AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-en
June 08, 2005 - June 21, 2005
I conducted a 500A test first crack out of the box
and got a lot of stinky smoke (new carbon pile
parts). Subsequent tests were less distasteful.
You DO want to let it cool between high current
tests. My $high$ tester has a built in fan, it
wouldn't be hard to add one to this guy but I suspect
most folks won't need it.
The only down side was when I reassembled it, the
1.5MM machine screws threaded into too-thin sheet
metal stripped out when the little battery powered
screwdriver I was using bottomed out the screws . . .
If that's the ONLY thing I can find to carp about,
then this device is a steal at $60. Between this
load tester and the CBA-II cap checker at:
http://westmountainradio.com/CBA_ham.htm
. . .you can have all the equipment you need to keep very
close tabs on not just the battery in your airplane
but all the batteries in your life.
Bob . . .
--
-- incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
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: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> |
Subject: | Re: Capacitance style fuel level sensor |
Why didn't you just use one of the existing $87 sensors that already does
all that stuff for you from Westach (go to the Wicks site and put in
"westach fuel" in the search box) and outputs a 0-5V signal giving the tank
level. Then you can read it on a 0-5V voltmeter installed in the panel.
Dave Morris
At 07:25 AM 6/8/2005, you wrote:
>
>Gang,
>
>I'm forwarding this message recently posted on the Lancair Mailing List.
>Please respond directly to him as well as this list (he isn't a subscriber
>although I've encouraged him).
>
> >>SNIP
>
>FROM:
>jeffreyb.peterson(at)gmail.com
>
>I extended the wing tanks on my 360 and took the opportunity to
>install a homebuilt capacitacne level sensor. I did this because the
>commercial sensors are expensive, too short and difficult to tread into
>the extended region of the tank. Mine is simple, just a length of 1/4 inch
>tubing with holes every six inches, and a wire thin teflon insulated wire
>suspeneded near the center. It has 133 pF capacitance empty and about
>twice that full.
>
>Now I need to build a circuit to read the capacitance and pass along the
>correct signal to some filght instrument computer. I have been told
>that these computer systems take a TTL square wave at about 3000 Hz, with
>a frequency carrying the level info, and that the computer gets
>programmed during setup with the empty and full levels. so, the precise
>frequency for empty or full is not critical. I breadboarded up a TLC555
>circuit today and it seemed stable.
>
>I have not chosen the computer. Mabye it will be EDM 900...or a
>Chelton screen...or whatever seems nice when I get around to the avionics.
>
>I hope the group can help by answering a few questions:
>
>-I am correct that these systems use a 3000 Hz TTL square wave?
>-Is there a published (or defacto) standard?
>-Can I buy the circuit I need?
>
>I would consider paying a few hundred, but considering that I have spent
>JUST $1.49 at radio shack so far, $1000 seems rather steep.
>
>Thanks.
>
>--
>Jeff Peterson
>
> >>SNIP
>
>Thanks for looking this over guys/gals.
>
>Mark & Lisa Sletten
>Legacy FG N828LM
>http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Z-19 vs. Z-14 |
>
> My preference is for the Z-13 architecture, but I'm pretty sure it was
>Bob N. himself who stated that the SD-8 MUST have a battery to excite it. It
>will not power up by itself.
Based on the regulator in service at the time. B&C may have
a new regulator that will take advantage of a PM alternator's
ability to come on line sans battery. I'll check with them . . .
> So what I have sort of settled on is the Z-13 plus the Z-30 additional
>battery (very small, say 4 amp) which does three things: It gives the SD-8
>something to lean on to get it started if need be, the small additional
>battery can be use to keep (full voltage) power on my Lightspeed ignition
>when starting, and if both the main alternator and the primary battery go
>offline, the 4 amp battery with the SD-8 is plenty to keep all the important
>systems (and then some) up and running as long as needed.
A logically considered game plan.
> My big "problem" with just one battery is not the RG battery's
>dependability in general, but the (very?) possible occurance of a broken
>terminal. I know that's a "full bucket" as Bob says, but a broken battery
>terminal definitely qualifies as a "single point of failure" which we are
>all using as our baseline in electrical design.
Sure . . . now, when doing the FMEA (failure modes effects analysis)
how do you construct your checklist and/or monitoring capabilities
to mitigate the failure? Let's review:
1. How many ways can a part fail?
2. How will each failure affect system operation?
3. How will I know it failed in flight?
4. Is the failure preflight detectable?
5. Is failure of this part, in any failure mode, likely to create
a hazard to flight?
6. Will failure of this part be likely to overtax my piloting
skills for comfortably terminating the flight?
> I've seen some posters go a bit further and worry about scenarios of
>multiple failures, but the probabability of any more than one critical
>failure in a single flight is in the nth degree of possibility.
Correct.
> If I lose my
>main battery, my main alternator goes over voltage, the SD-8 won't start, I
>start to smell smoke, and my one mag on the other side fails, and all this
>happens exactly while I'm flying on top a mountain range, then I'm simply
>going to assume that I have gotten a personal invitation from God to meet
>Him face to face which will allow me to enjoy the ride down :-)
This only happens in the movies with John Wayne at the controls
and he sits at the right hand of . . . oh well.
> In the end, I'd be just as confident to fly with the Z-19 design as much
>as the Z-13 + Z-30 design. While Z-19 is cheaper, it's a lot more weight
>that I won't need in my RV7-A.
> I'm not totally decided yet being that I won't have to start installing
>a chosen system until later this Fall, but Z-13 + Z30 looks good to me. Now
>if Bob would only add the Z-30 extra battery to the Z-13/SD-8 drawing and
>show it as one sheet...
I'll leave this up to you. The more I specialize the base drawings,
the more it begins to look like I am recommending this architecture
as "THE way to go" . . .
I'd much rather have you spill all the Tinker-Toys out on the
carpet, ponder each as to its utility (and liability) and assemble
them together in satisfaction of your FMEA. I had a gentleman at
the last seminar write to express his dis-satisfaction with the
program . . . too many "side trips" and not enough attention to
telling him how to put his airplane together. He was not charged
for the tuition. My mission is to illuminate and explain the Tinker-Toys
and offer examples of how they're used and then assist in crafting
a system based on your understanding, not my recommendations.
What goes on here on the List is NOT for the average OBAM aircraft
builder. I'd like to believe all of you will get many hours of
enjoyment from your finished project with the electrical system
being at the very bottom of the worry bucket. The majority of
builders will be better served by duplicating the work in an
issue of Firewall Forward or buying Van's kit for installation
as-supplied.
> This is a great discussion, so let's not be afraid to keep it going. I'm
>betting there's lot's of people wondering the same things.
Vern, your post illustrates most adequately the level of
understanding you've achieved and bodes well for what you'll
accomplish by the time your project is done. This is
an evolutionary process that often begins with wild swings
in concepts but as understanding is gained, the swings dampen
out and you begin to focus on what's really needed to satisfy
your design goals.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Capacitance style fuel level sensor |
>
>Gang,
>
>I'm forwarding this message recently posted on the Lancair Mailing List.
>Please respond directly to him as well as this list (he isn't a subscriber
>although I've encouraged him).
>
> >>SNIP
>
>FROM:
>jeffreyb.peterson(at)gmail.com
>
>I extended the wing tanks on my 360 and took the opportunity to
>install a homebuilt capacitacne level sensor. I did this because the
>commercial sensors are expensive, too short and difficult to tread into
>the extended region of the tank. Mine is simple, just a length of 1/4 inch
>tubing with holes every six inches, and a wire thin teflon insulated wire
>suspeneded near the center. It has 133 pF capacitance empty and about
>twice that full.
>
>Now I need to build a circuit to read the capacitance and pass along the
>correct signal to some filght instrument computer. I have been told
>that these computer systems take a TTL square wave at about 3000 Hz, with
>a frequency carrying the level info, and that the computer gets
>programmed during setup with the empty and full levels. so, the precise
>frequency for empty or full is not critical. I breadboarded up a TLC555
>circuit today and it seemed stable.
>
>I have not chosen the computer. Mabye it will be EDM 900...or a
>Chelton screen...or whatever seems nice when I get around to the avionics.
>
>I hope the group can help by answering a few questions:
>
>-I am correct that these systems use a 3000 Hz TTL square wave?
No. you can use any freqency you like
>-Is there a published (or defacto) standard?
No.
>-Can I buy the circuit I need?
Probably not but you can build it. See;
http://www.rst-engr.com/kitplanes/KP0006/KP0006.htm
http://www.rst-engr.com/kitplanes/KP0007/KP0007.htm
http://www.rst-engr.com/kitplanes/KP0008/KP0008.htm
I don't know that Jim's design is the elegant solution
but it's a solid discussion on the fundamentals.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Paul Folbrecht <paulfolbrecht(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: Z-19 vs. Z-14) |
Vern W. wrote:
>
> My preference is for the Z-13 architecture, but I'm pretty sure it was
>Bob N. himself who stated that the SD-8 MUST have a battery to excite it. It
>will not power up by itself.
> So what I have sort of settled on is the Z-13 plus the Z-30 additional
>battery (very small, say 4 amp) which does three things: It gives the SD-8
>something to lean on to get it started if need be, the small additional
>battery can be use to keep (full voltage) power on my Lightspeed ignition
>when starting, and if both the main alternator and the primary battery go
>offline, the 4 amp battery with the SD-8 is plenty to keep all the important
>systems (and then some) up and running as long as needed.
> My big "problem" with just one battery is not the RG battery's
>dependability in general, but the (very?) possible occurance of a broken
>terminal. I know that's a "full bucket" as Bob says, but a broken battery
>terminal definitely qualifies as a "single point of failure" which we are
>all using as our baseline in electrical design.
>
>
How about two batts *in parallel*? That is, straight Z-13 with no Z-30
circuit but with two identical batts wired parallel. Eliminates the
terminal concern and an open cell as well. But this doesn't seem to be
a popular configuration. At least not from a search of the archives.
What am I missing? A shorted cell would still be disastrous but that is
far less likely and could be gotten around too. If I'm missing nothing
with this idea, than Z-13 with the SD-8 is what I'll do.
> I've seen some posters go a bit further and worry about scenarios of
>multiple failures, but the probabability of any more than one critical
>failure in a single flight is in the nth degree of possibility. If I lose my
>main battery, my main alternator goes over voltage, the SD-8 won't start, I
>start to smell smoke, and my one mag on the other side fails, and all this
>happens exactly while I'm flying on top a mountain range, then I'm simply
>going to assume that I have gotten a personal invitation from God to meet
>Him face to face which will allow me to enjoy the ride down :-)
>
>
I made a similar comment in response to Bob earlier in this thread. :->
Can't fight the big guy if he's got your number!
> In the end, I'd be just as confident to fly with the Z-19 design as much
>as the Z-13 + Z-30 design. While Z-19 is cheaper, it's a lot more weight
>that I won't need in my RV7-A.
> I'm not totally decided yet being that I won't have to start installing
>a chosen system until later this Fall, but Z-13 + Z30 looks good to me. Now
>if Bob would only add the Z-30 extra battery to the Z-13/SD-8 drawing and
>show it as one sheet...
>
> This is a great discussion, so let's not be afraid to keep it going. I'm
>betting there's lot's of people wondering the same things.
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
Subject: | Re: Intercom Wiring |
Guy, the Sigtronics instructions are not particularly clear.
Using two-wire shielded cable, with the shields grounded to a single
point ('A') at the intercom end, wire in these three signals. In each
cable, use one wire for signal (both ends), one wire for signal ground
(both ends) and the shield (intercom end only). You could get away with
not shielding the RADIO MIC KEY signal if it's short, or using 3-wire
cable and running it with the MIC cable. You may also need a series
resistor in the HEADPHONE AUDIO line (510 ohms or so), depending on the
radio characteristics (obscure Sigtronics app note).
Have a look at the Vx Aviation website http://www3.telus.net/aviation/vx
. At the top is the AMX-1A Sigtronics Audio Bus wiring device. If you
open the .pdf datasheet for this, there are schematics in the back of
the document that is pretty descriptive on how to wire everything up,
even if you don't use the AMX-1A
The AMX-1A will also solve the 'forest of tabs' problems on the panel,
plus provides four of the ten channels with series resistors, and one
channel with a volume control (to support future Dynon audio warnings).
Vern Little
RV-9A
Guy Buchanan wrote:
>
>All,
> I'm attaching an Icom A200 VHF to a Sigtronics ST-400 intercom.
>The Sigtronics instructions say to connect three wires to the "MIC AUDIO",
>"RADIO MIC KEY", and "HEADPHONE AUDIO" pins of the "Aircraft Radio".
>Another set of Sigtronics installation instructions, for the SPA-400,
>specifically denotes the H, J, and 9 pins, respectively, of the A200 for
>these three functions. Does this mean I don't connect anything to the
>corresponding aircraft radio ground pins for these functions? Is the
>Sigtronics using the power ground as a return? Will this set up a ground loop?
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>
>Guy Buchanan
>K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99% done, thanks to Bob Ducar.
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: battery maintainer/load tester |
>
>
>oops... Should be:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/HF91129_2.jpg
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/HF91129_3.jpg
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/HF91129_4.jpg
>
>Dick Tasker
Hmmm . . . really hosed that one, didn't I? I've fixed
the links and reposted the note. Thanks Dick.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | battery maintainer |
From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Never did actually put a volmeter across it...I guess my batteries were
always pretty much charged...I.e got out the plane hooked up the
chargers and left.
Interesting the comment about reverting down to 13+ volts...I mean in
the car/plane the thing will run at 14.5V all the time...why the need
for the lower maintenance voltage?
I have one at home on a SLA I'll see what its doing.
Frank
-----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: battery maintainer
-->
(Corvallis)"
>
>
>Funny you should ask this because I did a similar experiment with a HF
>charger a few years ago.
>
>Firstly let me say the plug in charger works great, plug 'em in walk
>away.
Do you have data on how this charger performs? For a "maintainer"
we need a charge cycle that terminates somewhere above 14 - 14.5
volts that reverts to a maintenance level around 13 - 13.5 volts.
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/schumacher_2.jpg
Do you know if the device you tested does this? I had to
discount one HF "maintainer" because it wouldn't go to
the charge mode unless the battery to be charged was
severely discharged.
Snip . . .
>Concerning battery maintainers. Just got a sales paper from Harbor
>Freight, and they have one on sale for $5. The illustration showed a
>wall wart, followed by a black box (I'm assuming the regulator), then
>out to a couple of aligator clips.
I'll see if I can get one of these too and check it out.
> They also have the solar battery
>charger for $12. Since the solar charger is unregulated, I'm wondering
>about the feasibility of combining the two. Cut the walwart off the
>regulator and the end off the solar panels output lead. Connect the
>solar panel to the regulator. Remove the panel's housing and build it
>into a custom battery cover and mount the regulator's black box with a
>couple of ties to a longeron close to the battery. Cut the aligator
>clips, and solder on a couple of ring terminals. Now the system can be
>added inline with the battery contactor leads, and all but forgotten.
>
>Is it feasible? What sort of gotchas would I have to test for beyond
>insuring that it has enough capacity to maintain the battery in
>moderate lighting?
Don't know. Let's find out. On the way home from Apex, I
crafted a DIY maintainer controller. I'll add the drawing
to the battery maintenance article as soon as I can get
around to it. I don't recommend that anyone build such a
device when they're dirt cheap to buy already working. I
think our best effort would research which products do
it right.
Thanks for your feedback.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Vern W." <vernw(at)ev1.net> |
Subject: | Re: Z-19 vs. Z-14 |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Z-19 vs. Z-14
>
>
> >
> > My preference is for the Z-13 architecture, but I'm pretty sure it
was
> >Bob N. himself who stated that the SD-8 MUST have a battery to excite it.
It
> >will not power up by itself.
>
> Based on the regulator in service at the time. B&C may have
> a new regulator that will take advantage of a PM alternator's
> ability to come on line sans battery. I'll check with them . . .
>
Now THAT would be the answer I'm looking for, Bob, and if that's what
they've come up with, there is no question that the Z-13 "as is" would be
more than I need to feel good about flying over the Rocky's at night :-)
Please let us know when you find something out.
Thanks,
Vern
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Z-19 vs. Z-14 |
>
>
>Hey! I resemble that comment! :->
You too Paul and (I hope) hundreds of others out of
over 1300 builders who monitor this list.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Vern W." <vernw(at)ev1.net> |
Subject: | Re: Z-19 vs. Z-14) |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Folbrecht" <paulfolbrecht(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Z-13/Z-30/parallel batts (Was: Re: AeroElectric-List: Z-19 vs.
Z-14)
>
> Vern W. wrote:
>
> >
> > My preference is for the Z-13 architecture, but I'm pretty sure it
was
> >Bob N. himself who stated that the SD-8 MUST have a battery to excite it.
It
> >will not power up by itself.
> > So what I have sort of settled on is the Z-13 plus the Z-30
additional
> >battery (very small, say 4 amp) which does three things: It gives the
SD-8
> >something to lean on to get it started if need be, the small additional
> >battery can be use to keep (full voltage) power on my Lightspeed ignition
> >when starting, and if both the main alternator and the primary battery go
> >offline, the 4 amp battery with the SD-8 is plenty to keep all the
important
> >systems (and then some) up and running as long as needed.
> > My big "problem" with just one battery is not the RG battery's
> >dependability in general, but the (very?) possible occurance of a broken
> >terminal. I know that's a "full bucket" as Bob says, but a broken battery
> >terminal definitely qualifies as a "single point of failure" which we are
> >all using as our baseline in electrical design.
> >
> >
>
> How about two batts *in parallel*? That is, straight Z-13 with no Z-30
> circuit but with two identical batts wired parallel. Eliminates the
> terminal concern and an open cell as well. But this doesn't seem to be
> a popular configuration. At least not from a search of the archives.
> What am I missing? A shorted cell would still be disastrous but that is
> far less likely and could be gotten around too. If I'm missing nothing
> with this idea, than Z-13 with the SD-8 is what I'll do.
>
Two parallel batteries with two alternators ala Z-13 suggests to me that you
want to run all your systems off the one "set" of batteries unless I'm
misunderstanding something about running parallel batteries.
An isolated battery allows you more options for an essential bus to be
configured off of it, so if you truly must have two full size batteries plus
two alternators, then Z-14 is your answer.
My only reason for the second battery scenario (Z-13 + Z-30 "teeny" battery)
is not so much that I want a second battery per se, but that I want to be
able to get the SD-8 online which, at this point and until Bob finds out
different, would NEED that extra teeny battery to do that.
You probably have already seen Bob's response that he's checking to see if
B&C has managed to allow the SD-8 to come online with a particular type of
regulator and NOT need a battery to do so. If that is actually possible,
then my decision would be definitely made to go with the Z-13 architecture
as it is other than small decisions based on my particular panel
arrangement.
Vern
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ron Russell Voyager Travel <ron(at)voyagertravel.com> |
I have a Vans 60A alternator with an internal regulator. Engine has not run
yet.
Last night I had the master switch on for a few hours while testing the
wiring and I notices the front of the alternator was warm. Not hot but
warmer than room temp. Is this normal?
Ron Russell
RV6 close to flying
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Werner Schneider" <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
Subject: | Moving Battery and howto |
Dear all,
I woudl like to ask for your advice, my plane (a Glastar) is quite nose
heavy with the current setup the Battery is directly behind the copilot
seat. Now I would like to move it another 8-10 ft to get a better setup, the
question is, can I just get some additional cable and some kind of butt
splices to extend it further after? If yes, where can I get such splices for
AWG 2 cables?
Many thanks for your advice
Werner
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: Aerosport Alternator and Overvoltage - Request |
Re: Aerosport Alternator and Overvoltage - Request
>Aha! They're doing b-lead disconnect protection on internally
>regulated alternators . . . Wonder if they've tested their
>recommended disconnect relay in the output of a runaway
>alternator running at over 10,000 rpm?
Bob:
No, niagaraairparts.com does not do anything regarding an OV b-lead disconnect,
they only offer the OV module from Zeftronics as an option for those who want
it but don't recommend it.
I have talked to Niagara Airparts and they don't recommend it. The owner of the
company has had his Denso on his experimental aircraft for almost 10 years, with
no external protection or problems.
Cheers George
---------------------------------
Find restaurants, movies, travel & more fun for the weekend. Check it out!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Ronald J. Parigoris" <rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US> |
Hey Mr. Wayne
Is your printer in here and ordered?
later
8
"Eric M. Jones" wrote:
>
> Here is an approach to labeling panels in the airplane:
>
> Inkjet and LaserJet decals.
>
> http://www.decal-paper.com/index.html
>
> Throw a cartridge of fluorescent ink into your inkjet---
>
> http://www.ink4art.com/
>
> Add a UV led into your brow lighting and watch these babies glow.
>
> Regards,
> Eric M. Jones
> www.PerihelionDesign.com
> 113 Brentwood Drive
> Southbridge MA 01550-2705
> Phone (508) 764-2072
> Email: emjones(at)charter.net
>
> "Nothing is too wonderful to be true."
> James Clerk Maxwell, discoverer of electromagnetism
> "Too much of a good thing can be wonderful."
> Mae West, discoverer of personal magnetism
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: warm Alternator |
>
>
>I have a Vans 60A alternator with an internal regulator. Engine has not run
>yet.
>Last night I had the master switch on for a few hours while testing the
>wiring and I notices the front of the alternator was warm. Not hot but
>warmer than room temp. Is this normal?
sounds like you had the alternator ON or otherwise energized
without spinning it to produce power. During this time it will
draw something on the order of 2 to 3 amps (24 to 42 watts)
in the field circuit that produces no benefit and consumes
power thus producing the warming you've noted.
This is the reason for progressive transfer switches in the
Z-figures that allow battery-only operations without energizing
the alternator field. This is easily orchestrated with
externally regulated alternators but problematic with internal
machines where field control is a function of its design and
may or may not be externally controllable.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Aerosport Alternator and Overvoltage |
>
>
>Re: Aerosport Alternator and Overvoltage - Request
>
>
> >Aha! They're doing b-lead disconnect protection on internally
>
> >regulated alternators . . . Wonder if they've tested their
>
> >recommended disconnect relay in the output of a runaway
>
> >alternator running at over 10,000 rpm?
>
>
>Bob:
>
>
>No, niagaraairparts.com does not do anything regarding an OV b-lead
>disconnect, they only offer the OV module from Zeftronics as an option for
>those who want it but don't recommend it.
Understand . . . I was referring to Zeftronics' offering
of OV protection for internally regulated alternators.
>I have talked to Niagara Airparts and they don't recommend it. The owner
>of the company has had his Denso on his experimental aircraft for almost
>10 years, with no external protection or problems.
Yup, millions of cars go to the junk yards every year
with hundreds of thousands of miles on them never having
suffered an alternator failure. They are extremely
reliable and if that's good enough for anyone, by all means.
Van says the same thing and apparently that's good enough
for him to recommend whatever products he supplies to
his customers. But that's his business model.
My inquiry concerning the architecture will be directed
to Zeftronics, not Niagara Air Parts.
From an aircraft system designer's perspective, I have
no means at hand to CONTROL brand, model and field
modifications that apply to just any automotive alternator
one might select to install on their OBAM aircraft. Therefore,
I can offer no learned opinion as to suitability of any
specific part. Designs I offer include a hedge against
over voltage runaway. If I were offering an internally
regulated design to a certified ship, I'd have to either
(1) supply ov protection or (2) demonstrate and CONFIGURATION
MANAGE use of an alternator known to offer 10-to-the-minus-6th
failure rates (1 per million flight hours).
I note that Niagara Air Parts offers this alternator only
to the OBAM aircraft community and they DO offer the
OV protection kit from Zeftronics.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Moving Battery and howto |
>
>Dear all,
>
>I woudl like to ask for your advice, my plane (a Glastar) is quite nose
>heavy with the current setup the Battery is directly behind the copilot
>seat. Now I would like to move it another 8-10 ft to get a better setup, the
>question is, can I just get some additional cable and some kind of butt
>splices to extend it further after? If yes, where can I get such splices for
>AWG 2 cables?
You betcha . . . but they are bound to be crimp type
splices and will need the proper tool for installation.
You already have ring terminals crimped or soldered to
the battery end of the cables . . . crimp or solder terminals
to your extension cables and BOLT them together as a splice.
If you can find some double-walled, super-heat shrink to
encapsulate the joints, fine. Otherwise, two or three layers
of plain-vanilla heat shrink will do.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Moving Battery and howto |
From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
My friendly local electrician has splices for this size of wire and a
crimper...I crimped all mine and then flowed some solder in the joint
for good measure...Would this be an OK appraoch?
Frank
-----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: Moving Battery and howto
-->
>-->
>
>Dear all,
>
>I woudl like to ask for your advice, my plane (a Glastar) is quite nose
>heavy with the current setup the Battery is directly behind the copilot
>seat. Now I would like to move it another 8-10 ft to get a better
>setup, the question is, can I just get some additional cable and some
>kind of butt splices to extend it further after? If yes, where can I
>get such splices for AWG 2 cables?
You betcha . . . but they are bound to be crimp type
splices and will need the proper tool for installation.
You already have ring terminals crimped or soldered to
the battery end of the cables . . . crimp or solder terminals
to your extension cables and BOLT them together as a splice.
If you can find some double-walled, super-heat shrink to
encapsulate the joints, fine. Otherwise, two or three layers
of plain-vanilla heat shrink will do.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Paul Wilson <pwilson(at)climber.org> |
Subject: | Re: battery maintainer More |
I have an "automatic 1.5 amp Schumacher SE-1-12S" I use all the time for
various batteries, tractor, un-used truck etc. This unit is stocked a the
local battery store so is readily available. I think I got mine at Walmart
years ago. With all the discussion I decided to see how it works. I put it
on a yellow Optima which is a deep cycle spiral glass matt 750 cca, 55AH.
Too big for a plane but a good choice for a car/truck. Weighs 46 pounds.
I just clock watched to see what the volts were.
initial 12.38 after sitting for 6 months
1 minute 12.94
2 minutes 13.45
1 hour 12.76
3 hours 12.67
22 hours 12.68
Don't know how high it got.
To lazy to do the same test on my small lawn tractor battery (similar to
a light plane battery). It is a glass matt with 340 cca, ?AH and after a
being plugged in for a week I remember the volts were around 12.6.
The charger sells for $42 to $27 on the net, locally for $28.95.
Seems like it wont hurt a battery if left plugged in for long periods. It
comes with a bracket to mount under the hood of a car and had bolted
eyelets. A portable version with clips is SE1562A sells for an extra $4
locally.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Larry E. James" <larry(at)ncproto.com> |
Subject: | choosing which loads go on the Main Buss and E-Buss |
SpamAssassin (score=-2.561, required 4, autolearn=not spam, AWL 0.04,
BAYES_00 -2.60)
New conundrum. I'm building my load spreadsheet and seeing
that a lot of pilot choice and procedure enters into the
decision of where to route certain loads (pieces of
equipment). Where I'm currently headed is to minimize the
equipment on the Battery Buss (because it is always on) and
limit the E-Buss equipment to first 8 amps and second just
what is necessary to get me down. Everything else goes on
the Main Buss. Sounds simple, but in the few examples of
other's Load Analysis I have seen; different thinking is
evident. What's up ?? Can I get some direction ??
as always, thanks
--
Larry E. James
Bellevue, WA Harmon Rocket
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Larry E. James" <larry(at)ncproto.com> |
BAYES_00 -2.60)
>>>That's exactly where I got to Larry except I really
don't believe a
>>>battery will fail...I mean maybe short a cell or go open
circuit...In
>>>that case the primary alt will continue to run the ships
power.
>>>
>>>Like you the sd-8 (infinite flying time) vs a hunking
great weight of
>>>lead (some limited flying time) was a no brainer.
>>>
>>>My only issue is will an SD-8 keep up with an electric
fuel pump us I
>>>have no mechanical pump?...Really must get around to
measuring the draw
>>>one of these days..
>>>
>>>In my current plane I have a home grown version of the
dual batt set
>>>up...More than once I have come back to the hanger with
dead batteries,
>>>due mainly to the hangar power supply going off and not
charging the
>>>batts...I.e how do you KNOW how much flying time you got
in those
>>>batteries.
>>>
>>>After 5 years I found this to be an ongoing
problem...Unless one
>>>actually changes out the batteries yearly of course
which I have not.
>>>
>>>Frank
>>>Corvallis Oregon, RV7A
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Z-19 vs. Z-14
SpamAssassin (score=-2.56,
>required 4, AWL 0.04, BAYES_00 -2.60)
>
>
>Now I am confused b/c in searching the archive doing my
research I came across
>a thread that specifically stated that the SD-8 MUST in
fact have a batt online
>to get excited. If what you say is true I would also
consider a 2nd batt
>totally unnecessary.
>Paul
To Frank, I agree, and your experience seems to show the
wisdom in changing out the battery regularly. I'm planning
on replacing the battery at each annual. A bit overkill,
but cheap assurance. I also have gathered from this list
and Bill himself at B&C that an open battery failure is
highly unlikely. Using Bob's language, this is a very small
drop in my worry bucket ..... but it's nice to have it
covered with little or no compromise.
To Paul, I also heard this; but heard straight from the guy
that designed and builds the SD-8 that it does produce power
in the event of an open battery. Please someone step in
here: I am likely to mis-understand what I'm told by my lack
of knowledge / experience with this ..... so am open to
correction. And if I am mistaken, I would not blame Bill
...... I would blame my processing :-)
BTW, I met Bill this last weekend. What a genuinely great
person. I am pleased to have spent some time with him and
proud to be using his products. Truly a neat and
knowledgable person.
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Subject: | Re: Capacitance style fuel level sensor |
Before using Jim Weir's method---check the new ICs:
http://www.analog.com/en/prod/0,2877,AD7745,00.html
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
"Hey, it isn't rocket surgery!"
--anonymous
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Moving Battery and howto |
>
>
>My friendly local electrician has splices for this size of wire and a
>crimper...I crimped all mine and then flowed some solder in the joint
>for good measure...Would this be an OK appraoch?
Sure . . . if the tool is the right one for the terminals,
solder adds nothing of value to the joint.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Aerosport Alternator and Overvoltage |
>
>I can add a single point of data. I have a 40A Denso from Niagara.
>I have taken it to no load several times, both inadvertently and
>vertently. Not knowing any better, I just wanted to see if pulling
>the B lead circuit breaker would shut it down. What the hay, we are
>experimenters ain't we?? It did, and nothing else happened that I
>know of. I have also shut it down in flight several times using the
>alternator switch which is feeding the 12V to the alternator
>(regulator). This line goes by several names, but it is not field
>current; but it can be used for turn the alternator on and off, which
>I do every flight.
I have to believe that any manufacturer worth their
salt would show that their product can withstand a
load dump.
The experiences cited by Vans customers with respect
to loss of alternators when switched off while under
load gives rise to a suspicion that the alternators in
question were not the best combination of altenrator/
regulator the industustry knows how to produce.
>Consequently I am using Bob's (discontinued, I believe) OV module
>with the contactor on the B lead (and on the 12V line to the
>regulator) for (additional) OV protection.
The OVM-14 crowbar ov module is still very much in production
and one solution to adding ov protection to alternator systems
that will accommodate the builder's design goals. It's sold
by B&C and illustrated in several of the Z-figures.
What has been discontinued is the 'Connection's recommendations
for incorporating ov protection using a b-lead contactor in
conjunction with the ov module for lack of data on various
alternator characteristics and lack of b-lead contactor KNOWN
to open reliably while the supply voltage being disconnected
is rising rapidly for the moon.
>Being a belt and suspender fellow, and stubborn by nature I also have
>Bob's low volts warning flasher mounted in line with my nose.
This is not a belt-n-suspenders item but ONE of THREE items
recommended in EVERY power generation control system irrespective
of type: (1) Regulator, (2) ov protection, (3) active notification of
low voltage.
>I love my 40A Denso, and know many (virtually all of Bart's
>customers) who have one. Have heard of only one failure at about 700
>hours, which may be related to vibration. If so it would be
>compelling evidence that B&Cs version is worth the extra bucks just
>for the balancing. But I wish they would retain that internal
>regulator to save a couple hundred bucks. It has passed my tests so
>far, and its charging volts seems to be just right.
>
>WARNING: This Denso is not the same as the one Van's sells! It looks
>a lot like it but Van's 60A model is rebuilt with a much much
>different internal regulator in it. The one Niagara sells, and its
>deluxe brethern from B&C is brand new and has later technology.
>
>I repeat the introductory remark. This is a single point of data.
>Not recommending any one else perform my test! Especially don't do
>it if you have a Van's 60A alternator!
>
>I also have a radio master switch and a Cessna split master switch
>but have renamed them because I hate to admit that I use them. I
>like them and they have advantages which I feel outweigh the risks of
>having them. Other than these minor flaws in my thinking I am a firm
>disciple of Bob N's.
Good information sir. Thank you for sharing.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Capacitance style fuel level sensor |
>
>
>Before using Jim Weir's method---check the new ICs:
>http://www.analog.com/en/prod/0,2877,AD7745,00.html
Cool chip. Thanks for the heads-up!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Z-19 vs. Z-14 |
>
>To Frank, I agree, and your experience seems to show the
>wisdom in changing out the battery regularly. I'm planning
>on replacing the battery at each annual. A bit overkill,
>but cheap assurance. I also have gathered from this list
>and Bill himself at B&C that an open battery failure is
>highly unlikely. Using Bob's language, this is a very small
>drop in my worry bucket ..... but it's nice to have it
>covered with little or no compromise.
>
>To Paul, I also heard this; but heard straight from the guy
>that designed and builds the SD-8 that it does produce power
>in the event of an open battery.
To the best of my knowledge, the SD-8 would always run
with battery disconnected IF a battery were present to
get it started. The question we need to get an answer
to is "Will the SD-8 START UP and run regulated with no
battery and ONLY a filter capacitor across its output
terminals?"
