mean my "cold flow" . . . makeshift
crimping techniques always generate concerns about gas-tightness
of the finished joint . . . see:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/CrimpTools/crimptools.html
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/terminal.pdf
>Would you recommend solder at all or just leave the joint crimped?
Solder flowed into a "snug" joint has a very high probability of
gas-tightness and mechanical integrity using ordinary hand tools
and readily available materials. Crimping with the PROPER dies
offers exactly the same integrity of joint. There's no reason
to do both. See
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/rules/review.html
>If solder,what type: Rosin Core? Silver solder?
Ordinary 60/40 or 63/37 electronic solder is fine. Radio
Shack and virtually any electronic supply house will have
it.
I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
share the information with as many folks as possible.
A further benefit can be realized with membership on
the list. There are lots of technically capable folks
on the list who can offer suggestions too. You can
join at . . .
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
Thanks!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Starting Problem |
8/23/2004
Extract from a previous posting by Bob Nuckolls
<>
Hello Bob, Thanks for your response on this subject. My question is Do only PM
motors have this back EMF characteristic during spin-down or is the characteristic
also found in wound field motors?
If this back EMF characteristic also exists in wound field motors (my starter is
from B&C) then I will rewire my starting vibrator to provide its source of electricity
from the 12 volt input to the starter contactor coil.
Many thanks for your help. OC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jaye and Scott Jackson" <jayeandscott(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: incident with fuse holder |
Gentlemen:
My RV-6 has two fuse blocks, the big one and the smaller one for the
e-bus, as per the Connection manual, and the big fuse block has developed
exactly the symptoms you mention.
Although the smaller fuse block works well, and one side of the larger one
still works fine, every fuse on the other side is loose, and the Fast-On
tabs are also loose. Pushing in on the fuse stops the tab from moving
around, but the fuse block seems to have lost its ability to grip any of the
fuses on the one side, in that wiggling the tab causes the appropriate fuse
to lift up slightly and lose contact.
Hadn't got around to seeing how it's made or what I could do to repair it
yet.
Scott in VAncouveRV-6,
150 hours
----- Original Message -----
From: "Werner Schneider" <wernerschneider(at)compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: incident with fuse holder
>
> Hello Bob,
>
> thanks a lot for the fast response
>
> > >It looks like part of the fuseholder was also melted (black spots on
teh
> > >fuse, would you recommend to replace the whole holder?
> >
> > Yes. I've been aware of one other incident like this. In the other
case,
> > the grip tension of the fuse clip was getting damaged by occasional
> > contact with passenger's foot while ingressing/egressing the airplane.
> > Your situation may be different but I think the potential root cause
> > is still the same.
> >
> Hm, I do undesrtand, as mechanical damage can get loose contacts, however,
> my fuseholders are all built in behind the panel on top of the glove box
and
> can not be touched without lowering the panel first or open the
glareshield
> and this fuse was in the 67 hrs my plane has meanhwile just once removed.
It
> will be intersting to see if you can find out anything, I did remove the
> fuse with a pair of plyers, but as soon as I can replace the block I will
> send you the two parts!
>
> Werner
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Weight of RG-142 |
Chad, I just noticed that the link I gave you to the cited article
was incomplete. You can find the article at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/economics_of_weight_reduction.html
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>>...
>> Excellent points. I can reinforce those ideas with the following
>> anecdotes from my own experience. In 1964 when I was a tech writer
>> for Cessna, a number commonly circulated around the
>> engineering department suggested "For every pound of emptly weight
>> added to our airplanes, it will cost the owner(s) of that airplane
>> $100 to buy the pound of stuff, maintain it, and purchase fuel
>> to carry it around over the lifetime of the airplane.
>>...
>
>Bob, would you be willing to cut/paste your message/response here ("Weight
>of RG-142") into an article on your site? In my builder's log I'm trying
>to reference well-reasoned discussions for some decisions I'm making, like
>the efforts I'm going through myself to save weight. It would be great to
>be able to provide a link to this exact response because it mirrors
>exactly what I was looking for, and I think some other people might
>benefit from the same thought process.
>
>Many experimental builders often go for that "one more device" in the
>panel, or "maybe just one wire size larger" for every wire, for the same
>unfounded reasons as they install TVS devices and other "flooby dust". I
>figure if we're going to go through all this effort to build a plane on
>the basis of "doing it right," we may as well actually "do it right."
I've done as you suggested. The piece was cleaned up a bit and
posted at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/economics_of_weight_reduction.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ken Rice" <kennrice(at)msn.com> |
I have a magnetic clutch rated at 24 V and about 2-4 amps that I want to operate
in my 14 V system. Is there a simple way to step-up the voltage?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Malcolm Thomson" <mdthomson(at)attglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Dual VOR/GS Comant Splitter... |
I have a Garmin 430 and an SL30 Radio. The 430 has coax inputs for NAV
and G/S. The SL30 has one input for NAV and splits off the G/S signal
internally to the radio. My question is it OK to use a dual NAV, G/S
splitter (Comant CI 1125) that has two NAV and two G/S outputs? My
intent is to run one NAV and one G/S to the 430 and then run the second
NAV to the SL30. This will leave one G/S output of the splitter
attached to nothing, also will the NAV signal still have the G/S signal
in it after it has passed through the splitter/diplexer?
Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: DC-DC converter |
>I have a magnetic clutch rated at 24 V and about 2-4 amps that I want to
operate
>in my 14 V system. Is there a simple way to step-up the voltage?
