AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-gn
January 09, 2007 - January 22, 2007
A brief perusal of the AIM revealed: (italics mine)
AIM 1-1-19
d. General Requirements
1. Authorization to conduct any GPS operation under IFR requires that:
(a) GPS navigation equipment used must be approved in accordance
with the requirements specified in Technical Standard Order (TSO) TSO-C129,
or equivalent, and the installation must be done in accordance with Advisory
Circular AC 20-138, Airworthiness Approval of Global Positioning System
(GPS) Navigation Equipment for Use as a VFR and IFR Supplemental Navigation
System, or Advisory Circular AC 20-130A, Airworthiness Approval of
Navigation or Flight Management Systems Integrating Multiple Navigation
Sensors, or equivalent. Equipment approved in accordance with TSO-C115a does
not meet the requirements of TSO-C129.
The words "must be approved..." pretty much settles the issue with me. Then
they continue on with the phrase "or equivalent". What would be equivalent
to TSO-C129? So off I go to read TSO-C129....
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgTSO.nsf/0/e560cd9c6acf8ba186256dc700717e0f/$FILE/C129a.pdf
I now know the requirements of any GPS to meet the TSO...
"Airborne supplemental area navigation equipment using GPS that are
to be so identified and that are manufactured on or after the date of this
TSO must meet the minimum performance standard of Section 2, RTCA,
Inc. Document No. RTCA/DO-208, "Minimum Operational Performance Standards
for Airborne Supplemental Navigation Equipment Using Global Positioning
System (GPS)," dated July 1991."
See the RTCA/DO-208 document here...
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/cgsic/meetings/summaryrpts/31stmeeting/chesto/chesto.pdf
As you can see, the FAA has left a wide loophole with the phrase "or
equivalent". It appears that, from my understanding, a GPS used for IFR
navigation must meet the minimum standard of RTCA/DO-208 in order to meet
the standard of TSO-C129 in order to be approved for IFR navigation.
Problem is, I don't see where the FAA requires the GPS to be "certified". I
may be confused here but it seems that when Garmin states their GNS430 is
"IFR Approach Certified", they are only stating that this receiver meets the
requirements of TSO-C129.
Your thoughts are appreciated.
Bret
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Transpo V1200 Voltage Regulator (EXCELLENT!) |
>From: Bill Bradburry
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Transpo V1200
>Voltage Regulator
>Bob and others, I have the regulator that is
>described in the following data sheet.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Regulators/Transpo/V1200_Transpo.pdf
>It is a little difficult to tell from the picture, but the
>connection tabs are labeled like this left to right
>and top to bottom: F S A I B-
A = switch power to ALT switch
-B= ground
S= (power signal/switch to regulator)
I= Indicator LIGHT (ground side)
F=field
>I have the F connected to the alternator field, the
>A connected to the 5A circuit breaker, the A and
>S are jumpered together.
Sounds about right. Since we have a master switch
and just kill the whole electrical system that is fine.
I might try it with out the jump.
>I have no idea what to do with the tab labeled
>"Stator Output" .
Just leave it disconnected, Stator takes voltage off
the neutral junction to turn a relay on (internal to
the voltage regulator). JUST TO BE CLEAR you
have both S and Stator output. Leave Stator OUT
alone.
>"B-". I suspect that the "B-" is the ground, but
>not certain.
Correct.
************************************************************
Transpo 1200!
EVERY ONE THIS IS A GREAT REGULATOR. IT IS
10000 TIMES BETTER THAN A B&C AND COST 1/4TH
100% SOLID STATE, PART DIGITAL CONTROL, WITH
OV PROTECTION BUT NO CROW BAR!! YEA FOR
TECHNOLOGY AND ENGINEERS
************************************************************
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
Dr. Dee and I have been working on our 2007 seminar
schedule and we note that it's been a long time since
we visited southern California.
Are there any List members aware of an EAA chapter that
might like to host a program this spring/summer? We're
looking to fill slots in May and July.
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: | Bill Settle <billsettle(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe and other wireing |
Thanks John for your question, and Bob for your answer. I'm working on my wings
and was thinking about asking the same question...
Bill Settle
Winston-Salem, NC
RV-8 Wings
>
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
> Date: 2007/01/09 Tue AM 09:28:40 EST
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Strobe and other wireing
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >Should the strobe wires (from a central power pack) be kept apart from the
> >other wires e.g. trim, and nav light wiring to the emp, and nav lights etc
> >in the wings, or is it OK to bundle all in the same conduit - I have been
> >told this is asking for trouble regarding electrical interference
>
> It's one of aviation's enduring myths.
> You may bundle them together. If you DO
> experience noise from the strobes, it will
> have nothing to do with wiring proximity.
>
> 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: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
On 9 Jan 2007, at 17:10, wrote:
>
> 4) You wrote: "I may be confused here but it seems that when Garmin
> states their GNS430 is "IFR Approach Certified", they are only
> stating that this receiver meets the requirements of TSO-C129."
>
> I agree -- and also meeting all the pertinent references to TSO-
> C129a and permitting the FAA oversight of Garmin's production of
> the GNS 430. (See FAR 21.615).
>
One more thing - if Garmin says that their GNS430 is "IFR Approach
Certified", it also means that it has been found by the FAA to be
capable of being installed to meet the guidelines in Advisory
Circular 20-138A Airworthiness Approval of Global Navigation
Satellite System (GNSS) Equipment.
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ABEA and TSO's |
On 8 Jan 2007, at 13:52, Ernest Christley wrote:
>
>
> If non-TSOed equipment performs just as well at half the price,
> only lacking the reams of paperwork required for the bureaucratic
> blessing, why wouldn't the choice be equally clear? The builder
> has done the pre-requisite homework, after all?
I've seen frequent software crashes, completely confusing operator
interfaces, display of misleading information, etc when doing TSO
testing. And this was always on equipment that the manufacturer was
convinced was ready for a TSO. This is all too common with
equipment from small companies that are making their first attempt to
produce equipment with a new capability. They simply lack the
experience to know how to do comprehensive testing in the new area.
There is a big difference between a piece of equipment that a company
claims meets TSO requirements, and a piece of equipment that actually
has a TSO.
Kevin Horton
Ottawa, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "glaesers" <glaesers(at)wideopenwest.com> |
| Subject: | Garmin 300XL - CDI connections |
I am installing a Garmin 300XL in my panel and it will be connected to a GRT
Sport, via a serial connection, which will display the GPS CDI. However GRT
told me that in order to use the 300XL for IFR approaches, I need a
'regular' CDI connected because the Sport doesn't have the To/From/Off flag.
So I am eventually going to add a GI 102A (or equivalent), and I want to
install the wires from the 300XL that will eventually go to the CDI (because
adding them later will be a REAL pain). I think I've identified the 300XL
pins required, but want to find the pin definitions for the CDI to be sure.
So far my internet searches have not turned up anything, so I'm hoping
someone on the list has this info.
Thanks,
Dennis Glaeser
RV7A - wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Parlow" <ericparlow(at)hotmail.com> |
Does Mode S with TIS displayed on the GNS 430W have enough practical value
to justify the $2000 cost to upgrade to the GTX 330 from the GTX 327?
Is anyone using it now?
ERic--
RV-10
40014
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vern Little <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Fluctuation alternator output fix (using cheap external |
regulator)
After a year of fighting overvoltages (bad master switch) and
fluctuating alternator output (too much voltage drop in field sense
circuit), I finally found a fix.
I'm using the Van's supplied Transpo regulator, which senses the bus
voltage from the same circuit it provides field current, thus exciting
oscillations if there is too much resistance in the circuit.
Rather than repeat the details, I point anyone who's interested to this
link:
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=13682&highlight=FLUCTUATING
or the bottom of:
http://www3.telus.net/aviation/flying/RV-9A/photos/Electrical/Electrical_photos.html
I should have used a better regulator from the beginning, but the $5.00
fix now holds the alternator voltage rock solid.
Vern Little
RV-9A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Duane Wilson <aaa(at)pacifier.com> |
| Subject: | 2 comm antennas on one airplane |
Can someone please point me to a reference telling me how close together
I can put 2 comm antennas on my RV9?
I already have one just in front of the carry through bulkhead. I need
to add a second one for my new SL30.
Thanks,
Duane
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry L. Tompkins, P.E." <tompkinsl(at)integra.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ABEA and TSO's...and fuel level sensors |
The following is a portion of the historical basis for the term "or
equivalent."
This response is also a suggestion that we each continue to do the "best
we know how," as Bob N. advocates when it comes to equipment.
Unfortunately, a bureaucrat is someone who truly believes in his "heart
of hearts" that it is regulations written by non-pilot lawyers rather
than LIFT that keeps planes flying. Therefore, if you have a mishap in
an aircraft, said bureaucraft merely needs to determine which regulation
you broke and, by his own definition/philosophy, he has the explanation
for your crash. So your determination to use experimental category
avionics ought to be determined by your own diligent research that the
product design and manufacture is reliable and durable. IMHO, you will
be in the position of defending yourself after any accident you survive.
RANT:
Speaking from 35+ years auto/transportation engineering experience, some
of the worst efforts by bureaucrats are when they jump on the
UNDERdeveloped technology band wagon and legislate that technology into
production. Some examples are the original truck ABS systems and 1st
generations air bags. The original truck ABS law basically stated that
semi-trucks had to have ABS brakes. Because of susceptability to
RFI/EMI these early ABS trucks had NO brakes when the driver keyed the
mike on his CB radio, especially if equipped witha linear amplifier.
The Feds were sued by PACCAR and they learned their lesson. The Feds
have learned to drive technology with "patent law" type descriptions so
they can't be held liable for legally requiring technology that doesn't
work. Here is one example: NHTSA wanted to standardize car bumper
heights at 16 - 20" above ground, but the CFRs don't say build your car
with a bumper face that is 16 - 20" above ground. The CFRs say that the
bumper system is required to pass a pendulum test and the face of the
pendulum that strikes the bumper will be from 16 - 20" above ground.
Back to Aviation:
Rotax was at one time going to give customers the choice of purchasing a
certificated or non-certificated engine. By their own acknowledgment
all the engines were built in the same facility, on the same production
line and from the same parts. My recollection is that the cost of the
paperwork trail added 2 - 3 thousand dollars to the price of the
certificated engine. I would argue that the certification added no
value.
Non-certificated avionics is not quite the same apple, because the OBAM
avionics manufacturers are not building any certificated units. This is
a "caveat emptor" situation. There is a lot of attraction for a GRT or
AFS EFIS for 25% of the cost of a certificated Chelton System. The
determination each of us potentially bets our lives and the lives of our
families on is that these manufacturers have done all the work that adds
value, reliability and durability without the accompanying NO value
paperwork. I am contemplating one of these two systems for my own
plane, but my decision will be deliberate and I will be test flying
whatever system I choose for quite a while before I depend on it in the
clouds.
One area where I have a great deal of concern is the experience level of
the engineers at these companies. If a person is ignorant of items that
have already been discovered and addressed by TSO type testing, then
that person can actually believe that he is doing a terrific job, when
he is truly not doing "the best we know how." TSOs offer some
protection that known issues have been addressed. Without a TSO it then
becomes our OWN responsibility to determine that the purveyor of the
avionics is not ignorant of issues and has addressed them in his product
design.
A second concern I have is that new marketing features seem to be
frequently released. I don't know how well thought out and proven some
of these features are. My own preference is NOT to be a Beta site for
the avionics manufacturer. I am a forensic engineer and use an accident
reconstruction software that has had 14 new releases since December
2005! I would argue that every user of this software (Windows XP based)
is a beta site. The software is fabulously useful, but when it glitches
I am still sitting in my chair firmly supported by the floor. I would
not want to be using software like this at 5000' AGL in the soup!
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike" <mlas(at)cox.net> |
Eric,
I have a fully integrated Chelton EFIS system will almost all of the
bells and whistles. The WSI weather (some use XM) overlay is to me the
best bang for the buck, followed closely by some form of graphic traffic
system. I am using the TIS format, when you are in a busy terminal area
you have good traffic depiction. At work I have TCAS and find that TIS
works very will by comparison. I have a simple proximity system for the
non-terminal areas.
Mike Larkin
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
Parlow
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 6:43 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Mode S and TIS
Does Mode S with TIS displayed on the GNS 430W have enough practical
value
to justify the $2000 cost to upgrade to the GTX 330 from the GTX 327?
Is anyone using it now?
ERic--
RV-10
40014
--
12/12/2006
--
12/12/2006
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vern W." <highflight1(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Another 60A alternator, internally regulated |
voltage regulator failure
Just curious: Are you guys talking about the earlier Van's 60A alternators
or the newer ones from Van's that have the internal OV unit built in?
Vern
On 1/9/07, gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >From: "McFarland, Randy" <Randy.McFarland@novellus.com<http://us.f300.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=Randy.McFarland@novellus.com&YY=76944&y5beta=yes&y5beta=yes&order=down&sort=date&pos=0&view=a&head=b>
> >
>
> >Hmmm. My 60A alternator just failed after 15
> >hours. Mine had blast tubes for cooing on both
> >front and back openings.
> >Randy 7A San Jose, Ca
>
> Van suffered from a poor supplier for awhile. I talk
> to Tom Green and suggested new vendor's.
> It's not the ALTS issue, quality of new units are better.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky) |
| Subject: | Re: Another 60A alternator, internally regulated |
voltage regulator failure
for me, it must be the earlier one.
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Vern W." <highflight1(at)gmail.com>
Just curious: Are you guys talking about the earlier Van's 60A alternators or the
newer ones from Van's that have the internal OV unit built in?
Vern
On 1/9/07, gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com wrote:
>From: "McFarland, Randy" < Randy.McFarland(at)novellus.com>
>Hmmm. My 60A alternator just failed after 15
>hours. Mine had blast tubes for cooing on both
>front and back openings.
>Randy 7A San Jose, Ca
Van suffered from a poor supplier for awhile. I talk
to Tom Green and suggested new vendor's.
It's not the ALTS issue, quality of new units are better.
for me, it must be the earlier one.
Just curious: Are you guys talking about the earlier Van's 60A alternators
or the newer ones from Van's that have the internal OV unit built in?
Vern
On 1/9/07, gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> wrote:
<DIV>>From: "McFarland, Randy" <<A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="http://us.f300.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=Randy.McFarland@novellus.com&YY=76944&y5beta=yes&y5beta=yes&order=down&sort=date&pos=0&view=a&head=b" target=_blank> <FONT color=#003399>Randy.McFarland@novellus.com</FONT></A>><BR> </DIV>
>Hmmm. My 60A alternator just failed after 15
>hours.
Mine had blast tubes for cooing on both
>front and back openings.
>Randy
7A San Jose, Ca
Van suffered from a poor supplier for awhile. I talk
to Tom Green and suggested new
vendor's.
It's not the ALTS issue, quality of new units are better.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jonhults(at)speedband.com" <legacy(at)speedband.com> |
| Subject: | Secure connection to a diode? |
Hi all,
I've got 3 individual diodes that have to be wired between micro switches
and pin connectors and the gear switch and valves with fast-ons, etc. How
do you connect the ends coming out of each side of the diode to 20 AWG wire?
Is there a connector out there for that? Two of the diodes have multiple
(2) connections on each end.
Needless to say.I'm a wiring newbie!
Thanks,
Jon Hults
Legacy N222BZ (still building)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Secure connection to a diode? |
| From: | "Glaeser, Dennis A" <dennis.glaeser(at)eds.com> |
When I have multiple wires at one Faston connection, I use the
appropriate (bigger) size and put both (or all 3) wires in the connector
and crimp them all together. B&C does that for the diodes they install
on their contactors, so I figured it must be OK. I think Bob even has a
cartoon on how to do that on his website.
If the pin connectors are big enough (i.e. Molex) you could do that as
well, but D-Sub size pins are too small - you'd have to join the wires
with a faston size splice with the multiple wires in one end and a
single wire (maybe doubled over) out to the pin.
If for some reason you want to be able to separate them, you can get
faston 'spiders' at the auto store that have 2 male tabs and one female.
That's a less-robust solution IMHO. I personally wouldn't go that route
on gear switches.
And if all else fails, there is always solder...
Dennis Glaeser
RV7A - wiring
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: jonhults(at)speedband.com
Date: Thu Jan 11 - 7:47 AM
Hi all,
I've got 3 individual diodes that have to be wired between micro
switches
and pin connectors and the gear switch and valves with fast-ons, etc.
How
do you connect the ends coming out of each side of the diode to 20 AWG
wire?
Is there a connector out there for that? Two of the diodes have
multiple
(2) connections on each end.
Needless to say.I'm a wiring newbie!
Thanks,
Jon Hults
Legacy N222BZ (still building)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | WigWag and landing lights with one switch |
Bob: In all my years of flying, I've never really felt the need to
have just one landing (/taxi) light on at a time. (Maybe I'm just
different - my lights are used 100% for daytime see-and-avoid). I'm
wondering if, while it would mean giving up independent light
operation, one could impliment the wig-wag circuit of SSF-1 page 2.0
with only a single switch, a DPDT ON-OFF-ON of suitable rating. What
do you see as drawbacks?
-Bill Boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | WigWag and landing lights with one switch |
Bill,
I have experienced one drawback, a minor annoyance really. After
reducing power and landing at night, our alternator (40amp B&C) won't
keep the under voltage light from flashing while taxiing with position,
strobe and landing lights lit. If I do night currency, (3 full stop
trips with taxi back), the low volt light flashes on final - very
distracting. When this occurs, I usually pull the low volt breaker to
shut it up. This is one of the few places where having a pullable
breaker is worthwhile in my opinion. I'm considering replacing the
landing light switch with one that would allow me to choose to light one
side only or both, and see if that makes a difference.
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Boyd
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:27 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: WigWag and landing lights with one switch
Bob: In all my years of flying, I've never really felt the need to
have just one landing (/taxi) light on at a time. (Maybe I'm just
different - my lights are used 100% for daytime see-and-avoid). I'm
wondering if, while it would mean giving up independent light
operation, one could impliment the wig-wag circuit of SSF-1 page 2.0
with only a single switch, a DPDT ON-OFF-ON of suitable rating. What
do you see as drawbacks?
-Bill Boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: WigWag and landing lights with one switch |
Good thought, Ed, and I encountered the same annoyance with Van's 35
amp alternator and its suspected bad diodes, but with my 55 amp
upgrade, not seen even at idle with all lights on- puts out 14.4v at
even the lower rpm's. I think I'm golden on that score.
-Bill
On 1/11/07, Ed Holyoke wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> I have experienced one drawback, a minor annoyance really. After
> reducing power and landing at night, our alternator (40amp B&C) won't
> keep the under voltage light from flashing while taxiing with position,
> strobe and landing lights lit. If I do night currency, (3 full stop
> trips with taxi back), the low volt light flashes on final - very
> distracting. When this occurs, I usually pull the low volt breaker to
> shut it up. This is one of the few places where having a pullable
> breaker is worthwhile in my opinion. I'm considering replacing the
> landing light switch with one that would allow me to choose to light one
> side only or both, and see if that makes a difference.
>
> Pax,
>
> Ed Holyoke
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
> Boyd
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:27 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: WigWag and landing lights with one switch
>
>
>
> Bob: In all my years of flying, I've never really felt the need to
> have just one landing (/taxi) light on at a time. (Maybe I'm just
> different - my lights are used 100% for daytime see-and-avoid). I'm
> wondering if, while it would mean giving up independent light
> operation, one could impliment the wig-wag circuit of SSF-1 page 2.0
> with only a single switch, a DPDT ON-OFF-ON of suitable rating. What
> do you see as drawbacks?
>
> -Bill Boyd
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | WigWag and landing lights with one switch |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
That how my RV7a is wired and it works great....My up is wig-wag, middle
is off and down is both lights on full.
Wig-wagging landing lights are many more time isible than just lights on
steady all the time in my experience.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Boyd
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:27 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: WigWag and landing lights with one switch
-->
Bob: In all my years of flying, I've never really felt the need to have
just one landing (/taxi) light on at a time. (Maybe I'm just different
- my lights are used 100% for daytime see-and-avoid). I'm wondering if,
while it would mean giving up independent light operation, one could
impliment the wig-wag circuit of SSF-1 page 2.0 with only a single
switch, a DPDT ON-OFF-ON of suitable rating. What do you see as
drawbacks?
-Bill Boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Secure connection to a diode? |
>
>
>When I have multiple wires at one Faston connection, I use the
>appropriate (bigger) size and put both (or all 3) wires in the connector
>and crimp them all together. B&C does that for the diodes they install
>on their contactors, so I figured it must be OK. I think Bob even has a
>cartoon on how to do that on his website.
Yes. See . . .
http://aircraftspruce.com/
>If the pin connectors are big enough (i.e. Molex) you could do that as
>well, but D-Sub size pins are too small - you'd have to join the wires
>with a faston size splice with the multiple wires in one end and a
>single wire (maybe doubled over) out to the pin.
I've not had very good luck with multiple wires into
anything except the old MS3100 series solder-pot connectors.
Crimping multiple wires into connector pins is problematic.
>I've got 3 individual diodes that have to be wired between micro
>switches and pin connectors and the gear switch and valves with
>fast-ons, etc.
>How do you connect the ends coming out of each side of the diode
>to 20 AWG wire? Is there a connector out there for that? Two
>of the diodes have multiple (2) connections on each end.
>
>Needless to say.I'm a wiring newbie!
Jon it's not clear from your text as to the exact
nature of your task. Can you scan a sketch of the wiring
diagram and attach it to a reply? I 'think' I know
what you're dealing with but a schematic would help
me be more specific and useful.
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: | Ratchet PIDG Crimper? |
Bob:
Several messages posted on the canard-aviators news group mentioned buying
a racheting crimper from you. However, I cannot find one on the
AeroElectric Connection web site. Do you sell the crimpers? If so, how can
I order one?
I sold that business to B&C a number of years ago.
You can find the crimper I sold on their website at
http://bandc.biz
If you have a Harbor Freight close by, you can get this
tool at:
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=93977
---------------------------------------------------------
< 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: | <dsvs(at)ca.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Audio Cable Sheilds |
Bob,
I have an audio panel with three(3) non-switched audio inputs and five (5) devices
that will have to share these inputs. I selected the solo device as it is
the most important device of the group. The other four naturally group into
one each with voice and one tone only. All have volume control
If I am not mistaken I will need resistors in the leads from each of the four devices
that share inputs. I plan on loading the four resistors into a D-sub connector
to facilitate easily changing them if the original selction is not correct.
If this is correct then I have a sheilding question.
Is it good practice to to ground the sheilds at each device and terminate but not
attach at the D-sub and then do the same thing with the leads into the audio
panel? This looks to me to not violate the single ended sheils requirement
and it also protects all the wire except the D-sub.
Is there an easier/better way?
Thanks in advance. Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Settle <billsettle(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: WigWag and landing lights with one switch |
Bill,
What alternator are you using?
Bill Settle
Winston-Salem, NC
RV-8 Wings
>
> From: "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com>
> Date: 2007/01/11 Thu PM 02:44:13 EST
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: WigWag and landing lights with one switch
>
>
> Good thought, Ed, and I encountered the same annoyance with Van's 35
> amp alternator and its suspected bad diodes, but with my 55 amp
> upgrade, not seen even at idle with all lights on- puts out 14.4v at
> even the lower rpm's. I think I'm golden on that score.
>
> -Bill
>
> On 1/11/07, Ed Holyoke wrote:
> >
> > Bill,
> >
> > I have experienced one drawback, a minor annoyance really. After
> > reducing power and landing at night, our alternator (40amp B&C) won't
> > keep the under voltage light from flashing while taxiing with position,
> > strobe and landing lights lit. If I do night currency, (3 full stop
> > trips with taxi back), the low volt light flashes on final - very
> > distracting. When this occurs, I usually pull the low volt breaker to
> > shut it up. This is one of the few places where having a pullable
> > breaker is worthwhile in my opinion. I'm considering replacing the
> > landing light switch with one that would allow me to choose to light one
> > side only or both, and see if that makes a difference.
> >
> > Pax,
> >
> > Ed Holyoke
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
> > Boyd
> > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:27 AM
> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: WigWag and landing lights with one switch
> >
> >
> >
> > Bob: In all my years of flying, I've never really felt the need to
> > have just one landing (/taxi) light on at a time. (Maybe I'm just
> > different - my lights are used 100% for daytime see-and-avoid). I'm
> > wondering if, while it would mean giving up independent light
> > operation, one could impliment the wig-wag circuit of SSF-1 page 2.0
> > with only a single switch, a DPDT ON-OFF-ON of suitable rating. What
> > do you see as drawbacks?
> >
> > -Bill Boyd
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: WigWag and landing lights with one switch |
I was afraid somebody'd ask me that. It's a ND-type 55 A machine that
goes on a Geo Metro, I think. The paperwork is all in the hangar, but
I will make a point of recording the part # next time the cowl is off.
It's IR, and I'm currently running it with no OVP.
-Bill
On 1/11/07, Bill Settle wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> What alternator are you using?
>
> Bill Settle
> Winston-Salem, NC
> RV-8 Wings
>
>
> >
> > From: "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com>
> > Date: 2007/01/11 Thu PM 02:44:13 EST
> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: WigWag and landing lights with one switch
> >
> >
> > Good thought, Ed, and I encountered the same annoyance with Van's 35
> > amp alternator and its suspected bad diodes, but with my 55 amp
> > upgrade, not seen even at idle with all lights on- puts out 14.4v at
> > even the lower rpm's. I think I'm golden on that score.
> >
> > -Bill
> >
> > On 1/11/07, Ed Holyoke wrote:
> > >
> > > Bill,
> > >
> > > I have experienced one drawback, a minor annoyance really. After
> > > reducing power and landing at night, our alternator (40amp B&C) won't
> > > keep the under voltage light from flashing while taxiing with position,
> > > strobe and landing lights lit. If I do night currency, (3 full stop
> > > trips with taxi back), the low volt light flashes on final - very
> > > distracting. When this occurs, I usually pull the low volt breaker to
> > > shut it up. This is one of the few places where having a pullable
> > > breaker is worthwhile in my opinion. I'm considering replacing the
> > > landing light switch with one that would allow me to choose to light one
> > > side only or both, and see if that makes a difference.
> > >
> > > Pax,
> > >
> > > Ed Holyoke
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
> > > Boyd
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:27 AM
> > > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > > Subject: AeroElectric-List: WigWag and landing lights with one switch
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Bob: In all my years of flying, I've never really felt the need to
> > > have just one landing (/taxi) light on at a time. (Maybe I'm just
> > > different - my lights are used 100% for daytime see-and-avoid). I'm
> > > wondering if, while it would mean giving up independent light
> > > operation, one could impliment the wig-wag circuit of SSF-1 page 2.0
> > > with only a single switch, a DPDT ON-OFF-ON of suitable rating. What
> > > do you see as drawbacks?
> > >
> > > -Bill Boyd
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Read if you are "Pro" Bob Nuckolls, even if you are |
not!
| From: | <rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US> |
Please check out this special website:
www.bob.nuckolls.youaremighty.com
Sincerely
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joemotis(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Read if you are "Pro" Bob Nuckolls, even if you |
are not!
Bob Nuckolls is my God, Period
J.D. Motis
I.B.E.W. for decades
Ex U.S. Army 68F20/ 68F30
My Dad knew Kelly Johnson personally
I had "unserviceable" Lockheed aircraft toggle switches (3 of them) screwed
to my hi-chair
Come on back, RocketRod
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Settle <billsettle(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: WigWag and landing lights with one switch |
Thanks!
Bill Settle.
>
> From: "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com>
> Date: 2007/01/11 Thu PM 09:19:46 EST
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Re: AeroElectric-List: WigWag and landing lights with one switch
>
>
> I was afraid somebody'd ask me that. It's a ND-type 55 A machine that
> goes on a Geo Metro, I think. The paperwork is all in the hangar, but
> I will make a point of recording the part # next time the cowl is off.
> It's IR, and I'm currently running it with no OVP.
>
> -Bill
>
> On 1/11/07, Bill Settle wrote:
> >
> > Bill,
> >
> > What alternator are you using?
> >
> > Bill Settle
> > Winston-Salem, NC
> > RV-8 Wings
> >
> >
> > >
> > > From: "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com>
> > > Date: 2007/01/11 Thu PM 02:44:13 EST
> > > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: WigWag and landing lights with one switch
> > >
> > >
> > > Good thought, Ed, and I encountered the same annoyance with Van's 35
> > > amp alternator and its suspected bad diodes, but with my 55 amp
> > > upgrade, not seen even at idle with all lights on- puts out 14.4v at
> > > even the lower rpm's. I think I'm golden on that score.
> > >
> > > -Bill
> > >
> > > On 1/11/07, Ed Holyoke wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Bill,
> > > >
> > > > I have experienced one drawback, a minor annoyance really. After
> > > > reducing power and landing at night, our alternator (40amp B&C) won't
> > > > keep the under voltage light from flashing while taxiing with position,
> > > > strobe and landing lights lit. If I do night currency, (3 full stop
> > > > trips with taxi back), the low volt light flashes on final - very
> > > > distracting. When this occurs, I usually pull the low volt breaker to
> > > > shut it up. This is one of the few places where having a pullable
> > > > breaker is worthwhile in my opinion. I'm considering replacing the
> > > > landing light switch with one that would allow me to choose to light one
> > > > side only or both, and see if that makes a difference.
> > > >
> > > > Pax,
> > > >
> > > > Ed Holyoke
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
> > > > Boyd
> > > > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:27 AM
> > > > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > > > Subject: AeroElectric-List: WigWag and landing lights with one switch
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bob: In all my years of flying, I've never really felt the need to
> > > > have just one landing (/taxi) light on at a time. (Maybe I'm just
> > > > different - my lights are used 100% for daytime see-and-avoid). I'm
> > > > wondering if, while it would mean giving up independent light
> > > > operation, one could impliment the wig-wag circuit of SSF-1 page 2.0
> > > > with only a single switch, a DPDT ON-OFF-ON of suitable rating. What
> > > > do you see as drawbacks?
> > > >
> > > > -Bill Boyd
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Read if you are "Pro" Bob Nuckolls, even if you |
are not!
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
I received my copy of Bob's authorship (Revision 11) as a result of
sponsoring Matronics last year. With this website, I know it was a wise
investment.
It made my day.. or at least my morning.
John Cox
RV-10 Builder #40600
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:34 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Read if you are "Pro" Bob Nuckolls, even if
you are not!
Please check out this special website:
www.bob.nuckolls.youaremighty.com
Sincerely
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Read if you are "Pro" Bob Nuckolls, even if you |
are not!
OMG!!!
Bret Smith
RV-9A "Wings"
Blue Ridge, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 1:34 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Read if you are "Pro" Bob Nuckolls, even if you
are not!
>
> Please check out this special website:
>
> www.bob.nuckolls.youaremighty.com
>
> Sincerely
> Ron Parigoris
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Dudley <rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Read if you are "Pro" Bob Nuckolls, even if you |
are not!
Bob certainly has my admiration. His tireless, continuing support of the
OBAM community is a phenomenon. His gentlemanly and rational response to
the jealous detractors is amazing. I have incorporated many of his
recommendations into the design of electrical system.
Richard Dudley
-6A flying
rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US wrote:
>
>Please check out this special website:
>
>www.bob.nuckolls.youaremighty.com
>
>Sincerely
>Ron Parigoris
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Read if you are "Pro" Bob Nuckolls |
>
>Please check out this special website:
>
>www.bob.nuckolls.youaremighty.com
>
>Sincerely
>Ron Parigoris
Gee Ron, that's a lot to live up to. I'll do my
best to justify everyone's expectations.
On the occasions that I've been a beneficiary
of accolades from my contemporaries, I've seen fit
to remind them that the very best way to honor any
good teacher is to use what they have offered you
as the seed stock for becoming a teacher yourself.
