AeroElectric-List Archive Browser

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-gs
February 20, 2007 - March 03, 2007

Help me out here, if that isn't a "failure", just what would you call it? In my book, any mechanical screw up that causes an unplanned landing sure fits the definition of a failure. -- Harry Crosby RV-6 N16CX, 312 hours -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
(Corvallis)" > > > Nope Dual P mags. They did NOT fail. I believe ONE of them went to very > advanced timing. It has the effect of fouling up the timing completely > because once the charge has been lit the second spark doesn't do > anything. > > There is a long discussion on the Vansairforce website about it. > > Frank > RV-7a > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John > W. Cox > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 11:54 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: P-mags > > --> > > I was not aware the four cylinder P mag was yet available for Prime > Time. Could this have been dual E mags? > > John Cox > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Terry > Watson > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 10:47 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: P-mags > > > > > This is an excerpt from a message to the Matronics Engines list this > morning, posted by Mike Larkin: > > " As for the P-mag, I recovered an RV-7 from a highway two weekends ago > when Both P-mags failed. Guess what, the electrical system worked > perfectly......" > > Since E-mags and P-mags have been a subject on this list, I thought I > would pass it on. Does anyone know the story? > > Terry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "bob noffs" <icubob(at)newnorth.net>
Subject: Re: Trim Motor Rant
Date: Feb 20, 2007
paul, small world, i spent monday. i wired the led and the switch into 9 pin d sub connectors. now at least they can be removed from the panel without cutting those teeny weeny wires! bob noffs ----- Original Message ----- From: Valovich, Paul To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 9:37 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Trim Motor Rant I spent Sunday wiring the Ray Allen elevator trim motor on my -8A. Can anyone explain the logic of why this otherwise fine product has micro wires hanging off it instead of AWG 22's? What a PITA to work with. Paul Valovich ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "r falstad" <bobair8(at)msn.com>
Subject: Stripping Longer Piece of Shielded/Twisted Pair Wire
Date: Feb 20, 2007
I have a few electrical cables (e.g., from nav lights) to my panel that are shielded/twisted pairs. One of the wires goes to the panel switch and the other goes to the ground block on the firewall. Is there any easy way to strip of 2' to 3' of the outer cable jacket so I can reach both the switch and the ground block without splicing in a piece of wire to run to the ground block? Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: P-mags and the RV-7 Off Field Landing
> >Frank, > >Help me out here, if that isn't a "failure", just what would you call >it? In my book, any mechanical screw up that causes an unplanned landing >sure fits the definition of a failure. No doubt there WAS a SYSTEM failure. But accurate investigation and diagnosis of root cause extends FAR beyond what usually happens when unhappy events in aviation spark public discussions. It's inarguable that the pilot perceived a reason to make an off-field landing. Anecdotally, we understand that the ignition SYSTEM was misbehaving. What do we know about how the pilot reacted to his/her perceptions? What did your instructor tell you to do when the engine is running badly? Were there not words suggesting that turning the mags off one at a time would help you isolate a recalcitrant magneto? Is it not reasonable to expect that a similar investigation would have been useful in this event? What do you think the probability is that both Emagair products became unserviceable on the same tank full of fuel? What do we know about the post flight discovery of facts? I think the major point to be considered here is that the general public is very quick to launch lengthy and heated debate on a variety of non-news items reported in the media. I say "non-news" because while the stories may accurately record a happening, the reporter rarely knows diddly-squat about the simple-ideas that underlie the story. They're prone to rely on the words of others who are probably as ignorant of facts and understanding as the reporter is. In Chapter 17 of the 'Connection I've suggested that the pilot subsystem is subordinate only to the airframe in importance for having a happy ending to an aviation experience. Those of us who have lived and worked in the aviation venue most of our careers are skeptical of the notion that the aircraft featured in this story suffered an ignition system failure that would be expected to force an off-field landing. But lacking more data, the best we can offer is a considered opinion as to PROBABILITY based on our past experience. Opinions not founded in simple-ideas and offered by individuals who cannot teach the significance of those ideas are suspect. This is where the differences between teachers and propagandists become strikingly obvious. So before we get out the big brush and red paint and write ACCIDENT INDUCING FAILURE across E-Magair's reputation, let us take the time on THIS LIST to conduct careful consideration of facts. It's unlikely that you'll get any facts from folks who were not there and did not put their hands on hardware. So no matter what pot is boiling on any other List, let us do the science (and/or rely on others who ARE doing the science) lest we give rise to invariably poor recommendations that arise from equally poor conclusions. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Stripping Longer Piece of Shielded/Twisted Pair
Wire >I have a few electrical cables (e.g., from nav lights) to my panel that >are shielded/twisted pairs. One of the wires goes to the panel switch and >the other goes to the ground block on the firewall. Is there any easy way >to strip of 2' to 3' of the outer cable jacket so I can reach both the >switch and the ground block without splicing in a piece of wire to run to >the ground block? You have a ground block located adjacent to the switches? Interesting. In answer to your question, try a pair of cuticle scissors, the slim points can be pushed under the jacket and between the twisted wires far enough to allow the shears to cut the jacket away. Obviously, this doesn't work on single conductor cable. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: P-mags
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
Fair point Harry, I guess my conjecture was that one of the P mags could have been turned off and the engine would have resumed normal operation...I just wish I'd though of it when it happened to me...Of course my engine just ran hot, i.e did not causean engine stoppage. Frank -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of HCRV6(at)comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 5:43 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: P-mags Frank, Help me out here, if that isn't a "failure", just what would you call it? In my book, any mechanical screw up that causes an unplanned landing sure fits the definition of a failure. -- Harry Crosby RV-6 N16CX, 312 hours -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> (Corvallis)" > > > Nope Dual P mags. They did NOT fail. I believe ONE of them went to > very advanced timing. It has the effect of fouling up the timing > completely because once the charge has been lit the second spark > doesn't do anything. > > There is a long discussion on the Vansairforce website about it. > > Frank > RV-7a > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of > John W. Cox > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 11:54 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: P-mags > > --> > > I was not aware the four cylinder P mag was yet available for Prime > Time. Could this have been dual E mags? > > John Cox > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Terry Watson > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 10:47 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: P-mags > > > > > This is an excerpt from a message to the Matronics Engines list this > morning, posted by Mike Larkin: > > " As for the P-mag, I recovered an RV-7 from a highway two weekends > ago when Both P-mags failed. Guess what, the electrical system worked > perfectly......" > > Since E-mags and P-mags have been a subject on this list, I thought I > would pass it on. Does anyone know the story? > > Terry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Engine gage wiring
From: "Danm" <danm(at)gangnailtruss.com>
Date: Feb 21, 2007
I installed a UMA oil pressure gage, PN 4-210-080 and a oil temp gage, PN 12-200-250f in my Kitfox IV with a Jabiru 2200 engine. When I open the master switch (split rocker), the gages have readings of approximately 25 psi oil pressure and 120 degree oil temp. The engine hasn't been started yet (new aircraft), so there must be something wrong with the wiring or the sending units supplied with the engine. I check the gage wiring and looks to be correct. I suspect either a wiring issue or a sending unit issue. I you can help me out, it would be appreciated. Thanks in advance -------- Dan Mc Intyre Kitfox Model IV, Jab 2200 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p'487#96487 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike" <mlas(at)cox.net>
Subject: Engine gage wiring
Date: Feb 21, 2007
Dan, Check all of your grounds. Make sure the engine is grounded to the airframe. Make sure that the instrument is grounded to the main ground (airframe)or ground bus. Make sure you have a large enough ground from the engine to the airframe. Just my thoughts, Mike Larkin -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Danm Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 8:14 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Engine gage wiring I installed a UMA oil pressure gage, PN 4-210-080 and a oil temp gage, PN 12-200-250f in my Kitfox IV with a Jabiru 2200 engine. When I open the master switch (split rocker), the gages have readings of approximately 25 psi oil pressure and 120 degree oil temp. The engine hasn't been started yet (new aircraft), so there must be something wrong with the wiring or the sending units supplied with the engine. I check the gage wiring and looks to be correct. I suspect either a wiring issue or a sending unit issue. I you can help me out, it would be appreciated. Thanks in advance -------- Dan Mc Intyre Kitfox Model IV, Jab 2200 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p'487#96487 -- 2/8/2007 -- 2/8/2007 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: P-mags
Date: Feb 21, 2007