Unencumbered as I am with any knowledge of this beast (by the way...what are
the specs?), here is the answer--or guess.......
1) Jeeeeze......can't you get one in 12V? Sell the other on eBay.
2) Sometimes relays and, I assume, clutches actually work well on a range of
voltages. Try it. Add a big cap and try it again. The locked current may be
very small.
3) You can buy a DC-DC converter that will do the job. Your current
requirement is high, but again....try 2). Maybe you can do with a small
DC-DC converter if the locked current is small.
4) It is trivial (I leave the exercise for the reader), to charge two
capacitors in parallel (12V) and discharge them in series (24V). They make
power supplies that do this continuously, but you may not need to.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
"Doctors are the same as lawyers; the only difference is that
lawyers merely rob you, whereas doctors rob you and kill
you too."
~ Anton Chekhov
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "glaesers" <glaesers(at)wideopenwest.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Architecture for 2 batteries and 1 alternator |
Hi Mickey,
I love it! Same number of switches, no single point of failure, and no $35
4PDT switches!
So I added a new diagram to my website
(http://www.wideopenwest.com/~glaesers/RV7-Electrical-Architecture.html) It
is also much cleaner and simpler to boot.
The only connection the other design allows that this one doesn't is running
the Main fuel pump from the Aux battery. That can be accomplished by making
the Main Fuel pump switch an ON-ON-ON switch hooked up so it is an OFF-Aux
Bat-Main Bat switch. I don't think it's worth the effort. If the main
battery and the aux pump both fail simultaneously, you've really ticked off
the Big Guy.
Have you been following the Subaru Engine Yahoo Group lately - regarding the
EXPBUS replacement being designed? I can't wait see what it is going to
co$t. I'm sure it will work great - some very smart folks are designing
it - but will it really do anything that this design doesn't?
This electrical design is looking pretty solid now. What other SPOFs are
left lurking in the wings?
Thanks for your help.
Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Mickey Coggins [mailto:mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch]
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Architecture for 2 batteries and 1
alternator
Hi Dennis,
I agree completely. I'm not planning on using the
4PDT switches. Here's where I am with the fuel pumps:
http://www.rv8.ch/article.php?story=20040725003830181
For the ECM, I've got this:
http://www.rv8.ch/article.php?story=20040406145425120
I'm not going to have any more single points of failure
in my system than possible, and I plan to evaluate and
understand the remaining SPOFs as carefully as I can.
Mickey
>The Eggenfeller Subaru Engine electrical architecture, described in their
>on-line installation manual, has a single 4PDT switch which is used for the
>engine Master Bus Switch - powers pumps and ignition from either the Main
or
>Aux battery It also has a single 4PDT Fuel Pump Select switch. (see
>http://www.wideopenwest.com/~glaesers/RV7-Electrical-Architecture.html -
>bottom figure OR: http://www.jlc.net/~fcs/EAA_IG/Emotor1of7.jpg and
>http://www.jlc.net/~fcs/EAA_IG/Emotor2of7.jpg)
>
>These two switches are both potential single points of failure. If either
>fails, lots of silence. On the plus side (?), both Main and Aux positions
>of both switches should be tested before each flight, and once in their
>normal positions, neither would be moved inflight unless an abnormal
>situation occurs (some failure the switch is supposed to solve!)
>
>So, how risky do you consider this design? Can you suggest a more robust
>design? Any alternatives I've dreamed up so far just add complexity and
>potential for switch mis-management.
>
>Or am I just looking for problems that aren't there? I'm not looking to
>nit-pick their design, but if there is a more robust solution, I'm
certainly
>interested (and I suspect others will be as well).
>
>Thanks,
>
> Dennis Glaeser
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | strobe control box mount |
| From: | Margaret and Truman Sager <sag6267(at)otherside.com> |
Any ideas out there on the mounting design for the strobe control box in
a RV-7? I cannot find any info in archive.
Truman Sager
wiring wings on QB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DonVS" <dsvs(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | strobe control box mount |
Check out rvproject.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Margaret and Truman Sager
Subject: AeroElectric-List: strobe control box mount
Any ideas out there on the mounting design for the strobe control box in
a RV-7? I cannot find any info in archive.
Truman Sager
wiring wings on QB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
I would like to get opinions on 3 ideas I have gleaned from this list and
other sources, all aimed at reducing complexity and increasing reliability:
1. Manual master switch - The battery will be firewall-mounted and the idea
is to use a manual battery switch mounted ahead of the firewall and actuated
via a "torque" tube and a lever under the instrument panel. It eliminates
the potential failure mode of the master relay and should reduce weight a
tiny bit. And it eliminates several wires and connections.
2. "contactor-less" starter. By using one of the lightweight
solenoid-engaged starters I can energize the solenoid with a simple
momentary-contact switch rated at the appropriate current (I figure a 50-amp
rating is adequate). It reduces the number of wires and connections,
eliminates one of the contactors and should improve reliability while
reducing weight. The system is identical in concept to all automotive
starts, but a redundant way to shut off the starter is still there with the
master switch.
3. Eliminate the alternator switch entirely. The alternator will be
powered directly from the main bus through a pullable circuit breaker. The
breaker can be used to shut off the alternator if the need arises, but
normally the alternator will be powered all the time the master is on. I
see no need for a switch - in 25 years of flying the only time I've turned
the alternator off is when on the ground using the battery to power things
for diagnostic purposes.