Just this week, one of our List members jumped in
and offered hands-on assistance to a new builder
in overcoming a demonstrable lack of understanding.
This ladies and gentlemen is a teacher's ultimate
high. Unlike material things that wear out, break
or become obsolete, knowledge and understanding
are among the few commodities that GROW in value
the more they are shared and used. To see the seeds
of my shared knowledge and understanding take root
and begin to grow does more for my sense of
accomplishment than any amount of awards or praise.
Any student of history will see that we're moving
into an information-driven age where individual
opportunities for everyone to generate lives filled
with personal achievement and wealth are virtually
boundless.
The smoothest roads to this new horizon are
paved with the efforts of good teachers, clear
thinkers, motivated students and energetic practitioners
of their skills. All roads will have potholes. There
will be individuals and even groups of individuals
who for whatever reason do not share this bright vision
and may even be intent upon destroying it.
But the enduring commodities of success are not
represented by material things. These are but
the byproducts of your real wealth . . . knowledge,
understanding and the skills to DO good things
with them.
Just yesterday on my way back from a fire drill
in Dallas I read this rather profound passage
in Barry Carter's book, "Infinite Wealth" where
he quotes Terry Widrick, an Iroquois indian
philosopher:
"I am reminded of the teachings I received from
one of my elders on speaking in council. He used to
state quite frequently that when we come to discuss
a particular problem or concern, we are to speak
only from our own experience. In that way we are
not guessing. What we speak has to be the truth as
much as we know it to be. When we speak, we are
also to refrain from attacking others. We are only
to speak with the understanding we have been given.
When we take part in discussion about an issue we
should put forward only those of our thoughts and
and beliefs that will help lead to a solution. We
are to speak recognizing that when we bring our
own individual truth to the truth put forward by
others we will all arrive at a greater truth and
understanding. We are not to speak against another
person's beliefs or ideals but only speak for
ourselves as we are given insight and wisdom.
[I'll interject that teachers have an
obligation to illuminate and rectify errors
of logic or understanding of simple-ideas.
The goal is not to emphasize shortcomings
of individuals but to enhance their prospects
for success by aiding their understanding.]
Nowadays, that is a hard thing to do, especially
when we are taught the arts of aversarialism in all
branches of education, whether they be educational,
political, social or religious."
-----*****------
I'm sure that Mr. Widrick would be pleased to know
that his offering as teacher have found root in
yet another student . . . a student who perceives
value in adding these principals to his personal
toolbox for smoothing potholes in our paths to a
brighter future.
If you find value in the things that I can share
with you, there is no better use for those ideas
than to use them to improve your own life. In
so far as you have opportunity, be willing to
share with others so that the value of what we
do here will continue to benefit others long after
we are gone.
Thank you for the kind words.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Darrel Jones <wd6bor(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: So Cal Seminar? |
Bob,
We are all the way up in Northern California, but if you want to visit
the wine country, we have three EAA chapters, 124, 167 and 1268, in the
Sonoma and Napa areas that would be interested in hosting you. Let us
know what your travel plans are and if you might be interested.
Darrel Jones
Chapter 1268
>
>> Dr. Dee and I have been working on our 2007 seminar
>> schedule and we note that it's been a long time since
>> we visited southern California.
>>
>> Are there any List members aware of an EAA chapter that
>> might like to host a program this spring/summer? We're
>> looking to fill slots in May and July.
>>
>>
>>
>> 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: | <dsvs(at)ca.rr.com> |
Bob and other listers,
I have several audio devices that will have to share one input to my audio panel.
I understand the wiring and installation of resistors but the shields have
my not sure of the best way to do the install. I am using d-sub connectors mid
way between the devices and the audio panel to install the resistors so that
I can easily remove and change the values if needed to adjust individual volumes.
The shield on one device is connected (by the manufacturer at the device end the
others say connect at the audio panel. I understand the ground loop problem
with connecting at each end. The question is, Is it a good practice to shield
the device side terminated at the device but not at the d-sub and the audio
panel side terminated at the audio panel but not at the d-sub. This would
cover most of the wire except the d-sub in the middle of the run and still not
lead to a ground loop. Am I understand the idea correctly? If not I would appreciate
a little help with this. Thanks in advance. Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <dsvs(at)ca.rr.com> |
Bob and other listers,
I have several audio devices that will have to share one input to my audio panel.
I understand the wiring and installation of resistors but the shields have
my not sure of the best way to do the install. I am using d-sub connectors mid
way between the devices and the audio panel to install the resistors so that
I can easily remove and change the values if needed to adjust individual volumes.
The shield on one device is connected (by the manufacturer at the device end the
others say connect at the audio panel. I understand the ground loop problem
with connecting at each end. The question is, Is it a good practice to shield
the device side terminated at the device but not at the d-sub and the audio
panel side terminated at the audio panel but not at the d-sub. This would
cover most of the wire except the d-sub in the middle of the run and still not
lead to a ground loop. Am I understand the idea correctly? If not I would appreciate
a little help with this. Thanks in advance. Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bob noffs" <icubob(at)newnorth.net> |
hi all, i am getting started on the wiring of my ic-a200 icom radio. i
would use an 18 ga wire to the ''power '' pin and an 18 ga wire to the
''ground'' pin of the radio . the enclosed wiring instructions say
this.........POWER CABLE WIRING...
use 2 pairs of 18 ga wires for power and power grounding.
what the heck? the diagram is very simple and if it werent for the
printed statement above i would just proceed. anyone wired one of these
radios? what do their instructions mean? thanks for any info.
bob noffs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Audio Shields |
>
>Bob and other listers,
>
>I have several audio devices that will have to share one input to my audio
>panel. I understand the wiring and installation of resistors but the
>shields have my not sure of the best way to do the install. I am using
>d-sub connectors mid way between the devices and the audio panel to
>install the resistors so that I can easily remove and change the values if
>needed to adjust individual volumes.
>
>The shield on one device is connected (by the manufacturer at the device
>end the others say connect at the audio panel. I understand the ground
>loop problem with connecting at each end. The question is, Is it a
>good practice to shield the device side terminated at the device but not
>at the d-sub and the audio panel side terminated at the audio panel but
>not at the d-sub. This would cover most of the wire except the d-sub in
>the middle of the run and still not lead to a ground loop. Am I
>understand the idea correctly? If not I would appreciate a little help
>with this. Thanks in advance. Don
With all your goodies co-located on the panel, it probably
doesn't matter if you ground at one end or both . . . and given
the relatively short leads, all the wiring could probably be done
with no shielding whatsoever!
The latest addition to the AeroElectric Connection is a chapter
on audio systems which you're free to download at:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/18Audio_R11.pdf
It speaks to the simple "resistor mixing" technique
you've cited . . . and also illustrates various combinations
of intercoms, audio isolation amplifiers and audio sources.
I think you'll find enough information in this document
to proceed with your installation.
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: So Cal Seminar? |
>
>Bob,
>
>We are all the way up in Northern California, but if you want to visit the
>wine country, we have three EAA chapters, 124, 167 and 1268, in the Sonoma
>and Napa areas that would be interested in hosting you. Let us know what
>your travel plans are and if you might be interested.
We have no specific plans to be in California except that
someone wants to do a bit of advance legwork on our behalf
to do a presentation in their neighborhood. Have P.A. system, will
travel.
It's been almost as long since we visited northern California.
I think our last presentation was in the Aircrafters facility
in Watsonville several years ago. I had an EAA chapter in Livermore
make an inquiry some months ago but one of us dropped
the ball so that little flame didn't catch hold.
So check it out with your local clubs. We need a facility to seat
20-30 folks at tables. When we fly commercial, I can't drag screens
with me so I need to borrow one locally. Aside from that, details
for the presentation are available at:
http://aeroelectric.com/seminars/seminars.html
If the clubs can stir up enough local interest to encourage
10 sign-ups, several months of advertising on my website
will generally draw enough additional customers to fill out
the 20 minimum needed before we can buy non-refundable
airline tickets.
I take care of all registration through the website. Nobody
is charged until after the seminar and then only for what
they think it was worth if our rates are deemed too high.
The club is incurring no liability for the success of the
venture other than to help out with facilities.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <dsvs(at)ca.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Audio Shields |
Bob,
Thanks for the reply. I read the new chapter last night. The only thing that
I was not sure about was the shields. I will give it a shot with no shields attached.
Don
---- "Robert L. Nuckolls wrote:
>
>
> >
> >Bob and other listers,
> >
> >I have several audio devices that will have to share one input to my audio
> >panel. I understand the wiring and installation of resistors but the
> >shields have my not sure of the best way to do the install. I am using
> >d-sub connectors mid way between the devices and the audio panel to
> >install the resistors so that I can easily remove and change the values if
> >needed to adjust individual volumes.
> >
> >The shield on one device is connected (by the manufacturer at the device
> >end the others say connect at the audio panel. I understand the ground
> >loop problem with connecting at each end. The question is, Is it a
> >good practice to shield the device side terminated at the device but not
> >at the d-sub and the audio panel side terminated at the audio panel but
> >not at the d-sub. This would cover most of the wire except the d-sub in
> >the middle of the run and still not lead to a ground loop. Am I
> >understand the idea correctly? If not I would appreciate a little help
> >with this. Thanks in advance. Don
>
>
> With all your goodies co-located on the panel, it probably
> doesn't matter if you ground at one end or both . . . and given
> the relatively short leads, all the wiring could probably be done
> with no shielding whatsoever!
>
> The latest addition to the AeroElectric Connection is a chapter
> on audio systems which you're free to download at:
>
> http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/18Audio_R11.pdf
>
> It speaks to the simple "resistor mixing" technique
> you've cited . . . and also illustrates various combinations
> of intercoms, audio isolation amplifiers and audio sources.
> I think you'll find enough information in this document
> to proceed with your installation.
>
> 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: | LarryMcFarland <larry(at)macsmachine.com> |
Hi Bob,
The Molex connector has multiple grounds and there are also power inputs
at B, M and 11.
I'm sure that's all they're referring to. I remember going thru the
same ?? when wiring the A200.
Larry McFarland -601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
bob noffs wrote:
> hi all, i am getting started on the wiring of my ic-a200 icom radio. i
> would use an 18 ga wire to the ''power '' pin and an 18 ga wire to the
> ''ground'' pin of the radio . the enclosed wiring instructions say
> this.........POWER CABLE WIRING...
> use 2 pairs of 18 ga wires for power and power grounding.
> what the heck? the diagram is very simple and if it werent for the
> printed statement above i would just proceed. anyone wired one of
> these radios? what do their instructions mean? thanks for any info.
>
> bob noffs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Maxwell" <wrmaxwell(at)bigpond.com> |
The instructions are simply aiming to ensure that the radio can access
sufficient current once you hit PTT, Bob. A single 18 ga wire would
presumably run the risk of supplying inadequate current. I have wired
up several A200 but have used a single run of conventional multistrand
twin (figure 8) DC supply cable from my ham radio toolkit, good for at
least 8 Amps.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: bob noffs
To: aeroelectric list
Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 9:38 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: icom radio
hi all, i am getting started on the wiring of my ic-a200 icom radio. i
would use an 18 ga wire to the ''power '' pin and an 18 ga wire to the
''ground'' pin of the radio . the enclosed wiring instructions say
this.........POWER CABLE WIRING...
use 2 pairs of 18 ga wires for power and power grounding.
what the heck? the diagram is very simple and if it werent for the
printed statement above i would just proceed. anyone wired one of these
radios? what do their instructions mean? thanks for any info.
bob noffs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Duane Wilson <aaa(at)pacifier.com> |
| Subject: | How close together should I put comm antennas? |
Putting 2 comm radios. GNC 300XL and SL30.
Need two separate comm antennas (?)
How close together can they go on the bottom of the fuselage and not
interfere significantly with each other??
Thanks,
Duane
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
>hi all, i am getting started on the wiring of my ic-a200 icom radio. i
>would use an 18 ga wire to the ''power '' pin and an 18 ga wire to the
>''ground'' pin of the radio . the enclosed wiring instructions say
>this.........POWER CABLE WIRING...
> use 2 pairs of 18 ga wires for power and power grounding.
> what the heck? the diagram is very simple and if it werent for the
> printed statement above i would just proceed. anyone wired one of these
> radios? what do their instructions mean? thanks for any info.
I'm mystified about this trend in the newer radios
to suggest not only multiple power and ground leads but
the suggested sizes are very generous too. For a radio
that draws a couple of amps, 18AWG wire is certainly
plenty big for the job.
Looking over the installation instructions, the only
rationale I can deduce for multiple wires is redundancy.
Their choice of I/O connectors for this radio is highly
suspect. We quit using board edge fingers and large-area,
low-pressure connectors in new products years ago where
I work. MUCH better that they would choose to use at least
a d-sub connector. Given the poor history of the card-edge
fingers in aircraft, I suppose someone might have thought
they were increasing system reliability with multiple
power wires . . . but that idea works only if there are
no other single wires that would disable the radio.
As to oversized wire, I can't guess. I've been a great
fan of Icom Ham equipment for years. I've not heard
any complaints about the A200 performance but their
packaging leaves something to be desired.
My suggestion is that single, 20AWG power and ground
feeders will suffice and probably be more reliable
because this gage actually FITS the pins you're trying
to crimp onto the wires.
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: Secure connection to a diode? (CORRECTED LINK) |
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>When I have multiple wires at one Faston connection, I use the
>>appropriate (bigger) size and put both (or all 3) wires in the connector
>>and crimp them all together. B&C does that for the diodes they install
>>on their contactors, so I figured it must be OK. I think Bob even has a
>>cartoon on how to do that on his website.
>
> Yes. See . . .
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Wiring_Technique/Wire_treatment_3.jpg
>
>>If the pin connectors are big enough (i.e. Molex) you could do that as
>>well, but D-Sub size pins are too small - you'd have to join the wires
>>with a faston size splice with the multiple wires in one end and a
>>single wire (maybe doubled over) out to the pin.
>
> I've not had very good luck with multiple wires into
> anything except the old MS3100 series solder-pot connectors.
> Crimping multiple wires into connector pins is problematic.
>
>>I've got 3 individual diodes that have to be wired between micro
>>switches and pin connectors and the gear switch and valves with
>>fast-ons, etc.
>
>
>>How do you connect the ends coming out of each side of the diode
>>to 20 AWG wire? Is there a connector out there for that? Two
>>of the diodes have multiple (2) connections on each end.
>>
>>Needless to say.I'm a wiring newbie!
>
> Jon it's not clear from your text as to the exact
> nature of your task. Can you scan a sketch of the wiring
> diagram and attach it to a reply? I 'think' I know
> what you're dealing with but a schematic would help
> me be more specific and useful.
>
> 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: | Neil Clayton <harvey4(at)earthlink.net> |
Bob....I got held up by the same stupid instructions. Just wire it as
you would think - one wire for ground, one for power.
Neil
At 05:38 PM 1/12/2007, you wrote:
>hi all, i am getting started on the wiring of my ic-a200 icom radio.
>i would use an 18 ga wire to the ''power '' pin and an 18 ga wire to
>the ''ground'' pin of the radio . the enclosed wiring instructions
>say this.........POWER CABLE WIRING...
> use 2 pairs of 18 ga wires for power and power grounding.
> what the heck? the diagram is very simple and if it werent for
> the printed statement above i would just proceed. anyone wired one
> of these radios? what do their instructions mean? thanks for any info.
>
> bob noffs
>
33 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bob noffs" <icubob(at)newnorth.net> |
hi all, thanks to everyone that responded to my question. after getting
thru the confusing written instructions the rest should be easy!
bob noffs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave N6030X <N6030X(at)DaveMorris.com> |
| Subject: | Hypervox sidetone and music input |
Question for anybody who might have a Troll Avionics Hypervox HV-1 intercom:
Even though my King KY97A claims to have sidetone, I was not hearing
it through the intercom, so I did as the Hypervox manual says and
moved Jumper JMP1 to JMP2 to implement the "artificial sidetone". I
can finally hear myself talk.
But today I noticed that I can no longer hear the music I pipe in
from my iPod to the music input port. (I made sure I was not in
Pilot Isolation mode.)
Does anybody know whether enabling the artificial sidetone on the
HV-1 will disable the music input?
Thanks,
Dave Morris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: TSO's...and fuel level sensors |
Back to Aviation:
Rotax was at one time going to give customers the choice of purchasing a
certificated or non-certificated engine. By their own acknowledgment all
the engines were built in the same facility, on the same production line
and from the same parts. My recollection is that the cost of the paperwork
trail added 2 - 3 thousand dollars to the price of the certificated
engine. I would argue that the certification added no value.
In my experience, it's easy to SUBTRACT value by "certification".
Many rules that we're expected to meet were crafted with the idea
of establishing some minimum performance standards. But at the same
time, the bureaucracy surrounding the certification effort has become
so expensive that the kinds of testing we used to do as a matter of
course to validate our designs is minimized or even pushed off until
certification time so as to save on development costs. When some
failure occurs during qual, we look really incompetent in the
eyes of our bureaucratic examiners who can only respond by increasing
the numbers of examiners and hoops to jump through. We've lost our
IR&D mentality where there is freedom to fail inexpensively and to
accomplish all the non-certified, low-cost, engineering testing to
assure ourselves of performance before all the witnesses gather
with their microscopes. Instead of being a "floor" for performance,
certification has become a ceiling beyond which few managers want
to exceed for the sake of next quarter's bottom line. Engineers have
lost control of their destiny in a technology driven market.
Non-certificated avionics is not quite the same apple, because the OBAM
avionics manufacturers are not building any certificated units. This is a
"caveat emptor" situation. There is a lot of attraction for a GRT or AFS
EFIS for 25% of the cost of a certificated Chelton System. The
determination each of us potentially bets our lives and the lives of our
families on is that these manufacturers have done all the work that adds
value, reliability and durability without the accompanying NO value
paperwork. I am contemplating one of these two systems for my own plane,
but my decision will be deliberate and I will be test flying whatever
system I choose for quite a while before I depend on it in the clouds.
Yeah. There's also value in selecting systems that offer
perhaps 20% of the features of a certified system that
does 95% of everything we ever wanted the thing to do
but eliminates 80% of the risks due to a reduction in
the number of lines of code.
One area where I have a great deal of concern is the experience level of
the engineers at these companies. If a person is ignorant of items that
have already been discovered and addressed by TSO type testing, then that
person can actually believe that he is doing a terrific job, when he is
truly not doing "the best we know how." TSOs offer some protection that
known issues have been addressed. Without a TSO it then becomes our OWN
responsibility to determine that the purveyor of the avionics is not
ignorant of issues and has addressed them in his product design.
Exactly. I had a conversation with some folks this
evening who plan to bring some new software driven
hardware to the marketplace at OSH this summer. I
advised them to publish all their test plans, installation
manuals and operating manuals on their website. Start
a list-server unique to their product line and encourage
all customers and prospective customers to join it. There
needs to be very tightly coupled cooperation that
can only benefit the company by building customer
confidence and making sure problems are dealt with quickly
in front of the whole world.
A second concern I have is that new marketing features seem to be
frequently released. I don't know how well thought out and proven some of
these features are. My own preference is NOT to be a Beta site for the
avionics manufacturer. I am a forensic engineer and use an accident
reconstruction software that has had 14 new releases since December
2005! I would argue that every user of this software (Windows XP based) is
a beta site. The software is fabulously useful, but when it glitches I am
still sitting in my chair firmly supported by the floor. I would not want
to be using software like this at 5000' AGL in the soup!
It should be every designer's goal to increase the
value of their product and the temptation to add
features via software changes is exceedingly strong.
This is where the list-server can help the supplier's
managers decide what changes should be made and how.
I've been working an AP project where the hard-working
guts of the system holds GPS track to 1 degree of accuracy
and nothing more - 99% of everything you want an
autopilot to do. Less than a handfull of lines of code
in a $2 processor. ALL navigation bells and whistles are
offered as applications to run out of a hand-held.
The nav hardware sends "new course to make good" data
to the autopilot . . . and nothing more. If the bells
and whistles become troublesome, one can simply shut
them off without affecting the autopilot's stone-simple,
high-reliability task of keeping the dirty side down
and the pointy end aimed at your next waypoint.
I can't see any of the big name flight systems
folks taking this kind of approach. They'll consistently
dump all their tasks into one super-processor with
the attendant risks of having some whistle go off-key
and cripple the system's ability to do it's most
important tasks.
Only the OBAM aviation community can offer the close-
coupled supplier-consumer relationship necessary
to bypass bean-counters, process-and-procedure hacks
and certification inspectors so that a product may
evolve quickly in ways that benefit both the supplier
and the customer. The new paradigm is an information-
driven relationship between a capable supplier and
an informed, communicative customer. No amount
of regulation, certification or ISO9000 hat-dancing
can add value to an activity focused on capable and
willing suppliers offering the best they know how to
do to happy customers.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Miles" <terrence_miles(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Wgt complexity and parts count vs running (+) wires |
Bob,
I am looking at your example in the switch chapter on how I could use a 700
2-10 and wire Nav and Strobe lights. As I do this, I am mindful of keeping
things simple, but not at the risk of long power runs in the event of a post
accident short or loose wire or related risks.
I have an overhead switch panel in the Velocity I am building. When
possible I have tried to have those switches supply grounds (pin 85) to some
40 amp relays I got on Ebay from a Car Audio outlet that I will mount behind
the panel area.
The distance from the power fuse block to this o'head switch panel is about
8 feet one way. The load in question is a 1 amp (2 amp fuse) for the nav
light LEDs. (Not the strobe. It is fused at the control box.) Here is my
question.
Is there a good practices recommendation you might have given my choices are
an 8 foot run (+) power into my overhead panel over ground wire into the 700
2-10 switch that then requires two separate relays in nose.
Follow on question--if 1 amp loads (20awg) are OK, is there an amperage
break point where you would opt for remoted relays?
Thanks,
Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wgt complexity and parts count vs running (+) |
wires
>
>
>
>Bob,
>I am looking at your example in the switch chapter on how I could use a 700
>2-10 and wire Nav and Strobe lights. As I do this, I am mindful of keeping
>things simple, but not at the risk of long power runs in the event of a post
>accident short or loose wire or related risks.
Length of wire runs becomes a non-issue if the circuit is either
fused very lightly (5A or less) or is downstream of a DC power master
relay where it becomes "cold" as a result of preparation for landing
be it on or off-field.
>I have an overhead switch panel in the Velocity I am building. When
>possible I have tried to have those switches supply grounds (pin 85) to some
>40 amp relays I got on Ebay from a Car Audio outlet that I will mount behind
>the panel area.
>
>The distance from the power fuse block to this o'head switch panel is about
>8 feet one way. The load in question is a 1 amp (2 amp fuse) for the nav
>light LEDs. (Not the strobe. It is fused at the control box.) Here is my
>question.
We run power and control leads for distances as much as 50-60 feet
in some of our aircraft. As long as the wire gage is sufficiently
sized to offset voltage drop, there are no good reasons to add
relays EXCEPT to avoid having a LARGE switch in a row of otherwise
small switches or to avoid a LONG run of relatively fat wire (Larger
than 16 or 14 AWG).
>Is there a good practices recommendation you might have given my choices are
>an 8 foot run (+) power into my overhead panel over ground wire into the 700
>2-10 switch that then requires two separate relays in nose.
>
>Follow on question--if 1 amp loads (20awg) are OK, is there an amperage
>break point where you would opt for remoted relays?
Do your math. 20 AWG wire is 10 milliohms per foot and drops
10 millivolts per foot per amp. Assume total wire in
2A nav light circuit from bus to lamp and back to ground is
say 25 feet. 20AWG will drop 10 x 2 x 25 or 500 millivolts.
As a percentage of system voltage, this works out to 500/14000
or 3.5% . . . generally considered quite tolerable. 5% max is the
rule of thumb. I'll suggest your lowest cost of ownership and
highest reliability will happen when relays are used sparingly and
the S700 series switches perform happily at 7A continuous and
satisfactorily at 10A.
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: | Charles Brame <chasb(at)satx.rr.com> |
I recently made up a BNC connector for an antenna lead. I have always
soldered the central conductor into the gold pin. My buddy suggested
that I crimp the connector rather than solder. I did, and it seems to
be okay. Crimping was certainly faster than soldering. What's the
approved method?
Today I was reading Bob's Aeroelectric Connection Chapter 18 on Audio
Systems. It showed a D-sub connector with all its little gold pins.
Again, I have always soldered Sub-D pins. Should they be soldered or
crimped?
I have made up many a Molex type connector and I've always crimped
its male/female pins. Would a drop of solder make them more secure?
Charlie Brame
RV-6A N11CB
San Antonio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Miles" <terrence_miles(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Wgt complexity and parts count vs running (+) |
wires
Thank you, Sir.
-----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: Saturday, January 13, 2007 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wgt complexity and parts count vs running
(+) wires
>
>
>
>Bob,
>I am looking at your example in the switch chapter on how I could use a 700
>2-10 and wire Nav and Strobe lights. As I do this, I am mindful of keeping
>things simple, but not at the risk of long power runs in the event of a
post
>accident short or loose wire or related risks.
Length of wire runs becomes a non-issue if the circuit is either
fused very lightly (5A or less) or is downstream of a DC power master
relay where it becomes "cold" as a result of preparation for landing
be it on or off-field.
>I have an overhead switch panel in the Velocity I am building. When
>possible I have tried to have those switches supply grounds (pin 85) to
some
>40 amp relays I got on Ebay from a Car Audio outlet that I will mount
behind
>the panel area.
>
>The distance from the power fuse block to this o'head switch panel is about
>8 feet one way. The load in question is a 1 amp (2 amp fuse) for the nav
>light LEDs. (Not the strobe. It is fused at the control box.) Here is my
>question.
We run power and control leads for distances as much as 50-60 feet
in some of our aircraft. As long as the wire gage is sufficiently
sized to offset voltage drop, there are no good reasons to add
relays EXCEPT to avoid having a LARGE switch in a row of otherwise
small switches or to avoid a LONG run of relatively fat wire (Larger
than 16 or 14 AWG).
>Is there a good practices recommendation you might have given my choices
are
>an 8 foot run (+) power into my overhead panel over ground wire into the
700
>2-10 switch that then requires two separate relays in nose.
>
>Follow on question--if 1 amp loads (20awg) are OK, is there an amperage
>break point where you would opt for remoted relays?
Do your math. 20 AWG wire is 10 milliohms per foot and drops
10 millivolts per foot per amp. Assume total wire in
2A nav light circuit from bus to lamp and back to ground is
say 25 feet. 20AWG will drop 10 x 2 x 25 or 500 millivolts.
As a percentage of system voltage, this works out to 500/14000
or 3.5% . . . generally considered quite tolerable. 5% max is the
rule of thumb. I'll suggest your lowest cost of ownership and
highest reliability will happen when relays are used sparingly and
the S700 series switches perform happily at 7A continuous and
satisfactorily at 10A.
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: Crimp or Solder |
>
>I recently made up a BNC connector for an antenna lead. I have always
>soldered the central conductor into the gold pin. My buddy suggested
>that I crimp the connector rather than solder. I did, and it seems to
>be okay. Crimping was certainly faster than soldering. What's the
>approved method?
>
>Today I was reading Bob's Aeroelectric Connection Chapter 18 on Audio
>Systems. It showed a D-sub connector with all its little gold pins.
>Again, I have always soldered Sub-D pins. Should they be soldered or
>crimped?
what ever the manufacture of the connector recommends. You can
purchase both solder and crimp style connectors in most
technologies. I use mostly crimped pin connectors for ease of
installation, convenience and freedom from process-errors. In
terms of overall reliability, there is no difference between
soldered and crimped joints.
>I have made up many a Molex type connector and I've always crimped
>its male/female pins. Would a drop of solder make them more secure?
There have been TRILLIONS of pins installed per the recommendations
of the manufacturer with exceedingly low failure rates. Remember,
connector folks sell thousands to aircraft and billions to commercial
ventures. Names like Molex, AMP, Amphenol, T&B (just to name a few)
have been in this business for decades. The fact that they are still
in business must say something about the capabilities of their
products to meet customer expectations. Nonetheless, there's a host
of folks who don't understand how the products are designed to
work and they WORRY a lot about things that are not worthy of
the effort.
Buy the technology that appeals to you most (or accommodates your
tools and skills) and truck on. The whole solder-n-crimp or solder-
instead-of-crimp thing is floobydust.
See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/rules/review.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: | "jonhults(at)speedband.com" <legacy(at)speedband.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Secure connection to a diode? |
Bob,
I don't have a schematic or wiring diagram. The application is a gear door
sequencing system with a control box, gear switch, 10 micro switches, 4
electrically controlled hydraulic valves and three diodes (1N5400, I think).
All I got was a written description of how to wire all components. All
wires are 20 AWG except power and ground.
Diode A: Gear micro switch & control box pin 12---(diode)---gear switch &
hyd valve A
Diode B: Gear micro switch & control box pin 15---(diode)---gear switch &
hyd valve B
Diode C: Control box pin 2---(diode)---hyd valve D
So how do I connect the diode leads in line to 20 AWG wire securely?
I was wondering if there was a connector of some sort for that kind of
application or if I should, as Bill Schlatterer suggested, solder them and
then cover with two layers of heat shrink. His look really nice!
Thanks Bob,
Jon Hults
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael T. Ice" <aurbo(at)ak.net> |
| Subject: | over voltage protection |
Hello,
I don't want to start a IR/non IR alternator war here but I have a question.
I am going to be using the ND 55 (or at least it is the Van's 60 Amp model and
it is already on order) and I don't want to use the over voltage protection. I
don't think it is necessary and I can't figure out where to install another one
of the huge contactors.
I am following the Z-11 system. I was wondering if I were to just by pass the
part on the drawing for the over voltage and wire the Number 4 contact directly
to the F terminal on the Alternator and the wire from the Number 2 terminal
to the Battery contactor would that work.
Would installing the crow bar O.V. protect module after the 5 amp pull able fuse
offer any advantages if I don't install the battery disconnect contactor?
Electro-confusion
Mike Ice
Electric's
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "r falstad" <bobair8(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Voltage Regulator Wire Sizes: Do I Really Need 12 |
AWG?
Folks,
Per page 4-7 of the "Connection", I'm planning on running the Field and
two ground wires from the B&C LR3C-14 to the battery in the back of my
GlaStar. The round trip distance between the battery location and the
regulator is (generously) about 40' (it may turn out closer to 35'
depending on wire routing and final battery location).
Using the 5 Amp rating of the field breaker, my figuring using Figure
11-2 in AC 43.13 says to use a 12 AWG wire. That seems awfully "fat",
especially since the B&C instructions specify 18 AWG. Fig. 11-2
indicates that 18 AWG will carry 5 Amps continuously for about 16',
which sounds about right for the distance from the alternator to the
regulator and from the regulator to a power buss on the panel.
Do I really need 12 AWG here? I don't recall seeing any information on
the normal load on the Field wire. Since the B&C instructions call for
redundant ground wires, can I use two 15 AWG for the ground wires and a
12 AWG for the Field wire?
(My calculations don't take into account that these voltage regulator
wires would be bundled with the (2) 2 AWG "mains"; the two wires for
the battery contactor and an "always hot" wire.)
Unrelated "bonus" question. I there any reason I can't bundle the Field
wire from the alternator back through the firewall with the thermocouple
wires for the CHT and EGT? This bundle will also have another wire from
the alternator to a test point on the panel so I can measure the Field
voltage from the cockpit per Bob's suggestion.)
Best regards,
Bob F.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Al Etherington <aletherington(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Annunciator Panel FYI |
Nathan Ulrich wrote:
>
> Although it doesn't have nearly the features of Alan's proposed annunciator,
> I built a custom annunciator panel for my Bonanza. It has 16 LED outputs, 13
> Stanley bar LEDs and 3 discrete LEDs for marker beacon lights (amber, blue,
> white). Except for the marker beacon LEDs, each output can be driven by a
> low or high signal. It has a test button, of course. The circuitry is pretty
> basic, mostly some surface mount transistors, diodes and resistors. It dims
> at night by being connected to the dimmer circuit (switched by the nav light
> switch).
