AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-fl
February 21, 2006 - February 27, 2006
I got a bunch of these rocker switches from them a few years ago and they
had an engraver lined up too......
----- Original Message -----
| From: | <rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US> |
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 12:40 PM
| Subject: | Illuminated, engravable rocker / breaker? |
>
> Anyone know of a source in the USA of illuminated, engravable rocker
> switch / breaker?
>
> Thx.
> Sincerely
> Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 FADEC Version Question |
| From: | "dannylsmith" <dsmit132(at)bellsouth.net> |
Sorry I didn't give you enough info Bob.
It's a Mattituck IOF-360 with B&C starter and 60A alternator - no vacumn or mechanical
gyros. It's all electric - all glass panel. It will be IFR with Garmin
GMA-340 Audio Panel, GNS-480 GPS/Nav/Com, GTX-330 Xpondr (Traffic), SL-40 Com,
TruTrak DigiFlight II VSGS, TruTrak ADI, GRT 4000 EIS and two Horizon I EFISs
with XM Weather. Much of this equipment will accept power from two sources.
My backup to the Garmin equipment is the TruTrak ADI and the EIS 4000 option
of AS and Altitude. Plus the TruTrak auto pilot.
My plan is to use the Figure Z-14 FADEC and eliminate the aux alternator and regulator.
Does this sound reasonable?
--------
Danny
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=13852#13852
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Schematic Symbols - An Easier Way? |
> I want to announce my appreciation for all the comments received
for
> the above subject.
Just another bit of freeware to throw into the mix...
http://www.cadsoft.de/
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Honeywell....a short rant... |
I know businesses have to protect their dealers,but when it comes to
getting the install manuals Honeywell wants you to go to a dealer to
get them. Sure thing, Bud. I'll just go to the dealer when I know that
they're just sitting on the Honeywell/BK site as PDFs just waiting to
be downloaded.
Garmin does the same with their avionics stuff but not the boat or
car world. I think users that have manuals should offer them up to
the OCR gods to create a repository for those who neither want nor
need to go to a dealer to ask their benificence in allowing mere
mortals to gaze upon those pages.
Rant done.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
| Subject: | Honeywell....a short rant... |
I understand your feelings. While I can't help with Honeywell, here's a site
that can get you to the Garmin manuals.
http://www2.mstewart.net:8080/Downloads/howtogetagarminmanual.htm
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim Baker
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 3:29 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Honeywell....a short rant...
I know businesses have to protect their dealers,but when it comes to
getting the install manuals Honeywell wants you to go to a dealer to
get them. Sure thing, Bud. I'll just go to the dealer when I know that
they're just sitting on the Honeywell/BK site as PDFs just waiting to
be downloaded.
Garmin does the same with their avionics stuff but not the boat or
car world. I think users that have manuals should offer them up to
the OCR gods to create a repository for those who neither want nor
need to go to a dealer to ask their benificence in allowing mere
mortals to gaze upon those pages.
Rant done.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "D Wysong" <hdwysong(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: linear actuator |
Not sure about "extra small" but these folks make nice units:
www.ultramotion.com
D
---------------------
On 2/21/06, Bill and Marsha wrote:
>
> I've been searching the web and Google for a 12v 2" stroke, extra small,
> linear actuator. Preferably with adjustable limits and feedback. I want to
> use it to adjust prop pitch. Any one know of an actuator that mite work
> for me? Bill S.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Honeywell....a short rant... |
> I understand your feelings. While I can't help with Honeywell,
here's
> a site that can get you to the Garmin manuals.
>
>
http://www2.mstewart.net:8080/Downloads/howtogetagarminmanual.
htm
Thanks, Bruce, but you'll notice that most of those on the list are
pilot's guides and quickstart guides...not the install/interface manuals
that are needed to figure out the nitty-gritty of the item. Every little bit
helps, tho......
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "JAMES BOWEN" <jabowenjr(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Honeywell....a short rant... |
This link doesn't seem to work.
>From: "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com>
>Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Honeywell....a short rant...
>Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:40:11 -0600
>
>
> > I understand your feelings. While I can't help with Honeywell,
>here's
> > a site that can get you to the Garmin manuals.
> >
> >
>http://www2.mstewart.net:8080/Downloads/howtogetagarminmanual.
>htm
>
>Thanks, Bruce, but you'll notice that most of those on the list are
>pilot's guides and quickstart guides...not the install/interface manuals
>that are needed to figure out the nitty-gritty of the item. Every little
>bit
>helps, tho......
>
>
>Jim Baker
>580.788.2779
>'71 SV, 492TC
>Elmore City, OK
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "S Hamer" <s.hamer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Question for Bob or ? |
I've wired up my RV-6 per figure Z-11 (mostly) and when I turn on the master switch,
I'm seeing 11.5 volts on my voltage gauge. If I add the E-Bus switch it
goes to 12.1. With just the E-Bus switch on, my gauge shows zero volts. I
have an external shunt in the position as shown in figure Z-12, between the alternator
and the starter contactor. With the master switch off, I'm wondering
how the gauge would get any juice?
With this limited information, can anyone tell me where I messed up or is this
what I should be seeing? Just doesn't seem right.
Steve Hamer
Apple Valley, Ca.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
| Subject: | Honeywell....a short rant... |
It's been split in to 2 lines. Append htm to the end after the period, no
spaces and hit enter.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of JAMES
BOWEN
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 11:09 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Honeywell....a short rant...
This link doesn't seem to work.
>From: "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com>
>Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Honeywell....a short rant...
>Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:40:11 -0600
>
>
> > I understand your feelings. While I can't help with Honeywell,
>here's
> > a site that can get you to the Garmin manuals.
> >
> >
>http://www2.mstewart.net:8080/Downloads/howtogetagarminmanual.
>htm
>
>Thanks, Bruce, but you'll notice that most of those on the list are
>pilot's guides and quickstart guides...not the install/interface manuals
>that are needed to figure out the nitty-gritty of the item. Every little
>bit
>helps, tho......
>
>
>Jim Baker
>580.788.2779
>'71 SV, 492TC
>Elmore City, OK
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 FADEC Version Question |
>
>
>Sorry I didn't give you enough info Bob.
>
>It's a Mattituck IOF-360 with B&C starter and 60A alternator - no vacumn
>or mechanical gyros. It's all electric - all glass panel. It will be IFR
>with Garmin GMA-340 Audio Panel, GNS-480 GPS/Nav/Com, GTX-330 Xpondr
>(Traffic), SL-40 Com, TruTrak DigiFlight II VSGS, TruTrak ADI, GRT 4000
>EIS and two Horizon I EFISs with XM Weather. Much of this equipment will
>accept power from two sources. My backup to the Garmin equipment is the
>TruTrak ADI and the EIS 4000 option of AS and Altitude. Plus the TruTrak
>auto pilot.
>
>My plan is to use the Figure Z-14 FADEC and eliminate the aux alternator
>and regulator.
Then what you REALLY need is Z13/8 with a second battery.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Question for Bob or ? |
>
>I've wired up my RV-6 per figure Z-11 (mostly) and when I turn on the
>master switch, I'm seeing 11.5 volts on my voltage gauge.
Okay, that's about right for an e-bus driven voltmeter seeing hte main
bus through the normal voltage drop in the bus isolation diode.
> If I add the E-Bus switch it goes to 12.1
I would expect this . . . the switch is bypassing the diode
and the voltage jumps up about .5 volts.
> With just the E-Bus switch on, my gauge shows zero volts. I have an
> external shunt in the position as shown in figure Z-12, between the
> alternator and the starter contactor. With the master switch off, I'm
> wondering how the gauge would get any juice?
>With this limited information, can anyone tell me where I messed up or is
>this what I should be seeing? Just doesn't seem right.
You lost me. Z-11 suggests you wire the voltmeter to the e-bus
and the voltages you cite agree with what I'd expect for voltage
readings with the alternator off.
The shunt is for the ammeter which never reads anything until
the alternator is running and taking battery recharge and system
loads. When you say "my gauge shows zero volts" are you meaning
to say "zero amps"? The ammeter will be zero until the engine
is started and the alternator turned on.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT |
>
>The AD594 already has all that built in. The output from the 594 is
>0-5vdc. The 594 also helps linearize the output curve from the TC.
>
>David M.
Yes, that's what we're discussing. He wants to craft a compensated
signal conditioner to remove some of the uncertainty of the
UMA gages that have no cold-junction compensation. I need to know
the base sensitivity numbers for his instruments before I can calculate
the output characteristics of the signal conditioner.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Burnaby" <jonlaury(at)impulse.net> |
| Subject: | Grab-bar FW penetration |
I think this was discussed in Vol 11 of the AC, but I loaned my copy to a friend.
Re the "grab bar" method, I recall that Bob said to fill the tube with firecaulk
after all the wires were pulled. Now I see people are looking for the appropriate
size firesleeve for their grab-bar conduit.
How does one use the firesleeve and get an air tight seal?
Thanks,
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: Grab-bar FW penetration |
> Re the "grab bar" method, I recall that Bob said to fill
> the tube with firecaulk after all the wires were pulled.
> Now I see people are looking for the appropriate size
> firesleeve for their grab-bar conduit.
>
> How does one use the firesleeve and get an air tight seal?
Hi John,
Here's how these guys recommend doing it. I'm planning
on doing the same thing on mine.
http://www.epm-avcorp.com/fwalinst.html
Here is my USD 30.00 "custom" towel bar:
http://www.rv8.ch/article.php?story=20060222102305941
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Honeywell....a short rant... |
Bruce, James and all...
Or, easier, use tinyURL (www.tinyurl.com) when you think your link may
be too long and might get wrapped..
For the Garmin website below:
http://tinyurl.com/hvfyx
Easy and free....
Harley
Bruce Gray wrote:
>
>It's been split in to 2 lines. Append htm to the end after the period, no
>spaces and hit enter.
>
>Bruce
>www.glasair.org
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of JAMES
>BOWEN
>Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 11:09 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Honeywell....a short rant...
>
>
>
>
>This link doesn't seem to work.
>
>
>
>
>>From: "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com>
>>Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Honeywell....a short rant...
>>Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:40:11 -0600
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>I understand your feelings. While I can't help with Honeywell,
>>>
>>>
>>here's
>>
>>
>>>a site that can get you to the Garmin manuals.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>http://www2.mstewart.net:8080/Downloads/howtogetagarminmanual.
>>htm
>>
>>Thanks, Bruce, but you'll notice that most of those on the list are
>>pilot's guides and quickstart guides...not the install/interface manuals
>>that are needed to figure out the nitty-gritty of the item. Every little
>>bit
>>helps, tho......
>>
>>
>>Jim Baker
>>580.788.2779
>>'71 SV, 492TC
>>Elmore City, OK
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Grab-bar FW penetration |
>
>I think this was discussed in Vol 11 of the AC, but I loaned my copy to a
>friend.
>
>Re the "grab bar" method, I recall that Bob said to fill the tube with
>firecaulk after all the wires were pulled. Now I see people are looking
>for the appropriate size firesleeve for their grab-bar conduit.
>
>How does one use the firesleeve and get an air tight seal?
No sealant inside the firesleeve . . .
See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Firewall_Penetration/firewall.html
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Voltmeter location (was: Question for Bob or ?) |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>>
>> I've wired up my RV-6 per figure Z-11 (mostly) and when I turn on the
>> master switch, I'm seeing 11.5 volts on my voltage gauge.
>
> Okay, that's about right for an e-bus driven voltmeter seeing hte main
> bus through the normal voltage drop in the bus isolation diode.
The reason to have a voltmeter as opposed to a lo-volt/hi-volt indicator
is to show the actual voltage on the battery. You need to know the exact
voltage on the battery to ensure it is being fully charged without being
overcharged. It is also the indicator for remaining capacity in the
battery, i.e. when the battery is delivering system power and its
voltage drops to 10.5V (12V battery), the battery has delivered all its
energy and is now "dead".
I hold therefore that the proper place for a voltmeter is to read
battery voltage. You can measure battery voltage on the main bus when
the battery contactor is closed or you can measure battery voltage on
the e-bus when it is connected directly to the battery. Other than that,
the only place where you can always measure the battery voltage is right
at the battery.
If it were up to me, I would pick a digital voltmeter that had a sense
lead separate from the power lead (a three- or four-lead device -- does
anyone make one that is not part of an energy monitor?) to read battery
voltage. The drain for a device like this is so low as to allow it to
remain connected to the battery even when all other loads have been
removed. A drain of a couple of microamps through the sense lead is not
going to drain a battery faster than its self-discharge rate.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "S Hamer" <s.hamer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Question for Bob or ? |
Bob,
My voltmeter is powered by the -buss. With just the e-bus switch on, I'm
reading zero volts and zero amps. The gauge still has power to it at that
time because the backlight is still on.
Steve
>
> You lost me. Z-11 suggests you wire the voltmeter to the e-bus
> and the voltages you cite agree with what I'd expect for voltage
> readings with the alternator off.
>
> The shunt is for the ammeter which never reads anything until
> the alternator is running and taking battery recharge and system
> loads. When you say "my gauge shows zero volts" are you meaning
> to say "zero amps"? The ammeter will be zero until the engine
> is started and the alternator turned on.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> < What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
> < the authority which determines whether there can be >
> < debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
> < scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
> < with experiment. >
> < --Lawrence M. Krauss >
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 FADEC Version Question |
| From: | "dannylsmith" <dsmit132(at)bellsouth.net> |
nuckollsr(at)cox.net wrote:
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Sorry I didn't give you enough info Bob.
> >
> > It's a Mattituck IOF-360 with B&C starter and 60A alternator - no vacumn
> > or mechanical gyros. It's all electric - all glass panel. It will be IFR
> > with Garmin GMA-340 Audio Panel, GNS-480 GPS/Nav/Com, GTX-330 Xpondr
> > (Traffic), SL-40 Com, TruTrak DigiFlight II VSGS, TruTrak ADI, GRT 4000
> > EIS and two Horizon I EFISs with XM Weather. Much of this equipment will
> > accept power from two sources. My backup to the Garmin equipment is the
> > TruTrak ADI and the EIS 4000 option of AS and Altitude. Plus the TruTrak
> > auto pilot.
> >
> > My plan is to use the Figure Z-14 FADEC and eliminate the aux alternator
> > and regulator.
> >
> >
>
> Then what you REALLY need is Z13/8 with a second battery.
>
> You have me confused Bob. I have a FADEC so why would I use the Z-13/8 - all
electric airplane on a budget with P-Mags instead of the Z-14 FADEC? I just felt
that with a FADEC engine with two PC-680s that I don't need a second alternator.
> Danny
>
> Bob . . .
>
> < What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
> < the authority which determines whether there can be >
> < debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
> < scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
> < with experiment. >
> < --Lawrence M. Krauss >
--------
Danny
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=14166#14166
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Burnaby" <jonlaury(at)impulse.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Grab-bar FW penetration |
Subject: Re: Grab-bar FW penetration
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III (nuckollsr(at)cox.net)
Date: Wed Feb 22 - 6:26 AM
>
>I think this was discussed in Vol 11 of the AC, but I loaned my copy to a
>friend.
>
>Re the "grab bar" method, I recall that Bob said to fill the tube with
>firecaulk after all the wires were pulled. Now I see people are looking
>for the appropriate size firesleeve for their grab-bar conduit.
>
>How does one use the firesleeve and get an air tight seal?
No sealant inside the firesleeve . . .
See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Firewall_Penetration/firewall.html
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AI Nut <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT |
Ok, maybe I'm being dense here, but here goes:
If the 594 is used, no further cold junction compensation is necessary
from the TC side is necessary. If the UMA instrument needs it, then I
suggest dropping it. Use a simple microprocessor (about $1) and an LED
display ($40?) instead. Some of the micros have an LED display driver
already built-in, IIRC. Check out Freescale's website.
If he's married to the UMA, then enjoy the exercises 8-).
David M.
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>The AD594 already has all that built in. The output from the 594 is
>>0-5vdc. The 594 also helps linearize the output curve from the TC.
>>
>>David M.
>
>
> Yes, that's what we're discussing. He wants to craft a compensated
> signal conditioner to remove some of the uncertainty of the
> UMA gages that have no cold-junction compensation. I need to know
> the base sensitivity numbers for his instruments before I can calculate
> the output characteristics of the signal conditioner.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Splicing strobe wires |
| From: | "Jekyll" <rcitjh(at)aol.com> |
When building my wings, I installed the strobe wires in a conduit and cut them
off, leaving only a 2 foot length on the root end. That was before I started learning
about wiring. Now I have to learn how to connect my installation. I'm
using the Whelen system 6 in an RV-7A (3-wire shielded cable, single power supply.)
a. Can I splice the cables to extend them to the power supply? If I do, do I treat
the shields as fourth wires and splice those also? If I do this, how do I
splice the shield (solder or crimp)?
b. Do I install a molex with 4 pins, 1 for the shield, at the root bulkhead? (I
guess this was my original concept when I cut the wires)
c. Should I replace the wires so I have an unbroken run to the power supply? I
can probably pull a replacement through if need be.
I'm concerned about RMI from the cable. Whelen says to ground the shield only at
the power supply.
Jekyll
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=14201#14201
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Grab-bar FW penetration |
John,
3M (CP-25) caulk is used around the firewall because the foam contracts when
heated so you want to use an intumescent calk here. Around the fire sleeve I
would not expect any shrinkage so a non intumescent calk would be my choice.
You might look at RTV-88.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John
Burnaby
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:53 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Grab-bar FW penetration
Subject: Re: Grab-bar FW penetration
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III (nuckollsr(at)cox.net)
Date: Wed Feb 22 - 6:26 AM
>No sealant inside the firesleeve... So the last picture shows a piece of
firesleeve wrapped around the wire bundle and the hose clamp "seals" it to
the bundle? No sealant necessary?Next question: At Home Depot, there are 3-4
3M fire sealant/barrier caulks to chose from. Some are intumescentand some
are not. Which one for FW's? I would guess that you don't want intumescent
caulk expanding between FW layers during a fire. Mine is a composite
firewall using Rohacell foam/glass sandwich for structure and Fiberfrax for
fire protectionwith an aluminum sheet over the Fiberfrax for a wipeable
Nuckolls, III"
>
>I think this was discussed in Vol 11 of the AC, but I loaned my copy to a
>friend.
>
>Re the "grab bar" method, I recall that Bob said to fill the tube with
>firecaulk after all the wires were pulled. Now I see people are looking
>for the appropriate size firesleeve for their grab-bar conduit.
>
>How does one use the firesleeve and get an air tight seal?
No sealant inside the firesleeve . . .
See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Firewall_Penetration/firewall.html
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Grab-bar FW penetration |
>
> >No sealant inside the firesleeve... So the last picture shows a piece of
> firesleeve wrapped around the wire bundle and the hose clamp "seals" it
> to the bundle?
correct
>No sealant necessary?
that's what the 'big' guys do . . .
>Next question: At Home Depot, there are 3-4 3M fire sealant/barrier caulks
>to chose from. Some are intumescentand some are not. Which one for FW's? I
>would guess that you don't want intumescent caulk expanding between FW
>layers during a fire. Mine is a composite firewall using Rohacell
>foam/glass sandwich for structure and Fiberfrax for fire protectionwith an
>aluminum sheet over the Fiberfrax for a wipeable surface.
I've not researched their range of products and I'd
have to run them by my power plant guys at RAC. I think
others on the list have made suggestions about this . . .
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Splicing strobe wires |
>
>When building my wings, I installed the strobe wires in a conduit and cut
>them off, leaving only a 2 foot length on the root end. That was before I
>started learning about wiring. Now I have to learn how to connect my
>installation. I'm using the Whelen system 6 in an RV-7A (3-wire shielded
>cable, single power supply.)
>
>a. Can I splice the cables to extend them to the power supply?
Yes
> If I do, do I treat the shields as fourth wires and splice those also?
Yes
> If I do this, how do I splice the shield (solder or crimp)?
Your choice.
>b. Do I install a molex with 4 pins, 1 for the shield, at the root bulkhead?
yes
> (I guess this was my original concept when I cut the wires)
no problem if you have no heartburn over the connector/
>c. Should I replace the wires so I have an unbroken run to the power supply?
no
> I can probably pull a replacement through if need be.
Not necessary
>I'm concerned about RMI from the cable. Whelen says to ground the shield
>only at the power supply.
That's correct. Shielding breaks ELECTROSTATIC coupling of noise
and the few inches of exposed wiring at the connector location is
a microscopic risk. Open shields are not "leaks in the dam where
torrents of noise pour out."
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Brame <chasb(at)satx.rr.com> |
| Subject: | RE: carrier only problem |
Problem solved. Several guys responded, on the list and back channel.
Thanks for all the feed back. It helped with the trouble shooting.
The problem was with the mic audio line. A shielded wire was soldered to
ground and the soldering managed to short out the audio feed. We did a
proper soldering job and the set now works like it was supposed to.
Charlie Brame
San Antonio
------------------------------------------------
> From: Charlie Brame <chasb(at)satx.rr.com>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Carrier Only Problem
>
>
> A friend is having radio problems with a new intercom/radio installation.
>
> His bird is equipped with a intercom which appears to work as
> advertised. Intercom between cockpits is okay. The mic break level is
> easily adjustable using the intercom squelch, and the intercom volume is
> adjustable. The comm radio receives very well on all channels. However,
> the radio only sends a carrier - no voice, when attempting to transmit.
> The carrier is strong and can be heard on a handheld over a half mile
> away, but no hint of any voice.
>
> We have eliminated the headset and the intercom, we think. We have
> traced mic wires and all appear to be as they should be. The PTT circuit
> is apparently working as a carrier is transmitted. Why no voice?
>
> Any suggestions as to where to continue trouble shooting would be appreciated.
>
> Charlie Brame
> San Antonio
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Transponder/ RS-232 |
Question on the Gray Code connection to the transponder. I have an Apollo
(UPS AT-now Garmin) SL70 transponder and it has a "D4" Gray code input. I
plan to use a Dynon EFIS D10 (not a D10-A) as my encoder but it does not
have a "D4" Gray code output. What should I do with this connection at the
Transponder end? Can I just leave it floating, do I need to ground it or
what? Don't see anything in the manual about this.
I also plan to connect my full UPS AT radio stack together at their
respective RS-232 Tx/Rx I/O interfaces. My GPS/COM manual says to use a
three conductor shielded cable for two way RS-232 communication (Tx and RX)
and two conductor shielded for one way communication (Tx only or Rx only).
What is confusing to me though is their wiring diagram, it shows two wires
PLUS a shield connection to the transponder (one way comm). One wire is
connected to RS-232 Rx, another wire to a specific ground pin at the
connector AND....a shield connection to the mounting frame of the GPS/COM.
First, I'm a little confused about what UPS AT is saying...since the
Transponder will only require one way communication then according to the
text, I only need a TWO conductor shielded cable! But from the wiring
diagram, it looks like I need two conductors PLUS A SHIELD!!!
Does that mean I need something like a shielded twisted pair for this
connection, or triax....or what?
Where would I obtain shielded twisted pair Tefzel wire for this purpose?
Thanks.
Dean Psiropoulos
RV-6A N197DM
Finishing Autocad and stripping wires.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kingsley Hurst" <khurst(at)taroom.qld.gov.au> |
| Subject: | Topic with a little difference |
All,
We discussed a topic at work today which has baffled me for some time.
Ok, I admit it is not hard to baffle me but I don't know the answer and
I'm sure someone on this list will know so . . . . .
I'm told that when welding on a vehicle that has an alternator, the
diodes in the alternator can be damaged if the battery is not
disconnected first. Fact or fiction ?
If fact, explanations gratefully received thank you.
Cheers
Kingsley
Europa builder in Oz.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Topic with a little difference |
>
>
>All,
>
>We discussed a topic at work today which has baffled me for some time.
>Ok, I admit it is not hard to baffle me but I don't know the answer and
>I'm sure someone on this list will know so . . . . .
>
>I'm told that when welding on a vehicle that has an alternator, the
>diodes in the alternator can be damaged if the battery is not
>disconnected first. Fact or fiction ?
>
>If fact, explanations gratefully received thank you.
Actually, the battery is the best filter in the vehicle
for transients induced by an external source.
This idea is further discredited by the notion
that most system have multiple accessories that are less
robust than the system's alternator. If the threat were
serious, perhaps one would do well to remove all the fuses
from the fuse block, disconnect all potentially vulnerable
devices from the system, etc. etc.
I can deduce no physics by which serious stresses might be
induced into any of the system's components by welding
equipment.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob C. " <flyboy.bob(at)gmail.com> |
Now THIS is interesting!
Press Release: Direct-To Avionics (RECALL ON ALL CROSSBOW 425EX AHRS)
...from Jeff Berlin (Publicity, D2Av)
For Immediate Release
Press Contact: Jeff Berlin 646.528.9696 Jeff(at)d2av.com
DIRECT-TO AVIONICS ISSUES RECALL ON ALL CROSSBOW 425EX AHRS
Bend, OR, February 21, 2006 Direct-To Avionics announced today a
full recall of the Crossbow 425EX AHRS. Unresolved problems with
Crossbow 420 Series AHRS preclude Direct-To Avionics (D2A) from
incorporating Crossbow in future experimental Chelton Electronic
Flight Instrumentation Systems (EFIS).
"Direct-To Avionics is committed to providing the best, most reliable,
and most accurate components for our Chelton EFIS systems. Our
customers want to know that when they're flying with their families,
they're flying with the highest quality, best performing equipment
available," said Kirk Hammersmith, President of Direct-To Avionics.
"Therefore, in our ongoing commitment to bring our customers the best
in state-of-the-art EFIS systems, Direct-To Avionics will now supply
the Pinpoint Inertial Inc. GADAHRS with our experimental Chelton EFIS
systems."
In side by side comparisons with certified systems by Rockwell
Collins, Litef, and others, and after exhaustive, real-world flight
testing, the Pinpoint Inertial GADAHRS (GPS / Air Data / Attitude and
Heading Reference System) has proven to exceed all performance and
reliability parameters established by D2A.
Based on technology currently used in certified commercial and
military applications, the Pinpoint Inertial unit is the first and
only GADAHRS optimized for reliability while working within the
dynamics of high-performance experimental aircraft.
The shift to the Pinpoint Inertial system has been precipitated by
performance and reliability problems plaguing the Crossbow 425EX.
Copyright (c) 2006 Direct To Avionics Inc. All rights reserved.
Specifications subject to change without notice.
Direct-To Avionics requests that all Crossbow units be removed or
henceforth limited to Day/VFR flight conditions until a control group
has logged 100 hours each without any performance problems.
For details regarding replacement of Crossbow units, please visit the
Direct-To Avionics website at www.d2av.com.
Direct-to-Avionics is the exclusive distributor of Chelton's
experimental EFIS line. D2A also participates in the development and
evaluation of future Chelton systems for both certified and
experimental aircraft. Direct-to-Avionics is the preeminent source for
the most reliable and affordable EFIS for experimental aircraft.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Casey <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Thermocouple wire connections |
Now I'm second-guessing myself. I wired my thermocouples by
connecting them to copper wire (twisted pairs) in the engine
compartment. The firewall connections were prewired by my panel
supplier to bulkhead connections with gold-plated terminals. I'm
sure they used copper wires on the back side of the firewall. I'm
trying to convince myself that the cold junction compensation is
still good, but I'm worried that the transition to copper, being
inside the engine compartment, effectively places the cold junction
there and therefore I'll get an error in reading equal to the
temperature difference between the engine compartment and the
instrument on the panel. I'm tempted to pull all the wires and
replace them with thermocouple wires that will penetrate the firewall
and go directly to the instrument. That's a LOT of work , especially
this late in the project. Tell me I don't have to do that.
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Transponder/ RS-232 |
DEAN PSIROPOULOS wrote:
>
> Question on the Gray Code connection to the transponder. I have an Apollo
> (UPS AT-now Garmin) SL70 transponder and it has a "D4" Gray code input. I
> plan to use a Dynon EFIS D10 (not a D10-A) as my encoder but it does not
> have a "D4" Gray code output. What should I do with this connection at the
> Transponder end? Can I just leave it floating, do I need to ground it or
> what? Don't see anything in the manual about this.
The Apollo stuff uses a serial code to communicate altitude information
to their radios (GPS, etc.). I don't remember if the SL-70 accepts
serial data in instead of gray code. I *think* it does but I am not
sure. If it does not you will need a serial-to-grey-code converter to
get the data from the Dynon to the SL-70. (I like the SL-70. I have had
one in three airplanes at this point.)
> I also plan to connect my full UPS AT radio stack together at their
> respective RS-232 Tx/Rx I/O interfaces. My GPS/COM manual says to use a
> three conductor shielded cable for two way RS-232 communication (Tx and RX)
> and two conductor shielded for one way communication (Tx only or Rx only).
> What is confusing to me though is their wiring diagram, it shows two wires
> PLUS a shield connection to the transponder (one way comm). One wire is
> connected to RS-232 Rx, another wire to a specific ground pin at the
> connector AND....a shield connection to the mounting frame of the GPS/COM.
> First, I'm a little confused about what UPS AT is saying...since the
> Transponder will only require one way communication then according to the
> text, I only need a TWO conductor shielded cable! But from the wiring
> diagram, it looks like I need two conductors PLUS A SHIELD!!!
They are using one of the wires in the bundle as the common and they are
using the shield separately as just a shield. This is the best way to
prevent ground loops and other noise pick-up. (The special ground for
mic input is isolated from the chassis.) I recommend you use the
approach shown in the wiring diagram with both the shield AND the wire
common/ground. It will greatly reduce the chance you might have a noise
problem on your mic.
> Does that mean I need something like a shielded twisted pair for this
> connection, or triax....or what?
Yes. In that case you will need two-conductor shielded (two center
conductors plus shield). If you have more signal lines you will need one
extra for common.
BTW, this is needed for mic and possibly for RS-232. It will not be
needed for headphone wiring. (In fact, you probably do not need even
shielded wire for headphone except in very rare cases.)
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Topic with a little difference |
Kingsley Hurst wrote:
> I'm told that when welding on a vehicle that has an alternator, the
> diodes in the alternator can be damaged if the battery is not
> disconnected first. Fact or fiction ?
>
> If fact, explanations gratefully received thank you.
I see Bob has replied and I think that he is right in general but I can
tell you what the rationale is about disconnecting the alternator.
Arc welding uses relatively high voltage (compared to your DC system)
and potentially high amperage (once the arc starts, voltage goes down
but current goes way up). Imagine you connect the ground from the arc
welder to one of the two pieces of metal to be welded. When you go to
strike the arc you may touch the other piece of metal before you get the
arc started. This impresses a rather large voltage between the two
pieces of metal. (This assumes that they are not clamped together well
or that there is something else, e.g. paint, preventing good contact
between the pieces of metal.)
Now imagine that the case of the alternator is somehow connected to the
first piece of metal and the ground of the battery is connected to the
other. (We are postulating a cracked frame in your car or some such.)
Now what you have done is to put the output of the welder in series with
the battery going to the alternator. Since the welder may be putting out
80V-100V open-circuit, this is more than enough to cause the diodes in
the alternator to go into reverse breakdown. The battery and welder then
can deliver more than enough current to destroy the diodes.
Could it happen? Yes. Is this likely to happen? No. Is it something you
need to worry about? Probably not. But the point is good: that arc
welder can put out a LOT of voltage before the arc actually starts. And
if your bonding fails, the other wiring in your airplane or car can
become the return for the current in the arc welder. It is probably
better safe than sorry to disconnect or remove things when arc welding
on your airplane.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Thermocouple wire connections |
Gary Casey wrote:
> instrument on the panel. I'm tempted to pull all the wires and
> replace them with thermocouple wires that will penetrate the firewall
> and go directly to the instrument. That's a LOT of work , especially
> this late in the project. Tell me I don't have to do that.