I think by incorporating all three of these ideas a considerable reduction
in wiring complexity can be realized and I see no downside. Any opinions
out there?
Gary Casey
Lancair ES
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bryan Flood" <bryanflood(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Fuse Holders and Bus diodes |
Just a quick clarification question...
I have the B&C fuse holders in my RV connected by the recomeded diode. The
diode is bolted to an aluminum bulkhead. B&C states to not use more that 15
amps per fuse slot. Will I be okay running say 30 to 40 amps total? through
one fuse block whith no single fuse larger than 15 amps? And second what is
the rating for the diode that connects the busses when it is bolted to a
large aluminum heat sink and should it be attached with any speical adhesive
to promote heat transfer and increase it's current rating. AND FINALLY...
would it help the current rating to hook up two legs of the diode to use two
diodes instead of one?
Thanks,
Bryan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Banus" <mbanus(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Male Fast-on Terminals |
I'm looking for Male fast-on terminals that can be attached with solder or crimps.
Anyone know where to get them. I've done a search, but no luck.
Mark Banus
Glasair SIIFT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Simplification |
>
>I would like to get opinions on 3 ideas I have gleaned from this list and
>other sources, all aimed at reducing complexity and increasing reliability:
>
>1. Manual master switch - The battery will be firewall-mounted and the idea
>is to use a manual battery switch mounted ahead of the firewall and actuated
>via a "torque" tube and a lever under the instrument panel. It eliminates
>the potential failure mode of the master relay and should reduce weight a
>tiny bit. And it eliminates several wires and connections.
How many parts are anticipated for the mechanical linkage to
the battery switch. Are these more (less) likely to fail
than a contactor? Do you plan to have an alternate power path
to and endurance bus? How would failure of a battery contactor
affect the outcome of any particular mode of flight?
>2. "contactor-less" starter. By using one of the lightweight
>solenoid-engaged starters I can energize the solenoid with a simple
>momentary-contact switch rated at the appropriate current (I figure a 50-amp
>rating is adequate). It reduces the number of wires and connections,
>eliminates one of the contactors and should improve reliability while
>reducing weight. The system is identical in concept to all automotive
>starts, but a redundant way to shut off the starter is still there with the
>master switch.
Lots of builders have gone this route. There are no down-sides
that I can deduce.
>3. Eliminate the alternator switch entirely. The alternator will be
>powered directly from the main bus through a pullable circuit breaker. The
>breaker can be used to shut off the alternator if the need arises, but
>normally the alternator will be powered all the time the master is on. I
>see no need for a switch - in 25 years of flying the only time I've turned
>the alternator off is when on the ground using the battery to power things
>for diagnostic purposes.
>
>I think by incorporating all three of these ideas a considerable reduction
>in wiring complexity can be realized and I see no downside. Any opinions
>out there?
The starter circuit is fine.
You've eliminated one switch, one contactor and a couple of pieces of
wire for a weight savings of less than 1 pound that is offset by the
weight and labor to fabricate an operating extension to a battery switch.
Looks like weight will be a wash. I'm having trouble deducing any
advantages . . . but what you describe will probably function okay.
Another thing to consider is what the guy you sell the airplane to
is going to think about it. You are, after all, building a LANCAIR.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: incident with fuse holder |
>
>
>Gentlemen:
> My RV-6 has two fuse blocks, the big one and the smaller one for the
>e-bus, as per the Connection manual, and the big fuse block has developed
>exactly the symptoms you mention.
> Although the smaller fuse block works well, and one side of the larger one
>still works fine, every fuse on the other side is loose, and the Fast-On
>tabs are also loose. Pushing in on the fuse stops the tab from moving
>around, but the fuse block seems to have lost its ability to grip any of the
>fuses on the one side, in that wiggling the tab causes the appropriate fuse
>to lift up slightly and lose contact.
> Hadn't got around to seeing how it's made or what I could do to repair it
>yet.
>Scott in VAncouveRV-6,
>150 hours
When no fuse is installed, the output tab of the fuseblock should "float"
slightly. If you take one of these things apart, you'll see how the output
tab is not held tightly. By the same token, there should be a short
service-loop in the wire as it exits the fuseblock and ties into
any wire bundles. This feature allows the output connection tab to
align with the fuse as it's inserted.
Your fuseblock may not be in need of "repair". If you believe it's
defective, then return it to the folks you bought it from for
replacement. But be aware that all output tabs on all of these
devices will "rattle around" a bit when there is no fuse installed
and/or no output wire connected.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starting Problem |
>
>8/23/2004
>
>Extract from a previous posting by Bob Nuckolls
>
><gear retraction delay experienced by folks who try to wire PM motor
>starters from Skytec exactly like the wound field motor starters from B&C.
>Voltage generated by the motor during spin-down keeps the pinion gear
>engaged for several seconds after the starter button is released.>>
>
>Hello Bob, Thanks for your response on this subject. My question is Do
>only PM motors have this back EMF characteristic during spin-down or is
>the characteristic also found in wound field motors?
A motor or generator has two basic requirements for functionality:
(1) a magnetic field through which (2) wires can move to convert
magnetic to motion or motion to electron flow. The PM motor has a
fixed field that does not depend on externally applied power. The
would field motor loses it's magnetic field when power is removed.
>If this back EMF characteristic also exists in wound field motors (my
>starter is from B&C) then I will rewire my starting vibrator to provide
>its source of electricity from the 12 volt input to the starter contactor
>coil.