On 21 Feb 2007, at 09:49, Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) wrote: > (Corvallis)" > > Fair point Harry, > > I guess my conjecture was that one of the P mags could have been > turned > off and the engine would have resumed normal operation...I just > wish I'd > though of it when it happened to me...Of course my engine just ran > hot, > i.e did not causean engine stoppage. > It is too much to expect for you to suddenly become very bright after the incident occurs, and decide to try turning one ignition off. It is far better to put that step in your Rough Running Engine and Engine Failure checklists now. Then, whenever the problem occurs, the fact that you are familiar with your emergency checklist should hopefully trigger you to try turning one ignition off at a time. Kevin Horton RV-8 (Finishing Kit) Ottawa, Canada http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Engine gage wiring
> >I installed a UMA oil pressure gage, PN 4-210-080 and a oil temp gage, PN >12-200-250f in my Kitfox IV with a Jabiru 2200 engine. When I open the >master switch (split rocker), the gages have readings of approximately 25 >psi oil pressure and 120 degree oil temp. The engine hasn't been started >yet (new aircraft), so there must be something wrong with the wiring or >the sending units supplied with the engine. I check the gage wiring and >looks to be correct. I suspect either a wiring issue or a sending unit >issue. I you can help me out, it would be appreciated. > >Thanks in advance Without knowing details of the internal workings for these instruments, I'll offer the following hypothesis to explain what you're observing: The earliest PRECISION (meaning stable and repeatable) instruments were crafted from a coil of wire suspended in a magnetic field where a current impressed on the coil would force rotation against a spring and move a pointer upscale. This is known as the D'Arsonval meter movement. http://www.triquartz.co.uk/ammeter.html Similar devices had moving magnets held at "zero" by a spring and suspended in a single fixed coil. Both of these technologies feature a return spring that causes the instrument to assume a familiar and expected "zero" reading when powered down. Modern instruments have worked past some of the manufacturing problems with legacy designs. A very popular, robust and inexpensive design is also moving magnet. But instead of one coil, there are two coils at right angles to each other. When the two coils are energized, the magnet (free to move 360 degrees) will assume alignment with the magnetic field generated by the two coils. This technology allows a designer to produce instruments having very small rotational arcs . . . up to and including 360 continuous degrees without stops. These movements do not have or need return springs. Therefore, the position assumed by the pointer in a powered down condition may be random and unpredictable unless the designer takes special pains with driving circuitry to make the instrument indicate "zero" when powered down. Given the popularity of this technology and the very reasonable cost to manufacture, I'll bet that what you're seeing is the predictable behavior of a 4-quadrant, moving magnet movement during power down. As long as the instrument is reading correctly when powered up, there's no reason to be concerned. Bob . . . For further reading see: http://www.jewellinstruments.com/pmtheory101.htm http://www.jewellinstruments.com/pmglossary.htm ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Engine gage wiring
From: "Danm" <danm(at)gangnailtruss.com>
Date: Feb 21, 2007
I ment to say that the gages are at zero with no power applied, when I power up thats when the gages go to the 25psi and 120 degree reading, engine not running. What do you think??? Thanks for the help -------- Dan Mc Intyre Kitfox Model IV, Jab 2200 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p'519#96519 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Full Auto
From: "marcausman" <marc(at)verticalpower.com>
Date: Feb 21, 2007
Sam, Take a look at www.verticalpower.com . It will load shed and switch alternators (nearly) automatically, and meet your KISS principles for wiring. Won't be available until August though. Marc -------- Marc Ausman http://www.verticalpower.com RV-7 IO-390 Flying Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p'520#96520 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Ensing" <densing(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Engine gage wiring
Date: Feb 21, 2007
Dan, I remember getting an obviously erronous number on my oil pressure when system was first turn on. Solved the problem by reversing the leads connection at the sending unit. The sending unit had no indication of polarity so initial connection was a 50% guess. Dale Ensing ----- Original Message ----- From: "Danm" <danm(at)gangnailtruss.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 12:52 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Engine gage wiring > > I ment to say that the gages are at zero with no power applied, when I > power up thats when the gages go to the 25psi and 120 degree reading, > engine not running. What do you think??? Thanks for the help > > -------- > Dan Mc Intyre > Kitfox Model IV, Jab 2200 > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p'519#96519 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Engine gage wiring
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
Either the wrong senders for the guages or a bad ground between the sender and the guages. Worng senders happen quite often. Call the supplier and ask them what the resistnace curve looks like, i.e get the resistance for say 55F and measure resistance with your multimeter. Frank -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Danm Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:53 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Engine gage wiring I ment to say that the gages are at zero with no power applied, when I power up thats when the gages go to the 25psi and 120 degree reading, engine not running. What do you think??? Thanks for the help -------- Dan Mc Intyre Kitfox Model IV, Jab 2200 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p'519#96519 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "C Smith" <pilot4profit(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Strobes
Date: Feb 21, 2007
-----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fergus Kyle Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 5:05 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Strobes >>Craig, I read your latest paragraph regarding lighting and noted that's it's all "I" and no "we". Manoeuvring around an airfield, particularly a busy one, is very much a community thing, not a solitary event.<< (I) speak for my self, therefore (I) don't use the term we. (I) don't see anyone else using "we" when writing about themselves. Silly issue to pick on. >> While you are not bothered by another's strobes on the tarmac, many others are, me included. If you were to sit up at 20 feet in Chicago O'Hare and every aircraft had on strobes, you would appreciate the confusion and wariness that occurred.<< While (I)'m sure people get bothered by lots of things, I can't accommodate everyone's peeve. (I) don't intend to fly into O'Hare and I wouldn't use strobes at a busy controlled airport for taxi. My airport is uncontrolled, and after the events mentioned, (I) determined (I) prefer to be seen. >> Strobes don't quickly indicate speed, turns or direction. That's why we copied ships and used coloured lamps - which do all three. Trying to guess the progress of conflicting traffic between flashes is a mug's game and unsafe. It is unnecessarily distracting and time-wasting when time's in short supply.<< (I) would challenge all of what you have written. The lighting (on aircraft) was adopted long before strobes were in existence, and strobes are used to capture (photography) and simulate motion (the rabbit on instrument approach lighting) all the time. Please cite some professional study for this claim. While observing aircraft (I) have had no trouble discerning their motion with strobes on, and can clearly see their other running lights in spite of the strobes. Against a static background motion is clearly accentuated by stroboscopic effect, giving both direction and speed, the latter most precisely. >> Strobes are designed to be seen many miles away, not several feet.<< (I) beg to differ, the factory in which (I) work employs strobes on all autonomous vehicles that operate there, and (I) believe it is an OSHA requirement. The distances are measured in feet, from where these vehicles operate and people work. The strobes make them virtually unmistakable. So strobes are not distance limited. >> Turning strobes on at Take-off clearance tells everyone who's the primary traffic on the live runway, and the tower that the clearance has been received and acted on.... and it does so without bothering anyone. If the clearance wasn't issued, it draws attention to the tower that danger is building and the take-off stopped if possible.<<< First (I)'ve heard of this connection, it was not taught in my instrument work. Please cite the appropriate FAR/AIM entry. (I) don't find the reasoning for this one as unfounded as the other claims, it actually makes some sense. If this is truly an ATC procedure (I) would like to read that in an official document. >>>"I'm sure the flames will start, and the name calling will follow, but I'd rather be an a*****e than an accident statistic." Safe, co-ordinated airport traffic is not necessarily about what you'd rather be. It's more concerning about what you'd rather not cause.<<< (I)'d love to see an accident report from the NTSB, or the FAA citing "inappropriate or illegal use of strobes" as either a cause or contributing factor of an accident. You will of course send me a link. >> Turning landing lights on descent through 10.000 feet is not about aircraft collisions, it's training bird flocks to avoid aircraft. Ferg Kyle Europa A064 914 Classic PS: I think the argument for rotating beacons has more merit.<< This one escapes me, pardon my misunderstanding. This is tongue in cheek? Or a serious entreaty on use of lights. You are entitled to your opinion, (I) respect your civil and creative discourse, but give me facts, and (I) will then make a considered change of mind. Craig Smith ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: <sam.marlow(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Full Auto
Yea, that's a great idea, but I can't until Summer, I hope to fly on the next few weeks! ---- marcausman wrote: > > Sam, Take a look at www.verticalpower.com . It will load shed and switch alternators (nearly) automatically, and meet your KISS principles for wiring. Won't be available until August though. > > Marc > > -------- > Marc Ausman > http://www.verticalpower.com > RV-7 IO-390 Flying > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p'520#96520 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 28v switches in a 12v system?