You don't have to do that. The errors will be small, especially if all
your junctions that have similar metal pairs along the wire are at the
same temperature.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT |
>
>Ok, maybe I'm being dense here, but here goes:
>If the 594 is used, no further cold junction compensation is necessary
>from the TC side is necessary. If the UMA instrument needs it, then I
>suggest dropping it. Use a simple microprocessor (about $1) and an LED
>display ($40?) instead. Some of the micros have an LED display driver
>already built-in, IIRC. Check out Freescale's website.
I don't think the UMA bothers to use dynamic cold-junction
compensation. Their cold junction is at the back of the instrument
and the calibration is optimized at a 20C cockpit. So
ranges of temperatures that most pilots are willing to
endure in the cockpit is assumed to introduce insignificant
error.
Possibly true for most enclosed cockpit/pilot combinations.
This is an open cockpit a/c where the owner says his
motivations to fly outweigh other pilot's inhibitions
(maybe he has a heated flight-suit). In any case, the
stated accuracy of the stock gage is found deficient for
his needs.
The idea is to apply EXTERNAL signal conditioning using
the 594 and drive the instrument with whatever combination
of constant current/voltage seems best. This allows us
to provide offset/scale-factor pots that will permit
calibration to number probably better than the off-the-shelf
instrument. Dynamic cold-junction compensation comes with
the package.
>If he's married to the UMA, then enjoy the exercises 8-).
That's the major rub. He has the instruments, they're both
physically attractive for their size (tiny panel) and round
dials but a tad short on performance. Just ONE of life's
little challenges . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup |
>
>These modern IR regulators are are "intelligent", the IQ depending on
>the particular model. LIke me, some need to warm up before it they
>think well enough to work. Many have a ramp function to bring the
>output current up slowly at low rpm to prevent sudden engine loading
>when alternator torque would be high, so the slow ramp up of the output
>isn't surprising. 35 degrees seems pretty warm to be seeing such a
>long warm-up delay, and it's possible that the regulator IC is
>defective for low temp operation. If you can trace the problem
>directly to the regulator, say by warming it with a hair dryer before
>starting on a cold day, you might consider replacing it, perhaps with
>an external one that doesn't try to be quite so clever. Another
>possibility is that the belt slips in the cold when it's a little bit
>stiff, and the the alternator rpm drops below the minimum at which the
>regulator will turn on the output. Many regulators keep the output off
>below a minimum rpm, to prevent loading the engine during startup. You
>might not be getting above this threshold until the belt warms up and
>grabs better.
Can you point us to any published literature on this? Please
understand that I'm not attacking your assertions with any
kind of "PROVE IT" attitude. My request is driven by the simple
fact that many of my suggestions about the IR alternator have
been driven by what I KNOW about them (admittedly not much . . .
the automotive guys are not used to getting requests for such
data . . . their gazillions of automotive customers don't care).
A handful of idiots that want to put "automotive" stuff into
airplanes are not to be taken seriously.
When I've crafted architectures and design philosophies that
assume NOTHING, I've had to field a barrage of cabbages and
tomatoes from congregations of certain beliefs because I don't
embrace their faith . . . when at the same time, the bibles
upon which their faith is based appear not to be in print.
My time to research such things is limited so I you (or anyone
else on the list) can point me to any descriptive literature
for any of the modern (or not so modern) products, I'd be
grateful.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Thermocouple wire connections |
>
>Now I'm second-guessing myself. I wired my thermocouples by
>connecting them to copper wire (twisted pairs) in the engine
>compartment. The firewall connections were prewired by my panel
>supplier to bulkhead connections with gold-plated terminals. I'm
>sure they used copper wires on the back side of the firewall. I'm
>trying to convince myself that the cold junction compensation is
>still good, but I'm worried that the transition to copper, being
>inside the engine compartment, effectively places the cold junction
>there and therefore I'll get an error in reading equal to the
>temperature difference between the engine compartment and the
>instrument on the panel. I'm tempted to pull all the wires and
>replace them with thermocouple wires that will penetrate the firewall
>and go directly to the instrument. That's a LOT of work , especially
>this late in the project. Tell me I don't have to do that.
What instruments? Do they feature dynamic cold junction compensation
or static compensation. In either case, you're correct that splicing
to copper wire at any location OTHER than proximity to where DYNAMIC
cold junction compensation takes place, calibration of the instrument
is a flag waving in the breeze. If it's static cold junction compensation
(a la UMA) then you've got two flags waving in the breeze.
I'm mystified as to why someone would take the time, effort and
expense to PACKAGE such a device (the hard part) and then
drop all their cookies on the floor by not putting $5 dynamic
cold junction compensation in and educating their customers
on the best we know how to do with thermocouples.
Thermocouple temperature measurement technology goes back 100+
years when measuring the microvolt shifts in output was damned
difficult. Now we can do it for peanuts and it seems to have
been blown off by some purveyors of technology.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 FADEC Version Question |
>
>
>
>nuckollsr(at)cox.net wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sorry I didn't give you enough info Bob.
> > >
> > > It's a Mattituck IOF-360 with B&C starter and 60A alternator - no vacumn
> > > or mechanical gyros. It's all electric - all glass panel. It will be IFR
> > > with Garmin GMA-340 Audio Panel, GNS-480 GPS/Nav/Com, GTX-330 Xpondr
> > > (Traffic), SL-40 Com, TruTrak DigiFlight II VSGS, TruTrak ADI, GRT 4000
> > > EIS and two Horizon I EFISs with XM Weather. Much of this equipment
> will
> > > accept power from two sources. My backup to the Garmin equipment is the
> > > TruTrak ADI and the EIS 4000 option of AS and Altitude. Plus the TruTrak
> > > auto pilot.
> > >
> > > My plan is to use the Figure Z-14 FADEC and eliminate the aux alternator
> > > and regulator.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Then what you REALLY need is Z13/8 with a second battery.
> >
> > You have me confused Bob. I have a FADEC so why would I use the Z-13/8
> - all electric airplane on a budget with P-Mags instead of the Z-14
> FADEC? I just felt that with a FADEC engine with two PC-680s that I don't
> need a second alternator.
Your confusing the Z-figures as illustrations of ARCHITECTURE with
recommended combinations of hardware to end up in the finished
design. You don't HAVE to put p-mags in for Figure Z-13/8. Figure
Z-19 suggests an architecture for an electrically dependent engine
having one alternator and two batteries. But again, don't focus
on individual equipment items illustrated but the plan-a/plan-b
operational aspects offered by the architecture. Figure Z-14 with
a cross-feed contactor is an architecture for totally isolated,
independent, dual electrical systems. Since you plan only one
alternator, Z-14 is not applicable. In simplest terms, Z-19
is an expanded version of Z-11 with a second battery added along
with features to manage control and monitoring philosophies that
you may find attractive. I suggested Z-13/8 because you'll have
a vacuum pump pad with a cover plate over it. It seems a small
cost and weight penalty to take advantage of that pad with a
4# alternator installation. But Z-11 with dual batts, or Z-19
is closer to what you're looking for. You can always add the /8
feature to either system at a later date.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 FADEC Version Question with P.S. |
>
>
>
>nuckollsr(at)cox.net wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sorry I didn't give you enough info Bob.
> > >
> > > It's a Mattituck IOF-360 with B&C starter and 60A alternator - no vacumn
> > > or mechanical gyros. It's all electric - all glass panel. It will be IFR
> > > with Garmin GMA-340 Audio Panel, GNS-480 GPS/Nav/Com, GTX-330 Xpondr
> > > (Traffic), SL-40 Com, TruTrak DigiFlight II VSGS, TruTrak ADI, GRT 4000
> > > EIS and two Horizon I EFISs with XM Weather. Much of this equipment
> will
> > > accept power from two sources. My backup to the Garmin equipment is the
> > > TruTrak ADI and the EIS 4000 option of AS and Altitude. Plus the TruTrak
> > > auto pilot.
> > >
> > > My plan is to use the Figure Z-14 FADEC and eliminate the aux alternator
> > > and regulator.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Then what you REALLY need is Z13/8 with a second battery.
> >
> > You have me confused Bob. I have a FADEC so why would I use the Z-13/8
> - all electric airplane on a budget with P-Mags instead of the Z-14
> FADEC? I just felt that with a FADEC engine with two PC-680s that I don't
> need a second alternator.
Your confusing the Z-figures as illustrations of ARCHITECTURE with
recommended combinations of hardware to end up in the finished
design. You don't HAVE to put p-mags in for Figure Z-13/8. Figure
Z-19 suggests an architecture for an electrically dependent engine
having one alternator and two batteries. But again, don't focus
on individual equipment items illustrated but the plan-a/plan-b
operational aspects offered by the architecture. Figure Z-14 with
a cross-feed contactor is an architecture for totally isolated,
independent, dual electrical systems. Since you plan only one
alternator, Z-14 is not applicable. In simplest terms, Z-19
is an expanded version of Z-11 with a second battery added along
with features to manage control and monitoring philosophies that
you may find attractive. I suggested Z-13/8 because you'll have
a vacuum pump pad with a cover plate over it. It seems a small
cost and weight penalty to take advantage of that pad with a
4# alternator installation. But Z-11 with dual batts, or Z-19
is closer to what you're looking for. You can always add the /8
feature to either system at a later date.
Bob . . .
P.S. please note that the FADEC version of Z-14 simply eliminates
the automatic paralleling of batteries for cranking so that the
second battery can be held in isolated reserve to support FADEC
systems not designed to live in the real world. Many designers
of the new electronic support systems for engines have put
some aspects of DO-160 in the "too hard" pile and choose not
to live with starter current brown-outs . . .
(See http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/99_Saturn_SL1.jpg )
. . . common to every vehicle that cranks the engine from a battery.
The result is that the system integrator (you) need to supply
stand-alone power to keep you engine's electronics from
wandering into the weeds during cranking. This is the prime
driver for a second battery.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Topic with a little difference |
>
>Kingsley Hurst wrote:
>
> > I'm told that when welding on a vehicle that has an alternator, the
> > diodes in the alternator can be damaged if the battery is not
> > disconnected first. Fact or fiction ?
> >
> > If fact, explanations gratefully received thank you.
>
>I see Bob has replied and I think that he is right in general but I can
>tell you what the rationale is about disconnecting the alternator.
>
>Arc welding uses relatively high voltage (compared to your DC system)
>and potentially high amperage (once the arc starts, voltage goes down
>but current goes way up). Imagine you connect the ground from the arc
>welder to one of the two pieces of metal to be welded. When you go to
>strike the arc you may touch the other piece of metal before you get the
>arc started. This impresses a rather large voltage between the two
>pieces of metal. (This assumes that they are not clamped together well
>or that there is something else, e.g. paint, preventing good contact
>between the pieces of metal.)
>Could it happen? Yes. Is this likely to happen? No. Is it something you
>need to worry about? Probably not. But the point is good: that arc
>welder can put out a LOT of voltage before the arc actually starts. And
>if your bonding fails, the other wiring in your airplane or car can
>become the return for the current in the arc welder. It is probably
>better safe than sorry to disconnect or remove things when arc welding
>on your airplane.
Of course, this is a special case condition. I just worked
a relay failure in an airplane where the failure caused a
wire to become disconnected from the relay enclosure and
drop down into other portions of the circuitry. The 115 vac
400 Hz power on this wire was conducted into other rather
sensitive systems and caused a LOT of damage secondary to
the relay's initial failure. I don't expect to see this again
in my lifetime . . . especially after I keel-haul the relay
guys for some really dumb design errors.
The point to be made here is that if an alternator is at-risk
for the secondary fallout of a failure (welder's inattention
to proper grounding of his tool's electrical power) then
components of the entire system are equally at risk. Protecting
one's assets from this kind of event would call for disconnection
of everything in the system, not just the alternator.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup |
>
>
>I have a 60amp internally regulated ND alternator with the alternator
>contactor and crowbar protection on it.
>
>In cold weather, say below 35degreesF, on initial start, I have no
>charge. If I let her sit for a few minutes at 800rpm and worm up a
>little, then give her some rpm up above 1100rpm, voltage and amp charge
>slowly come up to proper level. Takes about 4 seconds for it to come up.
>If I don't raise the rmp and just let her idle at 800, then after about
>10 minutes of warming up, the same behavior happens where the voltage
>slowly comes up. I do not get this behavior when its above 40 degrees F,
>nor do I get this behavior if it has been run already.
>
>
>Killing the alt field wire will not kill the alternator once she is
>making current. Which I believe is proper behavior with this alternator.
If running this dog to ground involves swapping out the alternator,
I'll offer core value and shipping to have the alternator for
evaluation.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: SD8 Alternator Install - Z-12 vs. Manual |
>
>
>I comparing the SD8 install manual to Z-12 and I'm a bit confused of why the
>wiring difference.
>
>The install manual (Drawing 504-500 from B&C) details the following:
> 1. Aux Alt field breaker connected to main power bus via 2A breaker
>and aux alt switch then on to yellow OV crowbar module wire and onto 20 amp
>relay.
> 2. Install manual shows alt warning light coming off of relay
> 3. Install manual shows a second power connection via 10A breaker to
>main bus
>
>
>Z-13 details
> 1. Aux alt field connected breaker connected to 20Amp relay then onto
>aux alt switch. Black wire of OV module is connected to relay.
> 2. Z-13 does not show any aux alt warning light
> 3. Z-13 shows 16Awg fuselink coming from Battery contactor
>
>There are more differences but can someone recommend which diagram to follow
>and the reasoning for the differences.
First, keep in mind that you're comparing two different architectures.
You're trying to blend the difference between a pickup truck and a
sedan.
>When does the warning light come on for the aux alt? Some instructions say
>the alt light comes on when the aux alt switch is off or it is OV.
>
>I plan on leaving the aux alt switch off all the time. Some have
>recommended to leave it on but in this scenario how does one diagnose a
>failed main alt if the backup alt has the ability to absorb all of the load?
>
>I'm also running a B&C 60 Amp alt with LR3 reg.
>
>Thanks for some clarification,
Start with tossing out the B&C papers that show you how to
wire up the SD-8 as the only power generating source for
an airplane.
Figure Z-13/8 does not have a warning light for the SD-8
because it's the standby alternator and you don't want
a warning light starring you in the face for 99.9% of your
flight where the SD-8 is never used.
Yes, the SD-8 is left off all times the 60A machine is
running. The LV warning in the LR-3 is to tell you when
you need the SD-8. Under max endurance operations SD-8
only, there are no warnings . . . you already KNOW that
your operating with limited capabilities so you'll have
to watch a voltmeter -OR- install LV warning on the
e-bus but this would be a bit of over kill.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: fluid level sensor needed |
>
>
> > I'm working on a one wire, no moving parts, thermally
> > sensed low liquid level detection system that will be
> > simpler to install and still more rugged but no schedule
> > on that activity yet. If you need something tomorrow,
> > consider the technology cited above.
>
>That sounds like a winner. Please keep us posted.
>
> > Some of these mount right through the sidewall of a
> > container. You could install more than one and use
> > simple indicator lamps to annunciate switch position.
>
>Looks like I need to modify the expansion tank drawing
>I sent to Canton Racing to add a couple of 1/4" NPTs
>onto the side.
If that's for my product, it will use straight-threaded
o-ring sealed fittings. Not sure what size yet . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Z13-8 how to energize standby contactor? |
>
>I'm rebuilding the electrical system on my flying RV6a. Conventional Mags
>but all electric panel, so leaning strongly toward the Z-13/8 configuration.
>I have developed several questions, but I'll send them individually to try
>to keep the list archive most useable.
>
>On the A13-8 diagram, it shows the Aux Alt "master" contractor energized
>from the main battery side. Is there any reason not to energize it from the
>SD-8 alternator side? My assumption is that the SD-8 will always generate a
>voltage since it's got permanent magnets so it wouldn't need the battery to
>energize the field before it was able to kick it's own relay on. It should
>be a fine point that wouldn't usually matter, but if somehow the main
>battery went flat (I don't know, flying with the Nav lights on durring the
>day and not noticing a failed main alt because the low volts light bulb was
>burned out?) it seems like it'd be nice to be able to bootstrap the system
>from the SD-8.
Last I heard, the SD-8 still needs a battery to come on line.
If you want something better, hammer on B&C about this. There's
no good reason for this not to be a feature of the SD-8.
Z-13 is a two layer system that will function in the bare minimum
SD-8/Single battery system common to hundreds of Long and VariEz
aircraft flying the SD-8. Closing the battery master adds a second
layer with a main-bus.
Even if the SD-8 came up without a battery, hooking as shown
is recommended . . . let it bring the battery up a bit and it will
then close the battery contactor. You don't want to close the battery
contactor under SD-8 only ops until you have airport in sight and
your asking whatever is left in the battery + SD-8 support to let
you run more goodies in the approach to landing phase.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pat Hatch" <pat_hatch(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Transponder/ RS-232 |
Brian, you are correct, the SL70 can input either serial or gray code. The
selection is made on the setup function during the post installation
checkout.
Pat
DEAN PSIROPOULOS wrote:
>
> Question on the Gray Code connection to the transponder. I have an Apollo
> (UPS AT-now Garmin) SL70 transponder and it has a "D4" Gray code input. I
> plan to use a Dynon EFIS D10 (not a D10-A) as my encoder but it does not
> have a "D4" Gray code output. What should I do with this connection at
the
> Transponder end? Can I just leave it floating, do I need to ground it or
> what? Don't see anything in the manual about this.
The Apollo stuff uses a serial code to communicate altitude information
to their radios (GPS, etc.). I don't remember if the SL-70 accepts
serial data in instead of gray code. I *think* it does but I am not
sure. If it does not you will need a serial-to-grey-code converter to
get the data from the Dynon to the SL-70. (I like the SL-70. I have had
one in three airplanes at this point.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey % of charge (Correction) |
I stubbed my toe in interpretation of the graphs in an earlier
post. The revision is below:
>
>If the charging system is not working does anyone have an approximate % of
>remaining capacity versus voltage for a Odyssey PC680 or similar?
>
>What is a safe lower voltage limit one can discharge a PC680 to and not
>cause permanent battery damage?
Know that ALL lead-acid technologies are 95% used up
at 11 volts for a 12-volt battery. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/Capacity_vs_Voltage.gif
This is a curve for a big biz jet battery where we see
that for "light" loads (1 to 2x of capacity), the discharge
voltage has a sharp "knee" that increases the negative
going slope as it crosses 11v/22v line.
This particular battery is capacity rated at CC levels
of discharge i.e., it's a 37 a.h. battery that will give
100% of rated capacity at 74 amps of discharge (typical
for rating bizjet batteries that have a 30 minute emergency
requirement). If one were to discharge this battery like
most of the rest of the industry does (20 hour rate) then
it would probably exhibit a capacity on the order of
50 ampere-hours.
Check out this curve from the datasheet on a Panasonic
33 a.h. battery:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/LA1233_Panasonic.gif
Again, note the shape knee in the curve as it dives
through 11 volts . . . all used up. In this case, the
battery is not specifically rated for emergency power
service in airplanes - it couldn't be called a
33 a.h. device. If we run up the 30-minute line to
11 volts, we find that the battery would have to be
rated as a 26 a.h. device if intended for that kind
of service.
HERE'S THE POT HOLE - THE 30 MINUTE DISCHARGE CURVE
OF 26.4 AMPS SAYS THE CAPACITY IS 26.4A X 0.5 HOURS
OR 13.2 A.H., NOT 26 A.H.
I SHOULD HAVE CAUGHT THAT . . . A 33 TO 26 REDUCTION
IN APPARENT CAPACITY FOR A 15X LARGER DISCHARGE
RATE DIDN'T RAISE THE FLAGS. FOUND IT WHILE ARCHIVING
THE POST.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> from starter contactor |
| Subject: | Re: ANL Current Limiter more than 6 inches from starter |
contactor
>
>
>All of the Aeroelectric 'Z' diagrams show the ANL current limiter mounted
>within 6 inches of the starter contactor. I would like to mount mine on
>the right side of the battery on a RV9. What wire size would you use ? I
>am using the B&C base with a 60A fuse.
The 6" figure for acceptable runs of un-protected wire
is a rule-of-thumb long practiced in certified aviation.
Admittedly, it's most often applied to small wires . . .
the kinds that come off the busses to supply varios
accessories. The alternator b-lead is a major distribution
feeder and is one of the biggest wires in the airplane.
Major feeders are not generally "protected". This practice
is supported by decades of service history and failure
data.
The goal is to put any form of circuit protection for
a wire as close as practical to the source of the energy
that will burn the wire. Likelihood that departures
from the 6" 'rule' is going to cause you grief in the
future is exceedingly small. My personal choice for
all fat wires in closely located battery/bus/alternator
installations is 4AWG.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Strange alternator behavior at Startup |
>
>
>Thanks Bob,
>Is the behavior of the alt continuing to charge after the field wire is
>killed, normal behavior?
Probably . . . the "field" wire is really a command wire to
the internal regulator and has no direct responsibility for
carrying field current.
>Means I have no way to stop the alternator once its alive, except for
>the crowbar protection on the alternator contactor, which I have not
>verified actually works.
Yup, that's the nature of the beast.
>I don't have a way to kill it in a car driving down the road so I guess
>this should not bother me, somehow it does.
You've apparently missed a few megabytes worth of discussion
on this topic. For a review, see:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Alternator_Failures.pdf
I'm working on a one-size-fits-all solution adaption of
Z-24. If you have Z-24 installed, drive on. The Band-Aid
is coming.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
>
>
>Bob,
>
>The primary small gage wiring on the design is 4 AWG. Between the cross
>feed contactor and the main battery contactor you show a 2 AWG. This is
>the only place on the design that is using a 2 AWG wire. Why does it need
>to be 2 AWG? Will 4 AWG work?
>
>Thanks,
>Johnathan
Keep in mind these are architecture drawings. Details as to
wire sizing, fuse/breaker sizing, etc are variables that need
attention during the design of YOUR system. The Z-figures
are not all combed for agreement of the variables. If 4AWG
was adequate for the fat wires in the rest of your system, then
2AWG is not necessary to jumper contactors.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "D Wysong" <hdwysong(at)gmail.com> |
Anyone have a link for "Pinpoint Inertial, Inc." (the new supplier)?
I've happily used XBow IMUs in the past but have never even heard of
the other guys.
D
-------
On 2/23/06, Bob C. wrote:
>
> DIRECT-TO AVIONICS ISSUES RECALL ON ALL CROSSBOW 425EX AHRS
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pat Hatch" <pat_hatch(at)msn.com> |
www.pinpointinertial.com
Interestingly, if you google them, you get nothing, not even on GADAHARS.
Pat
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of D Wysong
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Info
Anyone have a link for "Pinpoint Inertial, Inc." (the new supplier)?
I've happily used XBow IMUs in the past but have never even heard of
the other guys.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Dube <william.p.dube(at)noaa.gov> |
| Subject: | Handy Battery Cpacity Calculator (was: Odyssey % of |
charge)
The Peukert calculator at the bottom of this web page is very useful for
determining the capacity of a particular battery under some load other
than the rates given in the specifications.
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/8679/battery.html
You plug in the 20 hr rate and the reserve capacity (or the capcity
at some other rate) and the webpage calculates the Peukert exponent. You
them move down a bit and plug in the load of interest and the web page
will calculate the capacity at that load.
Quite handy. Very useful.
Keep in mind that the temperature of the battery has a big effect.
The capacity goes down the toilet on a lead-acid battery when it gets cold.
Bill Dube'
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
If you noticed the comment at the bottom of their page
We are currently accepting dealer and OEM inquiries only. Click
here to e-mail us.
Clearly not interested in talking to the individual builder, so
appears they are looking for someone to use their unit in an EFIS in a
production run. Too, bad, I'd like to get one to see what could be done
with it.
Ed
Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pat Hatch" <pat_hatch(at)msn.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 1:46 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Info
>
> www.pinpointinertial.com
>
> Interestingly, if you google them, you get nothing, not even on GADAHARS.
>
> Pat
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of D
> Wysong
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 1:19 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Info
>
>
> Anyone have a link for "Pinpoint Inertial, Inc." (the new supplier)?
> I've happily used XBow IMUs in the past but have never even heard of
> the other guys.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup |
Jon,
Jon, excellent great reply to Michael.
I agree and well stated. I would add two things to what Michael wrote:
> Killing the alt field wire will not kill the alternator once she is
> making current. Which I believe is proper behavior with this
> alternator.
-DO NOT (ever) switch IGN lead ON or OFF w/ engine running (possible damage)
( To nit pick *alt field wire* is an IGN wire not field & not intended for this
use.)
> "then give her some rpm up above 1100rpm, voltage and amp charge
> slowly come up to proper level. Takes about 4 seconds for it to come
> up."
-Consider idling at 1100 RPM initially (as recommend by Sacramento Sky Ranch)
(one of the best books around: http://www.sacskyranch.com/pubsem.htm )
I don't see any problem and concur with Jon it sounds like the SOFT START feature
of the alternators regulator. Just stop messing with the IGN lead (you called
alt field).
George
PS
(IGN wire is a small signal to tell the regulator to go to work or go to sleep.
It was not intended to control the regulator while running. The FIELD wire is
internal to the alternator and you do not have direct access to the field.
Turning the IGN wire ON and OFF while under load has been known to cause
problems. In the original applications for this alternator the IGN wire is NEVER
switched while the alternator is running. Whether it can control the alternator
while running or not is not important. Also you know NOT to ever trip the crow
bar intentionally while running. This WILL damage the alternator. )
From: Jon Goguen <jon.goguen(at)umassmed.edu>
Subject: Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup
These modern IR regulators are are "intelligent", the IQ depending on
the particular model. Like me, some need to warm up before it they
think well enough to work. Many have a ramp function to bring the
output current up slowly at low rpm to prevent sudden engine loading
when alternator torque would be high, so the slow ramp up of the output
isn't surprising. 35 degrees seems pretty warm to be seeing such a
long warm-up delay, and it's possible that the regulator IC is
defective for low temp operation. If you can trace the problem
directly to the regulator, say by warming it with a hair dryer before
starting on a cold day, you might consider replacing it, perhaps with
an external one that doesn't try to be quite so clever. Another
possibility is that the belt slips in the cold when it's a little bit
stiff, and the the alternator rpm drops below the minimum at which the
regulator will turn on the output. Many regulators keep the output off
below a minimum rpm, to prevent loading the engine during startup. You
might not be getting above this threshold until the belt warms up and
grabs better.
Jon
Jon Goguen
jon.goguen(at)umassmed.edu
Central Massachusetts
Kitfox Series V Rotax 912S / N456JG (reserved)
Complete except for electrics and avionics
From: Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) wrote:
> Atlanta)"
>
> I have a 60amp internally regulated ND alternator with the alternator
> contactor and crowbar protection on it.
>
> In cold weather, say below 35degreesF, on initial start, I have no
> charge. If I let her sit for a few minutes at 800rpm and worm up a
> little, then give her some rpm up above 1100rpm, voltage and amp charge
> slowly come up to proper level. Takes about 4 seconds for it to come
> up.
> If I don't raise the rpm and just let her idle at 800, then after about
> 10 minutes of warming up, the same behavior happens where the voltage
> slowly comes up. I do not get this behavior when its above 40 degrees
> F,
> nor do I get this behavior if it has been run already.
>
>
> Killing the alt field wire will not kill the alternator once she is
> making current. Which I believe is proper behavior with this
> alternator.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike
>
> RV-8 io-540
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Avionics ground bus kit |
Hi,
I vaguely recall hearing that someone was putting together
a kit or perhaps a finished avionics ground bus like Bob
shows in this photo:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Grounding/Avionics_Bus_3.jpg
Does anyone know where I can purchase either the kit or
(preferably) the finished product?
Thanks,
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup |
| From: | "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart(at)iss.net> |
Copy All George.
New rule. No need for an alt field switch. IGN lead should just be on
the master buss and be done with it. Don't Kill master when its running.
Thanks
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 3:09 PM
Subject: [ ] AeroElectric-List: Re: Strange alternator behavior at
Startup
Jon,
Jon, excellent great reply to Michael.
I agree and well stated. I would add two things to what Michael wrote:
> Killing the alt field wire will not kill the alternator once
she is
> making current. Which I believe is proper behavior with this
> alternator.
-DO NOT (ever) switch IGN lead ON or OFF w/ engine running (possible
damage)
( To nit pick *alt field wire* is an IGN wire not field & not
intended for this use.)
> "then give her some rpm up above 1100rpm, voltage and amp
charge
> slowly come up to proper level. Takes about 4 seconds for it to
come
> up."
-Consider idling at 1100 RPM initially (as recommend by Sacramento Sky
Ranch)
(one of the best books around: http://www.sacskyranch.com/pubsem.htm
)
I don't see any problem and concur with Jon it sounds like the SOFT
START feature of the alternators regulator. Just stop messing with the
IGN lead (you called alt field).
George
PS
(IGN wire is a small signal to tell the regulator to go to work or go to
sleep.
It was not intended to control the regulator while running. The FIELD
wire is
internal to the alternator and you do not have direct access to the
field.
Turning the IGN wire ON and OFF while under load has been known to cause
problems. In the original applications for this alternator the IGN wire
is NEVER
switched while the alternator is running. Whether it can control the
alternator
while running or not is not important. Also you know NOT to ever trip
the crow
bar intentionally while running. This WILL damage the alternator. )
From: Jon Goguen <jon.goguen(at)umassmed.edu>
Subject: Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup
These modern IR regulators are are "intelligent", the IQ depending
on
the particular model. Like me, some need to warm up before it
they
think well enough to work. Many have a ramp function to bring the
output current up slowly at low rpm to prevent sudden engine
loading
when alternator torque would be high, so the slow ramp up of the
output
isn't surprising. 35 degrees seems pretty warm to be seeing such
a
long warm-up delay, and it's possible that the regulator IC is
defective for low temp operation. If you can trace the problem
directly to the regulator, say by warming it with a hair dryer
before
starting on a cold day, you might consider replacing it, perhaps
with
an external one that doesn't try to be quite so clever. Another
possibility is that the belt slips in the cold when it's a little
bit
stiff, and the the alternator rpm drops below the minimum at which
the
regulator will turn on the output. Many regulators keep the output
off
below a minimum rpm, to prevent loading the engine during startup.
You
might not be getting above this threshold until the belt warms up
and
grabs better.
Jon
Jon Goguen
jon.goguen(at)umassmed.edu
Central Massachusetts
Kitfox Series V Rotax 912S / N456JG (reserved)
Complete except for electrics and avionics
From: Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) wrote:
> Atlanta)"
>
> I have a 60amp internally regulated ND alternator with the
alternator
> contactor and crowbar protection on it.
>
> In cold weather, say below 35degreesF, on initial start, I have
no
> charge. If I let her sit for a few minutes at 800rpm and worm up
a
> little, then give her some rpm up above 1100rpm, voltage and amp
charge
> slowly come up to proper level. Takes about 4 seconds for it to
come
> up.
> If I don't raise the rpm and just let her idle at 800, then
after about
> 10 minutes of warming up, the same behavior happens where the
voltage
> slowly comes up. I do not get this behavior when its above 40
degrees
> F,
> nor do I get this behavior if it has been run already.
>
>
> Killing the alt field wire will not kill the alternator once she
is
> making current. Which I believe is proper behavior with this
> alternator.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike
>
> RV-8 io-540
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Topic with a little difference |
| From: | <rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US> |
"welding on a vehicle that has an alternator, the diodes in the alternator
can be damaged if the battery is not disconnected first. Fact or fiction
?"
For what it's worth, I have TIG welded on Automobiles here and there.
Chassis, exhaust and motor).
I never had a alternator failure, never disconnected battery. Did remove
battery a few times when welding near it, precaution in case some hydrogen
decided to follow my puddle round.