The original regulator would not offer this capability
but I don't know that they're still using the same
regulator. I'll find out.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "DonVS" <dsvs(at)comcast.net> |
Bob,
Now that you have found and recommend a cap tester and a separate load
tester, how about a short article on what to test, how often to test and any
other pertinent info you feel would be of help. This way we would all be on
the same page with this equipment. Thanks. Don
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Charlie Kuss <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> |
Subject: | Re: Capacitance style fuel level sensor |
Eric
Do I understand this correctly? It appears that your recommendation is a
"single chip" solution to this problem. Might you consider producing these
and selling them?? I need two of them for my "Vans" capacitance senders.
Charlie Kuss
>
>
>Before using Jim Weir's method---check the new ICs:
>http://www.analog.com/en/prod/0,2877,AD7745,00.html
>
>Regards,
>Eric M. Jones
>www.PerihelionDesign.com
>113 Brentwood Drive
>Southbridge MA 01550-2705
>Phone (508) 764-2072
>Email: emjones(at)charter.net
>
>"Hey, it isn't rocket surgery!"
>--anonymous
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Guy Buchanan <bnn(at)nethere.com> |
Subject: | Re: Intercom Wiring |
At 06:48 AM 6/8/2005, you wrote:
>
>Guy, the Sigtronics instructions are not particularly clear.
>
>Using two-wire shielded cable, with the shields grounded to a single
>point ('A') at the intercom end, wire in these three signals. In each
>cable, use one wire for signal (both ends), one wire for signal ground
>(both ends) and the shield (intercom end only).
Hmmmm. This leads me to think I might have wired the headphone and mic
jacks incorrectly. I used two conductor shielded for the headphones, with
ring and tip in the conductors, and shield from barrel to 'A'. Should I
have used three conductor shielded and not grounded the shield at both
ends? Is that the same for the mic? Should I have used two conductor
shielded for the mic, instead of one conductor shielded?
Thanks Vern.
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99% done, thanks to Bob Ducar.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
Subject: | Re: Capacitance style fuel level sensor |
This is a great part but is intended for use with silicon capacitance
sensors (e.g. silicon capacitance pressure sensor) and as such works
with very low capacitances. The capacitance fuel level sensors are
typically 1-2 orders of magnitude greater than what this chip will work
with (80-150pf empty to full for the fuel sensor vs 4 pf for the AD7745).
We may be using this for our new low (ultra low) pressure sensor, but it
is not suitable for the typical fuel sensors.
Dick Tasker
Eric M. Jones wrote:
>
>
>Before using Jim Weir's method---check the new ICs:
>http://www.analog.com/en/prod/0,2877,AD7745,00.html
>
>Regards,
>Eric M. Jones
>www.PerihelionDesign.com
>113 Brentwood Drive
>Southbridge MA 01550-2705
>Phone (508) 764-2072
>Email: emjones(at)charter.net
>
>"Hey, it isn't rocket surgery!"
>--anonymous
>
>
>
>
--
----
Please Note:
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however,
that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced.
----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Werner Schneider" <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
Subject: | Re: Moving Battery and howto |
Should have thought about bolting before; as I reduce the cross section here
I might expect some warming up of the connection during starting I guess,
but I will follow this easiest route and butt splice just the battery-bus
items.
Many thanks for the advice!
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Moving Battery and howto
>
>
> >
> >Dear all,
> >
> >I woudl like to ask for your advice, my plane (a Glastar) is quite nose
> >heavy with the current setup the Battery is directly behind the copilot
> >seat. Now I would like to move it another 8-10 ft to get a better setup,
the
> >question is, can I just get some additional cable and some kind of butt
> >splices to extend it further after? If yes, where can I get such splices
for
> >AWG 2 cables?
>
> You betcha . . . but they are bound to be crimp type
> splices and will need the proper tool for installation.
> You already have ring terminals crimped or soldered to
> the battery end of the cables . . . crimp or solder terminals
> to your extension cables and BOLT them together as a splice.
> If you can find some double-walled, super-heat shrink to
> encapsulate the joints, fine. Otherwise, two or three layers
> of plain-vanilla heat shrink will do.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
Subject: | Re: Intercom Wiring |
Guy, you can probably get away with your headphone wiring the way it
is. In this case, you are using the shield as a signal return, so it is
theoretically less noise immune, but not likely to be a problem usless
you are running it long distances next to disturbers (noisy signals).
I would make sure that your headphone jack is isolated from the airframe
with shoulder washers, available at B&C. This will prevent ground loops.
Similarly, you may get away with wiring the mic this way. Again, make
sure that you are using shoulder washers.
We're not building hi-fi's here! A little bit of electrical noise is
usually not noticable. The wiring that I recommended in my previous
email is 'ideal'-- suitable for electrically noisy environments.
Sometimes 'ideal' is not tearing out your wiring, and living with what
you've got.
Just use the shoulder washers, declare victory and go flying.
Vern
Guy Buchanan wrote:
>
>At 06:48 AM 6/8/2005, you wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Guy, the Sigtronics instructions are not particularly clear.
>>
>>Using two-wire shielded cable, with the shields grounded to a single
>>point ('A') at the intercom end, wire in these three signals. In each
>>cable, use one wire for signal (both ends), one wire for signal ground
>>(both ends) and the shield (intercom end only).
>>
>>
>
>Hmmmm. This leads me to think I might have wired the headphone and mic
>jacks incorrectly. I used two conductor shielded for the headphones, with
>ring and tip in the conductors, and shield from barrel to 'A'. Should I
>have used three conductor shielded and not grounded the shield at both
>ends? Is that the same for the mic? Should I have used two conductor
>shielded for the mic, instead of one conductor shielded?
>
>Thanks Vern.
>
>
>Guy Buchanan
>K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99% done, thanks to Bob Ducar.
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Richard Riley <richard(at)RILEY.NET> |
Subject: | Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory help, please? |
I'm installing a 22 hp single cyl 2 stroke in an open frame ultralight.
I'm using a CHT/EGT combo analog gauge. Can I transition from the
thermocouple wire to copper at the end of the probe wire? Since everything
is out in the open air, and thus should all be at about the same temperature?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | chad-c_sip(at)stanfordalumni.org |
please?
Subject: | Re: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory help, |
please?
Z-USANET-MsgId: XID948JFiLrr0177X38
No, I don't believe that's possible. Though the copper junctions with the TC
wires may be at the same temperature, they're not, necessarily, the same
voltage jump/drop at each junction. Instead, run thermocouple extension wire.
It's material designed for each kind of TC that's either got near-zero voltage
or matched voltage changes at each junction but is a whole lot cheaper than
the actual probe wire.
Omega sells a ton of this stuff at:
http://www.omega.com/toc_asp/subsectionSC.asp?subsection=H07&book=Temperature
Good luck.
Chad
Chad Sipperley
Lancair IVP-turbine (under construction)
Phoenix, AZ
------ Original Message ------
From: Richard Riley <richard(at)RILEY.NET>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory help,
please?
>
> I'm installing a 22 hp single cyl 2 stroke in an open frame ultralight.
>
> I'm using a CHT/EGT combo analog gauge. Can I transition from the
> thermocouple wire to copper at the end of the probe wire? Since everything
> is out in the open air, and thus should all be at about the same
temperature?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> help, |
please?@roxy.matronics.com
Subject: | Re: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory |
help, please?
>
>I'm installing a 22 hp single cyl 2 stroke in an open frame ultralight.
>
>I'm using a CHT/EGT combo analog gauge. Can I transition from the
>thermocouple wire to copper at the end of the probe wire? Since everything
>is out in the open air, and thus should all be at about the same
>temperature?
If you have a stand-alone gage (like View -C- in Figure 14-10
of 'Connection or in:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/excerpt.pdf
then the instrument is calibrated assuming that the cold
junction occurs inside or at the rear of the instrument.
In an airplane like an ultralight, your supposition that
ambient temperatures at a remote cold junction and at
the instrument will be fairly close is a good one . . .
as long as the remote junction is not exposed to localized
heating from the engine.
The always-proper way to extend thermocouples in any
instrumentation package is with thermocouple wire which
is readily available as cited in another post. In this
case, however, you're not likely to introduce serious
errors by using copper to extend the wires.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> |
Subject: | Re: choosing which loads go on the Main Buss |
I'm not going to solve your entire problem, but I can add a data point. I
had this same conundrum, with a battery bus, and e-bus, and a main
bus. This was my thinking.
Look at the devices that have no power switch on them, and that can turn
themselves on and off without your control, such as a tank level dependent
fuel pump. If it is necessary for flight, put it on the e-bus. Otherwise,
put it on the Main bus.
Now look at the devices that have no power switch and must be on all the
time for flight. For example, I have a Rocky Mountain Microencoder. It
has no power switch, so even though I originally thought it was a prime
candidate for the battery bus, I had to put it on the e-bus in order to
shut it off after flight. Same for my GRT EIS.
I have some pitch and roll servos. I can put them on the e-bus, because
*I* control when they are used. In the event of an alternator failure, if
I need the AH kept in reserve, I just don't use the pitch and roll
trim. They don't have to go on the Main bus, because again *I* will just
choose not to use them in a battery-only flight.
I think the purpose of separating the e-bus from the main bus is to be able
to flip a switch, without having to think long and hard about it, and
instantly reduce your battery load and extend your flight. If everything
you have on the Main bus had its own power switch, you could just as easily
just switch OFF everything (there's still the battery contactor current,
but that's another issue) and accomplish the same thing. So think of the
things that you would not mind - instantly and without hesitation - losing,
and put those on the Main bus.
Remember also that - in the event of an alternator outage - you can flip
off the main bus, fly along on the e-bus, and then in your own good time,
switch off all the devices on the main bus that you don't really need, and
occasionally power up the main bus again to operate some piece of equipment
you put on the main bus but that you really want to use. For instance you
could put your COM radio on the main bus and just power it up occasionally
when you need it, with all other main bus equipment switched off.
That's my $0.02 worth.
Dave Morris
At 06:36 PM 6/8/2005, you wrote:
>
>New conundrum. I'm building my load spreadsheet and seeing
>that a lot of pilot choice and procedure enters into the
>decision of where to route certain loads (pieces of
>equipment). Where I'm currently headed is to minimize the
>equipment on the Battery Buss (because it is always on) and
>limit the E-Buss equipment to first 8 amps and second just
>what is necessary to get me down. Everything else goes on
>the Main Buss. Sounds simple, but in the few examples of
>other's Load Analysis I have seen; different thinking is
>evident. What's up ?? Can I get some direction ??
>as always, thanks
>--
>Larry E. James
>Bellevue, WA Harmon Rocket
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> |
Subject: | Re: Moving Battery and howto |
I bought several of B&C's custom battery cables. You specify the end
terminal size and style and the length of the cable, and they do all the
hard work for you installing the 2 or 4ga terminals. And I'm bolting two
pieces together myself to allow more flexibility in installing the battery.
Dave Morris
At 12:24 AM 6/9/2005, you wrote:
>
>Should have thought about bolting before; as I reduce the cross section here
>I might expect some warming up of the connection during starting I guess,
>but I will follow this easiest route and butt splice just the battery-bus
>items.
>
>Many thanks for the advice!
>
>Werner
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
>To:
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Moving Battery and howto
>
>
>
> >
> >
>
> > >
> > >Dear all,
> > >
> > >I woudl like to ask for your advice, my plane (a Glastar) is quite nose
> > >heavy with the current setup the Battery is directly behind the copilot
> > >seat. Now I would like to move it another 8-10 ft to get a better setup,
>the
> > >question is, can I just get some additional cable and some kind of butt
> > >splices to extend it further after? If yes, where can I get such splices
>for
> > >AWG 2 cables?
> >
> > You betcha . . . but they are bound to be crimp type
> > splices and will need the proper tool for installation.
> > You already have ring terminals crimped or soldered to
> > the battery end of the cables . . . crimp or solder terminals
> > to your extension cables and BOLT them together as a splice.
> > If you can find some double-walled, super-heat shrink to
> > encapsulate the joints, fine. Otherwise, two or three layers
> > of plain-vanilla heat shrink will do.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Moving Battery and howto |
>
>Should have thought about bolting before; as I reduce the cross section here
>I might expect some warming up of the connection during starting I guess,
>but I will follow this easiest route and butt splice just the battery-bus
>items.
>
>Many thanks for the advice!
Your concerns about heating at a reduced cross-section
are not well founded. If such a reduction exists over a
small length, it's still well heat-sinked by wire on
either side of the joint. If you were to thermocouple
the joint and conduct a "hard start" . . . you'd be
hard pressed to measure more than a few degrees rise
in temperature at the joint.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Capacitance style fuel level sensor |
>
>
>This is a great part but is intended for use with silicon capacitance
>sensors (e.g. silicon capacitance pressure sensor) and as such works
>with very low capacitances. The capacitance fuel level sensors are
>typically 1-2 orders of magnitude greater than what this chip will work
>with (80-150pf empty to full for the fuel sensor vs 4 pf for the AD7745).
>
>We may be using this for our new low (ultra low) pressure sensor, but it
>is not suitable for the typical fuel sensors.
Dick, thanks for reviewing this data and posting your findings.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Intercom Wiring |
>
>At 06:48 AM 6/8/2005, you wrote:
>
> >
> >Guy, the Sigtronics instructions are not particularly clear.
> >
> >Using two-wire shielded cable, with the shields grounded to a single
> >point ('A') at the intercom end, wire in these three signals. In each
> >cable, use one wire for signal (both ends), one wire for signal ground
> >(both ends) and the shield (intercom end only).
>
>Hmmmm. This leads me to think I might have wired the headphone and mic
>jacks incorrectly. I used two conductor shielded for the headphones, with
>ring and tip in the conductors, and shield from barrel to 'A'. Should I
>have used three conductor shielded and not grounded the shield at both
>ends? Is that the same for the mic? Should I have used two conductor
>shielded for the mic, instead of one conductor shielded?
Shielding is of minimal if not zero value in wiring of mic and
headset leads. There are few noise sources in your panel wiring
that will propagate noise from one wire to the next via electrostatic
coupling. I very often use shielded wire and take advantage of the
shield as a signal return line in mic, headset and other small
signal applications . . . mostly as a convenience and almost never
as a noise abatement technique.
A twisted trio for microphones and twisted pair for headsets
is entirely adequate for installing these accessories. The insulating
washers called out in other posts will mitigate 99.9% of noise
problems associated with installation practices for microphone
and headset wiring.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Capacitance style fuel level sensor |
>
>Eric
> Do I understand this correctly? It appears that your recommendation is a
>"single chip" solution to this problem. Might you consider producing these
>and selling them?? I need two of them for my "Vans" capacitance senders.
>Charlie Kuss
This wouldn't be a single chip solution . . . the device cited is an
accessory
to a microprocessor based where capacitance values are extrapolated and
converted to a serial data stream. At a minimum, using the 7745 in
a measurement system requires a uProcessor and some means for outputing
data in a form suited for panel display. This indicates a software task
as well.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Battery Testing |
>
>Bob,
>Now that you have found and recommend a cap tester and a separate load
>tester, how about a short article on what to test, how often to test and any
>other pertinent info you feel would be of help. This way we would all be on
>the same page with this equipment. Thanks. Don
I've considered this. There's an aged article at . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/battest.pdf
that was basically excerpted from the 'Connection
that could be updated to speak to these low-cost
battery maintenance tools.
I'll put it up on the stove for future consideration.
Even with this updated article, I'm still of the
opinion that spending $time$ to acquire and use
tools for battery testing may be poor return on
investment . . . the cost of a new, el-cheeso
battery installed at every annual is pretty attractive.
Consider the load-tester/cap-tester combo at $160.
Consider the $time$ of approximately 1 hour to conduct
all the tests even if the battery is not removed from
the airplane (you also have to consider the $time$
value of a computer to support the CBA-II).
Let's assume you can get three years service out
of a $high$ battery by periodic testing. Assume
the "good" battery is $100 and the el-chesso is
$50. By the time you've tested your premium battery
say three times with $160+ worth of equipment, was
the "savings" of $50 worth it?
I think the article needs to be updated but I'm
certainly not going to offer its content as
a recommended procedure for economical ownership
of an airplane . . . I think I'll bring this out
in the article as well.
I've purchased all that stuff and used it to
educate myself in the mysteries of battery
physics and application. However, if I owned
an airplane, I'm not sure I'd find it economically
practical to periodically test the ship's battery
even though I have the equipment which has already
been depreciated to $0$ for other considerations.
Now, if you owned a CERTIFIED ship and the battery
was several hundreds to thousands of dollars (not
unusual for a bizjet), then periodic cap checks
are not only good ownership, they help you comply
with regulations. However, I just don't perceive
favorable economics in doing this on an OBAM S.E.
aircraft.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | AI Nut <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
Subject: | Re: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory help, |
please?
No.
Richard Riley wrote:
>
>I'm installing a 22 hp single cyl 2 stroke in an open frame ultralight.
>
>I'm using a CHT/EGT combo analog gauge. Can I transition from the
>thermocouple wire to copper at the end of the probe wire? Since everything
>is out in the open air, and thus should all be at about the same temperature?
>
>
>.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | AI Nut <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
Subject: | Re: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory help, |
please?
Copper, indeed any metal that is not what that particular TC was
calibrated with, will most likely incude large errors in the final readings.
Robert L. Nuckolls, III help wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>
>>I'm installing a 22 hp single cyl 2 stroke in an open frame ultralight.
>>
>>I'm using a CHT/EGT combo analog gauge. Can I transition from the
>>thermocouple wire to copper at the end of the probe wire? Since everything
>>is out in the open air, and thus should all be at about the same
>>temperature?
>>
>>
>
>
> If you have a stand-alone gage (like View -C- in Figure 14-10
> of 'Connection or in:
>
>http://aeroelectric.com/articles/excerpt.pdf
>
> then the instrument is calibrated assuming that the cold
> junction occurs inside or at the rear of the instrument.
> In an airplane like an ultralight, your supposition that
> ambient temperatures at a remote cold junction and at
> the instrument will be fairly close is a good one . . .
> as long as the remote junction is not exposed to localized
> heating from the engine.
>
> The always-proper way to extend thermocouples in any
> instrumentation package is with thermocouple wire which
> is readily available as cited in another post. In this
> case, however, you're not likely to introduce serious
> errors by using copper to extend the wires.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
Subject: | Re: Intercom Wiring |
Bob points out the use of twisted pair wiring for headsets and mics.
A well-constructed balanced twisted pair is extremely noise immune.
This technique is used in telephone systems and data networking (fast
ethernet, gigabit ethernet).
The reason for the noise immunity is that both wires are subject to
almost exactly the same interference due to the twist characteristics
(i.e. both wires, on average, are the same distance from an interfering
source).
In fact, shielded twisted pair wire has fallen out of practice in modern
data networking because it offers little additional benefit and is
difficult to install. It's main benefit is to minimize radiation from
the wire pair at high frequencies.
[Geek Speak On]
Now... the twisted pair technique works best if the wires are driven and
terminated in a balanced fashion (i.e. signal+, signal-) with identical
drive and termination impedances (resistances) on both wires. Most
avionics signals are single-ended (i.e. signal, ground) with unbalanced
impedances. This imbalance can lead to higher noise than a true
balanced system.
[Geek Speak Off]
Does this make any difference for us?... probably not. I run headset
wiring from the panel, through a connector and down the fuselage to
beside the seats. Along the way, it parallels interfering sources like
antennas, RS-232 cables and so on. In this application, I would
recommend at least shielded wiring, and preferably a shielded pair
(signal, signal ground). This is the belt and suspenders approach that
is not going to be a problem.
The shoulder washers will give you most of the benefit, shielding more,
and shielded pairs the most.
This information is educational, not necessary a recommendation for what
you should do in your own aircraft. I would not recommend ripping out
perfectly good wiring trying to make it 'perfect'.
As a final comment, the audio system is the most difficult wiring task
(with maybe the exception of the engine monitor) that you will have.
All of those signal sources, shields and connectors challenge your
dexterity. Once you've done the audio, you can wire anything!
Vern Little RV-9A
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Drdavevk30(at)aol.com |
Subject: | 12 volt bus in a 24 volt system |
Bob:
I have a need for a 12 volt bus in my 24 volt electrical system using Z-14
architecture. The 12 volt bus will be used for ground engine cooling fans
(aircraft is a Cirrus VK-30 mid engine pusher) and for some access door solenoids.
The total load should not exceed 25 amps. Can you show me where you would
put that in the Z-14 drawing and also where I might get appropriate DC/DC
convertor?
Dave
drdavevk30(at)cs.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Comments/Questions:
(1) What's the differences between a current limiter an ammeter shunt??
While they have similarities in appearance, current limiters
and shunts are entirely different critters. Shunts are a precision
high current resistor that converts large current values into tiny
buy calibrated voltages for display on a remote ammeter display.
A current limiter is a large fuse.
2. There is no way to make my conncetion for the battery contactor
to the battery bus 6" it will be 8 to 10' . Can I up size the wire?
The purpose of a battery contactor is to ISOLATE the vast
majority of ship's wiring from the battery for crash
safety. Please find a way to mount the battery contactor
as close as practical to the battery.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | chad-c_sip(at)stanfordalumni.org |
Subject: | Difficulties with AC motor |
Z-USANET-MsgId: XID554JFiRCq0329X31
1.25 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains an IP address used for HELO
I'm hoping someone out there can clear something up for me.
We're putting an electrically-powered AC into the Lancair we're building.
Before we turn on the engine we'd like to be able to run this from 110V ground
power - rather than simply a GPU cart. Unfortunately, that'll require about
25-30 amps of 110VAC power to run at full blast (it's 100 Amps max at 28VDC,
80 for the compressor, 20 for the fans).
So I thought that it'd be nice to run the AC at a reduced power setting that
only requires a few amps of wall power. Sure, it won't be able to run the AC
at full blast, but even if it cools a bit we're ahead of the game.
In the last 30 minutes I've been told by two different people that trying to
run a 28V compressor at 12 or 14VDC will draw more current than it would pull
at 28. I realize I'm a mechanical engineer, not electrical, but this just
makes no sense to me whatsoever. Sure, to get equal power out of a motor at
half the voltage you've gotta run the current higher. But I'm not looking to
get the same power output at a lower voltage. I've already got a motor wound
that will draw 80 amps at 28V. How much current will _that_ motor draw when
fed with 12?
Beyond the current draw issue, is there any other reason I shouldn't be
attempting this? Is running the compressor at a lower power setting going to
hurt something somehow?
I'm hoping I'm not off my rocker here and I appreciate the input from
everyone. And if I'm _am_ off my rocker I'd much rather know that too!
Thanks-
Chad
Chad Sipperley
Lancair IVP-turbine (under construction)
Phoenix, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Joel Jacobs" <jj(at)sdf.lonestar.org> |
Subject: | Re: 12 volt bus in a 24 volt system |
Sorry, not Bob here but might have a solution. Did you say fans? As in -
two? Why not just hook them in series to the 24V bus?
Joel
----- Original Message -----
From: <Drdavevk30(at)aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: 12 volt bus in a 24 volt system
>
> Bob:
>
> I have a need for a 12 volt bus in my 24 volt electrical system using Z-14
> architecture. The 12 volt bus will be used for ground engine cooling fans
> (aircraft is a Cirrus VK-30 mid engine pusher) and for some access door
solenoids.
> The total load should not exceed 25 amps. Can you show me where you would
> put that in the Z-14 drawing and also where I might get appropriate DC/DC
> convertor?
>
> Dave
> drdavevk30(at)cs.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Difficulties with AC motor |
From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
To a fellow mechanical Engineer kudos for knowing when something doesn't
smeel right...:)
The simple resistance is the same so the current will drop to half the
original value..This means available power will drop to 1/4 when running
on 14V vs 28V...Of course this is simple resistance. As we know
intuitively current must go up as we try to slow down a motor this may
or may not hold true if you actually get it running
My best guess is the compressor is unlikly to start with 1/4 of the
available power.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
chad-c_sip(at)stanfordalumni.org
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Difficulties with AC motor
I'm hoping someone out there can clear something up for me.
We're putting an electrically-powered AC into the Lancair we're
building.
Before we turn on the engine we'd like to be able to run this from 110V
ground power - rather than simply a GPU cart. Unfortunately, that'll
require about 25-30 amps of 110VAC power to run at full blast (it's 100
Amps max at 28VDC, 80 for the compressor, 20 for the fans).
So I thought that it'd be nice to run the AC at a reduced power setting
that only requires a few amps of wall power. Sure, it won't be able to
run the AC at full blast, but even if it cools a bit we're ahead of the
game.
In the last 30 minutes I've been told by two different people that
trying to run a 28V compressor at 12 or 14VDC will draw more current
than it would pull at 28. I realize I'm a mechanical engineer, not
electrical, but this just makes no sense to me whatsoever. Sure, to get
equal power out of a motor at half the voltage you've gotta run the
current higher. But I'm not looking to get the same power output at a
lower voltage. I've already got a motor wound that will draw 80 amps at
28V. How much current will _that_ motor draw when fed with 12?
Beyond the current draw issue, is there any other reason I shouldn't be
attempting this? Is running the compressor at a lower power setting
going to hurt something somehow?
I'm hoping I'm not off my rocker here and I appreciate the input from
everyone. And if I'm _am_ off my rocker I'd much rather know that too!
Thanks-
Chad
Chad Sipperley
Lancair IVP-turbine (under construction) Phoenix, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Difficulties with AC motor |
From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
How big is this Lancair?? Googling around, I seem to be finding numbers
like 15A at 110VAC for an AC unit large enough to keep a motor home cool..
It seems like the 100A max at 28VDC may be from the inrush current...
Your continuous amperage demand numbers are probably much less.
Can you provide any more information about the AC unit you are planning to
use? The ability to develop a low power mode depends to some extent on
what kind of motor it uses.
If you aren't able to run the unit set on 'kill' (instead of 'stun'),
maybe you need a smaller, less power hungry unit...
Regards,
Matt-
VE N34RD, C150 N714BK
>
> I'm hoping someone out there can clear something up for me.
>
> We're putting an electrically-powered AC into the Lancair we're
> building. Before we turn on the engine we'd like to be able to run this
> from 110V ground power - rather than simply a GPU cart. Unfortunately,
> that'll require about 25-30 amps of 110VAC power to run at full blast
> (it's 100 Amps max at 28VDC, 80 for the compressor, 20 for the fans).
>
> So I thought that it'd be nice to run the AC at a reduced power setting
> that only requires a few amps of wall power. Sure, it won't be able to
> run the AC at full blast, but even if it cools a bit we're ahead of the
> game.
>
> In the last 30 minutes I've been told by two different people that
> trying to run a 28V compressor at 12 or 14VDC will draw more current
> than it would pull at 28. I realize I'm a mechanical engineer, not
> electrical, but this just makes no sense to me whatsoever. Sure, to get
> equal power out of a motor at half the voltage you've gotta run the
> current higher. But I'm not looking to get the same power output at a
> lower voltage. I've already got a motor wound that will draw 80 amps at
> 28V. How much current will _that_ motor draw when fed with 12?
>
> Beyond the current draw issue, is there any other reason I shouldn't be
> attempting this? Is running the compressor at a lower power setting
> going to hurt something somehow?
>
> I'm hoping I'm not off my rocker here and I appreciate the input from
> everyone. And if I'm _am_ off my rocker I'd much rather know that too!
>
> Thanks-
>
> Chad
>
>
> Chad Sipperley
> Lancair IVP-turbine (under construction)
> Phoenix, AZ
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | chad-c_sip(at)stanfordalumni.org |
Subject: | Re: Difficulties with AC motor |
Z-USANET-MsgId: XID020JFiuuk0325X30
First off, I meant to put the subject line as "DC motors" not AC - alas.
Unfortunately I'm in Florida right this minute and the plane is in Arizona so
I can't be more specific. The 80 amps is the peak inrush, yes. The continuous
current is apparently 60 amps so I'm told (by the same folks who were telling
me the current draw would double if i cut the voltage in half). The compressor
unit isn't really all that heavy so we're going to keep the system we've got.
Having too much air conditioning in Phoenix isn't usually something you gripe
about. It'd just be real nice to be able to have the local FBO be able to plug
in the plane an hour before my father plans to head home and have it already
cooled off.
Thanks again for the input.
Chad
Chad Sipperley
Lancair IVP-turbine (under construction)
Phoenix, AZ
------ Original Message ------
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Difficulties with AC motor
>
> How big is this Lancair?? Googling around, I seem to be finding numbers
> like 15A at 110VAC for an AC unit large enough to keep a motor home cool..
> It seems like the 100A max at 28VDC may be from the inrush current...
> Your continuous amperage demand numbers are probably much less.
>
> Can you provide any more information about the AC unit you are planning to
> use? The ability to develop a low power mode depends to some extent on
> what kind of motor it uses.
>
> If you aren't able to run the unit set on 'kill' (instead of 'stun'),
> maybe you need a smaller, less power hungry unit...
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matt-
> VE N34RD, C150 N714BK
>
>
> >
> > I'm hoping someone out there can clear something up for me.
> >
> > We're putting an electrically-powered AC into the Lancair we're
> > building. Before we turn on the engine we'd like to be able to run this
> > from 110V ground power - rather than simply a GPU cart. Unfortunately,
> > that'll require about 25-30 amps of 110VAC power to run at full blast
> > (it's 100 Amps max at 28VDC, 80 for the compressor, 20 for the fans).
> >
> > So I thought that it'd be nice to run the AC at a reduced power setting
> > that only requires a few amps of wall power. Sure, it won't be able to
> > run the AC at full blast, but even if it cools a bit we're ahead of the
> > game.
> >
> > In the last 30 minutes I've been told by two different people that
> > trying to run a 28V compressor at 12 or 14VDC will draw more current
> > than it would pull at 28. I realize I'm a mechanical engineer, not
> > electrical, but this just makes no sense to me whatsoever. Sure, to get
> > equal power out of a motor at half the voltage you've gotta run the
> > current higher. But I'm not looking to get the same power output at a
> > lower voltage. I've already got a motor wound that will draw 80 amps at
> > 28V. How much current will _that_ motor draw when fed with 12?
> >
> > Beyond the current draw issue, is there any other reason I shouldn't be
> > attempting this? Is running the compressor at a lower power setting
> > going to hurt something somehow?
> >
> > I'm hoping I'm not off my rocker here and I appreciate the input from
> > everyone. And if I'm _am_ off my rocker I'd much rather know that too!
> >
> > Thanks-
> >
> > Chad
> >
> >
> > Chad Sipperley
> > Lancair IVP-turbine (under construction)
> > Phoenix, AZ
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "John Danielson" <johnd(at)wlcwyo.com> |
Subject: | Difficulties with AC motor |
It looks like it will draw 40amp with 14 volts.
John L. Danielson
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Difficulties with AC motor
(Corvallis)"
To a fellow mechanical Engineer kudos for knowing when something doesn't
smeel right...:)
The simple resistance is the same so the current will drop to half the
original value..This means available power will drop to 1/4 when running
on 14V vs 28V...Of course this is simple resistance. As we know
intuitively current must go up as we try to slow down a motor this may
or may not hold true if you actually get it running
My best guess is the compressor is unlikly to start with 1/4 of the
available power.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
chad-c_sip(at)stanfordalumni.org
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Difficulties with AC motor
I'm hoping someone out there can clear something up for me.
We're putting an electrically-powered AC into the Lancair we're
building.
Before we turn on the engine we'd like to be able to run this from 110V
ground power - rather than simply a GPU cart. Unfortunately, that'll
require about 25-30 amps of 110VAC power to run at full blast (it's 100
Amps max at 28VDC, 80 for the compressor, 20 for the fans).
So I thought that it'd be nice to run the AC at a reduced power setting
that only requires a few amps of wall power. Sure, it won't be able to
run the AC at full blast, but even if it cools a bit we're ahead of the
game.
In the last 30 minutes I've been told by two different people that
trying to run a 28V compressor at 12 or 14VDC will draw more current
than it would pull at 28. I realize I'm a mechanical engineer, not
electrical, but this just makes no sense to me whatsoever. Sure, to get
equal power out of a motor at half the voltage you've gotta run the
current higher. But I'm not looking to get the same power output at a
lower voltage. I've already got a motor wound that will draw 80 amps at
28V. How much current will _that_ motor draw when fed with 12?
Beyond the current draw issue, is there any other reason I shouldn't be
attempting this? Is running the compressor at a lower power setting
going to hurt something somehow?
I'm hoping I'm not off my rocker here and I appreciate the input from
everyone. And if I'm _am_ off my rocker I'd much rather know that too!
Thanks-
Chad
Chad Sipperley
Lancair IVP-turbine (under construction) Phoenix, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Difficulties with AC motor |
>
>First off, I meant to put the subject line as "DC motors" not AC - alas.
>
>Unfortunately I'm in Florida right this minute and the plane is in Arizona so
>I can't be more specific. The 80 amps is the peak inrush, yes. The continuous
>current is apparently 60 amps so I'm told (by the same folks who were telling
>me the current draw would double if i cut the voltage in half). The compressor
>unit isn't really all that heavy so we're going to keep the system we've got.
>Having too much air conditioning in Phoenix isn't usually something you gripe
>about. It'd just be real nice to be able to have the local FBO be able to plug
>in the plane an hour before my father plans to head home and have it already
>cooled off.
>
>Thanks again for the input.
>
>Chad
The off-hand estimate of current increase with decreased
voltage assumes that horsepower to produce designed flow
of Freon in the A/C will be a constant irrespective of
motor RPM . . . motor RPM will fall to 1/2 or less depending
on design of the motor. Unless there's a VERY agile expansion
valve capable of maintaining design pressure on the system at
low flow, both flow and pressure will go down as well which
means that horsepower the system can absorb will probably
be way less than 1/2 of design value.