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com>
Alright smart guys... here's my dumb question of the day... Can I use LED illuminated switches designed for a 28 volt system in a 12 volt system? Why or why not? What would theoretically happen? I imagine that I'm fully displaying my lack of understanding in this area, but try to be gentle. Thanks! cj ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: 28v switches in a 12v system?
> > >Alright smart guys... here's my dumb question of the day... > >Can I use LED illuminated switches designed for a 28 volt system in a 12 >volt system? Why or why not? What would theoretically happen? I >imagine that I'm fully displaying my lack of understanding in this area, >but try to be gentle. Sure, they'll just be dim compared to the 14v illumination level. Better get one, hook it to a battery and see if the illumination level is still satisfactory to your needs. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 2007
Subject: Re: 28v switches in a 12v system?
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
It won't hurt anything, but they'll be dimmmer. LED's like most diodes have very non-linear current vs. voltage curves. Below the knee voltage the current is nearly zero. Once the voltage goes above gets above the knee, the current increases rapidly for small increases in voltage. A typicl LED knee voltage is about 1.5V. Changing from 28V to 12V will still keep the voltage applied to the LED above the knee voltage. For the purposes of your question, let's assume that for both 12V and 28V the voltage across the LED is 1.7V - a safe assumption, though not perfectly accurate. Let's also assume that the current through the LED at 28V was 20mA. That says the switch has a dropping resistor with a value given by R = V/I (28V - 1.7V) /20mA = 1315ohm. Next, let's calculate the current through the circuit when running with a 12V supply. I = V/R = (12V - 1.8V) / 1315ohm = 7mA When considering light output, the key is about power. Let's compare. P(28V) = 20mA * 1.7V = 34mW P(12V) = 7mA * 1.7V = 12mW So, I would expect that when running the 28V switches at 12V, the emitted light would be about one third. Maybe less, actually. At the lower current, the voltage drop across the diode is going to be a little less, so the power is going to be a little less too. At 1.5V the power is 10.5mW. Hope that helps.. Regards, Matt- > > > Alright smart guys... here's my dumb question of the day... > > Can I use LED illuminated switches designed for a 28 volt system in a 12 > volt system? Why or why not? What would theoretically happen? I > imagine that I'm fully displaying my lack of understanding in this area, > but try to be gentle. > > Thanks! > cj > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: P-mags
> > >Fair point Harry, > >I guess my conjecture was that one of the P mags could have been turned >off and the engine would have resumed normal operation...I just wish I'd >though of it when it happened to me...Of course my engine just ran hot, >i.e did not causean engine stoppage. > >Frank Since this is a failure mode unique to the e/p-mag products, perhaps words to guide the pilot in conducting an in-flight diagnosis and remedy should be added to the POH for any aircraft that carries one or more Emagair products. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Speedy11(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Subject: Re: P Mags
The initial info I have is that one P Mag advanced the timing too far resulting in power loss since the fuel/air mixture was ignited as in entered the cylinder. During a power loss, the pilot should cycle the ignition source to left/right/both to check for any improvement. The P Mags don't revert to the internal generator until electrical power is lost. Since electrical power was available, a P Mag would not revert to the backup mode, so that means when the faulty ignition is turned off, the engine would run normally again. Initial indications are the pilot did not cycle the ignitions through left/right. I will be interesting to see what Brad discovers. Stan Sutterfield Nope Dual P mags. They did NOT fail. I believe ONE of them went to very advanced timing. It has the effect of fouling up the timing completely because once the charge has been lit the second spark doesn't do anything. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: P Mags
>The initial info I have is that one P Mag advanced the timing too far >resulting in power loss since the fuel/air mixture was ignited as in >entered the cylinder. During a power loss, the pilot should cycle the >ignition source to left/right/both to check for any improvement. Makes sense . . . >The P Mags don't revert to the internal generator until electrical power >is lost. Since electrical power was available, a P Mag would not revert >to the backup mode, so that means when the faulty ignition is turned off, >the engine would run normally again. Hmmmm . . . whether or not ship's power is present, placing the P-Mag switch in the OFF position should shut it down. >Initial indications are the pilot did not cycle the ignitions through >left/right. >I will be interesting to see what Brad discovers. As will we all. Thanks! A client and I have discussed making a trip to Dallas/Ft.Worth area to visit both Plane Power and Emagair. I'm hoping to forge some good lines of communication with both of these companies with a goal of providing accurate, filtered-for- sensibility data should either of these folks encounter a pot-hole in the road. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: P Mags
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: "Stucklen, Frederic W UTPWR" <Fred.Stucklen(at)UTCPower.com>
Interesting problem... EMAG does have a service bulletin out on their latest software change. See http://emagair.com/Service%20Notes.htm This is for software updates that occurred between 12/06 and 2/07, and it involves how the engine timing is set while in the setup mode. I'm not sure if it would effect timing during normal engine operation, unless the power to the PMAGS was cycled in flight. Then it's perceivable that the timing could have been changed. Of course, this is all conjecture until all the facts are learned...... Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV 720 Hrs Two PMAGS Subject: Re: P Mags From: Speedy11(at)aol.com Date: Wed Feb 21 - 10:29 PM The initial info I have is that one P Mag advanced the timing too far resulting in power loss since the fuel/air mixture was ignited as in entered the cylinder. During a power loss, the pilot should cycle the ignition source to left/right/both to check for any improvement. The P Mags don't revert to the internal generator until electrical power is lost. Since electrical power was available, a P Mag would not revert to the backup mode, so that means when the faulty ignition is turned off, the engine would run normally again. Initial indications are the pilot did not cycle the ignitions through left/right. I will be interesting to see what Brad discovers. Stan Sutterfield ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: P-mags
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
Yes and in my head at least I intend to do this...I must say it did occur to me (briefly) but I was close to being overwhelmed as I was approaching a fog bank that I had to make an ILS approach through...It was 400ft ceiling so I knew we could make it but it takes some nerve to shut down a mag in that situation, bearing in mind I really had no idea what was happening at the time. Excuses excuses..:) With hindsight, yes just shut down a mag, does it get better? NO, re-enable and shutdown the other one. Cheers Frank -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 8:09 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: P-mags --> (Corvallis)" > > >Fair point Harry, > >I guess my conjecture was that one of the P mags could have been turned >off and the engine would have resumed normal operation...I just wish >I'd though of it when it happened to me...Of course my engine just ran >hot, i.e did not causean engine stoppage. > >Frank Since this is a failure mode unique to the e/p-mag products, perhaps words to guide the pilot in conducting an in-flight diagnosis and remedy should be added to the POH for any aircraft that carries one or more Emagair products. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: P Mags
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