That said, when welding with DC, many TIGs have a high frequency AC start
to help easily establish an arc. Also when welding Aluminium you use AC
all the time.
Once in a great while when welding DC, especial in awkward positions, the
torch electrode can hit the welding rod, instantly stopping the arc and
insulating the rod from the grounded work area. Now for tacking purposes
don't have gloves in rod hand (left), and somehow for balance purposes
have right arm resting on grounded work area. Of course it all happens
when high frequency is happening.
OUCH!!!!!
Do that just once and at least you will rest arm on something semi
insulated. When this happens if you pull away and are less than immediate
on stopping electron flow, if the now welded rod onto the electrode has a
nice long extension of it. If you left a can of your favorite beverage on
the welding table, if it was carbonated, closed and sticky it "Will" get
punctured at this precise time.
This holds true for your electronics project that is laid out at the far
end of the welding table that could not possibly get hurt so far away (the
only free table area in shop).
Resting on work that you think is grounded to table will give you a jolt
as well especial if some other part of yuor body is better grounded.
When TIG welding, always consider just how far that rod can reach when you
get zapped and jerk away. Use shorter rod, or cover stuff that is
critical. It is good practice to always make a rounded bend with a needle
nose pliers on end of rod that can get you or others when welding in tight
awkward positions.
I forget exact voltages, think 28 or 30 for both DC and AC, AC hurts a lot
more.
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Wait a minute George.. I think the only thing that we have possibly
speculated that would cause alternator damage was disconnecting the B-lead
(the output) from the main bus (including the battery) while the
alternator was producing power. That's the whole "load-dump" scenario
which the is introduced by the inclusion of the b-lead contactor. Do you
know of another failure mode associated with toggling the control lead to
the alternator? I must have missed something in the discussion.
Regards,
Matt-
>
> Jon,
>
> Jon, excellent great reply to Michael.
>
> I agree and well stated. I would add two things to what Michael wrote:
>
> > Killing the alt field wire will not kill the alternator once
> she is
> > making current. Which I believe is proper behavior with this
> alternator.
>
> -DO NOT (ever) switch IGN lead ON or OFF w/ engine running (possible
> damage)
> ( To nit pick *alt field wire* is an IGN wire not field & not
> intended for this use.)
>
> > "then give her some rpm up above 1100rpm, voltage and amp
> charge
> > slowly come up to proper level. Takes about 4 seconds for it to
> come up."
>
>
> -Consider idling at 1100 RPM initially (as recommend by Sacramento Sky
> Ranch) (one of the best books around:
> http://www.sacskyranch.com/pubsem.htm )
>
> I don't see any problem and concur with Jon it sounds like the SOFT
> START feature of the alternators regulator. Just stop messing with the
> IGN lead (you called alt field).
>
>
> George
>
> PS
> (IGN wire is a small signal to tell the regulator to go to work or go to
> sleep. It was not intended to control the regulator while running. The
> FIELD wire is internal to the alternator and you do not have direct
> access to the field. Turning the IGN wire ON and OFF while under load
> has been known to cause problems. In the original applications for this
> alternator the IGN wire is NEVER switched while the alternator is
> running. Whether it can control the alternator while running or not is
> not important. Also you know NOT to ever trip the crow bar
> intentionally while running. This WILL damage the alternator. )
>
>
> From: Jon Goguen <jon.goguen(at)umassmed.edu>
> Subject: Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup
>
>
> These modern IR regulators are are "intelligent", the IQ depending
> on the particular model. Like me, some need to warm up before it
> they think well enough to work. Many have a ramp function to
> bring the output current up slowly at low rpm to prevent sudden
> engine loading when alternator torque would be high, so the slow
> ramp up of the output isn't surprising. 35 degrees seems pretty
> warm to be seeing such a long warm-up delay, and it's possible
> that the regulator IC is defective for low temp operation. If
> you can trace the problem directly to the regulator, say by
> warming it with a hair dryer before starting on a cold day, you
> might consider replacing it, perhaps with an external one that
> doesn't try to be quite so clever. Another possibility is that
> the belt slips in the cold when it's a little bit stiff, and the
> the alternator rpm drops below the minimum at which the regulator
> will turn on the output. Many regulators keep the output off
> below a minimum rpm, to prevent loading the engine during startup.
> You might not be getting above this threshold until the belt
> warms up and grabs better.
>
> Jon
>
>
> Jon Goguen
> jon.goguen(at)umassmed.edu
> Central Massachusetts
> Kitfox Series V Rotax 912S / N456JG (reserved)
> Complete except for electrics and avionics
>
>
> From: Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) wrote:
>
> Atlanta)"
> >
> > I have a 60amp internally regulated ND alternator with the
> alternator contactor and crowbar protection on it.
> >
> > In cold weather, say below 35degreesF, on initial start, I have
> no charge. If I let her sit for a few minutes at 800rpm and worm
> up a little, then give her some rpm up above 1100rpm, voltage
> and amp charge slowly come up to proper level. Takes about 4
> seconds for it to come up.
> > If I don't raise the rpm and just let her idle at 800, then
> after about 10 minutes of warming up, the same behavior happens
> where the voltage slowly comes up. I do not get this behavior
> when its above 40 degrees F,
> > nor do I get this behavior if it has been run already.
> >
> >
> > Killing the alt field wire will not kill the alternator once she
> is making current. Which I believe is proper behavior with this
> alternator.
> >
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > RV-8 io-540
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Avionics ground bus kit |
I willed that product to Steinair at:
http://steinair.com
Bob . . .
>
>
>Hi,
>
>I vaguely recall hearing that someone was putting together
>a kit or perhaps a finished avionics ground bus like Bob
>shows in this photo:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Grounding/Avionics_Bus_3.jpg
>
>Does anyone know where I can purchase either the kit or
>(preferably) the finished product?
>
>Thanks,
>Mickey
>--
>Mickey Coggins
>http://www.rv8.ch/
>#82007 finishing
>
>
>--
>
>
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jon Goguen <jon.goguen(at)umassmed.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup |
Bob,
This comes from data sheets on modern alternator regulator ICs like
http://www.freescale.com/files/analog/doc/data_sheet/MC33092A.pdf. The
problem is that it's difficult to know how sophisticated the regulator
is in any particular alternator, and exactly what features are
implemented. For example, I suspect the small ND models intended for
forklifts and similar uses have regulators with many fewer functions
than the 70 amp versions intended for automotive use. The chip
described in the attached data sheet does lots of things, not all of
which are necessarily good things in an airplane. Have a good read! I
think you'll find it revealing.
Jon
Jon Goguen
jon.goguen(at)umassmed.edu
Central Massachusetts
Kitfox Series V Rotax 912S / N456JG (reserved)
Complete except for electrics and avionics
"Nothing worth knowing can be understood by the human mind"
--Woody Allen
On Feb 23, 2006, at 10:06 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> These modern IR regulators are are "intelligent", the IQ depending on
>> the particular model. LIke me, some need to warm up before it they
>> think well enough to work. Many have a ramp function to bring the
>> output current up slowly at low rpm to prevent sudden engine loading
>> when alternator torque would be high, so the slow ramp up of the
>> output
>> isn't surprising. 35 degrees seems pretty warm to be seeing such a
>> long warm-up delay, and it's possible that the regulator IC is
>> defective for low temp operation. If you can trace the problem
>> directly to the regulator, say by warming it with a hair dryer before
>> starting on a cold day, you might consider replacing it, perhaps with
>> an external one that doesn't try to be quite so clever. Another
>> possibility is that the belt slips in the cold when it's a little bit
>> stiff, and the the alternator rpm drops below the minimum at which the
>> regulator will turn on the output. Many regulators keep the output off
>> below a minimum rpm, to prevent loading the engine during startup. You
>> might not be getting above this threshold until the belt warms up and
>> grabs better.
>
> Can you point us to any published literature on this? Please
> understand that I'm not attacking your assertions with any
> kind of "PROVE IT" attitude. My request is driven by the simple
> fact that many of my suggestions about the IR alternator have
> been driven by what I KNOW about them (admittedly not much . . .
> the automotive guys are not used to getting requests for such
> data . . . their gazillions of automotive customers don't care).
> A handful of idiots that want to put "automotive" stuff into
> airplanes are not to be taken seriously.
>
> When I've crafted architectures and design philosophies that
> assume NOTHING, I've had to field a barrage of cabbages and
> tomatoes from congregations of certain beliefs because I don't
> embrace their faith . . . when at the same time, the bibles
> upon which their faith is based appear not to be in print.
> My time to research such things is limited so I you (or anyone
> else on the list) can point me to any descriptive literature
> for any of the modern (or not so modern) products, I'd be
> grateful.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott" <scott(at)randolphs.net> |
| Subject: | What happens if OV trips? |
If the "crowbar" overvoltage protection trips, is it a permanent fault or
something that can be reset on the fly?
I'm interested in general in how it works, but specificly thinking now about
the possibility of one alternator tripping both OV circuits if both
alternators happen to be on (by design or switchology error). If that
happened, would both alternators be permanently disabled or would turning
off the faulty one allow the other to be brought back online?
Thanks!
Scott.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey % of charge (Correction) |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> HERE'S THE POT HOLE - THE 30 MINUTE DISCHARGE CURVE
> OF 26.4 AMPS SAYS THE CAPACITY IS 26.4A X 0.5 HOURS
> OR 13.2 A.H., NOT 26 A.H.
>
> I SHOULD HAVE CAUGHT THAT . . . A 33 TO 26 REDUCTION
> IN APPARENT CAPACITY FOR A 15X LARGER DISCHARGE
> RATE DIDN'T RAISE THE FLAGS. FOUND IT WHILE ARCHIVING
> THE POST.
Welcome to Peukert's exponent. If you know the capacity at two different
discharge rates you can interpolate or extrapolate the capacity off the
battery at other discharge rates.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)allvantage.com> |
| Subject: | Alternator conversion |
Bob and others.
I have seen several instructions on how to convert MI and ND alternators
to either external regulation or to internal regulation such that the
field wire can be used to shut the alternator down. These instructions
seem simple enough that I feel that I could do it.
My question is why has this never?? been a topic on this list and what
are the pros and cons of these modifications? Is this safe? If not,
why? And Bob, no one so far has stumped you on an electrical question,
so why have you not told us how to do these modifications?
I understand that at some time in the past, there was some information
on internally regulated alternators on your web site, but they were
removed. Is this the information that was removed?
I am ready to modify an MI alternator for internal regulation where the
field can be interrupted by the OV module just like it is in the
external regulator, but have started to get second thoughts since this
has not been covered here. Please give me some guidance.
Thanks,
Bill Bradburry
-Snip-
Okay, in the simplest terms:
Install any internally regulated alternator of your choice.
Know that the reliability of whatever you choose (as long as
it's not a junkyard dog) is as good or better than anything
flying in certified ships . . . and we don't avoid flying
that rental machine because of our perceptions of alternators
and batteries they may carry.
Probability of OV condition is very low but not zero. Given
the current capability of the alternator, it's prudent to ASSUME
an OV condition can happen and plan for it . . . just as we've
done in certified ships for 70 years.
Know that some alternators recommended to the OBAM aircraft
community have control issues. Some if not most cannot be
turned ON/OFF at will any time under any conditions. If this
is a design goal you embrace, know that techniques are in
development
to meet that goal. If this is not a goal you embrace, then
the system as recommended by Van's and others does what it
says it will do . . . power your airplane with relatively low
risk even if you cannot control it.
99% of the past year's discussion on this topic dragged a
lot of peripheral and mostly irrelevant discourse that
did not advance the state of our art and science. We'll
endeavor to stay focused on simple-ideas and elegant
solutions for the future.
Not too much of a good thing my friend . . . too much of
irrelevant things. I've been taking flack from some cool
headed observers for letting "my List" get out of control.
I've never wanted to consider this List as a personal
possession. I did start it . . . but with the idea of planting
seeds that would grow on their own. However, it's entirely
appropriate to treat the List as a classroom where
ALL teachers are invited to practice their art and craft.
Seeds need water, sun, nutrients and protection from
destructive forces. Folks who just dig up seedlings and
throw dirt should be invited to modify their modus operandi
or take their shovels someplace else. I'll invite other
teachers who participate on this List to join me in maintaining
the loftiest goals in classroom atmosphere and decorum.
Keep in mind that anytime you have simple-ideas (obvious
truths) to share that will assemble into elegant solutions, you
too have an opportunity to be a teacher.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator conversion |
>
>
>Bob and others.
>I have seen several instructions on how to convert MI and ND alternators
>to either external regulation or to internal regulation such that the
>field wire can be used to shut the alternator down. These instructions
>seem simple enough that I feel that I could do it.
>My question is why has this never?? been a topic on this list and what
>are the pros and cons of these modifications?
Excellent question. When one crafts a "curriculum" for instruction
and study, trade offs need to be made for time to develop the
materials to be delivered, how universal are the instructions for
any one task (is there risk that unforeseen variability raises risks
for success), etc.
There HAVE been a number of conversion articles pointed out here
on the list . . . and I've encouraged folks to make their discoveries
of such data known to the rest of us. It's a task I wouldn't mind
doing but there are lots of tasks I don't mind doing and I have perhaps
10% of the time available necessary to take them all on.
>Is this safe?
If you mean TOTALLY RISK FREE, no. Nothing we do in life is SAFE.
By means of our study and verification by repeatable experiment,
we develop skills that mitigate risk. On top of that, we can craft
systems that are failure tolerant such that the failure of
a "conversion experiment" does not represent intolerable risk.
I.e., having your alternator crap should not cause you to break
a sweat whether or not it's a DIY conversion.
> If not,
>why? And Bob, no one so far has stumped you on an electrical question,
>so why have you not told us how to do these modifications?
It's all a matter of time . . .
>I understand that at some time in the past, there was some information
>on internally regulated alternators on your web site, but they were
>removed. Is this the information that was removed?
No, I don't think the info was posted on the website but it
was discussed here on the List.
>I am ready to modify an MI alternator for internal regulation where the
>field can be interrupted by the OV module just like it is in the
>external regulator, but have started to get second thoughts since this
>has not been covered here. Please give me some guidance.
You can give US some guidance. Get out your camera. Tear into the
thing and take photos. Share your findings as to how power is routed
within the machine and what you've deduced is a means by which you
can get in series with the field power for accomplishment of this
DESIGN GOAL.
We all have opportunities to become teachers here. And all of us
as students have the ability to help teachers refine their presentations.
It's an evolutionary process of discovery, experiment, and perhaps
abandonment of ideas for a better way. Ultimately the process moves
forward to the point where the experiment is repeatable and is ready
for prime time.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator conversion |
Hi Bill
Sure you can do this if you wish and there is nothing wrong with that.
The subject comes up periodically and several folks have posted
suggested methods for some specific alternators. Some look to be easier
to mod than others. There are a couple of companies that offer such units.
I was not particularly interested as it seemed somewhat
counterproductive. You must do the mod and not cause a related problem
by doing so which is probably not too difficult. However it wouldn't be
the first time that a problem was caused just by opening a factory
assembled device. You must purchase and install a separate voltage
regulator which may not be as good as what is already in the alternator
depending on which one you choose. The remote Regulator will not be able
to monitor the alternator's temperature although I guess that is a
pretty minor consideration. You must find a place to put that regulator
and wire it reliably. Most important perhaps, you can no longer purchase
a replacement off the shelf alternator and quickly install it.
In addition I have little concern with using an OV contactor and a few
transorbs on my IR alternator. I'm betting that eventually Bob will
likely confirm that approach with some real testing and actual numbers.
Risks are low either way I think.
Ken
Bill Bradburry wrote:
>
>Bob and others.
>I have seen several instructions on how to convert MI and ND alternators
>to either external regulation or to internal regulation such that the
>field wire can be used to shut the alternator down. These instructions
>seem simple enough that I feel that I could do it.
>My question is why has this never?? been a topic on this list and what
>are the pros and cons of these modifications? Is this safe? If not,
>why? And Bob, no one so far has stumped you on an electrical question,
>so why have you not told us how to do these modifications?
>I understand that at some time in the past, there was some information
>on internally regulated alternators on your web site, but they were
>removed. Is this the information that was removed?
>I am ready to modify an MI alternator for internal regulation where the
>field can be interrupted by the OV module just like it is in the
>external regulator, but have started to get second thoughts since this
>has not been covered here. Please give me some guidance.
>Thanks,
>Bill Bradburry
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey % of charge |
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> > HERE'S THE POT HOLE - THE 30 MINUTE DISCHARGE CURVE
> > OF 26.4 AMPS SAYS THE CAPACITY IS 26.4A X 0.5 HOURS
> > OR 13.2 A.H., NOT 26 A.H.
> >
> > I SHOULD HAVE CAUGHT THAT . . . A 33 TO 26 REDUCTION
> > IN APPARENT CAPACITY FOR A 15X LARGER DISCHARGE
> > RATE DIDN'T RAISE THE FLAGS. FOUND IT WHILE ARCHIVING
> > THE POST.
>
>Welcome to Peukert's exponent. If you know the capacity at two different
>discharge rates you can interpolate or extrapolate the capacity off the
>battery at other discharge rates.
Yeah . . . sorta. I'm working on that question along with the
notion that owning one of those super-charge-all smart battery
chargers is a good thing to do to. I'll give you all a forecast
on present findings:
An $80 smart charger and $??$ capacity meter are not well suited
to our ultimate design goals (1) know that the battery is mission
capable every time we walk up to the airplane and (2) have tools
requiring minimum expense and user time/attention to track that
capability. None of the devices I cited above do a very good job
of meeting those goals. An article on alternative hardware proposals
is in the works.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: What happens if OV trips? |
Hi Scott
I don't believe any of the Z architectures run two alternators in
parallel such that both would trip together.
However if a crowbar activates it becomes a momentary short until the CB
pops. Reset the CB and everything goes back to normal unless the voltage
goes high again in which case the breaker will immediately pop again.
Nuisance tripping seems to be quite rare and IMO one should not tolerate
any nuisance trips but rather find out why that is happening and fix it.
While I don't have much engine running time accumulated yet, I have not
been able to instigate a single nuisance trip with the latest homemade
version of Bob's crowbar circuit dated Jan 2006. I could instigate them
with earlier homemade versions.
Ken
Scott wrote:
>
>If the "crowbar" overvoltage protection trips, is it a permanent fault or
>something that can be reset on the fly?
>
>I'm interested in general in how it works, but specificly thinking now about
>the possibility of one alternator tripping both OV circuits if both
>alternators happen to be on (by design or switchology error). If that
>happened, would both alternators be permanently disabled or would turning
>off the faulty one allow the other to be brought back online?
>
>Thanks!
>
>Scott.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Todd Richmond" <trichmond(at)obermeyer.com> |
| Subject: | An Architecture Question - Z13 |
All,
I have been reading the AeroElectric posts for several weeks now and find
the forum extremely useful as I begin designing the electrical system for my
RV-7A (that and re-reading the AeroElectric Connection several times). I am
planning an all electric airplane based on the Grand Rapids EFIS/EIS system,
Garmin 430, E-Mag / P-Mag combo and all the other little gizmos I can fit
(afford). At this point, I'm basing my architecture on the Z-13 with a 60
Amp alternator and SD-20 auxiliary alternator.
So my first question is this. do I need an e-bus? The only reason I can
figure is that without the e-bus, the master battery contactor becomes a
single point of failure. If true, could I simply wire two battery
contactors in parallel and run them via a 2-10 switch? To me the advantage
of this approach is that in case of an alternator failure, I can simply
switch to the auxiliary alternator and systematically reduce my loads until
the alternator is picking up the full load without worrying what is attached
to each bus.
My second question is would it make sense to wire both alternators to a DP3T
switch? My thought being that this approach ensures only one alternator may
be operating at a time and thus would prevent them from inadvertently
fighting one another.
Any input is gratefully appreciated.
Todd R. Richmond
RV-7A Wings
trichmond(at)obermeyer.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey % of charge |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> An $80 smart charger and $??$ capacity meter are not well suited
> to our ultimate design goals (1) know that the battery is mission
> capable every time we walk up to the airplane and (2) have tools
> requiring minimum expense and user time/attention to track that
> capability. None of the devices I cited above do a very good job
> of meeting those goals. An article on alternative hardware proposals
> is in the works.
Having a smart energy monitor is necessary in a system where you will
have irregular charge/discharge cycles and want to know how much is left
in the battery. If you always recharge the battery to full every time,
you can have a much simpler energy monitor that isn't quite so smart.
The biggest issue as I see it is that you need to make sure you don't
overcharge the battery in summer but that you do actually charge the
battery in winter. That implies temperature compensation.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve & Denise" <sjhdcl(at)kingston.net> |
| Subject: | Re: SD8 Alternator Install - Z-12 vs. Manual |
I thought the point in having the warning light for the aux alternator is
tell you it is overloaded and
equipment needs to be turned off??
Steve
RV7A
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: SD8 Alternator Install - Z-12 vs. Manual
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >I comparing the SD8 install manual to Z-12 and I'm a bit confused of why
the
> >wiring difference.
> >
> >The install manual (Drawing 504-500 from B&C) details the following:
> > 1. Aux Alt field breaker connected to main power bus via 2A
breaker
> >and aux alt switch then on to yellow OV crowbar module wire and onto 20
amp
> >relay.
> > 2. Install manual shows alt warning light coming off of relay
> > 3. Install manual shows a second power connection via 10A breaker
to
> >main bus
> >
> >
> >Z-13 details
> > 1. Aux alt field connected breaker connected to 20Amp relay then
onto
> >aux alt switch. Black wire of OV module is connected to relay.
> > 2. Z-13 does not show any aux alt warning light
> > 3. Z-13 shows 16Awg fuselink coming from Battery contactor
> >
> >There are more differences but can someone recommend which diagram to
follow
> >and the reasoning for the differences.
>
> First, keep in mind that you're comparing two different architectures.
> You're trying to blend the difference between a pickup truck and a
> sedan.
>
>
> >When does the warning light come on for the aux alt? Some instructions
say
> >the alt light comes on when the aux alt switch is off or it is OV.
> >
> >I plan on leaving the aux alt switch off all the time. Some have
> >recommended to leave it on but in this scenario how does one diagnose a
> >failed main alt if the backup alt has the ability to absorb all of the
load?
> >
> >I'm also running a B&C 60 Amp alt with LR3 reg.
> >
> >Thanks for some clarification,
>
> Start with tossing out the B&C papers that show you how to
> wire up the SD-8 as the only power generating source for
> an airplane.
>
> Figure Z-13/8 does not have a warning light for the SD-8
> because it's the standby alternator and you don't want
> a warning light starring you in the face for 99.9% of your
> flight where the SD-8 is never used.
>
> Yes, the SD-8 is left off all times the 60A machine is
> running. The LV warning in the LR-3 is to tell you when
> you need the SD-8. Under max endurance operations SD-8
> only, there are no warnings . . . you already KNOW that
> your operating with limited capabilities so you'll have
> to watch a voltmeter -OR- install LV warning on the
> e-bus but this would be a bit of over kill.
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | An Architecture Question - Z13 |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Remember switches fail too and if I read your proposal correctly you
have mentioned two additional points of failure in your design...I
would'nt do it put it that way.
If you look at Bobs Z figures you will see that single points of failure
are not an issue, the back fed e bus is quite elaegant in this regard.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Todd
Richmond
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 7:09 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: An Architecture Question - Z13
-->
All,
I have been reading the AeroElectric posts for several weeks now and
find the forum extremely useful as I begin designing the electrical
system for my RV-7A (that and re-reading the AeroElectric Connection
several times). I am planning an all electric airplane based on the
Grand Rapids EFIS/EIS system, Garmin 430, E-Mag / P-Mag combo and all
the other little gizmos I can fit (afford). At this point, I'm basing
my architecture on the Z-13 with a 60 Amp alternator and SD-20 auxiliary
alternator.
So my first question is this. do I need an e-bus? The only reason I can
figure is that without the e-bus, the master battery contactor becomes a
single point of failure. If true, could I simply wire two battery
contactors in parallel and run them via a 2-10 switch? To me the
advantage of this approach is that in case of an alternator failure, I
can simply switch to the auxiliary alternator and systematically reduce
my loads until the alternator is picking up the full load without
worrying what is attached to each bus.
My second question is would it make sense to wire both alternators to a
DP3T switch? My thought being that this approach ensures only one
alternator may be operating at a time and thus would prevent them from
inadvertently fighting one another.
Any input is gratefully appreciated.
Todd R. Richmond
RV-7A Wings
trichmond(at)obermeyer.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mitchell Goodrich" <mgoodrich(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Baclup Battery monitor |
Hello All,
I am installing a backup battery for a dual EI installation.
I'm looking for a way to monitor w/warning, the voltage and
possibly load on it. Any ideas??
Mitchell Goodrich
VEZE 60P
Tampa,FL
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mickey
Coggins
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 3:24 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Avionics ground bus kit
Hi,
I vaguely recall hearing that someone was putting together
a kit or perhaps a finished avionics ground bus like Bob
shows in this photo:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Grounding/Avionics_Bus_3.jpg
Does anyone know where I can purchase either the kit or
(preferably) the finished product?
Thanks,
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson(at)highrf.com> |
| Subject: | SD-20 Alt performance chart? |
Bob, did you ever put together one of these for the SD-20? B&C specify 20A
output at 3500rpm, so I would assume that you could use the same "ratios"
and determine that on a continental for example, that is a 1.15:1, that
you'd have full output at 2900ish rpm?
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Alternator_Data/SD8-Performance.p
df
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Baclup Battery monitor |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Simplest way is to take a second battery and charge it through a diode
from the main bettery. That way if the main battry has a major short
somewhere it will not drag down the second batery with it.
The problem with diodes is they all have a forward volt drop, standard
diodes are about 1 volt drop. So if your system charges at say 14.2
volts, your second battery will only see 13.2V.
I believe the Shotkey (sp?) diode has a much lower drop...Althouigh I
don't know what it is.
My way round this issue on my current plane is to use a smaller battery
for the second ignition that requires a lower charging voltage.
So my first battery is a 18AH and my backup is a 3AH, and is used to run
one EI and a Facet fuel pump, nothing else.
No points of interconnect between the systems except for the diode.
Make sure the diode is sized to flow enough current to run your backup
EI and you can simply run your backup EI from the second battery all the
time, i.e no chageover contactors or other components that could fail.
If you do it this way there is really no need to montior the second
battery as you will be changing it every year or so anyway...I use a
simple digital voltmeter and check it before each flight.
All the best
Frank
Zenair zodiac 400 hours
RV7a...ALMOST finished..:)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Mitchell Goodrich
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 7:48 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Baclup Battery monitor
-->
Hello All,
I am installing a backup battery for a dual EI installation.
I'm looking for a way to monitor w/warning, the voltage and possibly
load on it. Any ideas??
Mitchell Goodrich
VEZE 60P
Tampa,FL
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Mickey Coggins
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 3:24 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Avionics ground bus kit
Hi,
I vaguely recall hearing that someone was putting together a kit or
perhaps a finished avionics ground bus like Bob shows in this photo:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Grounding/Avionics_Bus_3.jpg
Does anyone know where I can purchase either the kit or
(preferably) the finished product?
Thanks,
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> |
| Subject: | Re: An Architecture Question - Z13 |
If I understand your point correctly, you probably should think through the
scenario wherein you would feel comfortable doing that level of detective
work in a potentially busy cockpit. The beauty of the e-bus is that you
just flip a switch (or it gets flipped for you), and then you have a known
quantity of time remaining before you need to think about landing. No
systematic reduction of things, no long division in your head, no thinking
required. Just flip the switch and go to Plan B.
Dave Morris
At 09:09 AM 2/24/2006, you wrote:
>in case of an alternator failure, I can simply
>switch to the auxiliary alternator and systematically reduce my loads until
>the alternator is picking up the full load without worrying what is attached
>to each bus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> |
| Subject: | Baclup Battery monitor |
Facet pumps draw about 1.5A, don't they? And your EI draws how much? 3AH
seems awfully small to me. I'm guessing the Duration vs Current curve for
that battery gives you 3A for 30 minutes. Is that enough?
Dave Morris
www.N75UP.com
At 10:22 AM 2/24/2006, you wrote:
>So my first battery is a 18AH and my backup is a 3AH, and is used to run
>one EI and a Facet fuel pump, nothing else.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 FADEC Version Question with P.S. |
| From: | "dannylsmith" <dsmit132(at)bellsouth.net> |
Thanks for the help Bob!
--------
Danny
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=14679#14679
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Baclup Battery monitor |
>
>
>Simplest way is to take a second battery and charge it through a diode
>from the main bettery. That way if the main battry has a major short
>somewhere it will not drag down the second batery with it.
>
>The problem with diodes is they all have a forward volt drop, standard
>diodes are about 1 volt drop. So if your system charges at say 14.2
>volts, your second battery will only see 13.2V.
Which is a major issue for recharging the standby battery
to 100% of capacity.
>I believe the Shotkey (sp?) diode has a much lower drop...Althouigh I
>don't know what it is.
>
>My way round this issue on my current plane is to use a smaller battery
>for the second ignition that requires a lower charging voltage.
Battery size does not drive ideal charging voltage. We use the
same Battery Tender products to maintain 1.5 a.h. batteries as
for 50 a.h. batteries. Ideal voltage for charging is driven by
chemistry first and temperature second.
There's been some discussion about optimizing charging protocols
based on flooded vs. gel vs. RG which have proven to be a third
order concern. IF you use a battery as motive/standby power
and IF it's regularly discharged to a fraction of capacity and
immediately recharged then you MIGHT see some increase in service
life with a pampering suggested by folks who program smart chargers.
For all others where you crank first, stabilize alternators second
and supply standby power perhaps once in a lifetime of the battery,
the magic charging protocols yield no measurable return on investment.
>So my first battery is a 18AH and my backup is a 3AH, and is used to run
>one EI and a Facet fuel pump, nothing else.
>
>No points of interconnect between the systems except for the diode.
>
>Make sure the diode is sized to flow enough current to run your backup
>EI and you can simply run your backup EI from the second battery all the
>time, i.e no chageover contactors or other components that could fail.
>
>If you do it this way there is really no need to montior the second
>battery as you will be changing it every year or so anyway...I use a
>simple digital voltmeter and check it before each flight.
As described in other posts, an open circuit voltage check
of a battery is a very gross examination of battery condition
(at least it's not discharged) and yields no accurate data
as to capacity. The yearly change-out is the practical hedge
against the unknown.
A series of articles have been crafted dealing with second battery
management techniques:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/LVWarn-ABMM.html
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/9021-620.pdf
http://aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9005/9005.html
http://aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9005/9005-701B.pdf
These are illustrated in appendix Z, most notably
Figure Z-30 of:
http://aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9005/9005-701B.pdf
where the aux battery switching device can be any
size of switch or contactor suited to the task and the
battery can also be selected for capacity suited to
the task.
Key considerations are: (1) connect the standby battery
to the main system via lowest practical resistance i.e.
toggle switch or relay. (2) Have active notification of
low voltage that prompts you to open the switch or automatically
opens a relay or contactor . . . it doesn't matter.
You have PLENTY of time to react and there's little
advantage in making this function automatic. The hard
connection through a switch or relay insures that your
standby battery gets the same benefits of recharge as
your main battery.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Baclup Battery monitor |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
I measured the Facet and it was less than an amp...Can't remember what
the EI draws but I did measure it at the time.
The Zodiac is strictly a VFR airplane and most failure modes would leave
some juice left in the main battery.
So I think I assumed about 20 minutes of flight on Batt #2.
If I were re-doing it today I think the more modern diode (with lower
volt drop) would mean I could use a bigger battery.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave
Morris "BigD"
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 8:44 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Baclup Battery monitor
-->
Facet pumps draw about 1.5A, don't they? And your EI draws how much?