>
> I designed and machined an aluminum housing for it, so that it mounts with
> six screws from behind the panel above my six pack. You can see a photo at:
>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/nathantu
>
> The annunciator photo is near the bottom. I'd be glad to provide more info
> if anyone is interested...
>
> Nathan
>
>
>
Hi Nathan:
I saved your e-mail for a time when I wasn't so busy, thus the delay in
responding.
I would like a little more info on your annunciator. As I am somewhat
electronically challenged, your circuitry would be of particular
interest. Beautiful machining, by the way.
Thanks,
Al Etherington
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Voltage Regulator Wire Sizes: Do I Really Need |
12 AWG?
>Folks,
>
>Per page 4-7 of the "Connection", I'm planning on running the Field and
>two ground wires from the B&C LR3C-14 to the battery in the back of my
>GlaStar. The round trip distance between the battery location and the
>regulator is (generously) about 40' (it may turn out closer to 35'
>depending on wire routing and final battery location).
>
>Using the 5 Amp rating of the field breaker, my figuring using Figure 11-2
>in AC 43.13 says to use a 12 AWG wire. That seems awfully "fat",
>especially since the B&C instructions specify 18 AWG. Fig. 11-2 indicates
>that 18 AWG will carry 5 Amps continuously for about 16', which sounds
>about right for the distance from the alternator to the regulator and from
>the regulator to a power buss on the panel.
>
>Do I really need 12 AWG here? I don't recall seeing any information on
>the normal load on the Field wire. Since the B&C instructions call for
>redundant ground wires, can I use two 15 AWG for the ground wires and a 12
>AWG for the Field wire?
>
>(My calculations don't take into account that these voltage regulator
>wires would be bundled with the (2) 2 AWG "mains"; the two wires for the
>battery contactor and an "always hot" wire.)
The schematics on 4-7 are a discussion of the effects of voltage
drop in wiring and the advantages of choosing voltage sense
points with understanding. As a practical matter I recommend
the following:
Mount the regulator up front. Either side of the firewall is
fine. Ground the regulator's "ground" terminal and case to
the firewall ground block. Run 20AWG wire for the field supply
and field output leads by the shortest practical route to
alternator and DC PWR Master switch. Since the LR series
regulators now feature remote sensing by a conductor
separate from the field supply wire, concern for voltage
drops described in Chapter 4 have been eliminated by
design.
See Z-figures.
>
>Unrelated "bonus" question. I there any reason I can't bundle the Field
>wire from the alternator back through the firewall with the thermocouple
>wires for the CHT and EGT? This bundle will also have another wire from
>the alternator to a test point on the panel so I can measure the Field
>voltage from the cockpit per Bob's suggestion.)
There are NO constraints for bundling wires of various
systems together - assuming each of the systems in question have
been designed to live in the real world.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: over voltage protection |
>Hello,
>
>I don't want to start a IR/non IR alternator war here but I have a question.
>
>I am going to be using the ND 55 (or at least it is the Van's 60 Amp model
>and it is already on order) and I don't want to use the over voltage
>protection. I don't think it is necessary and I can't figure out where to
>install another one of the huge contactors.
>
> I am following the Z-11 system. I was wondering if I were to just by
> pass the part on the drawing for the over voltage and wire the Number 4
> contact directly to the F terminal on the Alternator and the wire from
> the Number 2 terminal to the Battery contactor would that work.
>
>Would installing the crow bar O.V. protect module after the 5 amp pull
>able fuse offer any advantages if I don't install the battery disconnect
>contactor?
At the present time, there is no one-size-fits-all ov protection
scheme available for internally regulated alternators. I have
taken possession of a 10 hp alternator drive stand that needs
some serious attention before I can use it for any new investigations
or development work. However, know that a technique has been
devised and will be turned into real product sometime this year.
Further, the device is easily added to any existing alternator
installation. I'll suggest you proceed with your plans while
bypassing the ov protection and control issues. We'll fill this
box in later.
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: Secure connection to a diode? |
>Bob,
>
>
>I don t have a schematic or wiring diagram. The application is a gear
>door sequencing system with a control box, gear switch, 10 micro switches,
>4 electrically controlled hydraulic valves and three diodes (1N5400, I
>think). All I got was a written description of how to wire all
>components. All wires are 20 AWG except power and ground.
>
>
>Diode A: Gear micro switch & control box pin 12---(diode)---gear switch &
>hyd valve A
>
>Diode B: Gear micro switch & control box pin 15---(diode)---gear switch &
>hyd valve B
>
>Diode C: Control box pin 2---(diode)---hyd valve D
>
>
>So how do I connect the diode leads in line to 20 AWG wire securely?
I'll publish a comic book on this later
today.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael T. Ice" <aurbo(at)ak.net> |
| Subject: | Re: over voltage protection |
Bob,
Thank you for a practical answer. I will keep looking for this new technique
and product that you speak of.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 7:17 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: over voltage protection
>
>
>
>>Hello,
>>
>>I don't want to start a IR/non IR alternator war here but I have a
>>question.
>>
>>I am going to be using the ND 55 (or at least it is the Van's 60 Amp model
>>and it is already on order) and I don't want to use the over voltage
>>protection. I don't think it is necessary and I can't figure out where to
>>install another one of the huge contactors.
>>
>> I am following the Z-11 system. I was wondering if I were to just by
>> pass the part on the drawing for the over voltage and wire the Number 4
>> contact directly to the F terminal on the Alternator and the wire from
>> the Number 2 terminal to the Battery contactor would that work.
>>
>>Would installing the crow bar O.V. protect module after the 5 amp pull
>>able fuse offer any advantages if I don't install the battery disconnect
>>contactor?
>
> At the present time, there is no one-size-fits-all ov protection
> scheme available for internally regulated alternators. I have
> taken possession of a 10 hp alternator drive stand that needs
> some serious attention before I can use it for any new investigations
> or development work. However, know that a technique has been
> devised and will be turned into real product sometime this year.
> Further, the device is easily added to any existing alternator
> installation. I'll suggest you proceed with your plans while
> bypassing the ov protection and control issues. We'll fill this
> box in later.
>
> 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: | "Greg Papendick" <gandjpappy(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Need low cost schematic program |
I just ordered "The AeroElectric Connection" and am looking forward to
laying out the electrical system for my RV8. I am interested in
purchasing an inexpensive CAD program to document the system and was
curious as to what recommendations this list might have.
I am also interested if anyone has any recommendatons of a good software
program and process for designing and producting 2 sided boards for
small circuits. It has been 15 years since I designed circuits and at
that point I had a lab at my disposal. I am looking for something I can
use at home and that would produce acceptable boards.
Thank you in advance for your recommendations.
Greg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LarryMcFarland <larry(at)macsmachine.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
Hi Greg,
I'd recommend you use TurboCAD Vers 11 or later. I've worked with ProE
and Autocad, but find
TurboCAD much more productive, capable of quick 3D design and all the
tools for rendering and
providing exacting product design without the strain involved with the
other two. It's not priced
nearly as high as the others as well.
Sample drawing links,
http://www.macsmachine.com/images/electrical/full/primary-wiring.gif
http://www.macsmachine.com/images/electrical/full/primary-wiring-(SH-2).gif
http://www.macsmachine.com/images/gear/full/travel-stop-and-stear-link.gif
Good luck,
Larry McFarland - 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
Greg Papendick wrote:
>
> I just ordered "The AeroElectric Connection" and am looking forward to
> laying out the electrical system for my RV8. I am interested in
> purchasing an inexpensive CAD program to document the system and was
> curious as to what recommendations this list might have.
>
> I am also interested if anyone has any recommendatons of a good software
> program and process for designing and producting 2 sided boards for
> small circuits. It has been 15 years since I designed circuits and at
> that point I had a lab at my disposal. I am looking for something I can
> use at home and that would produce acceptable boards.
>
> Thank you in advance for your recommendations.
>
> Greg
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
Greg Papendick wrote:
>
> I just ordered "The AeroElectric Connection" and am looking forward to
> laying out the electrical system for my RV8. I am interested in
> purchasing an inexpensive CAD program to document the system and was
> curious as to what recommendations this list might have.
>
> I am also interested if anyone has any recommendatons of a good software
> program and process for designing and producting 2 sided boards for
> small circuits. It has been 15 years since I designed circuits and at
> that point I had a lab at my disposal. I am looking for something I can
> use at home and that would produce acceptable boards.
>
> Thank you in advance for your recommendations.
>
> Greg
>
>
You simply must give gEDA a try. It sells for the whopping sum of
"absolutely nothing" (it's open source.) It took me only a few moments
to start laying out circuits, and a day or so to figure out the tools
set that will take you from your schematic layout to a PCB silkscreen
print. If you get everything set up correctly in the schematic, it will
arrange all the components and traces automatically. It did a much
better arrangement job in less than a minute than I did over several hours.
Get copper clad boards from RadioShack. Create a resist with a laser
printer. Use muriatic acid mixed with hydrogen peroxide to etch. My
single largest cost to produce one of Jim Weir's capacitive fuel level
sensor was, by far, the shipping of the components from Newark.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
>
>I just ordered "The AeroElectric Connection" and am looking forward to
>laying out the electrical system for my RV8. I am interested in
>purchasing an inexpensive CAD program to document the system and was
>curious as to what recommendations this list might have.
TurboCAD v7 and higher will open, edit, save, and print
the AutoCAD .dwg files posted at:
http://aeroelectric.com/PPS
You can buy TurboCAD really cheap on Ebay. Here's an exemplar
listing:
http://tinyurl.com/unm8y
>I am also interested if anyone has any recommendatons of a good software
>program and process for designing and producting 2 sided boards for
>small circuits. It has been 15 years since I designed circuits and at
>that point I had a lab at my disposal. I am looking for something I can
>use at home and that would produce acceptable boards.
We use ExpressPCB for all but the largest production
tasks. Their software is free. The service for small
quantities is quick and reasonable. Furhter, as we
begin to publish more DIY projects using ECB layouts,
we'll also publish the artwork files in ExpressPCB format.
Take a peek at:
http://www.expresspcb.com/
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: | Vern Little <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
Greg: Here is exactly what you need... it's free and very easy to use:
http://www.expresspcb.com/
Here is a schematic for my RV-9A, and a library of custom components:
http://vx-aviation.com/page_3.html
Have fun.
Vern Little
Greg Papendick wrote:
>
> I just ordered "The AeroElectric Connection" and am looking forward to
> laying out the electrical system for my RV8. I am interested in
> purchasing an inexpensive CAD program to document the system and was
> curious as to what recommendations this list might have.
>
> I am also interested if anyone has any recommendatons of a good software
> program and process for designing and producting 2 sided boards for
> small circuits. It has been 15 years since I designed circuits and at
> that point I had a lab at my disposal. I am looking for something I can
> use at home and that would produce acceptable boards.
>
> Thank you in advance for your recommendations.
>
> Greg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Malcolm Thomson" <mthomson(at)showmeproductions.com> |
| Subject: | Need low cost schematic program |
Try ExpressPCB - good for circuit layout and PCB layout and production.
It's free too. I've used it with great success. Software is reliable and
does a nice job.
www.expresspcb.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Greg
Papendick
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 10:55 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Need low cost schematic program
-->
I just ordered "The AeroElectric Connection" and am looking forward to
laying out the electrical system for my RV8. I am interested in purchasing
an inexpensive CAD program to document the system and was curious as to what
recommendations this list might have.
I am also interested if anyone has any recommendatons of a good software
program and process for designing and producting 2 sided boards for small
circuits. It has been 15 years since I designed circuits and at that point
I had a lab at my disposal. I am looking for something I can use at home
and that would produce acceptable boards.
Thank you in advance for your recommendations.
Greg
--
2:04 PM
--
2:04 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Morgan" <zk-vii(at)rvproject.gen.nz> |
| Subject: | Need low cost schematic program |
Hi,
For CAD work I've been using progeCAD LT 2006 (http://www.progecad.com/) -
which is a free (/ donationware) program and works well.
For PCB design work - I've ended up using Eagle (http://www.cadsoft.de/) -
it is a little clumbsy (UNIX X windows style interface) but once you get it
going works really well and well featured. The freeware version is limited
to 6" x 4" physical designs (but multi-layer).
Regards,
Carl
--
ZK-VII - RV 7A QB - finishing? - New Zealand
http://www.rvproject.gen.nz/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Papendick [mailto:gandjpappy(at)aol.com]
> Sent: Monday, 15 January 2007 6:55 a.m.
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Need low cost schematic program
>
>
>
>
> I just ordered "The AeroElectric Connection" and am looking forward to
> laying out the electrical system for my RV8. I am interested in
> purchasing an inexpensive CAD program to document the system and was
> curious as to what recommendations this list might have.
>
> I am also interested if anyone has any recommendatons of a good software
> program and process for designing and producting 2 sided boards for
> small circuits. It has been 15 years since I designed circuits and at
> that point I had a lab at my disposal. I am looking for something I can
> use at home and that would produce acceptable boards.
>
> Thank you in advance for your recommendations.
>
> Greg
>
>
> --
> 13/01/2007 5:40 p.m.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Need low cost schematic program |
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
TurboCAD. And it will convert coveted DWG. Files to be used in your
production drawings to boot.
John Cox
#40600
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Greg
Papendick
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 9:55 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Need low cost schematic program
I just ordered "The AeroElectric Connection" and am looking forward to
laying out the electrical system for my RV8. I am interested in
purchasing an inexpensive CAD program to document the system and was
curious as to what recommendations this list might have.
I am also interested if anyone has any recommendatons of a good software
program and process for designing and producting 2 sided boards for
small circuits. It has been 15 years since I designed circuits and at
that point I had a lab at my disposal. I am looking for something I can
use at home and that would produce acceptable boards.
Thank you in advance for your recommendations.
Greg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "raymondj" <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Annunciator Panel FYI |
Greetings Nathan,
I would like to get a copy of the schematic for your panel. I don't think
I'm up to working with SMT components but I might try it with larger
components.
Thanks.
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Al
Etherington
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 7:45 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Annunciator Panel FYI
Nathan Ulrich wrote:
>
> Although it doesn't have nearly the features of Alan's proposed
annunciator,
> I built a custom annunciator panel for my Bonanza. It has 16 LED outputs,
13
> Stanley bar LEDs and 3 discrete LEDs for marker beacon lights (amber,
blue,
> white). Except for the marker beacon LEDs, each output can be driven by a
> low or high signal. It has a test button, of course. The circuitry is
pretty
> basic, mostly some surface mount transistors, diodes and resistors. It
dims
> at night by being connected to the dimmer circuit (switched by the nav
light
> switch).
>
> I designed and machined an aluminum housing for it, so that it mounts with
> six screws from behind the panel above my six pack. You can see a photo
at:
>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/nathantu
>
> The annunciator photo is near the bottom. I'd be glad to provide more info
> if anyone is interested...
>
> Nathan
>
>
Hi Nathan:
I saved your e-mail for a time when I wasn't so busy, thus the delay in
responding.
I would like a little more info on your annunciator. As I am somewhat
electronically challenged, your circuitry would be of particular
interest. Beautiful machining, by the way.
Thanks,
Al Etherington
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eric Schlanser <eschlanser(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re:Re: TSO's...and fuel level sensors |
Hey Bob,
Any more information available on the new AP system? Is it for the OBAM market?
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: TSO's...and fuel level sensors
I've been working an AP project where the hard-working
guts of the system holds GPS track to 1 degree of accuracy
and nothing more - 99% of everything you want an
autopilot to do. Less than a handfull of lines of code
in a $2 processor. ALL navigation bells and whistles are
offered as applications to run out of a hand-held.
The nav hardware sends "new course to make good" data
to the autopilot . . . and nothing more. If the bells
and whistles become troublesome, one can simply shut
them off without affecting the autopilot's stone-simple,
high-reliability task of keeping the dirty side down
and the pointy end aimed at your next waypoint.
I can't see any of the big name flight systems
folks taking this kind of approach. They'll consistently
dump all their tasks into one super-processor with
the attendant risks of having some whistle go off-key
and cripple the system's ability to do it's most
important tasks.
Only the OBAM aviation community can offer the close-
coupled supplier-consumer relationship necessary
to bypass bean-counters, process-and-procedure hacks
and certification inspectors so that a product may
evolve quickly in ways that benefit both the supplier
and the customer. The new paradigm is an information-
driven relationship between a capable supplier and
an informed, communicative customer. No amount
of regulation, certification or ISO9000 hat-dancing
can add value to an activity focused on capable and
willing suppliers offering the best they know how to
do to happy customers.
Bob . . .
________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________
From: "Terry Miles"
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Wgt complexity and parts count vs running (+) wires
Bob,
I am looking at your example in the switch chapter on how I could use a 700
2-10 and wire Nav and Strobe lights. As I do this, I am mindful of keeping
things simple, but not at the risk of long power runs in the event of a post
accident short or loose wire or related risks.
I have an overhead switch panel in the Velocity I am building. When
possible I have tried to have those switches supply grounds (pin 85) to some
40 amp relays I got on Ebay from a Car Audio outlet that I will mount behind
the panel area.
The distance from the power fuse block to this o'head switch panel is about
8 feet one way. The load in question is a 1 amp (2 amp fuse) for the nav
light LEDs. (Not the strobe. It is fused at the control box.) Here is my
question.
Is there a good practices recommendation you might have given my choices are
an 8 foot run (+) power into my overhead panel over ground wire into the 700
2-10 switch that then requires two separate relays in nose.
Follow on question--if 1 amp loads (20awg) are OK, is there an amperage
break point where you would opt for remoted relays?
Thanks,
Terry
________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wgt complexity and parts count vs running (+)
wires
>
>
>Bob,
>I am looking at your example in the switch chapter on how I could use a 700
>2-10 and wire Nav and Strobe lights. As I do this, I am mindful of keeping
>things simple, but not at the risk of long power runs in the event of a post
>accident short or loose wire or related risks.
Length of wire runs becomes a non-issue if the circuit is either
fused very lightly (5A or less) or is downstream of a DC power master
relay where it becomes "cold" as a result of preparation for landing
be it on or off-field.
>I have an overhead switch panel in the Velocity I am building. When
>possible I have tried to have those switches supply grounds (pin 85) to some
>40 amp relays I got on Ebay from a Car Audio outlet that I will mount behind
>the panel area.
>
>The distance from the power fuse block to this o'head switch panel is about
>8 feet one way. The load in question is a 1 amp (2 amp fuse) for the nav
>light LEDs. (Not the strobe. It is fused at the control box.) Here is my
>question.
We run power and control leads for distances as much as 50-60 feet
in some of our aircraft. As long as the wire gage is sufficiently
sized to offset voltage drop, there are no good reasons to add
relays EXCEPT to avoid having a LARGE switch in a row of otherwise
small switches or to avoid a LONG run of relatively fat wire (Larger
than 16 or 14 AWG).
>Is there a good practices recommendation you might have given my choices are
>an 8 foot run (+) power into my overhead panel over ground wire into the 700
>2-10 switch that then requires two separate relays in nose.
>
>Follow on question--if 1 amp loads (20awg) are OK, is there an amperage
>break point where you would opt for remoted relays?
Do your math. 20 AWG wire is 10 milliohms per foot and drops
10 millivolts per foot per amp. Assume total wire in
2A nav light circuit from bus to lamp and back to ground is
say 25 feet. 20AWG will drop 10 x 2 x 25 or 500 millivolts.
As a percentage of system voltage, this works out to 500/14000
or 3.5% . . . generally considered quite tolerable. 5% max is the
rule of thumb. I'll suggest your lowest cost of ownership and
highest reliability will happen when relays are used sparingly and
the S700 series switches perform happily at 7A continuous and
satisfactorily at 10A.
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 >
---------------------------------------------------------
________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________
From: Charles Brame
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Crimp or Solder
I recently made up a BNC connector for an antenna lead. I have always
soldered the central conductor into the gold pin. My buddy suggested
that I crimp the connector rather than solder. I did, and it seems to
be okay. Crimping was certainly faster than soldering. What's the
approved method?
Today I was reading Bob's Aeroelectric Connection Chapter 18 on Audio
Systems. It showed a D-sub connector with all its little gold pins.
Again, I have always soldered Sub-D pins. Should they be soldered or
crimped?
I have made up many a Molex type connector and I've always crimped
its male/female pins. Would a drop of solder make them more secure?
Charlie Brame
RV-6A N11CB
San Antonio
________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________
From: "Terry Miles"
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Wgt complexity and parts count vs running (+)
wires
Thank you, Sir.
-----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: Saturday, January 13, 2007 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wgt complexity and parts count vs running
(+) wires
>
>
>Bob,
>I am looking at your example in the switch chapter on how I could use a 700
>2-10 and wire Nav and Strobe lights. As I do this, I am mindful of keeping
>things simple, but not at the risk of long power runs in the event of a
post
>accident short or loose wire or related risks.
Length of wire runs becomes a non-issue if the circuit is either
fused very lightly (5A or less) or is downstream of a DC power master
relay where it becomes "cold" as a result of preparation for landing
be it on or off-field.
>I have an overhead switch panel in the Velocity I am building. When
>possible I have tried to have those switches supply grounds (pin 85) to
some
>40 amp relays I got on Ebay from a Car Audio outlet that I will mount
behind
>the panel area.
>
>The distance from the power fuse block to this o'head switch panel is about
>8 feet one way. The load in question is a 1 amp (2 amp fuse) for the nav
>light LEDs. (Not the strobe. It is fused at the control box.) Here is my
>question.
We run power and control leads for distances as much as 50-60 feet
in some of our aircraft. As long as the wire gage is sufficiently
sized to offset voltage drop, there are no good reasons to add
relays EXCEPT to avoid having a LARGE switch in a row of otherwise
small switches or to avoid a LONG run of relatively fat wire (Larger
than 16 or 14 AWG).
>Is there a good practices recommendation you might have given my choices
are
>an 8 foot run (+) power into my overhead panel over ground wire into the
700
>2-10 switch that then requires two separate relays in nose.
>
>Follow on question--if 1 amp loads (20awg) are OK, is there an amperage
>break point where you would opt for remoted relays?
Do your math. 20 AWG wire is 10 milliohms per foot and drops
10 millivolts per foot per amp. Assume total wire in
2A nav light circuit from bus to lamp and back to ground is
say 25 feet. 20AWG will drop 10 x 2 x 25 or 500 millivolts.
As a percentage of system voltage, this works out to 500/14000
or 3.5% . . . generally considered quite tolerable. 5% max is the
rule of thumb. I'll suggest your lowest cost of ownership and
highest reliability will happen when relays are used sparingly and
the S700 series switches perform happily at 7A continuous and
satisfactorily at 10A.
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 >
---------------------------------------------------------
________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Crimp or Solder
>
>I recently made up a BNC connector for an antenna lead. I have always
>soldered the central conductor into the gold pin. My buddy suggested
>that I crimp the connector rather than solder. I did, and it seems to
>be okay. Crimping was certainly faster than soldering. What's the
>approved method?
>
>Today I was reading Bob's Aeroelectric Connection Chapter 18 on Audio
>Systems. It showed a D-sub connector with all its little gold pins.
>Again, I have always soldered Sub-D pins. Should they be soldered or
>crimped?
what ever the manufacture of the connector recommends. You can
purchase both solder and crimp style connectors in most
technologies. I use mostly crimped pin connectors for ease of
installation, convenience and freedom from process-errors. In
terms of overall reliability, there is no difference between
soldered and crimped joints.
>I have made up many a Molex type connector and I've always crimped
>its male/female pins. Would a drop of solder make them more secure?
There have been TRILLIONS of pins installed per the recommendations
of the manufacturer with exceedingly low failure rates. Remember,
connector folks sell thousands to aircraft and billions to commercial
ventures. Names like Molex, AMP, Amphenol, T&B (just to name a few)
have been in this business for decades. The fact that they are still
in business must say something about the capabilities of their
products to meet customer expectations. Nonetheless, there's a host
of folks who don't understand how the products are designed to
work and they WORRY a lot about things that are not worthy of
the effort.
Buy the technology that appeals to you most (or accommodates your
tools and skills) and truck on. The whole solder-n-crimp or solder-
instead-of-crimp thing is floobydust.
See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/rules/review.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 >
=== message truncated ==
---------------------------------
Bored stiff? Loosen up...
Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
Vern Little wrote:
>
>
> Greg: Here is exactly what you need... it's free and very easy to use:
>
> http://www.expresspcb.com/
>
> Here is a schematic for my RV-9A, and a library of custom components:
>
> http://vx-aviation.com/page_3.html
>
> Have fun.
>
> Vern Little
>
Vern, just a word of warning.
The difference between 'free' and 'open source' is that the program can
disappear, leaving a library of custom components worthless. Make sure
you make backups of your work in a format that is not proprietary.
I spent about a year learning to do 3D CAD with Pro/Desktop while the
tech industry was in the recent slump. I was nearly finished with a
complete rendition of a virtual Dyke Delta, when the makers of the
program decided that they were no longer interested in having people
learn to use their software for free. They were kind enough to give out
keys that enabled the software for 5yrs, but I quickly lost mine in a
harddrive crash. I still have the files, but they are useless without a
program to interpret them. I did convert a few of the parts to STEP
files, so they are usable in other programs, but most of the work has to
be written off as an 'educational' exercise. If I had taken an hour or
so to save each of the components in a more universal format I wouldn't
get a sick feeling whenever I look at those files.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Jurotich <mjurotich(at)hst.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Fat Capacitor Question |
I am thinking of putting a Fat capacitor between the E bus and ground. Idea is
if the E bus switch is open
and the battery is suppling power through the diode
and the voltage sags for a short time (300 milliseconds is what I
remember) when first engaging the starter
the capacitor would keep the voltage above 10 for the voltage
sensitive stuff that may reset.
2 questions:
Would this work?
It seems to introducing a single point failure for the shorted
capacitor case. Are todays electrolytic caps sufficiently robust to
mitigate the risk?
Thanks
Matthew M. Jurotich
e-mail mail to:
phone : 301-286-5919
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | 8AWG Wire to Fast-On Connection |
In order to keep the voltage drop down on a long 14 volt 30 amp run I
want to use 8 AWG wire. The final device has a male Fast-On terminal.
The only terminals I can find for 8 AWG wire are ring terminals, how do
I transition to a Fast-On?
Larry
RV-10
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stone-simple, GPS course tracking wing leveler |
>>Hey Bob,
>>
>>Any more information available on the new AP system? Is it for the OBAM
>>market?
Yes. That's the project that took hold over a plate of tacos
back when I did the annunciator features survey. We were
talking about a variety of things to explore. The one that
generated the most excitement was the stone-simple-super-
accurate wing leveler.
It's not a front-burner project but yes, if it comes
to any state of flyable hardware, it will be available
only to the OBAM aviation market. Right now, the
alternator drive stand has to be my front burner
project for new development. But perhaps later this
year. We'll see what the GMC (gray matter consortium)
comes up with in the mean time.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
>
>
>Vern Little wrote:
>>
>>Greg: Here is exactly what you need... it's free and very easy to use:
>>
>>http://www.expresspcb.com/
>>
>>Here is a schematic for my RV-9A, and a library of custom components:
>>
>>http://vx-aviation.com/page_3.html
>>
>>Have fun.
>>
>>Vern Little
>Vern, just a word of warning.
>
>The difference between 'free' and 'open source' is that the program can
>disappear, leaving a library of custom components worthless. Make sure
>you make backups of your work in a format that is not proprietary.
>
>I spent about a year learning to do 3D CAD with Pro/Desktop while the tech
>industry was in the recent slump. I was nearly finished with a complete
>rendition of a virtual Dyke Delta, when the makers of the program decided
>that they were no longer interested in having people learn to use their
>software for free. They were kind enough to give out keys that enabled
>the software for 5yrs, but I quickly lost mine in a harddrive crash. I
>still have the files, but they are useless without a program to interpret
>them. I did convert a few of the parts to STEP files, so they are usable
>in other programs, but most of the work has to be written off as an
>'educational' exercise. If I had taken an hour or so to save each of the
>components in a more universal format I wouldn't get a sick feeling
>whenever I look at those files.
Most serious CAD programs are ambiformexerous . . . they'll input
and output a variety of popular formats. For example, my AutoCAD
.dwg files can be opened directly by a variety of competitive programs.
Further, I can save in .dxf and IGES formats that will transport the
drawings to other applications. It's good to research these capabilties
before you infest much $time$ in a CAD based documentation project.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Wig Wag High Beams |
| From: | <rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US> |
I saw a small Truck from Fire Department racing around tonight just bout
twilight, he had a Wig Wag system for his headlights that left low beams
on all the time and Wig Waged the High Beams.
Pretty neat.
If you have high and low beam, perhaps a consideration.
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Secure connection to a diode? |
>Bob,
>
>
>I don t have a schematic or wiring diagram. The application is a gear
>door sequencing system with a control box, gear switch, 10 micro switches,
>4 electrically controlled hydraulic valves and three diodes (1N5400, I
>think). All I got was a written description of how to wire all
>components. All wires are 20 AWG except power and ground.
>
>
>Diode A: Gear micro switch & control box pin 12---(diode)---gear switch &
>hyd valve A
>
>Diode B: Gear micro switch & control box pin 15---(diode)---gear switch &
>hyd valve B
>
>Diode C: Control box pin 2---(diode)---hyd valve D
>
>
>So how do I connect the diode leads in line to 20 AWG wire securely?
>
>
>I was wondering if there was a connector of some sort for that kind of
>application or if I should, as Bill Schlatterer suggested, solder them and
>then cover with two layers of heat shrink. His look really nice!
See http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Homeless/Homeless_Components.htm
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: 8AWG Wire to Fast-On Connection |
>
>In order to keep the voltage drop down on a long 14 volt 30 amp run I want
>to use 8 AWG wire. The final device has a male Fast-On terminal.
>The only terminals I can find for 8 AWG wire are ring terminals, how do I
>transition to a Fast-On?
Splice a 6" 10AWG stub on the end of the 8AWG wire
so that you can crimp a standard yellow (10-12AWG)
PIDG on the end.
30A is pushing a Fast-On pretty hard. What's your
application?
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: | luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky) |
| Subject: | Re: Another 60A alternator, internally regulated voltage |
regulator failure
14824
What's the URL that you can get maintenance/recall history on parts?
thx,
lucky
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com>
>
> Lucky, mind sharing the part # on the alternator? It might be the
> same as the Geo Metro 55A machine I just installed (I'd have to pull
> the cowl to look) but I'd like to know if it had a significant OV
> failure mode history.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Bill B
>
> On 1/8/07, lucky wrote:
> >
> > My update. I bought an alternator from Autozone that matched the
> > suzuki/chevrolet automobile replacement alternator often quoted to be the
> > same as Van's 60 amp internally regulated alternator even though the part
> > number was just slightly different. I could not tell a difference from the
> > outside though their computer said 55 amp and not 60 amp. It has a
> > Nippondenso internal fan and a hotline of 800 228 9672.
> >
> > In the install manual, it has a CAUTION: A defective or discharged battery
> > can damage your new alternator.
> >
> > But the reason my alternator may have failed is that there was one of the
> > feet on the alternator was cracked clean through. Though it was still
> > rigidly mounted that had to set up some fun vibration within the alternator
> > itself. Don't know if that actually was a cause for the battery to fail as
> > opposed to the opposite hypothesis I was banting about.
> >
> > Fun stuff. I still have the magic alternator killing odyssey pc680 battery
> > I removed if anyone has a Van's 60amp alternator they want to test for
> > kill..... ;-)
> >
> > Next task is to replace the high intensify landing/taxi light bulbs that
> > burned out when turned on with 18 volts on the bus....