Well he didn't discover anything wrong with mine...Darn those intermittent faults...:) Not quite sure I understand what your saying Stan.... When we say cycle the E/Pmags we mean to ground the P lead...I.e the mag that is turned off will stop firing. You mention removing the power to the Pmag but that will do nothing to stop the Pmag firing because as you say the backup alt will continue to make sparks. In order to fault find which P/emag has gone whacko you have to stop each one form working to see if the situation gets better...i.e ground the P lead. Frank ________________________________ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Speedy11(at)aol.com Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:27 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: P Mags The initial info I have is that one P Mag advanced the timing too far resulting in power loss since the fuel/air mixture was ignited as in entered the cylinder. During a power loss, the pilot should cycle the ignition source to left/right/both to check for any improvement. The P Mags don't revert to the internal generator until electrical power is lost. Since electrical power was available, a P Mag would not revert to the backup mode, so that means when the faulty ignition is turned off, the engine would run normally again. Initial indications are the pilot did not cycle the ignitions through left/right. I will be interesting to see what Brad discovers. Stan Sutterfield Nope Dual P mags. They did NOT fail. I believe ONE of them went to very advanced timing. It has the effect of fouling up the timing completely because once the charge has been lit the second spark doesn't do anything. ________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redir=http://www.aol.com" l ?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaol%2Ecom" target="_blank">AOL.com. ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: P Mags
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
Yes, OFF being the Plead is grounded. I certainly would not advocate trying to put the E/pmag in test mode in flight, too complex and to lengthy to think through. All you need to do is shut one unit down hard..I.e ground the P lead...If it gets better great, if not simply repeat in the other e/pmag. I have a small bone of contention with the most recent incident. The story goes the timing was so advanced the charge simply puffed thru the open exhaust valve, implying this is a relatively harmless event. In my reading of the effects of excessively advanced timing it seems this can be very destructive pre-ignition. Remember that I and our friend saw very high oil temps and CHT's. According to my reading of some of the maintenance articles published by engine shops, preignition is caused by the charge being ignited while the piston is still travelling UP the bore. The piston then has to compress the rapidly expanding (and hot) charge. Apparently the very high cylinder pressures can then force this hot charge past the rings and heat the oil directly. It also adds considerable stress to the bottom end bearings. As you can see from the above description this stuation can be very destructive. I didn't want folks to think this was a relatively harmless situation as it could (from what has been explained to me) destroy the engine in short order. I have yet to do an oil anaylisis which I hope will show no abnormal levels. Frank -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 5:19 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: P Mags --> >The initial info I have is that one P Mag advanced the timing too far >resulting in power loss since the fuel/air mixture was ignited as in >entered the cylinder. During a power loss, the pilot should cycle the >ignition source to left/right/both to check for any improvement. Makes sense . . . >The P Mags don't revert to the internal generator until electrical >power is lost. Since electrical power was available, a P Mag would not >revert to the backup mode, so that means when the faulty ignition is >turned off, the engine would run normally again. Hmmmm . . . whether or not ship's power is present, placing the P-Mag switch in the OFF position should shut it down. >Initial indications are the pilot did not cycle the ignitions through >left/right. >I will be interesting to see what Brad discovers. As will we all. Thanks! A client and I have discussed making a trip to Dallas/Ft.Worth area to visit both Plane Power and Emagair. I'm hoping to forge some good lines of communication with both of these companies with a goal of providing accurate, filtered-for- sensibility data should either of these folks encounter a pot-hole in the road. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David M." <ainut(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: Poor man's DAS
Date: Feb 22, 2007
John, my plans are similar to yours. Good luck with them. I've had a labjack U12 for many years now and may have found a better alternative. Go to some of the Freescale (Motorola) processor seminars where the price includes a test board. You're more into the design phase during implementation but you can keep costs in the under $10 range if you like. The downside is that even though CodeWarrior lite comes 'free' during the seminar,it is ATROCIOUS as a development environment. David M. ----- Original Message ----- From: John and Kim Lumkes To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 2:11 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Poor man's DAS I can personally vouch for the Labjack series. I have purchased and installed approximately 25 units in a teaching laboratory; no matter how many mistakes the student made, only one unit ever failed and the factory replaced it at no charge. I now use them again at my "new" position, and have my own personal one at home. I have used it to record data around the house (temp's, flow, etc.) and plan on installing one in the airplane with a mini-ITX PC to have my own data logger / EIS. The interface can easily be done in Labview, and having the "carpc" will also allow me to run PocketFMS on a split screen. This is definitely "experimental" and so all required gauges will also be "steam wired". There so many ICs now like thermocouple amplifiers with built in cold junctions, small economical pressure transducers, etc., that adding features are easier now than ever before for amateur electrical system integrators (like myself). Long term plans: adding solid state gyros (IC chips now have this ability) for AHRS and wing leveling / GPS based auto-pilot. John ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- 2/10/2007 9:15 PM ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Darwin N. Barrie" <ktlkrn(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: P-mags and the RV-7 Off Field Landing
Date: Feb 22, 2007
The gentleman this happened to is a good friend. I received the call that he has went down and all was safe. I also have dual Pmags on my plane and have had no problems at all in 185 hours. After he was home safe, I asked him if he had switched between Mags to see if he could isolate the problem. He did not and said he didn't think of it. I agree that the chance of both failing is very slim. Switching each mag off individually should be part of your check list if a problem arrises. I personally don't power them off on ground run but only do the L/R/Both checks. As Bob said don't paint Emagair with such a wide brush. These guys are responsive to our needs and have never denied or made any effort to hide an issue. I continue to have 100% confidence in this system. As with any aspect of flying, it is critical to know what to do when something goes wrong. Darwin N. Barrie Chandler AZ RV7 N717EE ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike" <mlas(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: P Mags
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Frank is right again! The point he makes is as a very important. What is the effect of an ignition system going off time? In this case and the one I was involved with the P-mag appeared to go more advanced. Pre-ignition in an aircraft engine is a very bad thing! So it seems that the change in potential timing advance could be a bigger problem then a strait forward failure. Going back to Kelly's position about mags vs. CDI and the like, I believe this would be one for the mag pro side of the page. Mind you, I run dual LSE Plasma III on one of my airplanes and love it. Mike Larkin -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 8:00 AM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: P Mags (Corvallis)" Yes, OFF being the Plead is grounded. I certainly would not advocate trying to put the E/pmag in test mode in flight, too complex and to lengthy to think through. All you need to do is shut one unit down hard..I.e ground the P lead...If it gets better great, if not simply repeat in the other e/pmag. I have a small bone of contention with the most recent incident. The story goes the timing was so advanced the charge simply puffed thru the open exhaust valve, implying this is a relatively harmless event. In my reading of the effects of excessively advanced timing it seems this can be very destructive pre-ignition. Remember that I and our friend saw very high oil temps and CHT's. According to my reading of some of the maintenance articles published by engine shops, preignition is caused by the charge being ignited while the piston is still travelling UP the bore. The piston then has to compress the rapidly expanding (and hot) charge. Apparently the very high cylinder pressures can then force this hot charge past the rings and heat the oil directly. It also adds considerable stress to the bottom end bearings. As you can see from the above description this stuation can be very destructive. I didn't want folks to think this was a relatively harmless situation as it could (from what has been explained to me) destroy the engine in short order. I have yet to do an oil anaylisis which I hope will show no abnormal levels. Frank -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 5:19 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: P Mags --> >The initial info I have is that one P Mag advanced the timing too far >resulting in power loss since the fuel/air mixture was ignited as in >entered the cylinder. During a power loss, the pilot should cycle the >ignition source to left/right/both to check for any improvement. Makes sense . . . >The P Mags don't revert to the internal generator until electrical >power is lost. Since electrical power was available, a P Mag would not >revert to the backup mode, so that means when the faulty ignition is >turned off, the engine would run normally again. Hmmmm . . . whether or not ship's power is present, placing the P-Mag switch in the OFF position should shut it down. >Initial indications are the pilot did not cycle the ignitions through >left/right. >I will be interesting to see what Brad discovers. As will we all. Thanks! A client and I have discussed making a trip to Dallas/Ft.Worth area to visit both Plane Power and Emagair. I'm hoping to forge some good lines of communication with both of these companies with a goal of providing accurate, filtered-for- sensibility data should either of these folks encounter a pot-hole in the road. Bob . . . -- 2/8/2007 -- 2/8/2007 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: Dave N6030X <N6030X(at)DaveMorris.com>