3AH seems awfully small to me. I'm guessing the Duration vs Current
curve for that battery gives you 3A for 30 minutes. Is that enough?
Dave Morris
www.N75UP.com
At 10:22 AM 2/24/2006, you wrote:
>So my first battery is a 18AH and my backup is a 3AH, and is used to
>run one EI and a Facet fuel pump, nothing else.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: Baclup Battery monitor |
> The problem with diodes is they all have a forward volt drop, standard
> diodes are about 1 volt drop. So if your system charges at say 14.2
> volts, your second battery will only see 13.2V.
>
> I believe the Shotkey (sp?) diode has a much lower drop...Althouigh I
> don't know what it is.
Use one of Eric's Power Schotty diodes - they don't have much
voltage drop at all.
http://www.periheliondesign.com/powerschottkydiodes.htm
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: SD-20 Alt performance chart? |
>
>
>Bob, did you ever put together one of these for the SD-20? B&C specify 20A
>output at 3500rpm, so I would assume that you could use the same "ratios"
>and determine that on a continental for example, that is a 1.15:1, that
>you'd have full output at 2900ish rpm?
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Alternator_Data/SD8-Performance.p
>df
The SD-20 is an L-40 with different shoes. It's limited in output
only because of the reduced speed on the vacuum pump pad. It's
performance is described on B&C's website at:
http://bandc.biz/SD20REVC.pdf
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: What happens if OV trips? |
>
>Hi Scott
>I don't believe any of the Z architectures run two alternators in
>parallel such that both would trip together.
Z-12 does and the regulators specified are 'smart' enough to know
if an ov condition is caused by local failure or is coming from another
alternator.
>However if a crowbar activates it becomes a momentary short until the CB
>pops. Reset the CB and everything goes back to normal unless the voltage
>goes high again in which case the breaker will immediately pop again.
>Nuisance tripping seems to be quite rare and IMO one should not tolerate
>any nuisance trips but rather find out why that is happening and fix it.
>While I don't have much engine running time accumulated yet, I have not
>been able to instigate a single nuisance trip with the latest homemade
>version of Bob's crowbar circuit dated Jan 2006. I could instigate them
>with earlier homemade versions.
>Ken
Absolutely. Nuisance trips are a fact of life in virtually every
design that stands as close as practical to the edge. You DESIRE
sensitivity to the failure but in some cases, there is overlap
between things that should and should not be reacted to.
Of all the OV systems I've worked in the past 30 years, I'll guess
that perhaps 1/3 of them needed some tweaking after first delivery.
This is the nature of the beast that is a quest for best response to
a hazard and ability to filter and ignore conditions that are not
hazardous.
>Scott wrote:
>
> >
> >If the "crowbar" overvoltage protection trips, is it a permanent fault or
> >something that can be reset on the fly?
> >
> >I'm interested in general in how it works, but specificly thinking now about
> >the possibility of one alternator tripping both OV circuits if both
> >alternators happen to be on (by design or switchology error). If that
> >happened, would both alternators be permanently disabled or would turning
> >off the faulty one allow the other to be brought back online?
Virtually all ov systems for aircraft have allowed resetting by
the pilot with one notable exception. American/Grumman had a po' boy's
crowbar OV system using a zener and an upstream fuse. A trip event
took out a fuse and most often shorted the zener. However, while
crude in implementation, this system was immune to nuisance trips.
Cheap, effective and few downsides.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Dube <william.p.dube(at)noaa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey % of charge |
State-of-charge meters, like the Link-10
<http://www.xantrex.com/web/id/97/p/1/pt/5/product.asp> add up the
amp-hrs in and out (in a fancy manner) to figure the state-of-charge.
If the battery is damaged or worn out, (or the unit loses track of what
has happened lately,) the remaining capacity displayed is incorrect.
The high-tech battery testers like
<http://www.batterymart.com/battery.mv?p=ACC-SB-300> often use the
impedance of the battery to judge its health. If you measure voltage,
current, and temperature, and play them against each other, you can
estimate the state-of-charge and the health of the battery. This is more
what you want for an aircraft instrument. The key is measuring impedance
(along with an estimate of OCV) and comparing it to what had been
measured before under similar conditions.
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>
>>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> HERE'S THE POT HOLE - THE 30 MINUTE DISCHARGE CURVE
>>> OF 26.4 AMPS SAYS THE CAPACITY IS 26.4A X 0.5 HOURS
>>> OR 13.2 A.H., NOT 26 A.H.
>>>
>>> I SHOULD HAVE CAUGHT THAT . . . A 33 TO 26 REDUCTION
>>> IN APPARENT CAPACITY FOR A 15X LARGER DISCHARGE
>>> RATE DIDN'T RAISE THE FLAGS. FOUND IT WHILE ARCHIVING
>>> THE POST.
>>>
>>>
>>Welcome to Peukert's exponent. If you know the capacity at two different
>>discharge rates you can interpolate or extrapolate the capacity off the
>>battery at other discharge rates.
>>
>>
>
> Yeah . . . sorta. I'm working on that question along with the
> notion that owning one of those super-charge-all smart battery
> chargers is a good thing to do to. I'll give you all a forecast
> on present findings:
>
> An $80 smart charger and $??$ capacity meter are not well suited
> to our ultimate design goals (1) know that the battery is mission
> capable every time we walk up to the airplane and (2) have tools
> requiring minimum expense and user time/attention to track that
> capability. None of the devices I cited above do a very good job
> of meeting those goals. An article on alternative hardware proposals
> is in the works.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> < What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
> < the authority which determines whether there can be >
> < debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
> < scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
> < with experiment. >
> < --Lawrence M. Krauss >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Manual |
| Subject: | Re: SD8 Alternator Install - Z-12 vs. Manual |
>
>
>I thought the point in having the warning light for the aux alternator is
>tell you it is overloaded and
>equipment needs to be turned off??
That's a special feature that is built into B&C's regulators for the
SD-20 only when used as aux alternators. These regulators are fitted with
a current sensor. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11E.pdf
. . . latest revision to Z-12 where the SD-20 is controlled by
an SB-1 regulator.
This is an excellent example of how you need to UNDERSTAND exactly
what is meant by "warning light" and exactly what functions come
with it.
I'm doing an article on the MC33092A voltage regulator chip mentioned
by Jon earlier this week. A careful analysis of the regulator's
functionality
yields some interesting things about how the warning light works, what
it means, and whether or not the chip is suited for use in our airplanes
to meed certain design goals.
A wire coming out of a black box to drive a "warning light" tells
you nothing about the functionality of the light. This must be gleaned
from more detailed data as to how the lamp driver works . . . as will
be illustrated for the MC33092.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey % of charge |
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> > An $80 smart charger and $??$ capacity meter are not well suited
> > to our ultimate design goals (1) know that the battery is mission
> > capable every time we walk up to the airplane and (2) have tools
> > requiring minimum expense and user time/attention to track that
> > capability. None of the devices I cited above do a very good job
> > of meeting those goals. An article on alternative hardware proposals
> > is in the works.
>
>Having a smart energy monitor is necessary in a system where you will
>have irregular charge/discharge cycles and want to know how much is left
>in the battery.
Agreed . . . but how does this happen on an airplane and how
often might one expect to encounter it? . . . and are there
less complicated and more positive ways to achieve the desired
mission/maintenance conditions?
>If you always recharge the battery to full every time,
>you can have a much simpler energy monitor that isn't quite so smart.
Yup.
>The biggest issue as I see it is that you need to make sure you don't
>overcharge the battery in summer but that you do actually charge the
>battery in winter. That implies temperature compensation.
Agreed . . . and it's not clear that we have really practical
ways to achieve that. The LR-3 from B&C offers a battery temp
sensor option. But it's not clear to me that this option will
produce really meaningful differences in battery performance for
most of our fellow airplane drivers.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Baclup Battery monitor |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Interesting,
The battery manufacturer actually dictated the charging voltage as being
lower for the smaller battery. Both are SLA's.
The other piece I missed about my battery maintenance is that they are
connected to a smart charger when left in the hangar, so at least I have
a good charge when I start out.
Based on the above would you recommend raising the charging voltage by
using a lower loss diode?...I could change for a switch but that gives
me something else I have to remember.
Cheers
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
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 9:02 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Baclup Battery monitor
-->
(Corvallis)"
>
>
>Simplest way is to take a second battery and charge it through a diode
>from the main bettery. That way if the main battry has a major short
>somewhere it will not drag down the second batery with it.
>
>The problem with diodes is they all have a forward volt drop, standard
>diodes are about 1 volt drop. So if your system charges at say 14.2
>volts, your second battery will only see 13.2V.
Which is a major issue for recharging the standby battery
to 100% of capacity.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson(at)highrf.com> |
| Subject: | SD-20 Alt performance chart? |
Cuz the ignorance, but what ALT rpm would I expect to see on a continental
io-550 vacuum pad, when the engine is turning 2500 RPM?
Alan
-----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
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
-->
>
>
>Bob, did you ever put together one of these for the SD-20? B&C specify
>20A output at 3500rpm, so I would assume that you could use the same
"ratios"
>and determine that on a continental for example, that is a 1.15:1, that
>you'd have full output at 2900ish rpm?
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Alternator_Data/SD8-Performa
>nce.p
>df
The SD-20 is an L-40 with different shoes. It's limited in output
only because of the reduced speed on the vacuum pump pad. It's
performance is described on B&C's website at:
http://bandc.biz/SD20REVC.pdf
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: An Architecture Question - Z13 |
>
>
>All,
>
>
>I have been reading the AeroElectric posts for several weeks now and find
>the forum extremely useful as I begin designing the electrical system for my
>RV-7A (that and re-reading the AeroElectric Connection several times). I am
>planning an all electric airplane based on the Grand Rapids EFIS/EIS system,
>Garmin 430, E-Mag / P-Mag combo and all the other little gizmos I can fit
>(afford). At this point, I'm basing my architecture on the Z-13 with a 60
>Amp alternator and SD-20 auxiliary alternator.
Why so much snort? 'lectric toe heaters? Hot prop? Air conditioning?
Where does Z-13/8 fall short of your requirements for operational power?
>
>
>So my first question is this. do I need an e-bus? The only reason I can
>figure is that without the e-bus, the master battery contactor becomes a
>single point of failure. If true, could I simply wire two battery
>contactors in parallel and run them via a 2-10 switch? To me the advantage
>of this approach is that in case of an alternator failure, I can simply
>switch to the auxiliary alternator and systematically reduce my loads until
>the alternator is picking up the full load without worrying what is attached
>to each bus.
It would be presumptuous of us to tell you what you 'need'.
After a review of chapter 17, what are your power requirements
to continue flight sweat-free in spite of any single failure?
One should never "worry" about any aspect of operating your
electrical system. This isn't a jazz combo where one should
be prepared to improvise an impressive new rift at a moment's
notice.
EVERYTHING you might expect to encounter is 100% predictable
which includes loads, numbers and sizes of available energy
sources and combinations of sources and loads really useful
for the various phases of flight.
>My second question is would it make sense to wire both alternators to a DP3T
>switch? My thought being that this approach ensures only one alternator may
>be operating at a time and thus would prevent them from inadvertently
>fighting one another.
>
>Any input is gratefully appreciated.
Keep in mind that the Z-figures have been crafted over 15 years
of sifting the options. The features shown all have reasons
for their incorporation. I'll respectfully suggest that
you do a load analysis first. How much snort is necessary
for normal en-route operations, how much is necessary for
alternator-out operations and for how long. Answers to these
questions drive sizing of alternator(s) and battery(ies).
Then pick a Z-figure that seems closest to your NEEDS and
then tell us how that figure falls short of some perceived
NEED. I'm not suggesting for a moment that the z-figures are
"golden" . . . but at the same time, if any figure is deficient
in some feature that makes sense, I'd be pleased to revise the
the drawing or create a new one. That's how new figures find their
way into the book.
You are presently at the stage where it's important to know
the difference between what's needed and what's simply cool
(wanted). We wouldn't presume to tell you that what you want
shouldn't be considered either . . . but it's important that
you have those two buckets understood. A watchword of system
reliability is simplicity. Keep parts count down, avoid single
points of failure, keep operational options down (ZERO probability
of in-flight worries).
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Rotax Battery/Regulator Questions |
| From: | "Bill Denton" <bdenton(at)bdenton.com> |
I am referencing the Rotax wiring diagrams at the following link:
http://www.rotax-aircraft-engines.com/pdf/dokus/d00287.pdf
The diagrams are located on Adobe Acrobat page 53 of 68, which is Rotax page number
18-5.
There are three diagrams on the page, I am referring to the bottom two, labeled
"wiring diagram in conjuction with a battery" which I will call "No Starter",
and "wiring diagram for electric starter", which I will call "Starter".
On the No Starter diagram, it calls for a 12V 9Ah minimum battery, while on the
Starter diagram, it calls for a 12V 16Ah minimum battery. I am assuming that
the additional capacity of the battery on the Starter diagram is specified in
order to provide adequate starting power.
My question has to do with the No Starter diagram. Why is the "9Ah minimum" specified,
and what would be the result of using a lower capacity battery?
In one of the (many!) projects I am considering, I would be using a Rotax 477 without
an electric starter. However, I would have Nav/Strobe/Landing lights, a
couple of small electronic gauges, a handheld NAV/COM, a handheld GPS, and a
panel mount transponder, all connected to ship's power.
My reasons for considering the use of a battery would be to provide pre-start power
for the radio and GPS and to provide power in an engine-out situation. I'm
also thinking that it would keep the available power up during low RPM operations,
and possibly "smooth" the power a bit.
Is my reasoning okay on this?
Would I actually need a 9Ah battery for these purposes, or would a smaller unit
suffice?
If a battery smaller than 9Ah is acceptable from a load standpoint, would a smaller
battery create a problem with the regulator/rectifier?
Now a question specific to the No Starter diagram:
Would it be acceptable to install a toggle-switch circuit breaker in place of the
16A fuse in the black wire which runs between the regulator and the battery?
Would it be desirable to have a means of isolating the regulator in this way?
What size circuit breaker should be used?
Thanks in advance for anyone's help, and if my questions are less than clear or
less than properly worded, please feel free to read between the lines!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=14740#14740
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Todd Richmond" <trichmond(at)obermeyer.com> |
| Subject: | An Architecture Question - Z13 |
All good points, which lead to two operational questions assuming the
Z-13/8. First, I would assume that normal operations would include closing
the alternate feed switch to the e-bus, true? And second, is there a risk
of damage should the SD-8 inadvertently become activated while the primary
alternator is running?
Hopefully these aren't ignorant questions. Thanks.
Todd R. Richmond
trichmond(at)obermeyer.com
-----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
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 10:52 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: An Architecture Question - Z13
>
>
>All,
>
>
>I have been reading the AeroElectric posts for several weeks now and find
>the forum extremely useful as I begin designing the electrical system for
my
>RV-7A (that and re-reading the AeroElectric Connection several times). I
am
>planning an all electric airplane based on the Grand Rapids EFIS/EIS
system,
>Garmin 430, E-Mag / P-Mag combo and all the other little gizmos I can fit
>(afford). At this point, I'm basing my architecture on the Z-13 with a 60
>Amp alternator and SD-20 auxiliary alternator.
Why so much snort? 'lectric toe heaters? Hot prop? Air conditioning?
Where does Z-13/8 fall short of your requirements for operational power?
>
>
>So my first question is this. do I need an e-bus? The only reason I can
>figure is that without the e-bus, the master battery contactor becomes a
>single point of failure. If true, could I simply wire two battery
>contactors in parallel and run them via a 2-10 switch? To me the advantage
>of this approach is that in case of an alternator failure, I can simply
>switch to the auxiliary alternator and systematically reduce my loads until
>the alternator is picking up the full load without worrying what is
attached
>to each bus.
It would be presumptuous of us to tell you what you 'need'.
After a review of chapter 17, what are your power requirements
to continue flight sweat-free in spite of any single failure?
One should never "worry" about any aspect of operating your
electrical system. This isn't a jazz combo where one should
be prepared to improvise an impressive new rift at a moment's
notice.
EVERYTHING you might expect to encounter is 100% predictable
which includes loads, numbers and sizes of available energy
sources and combinations of sources and loads really useful
for the various phases of flight.
>My second question is would it make sense to wire both alternators to a
DP3T
>switch? My thought being that this approach ensures only one alternator
may
>be operating at a time and thus would prevent them from inadvertently
>fighting one another.
>
>Any input is gratefully appreciated.
Keep in mind that the Z-figures have been crafted over 15 years
of sifting the options. The features shown all have reasons
for their incorporation. I'll respectfully suggest that
you do a load analysis first. How much snort is necessary
for normal en-route operations, how much is necessary for
alternator-out operations and for how long. Answers to these
questions drive sizing of alternator(s) and battery(ies).
Then pick a Z-figure that seems closest to your NEEDS and
then tell us how that figure falls short of some perceived
NEED. I'm not suggesting for a moment that the z-figures are
"golden" . . . but at the same time, if any figure is deficient
in some feature that makes sense, I'd be pleased to revise the
the drawing or create a new one. That's how new figures find their
way into the book.
You are presently at the stage where it's important to know
the difference between what's needed and what's simply cool
(wanted). We wouldn't presume to tell you that what you want
shouldn't be considered either . . . but it's important that
you have those two buckets understood. A watchword of system
reliability is simplicity. Keep parts count down, avoid single
points of failure, keep operational options down (ZERO probability
of in-flight worries).
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Mickey |
and Bob N.)
Mickey wants to turn his car off at 100 mph and
AND
Bob N. wants proof.
Fair enough.
Also I'll take any failed VOLTAGE regulator for professional evaluation.
Mickey wrote:
"What happens if you are driving down the highway at 100 mph,
everything working fine, and you turn the key off?"
Dear Mickey:
I am so laughing out loud. I hope you are trying to be funny. To
answer your question you would DIE when the steering locks and
you fly off the road.
Do you often turn your car's ignition OFF at 100 mph?
I'll repeat the intended purpose of the IGN lead is a small signal
current/voltage to tell the alternator to come alive or go to sleep.
IT IS NOT designed to "CONTROL" high amp loads of the
alternator under load. It is also does not control the field directly.
To answer your question, if you turn the ignition off at 100 MPH,
it's no different than at zero MPH.
In a car the first position, normal driving is ignition. The next
position is accessory, than off.
Now in your scenario if you kill the ignition the engine will shut
down even at 100 mph with an automatic. With a manual and the
clutch out the engine will turn a little?
Now lets say you turn the ignition switch OFF/locked steering!
Now let's turn the ignition off, alternator off and load at 100 MPH?
Only the head lights and brake lights work. The alternator is still
connected to battery and the engine will lets assume keep turning
(manual transmission going down a steep hill). Now lets say you
turn the IGN on again to run? Could you do some ALT damage?
NOW TELL ME IF THIS IS realistic? Ha ha ha ha ha
Now when you look at the key function on a car, I think most bring
the alternator on first than the load (master realy). I could be wrong.
Reagardless your senerio is not going to happen in the real worlds.
Mickey I think you need to test this and get back to us. : - )
Mickey your are my idol, smart and have a beautiful airplane
project (you do nice work), but you need to get out of the shop
and get fresh air. : -) This is not how they are designed to work.
To clarify, I think most of the damage of IGN switching under
load is not turning it OFF, but happens when you turn it BACK
ON under load. Now I know many ND alternator will shut down
with the IGN lead and come back ON under load with IGN lead.
I suspect Van's alternator in question may already be damaged.
The first sign of damage, after controlling the alternator under
load successfully with the IGN lead, both OFF and ON, is it stops
responding to the IGN. Why? Not sure, send me the I-VR and I'll
have it tested and failure mode tested.
There may be some ND alternators that will be happy to switch
the IGN lead all day under load, but it seems that they protest after
a while. Sorry Bob N., no proof just seen it 3-4 times, there is a
pattern. Repeatable? Looks that way. My proof is how they are
wired in the application it was designed for. Nuff said.
Look at how cars and industrial applications use these alternators,
designed so you CAN'T turn it OFF or ON under load normally,
except for the wild 100 mph scenario Mickey (get help) came up
with above. Even than I don't think it makes a difference.
Bob N. wrote:
"Can you point us to any published literature on this? Please
understand that I'm not attacking your assertions with any kind of
"PROVE IT" attitude."
Bob, I know you dislike internal regulation but everything Jon said
is true & typical of an I-VR. They DO have *soft start, they do have
RPM drop out and they do have temperature compensation. I am
no expert, but I talk to experts. The temperature compensation
function I know monitors high temp protection, but I do not know
about a cold weather temp control function. It should be noted
that EXTERNAL voltage regulators have no idea of alternators internal
temps and do not protect the alternator from high temps like I-VR's
do. (one for the internal voltage regulators!)
*(soft start, ramps-up slow, also combined with time delay after
target RPM is reached.)
Bob, I know you will never believe me, no matter what evidence I
show, so I won't try. I have seen you dismiss too many people and
too set in your opinions to play that game, so Bob I suggest you
contact TRANSPO engineering, world wide producers of almost
every voltage regulator ever made. They will clue you into the
intelligent and logic functions of I-VR's. They really are smart
devices, not dumb VR's. They have all the features mentioned.
http://www.transpo-usa.com/
For the record I do not think the cold temp is the reason for this
problem, but I could be wrong. I think the I-VR may have been
damaged already from the crow-bar or switching the IGN lead
ON/OFF under load. Also for the record the IGN can and do
control the alternator under load on many ND models, but NOT
designed for this routinely and eventually damage results.
As far as control of I-VR alternators, it would be wonderful to use
and trust the IGN wire. We could put a crow-bar on the CB to the
IGN lead. However you can't depend on it (apparently from
historical & empirical data). That's why a pullable CB on the B-
lead, to positively isolate the alternator, independent of anything is
suggested. Another way to achieve the same isolation is the crow
bar and over voltage relay on the B-lead. That works also but its
heavy, costly, complicated and potentially can cause nuisance
trips. In defense of the crow-bar it is automatic. The pullable CB
needs pilot action. The choice is the builders. As Bob N. says if
you can't take the small chance of an OV, than use an External
Regulator and OV module of some kind. if for no other reason
it is simple. However there is no guarantee that will work 100%
There's no 100% system.
Cheers George
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: SD-20 Alt performance chart? |
In a message dated 2/24/2006 11:37:58 A.M. Central Standard Time,
aadamson(at)highrf.com writes:
Cuz the ignorance, but what ALT rpm would I expect to see on a continental
io-550 vacuum pad, when the engine is turning 2500 RPM?
Alan
7500
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey % of charge |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>> Having a smart energy monitor is necessary in a system where you will
>> have irregular charge/discharge cycles and want to know how much is left
>> in the battery.
>
>
> Agreed . . . but how does this happen on an airplane and how
> often might one expect to encounter it? . . . and are there
> less complicated and more positive ways to achieve the desired
> mission/maintenance conditions?
Oh, I agree that you don't need a complex energy monitor nor do you need
a fancy charger. OTOH, I have had experience with batteries failing due
to overcharge in hot weather and failing to charge properly in cold weather.
>> If you always recharge the battery to full every time,
>> you can have a much simpler energy monitor that isn't quite so smart.
>
> Yup.
>
>
>> The biggest issue as I see it is that you need to make sure you don't
>> overcharge the battery in summer but that you do actually charge the
>> battery in winter. That implies temperature compensation.
>
> Agreed . . . and it's not clear that we have really practical
> ways to achieve that. The LR-3 from B&C offers a battery temp
> sensor option. But it's not clear to me that this option will
> produce really meaningful differences in battery performance for
> most of our fellow airplane drivers.
I believe that this is one of the key reasons why current crop of
"sealed" AGM aircraft batteries have such a poor service record. Flooded
cell batteries shrug off overcharge by just boiling off excess water
which gets topped off by the owner or mechanic. AGMs build up pressure
in the case and valves open and relieve the pressure, letting the water
go to the atmosphere. The AGM battery, having no excess
electrolyte/water, quickly quits working. I have never had an AGM
battery (Concorde especially) survive longer than two years in a
standard aircraft electrical system.
Brian Lloyd
brian-yak(at)lloyd.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Baclup Battery monitor |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Is the Facet pump used continuously? Or only for takeoff, landing, or in
the event of a main (engine driven) pump failure? If only intermittent
duty, leave it out of the backup battery power budget. The chances of an
alternator failure, and an engine driven pump failure on the same flight
are exceedingly low...
Matt-
> (Corvallis)"
>
> I measured the Facet and it was less than an amp...Can't remember what
> the EI draws but I did measure it at the time.
> The Zodiac is strictly a VFR airplane and most failure modes would leave
> some juice left in the main battery.
>
> So I think I assumed about 20 minutes of flight on Batt #2.
>
> If I were re-doing it today I think the more modern diode (with lower
> volt drop) would mean I could use a bigger battery.
>
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave
> Morris "BigD"
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 8:44 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Baclup Battery monitor
>
> -->
>
> Facet pumps draw about 1.5A, don't they? And your EI draws how much?
> 3AH seems awfully small to me. I'm guessing the Duration vs Current
> curve for that battery gives you 3A for 30 minutes. Is that enough?
>
> Dave Morris
> www.N75UP.com
>
> At 10:22 AM 2/24/2006, you wrote:
>>So my first battery is a 18AH and my backup is a 3AH, and is used to
>> run one EI and a Facet fuel pump, nothing else.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson(at)highrf.com> |
| Subject: | SD-20 Alt performance chart? |
Bob, does that make sense. 7500 would give almost 40amps out of the SD-20,
is a continental really 3:1 on the vacuum pad? Engine rpm 2500, vacuum pad
7500?
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
In a message dated 2/24/2006 11:37:58 A.M. Central Standard Time,
aadamson(at)highrf.com writes:
Cuz the ignorance, but what ALT rpm would I expect to see on a continental
io-550 vacuum pad, when the engine is turning 2500 RPM?
Alan
7500
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Baclup Battery monitor |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
I have two electric pumps One in each wing root. No mechanical fuel
pump.
The FI RV is being set up the same way.
To switch tanks I simply switch pumps.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Prather
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 1:03 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Baclup Battery monitor
-->
Is the Facet pump used continuously? Or only for takeoff, landing, or
in the event of a main (engine driven) pump failure? If only
intermittent duty, leave it out of the backup battery power budget. The
chances of an alternator failure, and an engine driven pump failure on
the same flight are exceedingly low...
Matt-
> (Corvallis)"
>
> I measured the Facet and it was less than an amp...Can't remember what
> the EI draws but I did measure it at the time.
> The Zodiac is strictly a VFR airplane and most failure modes would
> leave some juice left in the main battery.
>
> So I think I assumed about 20 minutes of flight on Batt #2.
>
> If I were re-doing it today I think the more modern diode (with lower
> volt drop) would mean I could use a bigger battery.
>
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Dave Morris "BigD"
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 8:44 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Baclup Battery monitor
>
> -->
>
> Facet pumps draw about 1.5A, don't they? And your EI draws how much?
> 3AH seems awfully small to me. I'm guessing the Duration vs Current
> curve for that battery gives you 3A for 30 minutes. Is that enough?
>
> Dave Morris
> www.N75UP.com
>
> At 10:22 AM 2/24/2006, you wrote:
>>So my first battery is a 18AH and my backup is a 3AH, and is used to
>>run one EI and a Facet fuel pump, nothing else.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | SD-20 Alt performance chart? |
| From: | "George Braly" <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
Six cylinder vacuum pads that are on the same drive shaft as the
magnetos turn at 1.5 x crank RPM.
George
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan
K. Adamson
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 11:31 AM
Subject: Spam> RE: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
Cuz the ignorance, but what ALT rpm would I expect to see on a
continental
io-550 vacuum pad, when the engine is turning 2500 RPM?
Alan
-----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
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
-->
>
>
>Bob, did you ever put together one of these for the SD-20? B&C specify
>20A output at 3500rpm, so I would assume that you could use the same
"ratios"
>and determine that on a continental for example, that is a 1.15:1, that
>you'd have full output at 2900ish rpm?
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Alternator_Data/SD8-Performa
>nce.p
>df
The SD-20 is an L-40 with different shoes. It's limited in output
only because of the reduced speed on the vacuum pump pad. It's
performance is described on B&C's website at:
http://bandc.biz/SD20REVC.pdf
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Dube <william.p.dube(at)noaa.gov> |
| Subject: | AGM longevity (was: Odyssey % of charge) |
There are four main reasons why AGMs wear out.
1) Loss of electrolyte
2) Grid corrosion
3) Sulfation
4) Paste degradation
If you overcharge an AGM excessively, it will lose electrolyte and
dry out. This is NOT why they wear out in airplanes and cars (typically.)
Typically, AGMs go bad because they are not properly charged. If you
don't over charge them a little bit on a regular basis, the negative
plate gets further and further behind the positive plate. The negative
plate then sulfates and you lose capacity and cranking power. (In the
short term, you lose capacity simply because the negative plate is not
fully charged.)
Why you don't need to add water to an AGM is that the oxygen and
hydrogen gas recombine in the separator to form water. This
recombination process is not 100% efficient, and it causes the negative
plate to take slightly less charge than the positive plate when you
re-charge the battery. Each cycle gets the negative plate a bit more behind.
Occasionally, you need to purposely overcharge the battery to let the
negative plate catch up with the positive plate. A couple times per
year, you bring the battery up to 14.8 volts and let the current taper
off to less than an amp. You then push in a constant current of about 4%
of the amp-hr rating of the battery for about an hour. This cleans off
the negative plate.
High-end voltage regulators do something like this (like on boats
and motor homes). Every time you start up the engine, it charges up the
battery to normal voltage, then it gives the battery a slight overcharge
for a few minutes. Makes the big expensive AGM batteries last much longer.
>>>> What causes the other types of failures, just in case you wanted
to know. <<<
Excessive overcharging will cause the loss of electrolyte. Severe
discharge, causing reversal of a cell or two, will also cause
electrolyte loss.
Grid corrosion occurs if you leave the battery on float for a long
time. The oxygen gas formed eats at the grids that support the paste.
Sulfation is caused by leaving the battery discharged for extended
periods of time. Not fully charging the battery and leaving that way
will also cause sulfation.
Paste degradation is caused by repeated severe and/or deep
discharges. Cranking the battery flat over and over is a good way to
cause paste degradation.
Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>>>Having a smart energy monitor is necessary in a system where you will
>>>have irregular charge/discharge cycles and want to know how much is left
>>>in the battery.
>>>
>>>
>> Agreed . . . but how does this happen on an airplane and how
>> often might one expect to encounter it? . . . and are there
>> less complicated and more positive ways to achieve the desired
>> mission/maintenance conditions?
>>
>>
>
>Oh, I agree that you don't need a complex energy monitor nor do you need
>a fancy charger. OTOH, I have had experience with batteries failing due
>to overcharge in hot weather and failing to charge properly in cold weather.
>
>
>
>>>If you always recharge the battery to full every time,
>>>you can have a much simpler energy monitor that isn't quite so smart.
>>>
>>>
>> Yup.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>The biggest issue as I see it is that you need to make sure you don't
>>>overcharge the battery in summer but that you do actually charge the
>>>battery in winter. That implies temperature compensation.
>>>
>>>
>> Agreed . . . and it's not clear that we have really practical
>> ways to achieve that. The LR-3 from B&C offers a battery temp
>> sensor option. But it's not clear to me that this option will
>> produce really meaningful differences in battery performance for
>> most of our fellow airplane drivers.
>>
>>
>
>I believe that this is one of the key reasons why current crop of
>"sealed" AGM aircraft batteries have such a poor service record. Flooded
>cell batteries shrug off overcharge by just boiling off excess water
>which gets topped off by the owner or mechanic. AGMs build up pressure
>in the case and valves open and relieve the pressure, letting the water
>go to the atmosphere. The AGM battery, having no excess
>electrolyte/water, quickly quits working. I have never had an AGM
>battery (Concorde especially) survive longer than two years in a
>standard aircraft electrical system.