I think the level of cooling to be expected at 1/2 voltage
will be very disappointing. A 28 volt ground power carts
is very much in order. How would you get 14v? Doesn't
the FBO have a 28v ground power cart? If this is the
ship's home base, consider building a dedicated ground
power cart. You can get 28v from a 14v alternator with
use of proper regulator and spinning it fast enough.
80A continuous at 28v is 3 electrical horspower. A 5 hp
engine driving a 14v, 100A alternator combined with a
couple of 12v RG batteries could be assembled into
a reasonably compact, dedicated GPU for running your
A/C at full bore.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: 12 volt bus in a 24 volt system |
>
>Sorry, not Bob here but might have a solution. Did you say fans? As in -
>two? Why not just hook them in series to the 24V bus?
>Joel
I had a Cirrus builder do just that about 10 years ago.
I think it worked okay . . . never heard from him again
after we talked the first time about this solution.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | chad-c_sip(at)stanfordalumni.org |
Subject: | Re: Difficulties with AC motor |
Z-USANET-MsgId: XID969JFJaip0256X38
In our own hangar we'll have no problem setting up our own ground cart to run
the A/C at full power. The desire was to have the ability to run a 110
extension cord to any old outlet anywhere to cool the plane down a bit before
climbing in. Even if the A/C can only remove 1/4 the BTUs of heat as at full
power I'll take it. Instead of having the compressor come on only part time,
it'll just run 100% duty cycle.
I'm not sure that the FBOs on foreign fields will let us borrow a GPU for 20
minutes every time we want to fly home. And certainly, if the effective
cooling we get is near nil then we'll pull the AC-DC converter and give up on
the idea of running the A/C off 110 power. But until then I'd like to give it
a shot and see if it can actually cool the airplane down. After all, it's an
experimental airplane. This sounds like an experiment worth at least trying.
Chad
Chad Sipperley
Lancair IVP-turbine (under construction)
Phoenix, AZ
------ Original Message ------
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Difficulties with AC motor
>
>
> >
> >First off, I meant to put the subject line as "DC motors" not AC - alas.
> >
> >Unfortunately I'm in Florida right this minute and the plane is in Arizona
so
> >I can't be more specific. The 80 amps is the peak inrush, yes. The
continuous
> >current is apparently 60 amps so I'm told (by the same folks who were
telling
> >me the current draw would double if i cut the voltage in half). The
compressor
> >unit isn't really all that heavy so we're going to keep the system we've
got.
> >Having too much air conditioning in Phoenix isn't usually something you
gripe
> >about. It'd just be real nice to be able to have the local FBO be able to
plug
> >in the plane an hour before my father plans to head home and have it
already
> >cooled off.
> >
> >Thanks again for the input.
> >
> >Chad
>
> The off-hand estimate of current increase with decreased
> voltage assumes that horsepower to produce designed flow
> of Freon in the A/C will be a constant irrespective of
> motor RPM . . . motor RPM will fall to 1/2 or less depending
> on design of the motor. Unless there's a VERY agile expansion
> valve capable of maintaining design pressure on the system at
> low flow, both flow and pressure will go down as well which
> means that horsepower the system can absorb will probably
> be way less than 1/2 of design value.
>
> I think the level of cooling to be expected at 1/2 voltage
> will be very disappointing. A 28 volt ground power carts
> is very much in order. How would you get 14v? Doesn't
> the FBO have a 28v ground power cart? If this is the
> ship's home base, consider building a dedicated ground
> power cart. You can get 28v from a 14v alternator with
> use of proper regulator and spinning it fast enough.
> 80A continuous at 28v is 3 electrical horspower. A 5 hp
> engine driving a 14v, 100A alternator combined with a
> couple of 12v RG batteries could be assembled into
> a reasonably compact, dedicated GPU for running your
> A/C at full bore.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | chad-c_sip(at)stanfordalumni.org |
Subject: | Re: 12 volt bus in a 24 volt system |
Z-USANET-MsgId: XID501JFJaLM0243X36
Okay, fans are an inductive load and lights are not. But I've wired a couple
of Hella lamps as taxi lamps in series and they seem to be working like a
charm. They draw exactly the same current in series at 28V as they each do
when driven from a 14V source. You might make sure that nothing in the case is
electrically connected to the "ground" lead on the higher-potential fan. If
anything is grounded and you try and float one fan you'll create a nasty
short.
Chad
Chad Sipperley
Lancair IVP-turbine (under construction)
Phoenix, AZ
------ Original Message ------
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 12 volt bus in a 24 volt system
>
>
> >
> >Sorry, not Bob here but might have a solution. Did you say fans? As in -
> >two? Why not just hook them in series to the 24V bus?
> >Joel
>
> I had a Cirrus builder do just that about 10 years ago.
> I think it worked okay . . . never heard from him again
> after we talked the first time about this solution.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Larry E. James" <larry(at)ncproto.com> |
SpamAssassin (score=-2.572, required 4, autolearn=not spam, AWL 0.03,
BAYES_00 -2.60)
> In the end, I'd be just as confident to fly with the
Z-19 design as much
>>as the Z-13 + Z-30 design. While Z-19 is cheaper, it's a
lot more weight
>>that I won't need in my RV7-A.
>> I'm not totally decided yet being that I won't have
to start installing
>>a chosen system until later this Fall, but Z-13 + Z30
looks good to me. Now
>>if Bob would only add the Z-30 extra battery to the
Z-13/SD-8 drawing and
>>show it as one sheet...
> I'll leave this up to you. The more I specialize the
base drawings,
>the more it begins to look like I am recommending this
architecture
>as "THE way to go" . . .
Vern and Bob,
I'm also in agreement here. I'm working up a load sheet and
basic wiring diagram now. I just built / installed my
battery tray: I made it fit an Odyssey PC625 with enough
room to easily add another PC625 although I doubt I would
ever do that; instead I have open the more likely option of
adding a second battery of smaller size (and weight). Neat
stuff.
Larry E. James
Bellevue, WA HR2
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Drdavevk30(at)aol.com |
Subject: | 12 volt bus in a 24 volt system |
Bob:
Thanks for the suggestions of wiring fans in series. I am concerned that the
metal fan motor, housing, mounting brackets will ground out to the metal
fireproofing and cause problems. The old Cirrus fans were plastic housings and
mountings and the old fireproofing was phenolic/resin unlike my situation. The
other problem has been with the plastic fans partly melting/yielding a bit in
hot conditions.
I also have the access door solenoids (12 volts) to contend with.
Is there anyway to have a separate 12 volt bus in Z-14 as I originally
inquired?
Dave D.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Subject: | Re: 12 volt bus in a 24 volt system |
>Is there anyway to have a separate 12 volt bus in Z-14 as I originally
inquired? Dave D.
Dr. Dave,
Trust us on this. We wouldn't steer you wrong. If you really want a DC-DC
converter then go to
http://www.vicorpower.com/documents/datasheets/ds_compac.pdf There are many
other companies who will sell you what you asked for.
But you really don't want to do this. Get the fans with the right voltages
or wire them in series. The door solenoids can be fixed by adding a resistor
in series.
Trying to maintain a couple MAJOR power supplies with different voltages in
your VK30 is not a good idea. You can do it, but you can also train a dog to
walk on its back legs. Why bother?
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
"The problem with the world is that only the intelligent people want to be
smarter, and only the good people want to improve."
- E. Stobblehouse
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> please? |
Subject: | Re: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory help, |
please?
Baloney. If, as the original poster suggests, the instrument and the
end of the TC probe are at the same temperature you could connect them
with anything you want to. The reason that one normally uses
thermocouple extension wire to connect a TC probe to the remote mounted
instrument is because they are frequently at different temperatures -
and probably unpredictably different. For that case it is important to
use extension wire.
If the two junctions are at the same temperature, any emf generated is
either canceled out or is only the same as it the copper wire wasn't
there. That is, the terminals that the TC wire normally connects to on
the instrument are probably copper or brass or possibly nickel plated.
The connection between the TC wires generates an EMF that is canceled
out by the cold junction compensation circuitry in the instrument. If
you add a length of wire between the TC and the instrument, and assuming
the two junctions are at the same temperature, you have done nothing but
move the location of the cold junction - the EMFs at the instrument will
be exactly the same as without the additional copper wire.
Furthermore, the errors would not be "large" in any case. In fact, any
error will be exactly the difference in temperature between the
TC/copper wire junction and the copper wire/instrument junction. Unless
either of these junctions are very close to the engine, the practical
difference is minimal.
All the above applies to the original poster's situation. In a "normal"
GA or experimental with a closed cowl and a separate cockpit, the errors
could be significant.
If you want more theory, just ask and I can give it to you. :-)
Dick Tasker
AI Nut wrote:
>
>Copper, indeed any metal that is not what that particular TC was
>calibrated with, will most likely incude large errors in the final readings.
>
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III help wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>I'm installing a 22 hp single cyl 2 stroke in an open frame ultralight.
>>>
>>>I'm using a CHT/EGT combo analog gauge. Can I transition from the
>>>thermocouple wire to copper at the end of the probe wire? Since everything
>>>is out in the open air, and thus should all be at about the same
>>>temperature?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> If you have a stand-alone gage (like View -C- in Figure 14-10
>> of 'Connection or in:
>>
>>http://aeroelectric.com/articles/excerpt.pdf
>>
>> then the instrument is calibrated assuming that the cold
>> junction occurs inside or at the rear of the instrument.
>> In an airplane like an ultralight, your supposition that
>> ambient temperatures at a remote cold junction and at
>> the instrument will be fairly close is a good one . . .
>> as long as the remote junction is not exposed to localized
>> heating from the engine.
>>
>> The always-proper way to extend thermocouples in any
>> instrumentation package is with thermocouple wire which
>> is readily available as cited in another post. In this
>> case, however, you're not likely to introduce serious
>> errors by using copper to extend the wires.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
--
----
Please Note:
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however,
that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced.
----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: battery maintainer More |
>
>I have an "automatic 1.5 amp Schumacher SE-1-12S" I use all the time for
>various batteries, tractor, un-used truck etc. This unit is stocked a the
>local battery store so is readily available. I think I got mine at Walmart
>years ago. With all the discussion I decided to see how it works. I put it
>on a yellow Optima which is a deep cycle spiral glass matt 750 cca, 55AH.
>Too big for a plane but a good choice for a car/truck. Weighs 46 pounds.
> I just clock watched to see what the volts were.
>initial 12.38 after sitting for 6 months
>1 minute 12.94
>2 minutes 13.45
>1 hour 12.76
>3 hours 12.67
>22 hours 12.68
Hmmmm . . . doesn't like like this critter goes into much
of a maintenance mode . . . endpoint voltage is less than
the float voltage of a fully charged battery. Further,
we don't know if it went into a top-off mode by pulling
the battery up to better than 14 volts.
>Don't know how high it got.
> To lazy to do the same test on my small lawn tractor battery (similar to
>a light plane battery). It is a glass matt with 340 cca, ?AH and after a
>being plugged in for a week I remember the volts were around 12.6.
> The charger sells for $42 to $27 on the net, locally for $28.95.
> Seems like it wont hurt a battery if left plugged in for long periods. It
>comes with a bracket to mount under the hood of a car and had bolted
>eyelets. A portable version with clips is SE1562A sells for an extra $4
>locally.
You're correct, it won't hurt the battery on long term charge,
but it would be interesting to know how well it works
for topping off a dead battery and then storing it. The
numbers you've cited don't offer warm fuzzies about it.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert du Plooy" <rduplooy(at)iafrica.com> |
Subject: | Re: cannot download Z13 dwg...( or any Z) |
I can download most of the "downloads on Bob's website...however I cannot
download the Zdwgs .pdf files?
I only need to get Z-13...it comes up with the Adobe logo..but no
download...is there a problem with the URL address ?
Thanks
Robert du Plooy
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Wayne Glasser" <ku-tec(at)bigpond.net.au> |
Subject: | Re: cannot download Z13 dwg...( or any Z) |
Robert
You may have the wrong version of Adobe, try updating it as I have
experienced this problem before.
Regards
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert du Plooy" <rduplooy(at)iafrica.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: cannot download Z13 dwg...( or any Z)
>
>
> I can download most of the "downloads on Bob's website...however I cannot
> download the Zdwgs .pdf files?
>
> I only need to get Z-13...it comes up with the Adobe logo..but no
> download...is there a problem with the URL address ?
>
> Thanks
> Robert du Plooy
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Mark & Lisa" <marknlisa(at)hometel.com> |
Subject: | Weird audio panel panel |
Ok Guy & Gals,
Here's the deal. I've got a Terra TMA 340D audio panel that's been acting
up. Everything seems to work except when I press the mic button to transmit
on com 1/2 all I get is a carrier -- no mic audio.
My (FAA certified) avionics guy has been over the thing a couple of times
and can't find anything wrong with it. We assumed there might be a problem
with the intercom. We took the intercom out and bench tested it -- it's
fine. Since it works we know the headset mics and wiring to and from the
mics is good. We then "borrowed" a panel from another individual and
installed it my acft -- it worked fine. We took my panel back to the shop
and still can't find anything wrong. We rigged a bench test environment
that simulates my acft and the panel works fine on his bench.
So, the question is: What type of problem would cause the audio panel to
lose mic audio in the acft but not on the bench?
Mark & Lisa Sletten
Legacy FG N828LM
http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Subject: | Re: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory help, please? |
please?
>Baloney. If, as the original poster suggests, the instrument and the
>end of the TC probe are at the same temperature you could connect them
>with anything you want to.
Richard, I ditto your "baloney".
What Richard says is on the money.
I want to observe that arguments can go on forever because nobody will just
take their thermocouple meter and run a little experiment. As a worst case,
theory says, you might need a minor recalibration.
So just do it.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
"Life may have no meaning. Or even worse, it may have a meaning of which I
disapprove." -- Ashleigh Brilliant
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Battery Maintainer More |
From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Hello Bob -
I downloaded your paper that was cited in one of your posts this week, and
also the pictures of the Harbor Freight load tester. I did a two pager of
the latter pictures and email and folded it into the original paper for
you.
Let me know what email address I can send the combined .pdf file to.
I hope this is a help to your busy world of helping us folks in the OBAM
community.
Cheers,
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Earl_Schroeder <Earl_Schroeder(at)Juno.com> |
Subject: | Re: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory |
help, please?
Richard [and Eric], I too ditto your "baloney". I was going to jump in
but my energy level had peaked at the minimum level. I believe
thermocouples are one of the most misunderstood systems in aircraft.
Perhaps working with them for 30+ years at GE has enlightened me a bit.
However, care must be taken with the unpowered meter only readouts since
they are calibrated with a certain lead resistance. If confusion still
exists, ask Richard for more details. Earl
Eric M. Jones wrote:
>
>
>please?
>
>
>
>>Baloney. If, as the original poster suggests, the instrument and the
>>end of the TC probe are at the same temperature you could connect them
>>with anything you want to.
>>
>>
>
>Richard, I ditto your "baloney".
>
>What Richard says is on the money.
>
>I want to observe that arguments can go on forever because nobody will just
>take their thermocouple meter and run a little experiment. As a worst case,
>theory says, you might need a minor recalibration.
>
>So just do it.
>
>Regards,
>Eric M. Jones
>www.PerihelionDesign.com
>113 Brentwood Drive
>Southbridge MA 01550-2705
>Phone (508) 764-2072
>Email: emjones(at)charter.net
>
>"Life may have no meaning. Or even worse, it may have a meaning of which I
>disapprove." -- Ashleigh Brilliant
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Richard Riley <richard(at)RILEY.NET> help, please?(at)roxy.matronics.com |
Subject: | Re: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory |
help, please?
At 09:07 PM 6/9/05, you wrote:
> please?
>
>Furthermore, the errors would not be "large" in any case. In fact, any
>error will be exactly the difference in temperature between the
>TC/copper wire junction and the copper wire/instrument junction. Unless
>either of these junctions are very close to the engine, the practical
>difference is minimal.
Great, that's as I understood. I was afraid the error was a *function* of
the temperature difference, some multiple of it, and would be amplified at
the end. If it's exactly the same, in this installation it should be a
degree or two.
This installation is almost surreal in it's simplicity. 7 wires total - 2
each for CHT and EGT, one for a tach, one for ign and one for a
starter. At the same time, in the same hangar, I'm doing a Z-14 fully
redundant IFR panel, all glass WAAS/EFIS Uuber Cruiser.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: battery maintainer More |
From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Speaking of which I measured the behaviour of the Harbor freight $7
float charger.
I don't think the battery I had was very discharged so when I hooked it
it up it got the volts up fom 12.75 to 13 within about an hour...This
morning its sitting at about 13.4V
Seems OK for a 600mA charger don't ya think?
Frank
Hmmmm . . . doesn't like like this critter goes into much
of a maintenance mode . . . endpoint voltage is less than
the float voltage of a fully charged battery. Further,
we don't know if it went into a top-off mode by pulling
the battery up to better than 14 volts.
>Don't know how high it got.
> To lazy to do the same test on my small lawn tractor battery
>(similar to a light plane battery). It is a glass matt with 340 cca,
>?AH and after a being plugged in for a week I remember the volts were
around 12.6.
> The charger sells for $42 to $27 on the net, locally for $28.95.
> Seems like it wont hurt a battery if left plugged in for long
>periods. It comes with a bracket to mount under the hood of a car and
>had bolted eyelets. A portable version with clips is SE1562A sells for
>an extra $4 locally.
You're correct, it won't hurt the battery on long term charge,
but it would be interesting to know how well it works
for topping off a dead battery and then storing it. The
numbers you've cited don't offer warm fuzzies about it.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Difficulties with AC motor |
>
>In our own hangar we'll have no problem setting up our own ground cart to run
>the A/C at full power. The desire was to have the ability to run a 110
>extension cord to any old outlet anywhere to cool the plane down a bit before
>climbing in. Even if the A/C can only remove 1/4 the BTUs of heat as at full
>power I'll take it. Instead of having the compressor come on only part time,
>it'll just run 100% duty cycle.
>
>I'm not sure that the FBOs on foreign fields will let us borrow a GPU for 20
>minutes every time we want to fly home. And certainly, if the effective
>cooling we get is near nil then we'll pull the AC-DC converter and give up on
>the idea of running the A/C off 110 power. But until then I'd like to give it
>a shot and see if it can actually cool the airplane down. After all, it's an
>experimental airplane. This sounds like an experiment worth at least trying.
The first experiment I would run is:
(1) how long does it take to cool the airplane down to
"tolerable" temperatures after a hot-soak on the ramp.
I used to fly an A-36 with air-conditioning and it had
enough cooling capacity to bring the cockpit down to
tolerable in 2-3 minutes.
A long 110 vac extension cord can probably be depended upon
for 10A or less (about 1000 watts). You could install a
28v switch mode power supply that would deliver 35-40
amps. This supply should weigh under 10 pounds.
Arrange to support ship's batteries with the supply and
turn the A/C on a pre-determined and tightly observed
number of minutes before boarding. The 60 A running load
on batteries would be mitigated by 35 to 40A supporting
power from the supply. This means ship's batteries need
to support 20-30 amps for say up to 5 minutes. 150 ampere
minutes is less than 3 ampere hours of battery capacity.
Shouldn't be a big deal.
Whatever you try that will allow long term operation
at limited voltage has a number of risks. I think you'll
get much better (and highly predicable) results from
running the system at rated design voltage and installing
limited ground support and/or up-sizing ship's batteries
to support the requirement.
If you wanted heavier duty ground support, you could
develop a very light 2-cycle APU that could drive a
60-100A alternator. I suspect you could put this together
for 20-25 pounds of weight budget.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Battery Maintainer More |
>
>
>Hello Bob -
>
>I downloaded your paper that was cited in one of your posts this week, and
>also the pictures of the Harbor Freight load tester. I did a two pager of
>the latter pictures and email and folded it into the original paper for
>you.
>
>Let me know what email address I can send the combined .pdf file to.
Thanks for the offer . . . I have Adobe Acrobat and have considered
combining the documents as you've suggested. I'm leaning toward
a rewrite of the battery chapter in the 'Connection to include
essential particulars of battery maintenance and testing discussed
here recently . . . a Rev 11.5 change that I could publish on
the website and incorporate onto paper the next time we go to
print.
>I hope this is a help to your busy world of helping us folks in the OBAM
>community.
Thank you for the kind words . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Battery Charger/Maintainer/Desulphators |
luscombe-silvaire(at)yahoogroups.com,
vintage-and-warbirds(at)yahoogroups.com
Greetings to All,
I've been reading the posts pertaining to battery maintenance and am
wondering if any of you on the lists are, or have, used the charger/maintainer
and
desulphator units?
For years I too had problems with battery operation and longevity, then I
came across an article about desulphator's and It all made since. I got on the
web and started researching these units, and desulphation itself, and thought
I'd give it a try. The units from the company that I've included here were
inexpensive so I ordered one.
That was (2) years ago; I've taken batteries that my friends had taken out
of their airplanes, cars, and trucks, as "dead", and ran them through the
charging/desulphation process and have saved, and am now using about 95% of them.
Periodically I'll hook my airplane, etc., up for a trickle charge and so far
they haven't failed me when needed.
I was just wondering If anyone else was or had tried this process. Also for
you that like to build electronic "stuff", there are plans on the net to do
your own.
Bill Byars
1949 T8F
_http://www.vdcelectronics.com/index.htm_
(http://www.vdcelectronics.com/index.htm)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Dave Morris <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> help, please?(at)roxy.matronics.com |
Subject: | Re: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory |
help, please?
I for one would enjoy a discussion of how a spark plug CHT probe works. It
looks to me like "a ring terminal connected to some red and white marketing
hype" to produce an expensive part that nobody understands. What sort of
EMF is produced, where is it produced, can I use regular ole butt splices
to extend the special wires, and what other precautions do I need to take
when running the wire through the baffling, through the firewall, up into
the cockpit to my canopy-mounted instrument panel? If this has already
been hashed out somewhere, point me to the site :)
Thanks,
Dave Morris
At 11:07 PM 6/9/2005, you wrote:
> please?
>
>Baloney. If, as the original poster suggests, the instrument and the
>end of the TC probe are at the same temperature you could connect them
>with anything you want to. The reason that one normally uses
>thermocouple extension wire to connect a TC probe to the remote mounted
>instrument is because they are frequently at different temperatures -
>and probably unpredictably different. For that case it is important to
>use extension wire.
>
>If the two junctions are at the same temperature, any emf generated is
>either canceled out or is only the same as it the copper wire wasn't
>there. That is, the terminals that the TC wire normally connects to on
>the instrument are probably copper or brass or possibly nickel plated.
>The connection between the TC wires generates an EMF that is canceled
>out by the cold junction compensation circuitry in the instrument. If
>you add a length of wire between the TC and the instrument, and assuming
>the two junctions are at the same temperature, you have done nothing but
>move the location of the cold junction - the EMFs at the instrument will
>be exactly the same as without the additional copper wire.
>
>Furthermore, the errors would not be "large" in any case. In fact, any
>error will be exactly the difference in temperature between the
>TC/copper wire junction and the copper wire/instrument junction. Unless
>either of these junctions are very close to the engine, the practical
>difference is minimal.
>
>All the above applies to the original poster's situation. In a "normal"
>GA or experimental with a closed cowl and a separate cockpit, the errors
>could be significant.
>
>If you want more theory, just ask and I can give it to you. :-)
>
>Dick Tasker
>
>AI Nut wrote:
>
> >
> >Copper, indeed any metal that is not what that particular TC was
> >calibrated with, will most likely incude large errors in the final readings.
> >
> >
> >Robert L. Nuckolls, III help wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> help, please?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>I'm installing a 22 hp single cyl 2 stroke in an open frame ultralight.
> >>>
> >>>I'm using a CHT/EGT combo analog gauge. Can I transition from the
> >>>thermocouple wire to copper at the end of the probe wire? Since
> everything
> >>>is out in the open air, and thus should all be at about the same
> >>>temperature?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> If you have a stand-alone gage (like View -C- in Figure 14-10
> >> of 'Connection or in:
> >>
> >>http://aeroelectric.com/articles/excerpt.pdf
> >>
> >> then the instrument is calibrated assuming that the cold
> >> junction occurs inside or at the rear of the instrument.
> >> In an airplane like an ultralight, your supposition that
> >> ambient temperatures at a remote cold junction and at
> >> the instrument will be fairly close is a good one . . .
> >> as long as the remote junction is not exposed to localized
> >> heating from the engine.
> >>
> >> The always-proper way to extend thermocouples in any
> >> instrumentation package is with thermocouple wire which
> >> is readily available as cited in another post. In this
> >> case, however, you're not likely to introduce serious
> >> errors by using copper to extend the wires.
> >>
> >> Bob . . .
> >>
> >>
> >>.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>--
>----
>Please Note:
>No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede,
>however,
>that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily
>inconvenienced.
>----
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
>Any info on this alternator/regulator setup will be very handy.Am just unpacking
my >Aero Sport engine with a 40AMP Alt.
>Regards Chris Byrne
Chris|:
The 40 amps Denso is great and highly recommend it. No doubt similar to the one
niagarairparts.com sells. E-mail the part number to me and I can get you detailed
info. All the modern Denso have an IC chip voltage regulator (VR) that controls
voltage and protects against over voltage (OV). You have choices:
1) Use the alternator with internal VR as per the installation instruction (if
you dont have them see niagaraairparts.com).
2) Use alternator but add a b-lead OV protection device such as http://www.periheliondesign.com/LOVM.htm
3) Modify it for an external voltage regulator that has an OV protection or add
a crow bar per Bobs instruction or buy a modern external VR with internal OV
protection.
4) Buy B& C alternator and voltage regulator for over $600.
Recommend choice #1. You will get different opinions and some feel the internal
VR is not acceptable to use as is or at all. I respectfully disagree and 1000's
are flying with no problem. In 10 years this will be old news and the internal
regulator will be the accepted practice. External voltage regulators are some
what a throw back due to technical limitations of old technology. Internal
VR are safe and reliable and the service history really supports this.
Dont recommend choice #2, add on OV protection on an alternator that has internal
VR and internal OV protection. I am not against the external VR, but feel the
internal version is excellent and works as is. Also the external b-lead OV
disconnect relay may cause problems. Less is more, less failure points, weight
and cost. If you want external protection than you should go the choice #3 or
#4, in my opinion.
Choice # 3 is possible and I have info on doing the mod, but have not tried the
mod myself. I think this is a waste, but if you want to do this I can point you
to info on how to do the mod and what external regulator to use. OV protection
can be provided several ways.
Choice #4, nice products but too expensive. I have bought 40amp Denso for $90 new
and regulators for $30. I cant see almost $700 for an alternator for an experimental
airplane.
The concern Bob and others have with choice #1 is they feel that you can have a
failure of the internal VR field driver transistor, causing an OV. In theory
it is possible but no one has shown cases where any Denso, specifically a 40 amp
model, failed in this manner that caused an OV problem. If anyone has step
up to the plate and give the us the facts. The stories always seem very sketchy
at best with no details. Many OV stories involve older planes with external
voltage regulators that have two transistors and no OV protection. That is why
add-on external OV protection modules were invented in the first place many decades
ago, they needed them.
The modern reliability of electronics in a Denso, makes the likely hood of having
an OV failure a rare occurrence, not impossible but very unlikely. How likely
is it that your wing will fall off? Impossible? No, unlikely? Yes.
The IC chip in your Denso alternator is very sophisticated, with 1000-3500 transistors
and internal fault protection and monitoring. The drive transistor, external
to the IC, is part of the voltage regulators architecture. In the failure
scenario people claim this fails, which by-passes the IC chip control, allowing
the alternator to go to full output. For this to happen, the transistor must
fail in a very specific way (short). I never heard anyone with definitive
proof that this has ever happened in an alternator, or even know what the exact
transistor part number is. To make comparisons about transistors failing in
other applications is not valid unless you know what kind of transistor you are
talking about and how it is used. I have not nailed down the exact transistor,
such as a MOSFET, JFET or BJT, let me know if you find out. I am not going
to destroy my alternator to find out. Denso USA can not provide the information,
since all their real technical info is in Jap
an.
I have called Denso, auto electric shops and checked the Highway safety database
for alternator failures, fires, recalls and service problems and the Denso,
which seems to be very reliable and no reports of OV. Some alternators (Ford,
Hitachi) have had some problems, causing auto fires, but not the Denso brand.
Again the facts against the Denso, with the internal VR are few and far between.
I guess B&C who sells a product that cost 3 or 4 or 6 times as much, is going
to hype it a little, which is all fair in war and sales I guess. Not a put
down of B&C, they make a great product but I find the prices too high.
Even if a failure does occurs it would most likely cause a passive problem, meaning
the alternator will just stop producing. All alternators for cars have internal
a VR. Why? Also it is true getting an internal VR alternator certified
in a factory plane may be difficult, but who cares if you have an experimental.
Certification does not mean it is perfect; In fact all the old aircraft electrical
systems based on a 1950 Ford auto technology is certified! There are 1000s
of factory planes flying with truly terrible electrical systems everyday.
In fact if you wanted to design an electrical system for a certified plane you
could base it on a Ford model T generator and some mechanical VR (with points
and relays) and get it certified, as long as it is like an existing design.
I would much rather have a modern internally regulated Denso alternator. Just
because it cant be installed in a 1959 Cessna does not make it bad. There are
probably 100s or even 1000s of internally reg
ulated
Denso alternators flying around with no problem, not to mention millions and millions
of cars, trucks and industrial equipment. Install your aerosport alternator
and enjoy and don't worry.
Cheers George
---------------------------------
Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news & more. Check it out!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Paul Wilson <pwilson(at)climber.org> |
Subject: | Re: battery maintainer More |
Bob,
Thanks for the comments.
Paul
=========
0:59 PM 6/9/2005, you wrote:
>
>
>
> >
> >I have an "automatic 1.5 amp Schumacher SE-1-12S" I use all the time for
> >various batteries, tractor, un-used truck etc. This unit is stocked a the
> >local battery store so is readily available. I think I got mine at Walmart
> >years ago. With all the discussion I decided to see how it works. I put it
> >on a yellow Optima which is a deep cycle spiral glass matt 750 cca, 55AH.
> >Too big for a plane but a good choice for a car/truck. Weighs 46 pounds.
> > I just clock watched to see what the volts were.
> >initial 12.38 after sitting for 6 months
> >1 minute 12.94
> >2 minutes 13.45
> >1 hour 12.76
> >3 hours 12.67
> >22 hours 12.68
>
> Hmmmm . . . doesn't like like this critter goes into much
> of a maintenance mode . . . endpoint voltage is less than
> the float voltage of a fully charged battery. Further,
> we don't know if it went into a top-off mode by pulling
> the battery up to better than 14 volts.
>
> >Don't know how high it got.
> > To lazy to do the same test on my small lawn tractor battery (similar to
> >a light plane battery). It is a glass matt with 340 cca, ?AH and after a
> >being plugged in for a week I remember the volts were around 12.6.
> > The charger sells for $42 to $27 on the net, locally for $28.95.
> > Seems like it wont hurt a battery if left plugged in for long periods. It
> >comes with a bracket to mount under the hood of a car and had bolted
> >eyelets. A portable version with clips is SE1562A sells for an extra $4
> >locally.
>
> You're correct, it won't hurt the battery on long term charge,
> but it would be interesting to know how well it works
> for topping off a dead battery and then storing it. The
> numbers you've cited don't offer warm fuzzies about it.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Denso Alternator's with built in regulator and field |
input.
From: | "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)mail.sprint.com> |
I like the Denso Alternator unit that Aerosport Power sells.
They have a 40Amp and an 80 Amp unit. Does anyone know the actual part
numbers for these units and if there are other Amp version with these
similar features and specs?
Also if one of these were purchased at your local Auto Part
dealer, is there anything that needs to be done with them to be able to
be mounted and used on an Lycoming in an RV?
Thank You
Ray Doerr
RV-10
40250
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Denso Alternator's with built in regulator and |
field input.
From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
I went to my local autozone and bout a Toyota Camry unit...This is a
Denso unit but it is rebuilt...Lots of dtebate as to how reliable it
will be.
It will come with a serpentine belt so you will need a 3/8ths V pulley
of about 2.5 inch...to 4" diameter...I got mine mail order from "Green
Bay rebuilders"....They knew the bore diameter (15mm I think) and the
required offset.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Doerr, Ray R [NTK]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Denso Alternator's with built in regulator
and field input.
-->
I like the Denso Alternator unit that Aerosport Power sells.
They have a 40Amp and an 80 Amp unit. Does anyone know the actual part
numbers for these units and if there are other Amp version with these
similar features and specs?
Also if one of these were purchased at your local Auto Part
dealer, is there anything that needs to be done with them to be able to
be mounted and used on an Lycoming in an RV?
Thank You
Ray Doerr
RV-10
40250
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
Subject: | Re: battery maintainer More |
As previously stated, I have a Schumcher and have reported that it applies a
gradually increasing charging voltage until it hits 14.4 or so, then shuts
OFF and lets battery self-discharge to 12.99 (13) v at which time it starts
another charging cycle.
- With a fully charged battery, it takes about 1 second to go from 13 to
14.4 v and maybe 15 minutes to much longer to self-discharge down to 13 v
again.
- With a discharged battery, it will hang in the 13.5 v area for a long
time (at either 2 amps or 10 amps, selectable, with 10 amps being for faster
recharge of a discharged battery), gradually increasing top 14.4 v again -
may take 15 minutes, may take 30 minutes, may take an hour, but as the
battery takes more charge, the cycle time decreases until it is "on 1
second" and "off for a long time".
- I put the digital VOM on the two alligator clips on the battery
terminals and sit and sip lemonade while watching the charger do its thing -
I've gone thru 2 (still on my 2nd) - when it quits performing as I've
described, the charger is broken or the battery is bad.