> >
> > lucky
> >
> > -------------- Original message --------------
> > From: Ken
> >
> > >
> > > For years I was skeptical too that a weak battery would hasten
> > > alternator death. However eventually I developed a few thoughts on why
> > > there may be some truth to this in automobiles.
> > >
> > > 1. Higher longer charging does tend to make the alternator run hotter
> > > and some internal VR alternators are not well cooled. Any vehicle that
> > > is started with jumper cables is about to ask for a serious effort from
> > > its charging system.
> > >
> > > 2. Installing a new but partly charged battery may stress the alternator
> > > even higher than ever as it charges the battery at max current for an
> > > extended period. An old alternator just may not be up to the ef fort.
> > > Maybe the brushes are worn or maybe the solid state devices get hotter
> > > than they have for awhile. Certainly the cooling of old greasy/dirty
> > > components is not as good as on a clean new unit. I'm not sure that a
> > > test stand is going to successfully imitate the service environment that
> > > I'm thinking of. This might explain death shortly after the new battery
> > > is installed though.
> > >
> > > 3. Weak "maintenance free" batteries are sometimes low on electrolyte. I
> > > think that further reduces their capacity to absorb any excess voltage
> > > or current and might lead to more voltage excursions. Most people never
> > > pop the caps off automobile batteries any more as it is often not
> > > obvious how to do it, or that it can be done. It seems that my little
> > > (8AH) AGM batteries will accept very little current initially when fully
> > > discharged.
> > >
> > > 4. As a WAG another contrib ution might be abnormal operation while
> > > fooling around with a weak battery. If I leave the ignition/key on with
> > > my ND IR alternator on my aircraft without starting the engine, the
> > > alternator does draw several amps of field current and it will heat up
> > > quite noticeably with no cooling airflow.
> > >
> > > Anyway my personal rule now is to change out any suspicious battery with
> > > a new FULLY charged unit and I can sometimes send the vehicle to the
> > > wreckers with the original alternator. I do run weak batteries in my
> > > tractor but that has an external homemade VR that hangs out in the
> > > breeze (like the alternator) and everything runs very very cool ;)
> > >
> > > Ken
> > >
> > > >> SNIP>
> > > >> I had heard that a "weak" battery can damage the alternator/regulator
> > > >> so this seamed to have validated that statement. For sure though,
> > > >> from my observations , the battery appeared to go bad first then 2
> > > >> hours later after a new battery was installed the regulator seems to
> > > >> have failed.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm skeptical of such claims. Consider how many batteries
> > > > you've replaced in cars without having to replace the alternator
> > > > too.
> > > >
> > > > I've "killed" a few alternators in various test situations
> > > > but all failures involved either loss of cooling or mechanical
> > > > issues such as bearing or shear-shaft failures.
> > > >
> > > > The way to "test" a weak-battery-kills-alternators hypothesis is
> > > > to separate the two components and then craft a test plan designed
> > > > to kill an alternator. In other words, if I had a brand new
> > > > alternator and a charter to damage it in some way on the test
> > > > stand, what kinds of abuses might I heap upon the unsuspecting
> > > ; > device to bring about its untimely demise?
> > > >
> > > > Once such a test plan is devised, then deduce how battery
> > > > behavior mimics any of the abuses you've crafted for the
> > > > purpose of killing an alternator.
> > > >
> > > > I'd be interested in anyone's ideas as to how you might go
> > > > about it. Alternators are inherently self current limiting.
> > > > Given sufficient cooling air, you cannot "overload" one to
> > > > destruction. Alternator diodes are robust and will withstand
> > > > reverse voltage transients many times greater than system voltage.
> > > > It's the regulators that are most vulnerable to a load-dump
> > > > event and that's been demonstrated by several builders using
> > > > Van's (and perhaps other) alternators combined with b-lead
> > > > contactor controls.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not suggesting that battery condition might not be a bit-player
> > & gt; > in a scenario that's hard on alternators. For example:
> > > > I can see how the "weak battery" thing might have morphed into
> > > > a cause/effect for alternator failure where someone knows that
> > > > having a battery be disconnected from the alternator at the same
> > > > time all loads are removed causes a potentially hazardous
> > > > over-shoot. One might deduce that a "weak" battery has
> > > > lost its ability to mitigate a load-dump events thereby
> > > > placing the alternator at-risk.
> > > >
> > > > If this hypothesis were in play for your situation, the alternator
> > > > seems most likely to have failed while the "weak" battery was
> > > > in place. Certainly having a "strong" new battery in place totally
> > > > eliminates the risk for hazardous transients during ordinary
> > > > system load reductions.
> > > >
> > > > This could be hypothetically thrashed for d ays bu
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
14824
What's the URL that you can get maintenance/recall history on parts?
thx,
lucky
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted
by: "Bill Boyd"
>
> Lucky, mind sharing
the part # on the alternator? It might be the
> same as the Geo Metro 55A
machine I just installed (I'd have to pull
> the cowl to look) but I'd
like to know if it had a significant OV
> failure mode history.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Bill B
>
> On 1/8/07, lucky
wrote:
> >
> > My update. I bought
an alternator from Autozone that matched the
> > suzuki/chevrolet
automobile replacement alternator often quoted to be the
> > same
as Van's 60 amp internally regulated alternator even though the part
>
> number was just slightly different. I could not
tell
a difference from the
> > outside though their computer said 55 amp and
not 60 amp. It has a
> > Nippondenso internal fan and a hotline of
800 228 9672.
> >
> > In the install manual, it has a CAUTION:
A defective or discharged battery
> > can damage your new alternator.
> >
> > But the reason my alternator may have failed
is that there was one of the
> > feet on the alternator was cracked
clean through. Though it was still
> > rigidly mounted that had
to set up some fun vibration within the alternator
> > itself. Don't
know if that actually was a cause for the battery to fail as
> > opposed
to the opposite hypothesis I was banting about.
> >
> >
Fun stuff. I still have the magic alternator killing odyssey pc680 battery
> > I removed if anyone has a Van's 60amp alternator they want to test
for
> > kill..... ;-)
> >
>
> Next task is to replace the high intensify landing/taxi light bulbs that
>
> burned out when turned on with 18 volts on the bus....
> >
> > lucky
> >
> > -------------- Original message
-------------- <BR>> > From: Ken <KLEHMAN(at)ALBEDO.NET><BR>> >
> > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken
> >
>
> > > For years I was skeptical too that a weak battery
would hasten
> > > alternator death. However eventually I developed
a few thoughts on why
> > > there may be some truth to this in
automobiles.
> > >
> > > 1. Higher longer charging
does tend to make the alternator run hotter
> > > and some internal
VR alternators are not well cooled. Any vehicle that
> > > is
started with jumper cables is about to ask for a serious effort from
>
> > its charging system.
> > >
>
> > 2. Installing a new but partly charged battery may stress the alternator
> > > even higher than ever as it charges the battery at max
current for an
> > > extended period. An old alternator just may
not be up to the ef fort.
> > > Maybe the brushes are worn or maybe
the solid state devices get hotter
> > > than they have for awhile.
Certainly the cooling of old greasy/dirty
> > > components
is not as good as on a clean new unit. I'm not sure that a
> > >
test stand is going to successfully imitate the service environment that
>
> > I'm thinking of. This might explain death shortly after the new
battery
> > > is installed though.
> > >
> >
> 3. Weak "maintenance free" batteries are sometimes low on electrolyte.
I
> > > think that further reduces their capacity to absorb any
excess voltage
> > > or current and migh
t lead
to more voltage excursions. Most people never
> > > pop the caps
off automobile batteries any more as it is often not
> > > obvious
how to do it, or that it can be done. It seems that my little
> >
> (8AH) AGM batteries will accept very little current initially when fully
> > > discharged.
> > >
> > > 4. As a WAG
another contrib ution might be abnormal operation while
> > >
fooling around with a weak battery. If I leave the ignition/key on with
>
> > my ND IR alternator on my aircraft without starting the engine, the
> > > alternator does draw several amps of field current and it
will heat up
> > > quite noticeably with no cooling airflow.
>
> >
> > > Anyway my personal rule now is to change out
any suspicious battery with
> > > a new FULLY charged unit and
I can sometimes send the vehicle to the
> >
; >
wreckers with the original alternator. I do run weak batteries in my
>
> > tractor but that has an external homemade VR that hangs out in the
>
> > breeze (like the alternator) and everything runs very very cool
;)
> > >
> > > Ken
> > >
> >
> >> SNIP>
> > > >> I had heard that a "weak"
battery can damage the alternator/regulator
> > > >> so
this seamed to have validated that statement. For sure though,
> > >
>> from my observations , the battery appeared to go bad first then
2
> > > >> hours later after a new battery was installed the
regulator seems to
> > > >> have failed.
> > >
>
> > > >
> > > > I'm skeptical of such
claims. Consider how many batteries
> > > > you've replaced in
cars without having to replace the alternator
&g
t; >
; > > too.
> > > >
> > > > I've "killed"
a few alternators in various test situations
> > > > but all failures
involved either loss of cooling or mechanical
> > > >
issues such as bearing or shear-shaft failures.
> > > >
>
> > > The way to "test" a weak-battery-kills-alternators hypothesis
is
> > > > to separate the two components and then craft a test
plan designed
> > > > to kill an alternator. In other words,
if I had a brand new
> > > > alternator and a charter to damage
it in some way on the test
> > > > stand, what kinds of abuses
might I heap upon the unsuspecting
> > > ; > device to bring
about its untimely demise?
> > > >
> > > >
Once such a test plan is devised, then deduce how battery
> > >
> behavior mimics any of the abuses you've crafte
d for
the
> > > > purpose of killing an alternator.
> > >
>
> > > > I'd be interested in anyone's ideas as to how you
might go
> > > > about it. Alternators are inherently self
current limiting.
> > > > Given sufficient cooling air, you cannot
"overload" one to
> > > > destruction. Alternator diodes
are robust and will withstand
> > > > reverse voltage transients
many times greater than system voltage.
> > > > It's the regulators
that are most vulnerable to a load-dump
> > > > event
and that's been demonstrated by several builders using
> > > >
Van's (and perhaps other) alternators combined with b-lead
> > >
> contactor controls.
> > > >
> > > > I'm
not suggesting that battery condition might not be a bit-player
> >
& gt; > in a scenario that's hard on alternat
ors. F
or example:
> > > > I can see how the "weak battery" thing might
have morphed into
> > > > a cause/effect for alternator failure
where someone knows that
> > > > having a battery be disconnected
from the alternator at the same
> > > > time all loads
are removed causes a potentially hazardous
> > > > over-shoot.
One might deduce that a "weak" battery has
> > > > lost its
ability to mitigate a load-dump events thereby
> > > > placing
the alternator at-risk.
> > > >
> > > > If this
hypothesis were in play for your situation, the alternator
> > >
> seems most likely to have failed while the "weak" battery was
>
> > > in place. Certainly having a "strong" new battery in place totally
> > > > eliminates the risk for hazardous transients during
ordinary
> > > > system load reduc
tions.
&g
t;
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jan de Jong <jan.de.jong(at)xs4all.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
It seems that ExpressPCB output format is proprietary - no Gerber files
- and not supported by other prototype PCB makers.
A possible consideration.
Jan de Jong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | larger wire fuselinks |
Bob- your site says to contact you for fabrication of larger
fuselinks than 20 or 22 AWG.
I'm going to need an 8 AWG fuselink in my 4 AWG starter/alternator B+
wire. Pointers, please?
-Bill B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: larger wire fuselinks |
>
>Bob- your site says to contact you for fabrication of larger
>fuselinks than 20 or 22 AWG.
>
>I'm going to need an 8 AWG fuselink in my 4 AWG starter/alternator B+
>wire. Pointers, please?
Use an ANL or MAX-inline fuse holder. Fusible links should
not be applied to uses other than those illustrated and
sized in the Z-figures.
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: | "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: larger wire fuselinks |
I'm sorry, that should read, the 8AWG run from the alternator to the
PM starter solenoid lug needs a 12 AWG fuselink; can you advise how
best to construct one?
The run from the battery to the starter is obviously protected by the
battery contactor; my fault for not having the schematic open in front
of me as I wrote the querry.
-Bill
On 1/15/07, Bill Boyd wrote:
> Bob- your site says to contact you for fabrication of larger
> fuselinks than 20 or 22 AWG.
>
> I'm going to need an 8 AWG fuselink in my 4 AWG starter/alternator B+
> wire. Pointers, please?
>
> -Bill B
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
>
>It seems that ExpressPCB output format is proprietary - no Gerber files -
>and not supported by other prototype PCB makers.
>A possible consideration.
>Jan de Jong
Correct . . . but after years of doing business with
them (and considering/using a variety of options) their
pricing and service for the low volume OBAM aircraft
market has over-ridden these concerns.
It's exceedingly unlikely that anyone on the List is
going to regret having used ExpressPCB because of a
future wish to have a few thousand boards fabricated.
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: Need low cost schematic program |
| From: | "Roger Bentlage" <bentlage(at)sbcglobal.net> |
A number of programs are available for free download at:
http://www.freecad.com/cgi-bin/dcd/html/CAD_Programs___General_Purpose/
I use a purchased copy of EasyCAD for basic 2-axis stuff (wiring diagrams) because
of its simplicity.
I use A9CAD, downloadable free from the above site, for more complex applications.
It's comfortable with AutoCAD output.
Attached is a copy of my dual batt, dual alt, all electric RV-7. Criticisms are
welcome.
Roger
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=87817#87817
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Nathan Ulrich" <nulrich(at)technq.com> |
| Subject: | Annunciator schematic |
Al:
Unfortunately, I don't have a schematic, I kind of winged it a little bit
since the circuit is so easy. I'm only a *mechanical* engineer, after all
;).
I'd be glad to share the ExpressPCB layout file with anyone who is
interested. Just send me your email address.
Nathan
--- Begin forwarded message ---
Hi Nathan:
I saved your e-mail for a time when I wasn't so busy, thus the delay in
responding.
I would like a little more info on your annunciator. As I am somewhat
electronically challenged, your circuitry would be of particular
interest. Beautiful machining, by the way.
Thanks,
Al Etherington
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Tasker <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
True, but why compromise on a proprietary format when you can get Eagle
for free and do any layouts up to 4" x 6" with schematic capture and
Gerber outputs usable by any PCB house. http://www.cadsoft.de/
Dick Tasker
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> It seems that ExpressPCB output format is proprietary - no Gerber
>> files - and not supported by other prototype PCB makers.
>> A possible consideration.
>> Jan de Jong
>
>
> Correct . . . but after years of doing business with
> them (and considering/using a variety of options) their
> pricing and service for the low volume OBAM aircraft
> market has over-ridden these concerns.
>
> It's exceedingly unlikely that anyone on the List is
> going to regret having used ExpressPCB because of a
> future wish to have a few thousand boards fabricated.
>
>
> 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: Need low cost schematic program |
>
>
>True, but why compromise on a proprietary format when you can get Eagle
>for free and do any layouts up to 4" x 6" with schematic capture and
>Gerber outputs usable by any PCB house. http://www.cadsoft.de/
>
>Dick Tasker
. . . is there a fab house that inputs Gerber plots
that will do 5-day turnaround prototypes for $51 + 2nd
day air?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Need low cost schematic program |
While I have been a satisfied customer of ExpressPCB for a number of years
and think they are indeed a great PCB provider, I have lately found some of
there limitations - well, rather limiting. I have decided to convert my
project design from through-hole to surface Mount (ugh! those components are
almost invisible!).
In order to keep my sanity, I decided that using a stencil to lay on the
bare board for a limited number of units would be an ideal way to go. This
stencil is simply a thin metal (or plastic) sheet with holes very precisely
cut to fit over those component pads you wish to have a solder paste
deposited on. So you put the paste on the stencil and use a squeegee to
pull the paste across all the holes in the stencil thereby depositing the
solder paste only where you are going to put a component.
Then you use a magnifying glass and tweezers to put the tiny components on
their pads and pop them into an oven and voila (if everything goes right)
you have a solder surface mount board.
Now the problem is that ExpressPCB does not offer the stencil service,
furthermore most firms offering the stencil service require a set of Gerber
files (normal CAD output of most PC board software). You can not directly
produce one from the ExpressPCB software. You must pay an additional $60
for a Gerber file from ExpressPCB. This is the file that EAGLE and some of
the other readily available PC board software produces that file as a normal
course. So $60 just seems a bit much when there are package that produce it
free.
A PCB software package that produces such non-proprietary Gerber files also
give you a much greater range of service providers including all the way to
China (very nice prices if you can stand the transportation delay).
So I believe, as Bob pointed out - it all depends on what your needs are.
For one of a kind, or a few, ExpressPCB offers a valued service at a
reasonable price. Up to now, I have used no other. But, some of their
limitations in face of my current needs are causing me to reconsider.
FWF
Ed
Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com
http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW
http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net>
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 7:52 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Need low cost schematic program
>
>
> True, but why compromise on a proprietary format when you can get Eagle
> for free and do any layouts up to 4" x 6" with schematic capture and
> Gerber outputs usable by any PCB house. http://www.cadsoft.de/
>
> Dick Tasker
>
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It seems that ExpressPCB output format is proprietary - no Gerber
>>> files - and not supported by other prototype PCB makers.
>>> A possible consideration.
>>> Jan de Jong
>>
>>
>> Correct . . . but after years of doing business with
>> them (and considering/using a variety of options) their
>> pricing and service for the low volume OBAM aircraft
>> market has over-ridden these concerns.
>>
>> It's exceedingly unlikely that anyone on the List is
>> going to regret having used ExpressPCB because of a
>> future wish to have a few thousand boards fabricated.
>>
>>
>> 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: Fat Capacitor Question |
>
>
>I am thinking of putting a Fat capacitor between the E bus and
>ground. Idea is
>
>if the E bus switch is open
>and the battery is suppling power through the diode
>and the voltage sags for a short time (300 milliseconds is what I
>remember) when first engaging the starter
>
>the capacitor would keep the voltage above 10 for the voltage sensitive
>stuff that may reset.
>2 questions:
>Would this work?
Sure. In fact it's been done. The quick-n-dirty design
tool takes notice of the fact that a 1F capacitor discharged
at 1A will fall at 1V per second. So, assuming the system you're
protecting draws 3A. Assume further you want to keep the voltage
from falling below 10v with a start from 12v. Assume further that
you want to support the device for 1/2 second.
A/F = V/S
3/F = 2/0.5
3/F = 4
F = 0.75 Farads
That's a FAT capacitor. You can buy 1F caps popular with the
folks who like to install ear-crusher audio systems in their
vehicles. See:
http://tinyurl.com/tvrtx
The capacitor can get small by reducing supported
current, reducing support-time or allowing a greater voltage
drop during inrush transient.
If your system will benefit from some form of transient isolation
system, I think you'll find that a small battery is a much better
energy storage device. The smallest of SVLA batteries can be isolated
from the rest of the system during a few seconds of cranking time.
The installed weight and volume will be smaller but there will be
a preventative maintenance issue for the AUX battery. In this case,
AUX battery capacity is not a big issue ASSUMING that its only
task is to mitigate cranking inrush brownout. This means that you
could run it until it fails to support the protected system.
I've used some FAT caps for similar tasks but they have some
special integration issues. You can't just hook these critters
to a battery to charge them . . . charging currents are very
high and tends to burn switches. You need to develop a special
current limited charging circuit to avoid the stress.
Super caps are going to REPLACE batteries in our airplanes
in the foreseeable future. But using a FAT cap to replace
a small sealed lead-acid battery in this application is
problematic.
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: | "Dr. Andrew Elliott" <a.s.elliott(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Serial input transponders? |
Gang:
I am planning a minimalist glass cockpit, and find that my EFIS will
output serial altitude data directly. Anyone have a list of which
transponders will accept serial input?
I know that the Garmin GTX-327 does. What about the -320A? What about
any of the new NARCO boxes? Becker? Microair? Others? (Keep in the in
range of $2000=B1 GA units. I know that the fancier $datalink$ units
all do.) The serial-Gillman converter is about $250, which gives me
some lattitude in selecting a slightly pricier serial-compatible unit.)
Thanks,
Andy Elliott, Mesa, AZ
N601GE (reserved)
601XL/TD/QB, Corvair, building...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
Hi Bob,
Here is a site that offers 5 boards for as low as $13 per board, 5 day
turnaround. I have not yet used them (as I have not yet mastered Eagle PCB
software to the point of producing a board), but I will certainly give them
a try in the future.
http://ecommerce.pcbfabexpress.com/index.jsp
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 9:30 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Need low cost schematic program
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>True, but why compromise on a proprietary format when you can get Eagle
>>for free and do any layouts up to 4" x 6" with schematic capture and
>>Gerber outputs usable by any PCB house. http://www.cadsoft.de/
>>
>>Dick Tasker
>
> . . . is there a fab house that inputs Gerber plots
> that will do 5-day turnaround prototypes for $51 + 2nd
> day air?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Gill" <wgill10(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Serial input transponders? |
Dr. Elliott,
Negative on the 320/320A. Dynon produces a serial-to-parallel converter
if that helps.
Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dr.
Andrew Elliott
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 9:06 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Serial input transponders?
Gang:
I am planning a minimalist glass cockpit, and find that my EFIS will
output serial altitude data directly. Anyone have a list of which
transponders will accept serial input?
I know that the Garmin GTX-327 does. What about the -320A? What about
any of the new NARCO boxes? Becker? Microair? Others? (Keep in the in
range of $2000=B1 GA units. I know that the fancier $datalink$ units
all
do.) The serial-Gillman converter is about $250, which gives me some
lattitude in selecting a slightly pricier serial-compatible unit.)
Thanks,
Andy Elliott, Mesa, AZ
N601GE (reserved)
601XL/TD/QB, Corvair, building...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>Here is a site that offers 5 boards for as low as $13 per board, 5 day
>turnaround. I have not yet used them (as I have not yet mastered Eagle
>PCB software to the point of producing a board), but I will certainly give
>them a try in the future.
>
>http://ecommerce.pcbfabexpress.com/index.jsp
>
>Ed
Interesting! Thanks for the heads-up.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Leedham" <sideslip(at)tiscali.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Radio interference when receiving |
I have a new Jabiru 2200 (85hp) installed in a Murphy Maverick with an
Icom IC-A200 panel mount VHFand an external antenna mounted throughthe
fuselage skin midway between the cabin and fin using the fuselage for a
groundplane.
I am picking up ignition interference when receiving which increases
with engine speed.
I have tried running the radio from an independant power supply to
eliminate installation wiring and still get the same problem, which
seems to indicate that the antenna is picking up the radiated noise.
The engine has suppressed ht leads to the plugs but I am not sure about
the leads to the coils.I checked the rotor arms for security and they
seem fine.
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to cure the problem?
Geoff Leedham
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)GMAIL.COM> |
| Subject: | stud sizes on Sky tec starter |
I'm planning a PIDG terminal order and can't find this nugget on the
skytec website: anybody know the stud sizes for the various terminals
on the SkyTec Lycoming PM starter? Want to be sure I order the
correct thing.
TIA,
Bill B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger E. Bentlage" <bentlage(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Marker Beacon Antenna |
An old topic but I could not find the information.
I plan to install the marker beacon antenna on the lower cowl of a RV-7 and
have a couple of questions:
1. Is the 40" length mandatory or will 32 to 36" work?
2. Can the antenna be made from coax with the outer braid and insulation
stripped leaving only the center wire and insulation as the antenna?
3. Can the antenna be installed along the upper edge of the lower cowl or
will the vertically oriented fiberglass (side of cowl) mask the signal?
4. Does the antenna have to be straight for its entire length or is a 90*
turn for the last 6" acceptable?
A lot of concern for a system that will be gone in a few years but it's
there so I might as well use it.
Thanks in advance,
Roger,
RV-7 Finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Windhorn" <N1DeltaWhiskey(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Serial input transponders? |
The Apollo SL70 does, if it is still available.
Doug Windhorn
----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. Andrew Elliott
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, 15 January, 2007 19:06
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Serial input transponders?
Gang:
I am planning a minimalist glass cockpit, and find that my EFIS will
output serial altitude data directly. Anyone have a list of which
transponders will accept serial input?
I know that the Garmin GTX-327 does. What about the -320A? What
about any of the new NARCO boxes? Becker? Microair? Others? (Keep in
the in range of $2000=B1 GA units. I know that the fancier $datalink$
units all do.) The serial-Gillman converter is about $250, which gives
me some lattitude in selecting a slightly pricier serial-compatible
unit.)
Thanks,
Andy Elliott, Mesa, AZ
N601GE (reserved)
601XL/TD/QB, Corvair, building...
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Marker Beacon Antenna |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
I made mine 40" and curled the end round over the last 6"...It works
great. I stuck mine in the bottom....Unless you intend to fly
approaches inverted I would do the same again..:)
Like you I stripped a length of Coax.
One piece of advice, make the connection where you can reach it thru the
oil door. I put mine on the other side, amazing how many times I've had
to remove the top cowl again after forgetting to hook up the antenna.
Frank 7a...Doing my IFR training
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger
E. Bentlage
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 12:03 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Marker Beacon Antenna
-->
An old topic but I could not find the information.
I plan to install the marker beacon antenna on the lower cowl of a RV-7
and have a couple of questions:
1. Is the 40" length mandatory or will 32 to 36" work?
2. Can the antenna be made from coax with the outer braid and insulation
stripped leaving only the center wire and insulation as the antenna?
3. Can the antenna be installed along the upper edge of the lower cowl
or will the vertically oriented fiberglass (side of cowl) mask the
signal?
4. Does the antenna have to be straight for its entire length or is a
90* turn for the last 6" acceptable?
A lot of concern for a system that will be gone in a few years but it's
there so I might as well use it.
Thanks in advance,
Roger,
RV-7 Finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Windhorn" <N1DeltaWhiskey(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
Bob has a new superpower - development of new words!-}
Just for laughs, I punched "ambiformexerous" into several search engines and
dictionaries - all drew a blank. Webster couldn't even suggest anything
close.
Where DO you come up with these?
Doug Windhorn
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Sent: Sunday, 14 January, 2007 19:20
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Need low cost schematic program
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>Vern Little wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>Greg: Here is exactly what you need... it's free and very easy to use:
>>>
>>>http://www.expresspcb.com/
>>>
>>>Here is a schematic for my RV-9A, and a library of custom components:
>>>
>>>http://vx-aviation.com/page_3.html
>>>
>>>Have fun.
>>>
>>>Vern Little
>>Vern, just a word of warning.
>>
>>The difference between 'free' and 'open source' is that the program can
>>disappear, leaving a library of custom components worthless. Make sure
>>you make backups of your work in a format that is not proprietary.
>>
>>I spent about a year learning to do 3D CAD with Pro/Desktop while the tech
>>industry was in the recent slump. I was nearly finished with a complete
>>rendition of a virtual Dyke Delta, when the makers of the program decided
>>that they were no longer interested in having people learn to use their
>>software for free. They were kind enough to give out keys that enabled
>>the software for 5yrs, but I quickly lost mine in a harddrive crash. I
>>still have the files, but they are useless without a program to interpret
>>them. I did convert a few of the parts to STEP files, so they are usable
>>in other programs, but most of the work has to be written off as an
>>'educational' exercise. If I had taken an hour or so to save each of the
>>components in a more universal format I wouldn't get a sick feeling
>>whenever I look at those files.
>
> Most serious CAD programs are ambiformexerous . . . they'll input
> and output a variety of popular formats. For example, my AutoCAD
> .dwg files can be opened directly by a variety of competitive programs.
> Further, I can save in .dxf and IGES formats that will transport the
> drawings to other applications. It's good to research these capabilties
> before you infest much $time$ in a CAD based documentation project.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
>
>
>Bob has a new superpower - development of new words!-}
>
>Just for laughs, I punched "ambiformexerous" into several search engines
>and dictionaries - all drew a blank. Webster couldn't even suggest
>anything close.
>
>Where DO you come up with these?
uuuhhh . . . wud u believe where the sun don't shine?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | So you can't wait for window's Vista? |
So you can't wait for Windows new Vista to be released this week? Saw a
review of the final version on PC Magazine online, today...Here's some
of the results of the testing and review that PC Magazine did on it.
They tested the SAME versions that you'll get in the store, and on all
types of new machines, laptops, low end, high end, minimum memory and
speed, maximum, etc...
I only included some more general cons, but you'll hear about all the
claimed pluses from Windows ads that you will be seeing shortly. Of
course, they probably won't mention these...
Looks like it needs a lot of work yet to improve on XP...
Harley
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vista won't let you install over an OS that has a C:\Users
multiple-users folder. I didn't realize this until after I'd started the
installation and typed in my Vista product key. When it came time to
choose between a clean install and an overlay, the overlay wasn't an
option. So I moved my Users folder. But now the install wouldn't take:
Vista thought I'd already completed installation. It took me days to
straighten things out
Vista's real competitor, though, is Windows XP. For many users, XP is
still good enough. And for all the advances in Vista, it's hard to avoid
seeing the things that aren't as good as they could have been.
Nor is Vista bug-free. As I assessed final code, I ran into a variety of
small but annoying glitches and found plenty of features that didn't
work as seamlessly as I would have liked. I can't shake the feeling that
Vista's release was rushed.
Hefty hardware requirements. Minor bugs and rough edges in UI. Lack of a
killer app to compel adoption. Many features also available for Windows
XP users.
Vista offers improvements over Windows XP, but most of them are
conveniences rather than essentials.
Incompatibility issues with latest graphics card drivers from ATI
Some games were more sluggish than in Windows XP Pro.
Had to uninstall Norton Internet Security
Had to remove McAfee security applications
You can't back up your entire system if running a FAT32 file system.
Drive Encryption did not recognize the Trusted Platform Module; you'll
need an NTFS file system, TPM, and a BIOS update to run BitLocker.
Vista did not recognize the integrated Sierra Wireless EV-DO card.
Screen orientation, arrow, and escape buttons on the tablet screen do
not work.
Had to convert the file system of the C: partition to NTFS before
proceeding.
Installing Vista is a lot slower on a budget PC, taking over 3 hours
You might do better with Vista Home Basic. But if that's what you
choose, you'll need to install it fresh and reinstall all your
applications, because you can't upgrade to Home Basic, only to Premium
or Ultimate.
Office 2003 works just as well and as fast as it does in XP, so you
don't have to upgrade to Office 2007.
Integrated graphics and 512MB of system memory just aren't enough
Slow when installing programs, playing games, and encoding video. Media
Center works, but loading video is slow.
Bugs appeared in older games
Vista did not support ATI's CrossFire
Installer did not autodetect all components,
32-bit programs are installed in a Program Files (x86) folder, which can
cause problems for older installers that don't like parentheses in
their folder names.
Video became garbled after 15 minutes of viewing live and recorded TV.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave N6030X <N6030X(at)DaveMorris.com> |
| Subject: | Re: So you can't wait for window's Vista? |
Yeah, yeah, yeah. They said most of that when
Windows 95 came out too. Just suck it up and buy
a new computer with Vista
pre-installed. Progress can't be
stopped. Wintel marches on. Drink the Koolaid.
Dave Morris
At 05:40 PM 1/16/2007, you wrote:
>So you can't wait for Windows new Vista to be
>released this week? Saw a review of the final
>version on PC Magazine online, today...Here's
>some of the results of the testing and review
>that PC Magazine did on it. They tested the
>SAME versions that you'll get in the store, and
>on all types of new machines, laptops, low end,
>high end, minimum memory and speed, maximum, etc...
>
>I only included some more general cons, but
>you'll hear about all the claimed pluses from
>Windows ads that you will be seeing shortly. Of
>course, they probably won't mention these...
>
>Looks like it needs a lot of work yet to improve on XP...