>
>Brian Lloyd
>brian-yak(at)lloyd.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson(at)highrf.com> |
| Subject: | SD-20 Alt performance chart? |
Thanks George, so for 2500 RPM indicated engine speed, the vacuum pump pad
would be turning at 5000 rpm correct? That makes a little more sense.
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of George
Braly
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 8:13 PM
Subject: RE: Spam> RE: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
-->
Six cylinder vacuum pads that are on the same drive shaft as the magnetos
turn at 1.5 x crank RPM.
George
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan K.
Adamson
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 11:31 AM
Subject: Spam> RE: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
Cuz the ignorance, but what ALT rpm would I expect to see on a continental
io-550 vacuum pad, when the engine is turning 2500 RPM?
Alan
-----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
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
-->
>
>
>Bob, did you ever put together one of these for the SD-20? B&C specify
>20A output at 3500rpm, so I would assume that you could use the same
"ratios"
>and determine that on a continental for example, that is a 1.15:1, that
>you'd have full output at 2900ish rpm?
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Alternator_Data/SD8-Performa
>nce.p
>df
The SD-20 is an L-40 with different shoes. It's limited in output
only because of the reduced speed on the vacuum pump pad. It's
performance is described on B&C's website at:
http://bandc.biz/SD20REVC.pdf
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | SD-20 Alt performance chart? |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Err... Math in public isn't a good idea.. 2500 * 1.5 = 3750..
Matt-
>
>
> Thanks George, so for 2500 RPM indicated engine speed, the vacuum pump
> pad would be turning at 5000 rpm correct? That makes a little more
> sense.
>
> Alan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> George Braly
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 8:13 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Spam> RE: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
>
> -->
>
>
> Six cylinder vacuum pads that are on the same drive shaft as the
> magnetos turn at 1.5 x crank RPM.
>
> George
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan
> K. Adamson
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 11:31 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Spam> RE: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
>
>
>
> Cuz the ignorance, but what ALT rpm would I expect to see on a
> continental io-550 vacuum pad, when the engine is turning 2500 RPM?
>
> Alan
>
> -----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
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:05 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>Bob, did you ever put together one of these for the SD-20? B&C specify
>
>>20A output at 3500rpm, so I would assume that you could use the same
> "ratios"
>>and determine that on a continental for example, that is a 1.15:1, that
>
>>you'd have full output at 2900ish rpm?
>>
>>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Alternator_Data/SD8-Performa
>> nce.p
>>df
>
> The SD-20 is an L-40 with different shoes. It's limited in output
> only because of the reduced speed on the vacuum pump pad. It's
> performance is described on B&C's website at:
>
> http://bandc.biz/SD20REVC.pdf
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob McCallum" <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: SD-20 Alt performance chart? |
Alan
1.5 x 2500 = 3750 NOT 5000
Bob McC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson(at)highrf.com>
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 8:47 PM
Subject: RE: Spam> RE: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
>
> Thanks George, so for 2500 RPM indicated engine speed, the vacuum pump pad
> would be turning at 5000 rpm correct? That makes a little more sense.
>
> Alan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of George
> Braly
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 8:13 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Spam> RE: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
>
> -->
>
>
> Six cylinder vacuum pads that are on the same drive shaft as the magnetos
> turn at 1.5 x crank RPM.
>
> George
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan K.
> Adamson
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 11:31 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Spam> RE: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
>
>
>
> Cuz the ignorance, but what ALT rpm would I expect to see on a continental
> io-550 vacuum pad, when the engine is turning 2500 RPM?
>
> Alan
>
> -----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
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:05 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
>
> -->
>
>
> >
> >
> >Bob, did you ever put together one of these for the SD-20? B&C specify
>
> >20A output at 3500rpm, so I would assume that you could use the same
> "ratios"
> >and determine that on a continental for example, that is a 1.15:1, that
>
> >you'd have full output at 2900ish rpm?
> >
> >http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Alternator_Data/SD8-Performa
> >nce.p
> >df
>
> The SD-20 is an L-40 with different shoes. It's limited in output
> only because of the reduced speed on the vacuum pump pad. It's
> performance is described on B&C's website at:
>
> http://bandc.biz/SD20REVC.pdf
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert G. Wright" <armywrights(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | An Architecture Question - Z13 |
A thought I keep having during these double alternator discussions is:
What's wrong with having two alternators online at the same time, with the
standby set to a volt less than the main? The standby would only then
support the load of the bus it's attached to if the main went offline (this
assumes that a "nonessential" bus goes away automatically when the main alt
fails).
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Todd
Richmond
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 9:09 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: An Architecture Question - Z13
All,
I have been reading the AeroElectric posts for several weeks now and find
the forum extremely useful as I begin designing the electrical system for my
RV-7A (that and re-reading the AeroElectric Connection several times). I am
planning an all electric airplane based on the Grand Rapids EFIS/EIS system,
Garmin 430, E-Mag / P-Mag combo and all the other little gizmos I can fit
(afford). At this point, I'm basing my architecture on the Z-13 with a 60
Amp alternator and SD-20 auxiliary alternator.
So my first question is this. do I need an e-bus? The only reason I can
figure is that without the e-bus, the master battery contactor becomes a
single point of failure. If true, could I simply wire two battery
contactors in parallel and run them via a 2-10 switch? To me the advantage
of this approach is that in case of an alternator failure, I can simply
switch to the auxiliary alternator and systematically reduce my loads until
the alternator is picking up the full load without worrying what is attached
to each bus.
My second question is would it make sense to wire both alternators to a DP3T
switch? My thought being that this approach ensures only one alternator may
be operating at a time and thus would prevent them from inadvertently
fighting one another.
Any input is gratefully appreciated.
Todd R. Richmond
RV-7A Wings
trichmond(at)obermeyer.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGM longevity (was: Odyssey % of charge) |
Bill Dube wrote:
> Occasionally, you need to purposely overcharge the battery to let the
> negative plate catch up with the positive plate. A couple times per
> year, you bring the battery up to 14.8 volts and let the current taper
> off to less than an amp. You then push in a constant current of about 4%
> of the amp-hr rating of the battery for about an hour. This cleans off
> the negative plate.
Right. This is called an equalization charge.
> High-end voltage regulators do something like this (like on boats
> and motor homes). Every time you start up the engine, it charges up the
> battery to normal voltage, then it gives the battery a slight overcharge
> for a few minutes. Makes the big expensive AGM batteries last much longer.
Hmm. The big, expensive AGM and gel-cell batteries I used on my boat
came with warnings from the manufacturer to never do an equalization
charge, that the normal charging regimen would ensure proper charging.
So when it comes to batteries, I read and follow the manufacturer's
recommendations.
Good information by the way.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson(at)highrf.com> |
| Subject: | SD-20 Alt performance chart? |
Now, guys... It's been a long day... Guess I can't even play the Markup vs.
Margin game on this one... :) OR, can you, perhaps I did the divide by .5
instead of times by 1.5...
Sorry, you are right
Alan - tail between legs and going back to sanding... I knew I should have
even questioned 5000 rpm, let alone 7500 :)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob
McCallum
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 9:54 PM
Subject: Re: Spam> RE: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
-->
Alan
1.5 x 2500 = 3750 NOT 5000
Bob McC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson(at)highrf.com>
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 8:47 PM
Subject: RE: Spam> RE: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
>
> Thanks George, so for 2500 RPM indicated engine speed, the vacuum pump pad
> would be turning at 5000 rpm correct? That makes a little more sense.
>
> Alan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of George
> Braly
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 8:13 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Spam> RE: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
>
> -->
>
>
> Six cylinder vacuum pads that are on the same drive shaft as the magnetos
> turn at 1.5 x crank RPM.
>
> George
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan K.
> Adamson
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 11:31 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Spam> RE: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
>
>
>
> Cuz the ignorance, but what ALT rpm would I expect to see on a continental
> io-550 vacuum pad, when the engine is turning 2500 RPM?
>
> Alan
>
> -----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
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:05 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
>
> -->
>
>
> >
> >
> >Bob, did you ever put together one of these for the SD-20? B&C specify
>
> >20A output at 3500rpm, so I would assume that you could use the same
> "ratios"
> >and determine that on a continental for example, that is a 1.15:1, that
>
> >you'd have full output at 2900ish rpm?
> >
> >http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Alternator_Data/SD8-Performa
> >nce.p
> >df
>
> The SD-20 is an L-40 with different shoes. It's limited in output
> only because of the reduced speed on the vacuum pump pad. It's
> performance is described on B&C's website at:
>
> http://bandc.biz/SD20REVC.pdf
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Transponder/EFIS Gray code |
Thanks for the help Brian, I think you mis-understood my question on the
Gray Code connection to the transponder. You are correct that the SL70 has
both Gray code and serial encoder inputs. But.....my EFIS D10 is an
original production model and does NOT have an encoder serial data OUTPUT
like the newer EFIS D10-A model. So I have to use the Gray code signals out
of the EFIS to drive the transponder. The EFIS has "A", "B" and "C" Gray
code signals (out) which correspond to the transponder Gray code inputs with
one exception. The Transponder has one additional Gray code input labeled
"D4" but the EFIS does NOT have a "D4" output (I assume this extra input
allows the Transponder to encode and transmit higher altitudes than those
with just A/B/C inputs). In any case, my question is what to do with this
"D4" input at the transponder end. Is it ok to leave it unconnected
(floating) or do I need to connect it to a positive voltage or...to ground?
Can't find any direction in the manual so I assume leaving it float will not
cause a problem but would really like to know for sure. Sorry for the
initial confusion.
Dean Psiropoulos
RV-6A N197DM
Autocad-only the Radio Stack remains
----------------original message-------------------------
>From: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com>
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Transponder/ RS-232
>I don't remember if the SL-70 accepts serial data in instead of gray code.
>I *think* it does but I am not sure. If it does not you will need a
serial->to-grey-code converter to get the data from the Dynon to the
SL-70....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: SD-20 Alt performance chart? |
Good Evening Alan,
I had my head up and locked when I responded. The regular alternator drive
on most 520 or 550 Continentals spins the alternator at three times crankshaft
speed. That is what I had in mind. The accessory drive that often runs the
vacuum pump will spin at one and a half times crankshaft speed on all six
cylinder Continentals.
Sorry, I goofed!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 2/24/2006 6:58:53 P.M. Central Standard Time,
aadamson(at)highrf.com writes:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson"
Bob, does that make sense. 7500 would give almost 40 amps out of the SD-20,
is a continental really 3:1 on the vacuum pad? Engine rpm 2500, vacuum pad
7500?
Alan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Sultzbach <endspeed(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | An Architecture Question - Z13 |
Todd,
In regards to the e-bus question, it is not just to
protect against a contactor failure. Let me
illustrate this with a real live incident that
happened to a roommate of mine. Picture being IFR in
solid clag when you smell smoke and see thick smoke
instantly start billowing from under the bottom of
your instrument panel. A quick flip to off with the
master switch makes the smoke start to lessen. Now,
you have no radios working though your radio stack is
probably o.k. Your electrical system is now caput.
Nada, zilch. Now remember you are in the clag. What
will you do? At any rate, with the e-bus, you turn
off the master and then energize the e-bus to maintain
whatever you have determined is required for safety of
flight in your flight regime. If it is IFR I would
have one navcom with an ils hopefully still available.
You get the gist and this really did happen. The guy
did get the rental aircraft down safely but he was a
real solid CFI II MEI and you name it he had it for a
rating. More importantly he was proficient. I prefer
the e-bus method to avoid this superior display of
airmanship.
Take care.
Bob Sultzbach
> I have been reading the AeroElectric posts for
> several weeks now and find
> the forum extremely useful as I begin designing the
> electrical system for my
> RV-7A (that and re-reading the AeroElectric
> Connection several times). I am
> planning an all electric airplane based on the Grand
> Rapids EFIS/EIS system,
> Garmin 430, E-Mag / P-Mag combo and all the other
> little gizmos I can fit
> (afford). At this point, I'm basing my architecture
> on the Z-13 with a 60
> Amp alternator and SD-20 auxiliary alternator.
>
>
>
> So my first question is this. do I need an e-bus?
> The only reason I can
> figure is that without the e-bus, the master battery
> contactor becomes a
> single point of failure. If true, could I simply
> wire two battery
> contactors in parallel and run them via a 2-10
> switch? To me the advantage
> of this approach is that in case of an alternator
> failure, I can simply
> switch to the auxiliary alternator and
> systematically reduce my loads until
> the alternator is picking up the full load without
> worrying what is attached
> to each bus.
>
>
>
> My second question is would it make sense to wire
> both alternators to a DP3T
> switch? My thought being that this approach ensures
> only one alternator may
> be operating at a time and thus would prevent them
> from inadvertently
> fighting one another.
>
>
>
> Any input is gratefully appreciated.
>
>
>
> Todd R. Richmond
>
> RV-7A Wings
>
>
> trichmond(at)obermeyer.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Malcolm Thomson" <mthomson(at)showmeproductions.com> |
| Subject: | Transponder/EFIS Gray code |
>From my experience with other EFIS and encoder systems, just leave
unconnected. Your assumption is correct and it is used only for higher
altitudes.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of DEAN
PSIROPOULOS
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 9:13 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Transponder/EFIS Gray code
-->
Thanks for the help Brian, I think you mis-understood my question on the
Gray Code connection to the transponder. You are correct that the SL70 has
both Gray code and serial encoder inputs. But.....my EFIS D10 is an
original production model and does NOT have an encoder serial data OUTPUT
like the newer EFIS D10-A model. So I have to use the Gray code signals out
of the EFIS to drive the transponder. The EFIS has "A", "B" and "C" Gray
code signals (out) which correspond to the transponder Gray code inputs with
one exception. The Transponder has one additional Gray code input labeled
"D4" but the EFIS does NOT have a "D4" output (I assume this extra input
allows the Transponder to encode and transmit higher altitudes than those
with just A/B/C inputs). In any case, my question is what to do with this
"D4" input at the transponder end. Is it ok to leave it unconnected
(floating) or do I need to connect it to a positive voltage or...to ground?
Can't find any direction in the manual so I assume leaving it float will not
cause a problem but would really like to know for sure. Sorry for the
initial confusion.
Dean Psiropoulos
RV-6A N197DM
Autocad-only the Radio Stack remains
----------------original message-------------------------
>From: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com>
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Transponder/ RS-232
>I don't remember if the SL-70 accepts serial data in instead of gray
>code. I *think* it does but I am not sure. If it does not you will need
>a
serial->to-grey-code converter to get the data from the Dynon to the
SL-70....
--
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson(at)highrf.com> |
| Subject: | SD-20 Alt performance chart? |
It's ok, I did too.... :)... I think we have it straight now tho...
Nite all,
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 11:31 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: SD-20 Alt performance chart?
Good Evening Alan,
I had my head up and locked when I responded. The regular alternator drive
on most 520 or 550 Continentals spins the alternator at three times
crankshaft speed. That is what I had in mind. The accessory drive that
often runs the vacuum pump will spin at one and a half times crankshaft
speed on all six cylinder Continentals.
Sorry, I goofed!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 2/24/2006 6:58:53 P.M. Central Standard Time,
aadamson(at)highrf.com writes:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson"
Bob, does that make sense. 7500 would give almost 40 amps out of the
SD-20, is a continental really 3:1 on the vacuum pad? Engine rpm 2500,
vacuum pad 7500?
Alan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sarg314 <sarg314(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | LED position lights + strobe |
Some months ago I saw a small outfit selling small LED position lights
which also accomodated a strobe light and would fit in the van's
recessed (enclosed) wingtips. I thought I saved a reference to it, but
can't find it. Does this ring a bell with any one?
--
Tom Sargent
engine
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce McGregor" <bruceflys(at)comcast.net> |
FWIW, I found this message on the GlaStar e-mail group:
Just thought that I would pass this along for everyone's edification. I
noticed that my strobes were not working the other day so I checked the
fuses and sure enough, the strobe fuse was blown. I replaced the fuse and it
popped as soon as I flipped the master switch on. I traced the wire from the
fuse panel to the toggle switch and there was no chafing or problems
visible. I disconnected the wire that goes to the strobe power supply from
the strobe switch and tried it again, POP! Now I'm looking right at the 18"
of wire that goes from the fuse panel to the strobe switch and it's
undamaged. The wire that goes to the power supply is disconnected and the
switch is in the OFF position yet there is a dead short! I removed the
switch and checked the continuity between the terminals and the body of the
switch and sure enough, the switch was shorted internally. I replaced the
switch with one of my spares and all was back to normal. I took the switch
apart and found that the moving contact rocker inside the switch was
touching the switch body. I'll include a photo of the switch guts for your
amusement, you can see the arcing on the switch cover. The switch is from
B&C and is a CARLING brand. I'll be sure that I carry a spare in my parts
bag.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AGM longevity (was: Odyssey % of charge) |
This is one I've never heard of before.
The manufacturer of my wee AGM specifies a float voltage which I've been
using. This implies that a pulse type battery maintainer might be better
or maybe that they should not be float charged continuously while in
storage?? These are small but somewhat pricey Dekka batteries on a Z-14
architecture so there is no plan to periodically replace them - just
flog flog them until noticeable starting performance suffers.
thanks
Ken
> Grid corrosion occurs if you leave the battery on float for a long
>time. The oxygen gas formed eats at the grids that support the paste.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Opening Switch Contacts |
2/25/2006
FYI:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4468957986746104671&q=500kv
OC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: LED position lights + strobe |
| From: | "N395V" <N395V(at)direcway.com> |
Is this the place?
--------
Milt
N395V
F1 Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=14906#14906
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LED position lights + strobe |
I just installed these, http://deemsrv10.com/decisions.html (scroll down
to LED & Strobe write-up). They are made by an RV7 builder named Jeff
Bordelon. The links are in the write-up
Deems
sarg314 wrote:
>
>Some months ago I saw a small outfit selling small LED position lights
>which also accomodated a strobe light and would fit in the van's
>recessed (enclosed) wingtips. I thought I saved a reference to it, but
>can't find it. Does this ring a bell with any one?
>--
>Tom Sargent
>engine
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Riley <richard(at)RILEY.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: Opening Switch Contacts |
At 06:35 AM 2/25/2006, you wrote:
>
>2/25/2006
>
>FYI:
>
>http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4468957986746104671&q=500kv
More information on that video - and lots of other videos and
pictures of big arcs and lightning bolts -
http://teslamania.delete.org/frames/longarc.htm#Longspark
Those guys are crazy.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Markey <markeypilot(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | What makes an aircraft IFR certified - AOPA Legal view |
Here's a question asked by an AOPA member who contacted our aviation services
staff through the AOPA Pilot Information Center. Test your knowledge.
Question: What makes an aircraft IFR certified?
Answer: An aircraft is considered IFR certified based
on its installed equipment. As long as there is no statement prohibiting IFR
flight on the type certificate data sheet or in the operating limitations of
the aircraft, IFR flight is permitted provided it has the required operable
equipment listed in 14 CFR 91.205(d), flight manual supplements, and all appropriate
inspections, maintenance requirements, and checks have been complied
with. The instrument cockpit check (ICC) is a good systematic check of all radios
and navigation equipment that ensures proper operation of equipment prior
to flight. If you plan on using an IFR-certified GPS for approaches, remember
to ensure the database is current. For additional information on these and
other inspections, see AOPA Online.
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | What makes an aircraft IFR certified - AOPA Legal view |
Good Morning All,
Reading the reference submitted it could be construed as saying that a
current data card must be in the set.
For some installations, that would be true.
However, many installations have an approved Airplane Flight Manual
Supplement which states that the pilot must assure that the data to be used is
current and that the data that is used must be taken from an onboard datacard.
If the pilot uses a another method to assure that the data is current, the
approach can be legally conducted. Obviously, the easiest way to determine
currency is to have a current data card, but, depending on just how the
individual FMS is written, it MAY be legal to conduct the approach with an out
of
date card.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 2/25/2006 10:41:07 A.M. Central Standard Time,
markeypilot(at)yahoo.com writes:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: John Markey
Here's a question asked by an AOPA member who contacted our aviation
services staff through the AOPA Pilot Information Center. Test your knowledge.
Question: What makes an aircraft IFR certified?
Answer: An aircraft is considered IFR certified based on its installed
equipment. As long as there is no statement prohibiting IFR flight on the type
certificate data sheet or in the operating limitations of the aircraft, IFR
flight is permitted provided it has the required operable equipment listed
in 14 CFR 91.205(d), flight manual supplements, and all appropriate
inspections, maintenance requirements, and checks have been complied with. The
instrument cockpit check (ICC) is a good systematic check of all radios and
navigation equipment that ensures proper operation of equipment prior to flight.
If you plan on using an IFR-certified GPS for approaches, remember to
ensure the database is current. For additional information on these and other
inspections, see AOPA Online.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Transponder/EFIS Gray code |
DEAN PSIROPOULOS wrote:
>
> Thanks for the help Brian, I think you mis-understood my question on the
> Gray Code connection to the transponder. You are correct that the SL70 has
> both Gray code and serial encoder inputs. But.....my EFIS D10 is an
> original production model and does NOT have an encoder serial data OUTPUT
> like the newer EFIS D10-A model.
Ah, you are correct. I was thinking that the D10 had serial but not grey
code output. It is all a matter of listening to the question. ;-)
> So I have to use the Gray code signals out
> of the EFIS to drive the transponder. The EFIS has "A", "B" and "C" Gray
> code signals (out) which correspond to the transponder Gray code inputs with
> one exception. The Transponder has one additional Gray code input labeled
> "D4" but the EFIS does NOT have a "D4" output (I assume this extra input
> allows the Transponder to encode and transmit higher altitudes than those
> with just A/B/C inputs).
Correct. It adds one more data bit in addition to the 9 bits you already
have. It allows altitudes above 25,000'.
> In any case, my question is what to do with this
> "D4" input at the transponder end. Is it ok to leave it unconnected
> (floating) or do I need to connect it to a positive voltage or...to ground?
The transponder already has the necessary pull-up resistor at its input
so that if you don't connect the D4 input, it will automatically default
to a zero.
> Can't find any direction in the manual so I assume leaving it float will not
> cause a problem but would really like to know for sure. Sorry for the
> initial confusion.
No problem.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGM longevity (was: Odyssey % of charge) |
Ken wrote:
>
> This is one I've never heard of before.
>
> The manufacturer of my wee AGM specifies a float voltage which I've been
> using. This implies that a pulse type battery maintainer might be better
> or maybe that they should not be float charged continuously while in
> storage?? These are small but somewhat pricey Dekka batteries on a Z-14
> architecture so there is no plan to periodically replace them - just
> flog flog them until noticeable starting performance suffers.
Follow Deka's instructions for maintaining the battery. My larger 245AH
8D Deka AGMs say don't give them an equalization charge. Flooded cell
batteries benefit from a periodic equalization charge.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Czygan <bczygan(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Electrical System Design for 2 Stroke Engines |
Bob and all,
I, and a lot of other UL aircraft owners are going to have to register and
N number our aircraft in the next year. If we want to use our aircraft to take
the practical test we will have to install certain instruments. In addition,
many of us will need ELTTs and transponders to operate them. Most of these aircraft
will require some sort of electrical system to support this equipment. Most
of these aircraft have Rotax or other 2 stroke engines. I want to design and
install the most reliable system I can. What basic design considerations can
you tell me to follow.
Bill Czygan
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator conversion |
Bill Bradburry wrote:
>>
>>Bob and others.
>>I have seen several instructions on how to convert MI and ND alternators
>>to either external regulation or to internal regulation such that the
>>field wire can be used to shut the alternator down. These instructions
>>seem simple enough that I feel that I could do it.
>
>Hi Bill
>
>Sure you can do this if you wish and there is nothing wrong with that.
>The subject comes up periodically and several folks have posted
>suggested methods for some specific alternators. Some look to be easier
>to mod than others. There are a couple of companies that offer such units.
>
>I was not particularly interested as it seemed somewhat
>counterproductive. You must do the mod and not cause a related problem
>by doing so which is probably not too difficult. However it wouldn't be
>the first time that a problem was caused just by opening a factory
>assembled device. You must purchase and install a separate voltage
>regulator which may not be as good as what is already in the alternator
>depending on which one you choose. The remote Regulator will not be able
>to monitor the alternator's temperature although I guess that is a
>pretty minor consideration. You must find a place to put that regulator
>and wire it reliably. Most important perhaps, you can no longer purchase
>a replacement off the shelf alternator and quickly install it.
>
>In addition I have little concern with using an OV contactor and a few
>transorbs on my IR alternator. I'm betting that eventually Bob will
>likely confirm that approach with some real testing and actual numbers.
>Risks are low either way I think.
Very perceptive sir. Repeatability of results has been a HUGE
factor in my thoughts about mounting a task to craft IR alternator
modification instructions. The folks who make alternators
have refined designs, materials and manufacturing techniques
over decades of experience. While the modifications necessary
for positive external control are tiny, we must craft a
disassembly and re-assembly technique that does not introduce
degrading artifacts produced by lack of knowledge or skill.
Crafting an elegant set of instructions and assuming that a
large majroity of neophyte builders will achieve success is
like tossing a recipe for one of Emeril's prized creations on
the counter and expecting your teenager to achieve exemplar results
first crack out of the flour bin.
My reluctance to embrace the IR alternator has never been
about quality and suitability to the original task (long lived
performance in automobiles). It's always been about how
to incorporate the product into established design goals with
a minimum of risk and expense Obviously, minimum risk occurs when
we install the device as-received into an environment that
will artfully ADAPT it to our design goals.
Some might wonder why we didn't arrive at this juncture several
years ago? What's new?
I cannot speak for others . . . but for myself, the quest for
elegant solutions is an iterative process. It's time consuming
effort that sifts through the simple-ideas looking for the minimum
parts count, minimum risk, minimum cost, maximum performance
solution (Ask Emeril how many times he crafted that dish, or
precursors to it, before he put the first plate in front of
a customer). It takes time and focus . . . I've contemplated
thousands of non-related questions concerning hundreds of
other tasks/goals in the interval between my first regulator
design and the present time.
My first task for aircraft voltage regulation was 25 years
ago and bounded by the goal of crafting an external regulator
compatible with an ER alternator already in place on an airplane
(A-36 Bonanza). A few years later, I reused lessons learned for
an OBAM aircraft alternator wherein B&C had already mastered
disassembly, modification, re-assembly skills for an automotive
adaptation to ER operation.
The technology to do what I see in my head today WAS available
in some form back then. But it was not the task. If anyone
believes B&C set out to master a risky modification to a perfectly good
alternator and then build a companion regulator just to make more
money on their value-added efforts doesn't understand the art
of crafting, manufacturing and marketing hardware.
Had Bill tasked me then to tame the wild IR alternator
for use under contemporary aircraft design goals, I probably
could and would have done it. It's a sure bet that B&C's stable
of products would be VERY different today. Did we make a mistake
then? I don't think so - B&C's line of products have done well.
Is it the wave of the future? Not unless you think we should be
bolting carburetors and cam-driven, diaphragm fuel pumps to our engines.
Today, I see better technology and have new ways to do things that
I've learned over the intervening 25 years. I now KNOW that the solution
is simple, reliable and costs much less than the well-crafted but dated
ideas of yesteryear.
This is not intended to be a critique of anyone's design or marketing
decisions. It's an illustration of cause and effect but with
the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. Had B&C launched into an effort
to integrate the IR alternator back then, no doubt much of the
jousting and agitated rhetoric we've endured would not have happened.
Had either A. Hitler -OR- C. Kettering died of SIDS . . . no doubt
the planet's present landscape would be different too.
Hindsight is a great tool especially when used to illuminate
successes/errors
and encourage the discovery and application of simple-ideas in new ways.
I would NOT want to be a fresh graduate today. Folks coming out of
schools have little if ANY historical knowledge of what's gone before
them and their fresh new jobs are agonizingly lacking in mentorship.
Folks who use the Internet as a learning tool have better access to
a broader spectrum of history and technologies than most of our
descendants
are going to receive from schools and shepherds over their budding
careers. Their successes are increasingly dependent on personal
quests and cultivation of widely scattered relationships.
The Internet is an increasingly powerful and necessary tool of
success for just about everybody. We cannot expect our close circle
of teachers and mentors to pick up the slack . . . they cannot teach
that which they do not know (See "The Sovereign Individual" by
Davidson/Reed-Moog).
As a side note. When the Internet is mentioned as a target of
terrorism, a vast majority of our fellow citizens on this planet
think about the loss of access to their down-loaded entertainment.
I shudder to think of returning to a modus-operandi for sharing
of data and cultivation of new ideas that was standard practice
25 years ago. Loss of the coax coming into the back of my house
would bring my career to a halt . . . the recovery mode arduous
to contemplate. Even if recovery were possible, it would be under
comparably miserable circumstances.
As James Burke illustrated in "Connections", stimulation for some
important leaps forward in science have been attributed to diligence of a
few monks who took ideas sent to them, translated into other languages
as necessary and forwarded to individuals in other countries
by the same donkey. What might the world look like today if
da Vinci, Watt, Kettering, Volta, and Coulomb were able to communicate
with their contemporaries as we do today? Conversations on this List
have encouraged the necessary focus on my part to consider the IR
integration problem again. For all its warts and high-blood pressure
discussions, the Internet has again demonstrated value. We live in
interesting and powerfully capable times folks. It's just sad and
maddening that so much $time$ and effort is expended by individuals
to gain advantage over others by equally powerful means that do not
add value for anyone.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch Failure |
>
>
>FWIW, I found this message on the GlaStar e-mail group:
>
>Just thought that I would pass this along for everyone's edification. I
>noticed that my strobes were not working the other day so I checked the
>fuses and sure enough, the strobe fuse was blown. I replaced the fuse and it
>popped as soon as I flipped the master switch on. I traced the wire from the
>fuse panel to the toggle switch and there was no chafing or problems
>visible. I disconnected the wire that goes to the strobe power supply from
>the strobe switch and tried it again, POP! Now I'm looking right at the 18"
>of wire that goes from the fuse panel to the strobe switch and it's
>undamaged. The wire that goes to the power supply is disconnected and the
>switch is in the OFF position yet there is a dead short! I removed the
>switch and checked the continuity between the terminals and the body of the
>switch and sure enough, the switch was shorted internally. I replaced the
>switch with one of my spares and all was back to normal. I took the switch
>apart and found that the moving contact rocker inside the switch was
>touching the switch body. I'll include a photo of the switch guts for your
>amusement, you can see the arcing on the switch cover. The switch is from
>B&C and is a CARLING brand. I'll be sure that I carry a spare in my parts
>bag.
Please if you can. Send me the switch, removed with care to avoid
disturbing it's condition. I'll reimburse you for any expense.
It's VERY seldom we get to do an autopsy on field failures. So
much of what's seen by technicians in the trenches is simply viewed
as a maintenance issue with no interest in root causes. This makes
our jobs as systems designers exceedingly more difficult. We cannot
avoid or fix a condition for which we have no knowledge.
Your cooperation in an effort to understand would be appreciated more
than you know.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Mickey |
and Bob N.)
>
>Mickey wants to turn his car off at 100 mph and
>
> AND
>
> Bob N. wants proof.
Not proof sir . . . UNDERSTANDING. I see those words on the 4-color
brochures and bang-for-the-buck bullets at the top of data
sheets . . . all of which ASSUME that your understanding
of their words is the same as their understanding of
their words.