It looks to me like the reported numbers that started this current "thread"
were taken at random times, without any regard to where the charger and
battery were in "the cycle of charge & discharge". So, I don't think the
comment about "Hmmmm . . . doesn't like like this critter goes into much of
a maintenance mode . . . endpoint voltage is less than the float voltage of
a fully charged battery. Further, we don't know if it went into a top-off
mode by pulling
the battery up to better than 14 volts." reflects knowledge of the
Schumacher performance
- there is no "maintenance mode" - it shuts OFF - NO voltage, until it
starts pumping current thru again at 13v up to 14.4.
Just trying again to shed some light on how this charger works. Everytime
I've commented in the past it seems to have gone unnoticed and
un-acknowledged.
David Carter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: battery maintainer More
>
>
> >
> >I have an "automatic 1.5 amp Schumacher SE-1-12S" I use all the time for
> >various batteries, tractor, un-used truck etc. This unit is stocked a the
> >local battery store so is readily available. I think I got mine at
Walmart
> >years ago. With all the discussion I decided to see how it works. I put
it
> >on a yellow Optima which is a deep cycle spiral glass matt 750 cca, 55AH.
> >Too big for a plane but a good choice for a car/truck. Weighs 46 pounds.
> > I just clock watched to see what the volts were.
> >initial 12.38 after sitting for 6 months
> >1 minute 12.94
> >2 minutes 13.45
> >1 hour 12.76
> >3 hours 12.67
> >22 hours 12.68
>
> Hmmmm . . . doesn't like like this critter goes into much
> of a maintenance mode . . . endpoint voltage is less than
> the float voltage of a fully charged battery. Further,
> we don't know if it went into a top-off mode by pulling
> the battery up to better than 14 volts.
>
> >Don't know how high it got.
> > To lazy to do the same test on my small lawn tractor battery (similar
to
> >a light plane battery). It is a glass matt with 340 cca, ?AH and after a
> >being plugged in for a week I remember the volts were around 12.6.
> > The charger sells for $42 to $27 on the net, locally for $28.95.
> > Seems like it wont hurt a battery if left plugged in for long periods.
It
> >comes with a bracket to mount under the hood of a car and had bolted
> >eyelets. A portable version with clips is SE1562A sells for an extra $4
> >locally.
>
> You're correct, it won't hurt the battery on long term charge,
> but it would be interesting to know how well it works
> for topping off a dead battery and then storing it. The
> numbers you've cited don't offer warm fuzzies about it.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David A. Leonard" <dleonar1(at)maine.rr.com> |
Subject: | Near miss with lightning |
I was standing in my garage today, during the light rain before a distant
thunderstorm, thunder off in the distance, nothing going on nearby.
I was leaning against the garage door track, wearing sox, standing on a
slightly damp garage floor, talking to a friend in her car. Suddenely I
got one hell of a shock, in my hand, that was on the track, down the right
side of my body, and out my foot. The ball of my foot and my toes are still
tingling now from the burn, this being three hours later.
In the past, during an intense storm, I have seen sparks shoot off the
garage door track, and shoot to the floor, and I have lost multiple door
opener boards, so I was aware of the " potential. I really thought that
the storm was off in the distance, nothing nearby. I guess I thought
wrong! I'm happy to be alive!
I have been doing some reading, apparently the charges travel 6-8 miles
from the ground to the clouds. If you can hear thunder at all, you are in
danger. I think that the metal garage door tracks are great antennae and
though they are buried in the concrete, the ground is dry, and when they
charge a lot, the electricity can jump the gap to the floor. I think the
damp concrete and my sweaty hand were better conductors, and I completed
the circuit, long before the charge was enough to jump to the floor.
I always thought staying off the phone was bullshit, but I am rethinking
that one. Large metal objects like phone wires, appliances and any other
metal will act as antennas.
While I am not sure if this counts as being " hit by lightning" , it is
absolutely as close as I care to become intimate with the subject!
YIKES, my wife was watching, they asked if I was okay, I said yes ( In
shock I think..) and they left.. later I felt less okay...not sick or
damaged, just that "cheated death again" type of rush letdown.
I seem top be okay, I've been hit harder by 220, but YIKES.
I think I am going to electrically connect all the garage door tracks, and
then drive a six foot ground rod into the dirt driveway, and connect a
piece of jumper cable wire between them to bond the electrical
potential. Being that jumper wasn't cool. My thinking is that this will
make the electrical charge of the nearby ground and the tracks equal. This
will not stop a direct strike to the house, but I think it will remove the
difference in charge between the tracks and the floor. Anyone know about
this subject?
The obvious answer is to stay away from the garage in lightning storms..
http://www.ux1.eiu.edu/~cfjps/1400/shockinglecture.html
Reverend Sparky
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Cory Emberson" <bootless(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Near miss with lightning |
Dear Rev,
WOW. Thanks for sharing your story - that is very valuable information!
Glad you're OK.
best, Cory
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of David
A. Leonard
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Near miss with lightning
I was standing in my garage today, during the light rain before a distant
thunderstorm, thunder off in the distance, nothing going on nearby.
I was leaning against the garage door track, wearing sox, standing on a
slightly damp garage floor, talking to a friend in her car. Suddenely I
got one hell of a shock, in my hand, that was on the track, down the right
side of my body, and out my foot. The ball of my foot and my toes are still
tingling now from the burn, this being three hours later.
In the past, during an intense storm, I have seen sparks shoot off the
garage door track, and shoot to the floor, and I have lost multiple door
opener boards, so I was aware of the " potential. I really thought that
the storm was off in the distance, nothing nearby. I guess I thought
wrong! I'm happy to be alive!
I have been doing some reading, apparently the charges travel 6-8 miles
from the ground to the clouds. If you can hear thunder at all, you are in
danger. I think that the metal garage door tracks are great antennae and
though they are buried in the concrete, the ground is dry, and when they
charge a lot, the electricity can jump the gap to the floor. I think the
damp concrete and my sweaty hand were better conductors, and I completed
the circuit, long before the charge was enough to jump to the floor.
I always thought staying off the phone was bullshit, but I am rethinking
that one. Large metal objects like phone wires, appliances and any other
metal will act as antennas.
While I am not sure if this counts as being " hit by lightning" , it is
absolutely as close as I care to become intimate with the subject!
YIKES, my wife was watching, they asked if I was okay, I said yes ( In
shock I think..) and they left.. later I felt less okay...not sick or
damaged, just that "cheated death again" type of rush letdown.
I seem top be okay, I've been hit harder by 220, but YIKES.
I think I am going to electrically connect all the garage door tracks, and
then drive a six foot ground rod into the dirt driveway, and connect a
piece of jumper cable wire between them to bond the electrical
potential. Being that jumper wasn't cool. My thinking is that this will
make the electrical charge of the nearby ground and the tracks equal. This
will not stop a direct strike to the house, but I think it will remove the
difference in charge between the tracks and the floor. Anyone know about
this subject?
The obvious answer is to stay away from the garage in lightning storms..
http://www.ux1.eiu.edu/~cfjps/1400/shockinglecture.html
Reverend Sparky
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
Subject: | Re: Near miss with lightning |
David A. Leonard wrote:
>
>I was standing in my garage today, during the light rain before a distant
>thunderstorm, thunder off in the distance, nothing going on nearby.
>
>I was leaning against the garage door track, wearing sox, standing on a
>slightly damp garage floor, talking to a friend in her car. Suddenely I
>got one hell of a shock, in my hand, that was on the track, down the right
>side of my body, and out my foot. The ball of my foot and my toes are still
>tingling now from the burn, this being three hours later.
>
>In the past, during an intense storm, I have seen sparks shoot off the
>garage door track, and shoot to the floor, and I have lost multiple door
>opener boards, so I was aware of the " potential. I really thought that
>the storm was off in the distance, nothing nearby. I guess I thought
>wrong! I'm happy to be alive!
>
> I have been doing some reading, apparently the charges travel 6-8 miles
>from the ground to the clouds. If you can hear thunder at all, you are in
>danger. I think that the metal garage door tracks are great antennae and
>though they are buried in the concrete, the ground is dry, and when they
>charge a lot, the electricity can jump the gap to the floor. I think the
>damp concrete and my sweaty hand were better conductors, and I completed
>the circuit, long before the charge was enough to jump to the floor.
>
>I always thought staying off the phone was bullshit, but I am rethinking
>that one. Large metal objects like phone wires, appliances and any other
>metal will act as antennas.
>
>While I am not sure if this counts as being " hit by lightning" , it is
>absolutely as close as I care to become intimate with the subject!
>
>
>YIKES, my wife was watching, they asked if I was okay, I said yes ( In
>shock I think..) and they left.. later I felt less okay...not sick or
>damaged, just that "cheated death again" type of rush letdown.
>
>I seem top be okay, I've been hit harder by 220, but YIKES.
>
>I think I am going to electrically connect all the garage door tracks, and
>then drive a six foot ground rod into the dirt driveway, and connect a
>piece of jumper cable wire between them to bond the electrical
>potential. Being that jumper wasn't cool. My thinking is that this will
>make the electrical charge of the nearby ground and the tracks equal. This
>will not stop a direct strike to the house, but I think it will remove the
>difference in charge between the tracks and the floor. Anyone know about
>this subject?
>
>The obvious answer is to stay away from the garage in lightning storms..
>
>http://www.ux1.eiu.edu/~cfjps/1400/shockinglecture.html
>
>Reverend Sparky
>
No hard scientific insight, but I can tell you that staying away from
the garage during storms might be a very good idea, based on your
accounts of prior hits. In one of my prior lives (electronics repair &
installation) I did a lot of lightning related repairs. Most of my
customers were limited to a single hit during my career, but I had a few
customers that got hit several times over a 10 year span. One person had
5 or 6 hits. Some locations and/or structures just seem to attract
higher than 'normal' lightning activity.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> |
Subject: | Re: Near miss with lightning |
I learned some interesting lessons while living in Albuquerque in the late
70's. I had a large ham radio antenna on a 50 foot tower. Sometimes I
could pull 2 or 3 inch arcs from the center conductor of my coax cable to
the grounded chassis of my amplifier, even when there was no lightning,
just rain. We have to remember that those clouds have a very different
electrical charge than ground, whether there is lightning or not. You
might be really surprised what happens to the charge on your fuselage just
flying through the rain.
Dave Morris
At 09:26 PM 6/10/2005, you wrote:
>
>
>I was standing in my garage today, during the light rain before a distant
>thunderstorm, thunder off in the distance, nothing going on nearby.
>
>I was leaning against the garage door track, wearing sox, standing on a
>slightly damp garage floor, talking to a friend in her car. Suddenely I
>got one hell of a shock, in my hand, that was on the track, down the right
>side of my body, and out my foot. The ball of my foot and my toes are still
>tingling now from the burn, this being three hours later.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net> |
Subject: | Stuck transmit lite on microair 760 |
Hi Bob,
I'm trying to trouble shoot a problem with the Microair 760 transeiver. With the
microphone plugged into the jack, pushing the PTT button (ray allen stick grip)
causes the red (transmit) lite on the transeiver to stay on after the button
is released. Only when I pull out the mic does it go off. With the mic out,
the red lite comes on when the PTT is pushed and goes out, as it should, when
the PTT is released. Do you have any idea what might be wrong.
Thanks, Rick Fogerson
RV-3 about 2 months to flying
Boise, ID
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Subject: | Re: Near miss with lightning |
My father was an engineer on the Westinghouse-Van deGraff atomic accelerator
known as the "Atom Smasher" in East Pittsburgh. During testing he got
seriously zapped by several million volts (but micro-second pulses at low
current his boss said....). Afterwards, Dad replied, "Those were some of the
worst micro-seconds I ever spent."
>I think I am going to electrically connect all the garage door tracks, and
> then drive a six foot ground rod into the dirt driveway, and connect a
> piece of jumper cable wire between them to bond the electrical
> potential.
For bonding the garage door tracks, consider using the water main. It's a
good ground.
Better yet, install a couple lightning rods. (Google or you local electrical
supply). These don't attract lightning, but they do bleed-off charges and
will protect your house in case of a strike. Then install a whole-house
electrical protector at the breaker box. Spend some money for a good one to
protect your phones, cable, and electrical service.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
"The problem with the world is that only the intelligent people want to be
smarter, and only the good people want to improve."
- Eolake Stobblehouse
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Stuck transmit lite on microair 760 |
>
>Hi Bob,
>I'm trying to trouble shoot a problem with the Microair 760
>transeiver. With the microphone plugged into the jack, pushing the PTT
>button (ray allen stick grip) causes the red (transmit) lite on the
>transeiver to stay on after the button is released. Only when I pull out
>the mic does it go off. With the mic out, the red lite comes on when the
>PTT is pushed and goes out, as it should, when the PTT is released. Do
>you have any idea what might be wrong.
Sounds like something sticking in the mic's PTT
mechanism. This is a VERY common problem with
hand held microphones.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: battery maintainer More |
>
>
>As previously stated, I have a Schumcher and have reported that it applies a
>gradually increasing charging voltage until it hits 14.4 or so, then shuts
>OFF and lets battery self-discharge to 12.99 (13) v at which time it starts
>another charging cycle.
> - With a fully charged battery, it takes about 1 second to go from 13 to
>14.4 v and maybe 15 minutes to much longer to self-discharge down to 13 v
>again.
> - With a discharged battery, it will hang in the 13.5 v area for a long
>time (at either 2 amps or 10 amps, selectable, with 10 amps being for faster
>recharge of a discharged battery), gradually increasing top 14.4 v again -
>may take 15 minutes, may take 30 minutes, may take an hour, but as the
>battery takes more charge, the cycle time decreases until it is "on 1
>second" and "off for a long time".
> - I put the digital VOM on the two alligator clips on the battery
>terminals and sit and sip lemonade while watching the charger do its thing -
>I've gone thru 2 (still on my 2nd) - when it quits performing as I've
>described, the charger is broken or the battery is bad.
I think this was the protocol option for smart-chargers before
microprocessors came along. And . . . it's an effective protocol
that does a good job of charging/maintaining a battery.
>It looks to me like the reported numbers that started this current "thread"
>were taken at random times, without any regard to where the charger and
>battery were in "the cycle of charge & discharge". So, I don't think the
>comment about "Hmmmm . . . doesn't like like this critter goes into much of
>a maintenance mode . . . endpoint voltage is less than the float voltage of
>a fully charged battery. Further, we don't know if it went into a top-off
>mode by pulling
>the battery up to better than 14 volts." reflects knowledge of the
>Schumacher performance
> - there is no "maintenance mode" - it shuts OFF - NO voltage, until it
>starts pumping current thru again at 13v up to 14.4.
>
>Just trying again to shed some light on how this charger works. Everytime
>I've commented in the past it seems to have gone unnoticed and
>un-acknowledged.
The numbers I've cited for my experiments were continuously monitored
(and plotted) and taken from manufacturer's statements for protocols.
The current crop of battery charger/maintainers are a lot more agile.
I'm finding that Schumacher has DIFFERENT protocols. For example,
the recharge cycle depicted at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/schumacher_2.jpg
is strikingly different than this one:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/schumacher_3.jpg
The earlier trace was taken from the charge/maintenance
protocol for a WM-1562A that I'd mentioned in an earlier
thread. I bought this at Walmart for $18. Folks reported
not being able to find them at their local stores (although
mine still has a half dozen). Last night I picked up its
bigger brother for $25. Much more "smarts" (push-buttons
and lights) and higher recharge capability (6A max).
This was the WM-600A. I'm doing some further experiments
with it now and will report the results as they become
available.
You raise an interesting question that is not obviously
deducible from the plots taken so far . . . does the
"maintenance" mode ACTIVELY support the battery just above
its open circuit voltage -OR- does the charger simply shut
off and wait for the battery to self-discharge to the
point where protocol demands action from the charger
to replace lost energy. I'll find out for the two
Schumacher devices I have on hand.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
>
>
> >Any info on this alternator/regulator setup will be very handy.Am just
> unpacking my >Aero Sport engine with a 40AMP Alt.
>
> >Regards Chris Byrne
>
>
>Chris|:
>
>
>The 40 amps Denso is great and highly recommend it. No doubt similar to
>the one niagarairparts.com sells. E-mail the part number to me and I can
>get you detailed info. All the modern Denso have an IC chip voltage
>regulator (VR) that controls voltage and protects against over voltage
>(OV). You have choices:
>
>
>1) Use the alternator with internal VR as per the installation instruction
>(if you dont have them see niagaraairparts.com).
>
>
>2) Use alternator but add a b-lead OV protection device such as
>http://www.periheliondesign.com/LOVM.htm
>
>
>3) Modify it for an external voltage regulator that has an OV protection
>or add a crow bar per Bobs instruction or buy a modern external VR with
>internal OV protection.
>
>
>4) Buy B& C alternator and voltage regulator for over $600.
>
>
>Recommend choice #1. You will get different opinions and some feel the
>internal VR is not acceptable to use as is or at all. I respectfully
>disagree and 1000's are flying with no problem. In 10 years this will be
>old news and the internal regulator will be the accepted practice.
>External voltage regulators are some what a throw back due to technical
>limitations of old technology. Internal VR are safe and reliable and the
>service history really supports this.
>
>
>Dont recommend choice #2, add on OV protection on an alternator that has
>internal VR and internal OV protection. I am not against the external VR,
>but feel the internal version is excellent and works as is. Also the
>external b-lead OV disconnect relay may cause problems. Less is more, less
>failure points, weight and cost. If you want external protection than you
>should go the choice #3 or #4, in my opinion.
>
>
>Choice # 3 is possible and I have info on doing the mod, but have not
>tried the mod myself. I think this is a waste, but if you want to do this
>I can point you to info on how to do the mod and what external regulator
>to use. OV protection can be provided several ways.
>
>
>Choice #4, nice products but too expensive. I have bought 40amp Denso for
>$90 new and regulators for $30. I cant see almost $700 for an alternator
>for an experimental airplane.
>
>
>The concern Bob and others have with choice #1 is they feel that you can
>have a failure of the internal VR field driver transistor, causing an OV.
>In theory it is possible but no one has shown cases where any Denso,
>specifically a 40 amp model, failed in this manner that caused an OV
>problem. If anyone has step up to the plate and give the us the facts. The
>stories always seem very sketchy at best with no details. Many OV stories
>involve older planes with external voltage regulators that have two
>transistors and no OV protection. That is why add-on external OV
>protection modules were invented in the first place many decades ago, they
>needed them.
Okay, it's your considered recommendation that if one
purchases p/n (xxxxx) from supplier (YYYYY) then OV
protection is not called for. You've cited data to support
your advice. Now, how do we get this information into
the hands of the greatest numbers of builders?
George, you seem to have completely missed the point
I've been trying to illustrate during this endless
thread. YOU and many like you are building ONE airplane.
You may have conversed with others to gather data
on and make selection of specific components in
which you have either trust supported by repeatable
experiments or faith supported by the gross weight of
anecdotal information. In either case, you're certainly
free to go forward with your choice and I wish you well.
Please understand that I write for thousands of builders
working on thousands of airplanes being fabricated all
over the world. Their choices for selection of a suitable
alternator MIGHT include part number (xxxxx) and maybe
they have access to supplier (YYYYY) but I would be
remiss in my duties if I were to LIMIT my recommendations
to this narrow range of choices . . . especially when
I have no data from any repeatable experiments
to support my advice. Further, there are MILLIONS of
alternators with THOUSANDS of part numbers that will
perform very well and free of concerns if we drive
probability of hazardous failure down with layered
systems architecture . . . this is a major component
of FAILURE TOLERANT design. You ASSUME that a part
will fail and then incorporate protection -OR-
alternate technology (Plan B).
When I handed control lock keys of an explosively
launched recovery parachute controller to the pilot who
was going to depend on that system to safe his life
and perhaps his airplane, I could look him right in
the eye and offer that I have done the best I know
how to do. When I write words on this List and for
the 'Connection, I believe am operating with that
same sense of duty to offer the best and most
universally useable information available. I am
pleased that you have discovered what you believe
is the ultimate solution to your system design
goals and parts procurement issues. Please fly them in
good health. The odds are definitely in your favor.
But understand that I've obligated myself to operate
in a wider arena and to offer advice that permits
me to look any builder in the eye and offer that
it's the best and most universally applicable
technology I know how to do right now. I have no
FAITH in the universal performance of all the
automotive alternators available to the OBAM aircraft
community around the world but I do have the
knowledge of countless REPEATABLE EXPERIMENTS
conducted to craft the most failure tolerant
and hazard free systems I know how to do today.
I'm not here to argue against the gospel of
Nipon Denso or any other. I have tools called
Failure Mode Effects Analysis, decades of experience
with others who design, build and fly airplanes
and a personal goal of understanding how things
work and sharing that with anyone who has an
interest. I cannot advise a builder to adopt a
design philosophy that I do not understand or that
he cannot understand AND CONTROL.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> help, |
please?@roxy.matronics.com
Subject: | Re: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory |
help, please?
>help, please?
>
>I for one would enjoy a discussion of how a spark plug CHT probe works. It
>looks to me like "a ring terminal connected to some red and white marketing
>hype" to produce an expensive part that nobody understands. What sort of
>EMF is produced, where is it produced, can I use regular ole butt splices
>to extend the special wires, and what other precautions do I need to take
>when running the wire through the baffling, through the firewall, up into
>the cockpit to my canopy-mounted instrument panel? If this has already
>been hashed out somewhere, point me to the site :)
See chapter 14 of the 'Connection.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jim Oke <wjoke(at)shaw.ca> field input. |
Subject: | Re: Denso Alternator's with built in regulator and |
field input.
Hi Ray;
I have an Aerosport Power 40 Amp Nippon Denso alternator on an RV-6A that came
with the O-320 I bought from them. I liked it so much for size, weight, ease of
installation and general performance that I eventually bought a second one from
Aerosport to replace an older Honda unit on my RV-3.
So far as I can determine the Nippon Denso part number is 18504-6220. Searching the Denso web-site at http://www.densoheavyduty.com/ it appears the actual manufacturer of the unit is the Ishikawajima Company in Japan and that company's part number is 100211-1680.
I do not think there is a common automotive application for this alternator so
they will probably no be readily available at your usual local car parts store.
I asked at a few local stores and was told the main use of this alternator is
in a line of Toyota forklift trucks and some Kubota light tractors but that's
not for sure.
There was a Japanese language spec sheet in the box which I still have but could not make much sense of other than a few basic numbers. It would be "nice" if some one was able to do the technical research to determine what the electrical capabilities of the unit are regarding overvolt protection, load dump tolerance, rapid shutdown capability and so on are. Have a look at ttp://www.vicic.com.tw/alternators/a8062902.htm which seems to be an OEM replacement part number for the regulator on these things from a company in Taiwan which has a few hints about what is included.
I think this is Bob's worry about blindly using automotive alternators on OBAM
aircraft - there is huge variety of externally similar units out there with (probably)
varying electrical properties depending on the original design/cost/capability
tradeoffs. A comprehensive spec sheet for a particular alternator would
be a good start is sorting out the suitable for aircraft use from the unsuitable.
Jim Oke
RV-6A, RV-3
Winnipeg, MB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)mail.sprint.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Denso Alternator's with built in regulator and field
input.
>
> I like the Denso Alternator unit that Aerosport Power sells.
> They have a 40Amp and an 80 Amp unit. Does anyone know the actual part
> numbers for these units and if there are other Amp version with these
> similar features and specs?
> Also if one of these were purchased at your local Auto Part
> dealer, is there anything that needs to be done with them to be able to
> be mounted and used on an Lycoming in an RV?
>
>
> Thank You
> Ray Doerr
> RV-10
> 40250
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net> |
Subject: | Re: Clarification of Stuck transmit lite on microair |
760
Just to clarify that we're both talking apples to apples:
1) Does the fact that it only appears to stick in transmit (only
indication is red light stays on) when the mic jack is plugged in mean
something other than the transmit button is sticky?
2) The button itself does not appear to be sticking, in a mechanical sense
at least. Could it be sticking electrically and not mechanically?
3) Also, it is not a hand held button, it is on the Ray Allen stick grip.
Does that matter?
4) Should I just buy a new stick grip and not mess with it or could it be
something in the Microair?
Thanks in advance for any clarification and/or advice.
Rick
>>Hi Bob,
>>I'm trying to trouble shoot a problem with the Microair 760
>>transeiver. With the microphone plugged into the jack, pushing the PTT
>>button (ray allen stick grip) causes the red (transmit) lite on the
>>transeiver to stay on after the button is released. Only when I pull out
>>the mic does it go off. With the mic out, the red lite comes on when the
>>PTT is pushed and goes out, as it should, when the PTT is released. Do
>>you have any idea what might be wrong.
>
> Sounds like something sticking in the mic's PTT
> mechanism. This is a VERY common problem with
> hand held microphones.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
Subject: | Re: Difficulties with AC motor |
chad-c_sip(at)stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>
>I'm hoping someone out there can clear something up for me.
>
>We're putting an electrically-powered AC into the Lancair we're building.
>Before we turn on the engine we'd like to be able to run this from 110V ground
>power - rather than simply a GPU cart. Unfortunately, that'll require about
>25-30 amps of 110VAC power to run at full blast (it's 100 Amps max at 28VDC,
>80 for the compressor, 20 for the fans).
>
>So I thought that it'd be nice to run the AC at a reduced power setting that
>only requires a few amps of wall power. Sure, it won't be able to run the AC
>at full blast, but even if it cools a bit we're ahead of the game.
>
>In the last 30 minutes I've been told by two different people that trying to
>run a 28V compressor at 12 or 14VDC will draw more current than it would pull
>at 28. I realize I'm a mechanical engineer, not electrical, but this just
>makes no sense to me whatsoever. Sure, to get equal power out of a motor at
>half the voltage you've gotta run the current higher. But I'm not looking to
>get the same power output at a lower voltage. I've already got a motor wound
>that will draw 80 amps at 28V. How much current will _that_ motor draw when
>fed with 12?
>
>Beyond the current draw issue, is there any other reason I shouldn't be
>attempting this? Is running the compressor at a lower power setting going to
>hurt something somehow?
>
>I'm hoping I'm not off my rocker here and I appreciate the input from
>everyone. And if I'm _am_ off my rocker I'd much rather know that too!
>
>Thanks-
>
>Chad
>
>
>Chad Sipperley
>Lancair IVP-turbine (under construction)
>Phoenix, AZ
>
The guys telling you about higher current are probably thinking about AC
motors. If voltage goes down with some AC motors, current goes up, they
overheat & die.
Some DC motors can be run at full torque & lower rpm (lower total power)
using pulse width modulation where the peaks are at design voltage but
the DC is 'chopped'.
Have you tried running the numbers going the other way? I saw the
suggestion somewhere recently to use a very small window a/c unit. The
new ones are pretty light even in their big steel boxes. If it's gutted
& only the essentials are installed, you might be able to run the 120V
AC compressor off a DC-120V AC inverter while flying & just plug it in
to a regular outlet on the ground.
I've about exceeded my feeble memory (been a while since I had to deal
with this stuff) but maybe this will inspire some more questions...
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Denso Alternator's with built in regulator |
0.48 HTTP_ESCAPED_HOST URI": Uses@-escapes.inside.a.URL's.hostname
BTW: The 40 amp Niagara alternator will shut down if you pull the IGN wire power
even after it is running in normal conditions. However this is not a "field
wire" but is a control to the voltage regulators IC, which controls the field
driver transistor , which controls the field. VR is OV protected by the IC. The
transistor is somewhat protected by the IC from overload. The only way for
an OV to occur is a rare transistor short. If this did occure the IGN wire would
not be effective, in theory.
Ray:
There are many Denso part #'s available. The small frame, which covers the 35-55
amp range. The 60amp and higher are physically larger, but still fit in a RV.
The small alternators tend to have industrial applications like fork lifts and
tractors. All the car applications for small Denso alternators has gone away
since cars need more electrical power today. One example of a typical small
Denso alternator in a car application was found in 1987 Suzuki Side-kick / Samurai.
You will have better luck finding the large alternators in the autopart
stores (Camary is one model I think is a good application).
The typical new small Denso's are not going to be found in an auto part store because
they are used mostly now in industrial applications, but you might find
a new Suzuki Denso alternator.
Here is a Rocket builder with info for a do-it-yourself Denso installation. It
is a (Suzuki) Denso 55 amp, with two mount flanges:
http://www.f1-rocketboy.com/alternator.htm
For the 40 amp you can check the bigger autoelectric supply houses who stock all
kinds of alternators for all applications and not just cars. Also they often
have sales and offer better prices. I have seen a 40-amp racing Denso for as
little as $89, typ $140. The "racing" part as they call it is a universal 40 amp
alternator with a 2. 9 pulley. Most 40 amp Denso have 2.5 pulleys. The difference
are usually small , involving where the B-lead is (side or back) and the
shape of the connector plug for the IGN and L (low volt light).
You can shop around and get an alternator alone for $85-$180, typical $140, new.
By the time you get all the brackets, nuts and bolts and connector you have
a lot of time and effort into it. The Niagara kit is bolt on deal, all parts included.
You can check AutoZone or Peep Boys, but I would not buy a rebuilt. The
advantage is they do offer lifetime warranties. However the use in an airplane
is a little issue you may get a foul for warranty.
Also check the RV list, there is a lot of info there.
I would recommend you look at Niagara airparts http://www.niagara airparts.com/
I dont think Niagara has a 80 amp. I can recommend their 40 amp kit as a fair
deal. Everything you need for $225, includes a new Denso (not rebuilt) and all
the parts to install and wire.
Check your final electrical load. No doubt with the RV-10 you are going to have
full lights: Nav, Strobe, dual landing, panel, and cockpit. Also no doubt you
are going to have a large (electric) panel. I would not recommend running any
alternator continuously more than 75% of its rated amps, 50% even better. However
the 40 amp really can put out 50 amps at higher RPMs per the technical data,
but I would not push it more than 30 amps since they are rated at 40 amps.
Also the Denso VR has an overload protection and does sense temp in the VR. If
VR temp is to high it will shut down. It is best not to try checking it's ability
to keep from overloading by not overloading it. I think a 55amp-60 amp would
be better for you in a RV-10 if you are going to have full lights and panel.
The key to a happy alternator is a cool alternator. keep the % load down and also
think about a blast tube on the back, not a bad idea.
Also I would avoid rebuilt units because there are new units available for a good
price if you know where to look. There are are aftermarket and Denso parts,
get the new Denso to assure you have all denso parts.
Cheers George
Subject: Denso Alternator's with built in regulator and field input.
Date: Jun 10, 2005 From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)mail.sprint.com>
I like the Denso Alternator unit that Aerosport Power sells.
They have a 40Amp and an 80 Amp unit. Does anyone know the actual part
numbers for these units and if there are other Amp version with these
similar features and specs?
Also if one of these were purchased at your local Auto Part
dealer, is there anything that needs to be done with them to be able to
be mounted and used on a Lycoming in an RV?
Thank You
Ray Doerr
RV-10
40250
---------------------------------
Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM & more. Check it out!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
> The 40 amps Denso is great and highly recommend it. No doubt similar to
> the one niagarairparts.com sells. E-mail the part number to me and I can
> get you detailed info. All the modern Denso have an IC chip voltage
> regulator (VR) that controls voltage and protects against over voltage
> (OV). You have choices:
>
>
> 1) Use the alternator with internal VR as per the installation instruction
> (if you dont have them see niagaraairparts.com).
George, excellent post. There must be at least 500 messages on this list
talking about overvoltage and alternators. One question that remains
unanswered is this: If an alternator runs away voltage wise, but is still
connected to the battery, how many amps would the battery draw at the point
when the voltage is harmfully high? Isn't there some inherent protection in
having a circuit breaker in the main alternator output line? For example, I
have a 50 amp breaker on my 40 amp alternator.
Alex Peterson
RV6-A N66AP 624 hours
Maple Grove, MN
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Bill Maxwell" <wrmaxwell(at)bigpond.com> |
Subject: | Re: Clarification of Stuck transmit lite on microair |
760
Rick
I resisted the temptation to jump in when I read your first post yesterday,
as I thought you might have already received a solution by then. However, I
would first check that the switch in the allen grip is in fact a 'momentary
action' pushbutton. Those switches are also available in a 'toggle
on/toggle off' variety and one of the latter would leave your radio keyed in
transmit until the button is pushed the second time. I recall that ray
allen sells both types.
Hope this helps
Bil
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Clarification of Stuck transmit lite on
microair 760
>
>
>
> Just to clarify that we're both talking apples to apples:
> 1) Does the fact that it only appears to stick in transmit (only
> indication is red light stays on) when the mic jack is plugged in mean
> something other than the transmit button is sticky?
>
> 2) The button itself does not appear to be sticking, in a mechanical
> sense
> at least. Could it be sticking electrically and not mechanically?
>
> 3) Also, it is not a hand held button, it is on the Ray Allen stick
> grip.
> Does that matter?
>
> 4) Should I just buy a new stick grip and not mess with it or could it
> be
> something in the Microair?
>
> Thanks in advance for any clarification and/or advice.
> Rick
>
>>>Hi Bob,
>>>I'm trying to trouble shoot a problem with the Microair 760
>>>transeiver. With the microphone plugged into the jack, pushing the PTT
>>>button (ray allen stick grip) causes the red (transmit) lite on the
>>>transeiver to stay on after the button is released. Only when I pull out
>>>the mic does it go off. With the mic out, the red lite comes on when the
>>>PTT is pushed and goes out, as it should, when the PTT is released. Do
>>>you have any idea what might be wrong.
>>
>> Sounds like something sticking in the mic's PTT
>> mechanism. This is a VERY common problem with
>> hand held microphones.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Selective Radio Reception |
Howdy listers-
Odd problem here- In communicating with dozens of other aircraft in the last
year and a half, all report hearing me loud and clear, and I receive most of
their transmissions just fine whether they are in the pattern with me or 50
miles away.