There is a counter-emf generated while the motor is energized
and moving and a very small one while it's spinning down but it's
a tiny fraction of the voltage generated by a PM motor.
I would rewire the starting vibrator to the contactor coil
anyhow.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
| Subject: | Male Fast-on Terminals |
Try http://www.steinair.com/, nice guy.
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 Mark
Banus
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Male Fast-on Terminals
I'm looking for Male fast-on terminals that can be attached with solder
or crimps. Anyone know where to get them. I've done a search, but no
luck.
Mark Banus
Glasair SIIFT
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Simplification |
I like your suggestions.
1. I am already collecting e-mails and websites about manual master
switches. I definitely plan to use one. Made that decision several years
ago.
2. Starter: I assume you are proposing not to have "main starter cranking
current" go through a high current capacity "starter relay" - rather, have
the starter motor hard wired to the battery and only have the pilot actuate
a lower current switch to energize the relay coil of the relay on the
starter that engages the Bendix and also closes the "high current" circuit
to the motor from the "hard wired" wire. Do I have that wiring and
terminology correct? Then, if the starter ever fails and continues to crank
when the starter switch is released, then the Manual Battery Master can be
used to kill power to the starter motor.
3. In my very first attempt to tailor Z-13 to eliminate the standard field
controlled alternator and make the "2nd alternator" a PM alternator that
will be my only/main alternator, I eliminated the alternator switch and
wired it so that when the alternator started turning during start and
subsequent, as it put out voltage, that voltage was hard-wired to energize
the Crowbar Over Voltage relay, to close it and pass alternator output to
the DC Master Solenoid (if I remember correctly).
- Responses to my request for peer review conviced me that I needed an
alternator switch. I believe it was similar to this response to another
fellow who wanted "no alternator switch": Bob asked, "Suppose you have
smoke in the cockpit and you want to shut down the whole system? How do you
switch? You can turn the battery off, the alternator continues to run
MASTER switch unless you wire it up such that it truly has ultimate control
over all power sources in the airplane." (unquote)
- Well, like you said, you have your "alternator CB" and I would have
my Overvoltage Module's CB (that is supposed to pop if get overvoltage) -
you and I can use our respective CBs as a "switch" to turn off the
alternator output into the wires of the aircraft.
- Bob is correct that we would no longer have a "single switch" control
(master switch) to kill DC power when get smoke in cockpit from electrical
overheating. We'd have to use two actions: Turn off battery switch and
pull an appropriate alternator CB. I think I just talked myself back into
going "switchless" for the alternator.
- There is the further issue of "self-excited alternators" (PM in my
case): The alternator puts out power as long as the engine is turning,
unlike a "std" alternator that ceases to put out current if you kill the
low-current "field" circuit. (Hope "field" is the correct term.)
____- This almost becomes an issue of "PM vs std alternator" - PMs (& the
self-exciting alternators Bob mentions on some Bonanzas) will be putting out
voltage and current into any circuit it is connected to, regardless of your
"master switch or not" architecture - the alternator is putting out stuff.
So, use of PM/self-exciterd alternators requires a "design convention or
caveat" that the relay that "interrupts the flow out of the PM alternator"
(note, again, we don't "kill the output" - we can only interrupt it or stop
it from going very far) must be as close as possible to the alternator,
exactly like fat, unprotected wires from the alternator to the battery and
from the battery to anything else, need to be as short as possible so there
is not a "long" unprotected hot lead. Given compliance with that, and
being willing to actuate two things instead of one to kill DC power into the
aircraft's electrical ciruits, a "switchless" alterntor ought to be OK.
- For myself, that "kill the alternator CB" (regardless of its title or
the name on the label) will be positioned right next to the "battery switch"
(whether "electrical-to-battery contactor" or "manual battery master
switch"). That will give me the intuitive "view" of how to control my
electrical system during normal as well as emergency conditions.
David Carter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Simplification
>
> I would like to get opinions on 3 ideas I have gleaned from this list and
> other sources, all aimed at reducing complexity and increasing
reliability:
>
> 1. Manual master switch - The battery will be firewall-mounted and the
idea
> is to use a manual battery switch mounted ahead of the firewall and
actuated
> via a "torque" tube and a lever under the instrument panel. It eliminates
> the potential failure mode of the master relay and should reduce weight a
> tiny bit. And it eliminates several wires and connections.
>
> 2. "contactor-less" starter. By using one of the lightweight
> solenoid-engaged starters I can energize the solenoid with a simple
> momentary-contact switch rated at the appropriate current (I figure a
50-amp
> rating is adequate). It reduces the number of wires and connections,
> eliminates one of the contactors and should improve reliability while
> reducing weight. The system is identical in concept to all automotive
> starts, but a redundant way to shut off the starter is still there with
the
> master switch.
>
> 3. Eliminate the alternator switch entirely. The alternator will be
> powered directly from the main bus through a pullable circuit breaker.
The
> breaker can be used to shut off the alternator if the need arises, but
> normally the alternator will be powered all the time the master is on. I
> see no need for a switch - in 25 years of flying the only time I've turned
> the alternator off is when on the ground using the battery to power things
> for diagnostic purposes.
>
> I think by incorporating all three of these ideas a considerable reduction
> in wiring complexity can be realized and I see no downside. Any opinions
> out there?