Subject: Re: P Mags
Yes, I believe the latest word we have from the engine experts is that the destructive effects we have always blamed on "detonation" are actually caused by "preignition", the latter being the one that punches holes in pistons and generally destroys the engine in short order. Whereas "detonation" actually occurs in a broad range from "mild" to "severe" with the milder end having no ill effects on the engine. For reference: http://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/194452-1.html Dave Morris At 08:59 AM 2/22/2007, you wrote: >(Corvallis)" > > >I have a small bone of contention with the most recent incident. The >story goes the timing was so advanced the charge simply puffed thru the >open exhaust valve, implying this is a relatively harmless event. In my >reading of the effects of excessively advanced timing it seems this can >be very destructive pre-ignition. Remember that I and our friend saw >very high oil temps and CHT's. According to my reading of some of the >maintenance articles published by engine shops, preignition is caused by >the charge being ignited while the piston is still travelling UP the >bore. The piston then has to compress the rapidly expanding (and hot) >charge. > >Apparently the very high cylinder pressures can then force this hot >charge past the rings and heat the oil directly. It also adds >considerable stress to the bottom end bearings. > >As you can see from the above description this stuation can be very >destructive. I didn't want folks to think this was a relatively harmless >situation as it could (from what has been explained to me) destroy the >engine in short order. > >I have yet to do an oil anaylisis which I hope will show no abnormal >levels. > >Frank ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Battery Charging
CH701 wrote: > >Speaking of battery charging, a recent issue of Sport Aviation had an >article entitled "Pulse De-sulfator for Lead-acid Batteries." It described >the process of resurrecting weak or sulfated batteries, and included some >theory and a schematic of a circuit to address the process. I'm just >wondering what this community has to offer on the subject... > >Here's a link to the authors site: >http://www.geocities.com/powertugs/eaa79parts.html > > I wanted to make a Frankenstein combination of this circuit and one that Jim Weir laid out in a recent Kitplanes article for using a solar cell to charge the battery. Basically, I would insert the desulfator in the circuit where the green "charged" LED indicator would be in Jim's circuit. The idea was that once the battery was fully charged, the desulfating would be enough to keep it topped off and completely healthy. After some investigation, I gave up. The deal breaker was that the desulfator uses upwards of a 60V pulse. There would be no way short of a disconnected master of isolating the pulse from the rest of the airplane (and electronics that may not care for 60V pulses). I decided that I didn't want 60V pulses around my 12V system at all. It's what I call "setting a trap for myself", which I have a habit of doing accidently, so I try to avoid doing it on purpose. -- ,|"|"|, Ernest Christley | ----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta Builder | o| d |o http://ernest.isa-geek.org | ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeff " <jeffrey_davidson(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: JS-AIR Strobe Power pack with Whelen fixtures
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Does anyone have experience using the JS-AIR XPAK 604-HR power pack with the Whelan A650 position/strobe light fixtures? The JS-AIR is considerably cheaper and uses less amperage that the Whelen power pack. Jeff Davidson ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Subject: Re: P Mags
Good Morning Mike My following comments do NOT mean I dislike magnetos, but if you have an impulse magneto and the spring on the impulse fails, the same problem can occur. That is one of the reasons that most good instructors teach that each magneto should be shut down independently any time an engine gets rough. There are other internal failure modes that will do the same thing. I have had the plastic gear strip and have had springs break. Switching the bad magneto off put the engine back to running normally. In some ways the very reliability of modern ignition systems has set us up to not recognize failures when they occur. Sixty years ago, magneto failures of that sort were common. One more good idea is to make a magneto check just before landing. That check will be more meaningful if it is done at a fairly high cruise power setting. Such a check is much more likely to catch a magneto, spark plug, or a harness, that is getting marginal than is the low power check we do just before takeoff. I would certainly not consider the failure mode of the E-Mag to be any worse than failure modes that are common with any magneto. Happy Skies, Old Bob AKA Bob Siegfried Ancient Aviator Stearman N3977A Brookeridge Air Park LL22 Downers Grove, IL 60516 630 985-8503 In a message dated 2/22/2007 9:50:39 A.M. Central Standard Time, mlas(at)cox.net writes: Frank is right again! The point he makes is as a very important. What is the effect of an ignition system going off time? In this case and the one I was involved with the P-mag appeared to go more advanced. Pre-ignition in an aircraft engine is a very bad thing! So it seems that the change in potential timing advance could be a bigger problem then a strait forward failure. Going back to Kelly's position about mags vs. CDI and the like, I believe this would be one for the mag pro side of the page. Mind you, I run dual LSE Plasma III on one of my airplanes and love it. Mike Larkin

**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: P Mags
>Interesting problem... EMAG does have a service bulletin out on their >latest software change. >See ><http://emagair.com/Service%20Notes.htm>http://emagair.com/Service%20Notes.htm >This is for software updates that occurred >between 12/06 and 2/07, and it involves how the engine timing is set while >in the setup mode. >I'm not sure if it would effect timing during normal engine operation, >unless the power to the >PMAGS was cycled in flight. Then it's perceivable that the timing could >have been changed. >Of course, this is all conjecture until all the facts are learned...... Drop them a note and ask. When in doubt, talk to the "horse" . . . Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: P Mags
Date: Feb 22, 2007
On 22 Feb 2007, at 12:01, BobsV35B(at)aol.com wrote: > I would certainly not consider the failure mode of the E-Mag to be > any worse than failure modes that are common with any magneto. > The failure mode that is described in the E-Mag service bulletin could affect both ignitions at once, if one had two E-Mag ignition systems installed. The failure mode occurs when the system incorrectly uses negative MP pulses to trigger the timing Quick-Set mode. The system is supposed to only sense positive pressure MP pulses, but due to a software problem, it will also sense negative pressure MP pulses. Both ignition systems likely see the same MP pulses, so both ignitions could have their timing changed. There are other protections that were intended to ensure that the Quick-Set mode could not be triggered in flight, but there are things the pilot may do in normal operation that could invalidate those protections. http://emagair.com/E-MAG%20Service%20Bulletin1.pdf I'm not aware of any magneto failure modes where one event could trigger both mags to fail at the same time. Kevin Horton RV-8 (Finishing Kit) Ottawa, Canada http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "JOHN TIPTON" <jmtipton(at)btopenworld.com>
Subject: Re: JS-AIR Strobe Power pack with Whelen fixtures
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Who, What ??? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff " <jeffrey_davidson(at)earthlink.net> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 4:54 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: JS-AIR Strobe Power pack with Whelen fixtures > > > Does anyone have experience using the JS-AIR XPAK 604-HR power pack with > the > Whelan A650 position/strobe light fixtures? The JS-AIR is considerably > cheaper and uses less amperage that the Whelen power pack. > Jeff Davidson > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: P Mags