But there are TWO aircraft out of all of them that I can just barely hear-
one (another RV) is broken and staticky, and another (a rental Cherokee where
I'm based) I can't hear at all, just a slight change in background noise when
they are transmitting. These two aircraft report they can hear me fine.
Distance between and relative postion or orientation do not change this behavior.
Other a/c and unicom report hearing both of us fine as well. My radio is
Microair 760, bent whip bottom of fuse, and it doesn't matter whether I'm plugged
direct to the radio or through a Softcomm portable intercom when I've got a
co-pilot.
Any ideas?
Signed- Selective Reception in Columbia
(Mark Phillips)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> on microair 760 |
Subject: | Re: Clarification of Stuck transmit lite |
on microair 760
Is there any chance that RF is getting into the PTT circuitry and causing
it to latch on? Have you checked the integrity of the coax, the antenna
SWR, and made sure your microphone shielding is correct? I've seen this
with higher power transmitters but not on something this small.
Dave Morris
At 11:43 AM 6/11/2005, you wrote:
>
>
>Just to clarify that we're both talking apples to apples:
>1) Does the fact that it only appears to stick in transmit (only
>indication is red light stays on) when the mic jack is plugged in mean
>something other than the transmit button is sticky?
>
>2) The button itself does not appear to be sticking, in a mechanical sense
>at least. Could it be sticking electrically and not mechanically?
>
>3) Also, it is not a hand held button, it is on the Ray Allen stick grip.
>Does that matter?
>
>4) Should I just buy a new stick grip and not mess with it or could it be
>something in the Microair?
>
>Thanks in advance for any clarification and/or advice.
>Rick
>
> >>Hi Bob,
> >>I'm trying to trouble shoot a problem with the Microair 760
> >>transeiver. With the microphone plugged into the jack, pushing the PTT
> >>button (ray allen stick grip) causes the red (transmit) lite on the
> >>transeiver to stay on after the button is released. Only when I pull out
> >>the mic does it go off. With the mic out, the red lite comes on when the
> >>PTT is pushed and goes out, as it should, when the PTT is released. Do
> >>you have any idea what might be wrong.
> >
> > Sounds like something sticking in the mic's PTT
> > mechanism. This is a VERY common problem with
> > hand held microphones.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Ken Simmons" <ken(at)truckstop.com> |
Subject: | 2 1/4 Mitchell oil temp |
I have a 2 1/4" Mitchell mechanical oil temp gauge. I need to remove the sender
wire, but it doesn't seem obvious how to accomplish this. Anyone have one of
these that can give me a hint. Of course, this is the one instruction sheet that
didn't come with the plane from the builder.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Wiring of S704-1 with SD-8 OV protection |
Bob and Listers,
Had planned to install wiring per Bob's Z-13 for a backup SD-8 alternator
with OV module across the coil of the power relay with the Aux Alternator switch
and 5A breaker on the ground lead of the coil.
B&C's drawing accompanying the components calls for a different installation
with the coil being switched to +14 on a 2A breaker.
Hmmmm, a bit of confusion is creeping into my less than 'lectrically literate
mind.....
Soliciting comments regarding the differences/advantages of each. Obviously
both will work fine but since I had already started wiring for Z-13, I hate to
change but can still make the revisions if necessary.
Carl Raichle
RV-9A - Closing in on it.....
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Earl_Schroeder <Earl_Schroeder(at)juno.com> |
Subject: | Re: Selective Radio Reception |
Hi Mark,
One possibility might be that your receiver is more 'selective' [narrow
band receiver] and the offending radios transmitters are slightly skewed
to one end of the transmitted frequency and is thus ignored. If you
could find another Microair to see if it also has this characteristic,
it would be helpful. Earl
Fiveonepw(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>Howdy listers-
>
>Odd problem here- In communicating with dozens of other aircraft in the last
>year and a half, all report hearing me loud and clear, and I receive most of
>their transmissions just fine whether they are in the pattern with me or 50
>miles away.
>
>But there are TWO aircraft out of all of them that I can just barely hear-
>one (another RV) is broken and staticky, and another (a rental Cherokee where
>I'm based) I can't hear at all, just a slight change in background noise when
>they are transmitting. These two aircraft report they can hear me fine.
>Distance between and relative postion or orientation do not change this behavior.
>Other a/c and unicom report hearing both of us fine as well. My radio is
>Microair 760, bent whip bottom of fuse, and it doesn't matter whether I'm plugged
>direct to the radio or through a Softcomm portable intercom when I've got a
>co-pilot.
>
>Any ideas?
>
>Signed- Selective Reception in Columbia
>(Mark Phillips)
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "John Swartout" <jgswartout(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Built-in starter contactor |
Bob, on May 9th you replied, in part, to jerry(at)mc.net:
What you describe will function electrically. If that system
is attractive to you, consider using the built-in starter contactor
that comes with most modern starters. Use the boost relay
circuit shown in Figure Z-22. Then jumper alternator b-lead
to the starter contactor hot terminal using a Maxi-Fuse HHX inline
holder. See page 13 of
of
http://www.bussmann.com/shared/library/catalogs/Buss_Auto-Fuse_Cat.pdf
Maxi fuses can be found on page 3. Use MAX60 fuse on 40A alternator,
MAX80 on a 60A alternator. Eliminate alternator loadmeter feature.
The boost relay can mount on firewall. No new hardware bolted
to engine.
Bob . . .
My Sky-Tec starter is said to "feature an integrated starter solenoid
for homebuilt applications not wishing to install a separate firewall
solenoid."
I assume a starter solenoid is the same thing as a starter contactor.
Can you discuss why one might choose to have another starter contactor
if the starter has one built in?
Thanks.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Built-in starter contactor |
>
>
>Bob, on May 9th you replied, in part, to jerry(at)mc.net:
>
>
>What you describe will function electrically. If that system
> is attractive to you, consider using the built-in starter contactor
> that comes with most modern starters. Use the boost relay
> circuit shown in Figure Z-22. Then jumper alternator b-lead
> to the starter contactor hot terminal using a Maxi-Fuse HHX inline
> holder. See page 13 of
> of
>http://www.bussmann.com/shared/library/catalogs/Buss_Auto-Fuse_Cat.pdf
>
>
> Maxi fuses can be found on page 3. Use MAX60 fuse on 40A alternator,
> MAX80 on a 60A alternator. Eliminate alternator loadmeter feature.
> The boost relay can mount on firewall. No new hardware bolted
> to engine.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>My Sky-Tec starter is said to "feature an integrated starter solenoid
>for homebuilt applications not wishing to install a separate firewall
>solenoid."
>
>
>I assume a starter solenoid is the same thing as a starter contactor.
>Can you discuss why one might choose to have another starter contactor
>if the starter has one built in?
See http://aeroelectric.com/articles/strtctr.pdf
The extraordinary inrush currents common to modern starter
designs that caused extraordinary wear on the start switch
contacts of the ACS510 off-l-r-both-start keyswitch and
prompted an AD to add a diode across the contactor coil.
I prefer NOT to subject the ACS510 or any other panel mounted
switch to this stress and have recommended an auxiliary
starter contactor as illustrated in all of the Z-figures
-OR- use of a boost relay as depicted in figure Z-22 of
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/strtctr.pdf which not
only cures (1) a run-on problem with SOME PM starters when
using the on-board contactor (2) but isolates the panel
mounted starter control from the high current requirements
of the starter contactor.
By the way, if you ARE using a PM starter then figure
Z-22 may be the recommended control philosophy. Some of
these starters exhibit a delayed pinion engagement quirk
when back-emf during spin-down of the deenergized motor
keeps the pinion extended. These starters should be either
wired with ROBUST starter push buttons and heavier
than usual control wires (recommend 16AWG and 10A fuse)
-OR- per figure Z-22.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Wiring of S704-1 with SD-8 OV protection |
>
>Bob and Listers,
>
>Had planned to install wiring per Bob's Z-13 for a backup SD-8 alternator
>with OV module across the coil of the power relay with the Aux Alternator
>switch
>and 5A breaker on the ground lead of the coil.
>
>B&C's drawing accompanying the components calls for a different installation
>with the coil being switched to +14 on a 2A breaker.
>
>Hmmmm, a bit of confusion is creeping into my less than 'lectrically literate
>mind.....
>
>Soliciting comments regarding the differences/advantages of each. Obviously
>both will work fine but since I had already started wiring for Z-13, I
>hate to
>change but can still make the revisions if necessary.
The 5A breaker was called out as a lower cost, adequate protection
for this circuit. If you want to us a 2A or even a 1A breaker on
the SD-8 control, it's fine too. Actual operating current through
this breaker is about 0.1A
I chose to say with the 5A breaker as it was easier to find and
less expensive.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <psiegel(at)fuse.net> |
Subject: | diode protect for single e-ignition Z-14? |
Let's assume a single engine kitbuilt sportplane with a dual battery, dual alternator
(figure Z-14) system with one magneto and one electronic ignition system.
Each of the two batteries would have its own always hot battery bus.
It would seem to be a good idea to have a redundant supply of power to the single
electronic igniton system, one from each always hot battery bus.
Should the two batteries be isolated from the common supply to the single electronic
ignition system so that the only way to connect the two batteries together
is by the cross-feed contactor? If yes, how could this be accomplished?
Would a diode or a bridge rectifier between each always hot battery bus and the
single elctronic ignition accomplish this? Would a heat sink be needed on each
of these diodes? Should a specific diode be used? Or is there a better way?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
>
>
> > The 40 amps Denso is great and highly recommend it. No doubt similar to
> > the one niagarairparts.com sells. E-mail the part number to me and I can
> > get you detailed info. All the modern Denso have an IC chip voltage
> > regulator (VR) that controls voltage and protects against over voltage
> > (OV). You have choices:
> >
> >
> > 1) Use the alternator with internal VR as per the installation instruction
> > (if you dont have them see niagaraairparts.com).
>
>George, excellent post. There must be at least 500 messages on this list
>talking about overvoltage and alternators. One question that remains
>unanswered is this: If an alternator runs away voltage wise, but is still
>connected to the battery, how many amps would the battery draw at the point
>when the voltage is harmfully high? Isn't there some inherent protection in
>having a circuit breaker in the main alternator output line? For example, I
>have a 50 amp breaker on my 40 amp alternator.
>
>Alex Peterson
>RV6-A N66AP 624 hours
>Maple Grove, MN
Good question. Last spring I tried to get some dialong going
based on repeatable experiments concerning the dynamics and
functionality of crowbar ov protection. I began a series
of bench demonstrations of the simple ideas that support the
philosophy and published a running discussion document which
was last posted as revision C at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Crowbar_OV_Protection/DC_Power_System_Dynamics_C.pdf
The last experiment was to scale the magnitude of the
exactly the problem you asked about. I'll refer you to
the last few pages of the document.
Bottom line is that with a well maintained battery of
ANY type, an ov condition is not an event that requires
hair-trigger, millisecond response for correction.
Classically, we've designed fast responding systems
because (1) it wasn't hard to do, (2) it made the
customer feel better about it and (3) it offset the
unknowns concerning battery condition. We KNOW that
majority of all batteries flying in SE airplanes don't
get replaced until they don't crank the engine any
more . . . maybe even for the 3rd or 4th time!
Since you choose to understand how important the
battery is in minimizing risk and maximizing performance,
then YOUR battery is going to be replaced long before
it ceases to be an effective guard at the gates to
electrical disaster. Super fast response to an OV
condition is not at all critical to the health and
well-being of your electro-whizzies qualified to DO-160.
A new paradigm offering electrical system performance
bounded between 0 and 18 volts has been proposed and
I presume work to perfect systems based on this
philosophy is moving forward. If you're interested in
incorporating this philosophy, then the battery is
no longer qualified to guard the gate . . . I presume
folks developing this system will take this into
account and include mitigating systems into the
design.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D Wysong <hdwysong(at)gmail.com> |
Subject: | Voltage Regulator Failure? |
This was posted on the Europa list (Rotax specific) but I figured it
might get some comments from you folks. Any ideas?
D
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Joyce <davidjoyce(at)doctors.org.uk>
Date: Jun 12, 2005 6:56 AM
Subject: Europa-List: Voltage Regulator Failure
Just back from a great Europa Baltics trip, splendidly organised by Bob
Harrison & Ivor Phillips, and accompanied by challenging weather, and a
problem of intermittent charge, developing on the last leg home. The ammeter
would show a discharge related to however many items I had switched on, for
anything up to 40 mins and then have a spell of rapid recharging, gradually
coming back to zero, suggesting a fully recharged battery. Incidentally the
40 min bit coincided with the Channel crossing , which with a 914 made us
sit up and take notice!
I remember reading accounts of failing regulators previously but
paid less attention than I should have done! Is this intermittent failure
to charge the sort of symptom to be expected?
Happy landings, David Joyce, G-XSDJ
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
Subject: | Re: Wiring of S704-1 with SD-8 OV protection |
Carl
Regarding the position of the circuit breaker which I think you were
also enquiring about:
It should function fine on the positive or ground side of the coil.
There is no particular risk of running a small wire from the negative
terminal of the coil to the circuit breaker because a short in that wire
would still only flow well under an amp as limited by the coil.
Since there is always a slight risk of the coil shorting to ground
internally I can see why someone might prefer the breaker on the
positive side of the coil. Perhaps even more so for other situations
using a hot running metal encased contactor. With Z-13 you could always
use a small wire (22awg ?) to jumper to the positive coil terminal and
act as an additional fusible link if that is a concern.
In practice you might find it more difficult and risky to run a wire
from the battery to a circuit breaker and then on to the relay in
question. Z-13 seems like an elegant alternative to that.
Ken
CarlRai(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>Bob and Listers,
>
>Had planned to install wiring per Bob's Z-13 for a backup SD-8 alternator
>with OV module across the coil of the power relay with the Aux Alternator switch
>and 5A breaker on the ground lead of the coil.
>
>B&C's drawing accompanying the components calls for a different installation
>with the coil being switched to +14 on a 2A breaker.
>
>Hmmmm, a bit of confusion is creeping into my less than 'lectrically literate
>mind.....
>
>Soliciting comments regarding the differences/advantages of each. Obviously
>both will work fine but since I had already started wiring for Z-13, I hate to
>change but can still make the revisions if necessary.
>
>Carl Raichle
>RV-9A - Closing in on it.....
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Wiring of S704-1 with SD-8 OV protection |
Thanks to both Bob and Ken for your comments.
I'm sticking with Z-13......
Off to the shop with wirestripper and crimper in hand.
Carl
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Ronald J. Parigoris" <rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US> |
Subject: | Re: small high cca batteries |
Is anyone flying with a ATP Ultrabat-13?
I am thinking to use with Rotax 914.
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/atphighpwr.php
http://www.recreationalmobility.com/cgi-bin/recreation/27923.html
Is the expected service life similar to a Odyssey 680?
thx.
Ron Parigoris
N4211W
Europa Monowheel
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: battery maintainer More |
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >As previously stated, I have a Schumcher and have reported that it applies a
> >gradually increasing charging voltage until it hits 14.4 or so, then shuts
> >OFF and lets battery self-discharge to 12.99 (13) v at which time it starts
> >another charging cycle.
> > - With a fully charged battery, it takes about 1 second to go from
> 13 to
> >14.4 v and maybe 15 minutes to much longer to self-discharge down to 13 v
> >again.
> > - With a discharged battery, it will hang in the 13.5 v area for a
> long
> >time (at either 2 amps or 10 amps, selectable, with 10 amps being for faster
> >recharge of a discharged battery), gradually increasing top 14.4 v again -
> >may take 15 minutes, may take 30 minutes, may take an hour, but as the
> >battery takes more charge, the cycle time decreases until it is "on 1
> >second" and "off for a long time".
> > - I put the digital VOM on the two alligator clips on the battery
> >terminals and sit and sip lemonade while watching the charger do its thing -
> >I've gone thru 2 (still on my 2nd) - when it quits performing as I've
> >described, the charger is broken or the battery is bad.
>
> I think this was the protocol option for smart-chargers before
> microprocessors came along. And . . . it's an effective protocol
> that does a good job of charging/maintaining a battery.
>
> >It looks to me like the reported numbers that started this current "thread"
> >were taken at random times, without any regard to where the charger and
> >battery were in "the cycle of charge & discharge". So, I don't think the
> >comment about "Hmmmm . . . doesn't like like this critter goes into much of
> >a maintenance mode . . . endpoint voltage is less than the float voltage of
> >a fully charged battery. Further, we don't know if it went into a top-off
> >mode by pulling
> >the battery up to better than 14 volts." reflects knowledge of the
> >Schumacher performance
> > - there is no "maintenance mode" - it shuts OFF - NO voltage, until it
> >starts pumping current thru again at 13v up to 14.4.
> >
> >Just trying again to shed some light on how this charger works. Everytime
> >I've commented in the past it seems to have gone unnoticed and
> >un-acknowledged.
>
> The numbers I've cited for my experiments were continuously monitored
> (and plotted) and taken from manufacturer's statements for protocols.
> The current crop of battery charger/maintainers are a lot more agile.
>
> I'm finding that Schumacher has DIFFERENT protocols. For example,
> the recharge cycle depicted at:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/schumacher_2.jpg
>
> is strikingly different than this one:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/schumacher_3.jpg
>
> The earlier trace was taken from the charge/maintenance
> protocol for a WM-1562A that I'd mentioned in an earlier
> thread. I bought this at Walmart for $18. Folks reported
> not being able to find them at their local stores (although
> mine still has a half dozen). Last night I picked up its
> bigger brother for $25. Much more "smarts" (push-buttons
> and lights) and higher recharge capability (6A max).
>
> This was the WM-600A. I'm doing some further experiments
> with it now and will report the results as they become
> available.
>
> You raise an interesting question that is not obviously
> deducible from the plots taken so far . . . does the
> "maintenance" mode ACTIVELY support the battery just above
> its open circuit voltage -OR- does the charger simply shut
> off and wait for the battery to self-discharge to the
> point where protocol demands action from the charger
> to replace lost energy. I'll find out for the two
> Schumacher devices I have on hand.
I discharged one of my biggest portable power source batteries
(a 33 a.h. Panasonic) and put the WM600 Charger on it and
monitored voltage vs. time with the CBA-II analyzer. A couple
of hours after the charger reported "fully charged" I measured
current exchange from charter to battery and it was zero. I added
some artificial self-discharge leakage in the form of a 10
ohm power resistor and let it run for a few hours whereupon
I collected the following data:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Battery_Maintenance/WMA-600_Chg_Maint_Test_1.gif
One can see that this charger is strikingly different from
the WMA-1562 discussed earlier. This charger has a 1 hour
top-off mode at 15 volts before it shuts down completely.
When I added the sever case of self discharge leakage, the
charger comes alive at 12.7 volts and recharges the battery
with the same 1-hour top-off protocol. This cycle repeats
as the battery voltage again drops below 12.7 volts.
What we've learned so far: There is no fixed protocol shared
by the two Schumacher chargers tested and we've confirmed
David's observation that the charger doesn't support the
charged battery at some maintenance voltage level but simply
shuts off to wait for discharge serious enough to warrant
recharging.
I'll go see what the WMA-1562 charger does . . .
Oh, by the way . . . maintenance current out of the Battery
Tenders I have is not zero . . . it's on the order of 1.5
milliamperes for an array of SVLA batteries being stored
in parallel. I'll get a voltmeter reading for the array
while on charge and then disconnect the charger to see if
the votlage falls.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: small high cca batteries |
>
>
>Is anyone flying with a ATP Ultrabat-13?
>
>I am thinking to use with Rotax 914.
>
>http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/atphighpwr.php
>
>http://www.recreationalmobility.com/cgi-bin/recreation/27923.html
These are "premium" batteries. By that I mean that
they are relatively expensive compared to other
very popular and lower cost products. If you're
truly weight restricted, then perhaps the weight
savings of about 11 pounds between the garden variety
17 a.h. product ($40-$60) and the Ultra-Start Red
($92) offers a positive perception of return on
investment. If you're going with the Ultra-Bat 13,
then you save only 6 pounds for an expenditure of
$129 (and delta-dollars of 60-80).
Do you plan to replace based on (1) cap checks or
(2) preflight cranking tests? If (1), you'll
have to acquire test equipment and spend $time$
to check the battery that will only add to the
cost of ownership. If (2), I would encourage
you to run the Ultra-Bat until it craps, then replace
it with a Panasonic LC-1218. When that battery craps,
do another cycle with a second Ultra-Bat and then
a second Panasonic. Report back to us in a few years
the results of your tests because you'll then know
more about this product than anyone else does
at the present time.
>Is the expected service life similar to a Odyssey 680?
What do you mean by "service life"? If you have no
endurance requirements other than to be able to
crank the engine, this battery should perform as well
as any other SVLA product for it's size.
Nobody is going to be able to offer comparative data
for the two products until they've taken data that
makes the comparison under similar if not identical
conditions. I would not expect this kind of data to
come from the GA user community unless YOU conduct
the tests cited above and record results. You may
get testimonials both pro and con citing things like
"been use'n the thing for 5 years and still cranks
my engine great!" or, "a friend of my cousin has
a brother-in-law who tried one in his GoFast7 and
it crapped in a couple of months. Wouldn't put that
piece of junk in my lawnmower."
Neither data point has value in deducing a meaningful
answer to your question. I'll suggest the most important
question for you to ask is whether these products will
offer a lower cost of ownership and hence better return
on investment than the alternatives.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Ronald J. Parigoris" <rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US> |
Subject: | Re: small high cca batteries |
Hello Bob
I could not find any info when I searched Panasonic LC-1218? Any helpful info where
I may
find?
The full picture is we are building a Europa Monowheel with Rotax 914 and Airmaster
Prop.
We have the internal minimal Rotax alternator, and a Flight Crafters (Denso?)
that will
be mounted on the vacuum pad. Supposedly a realistic 2 plus times output of Rotax.
We
were thinking we could use the 13 amp battery with the Denso, and perhaps the ultra
start
red 5 amp battery for the rotax alternator.
We have both glider wings, and short wings. When you install the glider wings,
things go a
bit more nose heavy. We figured we could have 2 locations for the 5 amp battery
to adjust
CG.
Reasoning was the 2 batteries would be bout same weight as normal used 1 battery.
Reasoning was to have ability to connect 2 batteries for a start if needed. Would
probably
replace no matter after 4 years or so, or if had a problem.
Have a few questions:
1) Is there any problem connecting 2 batteries, each having its own alternator
for a short
time, like to start? We were thinking of using a Marine style switch as a isolator,
connection for each battery to its side of things and also ability to connect to
each
other.
2) In the event lets say the Denso alternator failed, is there a problem connecting
the 2
systems so you can use minimal stuff on that side? Can you just connect the 2 sides
or do
you need some sort of?? When throwing the switch should motor be at low RPMs to
prevent
some sort of frightful event?
3) If the 2 sides are just connected, is the only downside that the alternator
with the
higher voltage will take the full load?
4) Do you hate the idea of using a big switch instead of a relay or solenoid?
Thx.
Sincerely
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | zinc-air batteries |
A few weeks ago, Eric Jones sent me a 9v "zinc-air" battery
which I tested on the CBA-II analyzer and plotted its performance
against the garden variety alkaline cells. See plot at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Batteries/9V_ZincAir_Comparison.gif
There are plots of alkaline cells discharged at 100 mA and
20 mA along with a plot of the zinc-air cell discharged at
20 mA. The zinc air delivers at a somewhat lower average voltage
but for more than 2 twice the time for the alkaline cells discharged
at the same rate. Just for grins, I'll pick up some good-ol "heavy
duty" carbon-zinc cells and add them to the plot.
In any case, know that the Z-A 9V packs about twice the energy
of its nearest cousins but only IF you discharge them at a modest
rate (.02A or less).
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: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Voltage Regulator Failure? |
>
>This was posted on the Europa list (Rotax specific) but I figured it
>might get some comments from you folks. Any ideas?
>
>D
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: David Joyce <davidjoyce(at)doctors.org.uk>
>Date: Jun 12, 2005 6:56 AM
>Subject: Europa-List: Voltage Regulator Failure
>To: Europa list
>
>Just back from a great Europa Baltics trip, splendidly organised by Bob
>Harrison & Ivor Phillips, and accompanied by challenging weather, and a
>problem of intermittent charge, developing on the last leg home. The ammeter
>would show a discharge related to however many items I had switched on, for
>anything up to 40 mins and then have a spell of rapid recharging, gradually
>coming back to zero, suggesting a fully recharged battery. Incidentally the
>40 min bit coincided with the Channel crossing , which with a 914 made us
>sit up and take notice!
> I remember reading accounts of failing regulators previously but
>paid less attention than I should have done! Is this intermittent failure
>to charge the sort of symptom to be expected?
The charging system could become intermittent either because
of some condition inside the regulator/rectifier -OR- wiring
external to the regulator that carries output power or control
signals to the regulator.
Sounds like it's consistent enough to instrument and go catch
the problem during a test flight. I'd look at AC voltage into
the regulator, DC voltage out of the regulator, control voltage(s)
to the regulator and bus voltage in addition to what appears
to be the battery ammeter.
Observations taken on these readings during a 'brown out' will
be important clues as to how one would proceed.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: small high cca batteries |
>
>
>Hello Bob
>
>I could not find any info when I searched Panasonic LC-1218? Any helpful
>info where I may
>find?
I've got Panasonic and EnerSys (Hawker) data posted at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Batteries
I note that the ATP 13 a.h. battery bears a sriking
resemblance to the EnerSys Genesis G13 found on page
13 of
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Batteries/Enersys_Hawker/Genesis.pdf
>The full picture is we are building a Europa Monowheel with Rotax 914 and
>Airmaster Prop.
>We have the internal minimal Rotax alternator, and a Flight Crafters
>(Denso?) that will
>be mounted on the vacuum pad. Supposedly a realistic 2 plus times output
>of Rotax. We
>were thinking we could use the 13 amp battery with the Denso, and perhaps
>the ultra start
>red 5 amp battery for the rotax alternator.
>
>We have both glider wings, and short wings. When you install the glider
>wings, things go a
>bit more nose heavy. We figured we could have 2 locations for the 5 amp
>battery to adjust
>CG.
>
>Reasoning was the 2 batteries would be bout same weight as normal used 1
>battery.
>
>Reasoning was to have ability to connect 2 batteries for a start if
>needed. Would probably
>replace no matter after 4 years or so, or if had a problem.
The single 13 (or 17) will start the engine nicely.
"4 years or so" is not very definitive . . . with two
alternators let's assume you'll run 'em until they
don't crank the engine any more.
>Have a few questions:
>
>1) Is there any problem connecting 2 batteries, each having its own
>alternator for a short
>time, like to start? We were thinking of using a Marine style switch as a
>isolator,
>connection for each battery to its side of things and also ability to
>connect to each
>other.
>
>2) In the event lets say the Denso alternator failed, is there a problem
>connecting the 2
>systems so you can use minimal stuff on that side? Can you just connect
>the 2 sides or do
>you need some sort of?? When throwing the switch should motor be at low
>RPMs to prevent
>some sort of frightful event?
I'd run one big battery with the larger alternator and
use it to crank the engine. Use a smaller battery with
the smaller alternator and close the crossfeed relay
(S704 instead of S701) to share power between sides only
if one alternator has died.
>3) If the 2 sides are just connected, is the only downside that the
>alternator with the
>higher voltage will take the full load?
generally . . . but the only reason to connect both sides is
if one alternator has quit.
>4) Do you hate the idea of using a big switch instead of a relay or solenoid?
Sure. Thats fine too. You're needing a min-version of
Z-14.
But these are considerations above and beyond the points
I offered in my last post. The batteries you cited were
pretty expensive . . . and if you plan to run them 'til
they die, then you don't need a $time$ consuming maintenance
program to assure system integrity.
You're needing a battery that will crank for the big one.
Anything over 12 a.h. in a variety of products will do that
job. You need a small battery to stabilize the smaller
system, anything from 6 a.h. and up would do and it doesn't
have to supply cranking power so make it small, light and
wire up with relatively small wires.
The $high$ batteries you originally proposed would be
fine but I think you can do MUCH better than buying
from Aircraft Spruce. See Digikey catalog page at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Batteries/Panasonic/Digikey_P1414.pdf
check out catalog numbers P174 and P218
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Z-14? |
Subject: | Re: diode protect for single e-ignition |
Z-14?
>
>
> Let's assume a single engine kitbuilt sportplane with a dual battery,
> dual alternator (figure Z-14) system with one magneto and one electronic
> ignition system. Each of the two batteries would have its own always hot
> battery bus.
>
> It would seem to be a good idea to have a redundant supply of power to
> the single electronic igniton system, one from each always hot battery bus.
You've already got two independent ignition systems . . .
> Should the two batteries be isolated from the common supply to the
> single electronic ignition system so that the only way to connect the two
> batteries together is by the cross-feed contactor? If yes, how could
> this be accomplished?
>
> Would a diode or a bridge rectifier between each always hot battery bus
> and the single elctronic ignition accomplish this? Would a heat sink be
> needed on each of these diodes? Should a specific diode be used? Or is
> there a better way?
Figure Z-19 shows a diode isolated two-battery feed
for an engine absolutely dependent on DC power to run.
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Architecture_PDF/Z19K_1.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Architecture_PDF/Z19K_2.pdf
You can do as you suggest but I cannot see that it adds
any value and only increases complexity.
Bob. . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Selective Radio Reception |
One possibility might be that your receiver is more 'selective' [narrow
band receiver] and the offending radios transmitters are slightly skewed
to one end of the transmitted frequency and is thus ignored.
>>>>>>>>>
Hi Earl- thanks for the response-
Interesting suggestion- any idea if these radios (or others, for that matter)
are "tunable" if it is off-freq a bit one way or the other? Any theories if
SWR could effect this, or is that just xmit relevant?
Thanks again-
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Ronald J. Parigoris" <rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US> |
Subject: | Re: small high cca batteries |
Hello Bob
"I'd run one big battery with the larger alternator and
use it to crank the engine. Use a smaller battery with
the smaller alternator and close the crossfeed relay
(S704 instead of S701) to share power between sides only
if one alternator has died."
Which diagram are you referring S704 and S701?
>3) If the 2 sides are just connected, is the only downside that the
>alternator with the
>higher voltage will take the full load?
"generally . . . but the only reason to connect both sides is
if one alternator has quit."
If the larger battery is a bit run down, or in bad condition and I put the smaller
one in
parallel to help a start up, would this be a bad thing?
If I run the radios and instruments on the smaller battery, if they were turned
on when
starting the motor off the larger battery only, is there any downside to doing
this?
Thx.
Sincerely
Ron Parigoris
N4211W
Europa XS Monowheel
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
Subject: | Re: small high cca batteries |
Hi Ron
FWIW I went through a similar battery search about a year ago and
settled on two Deka Powersport ETX9 batteries at about 9 AH each and
about 8 lb each. They are priced in between the red tops and the
panasonics and I suspect are in between them in quality but they were
available locally from the Deka outlet, the local farm supply, and
motorcycle shops.
http://www.eastpenn-deka.com/products/small_engine_power.html
Ken
Ronald J. Parigoris wrote:
>
>Hello Bob
>
>I could not find any info when I searched Panasonic LC-1218? Any helpful info
where I may
>find?
>
>
snip
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D Wysong <hdwysong(at)gmail.com> |
Subject: | Fwd: Europa-List: Voltage Regulator Problem? |
Here's another, Bob!
--> Europa-List message posted by: MJKTuck(at)cs.com
Hi Folks,
The last two or three times I have gone flying I have experienced a problem
with the 5A ALT FIELD circuit breaker popping. The solution at first seemed
easy just push it back in and all is well. It occurs usually at start up soon
after I turn on the radio panel circuit.
A couple of flights ago it popped a couple more times in the cruise and I
reset it with no further problems.
Yesterday however it popped quite a number of times (5 or 6) and only settled
down after I had turned the radio master off and back on again. I don't see
how turning the radios off would affect the ALT circuit breaker except I
suppose they use the most load.
Looking at the circuit the breaker is located between output C on the voltage
regulator and the main power bus (and thus the battery positive). Very
simple.
The only thing I can think of is that the voltage regulator is spiking at
more than 5 amps until it 'warms up' or reaches some kind of battery charged
point after the battery has been used after start (although the engine typically
fires after just a few turns).
Any ideas and/or solutions as to what the problem might be would be
appreciated. I would like to trouble shoot before replacing the
regulator but do not
want to remove the panel unless I really have to.
P.S I usually turn on (both) the split master/alt switch - perhaps I should
only turn on the alternator after engine start? I have close to 200 hours
flying time on the aircraft so again this is a doubtful cause.
Regards,
Martin Tuck
Europa N152MT
Wichita, Kansas
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Tinne maha" <tinnemaha(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Antenna Locations |
Bob/List,
I have mounted my trasponder & comm antennas on the bottom of my fueselage
21 inches apart. A source of unknown authority (i.e. the kit manufacturer)
has advised that I need to separate the two by a greater distance for fear
of comm interference from the trasponder. My source neglected to specify a
minimum distance. Will you please advise?
King KT-76A Transponder with a Garmin GNC 250-XL GPS Comm.
Thanks,
Grant
PS: The GPS antenna is on top of the fuselage about 1/2 mile from any other
antenna per Garmin's instructions.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Earl_Schroeder <Earl_Schroeder(at)juno.com> |
Subject: | Re: Selective Radio Reception |
Hi Mark,
I believe the newer com radios are more difficult to 'adjust' [by a
Class I FCC type] than the older but then the older tend to wander more
than the new and need it. Of course, the requirement for more tunable
channels has caused tighter tolerances in the newer radios. Since
others can hear the offending transmitters OK, I doubt if SWR has much
impact in this situation. And yes, it is more .xmit relevant'. We
would be interested in hearing the solution if/when you discover it. Earl
Fiveonepw(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
>One possibility might be that your receiver is more 'selective' [narrow
>band receiver] and the offending radios transmitters are slightly skewed
>to one end of the transmitted frequency and is thus ignored.