>
> Gary Casey
> Lancair ES
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "McFarland, Randy" <Randy.McFarland(at)novellus.com> |
| Subject: | Warning light on SD-8 installation |
Could we not feed the 504-1 module with power from both the Main and
Essential busses? When the Main Alternator failed the light would come on
because the E Buss switch would be open so power would be lost to both
busses momentarily, and then go off when the E Buss switch is closed
providing 12v again to the 504 module?
Randy
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Warning light on SD-8 installation
> Hi Bob, I'm buying parts for elec on a budget system. I'v ordered the
> B&C SD-8 with the 504-1 OV module. My question is: if I use a switch for
> the AUX alt and have it off - will the yellow light with the 504-1 be on
> all the time? If I understand the electrical schematic, I would only
> switch the Aux alt on when I had a failure of the primary alt. How do I
> handle this situation? Any suggestions would be appreciated.
> Thanks. P.S. I have your book and practically sleep with it. My wife
> will be glad when I'm finished with the electrical system. Terry Dilley.
Your analysis is correct. The "ALT OFF" light would be
illuminated any time the aux alternator was off . . .
whether due to OV trip -OR- switch in the OFF position.
The light is suggested only for situations where the
SD-8 is the primary alternator like Figure Z-16. Note
that I do not show this light on Figure Z-13 where
the SD-8 is a stand-by alternator and the airplane
is likely to be fitted with voltmeters and/or low-voltage
warning lights.
I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
share the information with as many folks as possible.
A further benefit can be realized with membership on
the list. There are lots of technically capable folks
on the list who can offer suggestions too. You can
join at . . .
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
Thanks!
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------
( Knowing about a thing is different than )
( understanding it. One can know a lot )
( and still understand nothing. )
( C.F. Kettering )
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bobby Hester" <bhester(at)hopkinsville.net> |
| Subject: | Re: strobe control box mount |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Margaret and Truman Sager <sag6267(at)otherside.com>
> To:
> Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:55 (CDT)
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: strobe control box mount
>
>
>
> Any ideas out there on the mounting design for the strobe control box in
> a RV-7? I cannot find any info in archive.
>
> Truman Sager
> wiring wings on QB
>
You can see how I did it here:
http://members.hopkinsville.net/bhester/FuseAssyPg4.htm
-------
Surfing the web from Hopkinsville, KY
RV7A web site: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Locking female fast on source needed |
Listers,
I recently purchased several Bosch (automotive style) relays and the
related sockets for my RV-8A flap circuit. I purchased these items from
Waytek Wire. Nice folks with brand name stuff at good prices. The sockets
for these relays use a variant of the common 1/4" female fast ons. These
are open barrel, rather than PIDG items. They also have a locking tang, to
secure the connector into the socket body. Anyone familiar with automotive
connectors has seen these.
My question is, I need to find a part number and source for these
connectors designed for 22/18 AWG wire. Waytek has these connectors
for 16/14 AWG, but not for the 22/18 AWG. I know that these things are
actually quite common. I've tried finding them in Allied Electronics paper
catalog and their web site. However, I don't know the manufacturer or the
proper terminology these items are known by. Because of this, I have not
been able to locate what I need. Can anyone help?
The relay sockets and connectors can be seen here:
http://order.waytekwire.com/IMAGES/M37/catalog/216_54
I'm using the #75280 style sockets. These are modular. You can stack them
together. The connectors are part # 31073, also seen on the above web page.
Charlie Kuss
RV-8A cockpit wiring & systems
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: strobe control box mount |
FWIW...
http://images.rvproject.com/images/2003/20030611_strobe_power_supply.jpg
I installed it right behind F-706, bolted to two "Z brackets" that rivet to
the belly skin.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Margaret and Truman Sager" <sag6267(at)otherside.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: strobe control box mount
>
> Any ideas out there on the mounting design for the strobe control box
in
> a RV-7? I cannot find any info in archive.
>
> Truman Sager
> wiring wings on QB
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tammy and Mike Salzman <arrow54t(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Locking female fast on source needed |
Charlie,
I am also using the waytek wire supplied relays and sockets. I ended
up using the connectors on as small as 22 AWG wire. I used the manual
crimp tool. I soldered the wire after crimping. If you don't want to
solder, then just strip your wire a little longer then double it over
in the connector before crimping. This will make the connector "think"
it has a larger diameter wire inside.
Mike Salzman
Fairfield, CA
LNCE
--- Charlie Kuss wrote:
> My question is, I need to find a part number and source for these
> connectors designed for 22/18 AWG wire. Waytek has these connectors
> for 16/14 AWG, but not for the 22/18 AWG.
...
> I'm using the #75280 style sockets. These are modular. You can stack
> them
> together. The connectors are part # 31073, also seen on the above web
> page.
> Charlie Kuss
> RV-8A cockpit wiring & systems
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: [FlyRotary] Re: Joining thermocouple extension |
leads
Bob or anyone, any comments on "how to join/extend" theromcouple wires so
they run to a computer input? The first response was "silver solder". Then
the e-mail below came next, suggesting crimping and using a connector for
maintenance disconnect purposes.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Al Gietzen" <ALVentures(at)cox.net>
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Joining thermocouple extension leads
Subject: [FlyRotary] Joining thermocouple extension leads
Whats the best way to join thermocouple wire to the extension wire?
John
Crimp! If you want to have a disconnect, and it is in the engine
compartment (or somewhere where the temp is somewhat different than at the
data module) use the appropriate connector plug from Omega.