> > >Yes, OFF being the Plead is grounded. > >I certainly would not advocate trying to put the E/pmag in test mode in >flight, too complex and to lengthy to think through. How does one do this? Perhaps I'm behind the curve on this but I thought that powering up a Emagair product with the p-lead grounded offered the mechanic a built in "buzzer" used to set the mechanical timing. Are there "test" functions beyond this capability? >All you need to do is shut one unit down hard..I.e ground the P >lead...If it gets better great, if not simply repeat in the other >e/pmag. > >I have a small bone of contention with the most recent incident. The >story goes the timing was so advanced the charge simply puffed thru the >open exhaust valve, implying this is a relatively harmless event. In my >reading of the effects of excessively advanced timing it seems this can >be very destructive pre-ignition. Remember that I and our friend saw >very high oil temps and CHT's. According to my reading of some of the >maintenance articles published by engine shops, preignition is caused by >the charge being ignited while the piston is still travelling UP the >bore. The piston then has to compress the rapidly expanding (and hot) >charge. If someone observes high temps . . . then this implies that the condition existed for some period of time. From onset of a problem to the time that any temperature becomes "high" has to be on the order of minutes. The image painted by these words suggests a sort of mental paralysis . . . the fact that the pilot chose an off-field landing further suggests that he didn't have a good understanding of how his equipment worked nor did he have a "plan" for dealing with things that have proven to be in-flight diagnosed and dealt with toward the goal of a happy ending. >Apparently the very high cylinder pressures can then force this hot >charge past the rings and heat the oil directly. It also adds >considerable stress to the bottom end bearings. Higher than those pressures/stresses that occur when timing is optimized for maximum realization of available energy from the fuel? >As you can see from the above description this stuation can be very >destructive. I didn't want folks to think this was a relatively harmless >situation as it could (from what has been explained to me) destroy the >engine in short order. I'm not sure that the combustion physics teamed with knowledge of the strengths of engine components and stresses encountered in NORMAL operations support the notion that the engine is mechanically at risk for the hypothesized failure. George Braley - are you watching this thread? Can you help with a dissertation on the underlying simple-ideas? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Subject: Re: P Mags
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
Hello Bob, I have read/been-told that cycling the mag switch while at high power settings might cause the engine to backfire if one mag is dead and the other is turned back on, and that such a backfire might damage components of the intake and exhaust systems.. What do you think about this? Matt- > > > Good Morning Mike > > My following comments do NOT mean I dislike magnetos, but if you have an > impulse magneto and the spring on the impulse fails, the same problem can > occur. > > That is one of the reasons that most good instructors teach that each > magneto should be shut down independently any time an engine gets rough. > There are > other internal failure modes that will do the same thing. > > I have had the plastic gear strip and have had springs break. > > Switching the bad magneto off put the engine back to running normally. > > In some ways the very reliability of modern ignition systems has set us > up > to not recognize failures when they occur. Sixty years ago, magneto > failures > of that sort were common. > > One more good idea is to make a magneto check just before landing. That > check will be more meaningful if it is done at a fairly high cruise power > setting. Such a check is much more likely to catch a magneto, spark plug, > or a > harness, that is getting marginal than is the low power check we do just > before > takeoff. > > I would certainly not consider the failure mode of the E-Mag to be any > worse > than failure modes that are common with any magneto. > > Happy Skies, > > Old Bob > AKA > Bob Siegfried > Ancient Aviator > Stearman N3977A > Brookeridge Air Park LL22 > Downers Grove, IL 60516 > 630 985-8503 > > > In a message dated 2/22/2007 9:50:39 A.M. Central Standard Time, > mlas(at)cox.net writes: > > Frank is right again! The point he makes is as a very important. What > is the effect of an ignition system going off time? In this case and > the one I was involved with the P-mag appeared to go more advanced. > Pre-ignition in an aircraft engine is a very bad thing! So it seems > that the change in potential timing advance could be a bigger problem > then a strait forward failure. Going back to Kelly's position about > mags vs. CDI and the like, I believe this would be one for the mag pro > side of the page. Mind you, I run dual LSE Plasma III on one of my > airplanes and love it. > > Mike Larkin > > >

**************************************
AOL now offers free > email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at > http://www.aol.com. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Subject: Re: P Mags
Good Afternoon Matt, The procedure, as taught, is to be very sure you DO NOT turn on the remaining good magneto if the engine does quit. The drill then is to put the mixture in full lean, count to ten, turn on the magneto and slowly richen the mixture until the engine starts. I have never had it happen that way and I am sure it will take a lot of discipline to wait those few seconds for the engine to clear itself before the magneto is placed back in service! It does help if the operator has experience deliberately running fuel tanks dry. That procedure is another one that is rarely taught these days, but having run a tank dry often does instill confidence in the restart procedure. Happy Skies, Old Bob AKA Bob Siegfried Ancient Aviator Stearman N3977A Brookeridge Air Park LL22 Downers Grove, IL 60516 630 985-8503 In a message dated 2/22/2007 12:16:43 P.M. Central Standard Time, mprather(at)spro.net writes: I have read/been-told that cycling the mag switch while at high power settings might cause the engine to backfire if one mag is dead and the other is turned back on, and that such a backfire might damage components of the intake and exhaust systems.. What do you think about this? Matt-

**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Subject: Re: P Mags
Good Afternoon Ken, Well, as long as we are discussing potential multiple failures or single point failures, what happens when the drive gear on a dual magneto fails? In any case, I meant to be responding to the potential of getting a magneto out of time as happened on the flight being discussed. The Service Bulletin was not what I had in mind, but anything made by man is subject to some sort of failure mode. Happy Skies, Old Bob AKA Bob Siegfried Ancient Aviator Stearman N3977A Brookeridge Air Park LL22 Downers Grove, IL 60516 630 985-8503 In a message dated 2/22/2007 12:05:56 P.M. Central Standard Time, khorton01(at)rogers.com writes: On 22 Feb 2007, at 12:01, _BobsV35B(at)aol.com_ (mailto:BobsV35B(at)aol.com) wrote: I would certainly not consider the failure mode of the E-Mag to be any worse than failure modes that are common with any magneto. The failure mode that is described in the E-Mag service bulletin could affect both ignitions at once, if one had two E-Mag ignition systems installed. The failure mode occurs when the system incorrectly uses negative MP pulses to trigger the timing Quick-Set mode. The system is supposed to only sense positive pressure MP pulses, but due to a software problem, it will also sense negative pressure MP pulses. Both ignition systems likely see the same MP pulses, so both ignitions could have their timing changed. There are other protections that were intended to ensure that the Quick-Set mode could not be triggered in flight, but there are things the pilot may do in normal operation that could invalidate those protections. _http://emagair.com/E-MAG%20Service%20Bulletin1.pdf_ (http://emagair.com/E-MAG%20Service%20Bulletin1.pdf) I'm not aware of any magneto failure modes where one event could trigger both mags to fail at the same time. Kevin Horton RV-8 (Finishing Kit) Ottawa, Canada _http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8_ (http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8)

**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: P Mags
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