>
> As far as control of I-VR alternators, it would be wonderful to use
> and trust the IGN wire. We could put a crow-bar on the CB to the
> IGN lead. However you can't depend on it (apparently from
> historical & empirical data). That's why a pullable CB on the B-
> lead, to positively isolate the alternator, independent of anything is
> suggested. Another way to achieve the same isolation is the crow
> bar and over voltage relay on the B-lead. That works also but its
> heavy, costly, complicated and potentially can cause nuisance
> trips. In defense of the crow-bar it is automatic. The pullable CB
> needs pilot action. The choice is the builders. As Bob N. says if
> you can't take the small chance of an OV, than use an External
> Regulator and OV module of some kind. if for no other reason
> it is simple. However there is no guarantee that will work 100%
> There's no 100% system.
. . . and nobody has ever claimed there was. For Part 25 airplanes
we're chartered to do the fault trees with probabilities applied to
each branch. When just one of those numbers is assumed, the result
suffers from a garbage-in-garbage out syndrome. That's why I
have come to believe that they add little value in determining our
future field experience. I can show you dozens of carefully calculated
predictions of golden operations in fielded systems that don't
even come close. That's why failure tolerance is so much easier to
embrace that hoped-for failure proof.
I'm working on an article that will illustrate the pitfalls of
accepting the bang-for-the-buck bullets -OR- the four-color
brochures at face value. Soon . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | An Architecture Question - Z13 |
>
>
>All good points, which lead to two operational questions assuming the
>Z-13/8. First, I would assume that normal operations would include closing
>the alternate feed switch to the e-bus, true?
No. It's crafted to be open except when needed for independent
power of goodies on the e-bus during alternator out operations in
the endurance mode.
> And second, is there a risk
>of damage should the SD-8 inadvertently become activated while the primary
>alternator is running?
There is no risk for damage to either alternator by having it
on line with the other alternator. Neither is there a guarantee
of performance with respect to these alternators performing in
concert with each other in some predictable sharing of loads.
>Hopefully these aren't ignorant questions. Thanks.
Not at all . . . but perhaps not very useful answers if we're ignorant
of the conditions that raised the questions. You can help us help
you by describing more of what your goals are and by sharing
the circumstances that raised your questions than by simply
posting the questions.
What caused you to believe that a 60/20 combination of engine
driven power sources was the most useful/practical? What operational
consideration raises questions in the ability of one of the Z-figures
to handle as presently configured?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Engines |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical System Design for 2 Stroke Engines |
>
>Bob and all,
> I, and a lot of other UL aircraft owners are going to have to
> register and N number our aircraft in the next year. If we want to use
> our aircraft to take the practical test we will have to install certain
> instruments. In addition, many of us will need ELTTs and transponders to
> operate them. Most of these aircraft will require some sort of electrical
> system to support this equipment. Most of these aircraft have Rotax or
> other 2 stroke engines. I want to design and install the most reliable
> system I can. What basic design considerations can you tell me to follow.
>
Bill,
My sense is that you're new to both the Owner Built and Maintained
(OBAM) aircraft community and to this List-server. Welcome! I'll
suggest that you've chosen a good place from which to launch
your inquiries. I trust that others on the List will join me
in helping expand your horizons both in knowledge and understanding
that helps you achieve your goals.
May I suggest that you have two avenues of inquiry to pursue?
The first is the science and art of crafting an electrical system
that is an elegant solution of lowest cost of ownership with
the greatest utility. The second is identification of the materials,
tools and skills for turning ideas into functional hardware.
On the first task, may I suggest you cruise the down-load materials
available at:
http://aeroelectric.com/Downloads.html
Just glance at these items just to get a feel for what they offer
and as a reference as to where to come back and get them as
needed. In particular, read the chapter from The AeroElectric Connection
on system reliability . . . you can get it at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/8-%3E9/ch17-9.pdf
Of course, the system you're going to need is VERY simple compared
with those being installed in the majority of OBAM aircraft . . . but
the reliability chapter is more about an attitude that suggests
failure tolerance is much easier to achieve than failure proof.
A potential architecture for your project is illustrated in
Figure Z-16 of:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11E.pdf
For hardware, there are dozens of sources. Look at:
http://bandc.biz/
http://steinair.com/
http://aircraftspruce.com/
http://wicksaircraft.com/
http://terminaltown.com/
. . . just to name a few.
Okay, now that you have sampled the water from the fire-hose,
you're faced with selection decisions both in the philosophy
and the application of ideas. That's where this List will help.
Ask questions . . . and include the background in your thinking
that formed the question. There are over 1300 folks on the list -
many have the same questions.
They're watching this list go by because they find value in what's
offered. You can help increase the value by posing questions
that dozens of folks are willing to ponder the options and offer
suggestions . . . to the benefit of many more than yourself.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | An Architecture Question - Z13 |
>
>
>A thought I keep having during these double alternator discussions is:
>What's wrong with having two alternators online at the same time, with the
>standby set to a volt less than the main? The standby would only then
>support the load of the bus it's attached to if the main went offline (this
>assumes that a "nonessential" bus goes away automatically when the main alt
>fails).
>
>Rob
Not a bit. That's what Z-12 is all about. That system is now installed
in a whole boat load of Bonanzas, big Pipers and Mooneys. If the features
illustrated in that configuration are attractive to you, there's nobody here
on the list who would discourage you from doing it. Incorporation
of automatic switching of buses is problematic. When an alternator quits,
the airplane does not immediately roll over and head for the ground
trailing black smoke. If the interval between notification of low voltage
and re-configuration of the system for plan-b operations were 60 seconds
or 120 seconds, or . . . the probable outcome of the flight is not highly
dependent on reaction to the failure.
It's seems better to have plan-b in your check list (and adequate
notification
that plan-b is now the order of the day) than to add complexity and cost of
ownership for automatic changes of configuration. Z-13/8 is, in my never
humble opinion, very cost effective and offers not only a plan-B but a
plan-C
alternative to looking for someplace very close to set down. My personal
goal
is to craft systems and ways to use them where a limit to endurance is
determined
only by fuel aboard and not on unknowns or poorly planned design and
maintenance
of an electrical system.
Read chapter 17, look over the Z-figures. If there are any perceived
short comings of any of the suggested architectures that prompt useful
changes, bring them up. There's always room for improvement.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey % of charge |
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> >> Having a smart energy monitor is necessary in a system where you will
> >> have irregular charge/discharge cycles and want to know how much is left
> >> in the battery.
> >
> >
> > Agreed . . . but how does this happen on an airplane and how
> > often might one expect to encounter it? . . . and are there
> > less complicated and more positive ways to achieve the desired
> > mission/maintenance conditions?
>
>Oh, I agree that you don't need a complex energy monitor nor do you need
>a fancy charger. OTOH, I have had experience with batteries failing due
>to overcharge in hot weather and failing to charge properly in cold weather.
>
> >> If you always recharge the battery to full every time,
> >> you can have a much simpler energy monitor that isn't quite so smart.
> >
> > Yup.
> >
> >
> >> The biggest issue as I see it is that you need to make sure you don't
> >> overcharge the battery in summer but that you do actually charge the
> >> battery in winter. That implies temperature compensation.
> >
> > Agreed . . . and it's not clear that we have really practical
> > ways to achieve that. The LR-3 from B&C offers a battery temp
> > sensor option. But it's not clear to me that this option will
> > produce really meaningful differences in battery performance for
> > most of our fellow airplane drivers.
>
>I believe that this is one of the key reasons why current crop of
>"sealed" AGM aircraft batteries have such a poor service record. Flooded
>cell batteries shrug off overcharge by just boiling off excess water
>which gets topped off by the owner or mechanic. AGMs build up pressure
>in the case and valves open and relieve the pressure, letting the water
>go to the atmosphere. The AGM battery, having no excess
>electrolyte/water, quickly quits working. I have never had an AGM
>battery (Concorde especially) survive longer than two years in a
>standard aircraft electrical system.
It would be interesting to put a battery black-box on those
airplanes. I'm working a design for just such a critter with
one of my associates at RAC. It's a matchbook sized module that
installs in the head-space of an AGM battery. For a period of three
years, it will measure and record battery voltage and temperature
every 10 seconds.
When a battery craps in warranty, the owner recycles the battery
through local channels and sends the 0.5 ounce module back to the factory.
For batteries out of warranty, the owner gets a discount on a
new battery if he returns the black-box along with his order.
I expect this product to yield very revealing data both about
materials and processes used to craft good batteries along with
detailed insight into the battery's experience up and until
the time of failure/replacement.
This is a desperately needed tool for closing the loop in the
consumer/supplier relationship for batteries. So much bad blood
has flowed and much opportunity for improvement lost for lack
of data. The vast majority of discussions/deductions/accusations
about battery life has been floobydust from the customers,
interested observers AND manufacturers. A crapped battery is exceedingly
difficult to deduce life history from a simple teardown inspection.
Nobody is deserving of kudos or cabbages because there are no data
from which understanding can grow.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Battery/Regulator Questions |
>
>I am referencing the Rotax wiring diagrams at the following link:
>
>http://www.rotax-aircraft-engines.com/pdf/dokus/d00287.pdf
>
>The diagrams are located on Adobe Acrobat page 53 of 68, which is Rotax
>page number 18-5.
>
>There are three diagrams on the page, I am referring to the bottom two,
>labeled "wiring diagram in conjuction with a battery" which I will call
>"No Starter", and "wiring diagram for electric starter", which I will call
>"Starter".
>
>On the No Starter diagram, it calls for a 12V 9Ah minimum battery, while
>on the Starter diagram, it calls for a 12V 16Ah minimum battery. I am
>assuming that the additional capacity of the battery on the Starter
>diagram is specified in order to provide adequate starting power.
>
>My question has to do with the No Starter diagram. Why is the "9Ah
>minimum" specified, and what would be the result of using a lower capacity
>battery?
Take this to an extreme. Suppose you had a 12v battery with 0.5 a.h.
capacity. How might we deduce this to have an effect on the system?
It's very small (perhaps 8 ounces) and our operating philosophy does
not depend on standby power from a battery. Why would Rotax care?
We can only guess because we don't have the benefit of conversing
with the writer of those words (assuming too that he even understands
the simple-ideas that support them).
The smaller the battery, the more vulnerable it is to abuse. The
regulators supplied with most alternators of ANY size or utilty
are not precision devices designed to maximize battery life. Liberties
are taken with performance to offer ADEQUATE battery life assuming
a whole lot of operating conditions.
The smaller the battery, the more likely you are to experience
unsatisfactory he service life. Why 9 a.h., it's a WAG. 9 is better
than 6 but probably worse that 12. If you need to make the point
in your instructions, you throw the dart and pick a number that
upsets the fewest numbers of folks who review your work.
>In one of the (many!) projects I am considering, I would be using a Rotax
>477 without an electric starter. However, I would have Nav/Strobe/Landing
>lights, a couple of small electronic gauges, a handheld NAV/COM, a
>handheld GPS, and a panel mount transponder, all connected to ship's power.
>
>My reasons for considering the use of a battery would be to provide
>pre-start power for the radio and GPS and to provide power in an
>engine-out situation. I'm also thinking that it would keep the available
>power up during low RPM operations, and possibly "smooth" the power a bit.
>
>Would I actually need a 9Ah battery for these purposes, or would a smaller
>unit suffice?
>
>If a battery smaller than 9Ah is acceptable from a load standpoint, would
>a smaller battery create a problem with the regulator/rectifier?
A fat capacitor would provide most adequate smoothing. If you're
driven with desire for a small battery, try anything and see how
long it lasts. If your perceptions of value are poor, then a bigger
battery or perhaps an alternate brand is in order. Maybe a fat
cap and a small battery will be useful for you. You're going to have
to try it and then tell us what you discover. As a suggestion: Put
47,000 uf or more and any battery you like in the system. Then let
us know how it works out.
>Now a question specific to the No Starter diagram:
>
>Would it be acceptable to install a toggle-switch circuit breaker in place
>of the 16A fuse in the black wire which runs between the regulator and the
>battery? Would it be desirable to have a means of isolating the regulator
>in this way? What size circuit breaker should be used?
It won't hurt. Nobody here should be chartered with determining
what's acceptable . . . only what's useful based on predictable
performance and accommodation of your design goals.
>Thanks in advance for anyone's help, and if my questions are less than
>clear or less than properly worded, please feel free to read between the lines!
Better we should ask for clarification of the question
than guess. The conversation is generally shorter and more
to the point that way.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Mac Arthur" <jetfr8t(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | An Architecture Question - Z13 |
Bob,
Are you going to be at Sun'N'Fun, and if so, are you going as a spectator or
a presenter?
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | An Architecture Question - Z13 |
>
>
>
>Bob,
>
>Are you going to be at Sun'N'Fun, and if so, are you going as a spectator or
>a presenter?
>
>Craig
Sorry, I don't do the big shows any more. The cost of being there
far outweighs the revenues generated by attending. We went to OSH
a couple of years ago (the first time in about 8 years after having
been there 12-years running). It was fun, interesting, and not terribly
expensive (we had use of a hotel room that wasn't needed by an exhibitor
over the weekend).
Sun'N'Fun is a very long way from here and generated even less revenue.
I went only once. There's only so much money I can spend just to have
fun . . . I'd rather spend it on new tools (or products to buy and
evaluate).
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey % of charge |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> It would be interesting to put a battery black-box on those
> airplanes. I'm working a design for just such a critter with
> ...
> This is a desperately needed tool for closing the loop in the
> consumer/supplier relationship for batteries. So much bad blood
> has flowed and much opportunity for improvement lost for lack
> of data. The vast majority of discussions/deductions/accusations
> about battery life has been floobydust from the customers,
> interested observers AND manufacturers. A crapped battery is exceedingly
> difficult to deduce life history from a simple teardown inspection.
> Nobody is deserving of kudos or cabbages because there are no data
> from which understanding can grow.
Wow! I haven't heard anyone use the term Floobydust since my days
building analog amps back in the mid '70s.
But I think the battery manufacturers know a lot about how their
batteries live and die. It shouldn't be too hard to understand their
data and apply it to batteries in aircraft.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Prather <mprather(at)spro.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Baclup Battery monitor |
Oh right.. I think I forgot that from the initial discussion. Thanks..
Matt-
Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) wrote:
>
>I have two electric pumps One in each wing root. No mechanical fuel
>pump.
>
>The FI RV is being set up the same way.
>
>To switch tanks I simply switch pumps.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt
>Prather
>Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 1:03 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Baclup Battery monitor
>
>-->
>
>Is the Facet pump used continuously? Or only for takeoff, landing, or
>in the event of a main (engine driven) pump failure? If only
>intermittent duty, leave it out of the backup battery power budget. The
>chances of an alternator failure, and an engine driven pump failure on
>the same flight are exceedingly low...
>
>
>Matt-
>
>
>
>>(Corvallis)"
>>
>>I measured the Facet and it was less than an amp...Can't remember what
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>the EI draws but I did measure it at the time.
>>The Zodiac is strictly a VFR airplane and most failure modes would
>>leave some juice left in the main battery.
>>
>>So I think I assumed about 20 minutes of flight on Batt #2.
>>
>>If I were re-doing it today I think the more modern diode (with lower
>>volt drop) would mean I could use a bigger battery.
>>
>>Frank
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>>Dave Morris "BigD"
>>Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 8:44 AM
>>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Baclup Battery monitor
>>
>>-->
>>
>>Facet pumps draw about 1.5A, don't they? And your EI draws how much?
>>3AH seems awfully small to me. I'm guessing the Duration vs Current
>>curve for that battery gives you 3A for 30 minutes. Is that enough?
>>
>>Dave Morris
>>www.N75UP.com
>>
>>At 10:22 AM 2/24/2006, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>>So my first battery is a 18AH and my backup is a 3AH, and is used to
>>>run one EI and a Facet fuel pump, nothing else.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott" <scott(at)randolphs.net> |
| Subject: | Re: An Architecture Question - Z13 |
I find myself thinking along very similar lines to Todd. I like the idea of
having options and turning off things to shed load doesn't seem like a big
problem. I've drawn up something with a 2nd master switch that engages a
2nd contactor and in it's 2nd position brings the 2nd alternator into the
system. The point about smoke in the cockpit is a good one I'll give some
though to, however. It brings up a nagging conern of my about the e-bus,
though. With my Garmin 430 drawing 3A for the GPS side and 10A for the
radio (when transmitting) it seems to me that it would blow the e-bus feed
fuse if I hit the transmit button. Now I fully realize that transmitting is
not the best way to conserve battery, but a quick word to let ATC know
what's up or even an accidental (habitual?) bump of the transmit switch
having the potential to take down what remains of my electical system
through that fuse seems scary. Just the GPS and my EFIS and my Transponder
add up to about 7.5 Amps without the transmitter! If I go to a contactor
for the e-bus feed, then it might as well be another master it seems like,
no?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sportav8r(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Switch Failure |
An argument for switching the ground lead, vs the hot side, unless a stuck-on condition
is dangerous? Just a thought...
-Bill B
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce McGregor <bruceflys(at)comcast.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Switch Failure
FWIW, I found this message on the GlaStar e-mail group:
Just thought that I would pass this along for everyone's edification. I
noticed that my strobes were not working the other day so I checked the
fuses and sure enough, the strobe fuse was blown. I replaced the fuse and it
popped as soon as I flipped the master switch on. I traced the wire from the
fuse panel to the toggle switch and there was no chafing or problems
visible. I disconnected the wire that goes to the strobe power supply from
the strobe switch and tried it again, POP! Now I'm looking right at the 18"
of wire that goes from the fuse panel to the strobe switch and it's
undamaged. The wire that goes to the power supply is disconnected and the
switch is in the OFF position yet there is a dead short! I removed the
switch and checked the continuity between the terminals and the body of the
switch and sure enough, the switch was shorted internally. I replaced the
switch with one of my spares and all was back to normal. I took the switch
apart and found that the moving contact rocker inside the switch was
touching the switch body. I'll include a photo of the switch guts for your
amusement, you can see the arcing on the switch cover. The switch is from
B&C and is a CARLING brand. I'll be sure that I carry a spare in my parts
bag.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey % of charge |
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> > It would be interesting to put a battery black-box on those
> > airplanes. I'm working a design for just such a critter with
> > ...
> > This is a desperately needed tool for closing the loop in the
> > consumer/supplier relationship for batteries. So much bad blood
> > has flowed and much opportunity for improvement lost for lack
> > of data. The vast majority of discussions/deductions/accusations
> > about battery life has been floobydust from the customers,
> > interested observers AND manufacturers. A crapped battery is
> exceedingly
> > difficult to deduce life history from a simple teardown inspection.
> > Nobody is deserving of kudos or cabbages because there are no data
> > from which understanding can grow.
>
>Wow! I haven't heard anyone use the term Floobydust since my days
>building analog amps back in the mid '70s.
I think that's a Bob Pease original . . . I didn't hear it until
I became an avid reader of his monthly columns probably in the
80's . . . a good term I think for labeling intellectual babble
masquerading as fact.
>But I think the battery manufacturers know a lot about how their
>batteries live and die. It shouldn't be too hard to understand their
>data and apply it to batteries in aircraft.
In the lab, yes. Lightbulbs are the same way. I just finished
a song and dance routine to the FAA hand-cranked organ to subsitute
#327LSV (25,000 hour) lamps for the #327 (4,000 hr) in some places
on our airplanes. Seems customers are seeing a few hundreds of
hours . . . and since the L1011 went into the Everglades a few years
back, crews are forbidden to diddle with lightbulbs in flight, if at
all. So the low-life lamps are a serious regulatory dispatch item
and they're hoping that the better rated lamps will alleviate the
problem. The question not asked and answered was how lamp cycling
affects life and can we REALLY expect a 6x increase in lamp life
with the substitution?
I think we've made the FAA happy but now I'm starting more tests
on my own to do some cycle testing with the two part numbers side-by-side
for relative service life comparisons. I would not be surprised to
discover performance that falls far short of the customer's (and my
boss's expectations). At least I might be able to forewarn them as
opposed to waiting for a followup call from a surprised and unhappy
customer. If we called GE and asked how long their #327 will last in
our airplane, they wouldn't have a clue. You call Enersys or Concord
with the same question, they'd be silly to attempt a considered answer
because there's no data upon which one might consider. Further, they
have no idea how you will use/abuse their product.
I've discussed the battery black-box with a manufacturer who has
heartily endorsed the idea . . . both as a lowered cost warranty
adjustment tool but as a device for getting real numbers about
how their products are treated over LONG periods of time . . . not
in a laboratory or short term flight test program.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch Failure |
>
>An argument for switching the ground lead, vs the hot side, unless a
>stuck-on condition is dangerous? Just a thought...
>
>-Bill B
>
How would this be better? The same failure might then leave you with
some accessory running where you couldn't turn it off. Of course, this
gives rise to the secondary argument about having pullable breakers
accessible to pilots, etc.
I think I'd rather have it function exactly as described and get
OFF line and out of consideration. A second order consideration
in the failure tolerance equation is not to increase workload. The
switch died (albeit in what must be a really bizarre fashion) and
the fuse did its job. All done.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | AGM longevity (was: Odyssey % of charge) |
> Occasionally, you need to purposely overcharge the battery
> to let the negative plate catch up with the positive plate. A
> couple times per year, you bring the battery up to 14.8 volts
> and let the current taper off to less than an amp. You then
> push in a constant current of about 4% of the amp-hr rating
> of the battery for about an hour. This cleans off the negative plate.
Bill, excellent post! What would be your recommendation for a charger to
accomplish this periodic overcharging method for cleaning the negative
plate? I suspect that this is what my PC680 needs after two years.
Alex Peterson
RV6-A N66AP 719 hours
Maple Grove, MN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGM longevity (was: Odyssey % of charge) |
Alex Peterson wrote:
>
>
>> Occasionally, you need to purposely overcharge the battery
>> to let the negative plate catch up with the positive plate. A
>
>
> Bill, excellent post! What would be your recommendation for a charger to
> accomplish this periodic overcharging method for cleaning the negative
> plate? I suspect that this is what my PC680 needs after two years.
Before you opt for an equalization charge make sure this is supported by
the manufacturer.
As for an equalization charge, you can accomplish it with any adjustable
power supply that will allow you to set the voltage to that specified by
the manufacturer for performing an equalization charge. Typically an
equalization charge takes around two hours over and above the time
required to bring the battery up to full charge.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "glaesers" <glaesers(at)wideopenwest.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LED position lights + strobe |
Try: www.thorllc.net
Dennis Glaeser
7A Fuselage
Some months ago I saw a small outfit selling small LED position lights
which also accomodated a strobe light and would fit in the van's
recessed (enclosed) wingtips. I thought I saved a reference to it, but
can't find it. Does this ring a bell with any one?
--
Tom Sargent
engine
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phil White" <philwhite9(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LED position lights + strobe |
cc: sarg314(at)comcast.net
Tom: www.GS-Air.com may be what you were referring to. I installed a
set of their LED lites w/strobes in the tips of my RV-10 wings about a
year ago. They have updated their product line recently with brighter
LED's that they state will better meet FAR-23 illumination rules.
Phil (RV-10 fuse) in IL
Subject: AeroElectric-List: LED position lights + strobe
Some months ago I saw a small outfit selling small LED position lights
which also accomodated a strobe light and would fit in the van's
recessed (enclosed) wingtips. I thought I saved a reference to it, but
can't find it. Does this ring a bell with any one?
--
Tom Sargent
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
Before we gloat...
OC it has more to do with manual entry of LAT/LONG and an error, than
the data base for one. I fly across the Atlantic several times a month and
I also have to enter LAT/LONG in the Honeywell Flt Management
Computer FMC, thru a CDU (control display unit). It is possible (easy) to
make a mistake, however there are several checks that we do before
departing. The main check is both pilots must together go over each lat /
long and compare the course, distance between way points as well as
total distance to the printed flight plan. Before departure, before
going oceanic the NAV position is compared with ground stations and
noted on the flight plan. If no ground based NAV is available we have to
look at all three GPS and IRS (inertial ref system) and compare them.
During the flight you keep track of position with a good old plotting chart
and flight plan. A check is made approaching, over and 10 minutes after
way points. All this is noted on the the chart and a postion report is
radioed via HF. This is the TIP of oceanic NAV. You all remember the
KAL007 that the Russians shot down. That was likely caused by miss
placed Lat/long entries and a switch not selected to the proper position.
>"The crew of C-GKFJ did not receive any special training before the
>flight on the use of the Apollo 820 GPS, nor did they receive a briefing
>on company procedures for long-range navigation."
This is the first problem. Before I went across the pond I had 2 weeks of
ground school, of which many days spent on long range nav, simulator
training and at least one flight with a training Captain over
the Atlantic. This poor crew was set up to fail.
So before you all point finger, if it can happen to a Pro crew, it can happen
to you or me. First I can't believe an Apollo 820 GPS is legal for long range
Oceanic flight. It would not meet the requirements to cross the Atlantic.
Second the out of date data base blows me away. With that said they would
have been better off using the old data base way points, even out of
date. They could check the lat/longs against a chart or flight plane.
Entering lat / longs much more error prone than entering a way point ID.
This is WAY more than an out of date data base. Training, following
standard procedures, cross checking and using all information available
info to name a few. Lesson learned for GA pilots is get training, stay
current and just don't follow one NAV source blindly if at all possible. If
they would have plotted it and just used their compass they would have
caught it earlier. It is easy for me to say in the comfort of my office, but
dead reckoning would have helped. The fault lies with management of
the airline and than the crew for flying where they had no business. GPS
is magic and amazing, they where right where they told it to be.
The data base was a contributing but not critical factor
George
>From: <bakerocb(at)cox.net>
>Subject: Gotcha!
>Date: Jan 02, 2006
>
>1/2/2005
>For all of us believers in the magic of GPS and modern avionics please
read
>the below cautionary tale:
>http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/reports/air/2003/A03F0114/A03F0114.asp
>
>
>My flight time over the ocean is not that great, but the terror that wells
>up when one has been out of sight of land for hours and is uncertain of
>their position is huge.
>
>
>Particularly note the diagram at the end of this article. Imagine the
>decision process / courage involved in making that greater than 270
degree
>turn to the right.
>OC
>
>
>PS: All pilots flying around IFR with out dated GPS data bases should
>read this article.
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gilles Tatry" <gilles.tatry(at)wanadoo.fr> |
| Subject: | Re: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT |
You are absolutely right, Bob!
Except that I am not concerned with cold, but hot weather flying, when an
open cockpitt is delightful...
It is the worst case for engine temp, and also the worst for CHT reading.
With the cold junction at the back of the instrument, CHT can read about 20
C less than reality. If the cold junction was in the engine compartment,
reading might be somewhere in the middle of the scale, or lower, instead of
close to, or even higher than the engine CHT limitation...
Too late indeed to change the instrument, wich size is very specific: the
panel is built and wired, I don't want to do it again.
Moreover, I am highly interested indeed in this intellectual challenge, and
learn a lot...
Thank you for the help!
Gilles
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT
>
>
>
>>
>>Ok, maybe I'm being dense here, but here goes:
>>If the 594 is used, no further cold junction compensation is necessary
>>from the TC side is necessary. If the UMA instrument needs it, then I
>>suggest dropping it. Use a simple microprocessor (about $1) and an LED
>>display ($40?) instead. Some of the micros have an LED display driver
>>already built-in, IIRC. Check out Freescale's website.
>
> I don't think the UMA bothers to use dynamic cold-junction
> compensation. Their cold junction is at the back of the instrument
> and the calibration is optimized at a 20C cockpit. So
> ranges of temperatures that most pilots are willing to
> endure in the cockpit is assumed to introduce insignificant
> error.
>
> Possibly true for most enclosed cockpit/pilot combinations.
> This is an open cockpit a/c where the owner says his
> motivations to fly outweigh other pilot's inhibitions
> (maybe he has a heated flight-suit). In any case, the
> stated accuracy of the stock gage is found deficient for
> his needs.
>
> The idea is to apply EXTERNAL signal conditioning using
> the 594 and drive the instrument with whatever combination
> of constant current/voltage seems best. This allows us
> to provide offset/scale-factor pots that will permit
> calibration to number probably better than the off-the-shelf
> instrument. Dynamic cold-junction compensation comes with
> the package.
>
>
>>If he's married to the UMA, then enjoy the exercises 8-).
>
> That's the major rub. He has the instruments, they're both
> physically attractive for their size (tiny panel) and round
> dials but a tad short on performance. Just ONE of life's
> little challenges . . .
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 2/26/2006 12:36:01 A.M. Central Standard Time,
gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com writes:
So before you all point finger, if it can happen to a Pro crew, it can
happen
to you or me. First I can't believe an Apollo 820 GPS is legal for long
range
Oceanic flight. It would not meet the requirements to cross the Atlantic.
Second the out of date data base blows me away. With that said they would
have been better off using the old data base way points, even out of
date. They could check the lat/longs against a chart or flight plane.
Entering lat / longs much more error prone than entering a way point ID.
Good Morning George,
Don't get carried away with your indignation. There are many small, low
cost, navigation devices that are approved for operation as sole source guidance
for flight across the North Atlantic. Included among them are the Trimble 2000
Approach and Approach Plus, Garmin GNC 300 XL and the Apollo NMC 2001. There
are probably many more, but that is NOT an area of my expertise.
Incidentally, I do agree with you that errors are easy to make. I was flying
long haul when we first got rid of the live navigators (we had errors with
them too!) and went to INS navigation. I realize that current practice among
air carriers is much more regulated than it was in my day, but I never liked
the 'two man' loading scheme. I always loaded my FMC's by having one of us
load from the chart and the other from the flight plan. (We only used two FMC's
on my airline) After we had independently loaded the data, we then cross
checked the two units to assure that both had the same data loaded. No cross
filling allowed in my cockpit.
You would be amazed at how many errors we found in the early computer
generated flight plans!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Baclup Battery monitor - Aux batt charge |
>> The problem with diodes is they all have a forward volt drop, standard
>> diodes are about 1 volt drop. So if your system charges at say 14.2
>> volts, your second battery will only see 13.2V.
>
> Which is a major issue for recharging the standby battery
> to 100% of capacity.
>
>
>> I believe the Shotkey (sp?) diode has a much lower drop...Althouigh I
>> don't know what it is.
>>
I trimmed much of the thread for brevity on this single issue.
I'm now flying in my RV-10 with a schematic as shown here:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/electrical/N104CD_Electrical_Schematic_Rev5.pdf
By using a couple of different diodes, (one was Eric's schottky),
I've now got a system with a couple of benefits:
* charges the aux battery through a schottky with a lower Vdrop at all
times.
* Powers the E-Bus from the Avionics bus, whenever the avionics bus is
on.
* Powers the E-Bus directly from the aux battery when E-Bus is on.
I use the E-Bus switch during startup to start the EFIS and EIS before
I crank the engine, and I get no Voltage drops rebooting my E-Bus items.
After engine start, I fire up the avioinics bus, and the rest of my
stuff comes online. I then shut OFF my E-Bus feed switch and if you
trace back the wiring, you'll see that I don't lose power during the
switch because of the diodes, and, I get the benefit of a diode-free
path from the alternator to the Aux battery. So, even though the
charging circuit is there with the schottky, I'll get the benefit
of getting 100% voltage to the aux battery for a full charge.
The rest of the system works great for me too. Some breakers,
some fuses. I do use a keyswitch with my Lightspeed and a Mag,
which works great, but I couldn't illustrate the switching of the
circuit using the keyswitch model, so I drew it as switches and it's
innacurate.
The Aux Alternator section is currently not installed. I'm waiting
for Plane-Power to come out with their aux alternator to save a bunch
of cost. It would be a nice thing to have, but actually with the
large set of aux batteries and the wiring that I have, it's nearing
overkill to add that to the system unless I plan not to land when
I have a problem.
Sorry to chop the thread. I've changed the subject line to accomodate.
Tim
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Newton" <enewton57(at)cableone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LED position lights + strobe |
Could be this one:
http://www.creativair.com/cva/product_info.php?cPath=3D21&products_id=3D44
Eric
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com wrote:
> This is the first problem. Before I went across the pond I had 2 weeks of
> ground school, of which many days spent on long range nav, simulator
> training and at least one flight with a training Captain over
> the Atlantic. This poor crew was set up to fail.