And maybe others can back me up on getting Tracy to go to a crimp pin D-sub
at the EM2 25-pin plug rather than the solder-socket. I found soldering TC
wire to the pins is a real challenge (even needed some additional flux, and
now I worry about corrosion); and soldering those materials doesn't really
form a bond anyway (no eutectic as with copper or silver), just a mechanical
bond.
Al
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuse Holders and Bus diodes |
>
>
>Just a quick clarification question...
>
>I have the B&C fuse holders in my RV connected by the recomeded diode. The
>diode is bolted to an aluminum bulkhead. B&C states to not use more that 15
>amps per fuse slot.
The fuse holders are RATED by the manufacturer for up to
30A continuous. I de-rate them for my designs down to 15A
continuous. Do you have any accessories that draw more than
10A continuous?
> Will I be okay running say 30 to 40 amps total? through
>one fuse block whith no single fuse larger than 15 amps?
Total rating for the 20 slot fuse holder is over 100 amps.
The largest full-up running load I've calculated for an
IFR ship running pitot heat is 27A . . . These fuseholders
are quite adequate to the task.
> And second what is
>the rating for the diode that connects the busses when it is bolted to a
>large aluminum heat sink and should it be attached with any speical adhesive
>to promote heat transfer and increase it's current rating.
Any diode rectifier in this package is good for 25A minimum. The
E-bus loads in Figure Z-11 should be under 5A or so . . . if
you have a standby alternator like Z-13, then you can run an
e-bus of 10A continuous. These rectifiers will handle 10A
nicely when bolted to an aluminum surface.
> AND FINALLY...
>would it help the current rating to hook up two legs of the diode to use two
>diodes instead of one?
Not really . . . there are some tiny advantages including a slightly
lower voltage drop . . . but the ratings for any single diode
should be most adequate.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fw: [FlyRotary] Re: Joining thermocouple extension |
leads
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
The very niftiest method for joing thermocouples is to weld them....
However,
the welders I have seen are all very expensive when doing only a few
connections.
That said, if you need to make a splice in a location where it would be most
convenient to have a service disconnect, then by all means, a dedicated
Omega connector is a good (if bulky option). Even a dsub connector will
join thermocouples adequately. The downside is that these introduce more
failure modes, not to mention expense.
Silver solder is a good option. It is light weight, not particularly
difficult to
accomplish, and is relatively robust.
Regards,
Matt-
VE N34RD, C150 N714BK
>
>
> Bob or anyone, any comments on "how to join/extend" theromcouple wires
> so they run to a computer input? The first response was "silver
> solder". Then the e-mail below came next, suggesting crimping and using
> a connector for maintenance disconnect purposes.
>
> David
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Al Gietzen" <ALVentures(at)cox.net>
> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft"
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Joining thermocouple extension leads
>
>
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Joining thermocouple extension leads
>
>
> Whats the best way to join thermocouple wire to the extension wire?
>
> John
>
>
> Crimp! If you want to have a disconnect, and it is in the engine
> compartment (or somewhere where the temp is somewhat different than at
> the data module) use the appropriate connector plug from Omega.
>
>
> And maybe others can back me up on getting Tracy to go to a crimp pin
> D-sub at the EM2 25-pin plug rather than the solder-socket. I found
> soldering TC wire to the pins is a real challenge (even needed some
> additional flux, and now I worry about corrosion); and soldering those
> materials doesn't really form a bond anyway (no eutectic as with copper
> or silver), just a mechanical bond.
>
>
> Al
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: [FlyRotary] Re: Joining thermocouple extension |
leads
Personally I recommend using crimp connections, much easier than getting the
thermocouple wires to take the silver solder.
Regards,
Trampas
www.sterntech.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of David
Carter
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fw: [FlyRotary] Re: Joining thermocouple
extension leads
Bob or anyone, any comments on "how to join/extend" theromcouple wires so
they run to a computer input? The first response was "silver solder". Then
the e-mail below came next, suggesting crimping and using a connector for
maintenance disconnect purposes.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Al Gietzen" <ALVentures(at)cox.net>
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Joining thermocouple extension leads
Subject: [FlyRotary] Joining thermocouple extension leads
Whats the best way to join thermocouple wire to the extension wire?
John
Crimp! If you want to have a disconnect, and it is in the engine
compartment (or somewhere where the temp is somewhat different than at the
data module) use the appropriate connector plug from Omega.
And maybe others can back me up on getting Tracy to go to a crimp pin D-sub
at the EM2 25-pin plug rather than the solder-socket. I found soldering TC
wire to the pins is a real challenge (even needed some additional flux, and
now I worry about corrosion); and soldering those materials doesn't really
form a bond anyway (no eutectic as with copper or silver), just a mechanical
bond.
Al
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Simplified Z-13 elec sys- eliminate starter contactor |
& PM Alternator switch
Gary,
I'm looking at Z-13 as I compose this e-mail.
Alternator Switch issue:
My plan is to eliminate the "field controlled alternator shown to right of
Z-13 and only use a John Deere PM alternator in place of the SD-8 "dynamo"
shown in upper rt corner of Z-13. Now, the OVM (overvoltage module)'s relay
coil is part of an "always hot" battery bus. So, if I eliminate the (aux)
Alternator Off-On switch and just run the wire below the 5amp CB to gnd,
then the relay coils will run down my battery overnight. But, that can be
fixed by re-wiring that coil so it is NOT "always hot" but only gets power
from the PM alternator when it starts turning. (disconnect short wire from
bottom of contactor of OVM relay and re-connect to, e.g., the top of the
filter capacitor - main red output wire from PM alternator's Voltage
Regulator. And connect bottom of "(aux) alt cb") direct to gnd - & elim the
alt sw.) I think that is what you and I really want to do - no switch, no
voltage & current to close the OVM relay until PM alternator is putting out,
and use the OVM's "kill the OVM relay" cb as a switch if needed in an
emergency to stop electrical smoke.