>
>
>
>Hi Earl- thanks for the response-
>
>Interesting suggestion- any idea if these radios (or others, for that matter)
>are "tunable" if it is off-freq a bit one way or the other? Any theories if
>SWR could effect this, or is that just xmit relevant?
>
>Thanks again-
>Mark
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Bob C. " <flyboy.bob(at)gmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Antenna Locations |
Grant
The two operate a vastly different frequencies and modes . . . I doubt you
will have a problem. If you have them mounted I'd sure try it before I got
too excited!
Good Luck,
Bob Christensen - RV8 Builder - SE Iowa
On 6/12/05, Tinne maha wrote:
>
> tinnemaha(at)hotmail.com>
>
> Bob/List,
>
> I have mounted my trasponder & comm antennas on the bottom of my fueselage
> 21 inches apart. A source of unknown authority (i.e. the kit manufacturer)
> has advised that I need to separate the two by a greater distance for fear
> of comm interference from the trasponder. My source neglected to specify a
> minimum distance. Will you please advise?
>
> King KT-76A Transponder with a Garmin GNC 250-XL GPS Comm.
>
> Thanks,
> Grant
>
> PS: The GPS antenna is on top of the fuselage about 1/2 mile from any
> other
> antenna per Garmin's instructions.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
>If an alternator runs away voltage wise, but is still connected to the battery,
how many amps >would the battery draw at the point when the voltage is harmfully
high? Isn't there some >inherent protection in having a circuit breaker
in the main alternator output line? For example, >I have a 50-amp breaker on
my 40 amp alternator.
>Alex Peterson
>RV6-A N66AP 624 hours
>Maple Grove, MN
Hello Alex:
No I don't think that's going to work that way. The answer I believe is volts and
amps are obviously different, and the circuit breaker works on current (amps)
not voltage. Actually the CB is a thermal device and needs current (flow) to
heat up and trip.
If the volts go up, the battery will absorb so much and than, the system buss volts
will climb and the amps may even drop due to Ohms law:
Power = Volts x Amps,
Pwr (constant) = Volts(up) x Amps(down)
Bob N. could address this better than I but think Im in the ball-park.
I also have a 50 amp CB on my b-lead (40 amp alternator). I had a short lived idea
about putting a "crow-bar" on this 50 amp CB for the b-lead, to force it to
trip (open, pop), just like Bob's crow bar on the voltage regulator CB. The
big differnce is the CB on the VR is 5 amps and the b-lead CB we have is 50 amps.
I decided against it.
You can always reach over and manually pull the CB yourself if needed. May be one
advantage of using a CB on the alternator vs. a fuse.
A crow bar (SCR, silicon control rectifier) would be very large to "pop" a 50 amp
CB, but I am staying with my original position of not adding on any extra OV
protection to an internally regulated alternator based on the unlikely chance
of OV.
The problem with a 50 amp CB is it might take 600% (300 amps) to cause it to trip,
which might take .36-1 seconds. That might be too slow to help the radios.
which is the theory of doing the OV protection in the first place. They make
high amp SCR's that can take 300-500 amps for a second might be possible but too
much to be practical (safe).
If I wanted a b-lead disconnect, I would use a solid state relay to open the circuit
directly, with out using dead short (crow-bar). With the crow bar you hope
the CB trips fast enough to do good and fast enough before the crow bar melts.
May be Bob N. could give us insight into why a 50amp crow bar would not work or
would not want to do this. Again I am in the KISS camp, use the internal VR alternators
OV protection as is and leave all the extras off.
Cheers George (BTW Nice web site Alex)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
>
>
> >If an alternator runs away voltage wise, but is still connected to the
> battery, how many amps >would the battery draw at the point when the
> voltage is harmfully high? Isn't there some >inherent protection in
> having a circuit breaker in the main alternator output line? For
> example, >I have a 50-amp breaker on my 40 amp alternator.
>
> >Alex Peterson
> >RV6-A N66AP 624 hours
> >Maple Grove, MN
>
>
>Hello Alex:
>
>
>No I don't think that's going to work that way. The answer I believe is
>volts and amps are obviously different, and the circuit breaker works on
>current (amps) not voltage. Actually the CB is a thermal device and needs
>current (flow) to heat up and trip.
>
>
>If the volts go up, the battery will absorb so much and than, the system
>buss volts will climb and the amps may even drop due to Ohms law:
>
>Power = Volts x Amps,
>
>Pwr (constant) = Volts(up) x Amps(down)
>
>Bob N. could address this better than I but think Im in the ball-park.
>
>
>I also have a 50 amp CB on my b-lead (40 amp alternator). I had a short
>lived idea about putting a "crow-bar" on this 50 amp CB for the b-lead, to
>force it to trip (open, pop), just like Bob's crow bar on the voltage
>regulator CB. The big differnce is the CB on the VR is 5 amps and the
>b-lead CB we have is 50 amps. I decided against it.
>
>
>You can always reach over and manually pull the CB yourself if needed. May
>be one advantage of using a CB on the alternator vs. a fuse.
>
>
>A crow bar (SCR, silicon control rectifier) would be very large to "pop" a
>50 amp CB, but I am staying with my original position of not adding on any
>extra OV protection to an internally regulated alternator based on the
>unlikely chance of OV.
>
>
>The problem with a 50 amp CB is it might take 600% (300 amps) to cause it
>to trip, which might take .36-1 seconds. That might be too slow to help
>the radios. which is the theory of doing the OV protection in the first
>place. They make high amp SCR's that can take 300-500 amps for a second
>might be possible but too much to be practical (safe).
>
>
>If I wanted a b-lead disconnect, I would use a solid state relay to open
>the circuit directly, with out using dead short (crow-bar). With the crow
>bar you hope the CB trips fast enough to do good and fast enough before
>the crow bar melts.
>
>
>May be Bob N. could give us insight into why a 50amp crow bar would not
>work or would not want to do this. Again I am in the KISS camp, use the
>internal VR alternators OV protection as is and leave all the extras off.
>
>
>Cheers George (BTW Nice web site Alex)
The notion of using the b-lead circuit protection as a major
component of overvoltage protection surfaces from time to time.
Yes, a manually operable circuit breaker can be used to disconnect
a misbehaving alternator but this is a secondary task that may
best be accomplished other ways.
The b-lead circuit protection is useful only for isolating a
shorted b-lead feeder or an alternator with failed diodes.
This is an extremely rare event as the b-lead is generally short,
easily inspected for wear and diodes are many times more robust
than when they first migrated inside the alternator and replaced
the selenium rectifier stack about 50 years ago.
Automobiles use fusible links as b-lead protection.
An alternator is inherently current limited. Its b-lead protection
should be large enough to eliminate any nuisance trips. 60A breakers
on 60A alternator routinely nuisance trip in airplanes but nobody
wants to mount the phalanx of no-value-added paperwork it takes
to fix it on a certified ship.
When an alternator goes into runaway, it becomes a relatively
constant current power source that produces a stress on the battery
described in the paper:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Crowbar_OV_Protection/DC_Power_System_Dynamics_C.pdf
If the battery is in good shape then rate of rise for voltage
on the system is relatively benign - IF one chooses to live in
the DO-160 world where electro-whizzies are designed to withstand
20 volts for 1-second.
It's conceivable that a builder COULD choose to use a pullable
b-lead breaker combined with OV WARNING light and depend on
a good battery, and timely reaction to the warning light
to craft a manually operated ov protection system.
I don't think that's good design . . . certainly not the
best we know how to do.
In fact, there IS an elegant way to use solid state controls
to corral a runaway alternator. If one inserted a diode in
series with the altenrator's b-lead and placed a crowbar
module across the b-lead to ground, one could very
effectively bring a runaway alternator to heal by simply
shorting its output to ground. The crowbar module would not
need to be much larger than the current design . . . it only
takes 60-75 amps of load to stall a 60A alternator and it
would be all over in a heartbeat.
Problem is that adding a diode tosses away .6 to 1.0 volts
of alternator output which cannot be compensated for (built
in regulators are not adjustable). This means we'd have to
go inside the alternator to somehow boost it's output
by a volt or so. You would also need some kind of keep-alive
bias circuit (probably a resistor around the b-lead diode)
to make sure the crowbar module stays latched into an ON
state after it triggers.
There is a line of thought being considered to use this
technology but I don't have a combination that I'm satisfied
with yet.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Antenna Locations |
>
>Bob/List,
>
>I have mounted my trasponder & comm antennas on the bottom of my fueselage
>21 inches apart. A source of unknown authority (i.e. the kit manufacturer)
>has advised that I need to separate the two by a greater distance for fear
>of comm interference from the trasponder. My source neglected to specify a
>minimum distance. Will you please advise?
>
>King KT-76A Transponder with a Garmin GNC 250-XL GPS Comm.
21 inches is fine.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: small high cca batteries |
>
>
>Hello Bob
>
>"I'd run one big battery with the larger alternator and
> use it to crank the engine. Use a smaller battery with
> the smaller alternator and close the crossfeed relay
> (S704 instead of S701) to share power between sides only
> if one alternator has died."
>
>Which diagram are you referring S704 and S701?
Z-14 is the diagram. S704 is a high current relay
used in lieu of S701 contactor as a cross-feed controller.
> >3) If the 2 sides are just connected, is the only downside that the
> >alternator with the
> >higher voltage will take the full load?
>
> "generally . . . but the only reason to connect both sides is
> if one alternator has quit."
>
>If the larger battery is a bit run down, or in bad condition and I put the
>smaller one in
>parallel to help a start up, would this be a bad thing?
How do you plan to go flying with a battery that is a
"bit run down"? Starting an engine generally takes
less than 10% of the battery's total capacity. It can be
a "lot run down" and still get the engine started. If
you ever have a sense of the battery being overtaxed during
cranking, then you've done too much ground operations without
ground power support or something is wrong and needs to
be investigated.
A whole lot of airplanes have flown for over 100 years
with one battery . . . just because you have two batteries
shouldn't drive you into a requirement to use both for
cranking unless that was an original design goal. As
I understand the current design goal, you want to have
the benefits of a dual alternator system that doesn't
rely on premium batteries so cost will be down along with
installed weight.
The suggestion was to install the minimal battery to
stabilize/filter the smaller alternator system and use
only one battery for cranking. If the goal is to use both
batteries, then the second battery needs to get bigger,
heavier and the S704 relay needs to be relaced with
an S701 contactor.
>If I run the radios and instruments on the smaller battery, if they were
>turned on when
>starting the motor off the larger battery only, is there any downside to
>doing this?
No
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
If this will stall the alternator with a diode there, why wouldn't it
stall the alternator simultaneously with an opening OV contactor? I'm so
far not planning to remove my OV contactor ;)
Actually I also wonder if you can stall ALL alternators. Some (I believe
with 9 diodes) have been reported to start and run without a battery. Of
course that's not near as difficult as starting with a short on the
output...
Ken
>snip
> In fact, there IS an elegant way to use solid state controls
> to corral a runaway alternator. If one inserted a diode in
> series with the altenrator's b-lead and placed a crowbar
> module across the b-lead to ground, one could very
> effectively bring a runaway alternator to heal by simply
> shorting its output to ground. The crowbar module would not
> need to be much larger than the current design . . . it only
> takes 60-75 amps of load to stall a 60A alternator and it
> would be all over in a heartbeat.
>
> Problem is that adding a diode tosses away .6 to 1.0 volts
> of alternator output which cannot be compensated for (built
> in regulators are not adjustable). This means we'd have to
> go inside the alternator to somehow boost it's output
> by a volt or so. You would also need some kind of keep-alive
> bias circuit (probably a resistor around the b-lead diode)
> to make sure the crowbar module stays latched into an ON
> state after it triggers.
>
> There is a line of thought being considered to use this
> technology but I don't have a combination that I'm satisfied
> with yet.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Battery charger/desulphator |
Greetings,
If anyone is thinking about buying a battery charger/desulphator, such as I
mentioned in my post a couple of days ago, here is a VERY good buy at this
web site.
Bill Byars
1949 T8F
_http://www.batteryweb.com/batteryminder.cfm_
(http://www.batteryweb.com/batteryminder.cfm)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> |
Subject: | Re: Selective Radio Reception |
How bent is the antenna? Do the other 2 aircraft have horizontal or
vertical antennas? Have you tried hooking up a different antenna to the radio?
Dave Morris
At 09:13 PM 6/11/2005, you wrote:
>
>My radio is
>Microair 760, bent whip bottom of fuse, and it doesn't matter whether I'm
>plugged
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <jlundberg(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | twisted wire pairs |
What type of twisted pair wire do you use for the headset and mic hookups in the
intercoms you all are talking about?? Where do you buy this wire?
I have been using shielded multiconductor milspec wire from Steinair and it has
been rather expensive but at least it is tefzel and its very durable stuff.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
>Bob N wrote:
>Okay, it's your considered recommendation that if one
>purchases p/n (xxxxx) from supplier (YYYYY) then OV
>protection is not called for. You've cited data to support
>your advice. Now, how do we get this information into
>the hands of the greatest numbers of builders?
Bob, my advice is from a ranked amateur and offer it with no warrantee. You have
served to improve the knowledge and best interested of count less builders,
including myself. I dont think we need to disseminate my opinion further than
this list.
>George, you seem to have completely missed the point
>I've been trying to illustrate during this endless
>thread. YOU and many like you are building ONE airplane.
>You may have conversed with others to gather data
>on and make selection of specific components in
>which you have either trust supported by repeatable
>experiments or faith supported by the gross weight of
>anecdotal information. In either case, you're certainly
>free to go forward with your choice and I wish you well.
There are no one-size fits all solutions. I have not listed any specific part numbers
because frankly I dont want the liability. Second I have been honest that
getting detailed info on a Denso alternator and design in next to impossible
since all the engineers are in Japan. As far as anecdotal evidence, I have tracked
down as much info on how transistors fail, why and what characteristics
different transistors have. It is not a fact but a widely held electronics industry
expectation that transistor are VERY reliable. The external V-regulator
and crow bar is no doubt more bullet proof. I take your word on it based on
your experience and it makes sense. I think for most builders they take things
on faith and standard practice. No need to reinvent the wheel.
I think the hey my Denso has worked for 10 years with no problems is just that,
anecdotal. I agree. As far as tests, sadly are in Japan and in Japanese. I hear
the Japanese are good with electronics. I am sure Denso with 20-30 years making
alternators with internal VRs have tested them and done failure analysis.
Granted a car is not an airplane and I have no proof.
>Please understand that I write for thousands of builders
>working on thousands of airplanes being fabricated all
>over the world. Their choices for selection of a suitable
>alternator MIGHT include part number (xxxxx) and maybe
>they have access to supplier (YYYYY) but I would be
>remiss in my duties if I were to LIMIT my recommendations
>to this narrow range of choices . . . especially when
>I have no data from any repeatable experiments
>to support my advice. Further, there are MILLIONS of
>alternators with THOUSANDS of part numbers that will
>perform very well and free of concerns if we drive
>probability of hazardous failure down with layered
>systems architecture . . . this is a major component
>of FAILURE TOLERANT design. You ASSUME that a part
>will fail and then incorporate protection -OR-
>alternate technology (Plan B).
Bob, I understand all your recommendations. I understand from your analysis, lack
of information and judgment you cant endorse it. I think your opinions are
the most conservative and will provide a method of DC power production in an aircraft
that provides repeatable reliability and a level of safety required in
certified aircraft designs. However for me in a VFR RV (experimental) with an
engine that does not require electrical power (mechanical systems and self sustaining
ignition), I can get away with an alternate path to electric DC power
generation. This path is using an internal VR alternator with no extra external
OV protection. I have OV warning (large flashing red light) and a manual way
to disconnect the alternator output (b-lead) from the system thru a CB. Works
for me and me only.
Others have used the Denso 40 amp, aka Niagara, with good results. Again far from
rigorous scientific proof, but a collection of general facts, anecdotes and
opinion. My recommendation is inferior to the method of using an external alternator
regulator and an OV module, aka crow-bar, in a rigorous scientific way.
However my design will work OK as intended and be safe in my opinion, while
being lighter, simpler, and cheaper.
>When I handed control lock keys of an explosively
>launched recovery parachute controller to the pilot who
>was going to depend on that system to safe his life
>and perhaps his airplane, I could look him right in
>the eye and offer that I have done the best I know
>how to do. When I write words on this List and for
>the 'Connection, I believe am operating with that
>same sense of duty to offer the best and most
>universally useable information available. I am
>pleased that you have discovered what you believe
>is the ultimate solution to your system design
>goals and parts procurement issues. Please fly them in
>good health. The odds are definitely in your favor.
Mr. Nuckolls not to pander to you in anyway, sincerely you have single handedly
educated thousands of pilot/builders about electrical systems. The knowledge
of the aviation community in general is the better for your contributions. The
average aircraft (homebuilt) electrical system has improved due to your efforts.
I dont mean to undermine your methods, analysis or opinions. However I do
pick a choose what features I install in my electrical system. The most notably
is the internal regulated alternator. I think you have said this yourself,
If it can fail assume it will and what will happen when it does. I have analyzed
my system and find that all alternator failures will be passive and not a threat
to safety of flight FOR ME. (Dont try this at home, your mileage may vary
and this info is provided for entertainment purposes only, Sincerely Georges
Lawyers, Dwey-Cheat'em and Howe)
>But understand that I've obligated myself to operate
>in a wider arena and to offer advice that permits
>me to look any builder in the eye and offer that
>it's the best and most universally applicable
>technology I know how to do right now. I have no
>FAITH in the universal performance of all the
>automotive alternators available to the OBAM aircraft
>community around the world but I do have the
>knowledge of countless REPEATABLE EXPERIMENTS
>conducted to craft the most failure tolerant
>and hazard free systems I know how to do today.
Amen, I have no way, other than FAITH, that the Denso alternator will not hurt
me or the airframe, and the level of risk, is appropriate and I am willing to
accept it and understand it. I have determined that my old Collins transponder
and new Icom A200 (without OV protected power supply) may likely be damaged.
Other equipment is OV protected internally and if damaged the manufacture assured
me the damage would be repairable at nominal cost. Plan A never have an electrical
failure. My maintenance plan to assure reliability is checking electrical
volts and amps carefully for any sign/trend of impending failure, replace
battery on regular basis and never over load alternator. During flight test I
will thermocouple alternator to determine operating temps are acceptable. Blast
cooling tube will be installed.
> I'm not here to argue against the gospel of
>Nipon Denso or any other. I have tools called
>Failure Mode Effects Analysis, decades of experience
>with others who design, build and fly airplanes
>and a personal goal of understanding how things
>work and sharing that with anyone who has an
>interest. I cannot advise a builder to adopt a
>design philosophy that I do not understand or that
>he cannot understand AND CONTROL.
Bob, no one mounting the sermon; You are right you dont have ABSOLUTE control and
dont have complete understanding how the IC chip and transistor works in a
Denso. I have gone as far as I needed to see the truth, GOOD ENOUGH for me, no
more or less. I really think alternators with internal regulators are getting
better and soon will have failsafe internal regulators. The auto industry will
demand it and we will benefit from it.
Other alternators like Mitsubishi have also worked well, and from my research others
like Delco/Motorola/Hitachi have had poor service history according to the
Highway Safety foundation. The Denso has just happened to become the De-facto
choice for homebuilders, proven to be reliable in cars, industrial equip and
planes, size, weight and the dual internal fans.
I looked at the problem of over voltage, load dump, transient voltage and equipment
protection and found that it is acceptable that my system suffer an OV condition,
so reliably is moot. However I prey that it will be as reliable as I
think it will be and as others have experienced. The chance of fire or catastrophic
failure of the alternator is nill. I do run the risk of some equipment damage
if a rare OV occurred, but that may be limited to a few hundred dollars
of damage. That is where I am putting my faith, but this is a special system design
and meets my fault tolerance analysis.
If it can fail it will and any failure should not cause a hazard. Amen, we shall
now turn our Aeroelectric Hymnal to page XX.
>Bob . . .
All the best and I thank you again for forcing us to critically think thru out
systems. Even if it is not the perfect solution for ALL at least it is MY system
and I have knowledge of the risk and benefits. I am searching for the lightest
and most reliable electrical system I can get, and I accept the risk of an
OV as unlikely but an acceptable one. Bob I have learned a lot from your books
and forum.
Thanks again. George
---------------------------------
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <jlundberg(at)cox.net> |
Does anyone have any tips on putting a push-to-talk switch on the yoke of my Cherokee
Six? Also where can I buy aircraft grade coiled microphone cord that I
can use between the switch and the jack?
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>Does anyone have any tips on putting a push-to-talk switch on the yoke of
>my Cherokee Six? Also where can I buy aircraft grade coiled microphone
>cord that I can use between the switch and the jack?
To mount but button neatly on the tip of a control
horn like the "big guys do" requires long drills,
some machining and is certain to draw intense interest
from those-who-know-more-about-building-airplanes-
than-we-do. An in all fairness, there are issues of
reduced strength of an part when one hollows it out
for the passage of wires.
The most effective method I've seen in the rental
aircraft I fly is to fabricate a small bracket that
clamps or is bonded to the control in some place
both handy to reach and practical. If you mount it
hi up on the horn, then you have a wire to route
down the horn . . . saw one installation where the
wire was held to the horn by wrapping of silicone
rubber guide-line tape!
Probably the easiest is a bracket down low on the
width of the yoke where the wire runs a short distance
toward the center and is tied off right on the
control tube centerline. The coil cord can be extended
from this location to a grommet right under the
control tube bushing on the panel.
There ain't no such thing as an "aircraft quality"
anything . . . only parts which appear on a manufacture's
bill of materials for a certificated airframe . . . which
doesn't morph Carling's G-series hardware store switches
into a Cessna Service Parts Center "aircraft quality"
devices.
If you were looking for a multi-conductor coil cord
suited to the task . . . IT'S NOT EASY. However, the
best bet I can offer for a two conductor cord for
PTT is cut out of a coiled flash gun trigger cord.
A good example is at:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=64354&item=7523536455&rd=1
If you have access to a local camera store that
offers used cameras and/or repair services, they'll
have a junk-box full of similar cords that are small
in diameter, more robust than coil cords for phones
and easy to work with. There are other examples but
this is the first one that came to mind.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: twisted wire pairs |
>
>
>What type of twisted pair wire do you use for the headset and mic hookups
>in the intercoms you all are talking about?? Where do you buy this wire?
>
>I have been using shielded multiconductor milspec wire from Steinair and
>it has been rather expensive but at least it is tefzel and its very
>durable stuff.
I often use multiconductor cable that's shielded JUST
because it IS multi-conductor and bundled for convenience
whether I NEED the shield or not. I have huge spools
of the stuff left over from our production days. Sold
most to B&C but kept one spool of each type for shop
use.
You can twist your own assemblies. Start with 22AWG
tefzel of sufficient number of strands. Chuck one end
in your drill motor and the other in a vise or have someone
hold it. Put tension on wires and spin until you have
about 5-7 turns per inch. Keep tension on and reverse the
drill to partially unwind the bundle . . . if you don't
do this, at least control the spin-out of torque tension
as the bundle relaxes when you take it out of the drill
chuck. If it gets away from you, it will often coil
up like a snake and tangle.
I've built twisted bundles of up to 5 wires and 50'
long with this technique. Dirt cheap, simple, and
very effective.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
Subject: | Re: twisted wire pairs |
For up to about 5 feet I just braid them. Left over right, left over
right, etc. Quick and no twist in the wires although not as tightly
wound as using a drill of course.
Ken
snip
> You can twist your own assemblies. Start with 22AWG
> tefzel of sufficient number of strands. Chuck one end
> in your drill motor and the other in a vise or have someone
> hold it. Put tension on wires and spin until you have
> about 5-7 turns per inch. Keep tension on and reverse the
> drill to partially unwind the bundle . . . if you don't
> do this, at least control the spin-out of torque tension
> as the bundle relaxes when you take it out of the drill
> chuck. If it gets away from you, it will often coil
> up like a snake and tangle.
>
> I've built twisted bundles of up to 5 wires and 50'
> long with this technique. Dirt cheap, simple, and
> very effective.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: twisted wire pairs |
>
>For up to about 5 feet I just braid them. Left over right, left over
>right, etc. Quick and no twist in the wires although not as tightly
>wound as using a drill of course.
>Ken
Great alternative! I'd forgotten about that. I'll often
braid wires that are used for small bundles that run
between black boxes . . . especially bench test fixtures.
Braiding products a VERY flexible bundle that won't un-wind.
Bob . . .
>snip
>
> > You can twist your own assemblies. Start with 22AWG
> > tefzel of sufficient number of strands. Chuck one end
> > in your drill motor and the other in a vise or have someone
> > hold it. Put tension on wires and spin until you have
> > about 5-7 turns per inch. Keep tension on and reverse the
> > drill to partially unwind the bundle . . . if you don't
> > do this, at least control the spin-out of torque tension
> > as the bundle relaxes when you take it out of the drill
> > chuck. If it gets away from you, it will often coil
> > up like a snake and tangle.
> >
> > I've built twisted bundles of up to 5 wires and 50'
> > long with this technique. Dirt cheap, simple, and
> > very effective.
> >
> > Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
Received-SPF: softfail (mta4: domain of transitioning trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt does
not designate 85.138.30.109 as permitted sender) receiver=mta4; client_ip=85.138.30.109;
envelope-from=trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt;
From: | "Carlos Trigo" <trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt> |
Subject: | Odissey batteries |
Bob and all
I am planning to use (in my RV-9A with Egg Subaru) 2 Odissey batteries, and this
brand is widely used in the OBAM community.
Lately I became aware of some problems with this batteries, from which the cause
is not well determined.
I know that Bob will say "send the wrecked batts to me to be dissected", but I
found this link
http://batterytender.com/notice_odyssey.php
about which I would like to hear your comments, mainly on the voltage of the charging
current (14.2v of many alternators not being sufficient to the 14.7 that
Odissey batteries need).
Is it only a result of a commercial dispute or can it be a real cause?
Carlos Trigo
Portugal
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Earl_Schroeder <Earl_Schroeder(at)juno.com> |
Subject: | Re: Odissey batteries |
Carlos,
This has been discussed previously [in the last several months]. I have
the Odyssey battery in my Lancair and after reading Bob's answer
dismissed the supposed 'charging problem' as no concern of mine. You
might find the discussion in the archives. Earl
Carlos Trigo wrote:
>
>Bob and all
>
>I am planning to use (in my RV-9A with Egg Subaru) 2 Odissey batteries, and this
brand is widely used in the OBAM community.
>Lately I became aware of some problems with this batteries, from which the cause
is not well determined.
>I know that Bob will say "send the wrecked batts to me to be dissected", but I
found this link
>http://batterytender.com/notice_odyssey.php
>about which I would like to hear your comments, mainly on the voltage of the charging
current (14.2v of many alternators not being sufficient to the 14.7 that
Odissey batteries need).
>Is it only a result of a commercial dispute or can it be a real cause?
>
>Carlos Trigo
>Portugal
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Odyssey batteries |
>
>
>Bob and all
>
>I am planning to use (in my RV-9A with Egg Subaru) 2 Odissey batteries,
>and this brand is widely used in the OBAM community.
>Lately I became aware of some problems with this batteries, from which the
>cause is not well determined.
What have you heard? Do we know who has reported any
problems. I'd like to at least converse with the individuals
who are reporting these events.
>I know that Bob will say "send the wrecked batts to me to be dissected",
>but I found this link
>http://batterytender.com/notice_odyssey.php
>about which I would like to hear your comments, mainly on the voltage of
>the charging current (14.2v of many alternators not being sufficient to
>the 14.7 that Odissey batteries need).
>Is it only a result of a commercial dispute or can it be a real cause?
Complaints in the Batterytender posting are
mystifying. The voltages cited on the Odyssey website
http://www.enersysreservepower.com/odycharg_a.asp
. . . are completely consistent with voltages cited
for other lead-acid products INCLUDING those
produced by Enersys (Hawker) and virtually
every other manufacturer.
The assertion concerning "Pulse Cranking
Amperes" not being an approved
or recognized method for rating a battery is
silly. One can rate a battery any way they
wish as long as the rating is explained. I've
never depended on "Cold Cranking Amps" as a
meaningful measurement of performance because
my industry deals in gross capacity, and what's
called an "Ip" test (load battery to 1/2 open circuit
terminal voltage for 15 seconds and measure
current at end of that interval). This is a
recognized and understood testing philosophy
for aircraft batteries that we all understand.
If Odyssey posted a value for Ip instead of
"Cold Cranking Amps" the writer would no doubt
be equally upset. I'm disappointed that someone
with the experience of Batterytender should take
such a position.
Bottom line is that Batterytender writer's assertions
are floobydust. I have heard nothing concerning
problems unique to Odyssey batteries in the field
. . . but I'd sure like to know more.
I went through the Enersys_Hawker facility about
a year ago. ALL of the Enersys products are assembled
in the same plant on the same equipment. The only
differences across the product lines are variability
in assembly to accommodate deep discharge versus
hi-rate discharge batteries.
As far as I know right now, the Odyssey is a fine
premium battery product that can be treated like any
other sealed lead-acid battery.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Odissey batteries |
>
>
>Carlos,
>This has been discussed previously [in the last several months]. I have
>the Odyssey battery in my Lancair and after reading Bob's answer
>dismissed the supposed 'charging problem' as no concern of mine. You
>might find the discussion in the archives. Earl
>
>Carlos Trigo wrote:
>
>
> >
> >Bob and all
> >
> >I am planning to use (in my RV-9A with Egg Subaru) 2 Odissey batteries,
> and this brand is widely used in the OBAM community.
> >Lately I became aware of some problems with this batteries, from which
> the cause is not well determined.
> >I know that Bob will say "send the wrecked batts to me to be dissected",
> but I found this link
> >http://batterytender.com/notice_odyssey.php
> >about which I would like to hear your comments, mainly on the voltage of
> the charging current (14.2v of many alternators not being sufficient to
> the 14.7 that Odissey batteries need).
> >Is it only a result of a commercial dispute or can it be a real cause?
> >
> >Carlos Trigo
> >Portugal
I knew I'd posted a response to the Deltran/BatteryTender
article but couldn't find it in my own archives. Dug this
of the Matronics archives and permanently posted it to my
website at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Batteries/Deltran_Odyssey_Floobydust.html
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
Subject: | Re: D-sub connection screws |
You can also safety tie them together. No worry of vibrating loose.
Indiana Larry
>
> What size screwss are used to hold D-sub connectors in place generally
> (DB-9,
> DB-25, etc.)? I'm not looking for the size of the screw that holds the
> plastic
> enclosure together - rather the screws that hold the female part of the
> connection to the male. I don't have a pitch gage at the moment so I can't
> just measure it myself.
>
> Thanks
>
> Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: D-sub connection screws |
>
>
>Chad -
>
>I really love Dsubs - easy pinning and great to use for an aux power buss
>or aux ground buss (avionics). I have yet to find a good enclosure that
>provides:
>(1) a flexible way for wire support coming out of the connector
there are a variety of back-shells that come in two pieces
to install after the connector is wired. When used without
backshells, wire bundles may be tied up and supported like
any array of terminated wires that might go to a row of switches,
breakers, etc. Usually,
>(2) a way to connect a male to a female connector to join two cables
>together or:
Most backshells come with male jackscrews for holding a
d-sub to a chassis mounted connector. Female jackscrews
can be installed on the mating connector to accommodate
the other connector. See:
http://jameco.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&categoryId=302530
and
http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T052/0159.pdf
> (3) to fasten them to a plug on a device. The screws and hex
>standoffs always seem to be not deep enough (standoffs) or the screws too
>long such that you have to use a washer.
There are no hard standards for lengths and depths of
threads on mating screws. It may take a bit of fitting on a
case by case basis.
> Also you should have some way to
>lock them. We use split lock washers, but they never come in the little
>packages.
In my never humble opinion, the split lockwasher is
unsuitable for fishing line sinkers much less adding mechanical
integrity to a threaded fastener.
If you're concerned about jackscrews backing out, use
4-40 drilled head screw (or drill the shank of the
long handled jack screw) for safety wire. There
are alternative shake-proof joiners for d-sub connectors.
Consider the wire-bail locks.
> The long knurled screws like you find on computer dSubs can be
>ordered, but they also do not fit most of the housings. Using the slotted
>screws to lock them together or to a device is a royal pain in most places
>we used them on the airplane. If you find solutions to this and to yours,
>I'd love to know the product number and manufacturer.
We've used d-subs for years in both commercial aircraft and
military programs where the connectors were simply held together
with the 4-40 hardware found on:
http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T052/0159.pdf
. . . and used without special locking provisions. These assemblies
have endured both environmental testing and have proven adequate
in the field for decades. I think concerns for securing attach
hardware are not great. You might consider dabbing rtv on threads
at final assembly. This provides an excellent anti-rotation friction
that would prevent vibration loosening without affecting ability
to service the connection later.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: D-sub connection screws |
>
>
>You can also safety tie them together. No worry of vibrating loose.
>
>Indiana Larry
This is certainly applicable for cable-cable joints. I often
use a pair of tie wraps (through the screw holes) to hold
the connectors in joined position. Flat lace cable string
works good too.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
Subject: | Re: Fwd: Europa-List: Voltage Regulator Problem? |
Is there overvoltage protection and are you certain there are no loose
connections?
No one commented but I posted a situation a couple of weeks ago where I
had a loose connection to a relay that when wiggled would apparently
trigger the overvoltage crowbar and pop the breaker, even without the
engine running.