Well, there is training and there is training. It is quite possible for
the captain and crew to ensure their own training and to make a plan for
how to deal with contingencies. It would make a lot of sense for the
crew to think about their lack of training and then go get the
information they needed. A lot has been written on the subject and the
basics of navigation are well understood. That is what I did and I had
no problems with long-range, over-water navigation. It is when you
believe in your computers too much that you start to have problems.
> So before you all point finger, if it can happen to a Pro crew, it can happen
> to you or me. First I can't believe an Apollo 820 GPS is legal for long range
> Oceanic flight.
When making a ferry flight you can get away with a lot. I have flown my
Comanche across the Atlantic twice, once non-stop. There are a lot of
opportunities to screw up in 11 hours with nothing to look at but ocean.
None of my equipment was "approved" for long-range ocean flight but it
served me adequately well. My primary electronic nav was a LORAN which I
knew would stop working when it got out of range of the Canadian chain
and would remain unusable until I got within range of the North Atlantic
chain.
My HF was an old Collins KWM-2 that I had retuned to work in the
aviation bands. The Canadian authorities laughed saying they hadn't seen
someone use a KWM-2 for many years. I had designed an e-bus to ensure
that I would have my electronic nav gear in case of a loss of the main
electrical system. The Canadian DOT inspector at Moncton felt that my
e-bus design was pretty neat and eliminated the need for a separate
battery-operated LF DF radio.
So my real primary nav was DR backed up with LORAN and using ADF and VOR
for secondary backup. Everything worked as planned, including the loss
of LORAN navigation about 5 hours into the flight. The only surprise is
that we didn't get LORAN back until we were almost to Ireland. By then I
had VOR. ADF surprised me by working from mid-Atlantic. (BBC used to
have a very high-power LW station at 201 KHz if I recall. The
programming wasn't great but the signal kept the ADF needle pointed
where we were going.) Regardless, my DR planning got me to my
destination within 30 seconds of flight-plan time.
I kept a navigation log that cross-referenced DR and LORAN data. When
the LORAN quit working we were on DR-only but had good intermediate nav
data to start from. When I finally got my LORAN back we were only about
5 miles off-course. DR works a lot better than most people give it
credit for.
And, yes, I would do it again using the same equipment.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Czygan <bczygan(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical System Design for 2 Stroke Engines |
Bob,
Thank you for the kind welcome. Yes, I am new to this list and to aircraft
construction. I am an Extra class Amateur Radio Operator (Ham), so I am supposed
to know a few basic things about electricity. At my age (55), it is a race
to see if the learning, or the forgetting, is winning. Thank you for taking the
time to direct me to the right information. You, and the members, have put together
a valuable resource here. It is obvious that I need to do some serious
studying to come up to speed, enough to even pose useful questions. That I will
do right now. Meanwhile, I have put together a BLOG to help UL pilots transition
to Sport Pilot. One of the things I am doing is advising them on how to
transition their UL aircraft. Many of them will need to create electrical systems,
as I will. If you don't mind, I would like to provide a link to this list
for them. My site is here:
http://sptraining.blogspot.com/
Again, thank you for the help.
Yours,
Bill Czygan
AA8MF
Quicksilver MXIIA
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT |
>
>
>You are absolutely right, Bob!
>Except that I am not concerned with cold, but hot weather flying, when an
>open cockpitt is delightful...
>It is the worst case for engine temp, and also the worst for CHT reading.
>With the cold junction at the back of the instrument, CHT can read about 20
>C less than reality. If the cold junction was in the engine compartment,
>reading might be somewhere in the middle of the scale, or lower, instead of
>close to, or even higher than the engine CHT limitation...
>Too late indeed to change the instrument, wich size is very specific: the
>panel is built and wired, I don't want to do it again.
>Moreover, I am highly interested indeed in this intellectual challenge, and
>learn a lot...
>Thank you for the help!
Have you the tools and where-with-all to get
the measurements we need?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gilles Tatry" <gilles.tatry(at)wanadoo.fr> |
| Subject: | Re: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT |
I will probably be able to send you the measurements shortly, thanks to
well-equipped friends.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 8:30 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>You are absolutely right, Bob!
>>Except that I am not concerned with cold, but hot weather flying, when an
>>open cockpitt is delightful...
>>It is the worst case for engine temp, and also the worst for CHT reading.
>>With the cold junction at the back of the instrument, CHT can read about
>>20
>>C less than reality. If the cold junction was in the engine compartment,
>>reading might be somewhere in the middle of the scale, or lower, instead
>>of
>>close to, or even higher than the engine CHT limitation...
>>Too late indeed to change the instrument, wich size is very specific: the
>>panel is built and wired, I don't want to do it again.
>>Moreover, I am highly interested indeed in this intellectual challenge,
>>and
>>learn a lot...
>>Thank you for the help!
>
> Have you the tools and where-with-all to get
> the measurements we need?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Mickey |
and Bob N.)
Dear Bob N.:
I have no Idea what you are talking about again and why its relavant,
but God Bless you.
**
COMMENTS BELOW (..............) ; Cheers George
**
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
>Subject: Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Mickey and Bob N.)
>>
>>Mickey wants to turn his car off at 100 mph and
>>
>> AND
>>
>> Bob N. wants proof.
>Not proof sir . . . UNDERSTANDING. I see those words on the 4-color
>brochures and bang-for-the-buck bullets at the top of data
>sheets . . . all of which ASSUME that your understanding
>of their words is the same as their understanding of
>their words.
**
(BOB,CALL TRANSPO, TALK TO ENGINEERS:1800-TRANSPO/800-872-6776)
**
>>
>> As far as control of I-VR alternators, it would be wonderful to use
>> and trust the IGN wire. We could put a crow-bar on the CB to the
>> IGN lead. However you can't depend on it (apparently from
>> historical & empirical data). That's why a pullable CB on the B-
>> lead, to positively isolate the alternator, independent of anything
is
>> suggested. Another way to achieve the same isolation is the crow
>> bar and over voltage relay on the B-lead. That works also but its
>> heavy, costly, complicated and potentially can cause nuisance
>> trips. In defense of the crow-bar it is automatic. The pullable CB
>> needs pilot action. The choice is the builders. As Bob N. says if
>> you can't take the small chance of an OV, than use an External
>> Regulator and OV module of some kind. if for no other reason
>> it is simple. However there is no guarantee that will work 100%
>> There's no 100% system.
> . . . and nobody has ever claimed there was. For Part 25 airplanes
>we're chartered to do the fault trees with probabilities applied to
>each branch. When just one of those numbers is assumed, the result
>suffers from a garbage-in-garbage out syndrome. That's why I
>have come to believe that they add little value in determining our
>future field experience. I can show you dozens of carefully calculated
>predictions of golden operations in fielded systems that don't
>even come close. That's why failure tolerance is so much easier to
>embrace that hoped-for failure proof.
**
(BOB, I have an EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT; Don't give a RIP about Part 25 or 23)
**
>I'm working on an article that will illustrate the pitfalls of
>accepting the bang-for-the-buck bullets -OR- the four-color
>brochures at face value. Soon . . .
**
(BOB, What? U lost me (again), call Transpo, they'll help your UNDERSTANDING)
**
Bob . . .
**
(George, I am done. Peace)
**
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SMITHBKN(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Mic and Headset Jack Installation |
Group,
I've read the AeroElectric connection, searched the archives, etc. but can't
develop an answer to the following question: when I went to install my jacks I
found that I could either drill a ~3/8" hole that would allow the threaded
post of the jack to pass through, or b) drill a slightly larger hole that would
allow the threaded post PLUS the small shoulder to pass through.
I purchased some of the isolation washers from B&C and they slip easily over
the threaded post of the jack but won't go down over the shoulder at the base
of the post.
If I use the ~3/8" hole it appears the threaded portion of the jack could
contact the panel as it passes through it, even with use of the isolation
washers. So I guess I'm not sure what the isolation washers are doing.
Need some help ......, Thanks,
Jeff
RV-7A
smithbkn(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "SteinAir, Inc." <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | Mic and Headset Jack Installation |
If you have the higher end jacks, then the "shoulder" on the threaded part
of the jack is still part of the center ring or threaded portion. The goal
of the insulated washers is to completely isolate that part of the jack
(center ring) from the metal panel and airframe ground... It's still a good
idea to use the washers on the jacks, so drill the hold large enough to
allow the insualting washers.
Cheers,
Stein.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
>SMITHBKN(at)aol.com
>Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 3:02 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Mic and Headset Jack Installation
>
>
>Group,
>
>I've read the AeroElectric connection, searched the archives, etc.
>but can't
>develop an answer to the following question: when I went to
>install my jacks I
>found that I could either drill a ~3/8" hole that would allow the threaded
>post of the jack to pass through, or b) drill a slightly larger
>hole that would
>allow the threaded post PLUS the small shoulder to pass through.
>
>I purchased some of the isolation washers from B&C and they slip
>easily over
>the threaded post of the jack but won't go down over the shoulder
>at the base
>of the post.
>
>If I use the ~3/8" hole it appears the threaded portion of the jack could
>contact the panel as it passes through it, even with use of the isolation
>washers. So I guess I'm not sure what the isolation washers are doing.
>
>Need some help ......, Thanks,
>
>Jeff
>RV-7A
>smithbkn(at)aol.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Temperature compensation, UMA CHT |
>
>
>I will probably be able to send you the measurements shortly, thanks to
>well-equipped friends.
Great!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Startup (Mickey and Bob N.) |
| Subject: | Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Mickey |
and Bob N.)
>
>Dear Bob N.:
>
> I have no Idea what you are talking about again and why its relavant,
> but God Bless you.
Proof is for math problems and courts. Understanding is what real
teachers
offer. Engineers are dependent upon understanding for responsible conduct
of their craft.
>
>
> **
> (BOB,CALL TRANSPO, TALK TO ENGINEERS:1800-TRANSPO/800-872-6776)
>**
If they have understanding to offer, the block diagrams, schematics,
test results, etc are in order. That's what I offer and I expect no
less. Every simple idea I've had to offer was explained at length,
often illustrated and in many cases based on lessons-learned from
the past 40 years of cooking (and burning a few fingers) in this
particular kitchen.
>
>
>
> >>
> >> As far as control of I-VR alternators, it would be wonderful
> to use
> >> and trust the IGN wire. We could put a crow-bar on the CB to the
> >> IGN lead. However you can't depend on it (apparently from
> >> historical & empirical data). That's why a pullable CB on the B-
> >> lead, to positively isolate the alternator, independent of
> anything is
> >> suggested. Another way to achieve the same isolation is the crow
> >> bar and over voltage relay on the B-lead. That works also but its
> >> heavy, costly, complicated and potentially can cause nuisance
> >> trips. In defense of the crow-bar it is automatic. The
> pullable CB
> >> needs pilot action. The choice is the builders. As Bob N. says if
> >> you can't take the small chance of an OV, than use an External
> >> Regulator and OV module of some kind. if for no other reason
> >> it is simple. However there is no guarantee that will work 100%
> >> There's no 100% system.
>
> > . . . and nobody has ever claimed there was. For Part 25
> airplanes
> >we're chartered to do the fault trees with probabilities
> applied to
> >each branch. When just one of those numbers is assumed, the
> result
> >suffers from a garbage-in-garbage out syndrome. That's why I
> >have come to believe that they add little value in
> determining our
> >future field experience. I can show you dozens of carefully
> calculated
> >predictions of golden operations in fielded systems that don't
> >even come close. That's why failure tolerance is so much
> easier to
> >embrace that hoped-for failure proof.
>
> **
> (BOB, I have an EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT; Don't give a RIP about Part 25
> or 23)
> **
>
I wasn't suggesting you should. It was an ILLUSTRATION of just how
much we've come to depend on tools (and faith in the talent of
others) that started out with high ideals but failed in the
marketplace. All the analysis in the world does not replace
the repeatable experiment.
Unfortunately, there is so much faith in the up-front, computer
aided analysis that we've totally divested ourselves of any kind
of skunk works. At the same time, we're a bit dismayed that customer
aircraft have become IR&D tools for fixing problems that analysis
failed to reveal.
You seem to think I'm trying to convince you of something . . . or sell
you something. The only reason I offer you anything is as a courtesy
from one engineer to another . . . but gee, without all the alphabet
soup
after my name, perhaps my biggest failing is knowing the right kind of
words to use. I'm only trying to share my experience and observations
based on that experience. The only folks who's approval I MUST have
are those who send me money and expect a fair value in return.
Everything
else is the fun of considering simple-ideas . . . . and I DO enjoy it.
I'm sorry if it's upsetting for you. I AM distressed that you don't
seem to
grasp what I'm driving at . . . a serious failing on my part as a
teacher. Hmmmm . . . did you buy a copy of the 'Connection from me? Do
you want your money back?
> >I'm working on an article that will illustrate the pitfalls of
> >accepting the bang-for-the-buck bullets -OR- the four-color
> >brochures at face value. Soon . . .
>
>
> **
> (BOB, What? U lost me (again), call Transpo, they'll help your
> UNDERSTANDING)
> **
If that's what you did, then are you then a spokesperson for Transpo
or have you developed an independent but supporting professional
opinion you can share? Have you seen schematics, design philosophies,
parts selection criteria? Would you/they share that with us? I get
access
to this stuff when I approve products for my boss, it's called
preliminary
and critical design reviews. But since you're going experimental, do you
consider such tools superfluous, perhaps a waste of time? Is it no
longer
necessary that we understand how things work? Just field the pitch
over the
counter at OSH and plunk down the credit card? I may have to ask your
forgiveness. I consider my OBAM aircraft customers just as deserving
of the best-I-know-how-to-do as my TC aircraft customers.
Tell you what. I'm about done with the trade study on the MC33092A.
The task is see if there's some way we can adapt this marvelous
piece of technology into a modern replacement for all the external
regulators flying. Look over the data sheet and craft your own trade
study. If it's at all suited, how can we adapt it to this task?
Are there attractive alternatives? Are all the bang-for-the-buck-bullets
at the front of the data supported by explanation from within and
and at least supported if not confirmed by your independent analysis?
How do the features cited add value? Are any of the features nothing
more than chrome on the bumpers and fox tails on the antennas?
I've discovered some interesting points of design in the MC33022A
that offer interesting hypothesis on behaviors of failed alternators
cited recently on the List. It's been an enlightening exercise. When
yours
is done, send me a .pdf and I'll put it up on AeroElectric.com along
with my own.
You've tossed in tons of cabbages and tomatoes which I've attempted
to field with thoughtful, illustrative answers. May I suggest this
friendly competition. Let the List vote on the work product. Looser
sends the winner a copy of his favorite book.
If you 'dust' me, I'll be pleased to send you a copy of
"The Professional Amateur" by T.A. Boyd. It's a biography of
Charles F. Kettering - a scientist worthy of much respect and
emulation . . . one of my personal heros.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mic and Headset Jack Installation |
>
>Group,
>
>I've read the AeroElectric connection, searched the archives, etc. but can't
>develop an answer to the following question: when I went to install my
>jacks I
>found that I could either drill a ~3/8" hole that would allow the threaded
>post of the jack to pass through, or b) drill a slightly larger hole that
>would
>allow the threaded post PLUS the small shoulder to pass through.
>
>I purchased some of the isolation washers from B&C and they slip easily over
>the threaded post of the jack but won't go down over the shoulder at the base
>of the post.
That isn't what they're supposed to do.
>If I use the ~3/8" hole it appears the threaded portion of the jack could
>contact the panel as it passes through it, even with use of the isolation
>washers. So I guess I'm not sure what the isolation washers are doing.
Drill a 1/2" hole. Put the extruded washer on the jack first, extrusion
facing up. Insert jack in hole from behind and place flat insulating
washer on over the jack's barrel followed by the flat metal washer and
finally the screw.
The insulating washers will sandwich the panel material while the
extrusion keeps the jack centered in the hole and isolated from
the panel.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Stroke Engines |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical System Design for 2 Stroke Engines |
>
>Bob,
> Thank you for the kind welcome. Yes, I am new to this list and to
> aircraft construction. I am an Extra class Amateur Radio Operator (Ham),
> so I am supposed to know a few basic things about electricity. At my age
> (55), it is a race to see if the learning, or the forgetting, is winning.
> Thank you for taking the time to direct me to the right information. You,
> and the members, have put together a valuable resource here. It is
> obvious that I need to do some serious studying to come up to speed,
> enough to even pose useful questions. That I will do right now.
> Meanwhile, I have put together a BLOG to help UL pilots transition to
> Sport Pilot. One of the things I am doing is advising them on how to
> transition their UL aircraft. Many of them will need to create electrical
> systems, as I will. If you don't mind, I would like to provide a link to
> this list for them. My site is here:
>
> http://sptraining.blogspot.com/
>
> Again, thank you for the help.
You're correct . . . no EASY way to do it. The Vulcan mind-meld
is not yet in anyone's bag of tricks. I got my novice ticket in
spring of '56 in the 7th grade. Did a science class demo that failed
miserably. Dropped a wire out the second story window for an antenna.
My demo partner a few miles away heard me fine but noise from florescent
lights wilted my SX-28 like a pansy in the Mojave sun.
The website is an impressive effort. I wish you the best of luck
helping this new effort get spooled up. The world can always use
more pilots.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Startup |
| Subject: | Re: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup |
>
>
>Update:
>Was up north this weekend and was able to do a good test in the cold.
>Temp was 10F and I cranked her up.
>Set immediate idle at 800rpm. No charge. Sat ther for 10 seconds or so.
>Went to 1100rpm for about 5 seconds. And Wallah, charging.
>Back to 700rpm for 10 seconds. Still Charging.
>Down to 350rpm for 10 seconds and still charging.
This MAY be an on-purpose feature built into your
alternator. My little romp through the data sheet on the
MC33092A regulator chip offered some insights into
the thinking of at least these chip designers. Don't
know that the MC33092A found its way into your alternator
but it's a sure bet that any designer of a new chip who
is worth his salt has studied the market. The time delay
function offered in the MC33092A combined with the low/high
RPM transition switch may well have been included in your
alternator.
Don't jerk it out yet. It just might be performing
exactly as the designers intended.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> (correction) |
| Subject: | Re: Mic and Headset Jack Installation (correction) |
>
>Group,
>
>I've read the AeroElectric connection, searched the archives, etc. but can't
>develop an answer to the following question: when I went to install my
>jacks I
>found that I could either drill a ~3/8" hole that would allow the threaded
>post of the jack to pass through, or b) drill a slightly larger hole that
>would
>allow the threaded post PLUS the small shoulder to pass through.
>
>I purchased some of the isolation washers from B&C and they slip easily over
>the threaded post of the jack but won't go down over the shoulder at the base
>of the post.
That isn't what they're supposed to do.
>If I use the ~3/8" hole it appears the threaded portion of the jack could
>contact the panel as it passes through it, even with use of the isolation
>washers. So I guess I'm not sure what the isolation washers are doing.
Drill a 1/2" hole. Put the extruded washer on the jack first, extrusion
facing up. Insert jack in hole from behind and place flat insulating
washer on over the jack's barrel followed by the flat metal washer and
finally the NUT.
The insulating washers will sandwich the panel material while the
extrusion keeps the jack centered in the hole and isolated from
the panel.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Static Dischargers |
| From: | "steveadams" <dr_steve_adams(at)yahoo.com> |
Hopefully some of you can help me out. Last week I finally got to fly in some actual
IMC in my plane (total of 4 hours actual). After about 15 minutes in the
clouds, my radio transmissions became more and more filled with static. Still
understandable, but not very clear. No static when just listenning to controllers
or talking without transmitting. Slowly cleared up after exiting clouds.
I think this is a static build up problem and wondered what others thought. My
airplane is an CH640 and I have braided grounding straps across rudder and horizontal
tail hinges. They didn't specify static wicks in the design. I know that
static dischargers should be out and back as far as possible, but otherwise
am not sure about placement and how many I may need. Is there any general advise
concerning placement and number, or is it basically a trial and error process
to see what works?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=17053#17053
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Scott <rscott(at)cascadeaccess.com> |
| Subject: | Soldering question--What am I doing wrong? |
I'm building the Creative Air LED nav light kits, working on the LED's.
So here's what I am doing.
First I clean up the boards and LED leads with alcohol.
Put them in the boards & bend the wires.
Tin the iron. It's a 15 watt iron.
Put the iron on the connection, then apply the solder. Bill says the LED's
are heat sensitive and to only hold the iron on them a couple seconds.
Half the time the solder doesn't penetrate the board, so I only have a cone
of solder on the lead on one side of the board, the side I am soldering on.
To try to fix it, I try to solder it again.
If that doesn't work (it rarely does), I remove most of the solder using
the iron and a clean cotton swab to absorb the solder & try again. Rarely
works.
Some of these I try a dozen times & still no joy.
How can I get a good soldered joint with a cone of solder on both sides of
the board? I have been told that that's what I need for a good
joint. Maybe that guy was wrong?
Richard Scott
RV-9A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mchristian(at)canetics.com |
I used the Nova EPSX - 402 supply for something like $80. It is fully potted for
"extreme" conditions and has two strobe outlets, 3.75 amps draw and 12 diffrerent
selectable flash patterns in a box 4.7" X 4.4" X 1.7" to feed two wingtip
strobes ($18 each). It works great.
For position lights, I used three luxeon stars - one red one green, and you guessed it, one white. They are only $6.00 each. I put them in series with a calculated power resistor and they are so bright it is hard to look at. Total draw for position lights is one amp or less. I thermally bonded them to little thin sheetmetal brackets and mounted them under some Kutzleman clear plastic domes with the strobe heads. Since then, Kutzleman has come out with their streamline combo (www.kestrobes.com) essentially doing the same thing for $94 that I made for about $45 each.
Total cost of strobe and position light system is less than $180.
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup |
| From: | "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart(at)iss.net> |
Just as a reminder,
This behavior does not exist when OAT is above 40F OR is it is an
already warm engine.
On that same cold day Saturday, I started the warm engine at 400rpm and
it was charging immediately. There was no need to raise the rpm. Its
definitely temperature related.
Mike
-----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
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Update: Strange alternator behavior at
Startup
Startup
Atlanta)"
>
>
>Update:
>Was up north this weekend and was able to do a good test in the cold.
>Temp was 10F and I cranked her up.
>Set immediate idle at 800rpm. No charge. Sat ther for 10 seconds or so.
>Went to 1100rpm for about 5 seconds. And Wallah, charging.
>Back to 700rpm for 10 seconds. Still Charging.
>Down to 350rpm for 10 seconds and still charging.
This MAY be an on-purpose feature built into your
alternator. My little romp through the data sheet on the
MC33092A regulator chip offered some insights into
the thinking of at least these chip designers. Don't
know that the MC33092A found its way into your alternator
but it's a sure bet that any designer of a new chip who
is worth his salt has studied the market. The time delay
function offered in the MC33092A combined with the low/high
RPM transition switch may well have been included in your
alternator.
Don't jerk it out yet. It just might be performing
exactly as the designers intended.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD(at)DaveMorris.com> wrong? |
| Subject: | Re: Soldering question--What am I doing wrong? |
As long as you have a good solder joint on the soldered side of the board,
screw the other side.
Sorry, I should re-word that. It has nothing to do with bolts. "Ignore
the other side". There.
Dave Morris
At 12:54 PM 2/27/2006, you wrote:
>
>
>I'm building the Creative Air LED nav light kits, working on the LED's.
>
>So here's what I am doing.
>
>First I clean up the boards and LED leads with alcohol.
>
>Put them in the boards & bend the wires.
>
>Tin the iron. It's a 15 watt iron.
>
>Put the iron on the connection, then apply the solder. Bill says the LED's
>are heat sensitive and to only hold the iron on them a couple seconds.
>
>Half the time the solder doesn't penetrate the board, so I only have a cone
>of solder on the lead on one side of the board, the side I am soldering on.
>
>To try to fix it, I try to solder it again.
>
>If that doesn't work (it rarely does), I remove most of the solder using
>the iron and a clean cotton swab to absorb the solder & try again. Rarely
>works.
>
>Some of these I try a dozen times & still no joy.
>
>How can I get a good soldered joint with a cone of solder on both sides of
>the board? I have been told that that's what I need for a good
>joint. Maybe that guy was wrong?
>
>Richard Scott
>RV-9A
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glaeser, Dennis A" <dennis.glaeser(at)eds.com> |
Richard,
I built my CreativeAir lights last month. I think a 15 watt iron may be
a bit light. I used a 40 watt and had no problems - solder flowed
through the board just fine. I suspect that your iron doesn't have the
energy to heat the joint properly without excessive dwell time.
Dennis Glaeser
RV-7A
I'm building the Creative Air LED nav light kits, working on the LED's.
So here's what I am doing. First I clean up the boards and LED leads
with alcohol. Put them in the boards & bend the wires. Tin the iron.
It's a 15 watt iron. Put the iron on the connection, then apply the
solder. Bill says the LED's are heat sensitive and to only hold the iron
on them a couple seconds. Half the time the solder doesn't penetrate the
board, so I only have a cone of solder on the lead on one side of the
board, the side I am soldering on. To try to fix it, I try to solder it
again. If that doesn't work (it rarely does), I remove most of the
solder using the iron and a clean cotton swab to absorb the solder & try
again. Rarely works. Some of these I try a dozen times & still no joy.
How can I get a good soldered joint with a cone of solder on both sides
of the board? I have been told that that's what I need for a good joint.
Maybe that guy was wrong? Richard Scott RV-9A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Mather" <peter(at)mather.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Soldering question--What am I doing wrong? |
Richard
It depends on whether the board has plate-through holes - if there is track
on top of the board there should be but not always. If it has solder will
flow easily through unless the board is faulty, i.e some of the
plate-through is missing - not uncommon. If it is not plate through and
there is track on both sides then you need to solder both sides separately,
do not try and do it from one side. Otherwise just solder the bottom - one
little cone is fine.
Hope this helps
Best regards
Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Scott" <rscott(at)cascadeaccess.com>
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 6:54 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Soldering question--What am I doing wrong?
>
>
> I'm building the Creative Air LED nav light kits, working on the LED's.
>
> So here's what I am doing.
>
> First I clean up the boards and LED leads with alcohol.
>
> Put them in the boards & bend the wires.
>
> Tin the iron. It's a 15 watt iron.
>
> Put the iron on the connection, then apply the solder. Bill says the
> LED's
> are heat sensitive and to only hold the iron on them a couple seconds.
>
> Half the time the solder doesn't penetrate the board, so I only have a
> cone
> of solder on the lead on one side of the board, the side I am soldering
> on.
>
> To try to fix it, I try to solder it again.
>
> If that doesn't work (it rarely does), I remove most of the solder using
> the iron and a clean cotton swab to absorb the solder & try again. Rarely
> works.
>
> Some of these I try a dozen times & still no joy.
>
> How can I get a good soldered joint with a cone of solder on both sides of
> the board? I have been told that that's what I need for a good
> joint. Maybe that guy was wrong?
>
> Richard Scott
> RV-9A
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Hey everybody (especially Bob),
I've been sitting around thinking about how to make circuits more
complicated than they need to be (grin)... Here's an idea for turning off
an IR alternator with the end goal of not causing damage due to load dump.
It definitely adds parts count, and doesn't address over voltage nuisance
trips. The idea depends on the alternator using the sense lead as a
reference voltage input for the regulator. One of the schematics that I
looked at for an IR chip supported such behavior...
So, here's the idea. Actuating the 'off' position of the alternator
switch would actually connect a pumped ic regulator (LM1577 or similar)
output to the sense lead of the IR alternator at a voltage higher than
alternator output voltage. Say bump it up by 2Volts or so. This would
signal to the IR that the alternator output current needs to be reduced in
order to return to regulated voltage (in effect re-regulating, or fooling
the IR). After 1 sec or so, the alternator disconnect relay is then
opened, safely disconnecting the unit from the bus - no load-dump.
Turning the alternator switch back 'on' boots the circuit, closes the
alternator disconnect relay, and disconnects the pump regulator from the
sense lead circuit.
I can work up a schematic if this sounds interesting..
Matt-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sportav8r(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | d-sub panel connector source |
remind me where I can get a panel mount d-sub connector for laptop interconnectivity
with the Dynon and GRT EFIS I hope to install one day. I've checked websites
and list archives with no joy. I know this was recently discussed.
Thanks.
-Bill B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Startup |
| Subject: | Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup |
>
>
>Just as a reminder,
>This behavior does not exist when OAT is above 40F OR is it is an
>already warm engine.
>
>On that same cold day Saturday, I started the warm engine at 400rpm and
>it was charging immediately. There was no need to raise the rpm. Its
>definitely temperature related.
Aha! Great data point. If a regulator designer was trying
to be really clever, the delayed turn on would be not only
related to RPM (stumbling engine) but temperature too (cold
weather is the hardest time to start).
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Static Dischargers |
>
>
>Hopefully some of you can help me out. Last week I finally got to fly in
>some actual IMC in my plane (total of 4 hours actual). After about 15
>minutes in the clouds, my radio transmissions became more and more filled
>with static. Still understandable, but not very clear. No static when just
>listenning to controllers or talking without transmitting. Slowly cleared
>up after exiting clouds. I think this is a static build up problem and
>wondered what others thought. My airplane is an CH640 and I have braided
>grounding straps across rudder and horizontal tail hinges. They didn't
>specify static wicks in the design. I know that static dischargers should
>be out and back as far as possible, but otherwise am not sure about
>placement and how many I may need. Is there any general advise concerning
>placement and number, or is it basically a trial and error process to see
>what works?
Pretty much. P-static mitigation is a combination of science and
art . . . but without the 200Kv hot spot chaser wand we use at
RAC, a bit of luck doesn't hurt.
Fortunately your airplane is slow and your time in the clouds
probably limited. If you query the usual suspects for aircraft
quality static wicks, you'll find listing like:
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/staticwick.php
http://www.texair.com/aircraftparts/Dayton-Granger.asp
. . . and occasionally you might even find them on Ebay. See
item 4612427645
You can try three minimum. One on trailing edge of each
aileron and one on the rudder. It's a cut-n-try sort of
thing without a purposeful testing facility but you
have nothing to loose and an experimental airplane to
try things on.
Here's an article that speaks to the science of crafting
and installing static wicks for terrestrial applications:
http://www.repeater-builder.com/pdf/staticbusterarticlecomplete.pdf
In a Google search I ran across this note. I was 3/4th through
the thing before I realized it was one I wrote some years ago:
Stat Wicks
Static wicks have nothing to do with radio quality or
reliability. EVERY time dissimilar materials slide across each
other, there is a tendency for one material with a stronger affinity
for electrons than the other to acquire a negative charge.
Common manifestations include sparks that jump between
fingertip and doorknob after walking across carpet. In the winter
especially, I have to remind myself to keep part of my body
touching the frame of my 1" vertical belt sander while sculpting a
piece of metal . . . the Van DeGraff like nature of the belt sander
will charge the ol' bod with a significant kick if I don't bleed it off
during the sanding operations.
Precipitation static is unique to airborne particles sliding
past any conductor. Radio receivers can be severely affected by
dust storms usually associated with high winds. I used to work
with an amateur radio repeater installation 1200 feet up on
KTVH-TV in Hutchinson, KS. A blowing snowstorm would
severely de-sense our receivers.
Airplanes have unique problems in that they generate their
own wind. Airplanes flying through dust, rain or snow can pick
up significant charges. When the charge reaches sufficient
magnitude, it begins to form coronas at the sharp (usually trailing
edges) of wings and flight control surfaces.
The static wick is a sharp-ended conductor (enhances
tendency for charge to concentrate and form corona) connected to
the airframe through some nominal but rather high resistance.