>
>Harley
>
>
>----------
>Vista won't let you install over an OS that has
>a C:\Users multiple-users folder. I didn't
>realize this until after I'd started the
>installation and typed in my Vista product key.
>When it came time to choose between a clean
>install and an overlay, the overlay wasn't an
>option. So I moved my Users folder. But now the
>install wouldn't take: Vista thought I'd already
>completed installation. It took me days to straighten things out
>
>Vista's real competitor, though, is Windows XP.
>For many users, XP is still good enough. And for
>all the advances in Vista, it's hard to avoid
>seeing the things that aren't as good as they could have been.
>
>Nor is Vista bug-free. As I assessed final code,
>I ran into a variety of small but annoying
>glitches and found plenty of features that
>didn't work as seamlessly as I would have liked.
>I can't shake the feeling that Vista's release was rushed.
>
>Hefty hardware requirements. Minor bugs and
>rough edges in UI. Lack of a killer app to
>compel adoption. Many features also available for Windows XP users.
>
>Vista offers improvements over Windows XP, but
>most of them are conveniences rather than essentials.
>
>Incompatibility issues with latest graphics card drivers from ATI
>
>Some games were more sluggish than in Windows XP Pro.
>
>Had to uninstall Norton Internet Security
>
>Had to remove McAfee security applications
>
>You can't back up your entire system if running a FAT32 file system.
>
>Drive Encryption did not recognize the Trusted
>Platform Module; you'll need an NTFS file
>system, TPM, and a BIOS update to run BitLocker.
>
>Vista did not recognize the integrated Sierra Wireless EV-DO card.
>
>Screen orientation, arrow, and escape buttons on
>the tablet screen do not work.
>
>Had to convert the file system of the C: partition to NTFS before proceeding.
>
>Installing Vista is a lot slower on a budget PC, taking over 3 hours
>
>You might do better with Vista Home Basic. But
>if that's what you choose, you'll need to
>install it fresh and reinstall all your
>applications, because you can't upgrade to Home
>Basic, only to Premium or Ultimate.
>
>Office 2003 works just as well and as fast as it
>does in XP, so you don't have to upgrade to Office 2007.
>
>Integrated graphics and 512MB of system memory just aren't enough
>
>Slow when installing programs, playing games,
>and encoding video. Media Center works, but loading video is slow.
>
>Bugs appeared in older games
>
>Vista did not support ATI's CrossFire
>
>Installer did not autodetect all components,
>
>32-bit programs are installed in a Program Files
>(x86) folder, which can cause problems for older
>installers that don't like parentheses in their folder names.
>
>Video became garbled after 15 minutes of viewing live and recorded TV.
>
>
><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 8AWG Wire to Fast-On Connection |
Bob,
The Fast-On connection is to a mosfet switch solid state relay sold by
perihelion design <http://www.periheliondesign.com/powerlinkjr.htm>
rated for 35 amps continuous. But your statement "30A is pushing a
Fast-On pretty hard" got me thinking, which generated more questions, so
now I need some guidance.
I am using the a Z-13/20 architecture that is modified for a battery in
the tail cone (RV-10) The solid state relay is for the endurance bus
feed. The circuit goes from the battery to a 30 amp ANL limiter to the
relay and then to the endurance bus, the run is 17 feet. The continuous
e-bus load is just under 10 amps, but the maximum possible load is 30
amps (no diversity at all, everything running at once, flaps, auto pilot
servos, com transmit, etc). The drivers for the high load are pitot
heat and landing light. [I know it could be debated whether or not these
deserve to be on the e-bus, but IMHO this design is to allow me to fly
safely in IMC and land]
So, if my calculations are correct for a 14 volt system:
a] 10 amps @ 17 feet 10AWG has a voltage drop of 0.17 volts
b] 10 amps @ 17 feet 8 AWG has a voltage drop of 0.11 volts
c] 30 amps @ 17 feet 10 AWG has a voltage drop of 0.51 volts
d] 30 amps @ 17 feet 8 AWG has a voltage drop of 0.32 volts
This is only the voltage drop to the e-bus fuse block and does not
account for the voltage drop to the final device.
So, I believe I am justified in using a 30 amp fuse, but am I being way
to conservative in using 8 AWG wire to account for a very unlikely full
max load?
Larry
RV-10 N205EN (reserved)
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> In order to keep the voltage drop down on a long 14 volt 30 amp run I
>> want to use 8 AWG wire. The final device has a male Fast-On terminal.
>> The only terminals I can find for 8 AWG wire are ring terminals, how
>> do I transition to a Fast-On?
>
> Splice a 6" 10AWG stub on the end of the 8AWG wire
> so that you can crimp a standard yellow (10-12AWG)
> PIDG on the end.
>
> 30A is pushing a Fast-On pretty hard. What's your
> application?
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Thomas <lists(at)stevet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: So you can't wait for window's Vista? |
You're right, Harley. Buy a Mac.
Best Regards,
Steve
____________________________________________________________________
On Jan 16, 2007, at 4:40 PM, Harley wrote:
> So you can't wait for Windows new Vista to be released this week?
> Saw a review of the final version on PC Magazine online,
> today...Here's some of the results of the testing and review that
> PC Magazine did on it. They tested the SAME versions that you'll
> get in the store, and on all types of new machines, laptops, low
> end, high end, minimum memory and speed, maximum, etc...
>
> I only included some more general cons, but you'll hear about all
> the claimed pluses from Windows ads that you will be seeing
> shortly. Of course, they probably won't mention these...
>
> Looks like it needs a lot of work yet to improve on XP...
>
> Harley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: So you can't wait for window's Vista? |
Steve Thomas wrote:
> You're right, Harley. Buy a Mac.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Steve
8*) Or download Kubuntu Live* CD, and keep your money to buy airplane
parts with. Then you can use Adept to install gEDA and PCB, and be on
your way to making circuit boards.
I finished the board layout for my version of a capacitive fuel level
sensor. I use a second plate along the bottom of the tank instead of a
capacitor as the second input to the comparator. That should make it
more resistant to changes in dielectric constants due to fuel
reformulations. I also chose to forego the audible alarm and opted for
the alarm circuit to provide a ground for an external LED. If anyone
would care to critique/review/ogle the layout, I'd be happy to send a
PDF copy of the schematic and the output of PCB.
* - Kubuntu Live. Live CD's are a relatively new phenomena in Linux,
started by Knoppix distribution. You download an image and burn it to a
CD, making it bootable. You boot the PC from the CD, and you're
presented with a complete Linux destop. Play around. See what all the
fuss is about. Determine for yourself if it is hip or hype. Remove the
CD. Reboot. And you're right back where you started with nothing changed.
> ____________________________________________________________________
>
>
> On Jan 16, 2007, at 4:40 PM, Harley wrote:
>
>> So you can't wait for Windows new Vista to be released this week?
>> Saw a review of the final version on PC Magazine online,
>> today...Here's some of the results of the testing and review that PC
>> Magazine did on it. They tested the SAME versions that you'll get in
>> the store, and on all types of new machines, laptops, low end, high
>> end, minimum memory and speed, maximum, etc...
>>
>> I only included some more general cons, but you'll hear about all the
>> claimed pluses from Windows ads that you will be seeing shortly. Of
>> course, they probably won't mention these...
>>
>> Looks like it needs a lot of work yet to improve on XP...
>>
>> Harley
>
>
>*
>
>
> *
>
--
,|"|"|, Ernest Christley |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta Builder |
o| d |o http://ernest.isa-geek.org |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Radio interference when receiving |
I have a new Jabiru 2200 (85hp) installed in a Murphy Maverick with an Icom
IC-A200 panel mount VHFand an external antenna mounted through the fuselage
skin midway between the cabin and fin using the fuselage for a groundplane.
I am picking up ignition interference when receiving which increases with
engine speed.
I have tried running the radio from an independent power supply to
eliminate installation
wiring and still get the same problem, which seems to indicate that the
antenna is picking
up the radiated noise.
The engine has suppressed ht leads to the plugs but I am not sure about the
leads to
the coils.I checked the rotor arms for security and they seem fine.
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to cure the problem?
Hmmmm . . . when problems arise from a "per-the-factory"
ignition system installation, this can get sticky. I've
never had occasion to get a problem ignition system
into the lab to fix a noise problem. Our production piston
aircraft still use the classic shielded magneto installations
which have evolved into pretty radio-friendly products
over the years.
Are you on a list-server for either the Maverick, the
engine or both? I'd also contact the service rep for
the engine. You may find that he/she is aware of the
occasional odd problem that's easily fixed.
Try running from one ignition at a time. The problem
may be isolated to a single system. If this is true,
likelihood of it being a simple fix is improved.
How much of the wiring is stuff that's used as-supplied
and how much do you install? I did a quick look-see on the
'net for the installation manual. Don't have time to chase
it right now. Do you know where it can be acquired? I'd
like to see the schematic for the ignition system.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Hobbyist ECB services |
>
>
>While I have been a satisfied customer of ExpressPCB for a number of years
>and think they are indeed a great PCB provider, I have lately found some
>of there limitations - well, rather limiting. I have decided to convert
>my project design from through-hole to surface Mount (ugh! those
>components are almost invisible!).
>
>In order to keep my sanity, I decided that using a stencil to lay on the
>bare board for a limited number of units would be an ideal way to
>go. This stencil is simply a thin metal (or plastic) sheet with holes
>very precisely cut to fit over those component pads you wish to have a
>solder paste deposited on. So you put the paste on the stencil and use a
>squeegee to pull the paste across all the holes in the stencil thereby
>depositing the solder paste only where you are going to put a component.
Gave up on solder paste in a skunk-werks environment.
The stuff has a shelf life and is not the friendliest
material compared to wire solder.
>Then you use a magnifying glass and tweezers to put the tiny components
>on their pads and pop them into an oven and voila (if everything goes
>right) you have a solder surface mount board.
We've settled on 1206 or larger components as the
smallest we'll use in a hand-assembled design. We
lay down a wire solder dot on one of the pads, then
slide the part into the hot pad with a tweezer. After
the part is tacked into place, we solder the free end.
The tack end occasionally needs touch-up but not often.
>Now the problem is that ExpressPCB does not offer the stencil service,
>furthermore most firms offering the stencil service require a set of
>Gerber files (normal CAD output of most PC board software). You can not
>directly produce one from the ExpressPCB software. You must pay an
>additional $60 for a Gerber file from ExpressPCB. This is the file that
>EAGLE and some of the other readily available PC board software produces
>that file as a normal course. So $60 just seems a bit much when there are
>package that produce it free.
ExpressPCB was designed to support the
few-of-a-kind, hobbyist/skunk-werks market.
Our engineering overhead is $800/man-day
. . . turn-time is critical to achieving
low-cost proof of concept solutions.
In this venue, I've found their service
to be invaluable. On one occasion I was
able to order, stuff and test three different
board configurations in a 15-day window.
There may be others with similar services but
what they offer for $59 a pop is pretty attractive.
>A PCB software package that produces such non-proprietary Gerber files
>also give you a much greater range of service providers including all the
>way to China (very nice prices if you can stand the transportation delay).
>
>So I believe, as Bob pointed out - it all depends on what your needs are.
>For one of a kind, or a few, ExpressPCB offers a valued service at a
>reasonable price. Up to now, I have used no other. But, some of their
>limitations in face of my current needs are causing me to reconsider.
Once I've proven a design, others are most
welcome to repackage and/or modify the design
to suit their particular manufacturing requirements
and favorite materials.
For the guy who wants to build a one-of-a-kind
electro-whizzy for his project, I'll suggest that
ExpressPCB offers some attractive and practical
support.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 8AWG Wire to Fast-On Connection |
>
>Bob,
>The Fast-On connection is to a mosfet switch solid state relay sold by
>perihelion design <http://www.periheliondesign.com/powerlinkjr.htm> rated
>for 35 amps continuous. But your statement "30A is pushing a Fast-On
>pretty hard" got me thinking, which generated more questions, so now I
>need some guidance.
>
>I am using the a Z-13/20 architecture that is modified for a battery in
>the tail cone (RV-10) The solid state relay is for the endurance bus
>feed. The circuit goes from the battery to a 30 amp ANL limiter to the
>relay and then to the endurance bus, the run is 17 feet. The continuous
>e-bus load is just under 10 amps, but the maximum possible load is 30 amps
>(no diversity at all, everything running at once, flaps, auto pilot
>servos, com transmit, etc). The drivers for the high load are pitot heat
>and landing light. [I know it could be debated whether or not these
>deserve to be on the e-bus, but IMHO this design is to allow me to fly
>safely in IMC and land]
I'll suggest that nobody should plan to depend on a battery-feed
e-bus to extract themselves from an IMC environment. In
retrospect, I'm not too happy with the 13/20 configuration,
it's pretty messy. I'm beginning to think that Z-12 is the
best way to incorporate the SD-20 . . . this is how it's
done on thousands of TC aircraft that used to fly routinely
in IMC with NO second alternator and NO e-bus.
Given that you have two engine driven power sources, I'll
recommend that you pare the E-bus down to the minimum endurance loads
suggested in chapter 17. Likelihood of EVER needing to
recover from dual alternator failure using the e-bus all the
way to the ground is exceedingly low and to PLAN for it
is making your system get a bit messy.
If you're down to battery only, then the original e-bus
philosophy is critical to graceful recovery. You can always
close master contactors during approach to landing
for recovery. If you're looking at servicing a 30 amp
load under these conditions, then adding one or two
contactors at 1A each is insignificant.
>So, if my calculations are correct for a 14 volt system:
>a] 10 amps @ 17 feet 10AWG has a voltage drop of 0.17 volts
>b] 10 amps @ 17 feet 8 AWG has a voltage drop of 0.11 volts
>c] 30 amps @ 17 feet 10 AWG has a voltage drop of 0.51 volts
>d] 30 amps @ 17 feet 8 AWG has a voltage drop of 0.32 volts
>
>This is only the voltage drop to the e-bus fuse block and does not account
>for the voltage drop to the final device.
>
>So, I believe I am justified in using a 30 amp fuse, but am I being way to
>conservative in using 8 AWG wire to account for a very unlikely full max load?
Let's re-think this a bit and see if we can take
some weight and operating complexity out of your proposed
design. This is an excellent case where MORE is NOT BETTER.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 8AWG Wire to Fast-On Connection |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Larry,
Pushing hardware gets everybody into trouble. Please recalculate this based on
my Super-4-CCA. Also, have you looked at the ground return? Pushing 30A makes
me concerned with ground return currents through the control cables or structural
parts...an insidious killer.
As for the Fastons. I puzzled over this for years. Connectors are sold for 10 AWG
wires but no larger, and that firmly sets the amp limit. Splicing larger wires
to the connectors concerns me and I advise against it.
Email me offline and we can discuss some options.
(I will still send a sample of Super-2 and Super-4-CCA to interested parties...see
my website).
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=88281#88281
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mich=E8le_Delsol?= <michele.delsol(at)microsigma.fr> |
| Subject: | Need low cost schematic program |
As a newbie to electrical circuits for my RV8, I looked around for a cheap
schematic program and hit upon ExpressSCH. It has already been said that it
is a very good little program for general schematic work and FWIW I agree.
What has not been said is that one can make one's own components and that it
has a nifty component export feature. Each item in my schematics is
identified as a component, including wires. Each component has three items
of information that one can use as one likes. This means that I get my bill
of materials and all sorts of other information by carefully coding the
information on the schematic, exporting into a text file, importing into
Excel and by applying formulas on the three fields of each component, I get
lots of useful information, such as:
Components are grouped into parts, wires, junctions from one drawing to
another.
Each wire is identified as to drawing it belongs to, circuit it is attached
to, gauge, color, parts the wire connects to
Parts are identified as to drawings, name, type, source and other info
Junctions connect a wire on one drawing to the same wire or to a part on
another drawing. In my Excel sheet I maintain coherence by requiring that
there should be exactly two identical junction components for each junction.
This ExpressSCH export feature enables me to maintain coherence between the
schematic and the parts list.
Since all I need is to have clear up-to-date schematics and parts, junctions
and wire lists, I find that this program fulfils my needs. I am sure that
there are more powerful and more user friendly programs out there but they
may cost a fair amount and may have steep learning curve.
Michele
RV8 Finishing
-----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: lundi 15 janvier 2007 19:29
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Need low cost schematic program
>
>It seems that ExpressPCB output format is proprietary - no Gerber files -
>and not supported by other prototype PCB makers.
>A possible consideration.
>Jan de Jong
Correct . . . but after years of doing business with
them (and considering/using a variety of options) their
pricing and service for the low volume OBAM aircraft
market has over-ridden these concerns.
It's exceedingly unlikely that anyone on the List is
going to regret having used ExpressPCB because of a
future wish to have a few thousand boards fabricated.
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: | Kevin Kinney <kkinney(at)fuse.net> |
| Subject: | D-Sub EMI Filters |
I'm still learning about electronics and avionics. EMI still leaves me in the
dark, though I'm learning about it too.
Assume someone were to have a noisy radio: Would EMI shielded D-sub connectors help with this in any way? For example - http://specemc.com/series100.asp
How applicable would this be to correcting that problem?
Regards,
Kevin Kinney
--
Non-Parent - I don't see how you can raise children & stay sane.
Parent - You don't. You pick one and go with it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 8AWG Wire to Fast-On Connection |
>
>Larry,
>
>Pushing hardware gets everybody into trouble. Please recalculate this
>based on my Super-4-CCA. Also, have you looked at the ground return?
>Pushing 30A makes me concerned with ground return currents through the
>control cables or structural parts...an insidious killer.
Hmmmm . . . I'm not aware of any well considered
design situation where local grounding was discouraged
for the protection of control cables or structural
parts. We ground things ALL OVER the airframes on
everything from A36 to Hawker 850 and with return
currents that run a lot more than 30A.
I've heard a variety of stories but none were supported
by any critical review of hard data. Until we're
offered good data supported by simple-ideas, I'll
suggest that the eroded cables, loose rivets and
pitted skins are the result of some stresses OTHER
than ground return currents.
For example, a few years ago we identified a case where
drive-end bearings on starter generators were being
eroded by small voltage drops in structure (tens of
millivolts) but at hundreds of amps. This was supported
by good data, repeatable experiments and obvious
mitigation of a recurring problem by electrically
insulating one end of the quill shaft. It would have
been much BETTER to re-arrange some wiring but the
cost of modifying hundreds of airplanes was reduced by
building a special drop-in replacement for the
starter-generator.
>As for the Fastons. I puzzled over this for years. Connectors are
>sold for 10 AWG wires but no larger, and that firmly sets the amp limit.
My design philosophy for the use of Fastons has more
to do with longevity than for "ratings". Yes, one might
safely assume that 'cause AMP supplies a Faston to fit
a 10AWG wire, that the same Faston and it's mating
tab are capable of carrying the same current as the
wire.
But keep in mind that wire current "ratings" are based
on temperature rise . . . a 10AWG wire is not in danger
in a room temperature environment at 50 amps. Should we
out-of-hand assume that it's okay to load the 10AWG
Faston to 50A in the same environment?
Probably okay when new but consider the case of the
bouncing ammeters in many Cessna and Piper singles.
This is a case where multitudinous connections in
the voltage-sense/field-supply lead have increased
loop resistance by perhaps 100 milliohms. Not enough
voltage drop to case the system to fail . . . but enough
to upset the voltage regulator's servo loop stability.
This takes perhaps 20-30 years in the field. EXCEEDINGLY
difficult to diagnose if you don't understand the simple-
ideas behind system functionality.
This is why I de-rate the fuse blocks to 15A per slot
while the manufacturer rates them for 30A per slot.
Recall that heating effects are an I-squared effect.
Limiting the design loads on any one fuse by 50%
reduces heating stresses on the fuses connections by
75%. This is a element of an overall design philosophy
that has nothing to do with things you read in the
manufacturer's data sheets.
As I write these words, I'm in conversation with some
poor tech in Europe trying to fix a paralleling stability
problem on a 30 year old Hawker. This beast uses
MAGNETIC AMPLIFIERS in the generator control units.
The paralleling system has 30-50 joints in the loop . . .
ANY or ALL of which can be contributing to the malfunction.
The sad part is that we may find that LOTS of joints need
to be renewed to bring this airplane back to designed
performance. This is a case were the joints are carrying
perhaps less than 3A.
Just one of many examples of a situation where loading
decisions and architectures are fine-tuned NOT to
accommodate out-of-the-box ratings but to reduce
probability of disappointing performance 10-20 years from now.
The question that started this thread had to do with
running an 30A e-bus feeder through a Faston . . .
all the bells went off and red flags went up. Assume
this system checks out just fine for first flight
and then sits quietly waiting for the a some years
hence when its called upon to perform its intended
purpose. How much are we willing to bet that it's
going to take this 30A load for long enough to get
down? If you're betting your life on it, would
it not be more prudent to design this potential weakness
out from square one? This seems especially smart when
that one joint becomes single point of failure for
the e-bus alternate feed.
> Splicing larger wires to the connectors concerns me and I advise against it.
Keep in mind that the wire was up-sized to meet a voltage
drop requirement, not to increase max current in the
line. Splicing "too-big" wires in for the purpose
of mitigating voltage drop is a sound principal (See
chapter 8 in 'Connection) but maybe not practical after
we consider the big picture for system architecture and
the failure modes we're proposing to handle.
I'm about 80% convinced that Z-13/20 is going to come out
of Rev 12 in favor of recommending Z-12 as the most
practical way to incorporate the SD-20 into a light
aircraft.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LarryRosen(at)comcast.net |
| Subject: | Re: 8AWG Wire to Fast-On Connection |
Thanks Bob and Eric for your guidance. I will need to rethink my load analysis
once again.
Bob,
You said " I'm about 80% convinced that Z-13/20 is going to come out
of Rev 12 in favor of recommending Z-12 as the most
practical way to incorporate the SD-20 into a light
aircraft."
But, doesn't this defeat the elegance of the e-bus concept. The main alternator
fails and with 3 switches (Aux Alternator on, e-bus feed on and master off)
you would have an electrical design that would out last the fuel on board. With
Z-12 you would have to manually shed the load.
Larry
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
>
>
>
> >
> >Bob,
> >The Fast-On connection is to a mosfet switch solid state relay sold by
> >perihelion design <http://www.periheliondesign.com/powerlinkjr.htm> rated
> >for 35 amps continuous. But your statement "30A is pushing a Fast-On
> >pretty hard" got me thinking, which generated more questions, so now I
> >need some guidance.
> >
> >I am using the a Z-13/20 architecture that is modified for a battery in
> >the tail cone (RV-10) The solid state relay is for the endurance bus
> >feed. The circuit goes from the battery to a 30 amp ANL limiter to the
> >relay and then to the endurance bus, the run is 17 feet. The continuous
> >e-bus load is just under 10 amps, but the maximum possible load is 30 amps
> >(no diversity at all, everything running at once, flaps, auto pilot
> >servos, com transmit, etc). The drivers for the high load are pitot heat
> >and landing light. [I know it could be debated whether or not these
> >deserve to be on the e-bus, but IMHO this design is to allow me to fly
> >safely in IMC and land]
>
> I'll suggest that nobody should plan to depend on a battery-feed
> e-bus to extract themselves from an IMC environment. In
> retrospect, I'm not too happy with the 13/20 configuration,
> it's pretty messy. I'm beginning to think that Z-12 is the
> best way to incorporate the SD-20 . . . this is how it's
> done on thousands of TC aircraft that used to fly routinely
> in IMC with NO second alternator and NO e-bus.
>
> Given that you have two engine driven power sources, I'll
> recommend that you pare the E-bus down to the minimum endurance loads
> suggested in chapter 17. Likelihood of EVER needing to
> recover from dual alternator failure using the e-bus all the
> way to the ground is exceedingly low and to PLAN for it
> is making your system get a bit messy.
>
> If you're down to battery only, then the original e-bus
> philosophy is critical to graceful recovery. You can always
> close master contactors during approach to landing
> for recovery. If you're looking at servicing a 30 amp
> load under these conditions, then adding one or two
> contactors at 1A each is insignificant.
>
>
> >So, if my calculations are correct for a 14 volt system:
> >a] 10 amps @ 17 feet 10AWG has a voltage drop of 0.17 volts
> >b] 10 amps @ 17 feet 8 AWG has a voltage drop of 0.11 volts
> >c] 30 amps @ 17 feet 10 AWG has a voltage drop of 0.51 volts
> >d] 30 amps @ 17 feet 8 AWG has a voltage drop of 0.32 volts
> >
> >This is only the voltage drop to the e-bus fuse block and does not account
> >for the voltage drop to the final device.
> >
> >So, I believe I am justified in using a 30 amp fuse, but am I being way to
> >conservative in using 8 AWG wire to account for a very unlikely full max load?
>
> Let's re-think this a bit and see if we can take
> some weight and operating complexity out of your proposed
> design. This is an excellent case where MORE is NOT BETTER.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
Michle Delsol wrote:
>
>As a newbie to electrical circuits for my RV8, I looked around for a cheap
>schematic program and hit upon ExpressSCH. It has already been said that it
>is a very good little program for general schematic work and FWIW I agree.
>What has not been said is that one can make one's own components and that it
>has a nifty component export feature. Each item in my schematics is
>identified as a component, including wires. Each component has three items
>of information that one can use as one likes. This means that I get my bill
>of materials and all sorts of other information by carefully coding the
>information on the schematic, exporting into a text file, importing into
>Excel and by applying formulas on the three fields of each component, I get
>lots of useful information, such as:
>
>Components are grouped into parts, wires, junctions from one drawing to
>another.
>
>Each wire is identified as to drawing it belongs to, circuit it is attached
>to, gauge, color, parts the wire connects to
>
>Parts are identified as to drawings, name, type, source and other info
>
>Junctions connect a wire on one drawing to the same wire or to a part on
>another drawing. In my Excel sheet I maintain coherence by requiring that
>there should be exactly two identical junction components for each junction.
>
>This ExpressSCH export feature enables me to maintain coherence between the
>schematic and the parts list.
>
>Since all I need is to have clear up-to-date schematics and parts, junctions
>and wire lists, I find that this program fulfils my needs. I am sure that
>there are more powerful and more user friendly programs out there but they
>may cost a fair amount and may have steep learning curve.
>
>Michele
>RV8 Finishing
>
>
Excellent, Michele. It's just a tool that we hope to leave on the
ground someday 8*)
I was up to speed with gEDA in just a few days. Producing what I think
is a usable print in about 12 hours total time. The gEDA tool chain
uses ASCII files to maintain all its information, which has a lot of
valuable implications. I had a problem last night where I had misnamed
one of the pins on a custom component I created. I called it 'c'
instead of '3'. Opened the file in a text editor, made the changes, and
then auto-routed all the tracks. Slight modifications of component
sizing or pin spacing could be accomplish without even using the
program. I was also suprised that the print command automatically
produces 10 different views of the layout (solder, component,
componentmask, soldermask, plated-drill, topsilk, bottomsilk,
topassembly, bottomassembly, and fab).
--
,|"|"|, Ernest Christley |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta Builder |
o| d |o http://ernest.isa-geek.org |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: So you can't wait for window's Vista? |
Steve Thomas wrote:
>
> Well, it seems to be either time or money. Spend the money on a Mac
> and it just works. Or spend hours and hours trying to configure
> Linux and get all your peripherals working, time that could be spent
> building. Most of us want to build airplanes, not circuit boards.
>
Ahh, but how do you count the time if it is a circuit board FOR an
airplane? 8*)
Macs just work, because Apple has total control over both the software
and hardware. Not a bad system, but you're necessarily limited to the
hardware they recommend. Step out of line and install the random piece
of hardware and it doesn't necessarily just work anymore.
Two months ago, I wouldn't have had an argument about Linux needing
hours and hours of configuration. I was getting fed-up with all the
fiddling that I had to do to keep my Fedora box running. So I tried
Kubuntu on the suggestion of a friend. It was "here we go again" at
first, because I was trying to switch to 64-bit computing. Got tired of
that game and went with the 32-bit version of the distribution. I have
been tickled goofy by how everything just works. It has taken
everything that I've thrown at it.
Burn a Kubuntu Live CD and boot the odd computer up with it. Look for
"Hardware Browser" under "System Tools" in the menu, and note which
hardware the OS didn't find and configure. Do it on multiple systems.
Make sure some of them have really old, cheap, no-name hardware so that
the OS can get a little exercise. If that doesn't convince you that
times have changed, call up "Adept" from the "System Tools". This is
your open-source software shop. Enable all the repositories, then type
something that interests you in the search bar. "flight simulator"
would be a good example. Up pops FlightGear and a few supporting
files. Click the "Request Install" button and then "Process Queue". A
couple downloads, a little disk churning, and there's a new icon in your
system menu for your new flight simulator. If you really like the
simulator, you can construct your own airplane or terrain models and
share them back to the community. Except for initial installation and
installing new programs, I've spent very little time configuring Kubuntu
and much more time actually using it. In this case, Linux just works
(for a change).
--
,|"|"|, Ernest Christley |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta Builder |
o| d |o http://ernest.isa-geek.org |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: D-Sub EMI Filters |
>
>
>I'm still learning about electronics and avionics. EMI still leaves me in
>the dark, though I'm learning about it too.
>
>Assume someone were to have a noisy radio: Would EMI shielded D-sub
>connectors help with this in any way? For example -
>http://specemc.com/series100.asp
>
>How applicable would this be to correcting that problem?
>
>Regards,
>Kevin Kinney
Check out the chapter on noise in the 'Connection.
The short answer to your question is, "Yes, filters
may be useful in mitigating noise problems."
The facts one needs to secure before selecting any
noise mitigation tool or technique are:
(1) who is the victim?
(2) who is the antagonist?
(3) what is the propagation mode for coupling
the noise between 2 and 1?
One then needs to evaluate one or a combination
of (1) reduce noise from antagonist, (2) increase
ability of victim to operate satisfactorily with
noise presented and/or (3) consider ways to
attenuate if not eliminate the propagation mode(s).
It may well be that the filter connector you've cited
will help . . . but simply adding such a device as
an experiment is commonly called "Swaptronics . . .
let's replace or add things until something good
happens."
If this sounds like a daunting task, don't feel bad.
It CAN be an engineer's worst nightmare. To date,
I've not worked a noise problem we couldn't
fix . . . but some of them have been exceedingly
$time$ consuming. For example, see:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/Too_Close.jpg
Here's a photo of a ground fault detection
transformer on a biz jet that's mounted too close
to a bleed air tube that is excited by field flux
leakage from a starter generator.
A variety of techs spent 4 weeks chasing this
one before they moved the airplane to Wichita.
Our techs fought it for a week before one of
them joined me during the xmas holiday and an
ice storm to struggle with the beast. We found
the propagation mode by accident. I still don't
know root cause. The airplane was 13 years old
and something changed to allow coupling of the
starter generator to the engine and ultimately
generate an AC magnetic field around the bleed
air tube.
The "fix" was to build an adapter plate to
increase clearance between tube and transformer
to 1" . . . i.e. we broke the propagation mode.
Now, we COULD have chased down the change to the
engine but after the airplane was down for 6 weeks,
nobody was to eager to let me take the engine
apart. We COULD have substituted a modern torroidal
transformer but that would have generated a
certification effort. So . . . moving the transformer
turned out to be the practical solution.
Since the first happenstance of this condition,
a second airplane presented with the same problem
and the spacer kit fixed it too.
It's useful to consider the LONG answer. Not necessarily for
examples of things to keep in one's bag of tricks for
noise mitigation. The long answer is an illustration of
the variabilities one might encounter. It further
illustrates the fact that systems can become troublesome
after a long history of satisfactory performance.
The likelihood that a filtered D-sub will fix a problem
in the field is low. It's rare that supplier of
a product has failed to design their electro-whizzy
to live in the real world. If a device using d-sub
connectors presents with a noise problem, it's more
likely that the solution will not include addition
of a filtered d-sub connector.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 8AWG Wire to Fast-On Connection |
>
>Thanks Bob and Eric for your guidance. I will need to rethink my load
>analysis once again.