How does one do this? Perhaps I'm behind the curve on this but I thought that powering up a Emagair product with the p-lead grounded offered the mechanic a built in "buzzer" used to set the mechanical timing. Are there "test" functions beyond this capability? Nope I think you got it right there Bob...In theory you could do this in flight which is what I thought a previous lister was prosing. >All you need to do is shut one unit down hard..I.e ground the P >lead...If it gets better great, if not simply repeat in the other >e/pmag. > >I have a small bone of contention with the most recent incident. The >story goes the timing was so advanced the charge simply puffed thru the >open exhaust valve, implying this is a relatively harmless event. In my >reading of the effects of excessively advanced timing it seems this can >be very destructive pre-ignition. Remember that I and our friend saw >very high oil temps and CHT's. According to my reading of some of the >maintenance articles published by engine shops, preignition is caused >by the charge being ignited while the piston is still travelling UP the >bore. The piston then has to compress the rapidly expanding (and hot) >charge. If someone observes high temps . . . then this implies that the condition existed for some period of time. From onset of a problem to the time that any temperature becomes "high" has to be on the order of minutes. Depends when you Notice the problem...Yes it is minutes, but you also have to connect high CHT's to a timing problem...I didn't The image painted by these words suggests a sort of mental paralysis . . . the fact that the pilot chose an off-field landing further suggests that he didn't have a good understanding of how his equipment worked nor did he have a "plan" for dealing with things that have proven to be in-flight diagnosed and dealt with toward the goal of a happy ending. Mental paralysis?.....I'm a MECHANICAL engineer...we don't have those...:). As I said you had to connect high temps to wobbly timing. In my case the engine was running perfectly, just showing whacko temps...As all the temps were measured by the Dynon EMS I was a first almost convinced it was a Dynon grounding issue, I.e not a problem at all. >Apparently the very high cylinder pressures can then force this hot >charge past the rings and heat the oil directly. It also adds >considerable stress to the bottom end bearings. Higher than those pressures/stresses that occur when timing is optimized for maximum realization of available energy from the fuel? No but the piston is already on the way down...i.e the peak pressure may be the same but it is reducing rapidly...We know that blowby always happens, but in a pre-igniton situation it happens for much longer, therefore more blowby and direct heating of the oil. At least this is how it was explained to me...I am not an expert on preignition by any streatch. >As you can see from the above description this stuation can be very >destructive. I didn't want folks to think this was a relatively >harmless situation as it could (from what has been explained to me) >destroy the engine in short order. I'm not sure that the combustion physics teamed with knowledge of the strengths of engine components and stresses encountered in NORMAL operations support the notion that the engine is mechanically at risk for the hypothesized failure. George Braley - are you watching this thread? Can you help with a dissertation on the underlying simple-ideas? Yes inquiring mind most definatly want to know...:) Bob . . . _Frank ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: mags / EIS debate
Interesting coincidence, posted on another list yesterday... -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [ThorpList] Rough Engine Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 22:05:09 -0600 From: <hkaribian(at)yahoo.com> My rough engine turned out to be mag coils. Started up and ran fine when cold but after flying a while my electronic tach started jumping all over the gage, and I mistakenly assumed instrument problems, until the engine quit and put me down on a dirt road in the woods. --

________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Subject: Re: P Mags
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
Aha... That clears it up for me. Thanks for the description of the correct procedure. And, yes it would take some discipline to keep from just turning the mag back on... Regards, Matt- > > > Good Afternoon Matt, > > The procedure, as taught, is to be very sure you DO NOT turn on the > remaining good magneto if the engine does quit. The drill then is to put > the mixture > in full lean, count to ten, turn on the magneto and slowly richen the > mixture > until the engine starts. > > I have never had it happen that way and I am sure it will take a lot of > discipline to wait those few seconds for the engine to clear itself before > the > magneto is placed back in service! > > It does help if the operator has experience deliberately running fuel > tanks > dry. > > That procedure is another one that is rarely taught these days, but having > run a tank dry often does instill confidence in the restart procedure. > > Happy Skies, > > Old Bob > AKA > Bob Siegfried > Ancient Aviator > Stearman N3977A > Brookeridge Air Park LL22 > Downers Grove, IL 60516 > 630 985-8503 > > > In a message dated 2/22/2007 12:16:43 P.M. Central Standard Time, > mprather(at)spro.net writes: > > I have read/been-told that cycling the mag switch while at high power > settings might cause the engine to backfire if one mag is dead and the > other is turned back on, and that such a backfire might damage components > of the intake and exhaust systems.. What do you think about this? > > > Matt- > > >

**************************************
AOL now offers free > email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at > http://www.aol.com. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: P Mags
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Bob, I share your concern with dual drive magnetos, and would not want to own an engine with such a beast. Kevin Horton On 22 Feb 2007, at 13:58, BobsV35B(at)aol.com wrote: > Good Afternoon Ken, > > Well, as long as we are discussing potential multiple failures or > single point failures, what happens when the drive gear on a dual > magneto fails? > > In any case, I meant to be responding to the potential of getting a > magneto out of time as happened on the flight being discussed. > > The Service Bulletin was not what I had in mind, but anything made > by man is subject to some sort of failure mode. > > Happy Skies, > > Old Bob > AKA > Bob Siegfried > Ancient Aviator > Stearman N3977A > Brookeridge Air Park LL22 > Downers Grove, IL 60516 > 630 985-8503 > > In a message dated 2/22/2007 12:05:56 P.M. Central Standard Time, > khorton01(at)rogers.com writes: > On 22 Feb 2007, at 12:01, BobsV35B(at)aol.com wrote: > >> I would certainly not consider the failure mode of the E-Mag to be >> any worse than failure modes that are common with any magneto. >> > > The failure mode that is described in the E-Mag service bulletin > could affect both ignitions at once, if one had two E-Mag ignition > systems installed. The failure mode occurs when the system > incorrectly uses negative MP pulses to trigger the timing Quick-Set > mode. The system is supposed to only sense positive pressure MP > pulses, but due to a software problem, it will also sense negative > pressure MP pulses. Both ignition systems likely see the same MP > pulses, so both ignitions could have their timing changed. There > are other protections that were intended to ensure that the Quick- > Set mode could not be triggered in flight, but there are things the > pilot may do in normal operation that could invalidate those > protections. > > http://emagair.com/E-MAG%20Service%20Bulletin1.pdf > > I'm not aware of any magneto failure modes where one event could > trigger both mags to fail at the same time. > > Kevin Horton > RV-8 (Finishing Kit) > Ottawa, Canada > http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Subject: P Mags
From: James H Nelson <rv9jim(at)juno.com>
Stan, Brad has put out a service bulletin on the "E-Mags" to check for the possibility of a "vacuum" caused timing change. These units were put out in the last 90 days or so. His bulletin says to check the units by trying to change the timing by sucking on the vac hoses rather than the "pressure" method. I had my 'mags in for the latest software change so they could have had the "wrong" software installed. I checked them out last Sunday and they will not change the timing function no matter how hoard I suck on the vac hose. I'm not sure this may have caused the problem but worth the check out and having the latest software installed. Jim ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Subject: Re: P Mags
Good Afternoon Frank, Actually, if the timing is advanced, the pressures and temperature can, and probably will, be much higher than the pressures and temperatures developed when the fire is lit at the proper point. Any time the peak pressure point gets closer to TDC than ten or eleven degrees, the crank shaft has a LOT more resistance and the pressure can be as high as twelve hundred to fifteen hundred pounds whereas if the ignition event is properly timed the same engine may never see a pressure above eight hundred pounds. It can make a VERY big difference. Happy Skies, Old Bob AKA Bob Siegfried Ancient Aviator Stearman N3977A Brookeridge Air Park LL22 Downers Grove, IL 60516 630 985-8503 In a message dated 2/22/2007 1:15:55 P.M. Central Standard Time, frank.hinde(at)hp.com writes: Higher than those pressures/stresses that occur when timing is optimized for maximum realization of available energy from the fuel?