The idea is to put sufficient static wicks in the right places so that
they force lots of small, low current discharges to form and
dissipate the energy at much lower (read less noisy) levels than if
the wicks were not present.
The faster the airplane flies, the more likely it is to
experience the effects of p-static. Further, the finish and skin
materials have an influence on tendency to build and concentrate
static charges. These effects are present and potentially
troublesome irrespective of the vintage of radios carried aboard
the airplane.
VHF radios are less susceptible than HF or ADF receivers.
Grounded antennas are quieter than isolated antennas. There are
some modern digital signal processing techniques that can reduce
the audible effects of p-static but ultimately, locally generated
static noises will overwhelm a receiver looking for weaker
signals.
The number, style and placement of static wicks on our
bizjets is as much an art as a science. We spent a great deal of
$time$ selecting the right products and installations. Further,
there's a comprehensive incoming inspection of static wicks . . .
seems that a performance of a static wick is very sensitive to
production variability.
If your airplane suffers from the effects of p-static, it may
take a lot of effort over a long period of time to deduce the
optimum solution
I might add to this that a static wick is not
a simple sharp-tipped conductor tacked to the trailing
edge of a wing. It has a high resistance . . on the
order of tens of megohms. Not easy to build. This
long, linear resistance element is necessary to keep
the wick from becoming an efficient concentrator
and radiator of noise at it's 1/4 wave resonance
frequency. It's also necessary to mitigate the
ability of the discharge at the tip to generate
noise.
Your best source for "real" wicks is probably Ebay.
They'll come already built . . . but with no guarantees.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Startup |
| Subject: | Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup |
>
>Hey everybody (especially Bob),
>
>I've been sitting around thinking about how to make circuits more
>complicated than they need to be (grin)... Here's an idea for turning off
>an IR alternator with the end goal of not causing damage due to load dump.
> It definitely adds parts count, and doesn't address over voltage nuisance
>trips. The idea depends on the alternator using the sense lead as a
>reference voltage input for the regulator. One of the schematics that I
>looked at for an IR chip supported such behavior...
>
>So, here's the idea. Actuating the 'off' position of the alternator
>switch would actually connect a pumped ic regulator (LM1577 or similar)
>output to the sense lead of the IR alternator at a voltage higher than
>alternator output voltage. Say bump it up by 2Volts or so. This would
>signal to the IR that the alternator output current needs to be reduced in
>order to return to regulated voltage (in effect re-regulating, or fooling
>the IR). After 1 sec or so, the alternator disconnect relay is then
>opened, safely disconnecting the unit from the bus - no load-dump.
>Turning the alternator switch back 'on' boots the circuit, closes the
>alternator disconnect relay, and disconnects the pump regulator from the
>sense lead circuit.
>
>I can work up a schematic if this sounds interesting..
Your solution pre-supposes that we have access to an
internal sense lead and that the builder is willing/
able to add that lead at installation. Your premise is
sound. Anything you can do to fool a normally working
regulator into an orderly shut down would do the trick.
The approach I have in mind requires no modifications
to an alternator . . . it would even work with the so-called
one-wire alternators that don't have a control-wire.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> wrong? |
| Subject: | Re: Soldering question--What am I doing wrong? |
>
>
>I'm building the Creative Air LED nav light kits, working on the LED's.
>
>So here's what I am doing.
>
>First I clean up the boards and LED leads with alcohol.
>
>Put them in the boards & bend the wires.
>
>Tin the iron. It's a 15 watt iron.
>
>Put the iron on the connection, then apply the solder. Bill says the LED's
>are heat sensitive and to only hold the iron on them a couple seconds.
>
>Half the time the solder doesn't penetrate the board, so I only have a cone
>of solder on the lead on one side of the board, the side I am soldering on.
>
>To try to fix it, I try to solder it again.
>
>If that doesn't work (it rarely does), I remove most of the solder using
>the iron and a clean cotton swab to absorb the solder & try again. Rarely
>works.
>
>Some of these I try a dozen times & still no joy.
>
>How can I get a good soldered joint with a cone of solder on both sides of
>the board? I have been told that that's what I need for a good
>joint. Maybe that guy was wrong?
Sounds like not enough heat. ALL semiconductors are "sensitive" to
heat but they're all routinely installed by soldering. If you're
not getting the flow you want, the tool is too cold. I presume too
that you're using 63/37 or 64/40 solder with a good pedigree.
All of our tips here run 700F on 30W irons with a great deal of
ability to cook things if you are sloppy and/or really slow. But
I don't know of any components that are not designed to withstand
ordinary (4-5 seconds) of sufficient heat to get flow in their installation
joints.
Forget the wattage. Get a temperature controlled iron of any wattage
30 or more. Set for no less than 600F and use good solder. Then apply
heat as necessary to get the flow you're looking for. Wattage is an
exceedingly poor way to rate a soldering iron's ability. Our 30 Watt
irons (Metcal) will solder terminals to 4AWG fat wire and the same
iron installs 32 leg IC's with .025" pitch between the pins.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron Shannon <rshannon(at)cruzcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Static Dischargers |
Slightly tangential, but....
Early research on P-static and how to deal with it was carried out
during WWII by a team led by Bob Buck. In a B-17, they intentionally
sought and charged (sorry about that one) into major storm clouds all
over the world -- for the benefit of science. He writes about it in
fascinating detail in "North Star Over My Shoulder", a memoir of his
extraordinary life in aviation (early biplanes to Chief Pilot for TWA
driving 747's, etc.) and a good read all around.
Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Dube <william.p.dube(at)noaa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: LED position lights + strobe |
I designed these particular LED position lights and sell the kits. If
you have any questions, feel free to ask.
Mike shipper did a very nice write up when he built a pair of my lights.
Mike is a bit more of a perfectionist than most, so he put in about
double the time it takes the typical person to build the kit. Taking
these terrific pictures and doing this write-up also probably counted in
the time. (Most folks take about 4 hours to build the kit. I do them in
less than an hour, but I have a little bit of practice at this point.)
http://www.my9a.com/lights.asp
>>Caution - Blatant self promotion about to occur<<<
These LED position light kits cost less than $150 per pair. This is
cheaper than the standard incandescent lights.
Theses lights are the only ones on the market that are available as a
kit. (Most folks that are building a kit airplane seem to like building
kit position lights.)
The lights put out more light than required by the FAA in all
directions. I even tell you how to measure the light output yourself in
the instructions.
The LEDs will outlast the airplane.
I took a "belt and suspenders" approach in the design. They have 23
separate current regulated circuits. You can drill a few holes in each
light and they won't go dark. They stay the same brightness from 10
volts up to 30 volts input.
They only draw half an amp for the pair of lights. They are much,
much lighter than incandescent position lights.
Bill Dube'
Eric Newton wrote:
>
>Could be this one:
>http://www.creativair.com/cva/product_info.php?cPath=3D21&products_id=3D44
>
>Eric
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Dube <william.p.dube(at)noaa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Soldering question--What am I doing wrong? |
You are doing nothing wrong.
If the solder has wet the wire and wet the pad on one side, that is
perfect. The holes are plated through so you only need to make a solder
connection to the pad on one side.
It's is good that you read the instructions about overheating the
LEDs. :
)
Be sure to put on sunglasses before you apply power to the lights.
Otherwise, you will see spots for awhile.
If you have the combo lights, don't forget to install the jumper
wire for 12 volts (or the resistor for 24 volts.)
Bill Dube'
Peter Mather wrote:
>
>Richard
>
>It depends on whether the board has plate-through holes - if there is track
>on top of the board there should be but not always. If it has solder will
>flow easily through unless the board is faulty, i.e some of the
>plate-through is missing - not uncommon. If it is not plate through and
>there is track on both sides then you need to solder both sides separately,
>do not try and do it from one side. Otherwise just solder the bottom - one
>little cone is fine.
>
>Hope this helps
>
>Best regards
>
>Peter
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Richard Scott" <rscott(at)cascadeaccess.com>
>To:
>Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 6:54 PM
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Soldering question--What am I doing wrong?
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>I'm building the Creative Air LED nav light kits, working on the LED's.
>>
>>So here's what I am doing.
>>
>>First I clean up the boards and LED leads with alcohol.
>>
>>Put them in the boards & bend the wires.
>>
>>Tin the iron. It's a 15 watt iron.
>>
>>Put the iron on the connection, then apply the solder. Bill says the
>>LED's
>>are heat sensitive and to only hold the iron on them a couple seconds.
>>
>>Half the time the solder doesn't penetrate the board, so I only have a
>>cone
>>of solder on the lead on one side of the board, the side I am soldering
>>on.
>>
>>To try to fix it, I try to solder it again.
>>
>>If that doesn't work (it rarely does), I remove most of the solder using
>>the iron and a clean cotton swab to absorb the solder & try again. Rarely
>>works.
>>
>>Some of these I try a dozen times & still no joy.
>>
>>How can I get a good soldered joint with a cone of solder on both sides of
>>the board? I have been told that that's what I need for a good
>>joint. Maybe that guy was wrong?
>>
>>Richard Scott
>>RV-9A
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Dube <william.p.dube(at)noaa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: AGM longevity (was: Odyssey % of charge) |
I know a little bit about batteries. Check out my other hobby.
<http://www.KillaCycle.com>
and my daily driver <http://www.haritech.com/wabbit.html>
Bill Dube'
Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
>Bill Dube wrote:
>
>
>
>> Occasionally, you need to purposely overcharge the battery to let the
>>negative plate catch up with the positive plate. A couple times per
>>year, you bring the battery up to 14.8 volts and let the current taper
>>off to less than an amp. You then push in a constant current of about 4%
>>of the amp-hr rating of the battery for about an hour. This cleans off
>>the negative plate.
>>
>>
>
>Right. This is called an equalization charge.
>
>
>
>> High-end voltage regulators do something like this (like on boats
>>and motor homes). Every time you start up the engine, it charges up the
>>battery to normal voltage, then it gives the battery a slight overcharge
>>for a few minutes. Makes the big expensive AGM batteries last much longer.
>>
>>
>
>Hmm. The big, expensive AGM and gel-cell batteries I used on my boat
>came with warnings from the manufacturer to never do an equalization
>charge, that the normal charging regimen would ensure proper charging.
>
>So when it comes to batteries, I read and follow the manufacturer's
>recommendations.
>
>Good information by the way.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Lr-3 question Z diagram question |
| From: | "rlnelson5" <rlnelson-5(at)peoplepc.com> |
Hello I am installing a Lr-3c regulator from B+c. I was wondering if anybody
had made up a temp sensor for this regulator without buying the 85 dollar one
from B+C.
I have seen several items on this list about Shotsky diodes. The Digikey book
has 4 pages of them . Would they be better to use then the regular 4 terminal
diode that is listed in the Z diagrams for the endurance bus? If so which one
to get? Thanks
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=18244#18244
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Dube <william.p.dube(at)noaa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: AGM longevity (was: Odyssey % of charge) |
You are correct. They should not be continuously float charged for
longest life.
AGMs typically have very small self-discharge. If your airplane doesn't
have some continuous drain (like the clock or avionics memory) then the
AGM should stay quite well charged for 6 months or so. If you put on the
float (or pulse) charger for a couple of days every few months, that
should keep up the AGM just fine.
Bill Dube'
Ken wrote:
>
>This is one I've never heard of before.
>
>The manufacturer of my wee AGM specifies a float voltage which I've been
>using. This implies that a pulse type battery maintainer might be better
>or maybe that they should not be float charged continuously while in
>storage?? These are small but somewhat pricey Dekka batteries on a Z-14
>architecture so there is no plan to periodically replace them - just
>flog flog them until noticeable starting performance suffers.
>
>thanks
>Ken
>
>
>
>> Grid corrosion occurs if you leave the battery on float for a long
>>time. The oxygen gas formed eats at the grids that support the paste.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Update: Strange alternator behavior at Startup |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III Startup wrote:
>> Set immediate idle at 800rpm. No charge. Sat ther for 10 seconds or so.
>> Went to 1100rpm for about 5 seconds. And Wallah, charging.
>> Back to 700rpm for 10 seconds. Still Charging.
>> Down to 350rpm for 10 seconds and still charging.
> ...
>
> Don't jerk it out yet. It just might be performing
> exactly as the designers intended.
This is actually normal behavior for a self-exciting alternator if you
don't hook up the ignition terminal or the idiot light. There is no
source of power to provide any field excitation so excitation comes from
the residual magnetic field in the armature. Eventually you get it
spinning fast enough that there is enough output from the stator to
begin to excite the regulator and the field. The result is that the
alternator begins to bootstrap, i.e. a little current gets to the field
which slightly increases the output which causes a little more current
to get to the field, until the alternator has enough output to fully
turn on the regulator and the field.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Static Dischargers |
steveadams wrote:
> ...After about 15 minutes in the clouds, my radio transmissions became more and
more filled with static. Still understandable, but not very clear. No static
when just listenning to controllers or talking without transmitting.
While the fact that it happens in the cloud and clears up when you leave
the cloud certainly implies p-static, I have *never* heard of p-static
having an effect on transmission. I have been in p-static so bad (dry
snow) that not a single receiver in the aircraft worked (well, they
worked but the noise was greater than any signal). Through that my
transmissions were clear to receivers.
Is there anything else you turned on while in the clag? Pitot heat?
Another (remote) possibility is that the base of your antenna is not
bonded well and the water changed the characteristic of your ground
plane connection.
And of course it could be just a bad lobe on your antenna radiation
pattern. Did you make any turns or were you motoring straight and level?
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Soldering question--What am I doing wrong? |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrong? wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>I'm building the Creative Air LED nav light kits, working on the LED's.
>>
>>So here's what I am doing.
>>
>>First I clean up the boards and LED leads with alcohol.
>>
>>Put them in the boards & bend the wires.
>>
>>Tin the iron. It's a 15 watt iron.
>>
>>Put the iron on the connection, then apply the solder. Bill says the LED's
>>are heat sensitive and to only hold the iron on them a couple seconds.
>>
>>Half the time the solder doesn't penetrate the board, so I only have a cone
>>of solder on the lead on one side of the board, the side I am soldering on.
>>
>>To try to fix it, I try to solder it again.
>>
>>If that doesn't work (it rarely does), I remove most of the solder using
>>the iron and a clean cotton swab to absorb the solder & try again. Rarely
>>works.
>>
>>Some of these I try a dozen times & still no joy.
>>
>>How can I get a good soldered joint with a cone of solder on both sides of
>>the board? I have been told that that's what I need for a good
>>joint. Maybe that guy was wrong?
>>
>>
>
> Sounds like not enough heat. ALL semiconductors are "sensitive" to
> heat but they're all routinely installed by soldering. If you're
> not getting the flow you want, the tool is too cold. I presume too
> that you're using 63/37 or 64/40 solder with a good pedigree.
>
> All of our tips here run 700F on 30W irons with a great deal of
> ability to cook things if you are sloppy and/or really slow. But
> I don't know of any components that are not designed to withstand
> ordinary (4-5 seconds) of sufficient heat to get flow in their installation
> joints.
>
> Forget the wattage. Get a temperature controlled iron of any wattage
> 30 or more. Set for no less than 600F and use good solder. Then apply
> heat as necessary to get the flow you're looking for. Wattage is an
> exceedingly poor way to rate a soldering iron's ability. Our 30 Watt
> irons (Metcal) will solder terminals to 4AWG fat wire and the same
> iron installs 32 leg IC's with .025" pitch between the pins.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
I hope that adding to Bob's answer isn't too presumptuous....
Using insufficient heat/power is much more likely to damage stuff than
'too much'. Reason: if the iron isn't hot enough, or is so under
powered or under massed that it can't get the joint hot quickly, heat
can flow into easily damaged components & raise their temp to damaging
levels before the joint gets hot enough to flow solder. (Same thing can
happen if the joint or iron isn't clean.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Dube <william.p.dube(at)noaa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: AGM longevity (was: Odyssey % of charge) |
Here is an example of a high-end battery charger. Zivan sets these up to
giver precisely the correct charge algorithm for the specific brand and
type of battery.
http://www.zivanusa.com/BC1BatteryCharger.htm
They use this sort of high-end charger on fork lifts, golf carts,
etc where they care about battery life. Take a look at the charge curves
on some of these chargers and you will get an idea of the right way to
charge a battery.
I own a Zivan NG3 that I used for my electric car when I had Optima AGM
lead-acid batteries in it. It ran the curves that I spoke of in the
previous post. In an EV, you typically have over $1000 in batteries that
you want to last as long as possible. Thus, you buy a charger that will
run the "perfect" charge cycle. These high-wattage chargers typically
cost more than $1000, so adding the brains to do the proper charge
doesn't change the final cost of the charger very much and saves you a
bunch in batteries.
If you have an AGM that is a little tired, you can try the
overcharge that I outlined in the previous post. If it has sulfation or
a undercharged negative plates, it will perk up a bit. Crank the plane
up, let it charge normally (like on a flight) and then give it another
overcharge. It should crank even better.
If it is running out of water because your voltage regulator is set
too high, the overcharge will not help. You will not notice a difference
in cranking voltage. Thus, there is no point in doing a second go at it.
You should probably just get a new battery.
To do the overcharge, I use a bench power supply and set the voltage
and current exactly, but you won't have one probably. A good substitute
is a 15 volt, 2 or 3 amp Toshiba laptop AC adapter. You can pick one up
on Ebay for about $10.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Toshiba-Laptop-Power-Adapter-DC15V-2A_W0QQitemZ6853456587QQcategoryZ31517QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
or
http://cgi.ebay.com/Toshiba-Laptop-Power-Adapter-PA2426U-for-T-Series-NIB_W0QQitemZ6852048387QQcategoryZ31517QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
or
http://cgi.ebay.com/GENUINE-TOSHIBA-LAPTOP-AC-ADAPTER-PA2450U-POWER-CORD_W0QQitemZ6852574714QQcategoryZ116318QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Cut off the computer connector and attach a pair of clip leads. (The
shield is negative.) Disconnect one of the battery leads and connect up
the Toshiba laptop supply. Leave it on for a 3 or 4 hours. Should do the
trick. Don't leave it connected for more than a few hours or it will dry
out your battery. When the Toshiba power supply is no longer warm to the
touch, disconnect it.
Bill Dube'
Alex Peterson wrote:
>
>
>
>
>> Occasionally, you need to purposely overcharge the battery
>>to let the negative plate catch up with the positive plate. A
>>couple times per year, you bring the battery up to 14.8 volts
>>and let the current taper off to less than an amp. You then
>>push in a constant current of about 4% of the amp-hr rating
>>of the battery for about an hour. This cleans off the negative plate.
>>
>>
>
>
>Bill, excellent post! What would be your recommendation for a charger to
>accomplish this periodic overcharging method for cleaning the negative
>plate? I suspect that this is what my PC680 needs after two years.
>
>Alex Peterson
>RV6-A N66AP 719 hours
>Maple Grove, MN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mchristian(at)canetics.com |
I used the Nova EPSX - 402 supply for something like $80. It is fully potted for
"extreme" conditions and has two strobe outlets, 3.75 amps draw and 12 diffrerent
selectable flash patterns in a box 4.7" X 4.4" X 1.7" to feed two wingtip
strobes ($18 each). It works great.
For position lights, I used three luxeon stars - one red one green, and you guessed it, one white. They are only $6.00 each. I put them in series with a calculated power resistor and they are so bright it is hard to look at. Total draw for position lights is one amp or less. I thermally bonded them to little thin sheetmetal brackets and mounted them under some Kutzleman clear plastic domes with the strobe heads. Since then, Kutzleman has come out with their streamline combo (www.kestrobes.com) essentially doing the same thing for $94 that I made for less than $40 each.
Total cost of strobe and position light system is less than $180.
Mike
reposting to get subject line to adhere...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mchristian(at)canetics.com |
I used the Nova EPSX - 402 supply for something like $80. It is fully potted for
"extreme" conditions and has two strobe outlets, 3.75 amps draw and 12 diffrerent
selectable flash patterns in a box 4.7" X 4.4" X 1.7" to feed two wingtip
strobes ($18 each). It works great.
For position lights, I used three luxeon stars - one red one green, and you guessed it, one white. They are only $6.00 each. I put them in series with a calculated power resistor and they are so bright it is hard to look at. Total draw for position lights is one amp or less. I thermally bonded them to little thin sheetmetal brackets and mounted them under some Kutzleman clear plastic domes with the strobe heads. Since then, Kutzleman has come out with their streamline combo (www.kestrobes.com) essentially doing the same thing for $94 that I made for less than $40 each.
Total cost of strobe and position light system is less than $180.
Mike
reposting to get subject line to adhere...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> wrong? |
| Subject: | Re: Soldering question--What am I doing wrong? |
>
>
>I hope that adding to Bob's answer isn't too presumptuous....
>
>Using insufficient heat/power is much more likely to damage stuff than
>'too much'. Reason: if the iron isn't hot enough, or is so under
>powered or under massed that it can't get the joint hot quickly, heat
>can flow into easily damaged components & raise their temp to damaging
>levels before the joint gets hot enough to flow solder. (Same thing can
>happen if the joint or iron isn't clean.)
Dead on right sir. It's sorta like having your cubmaster having
you "start off easy" with a dull knife . . . lest you hurt yerself.
Saw more folks get buggered trying to force a cut with dull
knives than those who could concentrate on doing it right
because skill and not the tool was the limiting factor.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange alternator behavior at Startup (Bob N) |
Bob, most of what you wrote has nothing to do with the topic?
It is not a debate of IF you should use a I-VR alternator, but I will
try to address you question, fully knowing you will never be
satisfied.
>Bob N wrote
>If they have understanding to offer, the block diagrams,
>schematics, test results, etc are in order. That's what I offer and I
>expect no less.
Just call them Bob. What's the big deal.
For someone who says the want to understand you come off
as disingenuous when you dont really make and effort.
Did you even try to call Bob? I think you will find it worthwhile. I
cant guarantee they will meet a level of knowledge to satisfy
you. However you only have excuses for not calling. Do you
really want to try to understand, or do you want to posture and
make statements about schematics and repeatable test.
This is about how I-VR works for those who DO use them. Not about
Bob, what Bob does at Beechcraft, certified planes or what you feel
comfortable suggesting in your book. Those who already use an
I-VR want to know how they work; They dont need FAA or your approval
or absolute proof as you do. This is NOT about IF you should use,
only HOW they really work.
>Every simple idea I've had to offer was explained at length, often
>illustrated and in many cases based on lessons-learned from the past
>40 years of cooking (and burning a few fingers) in this particular
>kitchen.
For some reason you turn a debate about the functions of an
internal VR into something personal. Nothing personal Bob.
Bob you provide a wealth of knowledge and experience. I think
we all can say is of immense help and enjoyment to us amateur
airplane electricians. Your help to airplane builders in garages
and hangers world over is with out dispute. Even if I dont agree
with you, that does not mean I dont understand your point or
disrespect your accomplishments.
This all came about from a question about strange alternator
operation right after start up. Jon made a reply that I found was
reasonable and true. If you dont believe Jon, me, engineers who
work for a company that makes I-VRs or a technical spec
brochure from Motorola, than what else can I say to you?
I understand your position, but internal voltage regulators DO have
advanced protection, logic and control, FACT. Deal with it, or
otherwise prove they dont work that way.
Call Transpo and talk to an Engineer. No, they will not give you
the keys to the manufacturing plant, but they will be nice and talk
to you (if you are nice as I am sure you would be). Its a 800 number;
what do you have to loose. They are hard to get a hold of
sometimes, but it might be worth it. If that is not good enough,
OK. Then end of subject.
I say try to understand with any and whatever info is available.
Don't believe but dont cast dispersions. I'm guessing you are not
REALLY truly motivated for yourself and just want to cast doubt.
>I wasn't suggesting you should. It was an ILLUSTRATION of
>just how much we've come to depend on tools (and faith in the
>talent of others) that started out with high ideals but failed in the
>marketplace. All the analysis in the world does not replace the
>repeatable experiment.
>Unfortunately, there is so much faith in the up-front, computer
>aided analysis that we've totally divested ourselves of any kind
>of skunk works. At the same time, we're a bit dismayed that
>customer aircraft have become IR&D tools for fixing problems
>that analysis failed to reveal.
Again interesting but irrelevant.
I feel your lament. Not sure what it has to do with the debate. You
probably are right. America needs more scientist and engineers
researching in labs.
Bob you are skeptical and cynical, that is a great way to be. I
am also skeptical, but I pick my battles. This is not one of them.
>You seem to think I'm trying to convince you of something . . .
>or sell you something. The only reason I offer you anything is as
>a courtesy from one engineer to another . . . but gee, without all
>the alphabet soup after my name, perhaps my biggest failing is
>knowing the right kind of words to use. I'm only trying to share
>my experience and observations based on that experience. The
>only folks who's approval I MUST have are those who send me
>money and expect a fair value in return. Everything else is the
>fun of considering simple-ideas . . . . and I DO enjoy it. I'm sorry
>if it's upsetting for you.
Ha Ha, you could not upset me, I would not allow it. Further I dont
believe anything you say Bob or anyone says, with out checking it
out to my satisfaction. No offense. I have checked it out, your turn.
I agree you need high standards to give suggestions about a/c wiring.
Again, what does this have to do with I-VR functions? This is not
a debate whether we should use them, just how they work.
As far as words you use, frankly they get in the way sometimes.
There is NO doubt you are trying to share you experience and
it is helpful, but it does always directly translate into what we,
I-VR users need. In fact its mostly counter to what we need.
Also you always seem to have a chip or resentment about
college degrees. Again its NOT about you Bob, its about the
FACTS. Not sticking with the topic is distracting. We are talking
about HOW internal VRs work, that is all, not peace in the
Mid East, not Beechcraft.
>I AM distressed that you don't seem to grasp what I'm driving at
.> . . a serious failing on my part as a teacher. Hmmmm . . . did
>you buy a copy of the 'Connection from me? Do you want your
>money back?
I am sorry you are distressed, its not your fault teacher; its ok
Bob, I (we) really get it. You want unequivocal proof. I do think with
respect youre hypocritical, because you dont always require the
same level of proof consistently. For some reasons when you hear
something negative about an I-VR alternator you accept it and
NEVER question it. You require no proof or details. Why? You
loose credibility when you are not fair and consistent.
Bottom line is NOT everyone agrees with you. That is also ok, but
sadly many times you automatically assume that disagreeing with
you means the other party does not understand. I understand you
Mr. Bob N. I have run across guys like you a dozen times in my
career and appreciate your mind set and perspective, but I
respectfully dont agree and find it negative, not helpful sometimes.
Just to say prove it or info is hard to get does not make it
true or false. Someone out there has the details that you want.
You wont know unless YOU research it. I have and found
enough info to make me happy, as others have. That's all I claim.
>If that's what you did, then are you then a spokesperson for
>Transpo or have you developed an independent but supporting
>professional opinion you can share? Have you seen schematics,
>design philosophies, parts selection criteria? Would you/they
>share that with us? I get access to this stuff when I approve
>products for my boss, it's called preliminary and critical design
>reviews. But since you're going experimental, do you consider
>such tools superfluous, perhaps a waste of time? Is it no longer
>necessary that we understand how things work? Just field the
>pitch over the counter at OSH and plunk down the credit card? I
>may have to ask your forgiveness. I consider my OBAM aircraft
>customers just as deserving of the best-I-know-how-to-do as my
>TC aircraft customers.
Lots of words and smoke but no meat. WHAT are you talking
about? Spokesperson? OBAM? the best-I-know-how-to-do?
Great, but so what?
Bob dont be ridiculous; I am not their spokesman, and no
they are not going to hand you detailed info. SO WHAT? They
will confirm the functions and how they work. That is what
started this thread. I talk to them a few times and found them to
be friendly, knowledgeably and helpful. They have a true desire to
understand the problems and offered me their assistant in doing
detailed failure analysis of failed components I might have. I am
sure if you call, are nice and REALLY want to learn from them
(not teach them), they will help you also. Your I DEMAND PROOF
attitude (analysis, test reports, detailed schematics), I am
guessing will not go over big or impress them.
Its irrelevant what you do at work. We are talking about small
alternators for small planes that dont need certification approval.
Since there are many many thousands of I-VR's flying
successfully in experimental planes, the experiment has been
repeated so many times in so many builders planes, its not an
experiment anymore.
Bob you gladly expressed your opinion or allowed others to
express their opinions as fact with out ANY proof. Now when Jon
or I say I-VR have soft start or thermal protection you demand
proof? You make me laugh. That is hypocritical. I guess you cant
prove a negative. Prove I-VR are subject to massive OV. I know
you cant. I want to see your repeatable test. No THEORY, FACT.
Your position is untenable. The fact is I-VR do a great job and if
installed and operated appropriately, which respectfully your
your book does not represent, than you can expect good service.
It is experimental not Beechcraft.
How many I-VR have you seen and determined it was a shorted
transistor, your leading theory. NONE. Your past reply, parts are
gone or its so damaged you cant analyze it. I call BS! Lets see
your facts. However we are digressing.
A year ago Aeroelectric list was more like pulp fiction than a clearing
house of facts, when it came to internal voltage regulated alternators.
It is much better now.
If you really care or want to understand than look into it. If you
dont and want to stay in your belief system I understand. Why
should you change. You have a way that works for you which you
feel comfortable recommending. THAT IS FINE! I get it and
respect that position, but let I-VR users learn with out impediment.
>You've tossed in tons of cabbages and tomatoes which I've
>attempted to field with thoughtful, illustrative answers. May I
>suggest this friendly competition. Let the List vote on the work
>product. Looser sends the winner a copy of his favorite book.
More analogies Bob. Oh Boy, You are so funny. What tons of
cabbages and tomatoes are you talking about? Is that an insult?
What did I say specifically that was either cabbage or tomato?
I dont care. I am just having a hard enough time getting you to
stay on the subject. You like the student asking the professor
to prove Einstein's theory of relativity and worm holes exist.
PROVE IT, you say over and over. Nothing wrong with asking
questions, but after a while its counter productive, and you
need to figure it out for yourself. By just asking questions to
cast some doubt on the topic is a waste of time. Bob, everyone
else in the class either does not care, gets it or has moved on.
You need to answer your own questions because you are the
only one you will listen to or believe. That is cool.
I am trying to stay on point and talk about a subject with out all
the flowery language and meaningless analogies.
You make me laugh Bob N. What is a *work product*?
I think the list has voted already. There are more internally
regulated alternators going into planes than B&C or otherwise.
Even Aeroelectic readers put I-VRs in, but they dont have the
heart to tell you Bob. Vans sells thousands and thousands of the
I-VR Nippon Denso 60 amp alternators. Niagara sells 1000s of
NDs with I-VRs. Someone is buying them. How many does B&C sell?
As for the one problem with I-VR, there are a thousand times
more flying daily with no problem.
I WIN!
Ill take the THE DA VINCI CODE, hard back please.
>If you 'dust' me, I'll be pleased to send you a copy of "The
>Professional Amateur" by T.A. Boyd. It's a biography of
>Charles F. Kettering - a scientist worthy of much respect and
>emulation . . . one of my personal heroes.
You have already lost, so when you pick up THE DA VINCI
CODE for me, pick up a copy of that Bio you want for yourself,
to save a trip to the book store.
Bob, let us improve the understanding with out all the smoke
screen and posturing with irrelevant analogies, certification standards
and PROOF that will make YOU happy, which is not likely going to
happen, unless you do it yourself. You DO NOT represent I-VR at
all. What you suggest for E-VR is counter to safe efficient
operation of I-VR in my OPINION. No facts just opinion. However
I emphasize that I understand your position and respect it. Bottom
line people are going to use I-VRs no matter what you say. Why
not better understand the data that *IS* available than just
disparage the data as not being good enough. Lets use what
we have and know NOW. You just say not good enough.
George (write me for my address, so you can send my book.)
February 21, 2006 - February 27, 2006
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-fl