>
>Bob,
>You said " I'm about 80% convinced that Z-13/20 is going to come out
> of Rev 12 in favor of recommending Z-12 as the most
> practical way to incorporate the SD-20 into a light
> aircraft."
>
>But, doesn't this defeat the elegance of the e-bus concept. The main
>alternator fails and with 3 switches (Aux Alternator on, e-bus feed on and
>master off) you would have an electrical design that would out last the
>fuel on board.
Absolutely . . .
> With Z-12 you would have to manually shed the load.
. . . and there are features in the SB-1 regulator that assists
the pilot in the load reduction task.
I'm going to catch a lot of flack when I pull the drawing. No doubt
many folks have installed it . . . and I'll have to explain that
there's nothing functionally BAD about Z-13/20. Nonetheless, after
working with builders over the time the drawing has been published,
I've determined that it doesn't conform to my personal standards
of "the best we know how to do." It's simply too complex.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | how to wire basic resistive Isspro fuel gauges |
I find myself in need of the wiring schematic for the Isspro fuel
gauges that Van's sells - I think they're #8690, and am unable to find
it at the company website or with Google. I need to know how the
senders wire to the gauges and where the 12V and GND connections are
made.
Confession time: I have these gauges in my plane now, but have lost
the old wiring diagram I drew at the time (which would have been an
embarassment if it still existed, like the rat's nest behind my
present panel). I need the info to design relevant parts of the
diagram for the new electrical system.
Thanks,
-Bill B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: how to wire basic resistive Isspro fuel gauges |
>
>I find myself in need of the wiring schematic for the Isspro fuel
>gauges that Van's sells - I think they're #8690, and am unable to find
>it at the company website or with Google. I need to know how the
>senders wire to the gauges and where the 12V and GND connections are
>made.
>
>Confession time: I have these gauges in my plane now, but have lost
>the old wiring diagram I drew at the time (which would have been an
>embarassment if it still existed, like the rat's nest behind my
>present panel). I need the info to design relevant parts of the
>diagram for the new electrical system.
>
>Thanks,
If someone has relevant data to share with Bill . . . send
it to me also. I'll scan it and add to the library of installation
data at aeroelectric.com
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: | "Kenneth Melvin" <melvinke(at)coho.net> |
| Subject: | how to wire basic resistive Isspro fuel gauges |
Herewith the required schematic.
Kenneth Melvin, RV-9A N669TJ
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Boyd
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 5:24 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: how to wire basic resistive Isspro fuel gauges
-->
I find myself in need of the wiring schematic for the Isspro fuel gauges
that Van's sells - I think they're #8690, and am unable to find it at the
company website or with Google. I need to know how the senders wire to the
gauges and where the 12V and GND connections are made.
Confession time: I have these gauges in my plane now, but have lost the old
wiring diagram I drew at the time (which would have been an embarassment if
it still existed, like the rat's nest behind my present panel). I need the
info to design relevant parts of the diagram for the new electrical system.
Thanks,
-Bill B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Allison <stevea(at)svpal.org> |
| Subject: | Re: how to wire basic resistive Isspro fuel gauges |
Bill Boyd wrote:
> I find myself in need of the wiring schematic for the Isspro fuel
> gauges that Van's sells - I think they're #8690, and am unable to find
> it at the company website or with Google. I need to know how the
> senders wire to the gauges and where the 12V and GND connections are
> made.
I still have a pair of these in the boxes. No documentation with them
(wouldn't have thrown it out, so they probably didn't come with any).
The three studs are marked on the back +, ground symbol, and S. This is
basically the same setup as the new Van's gages marked I (input +12v), G
(ground), and S (signal from the sender).
The new Van's gages install drawing is here:
http://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/Gauge_Install.pdf
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ECLarsen81(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: how to wire basic resistive Isspro fuel gauges |
The ISSPRO gages were designed by Van's and manufactured by ISSPRO. ACS&S
carrries them without the a Logo and Chief carries them with the Chief Logo.
I ran into the lack of paperwork problem on the ACS&S ordered gages and
contacted ISS and got that info. Since then the ACS&S gages I have ordered have
a
copy of the PDF from Van's tucked in the box.
I also downloaded and printed the page from the Van's site for my files.
Oh, the gages don't like to work properly below 11 VDC, bear that in mind
when figuring your depleat battery time during charge failure. (or when running
tests in the shop..hehe..ask me how I know)
Ed Larsen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Leedham" <sideslip(at)tiscali.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Radio interference when receiving |
Hi Bob,
I have tried running one mag at a time- same problem from either.
The ignition wiring is all installed by Jabiru only the mag kill wires have
been installed by myself (screened wires earthing at the engine.
The plug leads are resistive car type but the leads from coils to
distributer caps are not marked so I am not sure about these and have my
suspicions. I will contact Jabiru to find out. Also the plugs are NGK but
not resistive type, perhaps it might be worth me changing these.
The only drawing in the manual I can find is a very basic drawing which
includes wiring for the Jabiru aircraft, and shows the ignition in a basic
form ie.transistor ignition unit feeding to spark plugs.
Geoff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Radio interference when receiving
>
>
>
> I have a new Jabiru 2200 (85hp) installed in a Murphy Maverick with an
> Icom IC-A200 panel mount VHFand an external antenna mounted through the
> fuselage skin midway between the cabin and fin using the fuselage for a
> groundplane.
>
> I am picking up ignition interference when receiving which increases with
> engine speed.
> I have tried running the radio from an independent power supply to
> eliminate installation
> wiring and still get the same problem, which seems to indicate that the
> antenna is picking
> up the radiated noise.
>
> The engine has suppressed ht leads to the plugs but I am not sure about
> the leads to
> the coils.I checked the rotor arms for security and they seem fine.
> Does anyone have any suggestions on how to cure the problem?
>
> Hmmmm . . . when problems arise from a "per-the-factory"
> ignition system installation, this can get sticky. I've
> never had occasion to get a problem ignition system
> into the lab to fix a noise problem. Our production piston
> aircraft still use the classic shielded magneto installations
> which have evolved into pretty radio-friendly products
> over the years.
>
> Are you on a list-server for either the Maverick, the
> engine or both? I'd also contact the service rep for
> the engine. You may find that he/she is aware of the
> occasional odd problem that's easily fixed.
>
> Try running from one ignition at a time. The problem
> may be isolated to a single system. If this is true,
> likelihood of it being a simple fix is improved.
>
> How much of the wiring is stuff that's used as-supplied
> and how much do you install? I did a quick look-see on the
> 'net for the installation manual. Don't have time to chase
> it right now. Do you know where it can be acquired? I'd
> like to see the schematic for the ignition system.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> --
> 15/01/2007 11:04
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Slaughter" <willslau(at)alumni.rice.edu> |
| Subject: | how to wire basic resistive Isspro fuel gauges |
At the Van's web site, click on Construction FAQs and scroll down to Gauge
Installation and Diagrams, or direct at
http://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/Gauge_Install.pdf
William Slaughter
RV8QB almost ready to run some wires
-----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: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 8:14 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: how to wire basic resistive Isspro fuel
gauges
-->
>-->
>
>I find myself in need of the wiring schematic for the Isspro fuel
>gauges that Van's sells - I think they're #8690, and am unable to find
>it at the company website or with Google. I need to know how the
>senders wire to the gauges and where the 12V and GND connections are
>made.
>
>Confession time: I have these gauges in my plane now, but have lost the
>old wiring diagram I drew at the time (which would have been an
>embarassment if it still existed, like the rat's nest behind my present
>panel). I need the info to design relevant parts of the diagram for
>the new electrical system.
>
>Thanks,
If someone has relevant data to share with Bill . . . send
it to me also. I'll scan it and add to the library of installation
data at aeroelectric.com
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: | "David A. Leonard" <dleonar1(at)maine.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 20 Msgs - 01/17/07 |
RE: the noisy ignition Jabiru.
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/magnetofilter.php
My Viking / Continental/ Bendix mags was noisy unitil I installed these
capacitors in the P leads. Then it stopped. I really don't know enough
about it to explain the mechanics of this, but it definitely took the noise
out of the audio. I assume the Jabiru mags have a p- lead somewhere, is
there any kind of filter on it?
Are the Ignition wires shielded style? I was told by an avionics guy ( King
factory type years ago) that a small amount of extra resistance in an old
plug wire , or a bad shield will make it noisy as well.
Hope this helps.
Dave Leonard N77FE Bellanca 17-30A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Leonard" <dleonar1(at)maine.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 20 Msgs - 01/17/07 |
RE: the noisy ignition Jabiru.
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/magnetofilter.php
My Viking / Continental/ Bendix mags was noisy unitil I installed these
capacitors in the P leads. Then it stopped. I really don't know enough
about it to explain the mechanics of this, but it definitely took the noise
out of the audio. I assume the Jabiru mags have a p- lead somewhere, is
there any kind of filter on it?
I'm sure one of the geniuses ( my boss used to call us F*****g geniuses), on
this list can find you a $.97 Cap that will do the job, I'm ashamed to say I
paid $35.00 each for thes for my certified bird.
Are the Ignition wires shielded style? I was told by an avionics guy ( King
factory type years ago) that a small amount of extra resistance in an old
plug wire , or a bad shield will make it noisy as well.
Hope this helps.
Dave Leonard N77FE Bellanca 17-30A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ignition noise in Jabiru engine. |
>
>
>RE: the noisy ignition Jabiru.
>http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/magnetofilter.php
>My Viking / Continental/ Bendix mags was noisy unitil I installed these
>capacitors in the P leads. Then it stopped. I really don't know enough
>about it to explain the mechanics of this, but it definitely took the noise
>out of the audio. I assume the Jabiru mags have a p- lead somewhere, is
>there any kind of filter on it?
The way to confirm whether or not the p-leads are
contributing to the noise is to simply disconnect them
at the mags and run the engine. A wire that is NOT connected
cannot conduct or radiate noise.
If the noise goes away, then try wiring the mags as shown
in Figure Z-26 and Z-27. Note that shields for p-lead are
grounded to the ENGINE end only while the same shields
PROVIDE GROUND for the ignition switch.
If the noise comes back in spite of this treatment of shields,
then a p-lead filter is in order.
>I'm sure one of the geniuses ( my boss used to call us F*****g geniuses), on
>this list can find you a $.97 Cap that will do the job, I'm ashamed to say I
>paid $35.00 each for thes for my certified bird.
P-leads are connected across the magneto's timing
points which already has a high quality capacitor
tied across it. An on-purpose filter for the purpose
of attenuating noises conducted out of the mags on
p-leads would be a combination of inductance and some
SMALLER value of capacitance than what already exists
inside the mag. It's more than a $.97 capacitor.
>Are the Ignition wires shielded style? I was told by an avionics guy ( King
>factory type years ago) that a small amount of extra resistance in an old
>plug wire , or a bad shield will make it noisy as well.
Loss of shielding on a plug wire demonstrated to benefit
by shielding is a potential threat against electromagnetic
order. However, "resistances" in plug wires is another
matter. It was discovered over 70 years ago that much
radiated ignition noise from plug wires was a function of
the wire's efficiency as an antenna. Solid copper conductors
were much better radiators when circuit losses were low
a radio frequencies.
Predecessors to the modern EMC facility like the one
shown here . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/Screen_Room_circa_1935.jpg
. . . were used to explore the effectiveness of various
noise mitigation techniques. It was discovered back then
that adding resistance in moderate amounts had little
effect on spark performance but a lot of effect in
killing the plug wire's efficiency as a radiator of
energy. Autolite, AC and others offered "resistor plugs"
with devices built into the assembly for the purpose of
reducing noise. Later, resistance wire replaced the
resistance plug . . . better to have the losses distributed
over the length of the wire as opposed to concentrated at
one end.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Radio interference when receiving |
>
>
>Hi Bob,
>I have tried running one mag at a time- same problem from either.
>The ignition wiring is all installed by Jabiru only the mag kill wires
>have been installed by myself (screened wires earthing at the engine.
>The plug leads are resistive car type but the leads from coils to
>distributer caps are not marked so I am not sure about these and have my
>suspicions. I will contact Jabiru to find out. Also the plugs are NGK but
>not resistive type, perhaps it might be worth me changing these.
>The only drawing in the manual I can find is a very basic drawing which
>includes wiring for the Jabiru aircraft, and shows the ignition in a basic
>form ie.transistor ignition unit feeding to spark plugs.
Okay, try running the engine with kill-leads totally
disconnected at the engine end.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Northern California Seminar for 2007 |
April 21/22 have been selected as a date to visit Sonoma
California for a weekend seminar presentation in the
local EAA chapter facilities.
A sign-up page will be posted at:
http://aeroelectric.com/whatsnew.html
as soon as we have all the data for location on the facility.
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: | Wisconsin Seminar date set. |
EAA Chapter 1158 has offered their fine facility for
the presentation of a weekend seminar on June 2/3 of 2007.
A signup page has been posted for this event at:
http://aeroelectric.com/whatsnew.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: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Some notes on future AeroElectric Connection seminars |
2007 will mark a milestone in the presentation format for
our weekend seminars. Since my first teaching job at WU
in '62, I've favored the use of an overhead projector as
both a substitute for a chalk/white board (we used grease
pencils back then) and as a tool for presenting material
on transparencies.
I liked the fact that I could face the class while drawing
as opposed to having my back to them. I've used that methodology
for over 40 years. The 'core' of my current presentation
is a 3-ring binder full of slides. I hand-carry that binder
on airplanes . . . I can loose everything else in baggage but
it would be exceedingly difficult to deliver without the
contents of that binder!
This year, we're changing over to a power-point format enhanced
by a digital sketch pad, extensive photographic capabilities
and soon to be added video production. Folks who sign up
for the seminars in 2007 will get the beta-versions of the
2008 format for the 2006 price.
The price of the seminar will go up in 2008 but attendees will
take home electronic and paper copies of the presentation
materials. Our hope is that folks not only refer to them
often as their own projects move forward but will also be
use the materials to support any presentations they might
choose offer to their fellow builders.
Several times on this List I've suggested that knowledge
and understanding are among few commodities that grow in
value the more they are shared. I've been doing the seminars
now for over ten years and I believe the program needs to
rise to the next level of maturity while adding value in
terms of enabling any attendee's willingness to become a
teacher too.
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: | starter warning light? |
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
A friend recommended adding a warning light to my panel that would simply
indicate whether there was power present at the starter. Is this providing
any real benefit? I presume the warning light would be lit for the few
seconds when I push my push-to-start button, but also when the button was
inadvertently stuck in the on position or the starter contactor was stuck
closed. Are a stuck switch or contactor likely enough to warrant this
warning light? I have vague memories of a starter run-on issue, but
perhaps that is a separate issue all together? Gotta re-read the
'Connection before I forget all the great stuff I learned.
Erich Weaver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: how to wire basic resistive Isspro fuel gauges |
Thanks to everyone for the help. Now to ponder the wiring needs for
future connection of Van's resistive float senders to GRT EIS/EFIS
circuitry. I'll research that and holler if I get stuck.
It's a challenge to run wires today for avionics you won't hold in
your hands for months to come :-)
-Bill B
On 1/18/07, William Slaughter wrote:
>
> At the Van's web site, click on Construction FAQs and scroll down to Gauge
> Installation and Diagrams, or direct at
> http://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/Gauge_Install.pdf
>
> William Slaughter
> RV8QB almost ready to run some wires
>
>
> -----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: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 8:14 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: how to wire basic resistive Isspro fuel
> gauges
>
>
> -->
>
>
> >-->
> >
> >I find myself in need of the wiring schematic for the Isspro fuel
> >gauges that Van's sells - I think they're #8690, and am unable to find
> >it at the company website or with Google. I need to know how the
> >senders wire to the gauges and where the 12V and GND connections are
> >made.
> >
> >Confession time: I have these gauges in my plane now, but have lost the
> >old wiring diagram I drew at the time (which would have been an
> >embarassment if it still existed, like the rat's nest behind my present
> >panel). I need the info to design relevant parts of the diagram for
> >the new electrical system.
> >
> >Thanks,
>
> If someone has relevant data to share with Bill . . . send
> it to me also. I'll scan it and add to the library of installation
> data at aeroelectric.com
>
> 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: starter warning light? |
>
>
>A friend recommended adding a warning light to my panel that would simply
>indicate whether there was power present at the starter. Is this providing
>any real benefit? I presume the warning light would be lit for the few
>seconds when I push my push-to-start button, but also when the button was
>inadvertently stuck in the on position or the starter contactor was stuck
>closed. Are a stuck switch or contactor likely enough to warrant this
>warning light? I have vague memories of a starter run-on issue, but
>perhaps that is a separate issue all together? Gotta re-read the
>'Connection before I forget all the great stuff I learned.
Starter "run-on" and "sticking" are two separate issues. Run-on
is a phenomenon unique to permanent magnet motors on starters
that under certain wiring configurations will cause a delayed
dis-engagement of the pinion gear after the engine catches and
the starter button is released.
One solution to this problem is illustrated at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Starter/PM_Starter_w_RunOn_Relay.pdf
The value of a STARTER ENGAGED light is to detect a stuck
starter button and/or stuck starter contactor. These events
are rare but allowed to proceed without detection is always
expensive.
You can use an LED. Put the LED's ballasting resistor right
at the starter main power terminal. Incorporate into the
wire using techniques described in:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Homeless/Homeless_Components.htm
Put a diode across the LED in the reverse direction to protect
from small reverse votlage transients that are ALWAYS hard
on LEDs. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/Starter_Engaged_Warning_Lt.pdf
It's a toss up. Adding the light is relatively easy, inexpensive
and doesn't add much weight to the airplane. It's easier to add
while building the airplane than to add it after it's finished.
If you're un-decided, at least pull the wire in and cap it off
to make it easier to add later.
Another instance of value added warning lights for starter
control systems is illustrated at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Starter/24V_Starter_14V_System.pdf
Here we see a means by which a 24 volt starter can be
serviced in 14 volt airplane. The lights are designed to
detect a stuck contactor in the series/parallel changeover
contactors. An unattended sticking of one of these relays
causes BIG fault currents to flow when buttons are pushed.
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: Some notes on future AeroElectric Connection |
seminars
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Hey Bob,
Speaking of losing your binder... It might make sense to "publish" your
presentation materials to a server that at least you can gain access to
via the internet. If your laptop dies, or some other resource gets away
from you while on a presentation trip, you could round up the physical
materials local to the presentation site, and the soft stuff you could
download from your site. Doing so would probably just kind of guarantee
that you wouldn't ever have a problem while on the road. :)
Matt-
>
>
> 2007 will mark a milestone in the presentation format for
> our weekend seminars. Since my first teaching job at WU
> in '62, I've favored the use of an overhead projector as
> both a substitute for a chalk/white board (we used grease
> pencils back then) and as a tool for presenting material
> on transparencies.
>
> I liked the fact that I could face the class while drawing
> as opposed to having my back to them. I've used that methodology
> for over 40 years. The 'core' of my current presentation
> is a 3-ring binder full of slides. I hand-carry that binder
> on airplanes . . . I can loose everything else in baggage but
> it would be exceedingly difficult to deliver without the
> contents of that binder!
>
> This year, we're changing over to a power-point format enhanced
> by a digital sketch pad, extensive photographic capabilities
> and soon to be added video production. Folks who sign up
> for the seminars in 2007 will get the beta-versions of the
> 2008 format for the 2006 price.
>
> The price of the seminar will go up in 2008 but attendees will
> take home electronic and paper copies of the presentation
> materials. Our hope is that folks not only refer to them
> often as their own projects move forward but will also be
> use the materials to support any presentations they might
> choose offer to their fellow builders.
>
> Several times on this List I've suggested that knowledge
> and understanding are among few commodities that grow in
> value the more they are shared. I've been doing the seminars
> now for over ten years and I believe the program needs to
> rise to the next level of maturity while adding value in
> terms of enabling any attendee's willingness to become a
> teacher too.
>
>
> 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: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: starter warning light? |
Bob,
On the B&C website, the documentation for the starter relay says you can use the
I terminal as a starter on light source.
Is this different than the solutions you have described below?
Thanks,
Ralph
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
>Sent: Jan 18, 2007 1:09 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: starter warning light?
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>A friend recommended adding a warning light to my panel that would simply
>>indicate whether there was power present at the starter. Is this providing
>>any real benefit? I presume the warning light would be lit for the few
>>seconds when I push my push-to-start button, but also when the button was
>>inadvertently stuck in the on position or the starter contactor was stuck
>>closed. Are a stuck switch or contactor likely enough to warrant this
>>warning light? I have vague memories of a starter run-on issue, but
>>perhaps that is a separate issue all together? Gotta re-read the
>>'Connection before I forget all the great stuff I learned.
>
> Starter "run-on" and "sticking" are two separate issues. Run-on
> is a phenomenon unique to permanent magnet motors on starters
> that under certain wiring configurations will cause a delayed
> dis-engagement of the pinion gear after the engine catches and
> the starter button is released.
>
> One solution to this problem is illustrated at:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Starter/PM_Starter_w_RunOn_Relay.pdf
>
> The value of a STARTER ENGAGED light is to detect a stuck
> starter button and/or stuck starter contactor. These events
> are rare but allowed to proceed without detection is always
> expensive.
>
> You can use an LED. Put the LED's ballasting resistor right
> at the starter main power terminal. Incorporate into the
> wire using techniques described in:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Homeless/Homeless_Components.htm
>
> Put a diode across the LED in the reverse direction to protect
> from small reverse votlage transients that are ALWAYS hard
> on LEDs. See:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/Starter_Engaged_Warning_Lt.pdf
>
> It's a toss up. Adding the light is relatively easy, inexpensive
> and doesn't add much weight to the airplane. It's easier to add
> while building the airplane than to add it after it's finished.
> If you're un-decided, at least pull the wire in and cap it off
> to make it easier to add later.
>
> Another instance of value added warning lights for starter
> control systems is illustrated at:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Starter/24V_Starter_14V_System.pdf
>
> Here we see a means by which a 24 volt starter can be
> serviced in 14 volt airplane. The lights are designed to
> detect a stuck contactor in the series/parallel changeover
> contactors. An unattended sticking of one of these relays
> causes BIG fault currents to flow when buttons are pushed.
>
> 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: | Nancy Ghertner <nghertner(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Some notes on future AeroElectric Connection seminars |
On 1/18/07 11:53 AM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
>
>
> 2007 will mark a milestone in the presentation format for
> our weekend seminars. Since my first teaching job at WU
> in '62, I've favored the use of an overhead projector as
> both a substitute for a chalk/white board (we used grease
> pencils back then) and as a tool for presenting material
> on transparencies.
>
> I liked the fact that I could face the class while drawing
> as opposed to having my back to them. I've used that methodology
> for over 40 years. The 'core' of my current presentation
> is a 3-ring binder full of slides. I hand-carry that binder
> on airplanes . . . I can loose everything else in baggage but
> it would be exceedingly difficult to deliver without the
> contents of that binder!
>
> This year, we're changing over to a power-point format enhanced
> by a digital sketch pad, extensive photographic capabilities
> and soon to be added video production. Folks who sign up
> for the seminars in 2007 will get the beta-versions of the
> 2008 format for the 2006 price.
>
> The price of the seminar will go up in 2008 but attendees will
> take home electronic and paper copies of the presentation
> materials. Our hope is that folks not only refer to them
> often as their own projects move forward but will also be
> use the materials to support any presentations they might
> choose offer to their fellow builders.
>
> Several times on this List I've suggested that knowledge
> and understanding are among few commodities that grow in
> value the more they are shared. I've been doing the seminars
> now for over ten years and I believe the program needs to
> rise to the next level of maturity while adding value in
> terms of enabling any attendee's willingness to become a
> teacher too.
>
>
> 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 >
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
Bob, you never seem to get to Western NY? Lory Ghertner
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: starter warning light? |
>
>
>Bob,
>
>On the B&C website, the documentation for the starter relay says you can
>use the I terminal as a starter on light source.
>
>Is this different than the solutions you have described below?
If your starter contactor HAS and "I" terminal, it can
be used for this purpose. I show the "generic" version
because it works with any contactor . . . INCLUDING the
one built onto the starter whether or not it incorporates
an "I" terminal.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Notes on AeroElectric Connection seminars |
>
>Hey Bob,
>
>Speaking of losing your binder... It might make sense to "publish" your
>presentation materials to a server that at least you can gain access to
>via the internet. If your laptop dies, or some other resource gets away
>from you while on a presentation trip, you could round up the physical
>materials local to the presentation site, and the soft stuff you could
>download from your site. Doing so would probably just kind of guarantee
>that you wouldn't ever have a problem while on the road. :)
Yeah. I've done that with other critical data files. I've got
some directories on the website server that are not generally
accessible to the public. Actually, as cheap and dense as
the thumb-drives are getting, I'll probably carry back-up
copies of all presentation materials on my keychain. Push
comes to shove, I can rent/borrow enough equipment to bail
out a crippled presentation.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric Connection seminars |
>
>
>On 1/18/07 11:53 AM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
>
>
> >
>Bob, you never seem to get to Western NY? Lory Ghertner
Only because you haven't asked. We'll do a program any place
we can seat 20+ folks at tables. I don't pick the locations
because I don't know where the amenable EAA chapters are
all located. If you'd like to see a program delivered in
your neighborhood, have your local EAA chapter get in touch.
Have P.A. system, will travel.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "springcanyon" <springcanyon(at)methow.com> |
| Subject: | how to wire basic resistive Isspro fuel gauges |
Hi Bill,
If you find good information regarding Van's fuel level senders to GRT EFIS/
EIS, please share it - I'm almost there.
Don Owens
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: how to wire basic resistive Isspro fuel
gauges
Thanks to everyone for the help. Now to ponder the wiring needs for
future connection of Van's resistive float senders to GRT EIS/EFIS
circuitry. I'll research that and holler if I get stuck.
--
1:03 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: starter warning light? |
Thanks
-----> If your starter contactor HAS and "I" terminal, it can
> be used for this purpose.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | how to wire basic resistive Isspro fuel gauges |
| From: | James H Nelson <rv9jim(at)juno.com> |
Bill,
Contact GRT and they will provide two resistors to be used in
hooking up the Stewart Warner float type fuel level units. I will do
that I think but at this time I have the Van's gages mounted and I also
have the optical low fuel level devices to be my back up. These are
available from Aircraft Extras. These are (almost) fool proof. I will
use my clock and prior burns for the main determination, then fuel gages
backed up with the optical units. Your right, I am NOT going to run out
of fuel. I hope to prevent any screw ups from causing my unscheduled
landings.
Jim Nelson
FWF about done - wings next.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | starter warning light? |
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
OK, got it: starter run-on and sticking are different issues. But assuming
I install the warning light and subsequently have a starter run-on
occurrence, will the warning light be on while the run-on is occurring? An
individual suggested to me off-list that if the starter gear is stuck in
the engaged position and the engine is running (push-to-start button
released and starter contactor open), the starter motor could act as a
generator and produce some current. If this is the case, it would seem
that a warning light that stayed on a little longer than the short period
my push to start button was in use could potentially be warning me of the
dreaded run-on condition instead of just the stuck contactor or stuck
starter button. Added value or just wishful thinking?
Erich Weaver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kingsley Hurst" <khurst(at)taroom.qld.gov.au> |
| Subject: | Radio interference when receiving |
Geoff,
I don't remember your saying what kind of noise it is i.e.. Tick,tick .
. . . or a Hash type noise.
I know a chap over here with a Jabiru (with Jab engine) and he had to
put an earth wire on the carburettor to stop static interference on his
radio.
Now if anybody thinks this is a load of hog wash, please don't shoot ME,
I'm only the messenger !
Cheers
Kingsley in Oz.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bob noffs" <icubob(at)newnorth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ignition noise in Jabiru engine. |
bob,
let me talk thru this and see if i have it right as i have questions about
this. wires that ground the jab coils at the ignition switch are shielded.
this shielding is grounded at the engine end of the shielding . this
shielding is used at the ignition switch to ground the switch. the shield is
attached at the switch where you would attach a wire to ground the switch.
this shielding is providing the same ground to the switch as if the switch
had been attached to a negative ''forest of tabs''. have i got all this
right? thanks for yourhelp, bob noffs
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 10:30 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Ignition noise in Jabiru engine.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>RE: the noisy ignition Jabiru.
>>http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/magnetofilter.php
>>My Viking / Continental/ Bendix mags was noisy unitil I installed these
>>capacitors in the P leads. Then it stopped. I really don't know enough
>>about it to explain the mechanics of this, but it definitely took the
>>noise
>>out of the audio. I assume the Jabiru mags have a p- lead somewhere, is
>>there any kind of filter on it?
>
> The way to confirm whether or not the p-leads are
> contributing to the noise is to simply disconnect them
> at the mags and run the engine. A wire that is NOT connected
> cannot conduct or radiate noise.
>
> If the noise goes away, then try wiring the mags as shown
> in Figure Z-26 and Z-27. Note that shields for p-lead are
> grounded to the ENGINE end only while the same shields
> PROVIDE GROUND for the ignition switch.
>
> If the noise comes back in spite of this treatment of shields,
> then a p-lead filter is in order.
>
>
>>I'm sure one of the geniuses ( my boss used to call us F*****g geniuses),
>>on
>>this list can find you a $.97 Cap that will do the job, I'm ashamed to say
>>I
>>paid $35.00 each for thes for my certified bird.
>
> P-leads are connected across the magneto's timing
> points which already has a high quality capacitor
> tied across it. An on-purpose filter for the purpose
> of attenuating noises conducted out of the mags on
> p-leads would be a combination of inductance and some
> SMALLER value of capacitance than what already exists
> inside the mag. It's more than a $.97 capacitor.
>
>
>>Are the Ignition wires shielded style? I was told by an avionics guy (
>>King
>>factory type years ago) that a small amount of extra resistance in an old
>>plug wire , or a bad shield will make it noisy as well.
>
> Loss of shielding on a plug wire demonstrated to benefit
> by shielding is a potential threat against electromagnetic
> order. However, "resistances" in plug wires is another
> matter. It was discovered over 70 years ago that much
> radiated ignition noise from plug wires was a function of
> the wire's efficiency as an antenna. Solid copper conductors
> were much better radiators when circuit losses were low
> a radio frequencies.
>
> Predecessors to the modern EMC facility like the one
> shown here . . .
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/Screen_Room_circa_1935.jpg
>
> . . . were used to explore the effectiveness of various
> noise mitigation techniques. It was discovered back then
> that adding resistance in moderate amounts had little
> effect on spark performance but a lot of effect in
> killing the plug wire's efficiency as a radiator of
> energy. Autolite, AC and others offered "resistor plugs"
> with devices built into the assembly for the purpose of
> reducing noise. Later, resistance wire replaced the
> resistance plug . . . better to have the losses distributed
> over the length of the wire as opposed to concentrated at
> one end.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carl Peters <say.ahh1(at)verizon.net> |
In starting to gather some electrical tools as I get deeper in my RV-9A
project, I wanted to sample some opinions on inexpensive electrical
tools (crimpers, both PIDG and D-sub pin types, strippers for wire and
coax, etc). After perusing the Connection and website articles,
archives, etc., I am noting there is a large price difference for the
same clones of crimpers, strippers, etc, that may not be very
justifiable. For example, HF has a ratcheting crimper for $10, and the
exact looking one sells at B and C for $40. Same with Stripmaster clones
and so on. I am a big believer in spending a premium dollar for a tool
if it really is above and beyond a competitor's or serves a unique
niche, but is there a reason I can't utilize some of these inexpensive
tools successfully (perhaps with a little more practice than needed with
the high dollar comparable)? Any tools folks recommend really staying
away from?