Ken
D Wysong wrote:
>
>Here's another, Bob!
>
>--> Europa-List message posted by: MJKTuck(at)cs.com
>
>Hi Folks,
>
>The last two or three times I have gone flying I have experienced a problem
>with the 5A ALT FIELD circuit breaker popping. The solution at first seemed
>easy just push it back in and all is well. It occurs usually at start up soon
>after I turn on the radio panel circuit.
>
>A couple of flights ago it popped a couple more times in the cruise and I
>reset it with no further problems.
>
>Yesterday however it popped quite a number of times (5 or 6) and only settled
>down after I had turned the radio master off and back on again. I don't see
>how turning the radios off would affect the ALT circuit breaker except I
>suppose they use the most load.
>
>Looking at the circuit the breaker is located between output C on the voltage
>regulator and the main power bus (and thus the battery positive). Very
>simple.
>
>The only thing I can think of is that the voltage regulator is spiking at
>more than 5 amps until it 'warms up' or reaches some kind of battery charged
>point after the battery has been used after start (although the engine typically
>fires after just a few turns).
>
>Any ideas and/or solutions as to what the problem might be would be
>appreciated. I would like to trouble shoot before replacing the
>regulator but do not
>want to remove the panel unless I really have to.
>
>P.S I usually turn on (both) the split master/alt switch - perhaps I should
>only turn on the alternator after engine start? I have close to 200 hours
>flying time on the aircraft so again this is a doubtful cause.
>
>Regards,
>Martin Tuck
>Europa N152MT
>Wichita, Kansas
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D Wysong <hdwysong(at)gmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Fwd: Europa-List: Voltage Regulator Problem? |
Martin's CB label was wrong (wasn't the ALT FIELD but, rather, the OV
breaker). He contacted Bob directly and (credit to Bob's memory) Bob
remembered (1) they tackled the problem once before and (2) the fix!
Seems that they installed a capacitor behind the panel many moons ago to
take care of the CB popping problem. Martin recently found a bag of
money and bought a bunch of "new & improved" stuff for his Europa
panel... but said he forgot to buy a "new & improved" capacitor so the
problem is back.
Brings up a good question for Bob -- is Martin's issue caused by using
an old OV design or are there circumstances where we might need to
upgrade that 22 uFD capacitor in the "roll-your-own" schematic?
D
----------
Ken wrote:
>
> Is there overvoltage protection and are you certain there are no loose
> connections?
> No one commented but I posted a situation a couple of weeks ago where I
> had a loose connection to a relay that when wiggled would apparently
> trigger the overvoltage crowbar and pop the breaker, even without the
> engine running.
> Ken
>
> D Wysong wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Here's another, Bob!
>>
>>--> Europa-List message posted by: MJKTuck(at)cs.com
>>
>>Hi Folks,
>>
>>The last two or three times I have gone flying I have experienced a problem
>>with the 5A ALT FIELD circuit breaker popping. The solution at first seemed
>>easy just push it back in and all is well. It occurs usually at start up soon
>>after I turn on the radio panel circuit.
>>
>>A couple of flights ago it popped a couple more times in the cruise and I
>>reset it with no further problems.
>>
>>Yesterday however it popped quite a number of times (5 or 6) and only settled
>>down after I had turned the radio master off and back on again. I don't see
>>how turning the radios off would affect the ALT circuit breaker except I
>>suppose they use the most load.
>>
>>Looking at the circuit the breaker is located between output C on the voltage
>>regulator and the main power bus (and thus the battery positive). Very
>>simple.
>>
>>The only thing I can think of is that the voltage regulator is spiking at
>>more than 5 amps until it 'warms up' or reaches some kind of battery charged
>>point after the battery has been used after start (although the engine typically
>>fires after just a few turns).
>>
>>Any ideas and/or solutions as to what the problem might be would be
>>appreciated. I would like to trouble shoot before replacing the
>>regulator but do not
>>want to remove the panel unless I really have to.
>>
>>P.S I usually turn on (both) the split master/alt switch - perhaps I should
>>only turn on the alternator after engine start? I have close to 200 hours
>>flying time on the aircraft so again this is a doubtful cause.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Martin Tuck
>>Europa N152MT
>>Wichita, Kansas
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "John Swartout" <jgswartout(at)earthlink.net> |
Is there an "ideal" place to attach the grounding strap to an O-360?
Will there be galvanic corrosion from attaching a copper strap to an
iron engine & steel engine mount?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Hotmail" <mbanus(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Wire Book Samples for AeroElectric Weekend Seminars |
Bob,
Sometime in the past I found these files on you website. But can't seam to
find them again. Would you give me the link?
TIA
Mark Banus
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
Subject: | Re: Engine ground |
Hi John,
On the rear right hand side of the engine you will find a hole (5/16" I
believe) above and just an inch or so inboard of the lower engine mount. The
hole is drilled in the casting and is commonly used for the ground strap.
Clean the surface down to bare aluminium apply your favourite corrosion
protection, grease, sealant ,paint etc. Install the ground strap being sure
to use star washers both ends with a mechanical self locking nut touqued
accordingly and carry on building.{[:-)
If at all present, galvanic corrosion should not be any more pronounced at
this location than any other area of the aicraft.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Swartout" <jgswartout(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Engine ground
>
>
> Is there an "ideal" place to attach the grounding strap to an O-360?
> Will there be galvanic corrosion from attaching a copper strap to an
> iron engine & steel engine mount?
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Weekend Seminars |
Subject: | Re: Wire Book Samples for AeroElectric |
Weekend Seminars
>
>Bob,
>
> Sometime in the past I found these files on you website. But can't
> seam to find them again. Would you give me the link?
I'm reorganizing. See
http://aeroelectric.com/PPS
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Problem? |
Subject: | Re: Fwd: Europa-List: Voltage Regulator |
Problem?
>
>Martin's CB label was wrong (wasn't the ALT FIELD but, rather, the OV
>breaker). He contacted Bob directly and (credit to Bob's memory) Bob
>remembered (1) they tackled the problem once before and (2) the fix!
>
>Seems that they installed a capacitor behind the panel many moons ago to
>take care of the CB popping problem. Martin recently found a bag of
>money and bought a bunch of "new & improved" stuff for his Europa
>panel... but said he forgot to buy a "new & improved" capacitor so the
>problem is back.
>
>Brings up a good question for Bob -- is Martin's issue caused by using
>an old OV design or are there circumstances where we might need to
>upgrade that 22 uFD capacitor in the "roll-your-own" schematic?
Don't know. Martin works at RAC where I do and he called me about
this a few days ago. I don't know what the rev-level his ov
module is. Martin's recollection of the nit that was upsetting
his ovm was different than mine but I do recall that we fixed
his problem simply before I left that morning.
We're doing some experiments to see what the new antagonist
is and will report our findings to the list as they become
available.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kevin Hester <kevinh-unfiltered(at)sneakyfrog.com> |
Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 11 Msgs - 06/14/05 |
Hi ya'll,
Please - o please - Fellow builders:
Does someone have a PDF of the Garmin GTX 330 installation manual they can email
me? It seems that Garmin tries to tightly control the distribution of these
documents, but I'd like to understand how the plane I've built is wired... ;-)
I'll happily pass it on as needed.
Kevin
RV-7A - DAR comes first week of July!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Walter Tondu <walter(at)tondu.com> |
Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 11 Msgs - 06/14/05 |
On 06/15 9:09, Kevin Hester wrote:
> Does someone have a PDF of the Garmin GTX 330 installation manual they can email
me? It seems that Garmin tries to tightly control the distribution of these
documents, but I'd like to understand how the plane I've built is wired...
;-)
http://www.rv7-a.com/manuals.htm
--
Walter Tondu
http://www.rv7-a.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Hotmail" <mbanus(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wire Book Samples for AeroElectric Weekend Seminars |
>Bob,
>
> Sometime in the past I found these files on you website. But can't
> seam to find them again. Would you give me the link?
I'm reorganizing. See
http://aeroelectric.com/PPS
Bob . . .
Thanks,
That's what I was looking for.
Mark Banus
Glasair II FT
Still wiring in VA Beach
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D Wysong <hdwysong(at)gmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Fw: Lightening Strikes Plane amazing photos |
Link to the lightning strike video...
http://gpsinformation.us/humor/Lightening.html
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Dave Morris <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> photos |
Subject: | Re: Fw: Lightening Strikes Plane amazing |
photos
I just have 2 words for that:
Faraday Cage
Dave Morris
At 10:55 AM 6/16/2005, you wrote:
>
>Link to the lightning strike video...
>
>http://gpsinformation.us/humor/Lightening.html
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Dan Brown <dan(at)familybrown.org> |
Subject: | Re: Fw: Lightening Strikes Plane amazing photos |
Quoting Jerry Grimmonpre :
> My second attempt didn't produce anything ... too bad ... I guess I need to
> do something else, what to try is a mystery to me. Sorry.
Send links--the list doesn't allow attachments.
--
Dan Brown, KE6MKS, dan(at)familybrown.org
"Since all the world is but a story, it were well for thee to buy the
more enduring story rather than the story that is less enduring."
-- The Judgment of St. Colum Cille
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQBCsaYJyQGUivXxtkERAiPsAJ4lOrluOSkE4MrJrgZb5gbBuiSLgwCgwAV7
AQVk8yff2J9POed7SwlD+IA=/NJQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
>
>
> >Bob N wrote:
> >Okay, it's your considered recommendation that if one
> >purchases p/n (xxxxx) from supplier (YYYYY) then OV
> >protection is not called for. You've cited data to support
> >your advice. Now, how do we get this information into
> >the hands of the greatest numbers of builders?
>
>
>Bob, my advice is from a ranked amateur and offer it with no warrantee.
>You have served to improve the knowledge and best interested of count less
>builders, including myself. I dont think we need to disseminate my opinion
>further than this list.
>
>
> >George, you seem to have completely missed the point
> >I've been trying to illustrate during this endless
> >thread. YOU and many like you are building ONE airplane.
> >You may have conversed with others to gather data
> >on and make selection of specific components in
> >which you have either trust supported by repeatable
> >experiments or faith supported by the gross weight of
> >anecdotal information. In either case, you're certainly
> >free to go forward with your choice and I wish you well.
>
>
>There are no one-size fits all solutions. I have not listed any specific
>part numbers because frankly I dont want the liability. Second I have been
>honest that getting detailed info on a Denso alternator and design in next
>to impossible since all the engineers are in Japan. As far as anecdotal
>evidence, I have tracked down as much info on how transistors fail, why
>and what characteristics different transistors have. It is not a fact but
>a widely held electronics industry expectation that transistor are VERY
>reliable. The external V-regulator and crow bar is no doubt more bullet
>proof. I take your word on it based on your experience and it makes
>sense. I think for most builders they take things on faith and standard
>practice. No need to reinvent the wheel.
>
>
>I think the hey my Denso has worked for 10 years with no problems is just
>that, anecdotal. I agree. As far as tests, sadly are in Japan and in
>Japanese. I hear the Japanese are good with electronics. I am sure Denso
>with 20-30 years making alternators with internal VRs have tested them and
>done failure analysis. Granted a car is not an airplane and I have no proof.
>
>
> >Please understand that I write for thousands of builders
> >working on thousands of airplanes being fabricated all
> >over the world. Their choices for selection of a suitable
> >alternator MIGHT include part number (xxxxx) and maybe
> >they have access to supplier (YYYYY) but I would be
> >remiss in my duties if I were to LIMIT my recommendations
> >to this narrow range of choices . . . especially when
> >I have no data from any repeatable experiments
> >to support my advice. Further, there are MILLIONS of
> >alternators with THOUSANDS of part numbers that will
> >perform very well and free of concerns if we drive
> >probability of hazardous failure down with layered
> >systems architecture . . . this is a major component
> >of FAILURE TOLERANT design. You ASSUME that a part
> >will fail and then incorporate protection -OR-
> >alternate technology (Plan B).
>
>
>Bob, I understand all your recommendations. I understand from your
>analysis, lack of information and judgment you cant endorse it. I think
>your opinions are the most conservative and will provide a method of DC
>power production in an aircraft that provides repeatable reliability and
>a level of safety required in certified aircraft designs. However for me
>in a VFR RV (experimental) with an engine that does not require electrical
>power (mechanical systems and self sustaining ignition), I can get away
>with an alternate path to electric DC power generation. This path is using
>an internal VR alternator with no extra external OV protection. I have OV
>warning (large flashing red light) and a manual way to disconnect the
>alternator output (b-lead) from the system thru a CB. Works for me and me
>only.
>
>
>Others have used the Denso 40 amp, aka Niagara, with good results. Again
>far from rigorous scientific proof, but a collection of general facts,
>anecdotes and opinion. My recommendation is inferior to the method of
>using an external alternator regulator and an OV module, aka crow-bar, in
>a rigorous scientific way. However my design will work OK as intended and
>be safe in my opinion, while being lighter, simpler, and cheaper.
>
>
> >When I handed control lock keys of an explosively
> >launched recovery parachute controller to the pilot who
> >was going to depend on that system to safe his life
> >and perhaps his airplane, I could look him right in
> >the eye and offer that I have done the best I know
> >how to do. When I write words on this List and for
> >the 'Connection, I believe am operating with that
> >same sense of duty to offer the best and most
> >universally useable information available. I am
> >pleased that you have discovered what you believe
> >is the ultimate solution to your system design
> >goals and parts procurement issues. Please fly them in
> >good health. The odds are definitely in your favor.
>
>
>Mr. Nuckolls not to pander to you in anyway, sincerely you have single
>handedly educated thousands of pilot/builders about electrical systems.
>The knowledge of the aviation community in general is the better for your
>contributions. The average aircraft (homebuilt) electrical system has
>improved due to your efforts. I dont mean to undermine your methods,
>analysis or opinions. However I do pick a choose what features I install
>in my electrical system. The most notably is the internal regulated
>alternator. I think you have said this yourself, If it can fail assume it
>will and what will happen when it does. I have analyzed my system and find
>that all alternator failures will be passive and not a threat to safety of
>flight FOR ME. (Dont try this at home, your mileage may vary and this info
>is provided for entertainment purposes only, Sincerely Georges Lawyers,
>Dwey-Cheat'em and Howe)
>
>
> >But understand that I've obligated myself to operate
> >in a wider arena and to offer advice that permits
> >me to look any builder in the eye and offer that
> >it's the best and most universally applicable
> >technology I know how to do right now. I have no
> >FAITH in the universal performance of all the
> >automotive alternators available to the OBAM aircraft
> >community around the world but I do have the
> >knowledge of countless REPEATABLE EXPERIMENTS
> >conducted to craft the most failure tolerant
> >and hazard free systems I know how to do today.
>
>
>Amen, I have no way, other than FAITH, that the Denso alternator will not
>hurt me or the airframe, and the level of risk, is appropriate and I am
>willing to accept it and understand it. I have determined that my old
>Collins transponder and new Icom A200 (without OV protected power supply)
>may likely be damaged. Other equipment is OV protected internally and if
>damaged the manufacture assured me the damage would be repairable at
>nominal cost. Plan A never have an electrical failure. My maintenance plan
>to assure reliability is checking electrical volts and amps carefully for
>any sign/trend of impending failure, replace battery on regular basis and
>never over load alternator. During flight test I will thermocouple
>alternator to determine operating temps are acceptable. Blast cooling tube
>will be installed.
>
>
> > I'm not here to argue against the gospel of
> >Nipon Denso or any other. I have tools called
> >Failure Mode Effects Analysis, decades of experience
> >with others who design, build and fly airplanes
> >and a personal goal of understanding how things
> >work and sharing that with anyone who has an
> >interest. I cannot advise a builder to adopt a
> >design philosophy that I do not understand or that
> >he cannot understand AND CONTROL.
>
>
>Bob, no one mounting the sermon; You are right you dont have ABSOLUTE
>control and dont have complete understanding how the IC chip and
>transistor works in a Denso. I have gone as far as I needed to see the
>truth, GOOD ENOUGH for me, no more or less. I really think alternators
>with internal regulators are getting better and soon will have failsafe
>internal regulators. The auto industry will demand it and we will benefit
>from it.
>
>
>Other alternators like Mitsubishi have also worked well, and from my
>research others like Delco/Motorola/Hitachi have had poor service history
>according to the Highway Safety foundation. The Denso has just happened to
>become the De-facto choice for homebuilders, proven to be reliable in
>cars, industrial equip and planes, size, weight and the dual internal fans.
>
>
>I looked at the problem of over voltage, load dump, transient voltage and
>equipment protection and found that it is acceptable that my system suffer
>an OV condition, so reliably is moot. However I prey that it will be as
>reliable as I think it will be and as others have experienced. The chance
>of fire or catastrophic failure of the alternator is nill. I do run the
>risk of some equipment damage if a rare OV occurred, but that may be
>limited to a few hundred dollars of damage. That is where I am putting my
>faith, but this is a special system design and meets my fault tolerance
>analysis.
>
>
>If it can fail it will and any failure should not cause a hazard. Amen, we
>shall now turn our Aeroelectric Hymnal to page XX.
>
>
> >Bob . . .
>
>
>All the best and I thank you again for forcing us to critically think thru
>out systems. Even if it is not the perfect solution for ALL at least it is
>MY system and I have knowledge of the risk and benefits. I am searching
>for the lightest and most reliable electrical system I can get, and I
>accept the risk of an OV as unlikely but an acceptable one. Bob I have
>learned a lot from your books and forum.
Carefully considered and well put sir . . . with one minor
exception. I hope I'm not "forcing" anyone to do anything,
even if it's to exercise the benefits of critical thinking.
I appreciate your participation here on the List. The quality
of our critical thinking can only grow when we have multiple
gray matter masses considering the questions!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Boost Pump Wiring |
From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
Hello Bob -
Attached is a wire sheet showing the wiring for a Dukes Fuel pump that we
installed in our Lancair ES. For some reason, Dukes keeps voltage on the
lead that is not in use - as designated by the switch position. We
discovered this when we turned the pump on for a quick check and both
annunciator lights lit up.
We tested a solution of inserting diodes in line on each power lead to the
pump. This works great. We used the 1n5400 diodes, but I wonder if the 3
amp capacity is sufficient. Dukes recommends a 7.5 amp fuse for the device.
Any comments on:
(1) The wiring itself?
(2) The size of the diodes?
Many thanks,
John Schroeder
--
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Bill Judge <bjudge(at)gmail.com> |
Subject: | KT-76 Solder connector |
Hello All:
I'm installing a KT-76 in my RV-8 and would like to be able to easily
disconnect the transponder from the co-ax but it has a solder
termination rather than a BNC. Does anyone know if there is BNC
version of this connector?
If not then I'll put a connector down the line a few inches but that
would be adding more places for failure...
Thanks in advance.
Bill Judge
N84WJ
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Boost Pump Wiring |
6/18/2005
Hello John, I am curious about your wiring set up. I also have a two stage
Dukes electric fuel boost pump in my KIS, but did not receive any wiring
diagram with the pump. (It is really only a priming pump in my set up since
it should never be turned on in flight unless the engine driven pump has
failed).
Since your wiring diagram did not come through the list could you please
email it to me?
I am puzzled as to how the high boost lead could have significant voltage
and current in it when voltage and current is only being sent into the
pump's low boost windings by the switch. One explanation could be that some
voltage is being induced into the high boost windings by the rotation of the
pump motor armature. But if the high boost circuit is open at the switch end
how could there be any flow of current?
I can understand voltage / current being available in the low boost windings
when the switch is in the high boost position because the pump may have
internal wiring that applies incoming current to both sets of boost windings
when current is sent into the pump motor on just the high boost lead by the
switch
You don't have some kind of special Dukes switch do you?
Thanks for your help.
OC
PS: You really think that the pump switch contacts need diode protection
because of an inductive spike generated when the pump motor is turned off?
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Boost Pump Wiring
From: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net>
Hello Bob -
Attached is a wire sheet showing the wiring for a Dukes Fuel pump that we
installed in our Lancair ES. For some reason, Dukes keeps voltage on the
lead that is not in use - as designated by the switch position. We
discovered this when we turned the pump on for a quick check and both
annunciator lights lit up.
We tested a solution of inserting diodes in line on each power lead to the
pump. This works great. We used the 1n5400 diodes, but I wonder if the 3
amp capacity is sufficient. Dukes recommends a 7.5 amp fuse for the device.
Any comments on:
(1) The wiring itself?
(2) The size of the diodes?
Many thanks,
John Schroeder
________________________________________________________________________________
"aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com"
Subject: | Re: Boost Pump Wiring |
From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
OC -
The problem comes when you tap off of the hot side of the switch to get
power to a lamp (LED) on the annunciator panel. This provides a path for
current from the pump to go through the annunciator panel to ground. With
the boost pump disconnected, the low boost lamp is lit when the switch
goes from the down position (2-10 progressive switch) to the mid position.
When the switch goes to the full up position, the low boost light goes out
and the high boost light comes on. The lamps get their power from their
respective switch contacts.
The pump wired iaw the Dukes diagram (I discarded the primer circuitry
from their diagram). When the switch is put from down to mid, both lights
come on. When it goes from mid to full up, both lights stay on.
Another builder has his pump wired per the attached diagram and got the
same situation. He measured the voltages and said that there is voltage on
the low side when the switch is in the high position and vice versa. He
put a diode in the wire to the high side of the pump. He gets just the low
boost light with the switch in the low position. But, he gets both lights
when the switch is in the high position.
The diodes in line on the low wire and high wire are to simply prevent
current flow back to the lights. I get power to the respective light from
the switch contact, and thus do not need the current from the pump. I
realize that this setup does not tell me that either the pump is running
or that it is pumping fuel. I can get a fuel pressure reading to tell me
that the pump is putting out pressure. The lamps serve as a reminder that
the pump switch is on and in what position.
I would appreciate your thoughts on this. Wirebook page is attached.
Cheers,
John
> 6/18/2005
>
> Hello John, I am curious about your wiring set up. I also have a two
> stage Dukes electric fuel boost pump in my KIS, but did not receive any
> wiring diagram with the pump. (It is really only a priming pump in my
> set up since it should never be turned on in flight unless the engine
> driven pump has failed).
>
> Since your wiring diagram did not come through the list could you please
> email it to me?
>
> I am puzzled as to how the high boost lead could have significant
> voltage and current in it when voltage and current is only being sent
> into the pump's low boost windings by the switch. One explanation could
> be that some voltage is being induced into the high boost windings by
> the rotation of the pump motor armature. But if the high boost circuit
> is open at the switch end how could there be any flow of current?
>
> I can understand voltage / current being available in the low boost
> windings when the switch is in the high boost position because the pump
> may have internal wiring that applies incoming current to both sets of
> boost windings when current is sent into the pump motor on just the high
> boost lead by the switch
>
> You don't have some kind of special Dukes switch do you?
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> OC
>
> PS: You really think that the pump switch contacts need diode protection
> because of an inductive spike generated when the pump motor is turned
> off?
>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Boost Pump Wiring
> From: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net>
>
>
>
> Hello Bob -
>
> Attached is a wire sheet showing the wiring for a Dukes Fuel pump that we
> installed in our Lancair ES. For some reason, Dukes keeps voltage on the
> lead that is not in use - as designated by the switch position. We
> discovered this when we turned the pump on for a quick check and both
> annunciator lights lit up.
>
> We tested a solution of inserting diodes in line on each power lead to
> the
> pump. This works great. We used the 1n5400 diodes, but I wonder if the 3
> amp capacity is sufficient. Dukes recommends a 7.5 amp fuse for the
> device.
>
> Any comments on:
>
> (1) The wiring itself?
>
> (2) The size of the diodes?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> John Schroeder
--
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Boost Pump Wiring |
>
>6/18/2005
>
>Hello John, I am curious about your wiring set up. I also have a two stage
>Dukes electric fuel boost pump in my KIS, but did not receive any wiring
>diagram with the pump. (It is really only a priming pump in my set up since
>it should never be turned on in flight unless the engine driven pump has
>failed).
>
>Since your wiring diagram did not come through the list could you please
>email it to me?
>
>I am puzzled as to how the high boost lead could have significant voltage
>and current in it when voltage and current is only being sent into the
>pump's low boost windings by the switch. One explanation could be that some
>voltage is being induced into the high boost windings by the rotation of the
>pump motor armature. But if the high boost circuit is open at the switch end
>how could there be any flow of current?
>
>I can understand voltage / current being available in the low boost windings
>when the switch is in the high boost position because the pump may have
>internal wiring that applies incoming current to both sets of boost windings
>when current is sent into the pump motor on just the high boost lead by the
>switch
>
>You don't have some kind of special Dukes switch do you?
It's been a LONG time since I put my hands on one of these
but I seem to recall that the motors are series wound with
a tapped field. Full field gets you low speed, partial field
is high speed. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Boost_Pump.gif
It's readily apparent that voltage will appear on the unused
input lead while the other one is selected for operation.
Diodes are called for as proposed in the original post.
This is another case where the diode bridge rectifier
similar to those used in the e-bus normal feed path
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/s401-25.jpg
might be useful. Yeah, there are "too many" diodes
in the assembly . . . but they mount with great mechanical
convenience. Have plenty of current capability. The're
fitted with mates to fast-on terminals.
>PS: You really think that the pump switch contacts need diode protection
>because of an inductive spike generated when the pump motor is turned off?
Probably not. Arcing from a spinning-down motor is pretty
minimal.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gert <gert.v(at)sbcglobal.net> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
It is my understanding that on some denso's one can swap the brush
holder for a diff model, so that one can use it with outside regulator,
any such info available on the one used on the Suzuki Sidekick???
The prob I see right now with the suzuki alternator is that one of the
field brushes is fed and physically screwed to the B post. so it is
hard to remove the regulator and run the brushes out
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Boost Pump Wiring |
From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
>> I can understand voltage / current being available in the low boost
>> windings when the switch is in the high boost position because the pump
>> may have
>> internal wiring that applies incoming current to both sets of boost
>> windings when current is sent into the pump motor on just the high
>> boost lead by the switch
>>
>> You don't have some kind of special Dukes switch do you?
>
> It's been a LONG time since I put my hands on one of these
> but I seem to recall that the motors are series wound with
> a tapped field. Full field gets you low speed, partial field
> is high speed. See:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Boost_Pump.gif
>
> It's readily apparent that voltage will appear on the unused
> input lead while the other one is selected for operation.
> Diodes are called for as proposed in the original post.
>
> This is another case where the diode bridge rectifier
> similar to those used in the e-bus normal feed path
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/s401-25.jpg
>
> might be useful. Yeah, there are "too many" diodes
> in the assembly . . . but they mount with great mechanical
> convenience. Have plenty of current capability. The're
> fitted with mates to fast-on terminals.
Bob:
I do not have a good recollection of the function of the bridge rectifier.
Is it possible to use one of them and provide a single diode function to
both the low and high lines going to the boost pump? This would negate
having to install two of them.
(2) There is a voltage drop across the diode, what is the drop on the
401-25 @ 13 v?
(3) Will this affect the operation of the pump?
Thanks for verifying our diagnosis of the problem and especially, why the
problem occurs.
John Schroeder
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Boost Pump Wiring |
>
>Bob:
>
>I do not have a good recollection of the function of the bridge rectifier.
>Is it possible to use one of them and provide a single diode function to
>both the low and high lines going to the boost pump? This would negate
>having to install two of them.
No, the "extra" diodes would make the system behave in undesireable
ways.
>(2) There is a voltage drop across the diode, what is the drop on the
>401-25 @ 13 v?
Same as as for any diode . . . .7 to 1.0 volts
>(3) Will this affect the operation of the pump?
Only slightly. Not enough to be concerned about it.
>Thanks for verifying our diagnosis of the problem and especially, why the
>problem occurs.
My pleasure sir.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
>
>It is my understanding that on some denso's one can swap the brush
>holder for a diff model, so that one can use it with outside regulator,
>any such info available on the one used on the Suzuki Sidekick???
>
>The prob I see right now with the suzuki alternator is that one of the
>field brushes is fed and physically screwed to the B post. so it is
>hard to remove the regulator and run the brushes out
There is an article on the net that speaks to such a modification
on a "presolite" that looks like an ND alternator (both are probably
made by bosch!). See:
http://www.miramarcollege.net/programs/avim/faculty/north/alternator/
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
>
>
>
> >
> >It is my understanding that on some denso's one can swap the brush
> >holder for a diff model, so that one can use it with outside regulator,
> >any such info available on the one used on the Suzuki Sidekick???
> >
> >The prob I see right now with the suzuki alternator is that one of the
> >field brushes is fed and physically screwed to the B post. so it is
> >hard to remove the regulator and run the brushes out
>
> There is an article on the net that speaks to such a modification
> on a "presolite" that looks like an ND alternator (both are probably
> made by bosch!). See:
Prof North tells me that the protocols for accessing his
college's website are a bit buggy. Several folks have told
me that their browsers won't find the root server if you
click on the whole link at once. Tnis may work better:
Click on this link first:
http://www.miramarcollege.net
When you have the college's front page up, then alt-tab back to
your e-mail client and click the second link. This works for
me 100% of the time while the direct link mostly hangs up.
Wunderful things these computers.
http://www.miramarcollege.net/programs/avim/faculty/north/alternator/
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Paul Kuntz" <paul.kuntz(at)virgin.net> |
Subject: | Re: Revision 11 is in print |
Awhile back someone provide a link to a talk radio interview with Bob
Nuckolls. I've lost it -- could you provide it again?
Thanks,
Paul Kuntz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
Subject: | Re: Revision 11 is in print |
Morning, Paul...
I believe that was me...
Here's the link:
www.ultraflightradio.com/byname/nuckolls-bob.html
Harley Dixon
Paul Kuntz wrote:
>
>Awhile back someone provide a link to a talk radio interview with Bob
>Nuckolls. I've lost it -- could you provide it again?
>
>Thanks,
>Paul Kuntz
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Boost Pump Wiring |
From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
wrote:
>> (2) There is a voltage drop across the diode, what is the drop on the
>> 401-25 @ 13 v?
> Same as as for any diode . . . .7 to 1.0 volts
>
>> (3) Will this affect the operation of the pump?
> Only slightly. Not enough to be concerned about it.
Bob -
One last question, with the max 6 amp draw of the pump, would a heat sink
be necessary with a single diode?
With the 401-25 bridge rectifier diode?
Thanks,
John
--
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Boost Pump Wiring |
>
>
> wrote:
>
> >> (2) There is a voltage drop across the diode, what is the drop on the
> >> 401-25 @ 13 v?
> > Same as as for any diode . . . .7 to 1.0 volts
> >
> >> (3) Will this affect the operation of the pump?
> > Only slightly. Not enough to be concerned about it.
>
>Bob -
>
>One last question, with the max 6 amp draw of the pump, would a heat sink
>be necessary with a single diode?
not if it's rated for 6A . . .
>With the 401-25 bridge rectifier diode?
ALL rectifiers of this genre' are rated at 25A
or more. Lower rated devices do not come in this
package. They get heat-sinked by virtue of their
contact with mounting surface and would certainly
handle 6A without heatsinking (mounted to composite
surface).
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Internal Voltage Regulators |
6/17/2005
Hello Fellow Builders, The "Car Talk" guys have a letter in today's column
in the Washington Post from a reader whose 2003 Chevy Impala with less than
15,000 miles was overcharging and ruining the battery.
The Chevy dealer replaced the battery and it happened again.
Click and Clack blame the voltage regulator and say "replace the
alternator".
Moral of the story: 1) Internal voltage regulators can go bad, and 2) Dealer
maintenance couldn't come up with the simple solution.
OC
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> |
Subject: | Re: Internal Voltage Regulators |
Click and Clack also laughed me off the air when I told them I was putting
a Volkswagen engine in an airplane. I hesitate to think what they would
say now that I'm using a Corvair instead.
Dave Morris
At 10:39 AM 6/19/2005, you wrote:
>
>6/17/2005
>
>Hello Fellow Builders, The "Car Talk" guys have a letter in today's column
>in the Washington Post from a reader whose 2003 Chevy Impala with less than
>15,000 miles was overcharging and ruining the battery.
>
>The Chevy dealer replaced the battery and it happened again.
>
>Click and Clack blame the voltage regulator and say "replace the
>alternator".
>
>Moral of the story: 1) Internal voltage regulators can go bad, and 2) Dealer
>maintenance couldn't come up with the simple solution.
>
>OC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Internal Voltage Regulators |
From: | "Craig P. Steffen" <craig(at)craigsteffen.net> |
>
> Click and Clack also laughed me off the air when I told them I was putting
> a Volkswagen engine in an airplane. I hesitate to think what they would
> say now that I'm using a Corvair instead.
Which shows that auto-conversion aero-engines aren't their area of
expertise. I don't know what the statistics are for airplanes flying
VW engines, but I would guess that it's at least in the thousands,
given that there are at least three companies making a living selling
them.
Craig Steffen
--
craig(at)craigsteffen.net
public key available at http://www.craigsteffen.net/GPG/
current goal: use a CueCat scanner to inventory my books
career goal: be the first Vorlon Time Lord
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | strobe noise in music input |
I've recently added a music input to my Garmin 340 audio panel so I can
use an ipod. The input is a 1/8" stereo mini plug.
When I plug the cord into the jack to connect the ipod I can hear the
strobes pulsing. I don't hear the noise when the cord's not in the jack
so I am assuming that my wiring from the 340 is not the problem.
The aeroflash strobe power packs are in the wingtips.
This noise isn't very loud and isn't too bothersome at cruise power
settings but I can hear it pretty clearly powered back or taxiing. Of
course the strobes are turned off pretty quickly after landing so
that's not too much of an issue.
I would, however, like to know what's causing this and what might the
solution be. A different cord perhaps? Any ideas?
thanks,
Robert Dickson
RV-6A
Carrboro NC
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | AI Nut <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
Subject: | Re: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory help, |
please?