Starter issue:
Again, I'm looking at Z-13 as I write this. There's a 2awg "fat wire" going
from "battery contactor" (a manual switch on your plane & mine) to "starter
contactor". Coils of the "starter contactor" are powered from the "push to
start sw", closing the main/big current contact and current flows to post on
solenoid on starter and a parallet tap goes to actuate the solenoid coil,
which closes and passes main current to the motor.
- I understand you want to eliminate the "starter contactor" and run
the 2awg "fat wire" direct to the "main juice post" on the solenoid, and
eliminate the parallel tap-off from that "same-post-to-the-solenoid-coils" -
rather, run the 20awg wire from push-to-start sw to the "solenoid's coil"
instead of the "starter contactor" which we just eliminated.
- Then if the starter "runs on", we turn off the manual battery switch
to kill power to the motor.
- Now, here are my questions about starters:
____- Is there a particular "name" for the type of starter shown in Z-13?
____- Is there a particular "name" for the type of starter that you would
use instead?
____- Or do we just wire any old starter differently so the solenoid coil's
juice comes from "push to start" and the "main juice" comes straight from
the battery master? (always hot, always protected with a fusible link or
some such)
____- I have lots of e-mails about Sky Tec starters, of which there are two
major different types (PM and not??) Then there are various auto starters
mentioned. So, are there any specific brands and models that you know will
work like you & I want it to?
David
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: OV protection for PM alternators |
Ken,
To do what you suggest, looks feasible to "transplant" the OVM relay,
module, and CB system from its current position in Z-13 to be between one
of the two wires showing between the SD-8 (John Deere in your case and mine)
and the VR. Seems like a fairly simple mod. Or, at least a fusible link
ought to be in that output line between PM Alt & VR so the "always spinning,
always outputting" PM alternator would have no place to "output" to.
A question: Why does it show two wires between the SD-8 and its VR? Will
the John Deere also have two wires, or just one? I think you and I have
Deere schematics but I can't lay my hand on mine (office is packed up for
painting walls).
David Carter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken" <klehman(at)albedo.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: OV protection for PM alternators on juliet
>
> All the Z diagrams show the overvoltage disconnect relay wired to the
> output of the voltage regulator on permanent magnet alternators. Given
> that the most likely cause of an over voltage is probably a regulator
> failure, wouldn't it make more sense to disconnect the input to the VR
> just in case the VR decided to overheat and make smoke? This would
> require a two pole relay to disconnect the AC input but that should not
> be a major problem since I was going to use a "40" amp rated automotive
> relay with my 20 amp John Deere VR and alternator. I'm assuming that the
> fusible link (actually a circuit breaker on my machine) would disconnect
> the VR from battery current in case the VR shorted - but that might be a
> bad assumption???
> Ken
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Malcolm Thomson" <mdthomson(at)attglobal.net> |
| Subject: | 220 Ohm Resistors? |
I believe I have seen that two 220 ohm resistors can be used in
conjunction with an LED to act as a OV light on the B&C LR3s. Can
someone help me with how 220 ohm was determined and why two of them?
Normally, I use a 600 ohm resistor in series with an LED to operate at
13.8V. (drop 12V at 20ma). What am I missing here?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "royt.or(at)netzero.com" <royt.or(at)NetZero.com> (by way of Matt Dralle <nospam(at)matronics.com>) |
| Subject: | RE: Wire terminals |
(by way of Matt Dralle )
Try
http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?9X358218#RCT-1
Stock #: RCT-1
OR
http://www.steinair.com/tools.htm
I have the tool from B & C which works great.
Regards,
Roy
N601RT: CH601HDS, nose gear, Rotax 912ULS, All electric, IFR equipped,
282hrs, 346 landings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jcrain2(at)juno.com" <jcrain2(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Quickie Electronics |
I am hearing slight alternator noise in my headsets. Sometimes they are garbled
plus transp. doesn't always get through. I feel I need to separate my
com/intercom from the master solenoid and feed off the battery. I have already
installed the noise filter after the master solenoid.
Also the mic key makes the wing leveler turn plus the fuel gauge pegs out. Is
there an extra shielded coax that works with the B and C connectors or should I
pull some off of an other larger coax to double shield?
I have just a "whip antenna" with a metal screen ground plane. Would the aluminum
"Flying W" be better than a dipole flat metal ribbon that "Spruce" advertises?
Bruce Crain
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rd2(at)evenlink.com |
| Subject: | Re: 220 Ohm Resistors? |
Hi Malcolm,
I haven't looked at the particular application you are referring to, but
the generic method is:
-LED is rated 3 V 20 ma (just an example, your LED's may be slightly
different, use your numbers)
-To connect the above LED to 13.8 V DC, you need a Voltage drop of 10.8 V
- R = V/A (Ohm's Law), in other words:
-Needed Voltage drop divided by current = resistance
-10.8 V divided by 0.02 A (20 mA) = 540 ohm resistor. For the above example
you need a 540 ohm resistor.
-Wattage of resistor should be = V x A (Voltage times current)
-V = 10.8 V (the Voltage drop the resistor carries)
-A = 20 mA (the current flowing through the resistor)
-Wattage = 10.8 x 0.02 = 0.216 Watt
So, for the above example it would be a 540 ohm 0.25 Watt resistor (0.25 W
is standard).