Thanks,
Carl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Coloccia <john(at)ballofshame.com> |
Remember...this is just my opinion:
1) strippers: if you're going to buy cheap strippers, get expensive
el'cheapo strippers (i.e. manual strippers), NOT cheap "automatic"
strippers. Or learn to strip wire with a sharp pair of good cutters. I
like Xuron's and can consistently strip wire without ever cutting
through the insulation. Slight pressure, twist the cutters to get a
nice ring all around, and give a little tug. Voila'. Cheap automatic
strippers can be very hit or miss. Some will work OK....others will
drive you bonkers. Personally, I really like my manual strippers the
best of all. Even the best ones are pretty cheap, easy to adjust and
they can get into tight spaces.
2) Crimpers: Buy'em and try'em. Either they work or they don't. If
they don't, just return them to HF.
3) Electrical tools to stay away from: As far as I can tell, just about
any tool you can buy at Radio Shack is either a piece of junk, or works
moderately well but is over priced. Poor value. Just my opinion...I'm
sure I'll be flamed for that one :)
You certainly can't ever go wrong with premium tools but unless you're
in a production environment, using them day in and day out (and
*calibrating* them, of course), what's the point? That said, Stein and
B&C both seem to sell decent (nowhere near premium) tools at a decent
price. You probably won't go wrong with either and it'll save you some
leg work figuring out how good is good enough to keep from driving
yourself nuts with botched parts...that's what you pay a little extra
for, I guess.
-John
www.ballofshame.com
Carl Peters wrote:
>
>
> In starting to gather some electrical tools as I get deeper in my
> RV-9A project, I wanted to sample some opinions on inexpensive
> electrical tools (crimpers, both PIDG and D-sub pin types, strippers
> for wire and coax, etc). After perusing the Connection and website
> articles, archives, etc., I am noting there is a large price
> difference for the same clones of crimpers, strippers, etc, that may
> not be very justifiable. For example, HF has a ratcheting crimper for
> $10, and the exact looking one sells at B and C for $40. Same with
> Stripmaster clones and so on. I am a big believer in spending a
> premium dollar for a tool if it really is above and beyond a
> competitor's or serves a unique niche, but is there a reason I can't
> utilize some of these inexpensive tools successfully (perhaps with a
> little more practice than needed with the high dollar comparable)? Any
> tools folks recommend really staying away from?
> Thanks,
> Carl
>
>
> .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ignition noise in Jabiru engine. |
| From: | "DonC" <djcowl(at)bigpond.com> |
This is my first post here - I just had to add to the comments about Jab ignition
interference. I have a factory built J230 and since new I have experienced
interference when receiving anything but strong signals - no problem with transmissions
, only reception.
I changed to resistor plugs and they made a slight difference. one thing I cannot
understand is when receiving a weak station and I turn the right mag off the
noise all but disappears and the signal doubles in strength!!
Turning off left mag makes no difference. I have swapped coils from side to side
, checked dizzy caps and rotors , fitted new ht leads ,all to no avail. As a
last resort I am considering sheilding upper and lower cowls with adhesive aluminium
foil and electricly bonding them to the firewall. Any suggestions please?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=88782#88782
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave N6030X <N6030X(at)DaveMorris.com> |
Strippers: Do NOT get the plastic strippers sold on TV
(http://www.eclipsetools.com/ProductPics/Latest%20.jpegs/200-091.jpg).
They are junk! They might work for the first few strips, and then
things start going downhill fast! Now, I know Bob doesn't like the
other automatic strippers out there, but I used to strip wire with my
teeth for about 30 years and I finally found complete bliss with
these things:
http://www.eclipsetools.com/ProductPics/Latest%20.jpegs/200-003.JPG
PIDG crimper: Bite the bullet and get the correct $40 one from B and
C Specialties. You'll use it a LOT and the cheaper ones don't work
well at crimping the wire and the insulation correctly. I bought 2
different "generic" ones, and neither of them crimped as well as the
one correct one from B&C.
Coax: I can't speak to the special tools now available for this
because since I was 15 I've always done coax connectors with my
teeth, a good sharp knife, and a soldering iron (including once while
hanging from mountain climbing ropes off the side of a 130 foot water tower).
A volt-ohmmeter with audible continuity checker for when you're
hanging upside-down under the panel holding a different wire in each
of your four hands. Cheap ones work fine and you can stash one in
the cockpit, one at home, one at the hangar, one in the glovebox of
the car, etc.
Dave Morris
At 09:48 PM 1/18/2007, you wrote:
>
>In starting to gather some electrical tools as I get deeper in my
>RV-9A project, I wanted to sample some opinions on inexpensive
>electrical tools (crimpers, both PIDG and D-sub pin types, strippers
>for wire and coax, etc). After perusing the Connection and website
>articles, archives, etc., I am noting there is a large price
>difference for the same clones of crimpers, strippers, etc, that may
>not be very justifiable. For example, HF has a ratcheting crimper
>for $10, and the exact looking one sells at B and C for $40. Same
>with Stripmaster clones and so on. I am a big believer in spending a
>premium dollar for a tool if it really is above and beyond a
>competitor's or serves a unique niche, but is there a reason I can't
>utilize some of these inexpensive tools successfully (perhaps with a
>little more practice than needed with the high dollar comparable)?
>Any tools folks recommend really staying away from?
>Thanks,
>Carl
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: starter warning light? |
>
>
>OK, got it: starter run-on and sticking are different issues. But assuming
>I install the warning light and subsequently have a starter run-on
>occurrence, will the warning light be on while the run-on is occurring?
Yes. While the PM motor is spinning down the voltage generated
by the rotating armature will keep the light lit. As the armature
comes to a stop the light will go out.
> An
>individual suggested to me off-list that if the starter gear is stuck in
>the engaged position and the engine is running (push-to-start button
>released and starter contactor open), the starter motor could act as a
>generator and produce some current.
A much fertilize myth. Starters have over-run clutches. The engine
CANNOT be allowed to 'push' the starter under any circumstances.
Consider that a highly geared starter armature is spinning at thousands
of RPM while cranking the engine at perhaps 300 rpm. When the engine
starts, it jumps up to 1000-1500 rpm. This 3 to 5 times increase in
speed cannot be allowed to impress on the starter's gears and armature.
The forces applied to gear teeth place them at risk. Spinning the
armature places winding and commutator at risk for damage due to
centrifugal forces.
> If this is the case, it would seem
>that a warning light that stayed on a little longer than the short period
>my push to start button was in use could potentially be warning me of the
>dreaded run-on condition instead of just the stuck contactor or stuck
>starter button. Added value or just wishful thinking?
The condition we've called "run-on" is poorly named. It's really
"delayed disengagement" do to currents circulating in the pinion
gear engagement solenoid that are being generated in a slowing
armature spinning in a permanent magnetic field. I've never personally
observed this event but it's my understanding that it lasts perhaps
3-5 seconds.
The "run-on" condition is not particularly stressful on the
starter . . . because of the over-run clutch cited. Assuming
(1) you wire your starter engaged light so as to sense voltage
at the starter motor power terminal and (2) it's a PM starter and
(3) you HAVE installed the relay intended to prevent delayed
disengagement then, you would STILL observe a fading STARTER
ENGAGED indication from the annunciator as the starter motor spins
down. This happens in spite of the fact that the relay has broken
the circuit responsible for delayed disengagement.
The light has value in that it shows when voltage is present
at the starter motor terminals at times when it is not expected
or desirable. It will also demonstrate the voltage generating
quality of a PM motor as it spins down after being disconnected
from the battery.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
I am all for saving money too. Lots of the high priced tools are for
jobbers who use them day in and out. We plane builders need them for a
couple of months at most hopefully.
For wire stripper I like the manual type. Takes a bit of practice to get
good but they work. Most inexpensive automatic strippers do not work well
with aviation grade wire. I bought my manual one at Radio Shack.
For crimper, you should get a good one. I have some HF tools but not their
crimper. Too much riding on it in my thinking. You do not want to be
debugging things a few years down the road and a bad intermittent connection
due to crimper could be the problem. $40 is not a bad price for that peace
of mind. I think I bought mine from Wicks which was the ratcheting type. I
also have a manual squeeze crimper that has three crimp sizes. They both
work well. You can get the job done nicely with the manual type. However,
I like the ratcheting type because it will hold the connector while you
insert the wire and ensures the squeeze is just right.
For coax, you need the correct type for the wire size you use. Be careful
to get the correct size and you will be happy. I think I bought mine from B
& C. Keep the instructions and use them on how to properly cut and prepare
the coax when using the particular tool for good results.
For crimping D-sub connectors, I got the B&C which is nice and works
perfectly. Not cheap. D-sub connectors are delicate and a precision tool
is well worth the cost..
You will be happy with B & C or Stein products. If not, you will be dealt
with in a manner that makes you happy. That has been my experience with
dealing with both of them.
Indiana Larry
----- Original Message -----
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Tooling up
> gather some electrical tools as I get deeper in my RV-9A project, I wanted
> to sample some opinions on inexpensive electrical tools (crimpers, both
> PIDG and D-sub pin types, strippers for wire and coax, etc). After
> perusing the Connection and website articles, archives, etc., I am noting
> there is a large price difference for the same clones of crimpers,
> strippers, etc, that may not be very justifiable. For example, HF has a
> ratcheting crimper for $10, and the exact looking one sells at B and C for
> $40. Same with Stripmaster clones and so on. I am a big believer in
> spending a premium dollar for a tool if it really is above and beyond a
> competitor's or serves a unique niche, but is there a reason I can't
> utilize some of these inexpensive tools successfully (perhaps with a
> little more practice than needed with the high dollar comparable)? Any
> tools folks recommend really staying away from?
> Thanks,
> Carl
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Morgan <wmorgan31(at)netzero.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 28 Msgs - 01/18/07 |
I own 5 different Ideal Stripmasters for different types / sizes of wires.
One of them is about 40 years old (bought it at Heathkit store).
I have compared the Ideal Stripmmaster to just about every other wire
stripper out there
and there is no comparison. I use a single edge razor blade for
large wire, coax cable and shielded multi-conductor.
I bought the B&C BCT-1 B-crimp open barrel type crimper and am happy
with that. I plan on buying a B&C BCT-2 also.
I bought the B&C RCT-2 coaxial crimper and am happy with that.
I have a PIDG type crimper with inter-changable jaws from Hi-Line
(don't remember the number, but it has an angled head) that is
excellent but a little pricey. It has a high leverage linkage so
requires very little effort to crimp, I also have the B&C RCT-1 PIDG
crimp tool but seldom use it anymore.
I have an eight way indent crimper that a friend in the wire
manufacturing business gave me that looks like the B&C RCT-3 (he said
I did not what to know what it cost) and have used the B&C RCT-3.
Go with the RCT-3.
Buy a Weller soldering iron. My 25 watt iron is also about 40 years
old. Get some extra tips in various sizes.
Hemostats, flush-cut wire cutters (to trim open barrel connectors per
Bob's instructions) and a small needle-nose plier are also handy.
Don't forget a shrink tube heat gun. Mine is from Harbor
Freight. Got it for $10.
Scott @ William Morgan Warbirds
At 01:55 AM 1/19/2007, you wrote:
>From: Carl Peters <say.ahh1(at)verizon.net>
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Tooling up
>
>
>In starting to gather some electrical tools as I get deeper in my RV-9A
>project, I wanted to sample some opinions on inexpensive electrical
>tools (crimpers, both PIDG and D-sub pin types, strippers for wire and
>coax, etc). After perusing the Connection and website articles,
>archives, etc., I am noting there is a large price difference for the
>same clones of crimpers, strippers, etc, that may not be very
>justifiable. For example, HF has a ratcheting crimper for $10, and the
>exact looking one sells at B and C for $40. Same with Stripmaster clones
>and so on. I am a big believer in spending a premium dollar for a tool
>if it really is above and beyond a competitor's or serves a unique
>niche, but is there a reason I can't utilize some of these inexpensive
>tools successfully (perhaps with a little more practice than needed with
>the high dollar comparable)? Any tools folks recommend really staying
>away from?
>Thanks,
>Carl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>I am all for saving money too. Lots of the high priced tools are for
>jobbers who use them day in and out. We plane builders need them for a
>couple of months at most hopefully.
>
>For wire stripper I like the manual type. Takes a bit of practice to get
>good but they work. Most inexpensive automatic strippers do not work well
>with aviation grade wire. I bought my manual one at Radio Shack.
The best strippers for teflon/tefzel insulations are expensive.
OK Stripmasters with the proper dies installed are about $170
a copy.
With a little practice, one can produce satisfactory strips
with ordinary wire cutters but it takes some technique and
practice. This is one of the techniques I demonstrate in
my seminars and everyone gets a chance to strip some Tefzel
wires before installing a variety of terminals/pins.
I own quite a few stripping tools but they tend to be either
stone-simple and very process sensitive or the $high$ Stripmasters.
It's a matter of what you're willing to learn.
>For crimper, you should get a good one. I have some HF tools but not
>their crimper. Too much riding on it in my thinking. You do not want to
>be debugging things a few years down the road and a bad intermittent
>connection due to crimper could be the problem. $40 is not a bad price
>for that peace of mind. I think I bought mine from Wicks which was the
>ratcheting type. I also have a manual squeeze crimper that has three
>crimp sizes. They both work well. You can get the job done nicely with
>the manual type. However, I like the ratcheting type because it will hold
>the connector while you insert the wire and ensures the squeeze is just right.
The best PIDG tool is the AMP T-head hand tool illustrated
in . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/CrimpTools/crimptools.html
The $40 tool is illustrated there too. Both produce satisfactory
terminal installations. The last time I put my hands on the
$10 ratchet-handled tool from Harbor Freight, it appeared to
be a clone of the $40 tool and a good value.
See also
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/rules/review.html
>For coax, you need the correct type for the wire size you use. Be careful
>to get the correct size and you will be happy. I think I bought mine from
>B & C. Keep the instructions and use them on how to properly cut and
>prepare the coax when using the particular tool for good results.
Get an adjustable tool like
http://tinyurl.com/ypxzv5
These can be set up for a variety of coaxes and
comes with the allen wrench needed for adjusting
the blades. This is the tool I demonstrate at
the seminars and give away as door prizes.
See also:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Coax_Stripper/coaxstrip.html
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/bnccrimp.pdf
I've had some problems with crimp tools of all
sources except AMP and other $high$ brands.
Many tools in the 40-100 dollar range have
a slightly undersized, ".213 hex die that does
an adequate but ugly crimp on the sleeve
intended to secure the shield. The undersized
die causes the sleeve to extrude into the gap
between the two dies on the tool. Looks crappy.
Here's some data on coax connectors.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Connectors/Coax
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Connectors/clampcm.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Connectors/crimpbf.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Connectors/crimpcf.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Connectors/s605cm.jpg
>For crimping D-sub connectors, I got the B&C which is nice and works
>perfectly. Not cheap. D-sub connectors are delicate and a precision tool
>is well worth the cost..
The best D-sub tools are priced in the hundreds of
dollars but you can often get good deals on e-bay like
this . . .
http://tinyurl.com/27588z
Be aware that you not only need the handle shown but
a pin-positioner unique to the style of pin being
installed. Again, I own a variety of tools including
the $high$ and the $40 tool from B&C. All produce
satisfactory installations and unless you're "in the
business" like I am, the $40 tool will do what you
need done.
>You will be happy with B & C or Stein products. If not, you will be dealt
>with in a manner that makes you happy. That has been my experience with
>dealing with both of them.
And either one will work with you to make sure that
the tools and connectors/terminals you've purchased
are compatible with the wire/cable you're trying
to install. Not ALL tools will properly install ALL
terminations on ALL wires. AMP didn't get to be the
big kid in the sandbox by ignoring the science of
good crimped installations. There are some adequate
up-n-commers out there but a modicum of caution
is useful. Rely on those suppliers dedicated to
the business of helping YOU with YOUR tasks.
See also:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/matenlok/matenlok.html
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | re: Starting points redux |
Here's a reprint on a reply I crafted for a builder some years
ago dealing with some of the issues faced by a neophyte builder
in coming to grips with a new task . . . configure and fabricate
an aircraft electrical system.
------------------****************-------------------
>Thanks for your reply and I do appreciate the time you have
>spent.
No problem. It's what I do . . .
>*IF* I knew anything about this subject I wouldn't have asked
>for help with *specifics*. I don't have the time to experiment
>and see who is right (or wrong). You are generally regarded as
>a guru in your discipline and I had hoped there would be a
>"reasonable, definitive and irrefutable answer", Since I have
>not been shown anything (by anyone), I guess I need to choose
>what seems to be the safest course of direction.
>
>I am not trying to argue or diminish your knowledge on the
>subject in any form or fashion. I simply need a document that
>will be an accurate guide and keep me out of trouble. The 43-13
>is generally regarded as the "accepted" methodology, not
>withstanding an heretofore unseen document that would supersede
>the 43-13 handbook.
>
>You mention that you could sit down and write some. Let me
>tell you that would be welcomed with open arms throughout
>the experimental community. I have read a lot of what you
>have wrote and it makes a lot of sense. A document about
>wiring in an vibrating environment would be a great asset
>to our community. "To Solder or Not to Solder".
----------------------------------------------------------------
Okay. Here are the "rules" by which Bob Nuckolls would
wire his own airplane:
----------------------------------------------------------------
RULE 1: First choice for joining/terminating any wires up
through 22 through 12AWG are PIDG style terminals as described in
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/terminal.pdf
using tools like
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#rct-1
or better.
---------------------------
RULE 2: Where there is a choice, I would select fast-ons over
threaded fasteners in the 22 to 12 AWG range using
terminals like
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/wiring.html#faston
with features as explained in
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/faston3.pdf
---------------------------
RULE 3: When I have to live with a treaded fastener then
these terminals are in order . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/wiring.html#s816p
----------------------------
RULE 4: For wires larger than 12AWG, then I would solder and heatshrink
joints as described in . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/big_term.pdf
Using materials like . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/s812.jpg
which are supplied with double-wall heatshrink for finishing.
-------------------------------
RULE 5A: Permanent splicing of single conductors to be accomplished
with butt splices like . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/s816.jpg
-------------------------------
RULE 5B: but if it was deemed desirable to break the
splice open for future convenience, a knife splice and heat
shrink would be used thusly . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/ksplc2.jpg
-------------------------------
RULE 6: When the accessory items are supplied with
nylon connectors like AMP Mate-n-Lock or Molex, pins
are installed with a tool like . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#bct-1
used thusly . . .
http://216.55.140.222/articles/matenlok/matenlok.html
These connectors would only be used as an accommodation
for the use of an accessory that comes with them already
installed. They are not my connector style of choice for any
other applications.
------------------------------------
RULE 7A: When working with accessories supplied with
D-sub connectors, the first choice of mating connectors
is the removable pin variety that will accept machined
pins like . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/connect/connect.html#S604
installed with a tool like
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#rct-3
and removed with a tool like . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#dse-1
---------------------------------------
RULE 7B: if for any reason the crimped-pin mating d-sub is
not available, then soldering is my second choice using
techniques described in . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/dsubs/d_solder.html
and tools like
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#s101_1
or better
-----------------------------------------
RULE 7C: If options 7A and 7B are not practical, then the
lowest order choice for working with d-subs is open barrel
crimped pins installed with a tools and techniques like
those described in RULE 6.
-----------------------------------------
RULE 8: Installation of connectors on coaxial cables to
antennas are installed per
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/bnccrimp.pdf
using tool . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#rct-2
and wire . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/antenna/antenna.html#rg-400
and connectors . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/antenna/antenna.html
-------------------------------------------
RULE 9: A single point ground system shall be established behind
the instrument panel with sufficient attach points for all
accessories in the cockpit area. In deference to RULE 2,
a forest-of-fast-on-tabs ground block similar to . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/wiring.html#gndblk
The threaded stud on the ground block assembly would penetrate
the firewall and be used to terminate battery (-) leads on
either side of firewall and the crankcase ground strap on
the engine side of the firewall.
In the case of canard pushers with the battery up front,
the ground bus would be mounted forward of the instrument
panel. If the airplane's firewall is metalic, then a
brass bolt and appropriate washers and nuts would be used
to provide an engine compartment ground stud and connection
of the ground lead to the firewall. A ground strap like . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/wiring.html#bbs
. . . will be used to connect the crankcase to the firewall
ground stud.
Any ground straps provided around the rubber biscuits of
an engine mount will be removed. Engine mounts are for holding
engines on airplanes and not use for any part of the electrical
system.
-------------------------------------------
RULE 10: Tefzel wire used throughout with the exception of
cranking circuit fat wires where 4AWG or 2AWG welding cable
would be used. An alternative FAT wire could be one of the
new copper-clad aluminum wires. These new materials are as
solderable and crimpable as pure copper conductors.
Caution
To get the same electrical performance, you need to use about
2AWG steps larger wire than for copper but the installed wire
will still be lighter.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Here endeth the reading of the rules. In parallel universes
there are differing rules which may well prove to be as useful
or perhaps even better than those cited in Bob's universe.
Given what Bob has learned up to and including Sunday,
October 27, 2003 the rules cited above are his personal
choices for practical, solid techniques using moderately
priced materials, and tools. Adherence to these rules is likely
to produce an electrical system where (1) component wear-out
and failure are the sole causes for maintenance and
(2) the wiring can be expected to perform as intended over
the lifetime of the airplane.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
>Here is how I perceive the question, "When can you use solder on
>a #2 wire?" Answer, "Well, that depends!". I can't deal with that
>kind of an answer. Unfortunately that is all I have been getting
>from our canard community rank and file.
Yes, it does depend . . . on only one thing. Whether or
not YOU want to solder wires. If any of the rank and file
disagree with this, please invite them to bring the facts
as they perceive them over to the AeroElectric-List. If
I'm unaware of some critical information on the matter,
I and several hundred others are intently interested
in knowing what it is.
This isn't a battle of wills or a turf war. We need to
be constantly evolving the art and science of building
airplanes based on physics. If I am in error, nobody is
more interested in knowing about it than I am.
> Let's take any war story you find "believable" and do a
> > critical analysis of facts cited to see how they add value
> > to our deliberations.
>
>Bob, you are getting picky here, I must have hit a nerve, I
>didn't mean to. Take my word for it however, there have been
>recent posts of this and breaking because they were soldered.
>I just am not going to find them at this time as most were
>bad work anyway. One fellow emailed me and stated a bad crimp
>is just as bad a bad solder. Hummmmm?
You brought up war stories as having an influence on your
deliberations. I've written many times and with extreme
disfavor on consideration of what I call "Dark and stormy
night" stories as useful data for the design and fabrication
of an electrical system. I'll suggest that most
of those stories came about due to a lack of
understanding on the part of pilots, manufacturers and
bureaucrats as to what it takes to produce a reliable
flight system.
See chapter 17 of the AeroElectric Connection.
Our easy-to-achieve goals for having airplanes that stand
above the spam-cans is (1) design for failure tolerance
and (2) take on the responsibility to learn how to use
ANY chosen assembly technique effectively. There will ALWAYS
be failures of one kind or another in ANY system. Yeah,
you might even burn a soldered terminal off the end of
a wire cause you didn't put it on right . . . but you might
burn a crimped terminal off too for EXACTLY THE SAME
REASON.
>You mentioned $120.00 for a tool. To me that is not an
>outrageous price. I'll look into them shortly. I suspect I
>will need several. Perhaps you could recommend one.
Not $120 per tool but the WHOLE SET of tools
. . . see citations in list of rules above.
>When I amuse my wife she becomes exuberant and happy. I hope
>I have effected you in the same manner. If you consider that
>no other document has been offered, except the 43-13, to answer
>my specific question, I guess it accurately fits the description.
>All I have seen are several multi page documents, although well
>written, do not answer my original question regarding solder
>in the vibrating arena.
I've made the statement numerous times and will repeat it
here. There is no significant difference in a properly
soldered versus properly crimped joint on a wire. Crimping
takes specialized tools and less skill; soldering uses
very in-expensive tools and takes some practice. I cannot
cite any reason for saying that one technique is better
than the other with respect to service life in your airplane.
> One of these days, I plan to do a "Layman's Guide to
> the use of AC43-13 Electrical Section" . . . it's
> going to be a big chore and I'm not looking forward to
> it.
>It would appear that it is a badly needed document. Having
>been inundated with just about every "war story" and Uncle
>Herbs snake oil remedy for proper wiring, I would personally
>be relieved to have in my possession such a document. All
>kidding aside, you should dedicate it to me. I represent the
>many who don't know but will admit it.
I think you're making it more complicated than it
needs to be. This is the objection I have for the
way the EXP-Bus was sold at OSH last time I was there.
A guy behind the counter hands you this whippy
assembly that looks really complicated . . .
http://www.controlvision.com/pages/avionics_expbus.htm
. . .and it only costs $300! You hold the thing in your
hand an think, "Damn! I'd NEVER be able to figure out
something like this," while the guy behind the counter
tells you about all the whippy things it will do and
how much "time" it will save.
The question you don't know to ask and he doesn't offer
is "Does this product offer the simplest, lowest parts
count, equal or better performance result at the same
or lower cost of ownership." My answer to that
question is, "No, it does not."
When you pick up an English language dictionary, one
finds perhaps 100,000+ words contained therein of which
most literate adults use less than two percent
of the total. Yet I think we communicate very well.
AC43-13 is a similar document. It's a real piece of
work and LOOKS important because its got this
whippy government agency seal on the cover.
Like the EXP-Bus and the dictionary, there are a handful
of core facts and features around which 95% of your
system will be designed and built and I think I've
touched on most of them above.
> > It's precisely this sort of quest for comfort in
> > traditional techniques and/or bureaucratic decision
> > making that has brought certified aviation to the point
> > it is today . . .
> >
> > |---------------------------------------------|
> > | Independence, Kansas . . . your #1 source |
> > | factory fresh, 50-year old airplanes. |
> > |---------------------------------------------|
>
>
>You have a valid point. I only wish my Long will be around
>as long and respected as the veritable DC-3.
No-biggie. Solar UV is going to rot the poor bugger
to dust before any of your wiring falls apart.
>Again, thanks for your time. I do feel honored that someone
>of your stature has taken the time to try and straighten me
>out and be a help.
Another no-biggie. You've just fallen victim to a
veritable blizzard of non-information that provides
job-security for certain classes of worker citizens
in other aviation venues.
You're really better prepared than you think you are
but pouring over a document that's 95% floobydust will
only make the answers harder to find and understand.
Put down your copy of AC43-13 and let's get started
on your airplane. If questions come up along the way,
you'll get better answers TAILORED to your situation
off the list-servers than you'll get out of that
document.
By the way, my e-mail address at nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com
is going away in a few days. 95% of what arrives there is
either spam or virus attacks. Use bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net
instead. There's an e-mail generator on the website at
http://aeroelectric.com/bob.nuckolls/ that will forward
to the Cox account. I'm trying to avoid publishing my
direct e-mail address on publicly accessed web pages
to keep from getting picked up by so many spam-bots.
Better yet, join the AeroElectric-List . . .
Bob . . .
------------------************-----------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: re: Starting points redux |
>
>
>Here's a reprint on a reply I crafted for a builder some years
>ago dealing with some of the issues faced by a neophyte builder
>in coming to grips with a new task . . . configure and fabricate
>an aircraft electrical system.
>
>------------------****************-------------------
>
>
>>Thanks for your reply and I do appreciate the time you have
>>spent.
>
>
>
>
> My apologies folks. The links in this posting are
> before the re-organization of the website that occurred
> right after the message.
>
> Dump this one and I'll see if I can sit down later today
> and fix the links for a re-posting of the piece.
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry E. James" <larry(at)ncproto.com> |
| Subject: | more direct method for designing electrical system |
Hello All,
I've been lurking on this list for some time and come to the conclusion that
I have little interest in diving into the electrical design and issues for
my Rocket as deeply as is addressed here. My hat is off to all of you and I
am very glad this forum exists as I truly believe you are accomplishing good
things in advancing the technology for aircraft. But this subject makes my
head hurt.
I have lurked enough to form some opinions on what I would like incorporated
into my aircraft. I am now looking for a more simple way of drawing this
out so that I can "connect wire from point A to point B". Anyone have any
ideas ??
Larry E. James
Bellevue, WA
Harmon Rocket
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | more direct method for designing electrical system |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Assuming your Rocket is a simple VFR airplane i would choose the
simplest of Bob's Aerolectric schematics and copy that. You really can't
go wrong.
If you have anything fancy like twin electronic ignitons or IFR then
you need to be careful and make sure you have redundancy built into the
design.
But if you have two mags, mechanical fuel pump, radio,transponder. Then
simply make sure you have a seperate circuit for each device that is
fused appropriately.
I would use the alternate feed method so that if you have to shut down
the the master switch (in flight fire) you can at least call for help on
the radio.
Frank
7a IFR
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry
E. James
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 8:57 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: more direct method for designing electrical
system
Hello All,
I've been lurking on this list for some time and come to the conclusion
that I have little interest in diving into the electrical design and
issues for my Rocket as deeply as is addressed here. My hat is off to
all of you and I am very glad this forum exists as I truly believe you
are accomplishing good things in advancing the technology for aircraft.
But this subject makes my head hurt.
I have lurked enough to form some opinions on what I would like
incorporated into my aircraft. I am now looking for a more simple way
of drawing this out so that I can "connect wire from point A to point
B". Anyone have any ideas ??
Larry E. James
Bellevue, WA
Harmon Rocket
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net> |
| Subject: | Re: re: Starting points redux |
Thank you for this...Looking forward to the redux
Bret Smith
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: re: Starting points redux
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>Here's a reprint on a reply I crafted for a builder some years
>>ago dealing with some of the issues faced by a neophyte builder
>>in coming to grips with a new task . . . configure and fabricate
>>an aircraft electrical system.
>>
>>------------------****************-------------------
>>
>>
>>>Thanks for your reply and I do appreciate the time you have
>>>spent.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> My apologies folks. The links in this posting are
>> before the re-organization of the website that occurred
>> right after the message.
>>
>> Dump this one and I'll see if I can sit down later today
>> and fix the links for a re-posting of the piece.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Ice <aurbo(at)ak.net> |
| Subject: | Re: more direct method for designing electrical system |
Larry,
less than a month ago I felt like you do right now, hopelessly lost.
Buy the aeroelectric connection. Read this forum. For a simple electric system,
follow the Z-11. It really isn't hard. Just figure out where your battery is
on the drawing and in your airplane and start running one wire at a time. Make
a copy of the Z-11 (drawing out of the aeroelectric book) and every time you
run a wire color it in with a high lighter. When all the lines are done you have
a working electrical system.
Also, take a look at your copy of the drawing and figure out what switches you
need and call up or web order from B&C or Stein.
Or: you could just order Van's pre-made wire harness, but i bet before you get
it installed you will take it up and use the wires to do the Z-11. I know because
that is what I did.
Don't sweat it, you can do it. Or just open up your wallet and hire someone to
do it.
Mike Ice
RV-9, wiring, wiring, wiring
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry E. James" <larry(at)ncproto.com>
Date: Friday, January 19, 2007 7:59 am
Subject: AeroElectric-List: more direct method for designing electrical system
> Hello All,
> I've been lurking on this list for some time and come to the
> conclusion that
> I have little interest in diving into the electrical design and
> issues for
> my Rocket as deeply as is addressed here. My hat is off to all of
> you and I
> am very glad this forum exists as I truly believe you are
> accomplishing good
> things in advancing the technology for aircraft. But this subject
> makes my
> head hurt.
> I have lurked enough to form some opinions on what I would like
> incorporatedinto my aircraft. I am now looking for a more simple
> way of drawing this
> out so that I can "connect wire from point A to point B". Anyone
> have any
> ideas ??