Your baloney does not agree with the engineering staff at Analog
Devices, nor with the manufacturer of the Microlight line of TC's.
Whatever works for you...
Richard E. Tasker please? wrote:
>
>Baloney. If, as the original poster suggests, the instrument and the
>end of the TC probe are at the same temperature you could connect them
>with anything you want to. The reason that one normally uses
>thermocouple extension wire to connect a TC probe to the remote mounted
>instrument is because they are frequently at different temperatures -
>and probably unpredictably different. For that case it is important to
>use extension wire.
>
>If the two junctions are at the same temperature, any emf generated is
>either canceled out or is only the same as it the copper wire wasn't
>there. That is, the terminals that the TC wire normally connects to on
>the instrument are probably copper or brass or possibly nickel plated.
>The connection between the TC wires generates an EMF that is canceled
>out by the cold junction compensation circuitry in the instrument. If
>you add a length of wire between the TC and the instrument, and assuming
>the two junctions are at the same temperature, you have done nothing but
>move the location of the cold junction - the EMFs at the instrument will
>be exactly the same as without the additional copper wire.
>
>Furthermore, the errors would not be "large" in any case. In fact, any
>error will be exactly the difference in temperature between the
>TC/copper wire junction and the copper wire/instrument junction. Unless
>either of these junctions are very close to the engine, the practical
>difference is minimal.
>
>All the above applies to the original poster's situation. In a "normal"
>GA or experimental with a closed cowl and a separate cockpit, the errors
>could be significant.
>
>If you want more theory, just ask and I can give it to you. :-)
>
>Dick Tasker
>
>AI Nut wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>Copper, indeed any metal that is not what that particular TC was
>>calibrated with, will most likely incude large errors in the final readings.
>>
>>
>>Robert L. Nuckolls, III help wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>I'm installing a 22 hp single cyl 2 stroke in an open frame ultralight.
>>>>
>>>>I'm using a CHT/EGT combo analog gauge. Can I transition from the
>>>>thermocouple wire to copper at the end of the probe wire? Since everything
>>>>is out in the open air, and thus should all be at about the same
>>>>temperature?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> If you have a stand-alone gage (like View -C- in Figure 14-10
>>> of 'Connection or in:
>>>
>>>http://aeroelectric.com/articles/excerpt.pdf
>>>
>>> then the instrument is calibrated assuming that the cold
>>> junction occurs inside or at the rear of the instrument.
>>> In an airplane like an ultralight, your supposition that
>>> ambient temperatures at a remote cold junction and at
>>> the instrument will be fairly close is a good one . . .
>>> as long as the remote junction is not exposed to localized
>>> heating from the engine.
>>>
>>> The always-proper way to extend thermocouples in any
>>> instrumentation package is with thermocouple wire which
>>> is readily available as cited in another post. In this
>>> case, however, you're not likely to introduce serious
>>> errors by using copper to extend the wires.
>>>
>>> Bob . . .
>>>
>>>
>>>.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Ronald J. Parigoris" <rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US> |
Subject: | Silver and Ethelene Glycol? |
I finally got around to looking at the Power Point wiring course.
Worthwhile information.
What exactly happens when you contaminate silver-plated with antifreeze?
Is 12 volts enough to create a fire hazard?
"due to potential fire hazard, silver-plated conductors shall not be used in areas
where
they are subject to contamination by ethylene glycol solutions.
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
> posted by: Jay Brinkmeyer
> >
> >
> >http://www.academy.jccbi.gov/airdl/wiringcourse/
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> help, |
please?@roxy.matronics.com
Subject: | Re: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory |
help, please?
>
>Your baloney does not agree with the engineering staff at Analog
>Devices, nor with the manufacturer of the Microlight line of TC's.
>Whatever works for you...
>
>
>Richard E. Tasker please? wrote:
>
> please?
> >
> >Baloney. If, as the original poster suggests, the instrument and the
> >end of the TC probe are at the same temperature you could connect them
> >with anything you want to.
This is a true statement but denote the qualifier "IF". The
task of keeping these two locations at the same temperature
in most situations is difficult if not impossible so folks
like Analog Devices and manufacturers of TC based products
won't even consider this situation in their application
notes..
But recall that the original poster was talking about an
ultralight . . . a very open, fair weather machine where
the likelihood of a remote cold junction and the instrument
operating at widely disparate temperatures is low.
The errors introduced by whatever real variability exists
would be small compared to the measurements of interest. From
a practical standpoint, Richard's answer was on firm ground.
Now, folks who manufacture measurement systems (like
Analog Device's cold-junction chips and anyone else who
builds instruments) have published accuracy specification
that do not allow or even consider the configuration being
considered.
If you want to accomplish the best that the system can do,
then a remote cold junction is not recommended as the
manufacturers will advise. When you want to know a couple
of temperatures wherein no more than 10 degrees of
installation error affects performance or operating decisions,
then the remote cold junction is okay.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Silver and Ethelene Glycol? |
>
>
>I finally got around to looking at the Power Point wiring course.
>
>Worthwhile information.
>
>What exactly happens when you contaminate silver-plated with antifreeze?
>
>Is 12 volts enough to create a fire hazard?
>
>"due to potential fire hazard, silver-plated conductors shall not be used
>in areas where
>they are subject to contamination by ethylene glycol solutions.
>
>Thx.
>Ron Parigoris
See:
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Ethylene-glycol
where we find the statement:
"The electrolysis of ethylene glycol solutions with the
anode made of silver results in an exothermic reaction.
The Apollo 1 fire catastrophe was caused by this reaction.
The ethylene glycol / water mixture was ignited and was able
to burn in the atmosphere of pure pressurized oxygen."
While this may have been root cause of the Apollo 1 event,
it seems unlikely that one will find this set of conditions
in very many venues.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Silver and Ethelene Glycol? |
>
>
>I finally got around to looking at the Power Point wiring course.
>
>Worthwhile information.
>
>What exactly happens when you contaminate silver-plated with antifreeze?
>
>Is 12 volts enough to create a fire hazard?
>
>"due to potential fire hazard, silver-plated conductors shall not be used
>in areas where
>they are subject to contamination by ethylene glycol solutions.
>
>Thx.
>Ron Parigoris
See:
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Ethylene-glycol
where we find the statement:
"The electrolysis of ethylene glycol solutions with the
anode made of silver results in an exothermic reaction.
The Apollo 1 fire catastrophe was caused by this reaction.
The ethylene glycol / water mixture was ignited and was able
to burn in the atmosphere of pure pressurized oxygen."
While this may have been root cause of the Apollo 1 event,
it seems unlikely that one will find this set of conditions
in very many venues.
Also see:
http://www.x-moto.net/articles/Apollo_1
This speaks of "silver plated copper wire" which I'm wondering
wasn't Teflon insulated wire. This was 1967 . . . the literal
heyday of Tefzel wiring. It was the latest and greatest in terms
of performance at both high and low temperature extremes. However,
it was not very abrasion resistant. Further, the high extrusion
temperatures for Teflon precluded the use of tin plated copper
wire with silver being the next best option.
Bob. . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: strobe noise in music input |
><robert@thenews-journal.com>
>
>I've recently added a music input to my Garmin 340 audio panel so I can
>use an ipod. The input is a 1/8" stereo mini plug.
>When I plug the cord into the jack to connect the ipod I can hear the
>strobes pulsing. I don't hear the noise when the cord's not in the jack
>so I am assuming that my wiring from the 340 is not the problem.
>The aeroflash strobe power packs are in the wingtips.
>This noise isn't very loud and isn't too bothersome at cruise power
>settings but I can hear it pretty clearly powered back or taxiing. Of
>course the strobes are turned off pretty quickly after landing so
>that's not too much of an issue.
>I would, however, like to know what's causing this and what might the
>solution be. A different cord perhaps? Any ideas?
Does it do it with the Ipod turned off but still plugged into
the audio panel? Does it do it with just the cord plugged into
the audio panel but with the Ipod disconnected?
Bob. . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Charger/maintainer protocols Schumacher WM1562 |
A few days ago I published test data take from one of Schumacher's
larger automatic charger/maintainer products. I just finished getting
data off a WM1562A charger. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/schumacher_4.jpg
This one is different. It appears to stroke the battery up to 14.4 and
drop off after recharge current falls below some value. It does go
OPEN circuit in the maintain mode but when I added and artifical
self discharge load, it triggers back into a boost mode at just
over 13 volts.
The 1.75A charger carried the battery back up to 14.4 volts but
was apparently fooled into thinking that full charge was not
yet achieved due to the 0.5A of artificial leakage. When the
leakage was removed, the charger almost immediately reverted to
an open circuit float mode.
It doesn't surprise me that Schumacher might have more than one
protocol. In this case, both versions simply go open circuit in the
maintenance mode and wait for hte battery to drift down in votlage
due to internal leakage before a re-boost cycle is initiated.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: strobe noise in music input |
On Jun 19, 2005, at 9:40 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> <robert@thenews-journal.com>
>
> I've recently added a music input to my Garmin 340 audio panel so I can
> use an ipod. The input is a 1/8" stereo mini plug.
> When I plug the cord into the jack to connect the ipod I can hear the
> strobes pulsing. I don't hear the noise when the cord's not in the jack
> so I am assuming that my wiring from the 340 is not the problem.
> The aeroflash strobe power packs are in the wingtips.
> This noise isn't very loud and isn't too bothersome at cruise power
> settings but I can hear it pretty clearly powered back or taxiing. Of
> course the strobes are turned off pretty quickly after landing so
> that's not too much of an issue.
> I would, however, like to know what's causing this and what might the
> solution be. A different cord perhaps? Any ideas?
Does it do it with the Ipod turned off but still plugged into
the audio panel? Does it do it with just the cord plugged into
the audio panel but with the Ipod disconnected?
Bob. . .
It does it when the ipod is plugged in and off but I can't remember
trying just the cord with no ipod. I'll try that tomorrow.
Robert Dickson
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> please? |
Subject: | Re: Thermocouples in an ultralight - theory help, |
please?
How long have you worked with thermocouples and in what applications?
Everything I said is not only true, but agrees with what AD and
Microlight say if they are being realistic and not just "playing safe"
in their advice.
AD designs devices to be used in industrial process control situations
(I have used them) where high accuracy is needed and temperatures vary
all over the map so one MUST use a cold junction compensator at the
measurement instrument and connect to the TC sensing the temperature
with either TC wire or TC extension wire. As the original lister said,
and as I noted with an "IF", the temperature difference between where
his thermocouple wire ended and where his instrument was was minimal.
Even if it was a few degrees different it would not be a big deal since
he was measuring several hundred degrees.
If you re-read my original post, you will also note that I ended with
the comment that in most situations you must use TC extension wire if
you want accuracy.
My understanding is that this forum is to help people "understand" all
things electrical and not to just accept dogma. Your response indicates
a lack of knowledge of how TCs really work and while you will never be
wrong with your approach, there are times when it is entirely unnecessary.
Dick Tasker
AI Nut wrote:
>
>Your baloney does not agree with the engineering staff at Analog
>Devices, nor with the manufacturer of the Microlight line of TC's.
>Whatever works for you...
>
>
>Richard E. Tasker please? wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>Baloney. If, as the original poster suggests, the instrument and the
>>end of the TC probe are at the same temperature you could connect them
>>with anything you want to. The reason that one normally uses
>>thermocouple extension wire to connect a TC probe to the remote mounted
>>instrument is because they are frequently at different temperatures -
>>and probably unpredictably different. For that case it is important to
>>use extension wire.
>>
>>If the two junctions are at the same temperature, any emf generated is
>>either canceled out or is only the same as it the copper wire wasn't
>>there. That is, the terminals that the TC wire normally connects to on
>>the instrument are probably copper or brass or possibly nickel plated.
>>The connection between the TC wires generates an EMF that is canceled
>>out by the cold junction compensation circuitry in the instrument. If
>>you add a length of wire between the TC and the instrument, and assuming
>>the two junctions are at the same temperature, you have done nothing but
>>move the location of the cold junction - the EMFs at the instrument will
>>be exactly the same as without the additional copper wire.
>>
>>Furthermore, the errors would not be "large" in any case. In fact, any
>>error will be exactly the difference in temperature between the
>>TC/copper wire junction and the copper wire/instrument junction. Unless
>>either of these junctions are very close to the engine, the practical
>>difference is minimal.
>>
>>All the above applies to the original poster's situation. In a "normal"
>>GA or experimental with a closed cowl and a separate cockpit, the errors
>>could be significant.
>>
>>If you want more theory, just ask and I can give it to you. :-)
>>
>>Dick Tasker
>>
>>AI Nut wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Copper, indeed any metal that is not what that particular TC was
>>>calibrated with, will most likely incude large errors in the final readings.
>>>
>>>
>>>Robert L. Nuckolls, III help wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm installing a 22 hp single cyl 2 stroke in an open frame ultralight.
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm using a CHT/EGT combo analog gauge. Can I transition from the
>>>>>thermocouple wire to copper at the end of the probe wire? Since everything
>>>>>is out in the open air, and thus should all be at about the same
>>>>>temperature?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>If you have a stand-alone gage (like View -C- in Figure 14-10
>>>>of 'Connection or in:
>>>>
>>>>http://aeroelectric.com/articles/excerpt.pdf
>>>>
>>>>then the instrument is calibrated assuming that the cold
>>>>junction occurs inside or at the rear of the instrument.
>>>>In an airplane like an ultralight, your supposition that
>>>>ambient temperatures at a remote cold junction and at
>>>>the instrument will be fairly close is a good one . . .
>>>>as long as the remote junction is not exposed to localized
>>>>heating from the engine.
>>>>
>>>>The always-proper way to extend thermocouples in any
>>>>instrumentation package is with thermocouple wire which
>>>>is readily available as cited in another post. In this
>>>>case, however, you're not likely to introduce serious
>>>>errors by using copper to extend the wires.
>>>>
>>>>Bob . . .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
--
----
Please Note:
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however,
that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced.
----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator (modification) |
Here is how to modify your Denso:
I considered this mod but it's more effort than it is worth to me. For me the small
fear that an internal regulator will cause an unlikely OV condition, is not
enough to justify the surgery. But here is the info if you choice to do it,
enjoy.
http://us.f1f.yahoofs.com/bc/428f57b3_10738/bc/Aircraft+data/Converting+an+Alternator2.doc?bf.EktCBk1h2fJz7
After you have hacked, pried, sawed, soldered and added more components and wires,
you still have an alternator :- )
You can set up a Denso for the "A" type external regulator (grounded regulator)
or "B" type external regulator (grounded field). Most Denso's internal regulators
are "A" type voltage regulators. The conversion is much easier if you also
use an "A" type external VR. If you wire it for a "B" external regulator you
will have to mod the brushes and brush housing.
The down side of using an external "A" type VR is the field wire going from the
external regulator, if grounded against the airframe, could cause the alternator
to go to max output. This is a small issue. Just protect the field wire.
You will need to pick an external regulator (A or B). Solid-state external VR's
come in both "A" type and "B" type. The "A" type is not as common as "B", which
has a better selection. As long as you protect the field wire from grounding
the "A" type regulator works as well as the "B" type. The choice is yours. As
far as OV protection you can use a crow-bar or purchase a modern solid state
VR with OV protection built in. They cost $30-$70.
A nice overview of alternator and regulator components inside a Denso:
http://www.autoshop101.com/trainmodules/alternator/alt101.html
(Diff between "A" and "B" regulators shown on page 30 thru 33 show regulator detail)
Enjoy, consider NOT doing anything but bolting the stock Denso on with the internal
regulator it came with and go fly. If you want to do it here is the info.
Credit goes to "George's Falco" builder web site in New Zealand. The nice thing
about his conversion is it looks stock and keeps the stock connector plug.
Cheers George ATP, CFI, MSME
---------------------------------
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Charlie Kuss <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> (modification) |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
(modification)
At 12:22 AM 6/20/2005, you wrote:
>
>Here is how to modify your Denso:
>
>I considered this mod but it's more effort than it is worth to me. For me
>the small fear that an internal regulator will cause an unlikely OV
>condition, is not enough to justify the surgery. But here is the info if
>you choice to do it, enjoy.
>
>http://us.f1f.yahoofs.com/bc/428f57b3_10738/bc/Aircraft+data/Converting+an+Alternator2.doc?bf.EktCBk1h2fJz7
>
>After you have hacked, pried, sawed, soldered and added more components
>and wires, you still have an alternator :- )
>You can set up a Denso for the "A" type external regulator (grounded
>regulator) or "B" type external regulator (grounded field). Most Denso's
>internal regulators are "A" type voltage regulators. The conversion is
>much easier if you also use an "A" type external VR. If you wire it for a
>"B" external regulator you will have to mod the brushes and brush housing.
>
>
>The down side of using an external "A" type VR is the field wire going
>from the external regulator, if grounded against the airframe, could cause
>the alternator to go to max output. This is a small issue. Just protect
>the field wire.
>
>You will need to pick an external regulator (A or B). Solid-state external
>VR's come in both "A" type and "B" type. The "A" type is not as common as
>"B", which has a better selection. As long as you protect the field wire
>from grounding the "A" type regulator works as well as the "B" type. The
>choice is yours. As far as OV protection you can use a crow-bar or
>purchase a modern solid state VR with OV protection built in. They cost
>$30-$70.
>
>A nice overview of alternator and regulator components inside a Denso:
>http://www.autoshop101.com/trainmodules/alternator/alt101.html
>(Diff between "A" and "B" regulators shown on page 30 thru 33 show
>regulator detail)
>
>
>Enjoy, consider NOT doing anything but bolting the stock Denso on with the
>internal regulator it came with and go fly. If you want to do it here is
>the info. Credit goes to "George's Falco" builder web site in New Zealand.
>The nice thing about his conversion is it looks stock and keeps the stock
>connector plug.
>
>Cheers George ATP, CFI, MSME
George,
Thanks for the links. However, both IE and Netscape can not reach the top
link in your post above.
Charlie Kuss
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator (modification) |
(CORRECTED URL LINK TO INFO, I HOPE)
Here is how to modify your Denso:
I considered this mod but it's more effort than it is worth to me. For me the small
fear that an internal regulator will cause an unlikely OV condition, is not
enough to justify the surgery. But here is the info if you choice to do it,
enjoy.
http://tinyurl.com/8fca7
or
http://us.f1f.yahoofs.com/bc/428f57b3_10738/bc/Aircraft+data/Converting+an+Alternator2.doc?bfWmttCB9Bu9fJz7
After you have hacked, pried, sawed, soldered and added more components and wires,
you still have an alternator :- )
You can set up a Denso for the "A" type external regulator (grounded regulator)
or "B" type external regulator (grounded field). Most Denso's internal regulator
are "A" type voltage regulator, which makes the conversion much easier if
you use a "A" type external VR. If you wire it for a "B" external regulator you
will have to mod the brushes and brush housing.
The down side of using an external "A" type VR is the field wire going from the
external regulator, if grounded against the airframe, could cause the alternator
to go to max output. There are modern solid-state external VR's of the "A"
type and "B" type. The "A" type is not as common as "B", which has a better selection.
As long as you protect the field wire from grounding the "A" type regulator
works as well as the "B" type. The choice is yours.
A nice overview of alternator and regulator components inside a Denso:
http://www.autoshop101.com/trainmodules/alternator/alt101.html
(Diff between "A" and "B" regulators shown on page 30 thru 33 show regulator detail)
Enjoy, consider NOT doing anything but bolting the stock Denso on with the internal
regulator it came with and go fly. If you want to do it here is the info.
Credit goes to "George's Falco" builder web site in New Zealand. The nice thing
about his conversion is it looks stock and keeps the stock connector plug.
Cheers George ATP, CFI, MSME
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: Internal Voltage Regulators |
Stories from a NPR radio show ""CarTalk" are fun, but how does it apply to a Denso
alternator in you Sky Scooter 3000?
>Moral of the story: 1) Internal voltage regulators can go bad, and 2)
>Dealer maintenance couldn't come up with the simple solution.
1) Yea, but what is going on? What does that have to do with a Denso alternator?
2) So what, what does that prove?
Chevy? Delco? So what does that have to do with a Denso alternator.
Over-voltage and Overcharge? There is a big difference. Overcharge might mean 15V?
What voltage are we talking about?
NHTSA-national highway transportation safety association has several complaints
against Chevy's and batteries being ruined and needing to be replaced many times
in a short period of time. What does that prove. Moral of the story: Don't
use Delco products in your Sky Scooter 3000.
That is what I mean. All these rumors and stories are few and far between on facts.
What alternator? Why was the voltage? How high was the voltage? Did changing
the alternator solve the problem? What does this have to do with a Denso alternator?
This story even claims the auto dealer can't find a problem with the
alternator? Why is this important to us? It is irrelevant. You can't mix and
match alternator brands, models and application. So if the wing falls off a few
aircraft, say a T-34, than all aircraft, including your experimental, should
be grounded?
Look this is not rocket science, it is an alternator. Is it producing the proper
voltage or not? Voltage is easily checked. Dealer could not figure it out?
What does that mean? So what. Is the alternator putting out too much voltage or
not.
I do agree that anything can fail and it is OK to be suspicious, but no offense
this one case of a Chevy Impala does little to cast doubt on a 40-55 amp Denso
or infact any Denso model or internal voltage regulators in general. The only
thing you have is a guess by Brothers Ray or Tom about a Chevy Impala battery
problem. Great show and funny Guy's, but by their own admission they are not
rocket scientist. (Although they are very smart they do shoot from the hip, which
is the fun part of their show. Bogus!)
I looked up Delco and 2003 Impala electrical safety recalls, complaints, defect
investigation and service bulletins @ Nat Hwy Trans. Safety Assoc.:
http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/recalls/recallsearch.cfm
NHTSA DATABASE:
2003 Chevy Impala:
4 electrical complaints, 11 technical service bulletins and 2 recalls.
(electrical issues not directly related to charging system or alternator but quality
issues)
All Delco electrical - Charging:
Complainants - (many) of replacing multiple batteries while the alternator checks
out OK
Tech Serv Bultn - Alternator: 4 TSB to replace parts various alternator components
Safety Recalls - No electrical fires or recalls of the alternator or charging system
My suggestion is avoid using Delco for your aircraft. BTW Japanese auto electrics
are not perfect and I am not picking on Delco, but that was the topic of discussion
a 2003 Impala.
Previous checks of Nippon Denso alternators found nothing in the NHTSA database.
Auto repair shops I talked to claim they never had a VR issue with a Denso alternator.
I do hear the brushes are the Denso weak link, but this would not cause
an OV or overcharge condition. BTW the Denso alternators have beautiful modular
bolt-in brush holder. You could almost replace it with the alternator still
on the engine in a few minutes.
You will find some electrical systems in a specific car brand or model have a pattern
of electrical problems, Ford, Hitachi for example. If you think aircraft
have a more severe operating condition than a car, I would point out car alternators
are crammed into some tight spaces, close to other components and hot
exhaust and turbochargers. The reason for most car/electrical fires is poor wiring
and too many components too close in a confined space. Also lights, massive
stereos, electronics and computers have a fairly high amp draw on auto charging
systems.
Lesion learned: Give your alternator breathing room, make good quality wiring
& wiring connections and don't continuously overload it.
I am not anti-American products, Chevy or Cartalk. Loved my 1967 and 69 Camaro's.
I also enjoy Car-Talk "Click and Clack". I listen to them every week. The point
is if we are going to draw conclusions about internal regulators you need
to look at the big picture and compare apples and apples.
If you hold a little Denso in your hand it looks like a quality piece of equipment.
Could it fail? Hell yes. Could it fail and cause a OV, hell may be? What
is the chance, slim if you go by service history alone. You can't compare one
brand to another and make a conclusion. It is like comparing a B&C setup to the
junk in a 1958 Piper, they both have external voltage regulators.
As far as a Denso voltage regulator, I still have a standing claim that there is
no evidence an OV condition has EVER happened in any plane using a Denso internal
voltage regulated alternator. There have been many problems with external
regulated alternators. If there has been an OV problem with a Denso alternator
I would like to have the info: Model number, component and sub-component that
failed, part number, how it failed, why it failed, indications of failure
and the result of the failure. Documented facts.
Moral of the story: Stuff happens. You can be paranoid and fixated on one detail
or one potential "single point" failure and loose sight of the big picture,
you need to get off the ground and actually fly the thing at some point. An internal
VR alternator is the easiest, lightest and least expensive installation,
while providing huge huge reliability.
Again a wing spar has one load path. If you let a super conservative structural
engineer design an airframe, like a super conservative electrical engineer would
design an electrical system, you would have a heavy airplane with wing struts
on your Glassair, Long-EZ, RV or Lancair. Yes it would be stronger , but it
would look like hell and be slow. As long as you don't go too fast and pull
too hard on the stick the wings always stay on. Same with the electrical system,
build it right and don't overload it. Don't go crazy making it redundant and
over protected, after all it is just a single engine airplane.
I am NOT saying Bob N's recommendations are too conservative, but the OV issue
has taken on a life of its own. Yes an external regulated alternator with crow-bar
is a great idea and should be predictable based on some service history behind
it. Is it more conservative? Yea may be, but it still makes sense. Has a
crow bar ever saved the day from a real OV condition?
However if you are flying around in a VFR experimental and the engine can run with
out electrical power, may be a single internal regulated alternator and one
battery makes sense for your design goals. I-VR's alternators are cheap, light,
easy to install and work real well. The big problem in the old day was I-VR
put out too much volts for the Gel cel batteries of the day, so people went
to external VR's with adjustable voltage setpoint. Today with SLA batteries the
I-VR setpoint is perfect for them, around 14.5V.
Why worry about your alternator going super NOVA when there is little evidence
it is a problem, just as you know your wing will not fall off (probably) without
struts. You have to go fly sometimes, and there will always be risk.
If you make your alternator OV proof, something else is going to fail: belt, bearings.
If you thought of every thing that can go wrong or fail on an airplane
you would not fly at all. An alternator spinning at 8,000 rpm could explode,
throw parts into the engine case or porp gov line, cause a massive oil leak and
fire. Let me put it this way, if my internal VR Denso was a poker hand, I would
be "all in". Some pilots think flying in anything less than a twin engine
turbo-jet powered aircraft is crazy, so what ever makes you happy.
Make the best quality installation you can and use good quality components (Denso
not Delco) and plan for success, but cover your back-side for any anticipated
failure. I propose making a simple, light and cheap electrical system that
is easy to install and maintain , while still getting the job done. This may not
be the right approach for all, but I believe the weights of experimentals have
increased due to overkill of systems. Part of the performance of a RV or other
experimetals is their light weight. Adding weight kills some performance,
utility and handling. Think about this every time you deviate from the kit makers
plans and add weight. You may have the best electrical system in world for
a RV, but you might also end up with the slowest and least useful payload RV
in the world.
There is a big advantage in using an I-VR alternator with little trade off. Consider
it and make your choice. I don't think you can go wrong either way.
Cheers George
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Internal Voltage Regulators
>
>Hello Fellow Builders, The "Car Talk" guys have a letter in today's
>column in the Washington Post from a reader whose 2003 Chevy Impala with less
>than 15,000 miles was overcharging and ruining the battery.
>
>The Chevy dealer replaced the battery and it happened again.
>
>Click and Clack blame the voltage regulator and say "replace the
>alternator".
>
>Moral of the story: 1) Internal voltage regulators can go bad, and 2)
>Dealer maintenance couldn't come up with the simple solution.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator (modification |
corrected again - part 3)
(CORRECTED URL LINK TO INFO, I HOPE PART 3, DIRECT LINK TO BUILDERS WEB SITE)
I TRYED MAKING MY OWN LINK TO A MODIFIED DOC TO MAKE IT EASIER, BUT I HEAR IT IS
NOT WORKING. HERE IS THE DIRECT LINK, BUT TAKES A FEW STEPS.)
Here is how to modify your Denso:
FROM THE BUILDER WEB SITE:
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/georger/
-Select *electrical* on the left under *construction*
-When the electrical page comes up, scroll down to the bottom.
-The second to last paragraph, last sentence, click on the hypertext *alternator
page*
-Note steps 1 thru 5 are the same. Depending on if you want an "A" or "B" type
external regulator follow the different steps. It seems he is modifying two different
alternator types, but they are basically the same type alternator, both
have "A" type internal regulators, which is standard on the Denso.
Cheers George ATP, CFI, MSME
---------------------------------
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator (modification |
corrected again - part 3)
(CORRECTED URL LINK TO INFO, I HOPE PART 3, DIRECT LINK TO BUILDERS WEB SITE)
I TRYED MAKING MY OWN LINK TO A MODIFIED DOC TO MAKE IT EASIER, BUT I HEAR IT IS
NOT WORKING. HERE IS THE DIRECT LINK, BUT TAKES A FEW STEPS.)
Here is how to modify your Denso:
FROM THE BUILDER WEB SITE:
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/georger/
-Select *electrical* on the left under *construction*
-When the electrical page comes up, scroll down to the bottom.
-The second to last paragraph, last sentence, click on the hypertext *alternator
page*
-Note steps 1 thru 5 are the same. Depending on if you want an "A" or "B" type
external regulator follow the different steps. It seems he is modifying two different
alternator types, but they are basically the same type alternator, both
have "A" type internal regulators, which is standard on the Denso.
Cheers George ATP, CFI, MSME
---------------------------------
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator (modification |
corrected again - part 3)
(CORRECTED URL LINK TO INFO, I HOPE PART 3, DIRECT LINK TO BUILDERS WEB SITE)
I TRYED MAKING MY OWN LINK TO A MODIFIED DOC TO MAKE IT EASIER, BUT I HEAR IT IS
NOT WORKING. HERE IS THE DIRECT LINK, BUT TAKES A FEW STEPS.)
Here is how to modify your Denso:
FROM THE BUILDER WEB SITE:
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/georger/
-Select *electrical* on the left under *construction*
-When the electrical page comes up, scroll down to the bottom.
-The second to last paragraph, last sentence, click on the hypertext *alternator
page*
-Note steps 1 thru 5 are the same. Depending on if you want an "A" or "B" type
external regulator follow the different steps. It seems he is modifying two different
alternator types, but they are basically the same type alternator, both
have "A" type internal regulators, which is standard on the Denso.
Cheers George ATP, CFI, MSME
---------------------------------
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
From: | "Mark R Steitle" <mark.steitle(at)austin.utexas.edu> |
Gert,
A while ago I posted a "how-to" on how I converted two 55A ND
alternators to external regulation. Search the A-E archives for "How to
Convert a Denso Alternator" for the posting. It requires a simple
modification to the brush holder.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of gert
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator
It is my understanding that on some denso's one can swap the brush
holder for a diff model, so that one can use it with outside regulator,
any such info available on the one used on the Suzuki Sidekick???
The prob I see right now with the suzuki alternator is that one of the
field brushes is fed and physically screwed to the B post. so it is
hard to remove the regulator and run the brushes out
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gert <gert.v(at)sbcglobal.net> |
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
Yes, I had seen that website before quite a while ago, that's what made
me start thinking.
well nothing ventured, nothing gained, I went to my local alternator
store and asked about the parts. got the spanish inquisition about what
model alternator(s) I was using. I finally got a word in edge wise and
said I could provide Lester numbers. Holy smokes, the red carpet was
rolled out. 2 seconds later I had the brush holder and terminal block.
the brush holder fits just great on my suzuki alternator, the terminal
block, although all the hole pitches are correct, the angle between the
terminal block mounting holes and the brush connection holes is sadly
wrong. I can make the brush and terminal an assembly, or, I can mount
the terminal block with 2 screws and the brush holder with one but then
don't have structural integrity.
anybody know how to use the lester system to seek out a terminal strip
more in tune with the denso alternator of the 87 suzuki samurai??
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>
>>It is my understanding that on some denso's one can swap the brush
>>holder for a diff model, so that one can use it with outside regulator,
>>any such info available on the one used on the Suzuki Sidekick???
>>
>>The prob I see right now with the suzuki alternator is that one of the
>>field brushes is fed and physically screwed to the B post. so it is
>>hard to remove the regulator and run the brushes out
>>
>>
>
> There is an article on the net that speaks to such a modification
> on a "presolite" that looks like an ND alternator (both are probably
> made by bosch!). See:
>
>http://www.miramarcollege.net/programs/avim/faculty/north/alternator/
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
--
is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator |
From: | "George Braly" <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
Im not sure - - but I suspect rather strongly that our built in (internal) regulator
for our Supplenator will also fit and work rather nicely on the larger 40amp
Denso.
I don't have one around handy to try it out, but just looking at it, it certainly
looks that way.
It is a regulator designed for aircraft use as a built in regulator - - with the
single point failure problems of automotive regulators eliminated.
Regards, George
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of gert
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: 40amp Denso Aerosport Alternator
Yes, I had seen that website before quite a while ago, that's what made
me start thinking.
well nothing ventured, nothing gained, I went to my local alternator
store and asked about the parts. got the spanish inquisition about what
model alternator(s) I was using. I finally got a word in edge wise and
said I could provide Lester numbers. Holy smokes, the red carpet was
rolled out. 2 seconds later I had the brush holder and terminal block.
the brush holder fits just great on my suzuki alternator, the terminal
block, although all the hole pitches are correct, the angle between the
terminal block mounting holes and the brush connection holes is sadly
wrong. I can make the brush and terminal an assembly, or, I can mount
the terminal block with 2 screws and the brush holder with one but then
don't have structural integrity.
anybody know how to use the lester system to seek out a terminal strip
more in tune with the denso alternator of the 87 suzuki samurai??
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>
>>It is my understanding that on some denso's one can swap the brush
>>holder for a diff model, so that one can use it with outside regulator,
>>any such info available on the one used on the Suzuki Sidekick???
>>
>>The prob I see right now with the suzuki alternator is that one of the
June 08, 2005 - June 21, 2005
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-en