To be conservative I'd use a 0.5 W resistor (for better heat dissipation).
If you can't find the exact resistor and space allows, you can combine
resistors in parallel or series. Papallel (of equal values) halves the
resistance and doubles the wattage, in series resistances wattages are added.
Rumen
_____________________Original message __________________________
(received from Malcolm Thomson; Date: 08:17 PM 8/24/2004
-0600)
I believe I have seen that two 220 ohm resistors can be used in
conjunction with an LED to act as a OV light on the B&C LR3s. Can
someone help me with how 220 ohm was determined and why two of them?
Normally, I use a 600 ohm resistor in series with an LED to operate at
13.8V. (drop 12V at 20ma). What am I missing here?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Simplification |
There were a number of very good comments received - I appreciate them all:
Manual master switch -
<<(from Bob) How many parts are anticipated for the mechanical linkage to
the battery switch. Are these more (less) likely to fail than a
contactor?>>
I would hope it would be less likely to fail as the contactor requires a
continuous current to work - any open in coil will render it inoperative.
The manual switch could fail, probably by the linkage falling off - but the
failure mode is to stay where it was, not fail open. Then there is the
continuous current draw of the contactor, but who's counting milliamps?
<<(From Bob) Do you plan to have an alternate power path
to and endurance bus? How would failure of a battery contactor
affect the outcome of any particular mode of flight?>>
Yes, there will be a direct path from the battery through a switch to the
endurance bus as well as a diode feed from the main bus. I expect that an
IFR flight will be inconvenienced from a master failure, but I don't expect
a higher heart rate. Besides the primary Chelton PFD there will be a
complete vacuum-powered "6-pack" on the right side of the panel in addition
to the endurance bus.
"contactor-less" starter. There was another comment on this subject by a
builder and basically, his comments were correct. The main starter power
will be connected at the bus-side of the master switch. The solenoid power
will be fed through the main bus and a momentary-contact switch.
Eliminate the alternator switch entirely. There was a suggestion to mount
the breaker close to the master to make it intuitive. It brings up a good
question: With the alternator field power directly connected to the main
bus the alternator would be self-exited with the master off IF the stator
were connected to the main bus side of the master. So the no-switch idea
would only work if the alternator stator were wired to the BATTERY side of
the master. that's not such a good idea because if the stator developed a
short it could discharge the battery (BTDT). hmm. Considering Bob's
reminder of resale value, it just might push me back to a conventional
contactor and sequential master switch. Assuming the direct connection of
the stator through a fuse to the main bus side of the master contactor
what's to prevent that from pulling the system down (assuming the short
isn't enough to blow the fuse)? There is no way to manually disconnect the
stator from the main bus. Add a 60-amp pullable breaker? But that would
add several feet of thick wire and several electrical connections.
Thanks again, Bob, for all the excellent comments.
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "royt.or(at)netzero.com" <royt.or(at)NetZero.com> |
| Subject: | Garmin GPSMAP 295 for sale, $600 |
Im going to upgrade my GPSMAP 295 to a GPSMAP 296. I can get $600 trade in for
the 295. Id be happy to sell the 295 for $600 plus shipping.
This would include:
GPSMAP 295 Receiver
One Americas Highway basemap
Built-in Jeppesen Database
Yoke Mount
Dashboard mount
GA26 Low-Profile Antenna
PC Interface Cable
Cigarette Lighter Adapter
Carrying Case
User's Manual
Quick-Reference Guide
Garmin training video
Please let me know by Sunday 8/29 if you are interested in buying this.
Regards,
Roy
N601RT: CH601HDS, nose gear, Rotax 912ULS, All electric, IFR equipped,
283hrs, 349 landings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Brian LLoyd - airstarts |
On Aug 22, 2004, at 11:50 AM, Fergus Kyle wrote:
> How that would echo in NA was a mystery to me. The
> advantage was
> airborne weight I am told, but what is the weight cost of the air
> turbine
> starter (?) and the compressed air tank and piping? .....and hoiw
> would it
> compare to present fuel system starters?
I don't know what a fuel system starter is so I can't comment on that.
But as for the air starting system, an air distributor admits
compressed air directly to the cylinder that is just past TDC on its
power stroke. The engine literally turns itself over. There is no
"starter" as we know of it. Each cylinder has a port with a one-way
valve that is held closed by combustion pressure should the cylinder
already have fired.
So the weight of the system consists of some aluminum tubing, an air
tank made out of welded sheet metal (a couple of pounds), a compressor
to make more compressed air, an air distributor, and a solenoid valve.
Yes it is light and simple. The only real complexity is in the air
distributor but even that is pretty simple.
If anyone is contemplating building something, the Russian M14P engine
is a cheap source of 360hp. I paid under $10,000 for a first-run,
zero-time engine. (Less than 600 hrs TTE with an overhaul to new
tolerances.) You can't even get a good overhauled Lyc O-320 for that.
And a lot of the CJ6A guys are upgrading from the 285hp Chinese engine
to the M14P so there are good 285hp radials out there for around $5000.
The key point I am trying to make is that there are other ways to skin
the cat. Imagine how much simpler and lighter your wiring can be if
you never ask your electrical system to turn a starter.
And the radial engines make such a lovely sound when they pass by.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
August 14, 2004 - August 25, 2004
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-dk