>
> Larry E. James
> Bellevue, WA
> Harmon Rocket
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: more direct method for designing electrical system |
On 19 Jan 2007, at 11:57, Larry E. James wrote:
> Hello All,
> I've been lurking on this list for some time and come to the
> conclusion that I have little interest in diving into the
> electrical design and issues for my Rocket as deeply as is
> addressed here. My hat is off to all of you and I am very glad
> this forum exists as I truly believe you are accomplishing good
> things in advancing the technology for aircraft. But this subject
> makes my head hurt.
> I have lurked enough to form some opinions on what I would like
> incorporated into my aircraft. I am now looking for a more simple
> way of drawing this out so that I can "connect wire from point A to
> point B". Anyone have any ideas ??
>
I started my original electrical system schematics with pencil, paper
and an eraser. A very big eraser. Select Bob's Z Drawing that
matches your needs and draw it out, putting the wire size and wire ID
on each wire. That takes care of the big picture, which gets power
to each bus. Then, make a separate drawing for each system, starting
at the bus, going to the fuse (or CB), then to the switch and then to
the item(s) that need power in that system.
While it is certainly possible to draw the schematics with pencil and
paper, I found that I made too many mistakes, and you can only erase
one area on the page so many times then you need to start over. So,
I switched to a simple drawing program on my computer. I used
AppleWorks on my Mac, but there are many other programs that will
work on all modern operating systems.
It isn't difficult, but it is time consuming.
Kevin Horton
Ottawa, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Thomas <lists(at)stevet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: more direct method for designing electrical system |
Two things, Larry:
1. Get Bob Nuckolls' book, "The Aeroelectric Connection" and read
it. Then, take a look at the various wiring diagrams included in the
appendices and pick the one that best suits your aircraft.
2. Attend one of Bob's regional weekend seminars.
This will solve most of your simple "how to" questions. The
remainder can be asked here and you will get expert answers.
Best Regards,
Steve
____________________________________________________________________
On Jan 19, 2007, at 8:57 AM, Larry E. James wrote:
> Hello All,
> I've been lurking on this list for some time and come to the
> conclusion that I have little interest in diving into the
> electrical design and issues for my Rocket as deeply as is
> addressed here. My hat is off to all of you and I am very glad
> this forum exists as I truly believe you are accomplishing good
> things in advancing the technology for aircraft. But this subject
> makes my head hurt.
> I have lurked enough to form some opinions on what I would like
> incorporated into my aircraft. I am now looking for a more simple
> way of drawing this out so that I can "connect wire from point A to
> point B". Anyone have any ideas ??
>
> Larry E. James
> Bellevue, WA
> Harmon Rocket
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | inrush limiters for landing lights |
Bob-
what's you latset thinking about using inline inrush current limiters
for those of us with halogen 100w landing lights? I'll be using mine
in wig-wag mode most of the time, and read your archived comments
about filament cooling in half-second time frames. Will limiters help
the life of my toggle switch enough to matter? I'm not using a relay
for that load when in the constant-on mode.
Thanks,
-Bill B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: more direct method for designing electrical system |
BlankLarry, you can learn how to use one of the flowcharting/design
tools on a computer and make your own design.
I thought about that and realized every minute spent learning something
like that would time away from flying. So, I bought Bob's book, made
copies of the schematics supporting features I wanted and used some tape
and scissors and made my own. I wired the plane and it all works. I am
a retired banker and not an EE or mechanic. You can do it using Bob's
schematics..
Indiana Larry with 175 hours RV7
----- Original Message -----
From: Larry E. James
To: AeroElectric-List(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 10:57 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: more direct method for designing
electrical system
Hello All,
I've been lurking on this list for some time and come to the
conclusion that I have little interest in diving into the electrical
design and issues for my Rocket as deeply as is addressed here. My hat
is off to all of you and I am very glad this forum exists as I truly
believe you are accomplishing good things in advancing the technology
for aircraft. But this subject makes my head hurt.
I have lurked enough to form some opinions on what I would like
incorporated into my aircraft. I am now looking for a more simple way
of drawing this out so that I can "connect wire from point A to point
B". Anyone have any ideas ??
Larry E. James
Bellevue, WA
Harmon Rocket
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net" <mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Strobe Light Selection |
I'm about to purchase a strobe/nav/position light kit. Can anyone tell
me if it is better to use an Aeroflash system with the two power
supplys monted in each wing or say a Creative-Air kit with one power
supply that runs sheilded cable the legth of the wing?
Anyone have any comments on either manufatures product?
Thanks,
MIke C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LarryMcFarland <larry(at)macsmachine.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe Light Selection |
Mike,
I've got strobes and power packages in the tips of my wings. Don't know
about reliability issues after 90 hours flight time and 4 years
installed yet,
but the idea of having a wing with more mass at the tips seems a good
idea because of in flight convective. I was surprised at the stability
of my HDS
and the way it cuts through turbulence. Not at all like the C150 I used
to fly. A convective day it would wear you out. The extra weight in the
tips along with usual 6 or 8 gallons in the wing tanks might just be a
factor.
Larry McFarland at www.macsmachine.com
mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net wrote:
>
>
> I'm about to purchase a strobe/nav/position light kit. Can anyone tell
> me if it is better to use an Aeroflash system with the two power
> supplys monted in each wing or say a Creative-Air kit with one power
> supply that runs sheilded cable the legth of the wing?
>
> Anyone have any comments on either manufatures product?
>
> Thanks,
> MIke C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vern Little <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: inrush limiters for landing lights |
Bill: I have some experience with this. The inrush limiters will save
wear and tear on your switch, breaker and lamps. Cold lamps have very
low resistance, and the inrush current can exceed the switch or breaker
rating as well as thermally shock the lamp filaments.
However, in wig-wag mode the lamps take longer to come up to full
brightness. I modified my wig-wag flasher to increase the flash period
(decrease the rate) so that the lamps will come on fully.
This simply requires the replacement of a capacitor in the flasher, and
it's readily availabe from Radio Shack. Just look at the value that's
in there and double it to start with.
Vern Little, 9A
Bill Boyd wrote:
>
> Bob-
>
> what's you latset thinking about using inline inrush current limiters
> for those of us with halogen 100w landing lights? I'll be using mine
> in wig-wag mode most of the time, and read your archived comments
> about filament cooling in half-second time frames. Will limiters help
> the life of my toggle switch enough to matter? I'm not using a relay
> for that load when in the constant-on mode.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Bill B.
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Werner Schneider <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe Light Selection |
Hi Mike,
I had Aeroflash wingtip PS in my Glastar, on one of them the main
condenser failed, as they're custom made you need to get them swapped by
the manufacturer 50$ ticket. Meanwhile I've a central PS with the set
from GS-Air and I'm happy, the Aeroflash lasted about 100hrs, the GS-Air
have over 150 on it by now.
br Werner
mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net wrote:
>
>
> I'm about to purchase a strobe/nav/position light kit. Can anyone
> tell me if it is better to use an Aeroflash system with the two
> power supplys monted in each wing or say a Creative-Air kit with one
> power supply that runs sheilded cable the legth of the wing?
>
> Anyone have any comments on either manufatures product?
>
> Thanks,
> MIke C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave N6030X <N6030X(at)DaveMorris.com> |
| Subject: | Nav radios in certified aircraft |
Other than 91.171, are there are rules that specify any particular
certifications that a Nav radio must have for use in IFR in certified
aircraft? The VAL INS-422 appears to be a nice little package to
provide an ILS capability in a single hole, and I'm trying to figure
out if I'm missing something.
Dave Morris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ignition noise in Jabiru engine. |
| From: | "jetboy" <sanson.r(at)xtra.co.nz> |
You might like to check the thread at Yahoo
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jabiruengines/message/16777
we have been testing inductive suppression HT leads and I have posted the radiated
noise plots from the various types of HT leads in the files section.
Ralph
--------
Ralph - CH701 / 2200a
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=89049#89049
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ignition noise in Jabiru engine. |
I have had an ignition noise problem in my VariEze composite (very
susceptible since no metal frame to shield RF noise) plane since installing a
CD
ignition form Lightspeed Engineering in place of one of the mags. I tried the
aluminum foil over the coil to plug leads grounded to the hex at the plugs with
no effect. After consultation with Klaus Savier at Lightspeed I removed the
foil and tightened the plug and coil clips and cleaned the contact surfaces.
That made a big improvement with my radio reception coming through with only
slight background plug firing noise. I am waiting for Klaus to ship a set of
plug leads with better wire and clips that should be even better. Seems that
any slight loose connection creates RF interference when the very high voltage
(40,000 volts plus) jumps the connection. I will make sure the connections
are tight and use a thin coat of dielectric grease (available at auto parts
stores as a Permatex product) on the connections. Hope this will solve the
problem. Be sure and check all your high voltage connections.
Good luck. I will report back if my changes work.
John Greaves
Redding, CA
VariEze N81JG
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ignition noise in Jabiru engine. |
Hi all,
I forgot to mention that my VariEze has an O235 Lycoming with the CD
ignition and one mag. Didn't mean to confuse with the Jabiru, but ignition noise
is
similar source from HT plug or coil leads.
John Greaves
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ignition noise in Jabiru engine. |
| From: | Paul Kuntz <paul.r.kuntz(at)gmail.com> |
Regarding dielectric grease -- the dielectric adjective denotes the fact
that the grease does NOT conduct electricity. Its use for electric
connections is to lubricate (which helps ensure that screw connections
and sliding connections mate completely and achieve the full
metal-to-metal contact desired), then after being displaced by the
connecting process the grease keeps oxygen away and helps prevent
corrosion that can eventually break down the connection. The dielectric
(non-conducting) property also prevents the grease from forming a
conductive pathway to adjacent circuits.
This isn't to say you shouldn't use it, particularly if Klaus recommends
it. I'm not an expert on high-voltage applications, and Klaus has a lot
of practical experience. Just trying to clarify and improve the
underlying knowledge base.
Regards,
Paul Kuntz
Cozy MKIV and
Pipistrel Sinus 912 motorglider
http://www.pipistrelbuilders.com/
----- Original Message -----
From: N81JG(at)aol.com
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 10:33 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Ignition noise in Jabiru engine.
I have had an ignition noise problem in my VariEze composite (very
susceptible since no metal frame to shield RF noise) plane since
installing a CD ignition form Lightspeed Engineering in place of one of
the mags. I tried the aluminum foil over the coil to plug leads grounded
to the hex at the plugs with no effect. After consultation with Klaus
Savier at Lightspeed I removed the foil and tightened the plug and coil
clips and cleaned the contact surfaces. That made a big improvement with
my radio reception coming through with only slight background plug
firing noise. I am waiting for Klaus to ship a set of plug leads with
better wire and clips that should be even better. Seems that any slight
loose connection creates RF interference when the very high voltage
(40,000 volts plus) jumps the connection. I will make sure the
connections are tight and use a thin coat of dielectric grease
(available at auto parts stores as a Permatex product) on the
connections. Hope this will solve the problem. Be sure and check all
your high voltage connections.
Good luck. I will report back if my changes work.
John Greaves
Redding, CA
VariEze N81JG
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Jack plug question |
| From: | "Miskelly, Francis G" <f.miskelly(at)imperial.ac.uk> |
I have a King 155 in a Glastar - fibreglass panel
To hear other stations i have the radio turned up full and there's lots
of radio interference. When i pull out the Jack plug the volume
increases substantially (maybe 30%) and i have to turn down the volume.
The radio interference is much less. When i push the jack plug back in
the volume diminishes and the static noise reappears
Can someone explain this?
Many thanks
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Tachometer Adapter |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
For one of my loyal and wise customers, I designed a built a device to adapt a
three-pulse-per-rev output to a 1.5 pulse per rev RPM display. I am totally ignorant
of what demand there is for such a device. If you are interested I will
either make these or sell kits or release the design in the common good.
O'scope shot attached.
You can always trust the information given to you by people who are crazy; they
have an access to truth not available through regular channels.
-- Sheila Ballantyne
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=89144#89144
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/tacho_divider_158.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Lammers <davelammers(at)mchsi.com> |
Hi Listers,
I'm looking for a module that I can use to turn off courtesy lights
after a predetermined (setable) period of time, similar to the function
in your automobile interior lighting.
I would like these courtesy lights to be usable independent of the
master switch, (i.e.: on an "always hot" bus), however, I want them to
turn off after a period of time to eliminate the possibility of battery
drain.
The requirements are:
Input & Output voltage: 12/14v
Output current: Less than 100 ma. (Drives several gangs of multiple
LED's)
Input current: As required for the output, but must be absolutely ZERO
in the off state.
Size: Less than several cubic inches.
Weight: Not much (I've found some controllers that would work but they
are big and hefty).
Activated by momentary on switch.
Optionally, after in the ON state, another press of the momentary ON
will turn the output OFF.
It seems that such a thing could be found reasonably easy, but I have
searched and come up with nothing.
I would appreciate your ideas/suggestions.
Thanks in advance.
Dave Lammers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Slaughter" <willslau(at)alumni.rice.edu> |
I want one, too! I was just thinking about the same application yesterday
for my baggage comparments.
William Slaughter
RV-8
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave
Lammers
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2007 10:02 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Timer module
-->
Hi Listers,
I'm looking for a module that I can use to turn off courtesy lights
after a predetermined (setable) period of time, similar to the function
in your automobile interior lighting.
I would like these courtesy lights to be usable independent of the
master switch, (i.e.: on an "always hot" bus), however, I want them to
turn off after a period of time to eliminate the possibility of battery
drain.
The requirements are:
Input & Output voltage: 12/14v
Output current: Less than 100 ma. (Drives several gangs of multiple
LED's)
Input current: As required for the output, but must be absolutely ZERO
in the off state.
Size: Less than several cubic inches.
Weight: Not much (I've found some controllers that would work but they
are big and hefty).
Activated by momentary on switch.
Optionally, after in the ON state, another press of the momentary ON
will turn the output OFF.
It seems that such a thing could be found reasonably easy, but I have
searched and come up with nothing.
I would appreciate your ideas/suggestions.
Thanks in advance.
Dave Lammers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Johnson" <pinetownd(at)volcano.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Strobe Light Selection |
Hi Mike,
I haven't flown yet (hoping for next month!) but I installed the
combined wingtip LED position lights and strobe lights from GS-Air
https://ssl.perfora.net/gs-air.com/sess/utn;jsessionid=1541ee915db8cd2/
shopdata/index.shopscript
They look great and are probably a tiny bit more aerodynamic than the
certified ones from Whelen and Aeroflash, plus, they're cheaper. They
have a single power supply, which has a variety of selectable flash
sequences and two power levels. Customer support from GS-Air has been
outstanding.
Good luck,
Dennis Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net> |
Dave, I'm searching for the same timer module. I want to actuate it from a
contact switch when the canopy is opened. I, too, plan to have it drive 3-4
banks of LEDs.
Please let me know if you identify an acceptable module and I will do
likewise.
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave
Lammers
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2007 11:02 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Timer module
-->
Hi Listers,
I'm looking for a module that I can use to turn off courtesy lights after a
predetermined (setable) period of time, similar to the function in your
automobile interior lighting.
I would like these courtesy lights to be usable independent of the master
switch, (i.e.: on an "always hot" bus), however, I want them to turn off
after a period of time to eliminate the possibility of battery drain.
The requirements are:
Input & Output voltage: 12/14v
Output current: Less than 100 ma. (Drives several gangs of multiple
LED's)
Input current: As required for the output, but must be absolutely ZERO
in the off state.
Size: Less than several cubic inches.
Weight: Not much (I've found some controllers that would work but they are
big and hefty).
Activated by momentary on switch.
Optionally, after in the ON state, another press of the momentary ON will
turn the output OFF.
It seems that such a thing could be found reasonably easy, but I have
searched and come up with nothing.
I would appreciate your ideas/suggestions.
Thanks in advance.
Dave Lammers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe Garner <jgarner(at)dslextreme.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Timer module |
How about using a relay and R-C circuit to time it? We use similar on
elevators all the time...
+12--|-----||--------------------> leds
| relay contact
|
|
----/_-----|----O------------gnd
switch | relay coil
|
|-/\/\/\/--|(-----gnd
resistor capacitor
When the switch closes it picks the relay, contacts light the led.
Switch opens and RC holds the relay in for a 'while'.
The resistor / capacitor / relay coil resistance sets the timing...
Sorry for the ascii art :} and note that I left out fuses, led
resistors, etc.
Hope this helps, YMMV!!
/Joe
Dave Lammers wrote:
>
>
> Hi Listers,
>
> I'm looking for a module that I can use to turn off courtesy lights
> after a predetermined (setable) period of time, similar to the function
> in your automobile interior lighting.
>
> I would like these courtesy lights to be usable independent of the
> master switch, (i.e.: on an "always hot" bus), however, I want them to
> turn off after a period of time to eliminate the possibility of battery
> drain.
>
> The requirements are:
>
> Input & Output voltage: 12/14v
> Output current: Less than 100 ma. (Drives several gangs of multiple
> LED's)
> Input current: As required for the output, but must be absolutely ZERO
> in the off state.
> Size: Less than several cubic inches.
> Weight: Not much (I've found some controllers that would work but they
> are big and hefty).
> Activated by momentary on switch.
> Optionally, after in the ON state, another press of the momentary ON
> will turn the output OFF.
>
> It seems that such a thing could be found reasonably easy, but I have
> searched and come up with nothing.
> I would appreciate your ideas/suggestions.
>
> Thanks in advance.
> Dave Lammers
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Joe Garner IASEL-RV 6@OAK aka 'Snoopy'
jgarner(at)elelink.org |
jgarner(at)dslextreme.com .______(o)______.
kc6utr(at)w6pw www.elelink.org / \
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brett Ferrell <bferrell(at)123mail.net> |
I bought such a module for my aircraft, and though it was a b*$ch to hook up
right, I'm really pleased with the result. It's called the "lights out"
module.
Here's a similar module, though it's not the one I bought. Let me know if this
doesn't meet your needs, I have papework on the one I used, but it's at the
hangar.
http://www.webelectricproducts.com/products.htm
Brett
Quoting Bret Smith :
>
> Dave, I'm searching for the same timer module. I want to actuate it from a
> contact switch when the canopy is opened. I, too, plan to have it drive 3-4
> banks of LEDs.
>
> Please let me know if you identify an acceptable module and I will do
> likewise.
>
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A (91314)
> Mineral Bluff, GA
> www.FlightInnovations.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave
> Lammers
> Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2007 11:02 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Timer module
>
> -->
>
> Hi Listers,
>
> I'm looking for a module that I can use to turn off courtesy lights after a
> predetermined (setable) period of time, similar to the function in your
> automobile interior lighting.
>
> I would like these courtesy lights to be usable independent of the master
> switch, (i.e.: on an "always hot" bus), however, I want them to turn off
> after a period of time to eliminate the possibility of battery drain.
>
> The requirements are:
>
> Input & Output voltage: 12/14v
> Output current: Less than 100 ma. (Drives several gangs of multiple
> LED's)
> Input current: As required for the output, but must be absolutely ZERO
> in the off state.
> Size: Less than several cubic inches.
> Weight: Not much (I've found some controllers that would work but they are
> big and hefty).
> Activated by momentary on switch.
> Optionally, after in the ON state, another press of the momentary ON will
> turn the output OFF.
>
> It seems that such a thing could be found reasonably easy, but I have
> searched and come up with nothing.
> I would appreciate your ideas/suggestions.
>
> Thanks in advance.
> Dave Lammers
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Timer module |
I'd suggest a solid state device with 4 components such as I use for
autoshutoff circuits on small battery powered devices such as multimeters.
A switch, mosfet, capacitor, and diode. The switch is the largest component.
You'd perhaps want a larger mosfet but I've used a VN10KM mosfet (radio
shack 276-2070) good for 0.5amp successfully. It looks like a tiny
plastic transistor with three leads.
I put the capacitor and diode in parallel from the Source to the gate
with the banded end of the diode and the + end of the cap connected to
the Gate. Ground the Source. Your LED's (with current limiting
resistors) goes between +12 volts and the Drain. Now you can
momentarilly switch +12volts onto the Gate and the LED's will stay on
until the charge on the cap bleeds off. As an example I typically get 1
min. with a .22uf capacitor and 1 hr. with 10uf. Just play with
capacitor values to get the time that you want.
I like to use a 3 positon switch. Center is normal. Up is on
continuously but usually I just put it up and immediately back to center
to let the timer run. Down shorts the cap or discharges it to ground for
an immediate off. A momentary switch (spring loaded to center) or just a
push button will also work well.
Ken
Joe Garner wrote:
>
>How about using a relay and R-C circuit to time it? We use similar on
>elevators all the time...
>
>+12--|-----||--------------------> leds
> | relay contact
> |
> |
> ----/_-----|----O------------gnd
> switch | relay coil
> |
> |-/\/\/\/--|(-----gnd
> resistor capacitor
>
>When the switch closes it picks the relay, contacts light the led.
>Switch opens and RC holds the relay in for a 'while'.
>
>The resistor / capacitor / relay coil resistance sets the timing...
>
>Sorry for the ascii art :} and note that I left out fuses, led
>resistors, etc.
>
>
>Hope this helps, YMMV!!
>
>/Joe
>
>
>Dave Lammers wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>>Hi Listers,
>>
>>I'm looking for a module that I can use to turn off courtesy lights
>>after a predetermined (setable) period of time, similar to the function
>>in your automobile interior lighting.
>>
>>I would like these courtesy lights to be usable independent of the
>>master switch, (i.e.: on an "always hot" bus), however, I want them to
>>turn off after a period of time to eliminate the possibility of battery
>>drain.
>>
>>The requirements are:
>>
>>Input & Output voltage: 12/14v
>>Output current: Less than 100 ma. (Drives several gangs of multiple
>>LED's)
>>Input current: As required for the output, but must be absolutely ZERO
>>in the off state.
>>Size: Less than several cubic inches.
>>Weight: Not much (I've found some controllers that would work but they
>>are big and hefty).
>>Activated by momentary on switch.
>>Optionally, after in the ON state, another press of the momentary ON
>>will turn the output OFF.
>>
>>It seems that such a thing could be found reasonably easy, but I have
>>searched and come up with nothing.
>>I would appreciate your ideas/suggestions.
>>
>>Thanks in advance.
>>Dave Lammers
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Timer module |
Check precisiontimer.com . They have compact modules, about 4 oz.
Regards,
Gaylen Lerohl
Terminaltown.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Lammers" <davelammers(at)mchsi.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2007 10:01 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Timer module
>
>
> Hi Listers,
>
> I'm looking for a module that I can use to turn off courtesy lights after
> a predetermined (setable) period of time, similar to the function in your
> automobile interior lighting.
>
> I would like these courtesy lights to be usable independent of the master
> switch, (i.e.: on an "always hot" bus), however, I want them to turn off
> after a period of time to eliminate the possibility of battery drain.
>
> The requirements are:
>
> Input & Output voltage: 12/14v
> Output current: Less than 100 ma. (Drives several gangs of multiple
> LED's)
> Input current: As required for the output, but must be absolutely ZERO
> in the off state.
> Size: Less than several cubic inches.
> Weight: Not much (I've found some controllers that would work but they
> are big and hefty).
> Activated by momentary on switch.
> Optionally, after in the ON state, another press of the momentary ON will
> turn the output OFF.
>
> It seems that such a thing could be found reasonably easy, but I have
> searched and come up with nothing.
> I would appreciate your ideas/suggestions.
>
> Thanks in advance.
> Dave Lammers
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Timer module |
>
>Hi Listers,
>
>I'm looking for a module that I can use to turn off courtesy lights after
>a predetermined (setable) period of time, similar to the function in your
>automobile interior lighting.
>
>I would like these courtesy lights to be usable independent of the master
>switch, (i.e.: on an "always hot" bus), however, I want them to turn off
>after a period of time to eliminate the possibility of battery drain.
>
>The requirements are:
>
>Input & Output voltage: 12/14v
>Output current: Less than 100 ma. (Drives several gangs of multiple LED's)
>Input current: As required for the output, but must be absolutely ZERO
>in the off state.
>Size: Less than several cubic inches.
>Weight: Not much (I've found some controllers that would work but they
>are big and hefty).
>Activated by momentary on switch.
>Optionally, after in the ON state, another press of the momentary ON will
>turn the output OFF.
That is one of the products we're developing that will fit into
our standard A enclosure. You can see the package at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Products/Enclosures/A_Enclosure.pdf
Weight on this puppy is about 3 oz.
It will have an externally programmable time delay ranging from
10 to 1000 seconds. It can be externally strapped to default
ON or default OFF at power up. Will handle 5 amp loads. External
controls are a steady pull to ground which initiates an ON
cycle limited to 1000 seconds. A momentary pull to ground on same
line initiates an ON-cycle for the programmed limit. A pull-to-ground
either momentary or continuous for OFF. If momentary (normally
open) then the system will default according to the strapping
on power up. If continuously held to ground, the system is OFF
under all conditions including right after power up.
This will be our 9024-100-1 On Limit Timer to be on the website
sometime this year. In the mean time, if you're of a notion to
roll-yer-own, consider the schematic at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/On_Limit_Timer.pdf
Parts are available from Digikey and while it doesn't have the
software driven features of control logic cited for the 9024,
it may well do what you need done. This defaults off on power up.
Momentary pull down to ground initiates a timed ON function, a
momentary pull down shuts the load off.
>It seems that such a thing could be found reasonably easy, but I have
>searched and come up with nothing.
>I would appreciate your ideas/suggestions.
There are dozens of ways to skin this cat . . . here
are a few.
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: | Starting Points (corrected as promised) |
Actually, I'd already incorporated an article with corrected
links into another larger work that got posted but never indexed.
I've expanded the article to talk about wire books and fixed
the links. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Getting_Started.pdf
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: | Earl_Schroeder <Earl_Schroeder(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starting Points (corrected as promised) |
Hmmm, updated in 2008? I didn't think I slept THAT long... :-D Earl
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
> Actually, I'd already incorporated an article with corrected
> links into another larger work that got posted but never indexed.
> I've expanded the article to talk about wire books and fixed
> the links. See:
>
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Getting_Started.pdf
>
>
> 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: | "Greg" <greg(at)itmack.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Need low cost schematic program |
I've been using DipTrace www.diptrace.com and check this place out for PCB
manufacture. There is an online quote service for comparison
http://www.futurlec.com/index.shtml
Greg
>
>
> I just ordered "The AeroElectric Connection" and am looking forward to
> laying out the electrical system for my RV8. I am interested in
> purchasing an inexpensive CAD program to document the system and was
> curious as to what recommendations this list might have.
>
> I am also interested if anyone has any recommendatons of a good software
> program and process for designing and producting 2 sided boards for
> small circuits. It has been 15 years since I designed circuits and at
> that point I had a lab at my disposal. I am looking for something I can
> use at home and that would produce acceptable boards.
>
> Thank you in advance for your recommendations.
>
> Greg
>
>
> --
> 13/01/2007 5:40 PM
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Jack plug question |
| From: | "Miskelly, Francis G" <f.miskelly(at)imperial.ac.uk> |
Re-posting question more accurately
I have a King KX155 in a Glastar - composite aircraft with fibreglass
panel
To hear other stations i have the radio turned up full and there's lots
of radio interference. When i pull out the microphone jack plug (leaving
the headphone jack in) the volume increases substantially (maybe 30%)
and i have to turn down the volume. The radio interference is much less.
When i push the microphone jack plug back in the volume diminishes and
the static noise reappears
Can someone explain this?
Many thanks
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Campbell" <gregcampbellusa(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Timer module |
I went to Home Depot and got a wind up timer switch for $9.
It weighs 4.1 oz and is rated for 20A @ 125 Vac or a 1HP motor.
They sell a 0-60 minute version and a 0-12 hour version.
It's a little bulky behind the panel, but the knob on the front is small,
sturdy,
and intuitive. You wind it up and you've got lights for 0 to 60 minutes.
It even has an audible reminder that the courtesy lights are on!
(It goes "ticka-ticka-ticka" ;-)
I found a piece of "nearly useless" panel space near the upper left of my
panel
that had very little room behind it and was otherwise hard to get to -
but it's perfect for the timer. It's easy to reach immediately after
opening
the door at night to start a preflight. It also makes a decent backup light
& timer.
I like the high tech stuff too, but this low tech "turn past 10" gizmo
filled the bill nicely for under $10.
Greg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Jurotich <mjurotich(at)hst.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Timer module |
Bob
Could you put the schematic and a parts list for the on-limit timer
in a more readable format. I am having difficulty reading some of
the parts and have to make assumptions such as the left most caps are
0.1 mircrofarrads and and V1A is same part as V1B and V1C and there
is a floating symbol that does not make sense to me.
Thanks
Matthew M. Jurotich
e-mail mail to:
phone : 301-286-5919
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Starting Points (corrected as promised) |
Thanks for the heads up. Fixed this and some other link problems.
The fixed version has been posted.
Bob . . .
>
>
>Hmmm, updated in 2008? I didn't think I slept THAT long... :-D Earl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Jack plug question |
>Re-posting question more accurately
>I have a King KX155 in a Glastar - composite aircraft with fibreglass panel
>To hear other stations i have the radio turned up full and there's lots of
>radio interference. When i pull out the microphone jack plug (leaving the
>headphone jack in) the volume increases substantially (maybe 30%) and i
>have to turn down the volume. The radio interference is much less. When i
>push the microphone jack plug back in the volume diminishes and the static
>noise reappears
>
>Can someone explain this?
I'm at a loss to deduce something I could purposely
do to create the problem you describe. Obviously, there
either a wiring problem or some form of failure in the
equipment . . . but I'd have to put my hands on it and
do some investigative experiments to sort this one out.
Has it always done this or is the condition new?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Timer module |
>
>
>Bob
>
>Could you put the schematic and a parts list for the on-limit timer in a
>more readable format. I am having difficulty reading some of the parts
>and have to make assumptions such as the left most caps are 0.1
>mircrofarrads and and V1A is same part as V1B and V1C and there is a
>floating symbol that does not make sense to me.
Look up the CD4093 integrated circuit. It has 4 sections
of which only three are used and the forth is "tied off".
The caps are either 0.1 uF and 10 uF except the
timing cap which may be 10 to 47 uF set by experiment
to achieve desired time delay.
The resistors are 1K, 100 ohms, 470 ohms, and 100K
except for the time-adjust resistor which you'll
have to experiment with to achieve the desired
time delay.
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: Jack plug question |
| From: | "Miskelly, Francis G" <f.miskelly(at)imperial.ac.uk> |
Thanks Bob.
The KX155 is 6 months old. This problem has been there from the
beginning. It came with harness pre-wired and i installed it. Sometimes
i use a handheld (ICOM A20) wired into the a/c power supply and aerial
and there's some ignition noise but not a serious problem. Its just the
panel mounted KX155. The microphone jack interferes with the volume
(even with the squelch turned off) and introduces interference
Two possibles i thought of were
1. The microphone socket may need an earth? The panel is fibreglass and
the socket has 2 wires running into it but is not earthed to the
airframe
2. Could the wires in the microphone socket be transposed?
As the ICOM works OK that seems to exclude power supply or aerial
issues?
Very grateful for your advice.
Frank
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of Robert
L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Mon 22/01/2007 14:13
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: Jack plug question
>Re-posting question more accurately
>I have a King KX155 in a Glastar - composite aircraft with fibreglass
panel
>To hear other stations i have the radio turned up full and there's lots
of
>radio interference. When i pull out the microphone jack plug (leaving
the
>headphone jack in) the volume increases substantially (maybe 30%) and i
>have to turn down the volume. The radio interference is much less. When
i
>push the microphone jack plug back in the volume diminishes and the
static
>noise reappears
>
>Can someone explain this?
I'm at a loss to deduce something I could purposely
do to create the problem you describe. Obviously, there
either a wiring problem or some form of failure in the
equipment . . . but I'd have to put my hands on it and
do some investigative experiments to sort this one out.
Has it always done this or is the condition new?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
January 09, 2007 - January 22, 2007
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-gn