**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com>
Subject: Re: P Mags
Jim... >>they will not change the timing function no matter how hoard I suck on the vac hose.<< Did you try TWO quick short "sucks", so to speak? 0.5 psi or greater? On reading the email I received from them, I interpreted it as it takes two short pulses to change the setting. Mine aren't installed yet, or I'd try it. Harley ------------------------------------------------------------------------ James H Nelson wrote: > > Stan, > Brad has put out a service bulletin on the "E-Mags" to check for > the possibility of a "vacuum" caused timing change. These units were put > out in the last 90 days or so. His bulletin says to check the units by > trying to change the timing by sucking on the vac hoses rather than the > "pressure" method. I had my 'mags in for the latest software change so > they could have had the "wrong" software installed. I checked them out > last Sunday and they will not change the timing function no matter how > hoard I suck on the vac hose. I'm not sure this may have caused the > problem but worth the check out and having the latest software installed. > > Jim > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: P Mags
> >Hello Bob, > >I have read/been-told that cycling the mag switch while at high power >settings might cause the engine to backfire if one mag is dead and the >other is turned back on, and that such a backfire might damage components >of the intake and exhaust systems.. What do you think about this? That is a risk. Magenetos will do it too but is it a "backfire"??? When the engine is totally deprived of ignition it continues to pull stoichiometric mixture through the plumbing. Then when any source of ignition returns, there's a volume full of unburned mixture that includes the entire exhaust system and any cylinder with an exhaust valve open at the time this volume gets lit off. I've experienced this on the ground when doing mag checks where I inadvertently turned off both mags during a run-up and then got them back on while the engine was still turning. Folks have done this in their cars too and I've heard of mufflers being split open from the resulting explosion. Hmmm . . . guess we need to agree on the word "backfire" which I use as ignition on the intake side of the cylinders. Does this make the exhaust side explosion a "foreward fire"????? In the common public vernacular, a loud report from a vehicle is referred to as "backfire" . . . I suppose because it blows flames out the back of the car . . . Oh well, I THINK we know what we're talking about!!!! Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: P Mags
>Good Afternoon Matt, > >The procedure, as taught, is to be very sure you DO NOT turn on the >remaining good magneto if the engine does quit. The drill then is to put >the mixture in full lean, count to ten, turn on the magneto and slowly >richen the mixture until the engine starts. > >I have never had it happen that way and I am sure it will take a lot of >discipline to wait those few seconds for the engine to clear itself before >the magneto is placed back in service! > >It does help if the operator has experience deliberately running fuel >tanks dry. > >That procedure is another one that is rarely taught these days, but having >run a tank dry often does instill confidence in the restart procedure. Hadn't heard that one. Makes a lot of sense. Something to check my instructor on at the next checkride! Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Subject: Re: P
Mags
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
Agreed.. "backfire" is an imprecise term. I used it to mean "any explosive combustion event which happens at a time or location where it's not intended to." I hope we don't need to invent new terminology to cover the specific case of unintended explosive combustion in the exhaust system. Fortunately, I think "Old Bob" understood what I was getting at... Regards, Matt > > > >> >> >>Hello Bob, >> >>I have read/been-told that cycling the mag switch while at high power >>settings might cause the engine to backfire if one mag is dead and the >>other is turned back on, and that such a backfire might damage components >>of the intake and exhaust systems.. What do you think about this? > > That is a risk. Magenetos will do it too but is it a > "backfire"??? When the engine is totally deprived of > ignition it continues to pull stoichiometric mixture through > the plumbing. Then when any source of ignition returns, there's > a volume full of unburned mixture that includes the entire > exhaust system and any cylinder with an exhaust valve open > at the time this volume gets lit off. > > I've experienced this on the ground when doing mag checks > where I inadvertently turned off both mags during a run-up > and then got them back on while the engine was still > turning. Folks have done this in their cars too and I've > heard of mufflers being split open from the resulting > explosion. Hmmm . . . guess we need to agree on the word > "backfire" which I use as ignition on the intake side of the > cylinders. Does this make the exhaust side explosion a > "foreward fire"????? > > In the common public vernacular, a loud report from a > vehicle is referred to as "backfire" . . . I suppose because > it blows flames out the back of the car . . . > > Oh well, I THINK we know what we're talking about!!!! > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeff " <jeffrey_davidson(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: JS-AIR Strobe Power pack with Whelen fixtures
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Does anyone have experience using the JS-AIR XPAK 604-HR power pack with the Whelan A650 position/strobe light fixtures? The JS-AIR is considerably cheaper and uses less amperage that the Whelen power pack. Jeff Davidson ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: Neil Clayton <harvey4(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: JS-AIR Strobe Power pack with Whelen fixtures
Jeff...I have this set up; Whelen ($180!!!) strobe heads driven by the Nova XPAC 604 power supply. I'll be starting it up for the first time in a few days and I'll let ya know what happens. Nova (http://www.strobe.com) said it would work way back when I bought it. Neil At 06:12 PM 2/22/2007, you wrote: > > >Does anyone have experience using the JS-AIR XPAK 604-HR power pack with the >Whelan A650 position/strobe light fixtures? The JS-AIR is considerably >cheaper and uses less amperage that the Whelen power pack. >Jeff Davidson > > >-- >2/22/2007 11:55 AM ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Deems Herring <dsleepy47(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: P Mags
Date: Feb 22, 2007
In FAA terms a backfire would be fire in the intake which would go "back" t hrough the carb or throttle body. "afterfiring" or "afterburning" is the te rm for burning in the exhaust. From a mechanics standpoint it would be nice to keep them straight because the items to check for damage after a backfi re are different than an afterfire. Deems > Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:25:52 -0600> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.co m> From: nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Subject: Re: Magneto failure in general, Was: A eroElectric-List: Re: P Mags> > I've experienced this on the ground when do ing mag checks> where I inadvertently turned off both mags during a run-up> and then got them back on while the engine was still> turning. Folks have done this in their cars too and I've> heard of mufflers being split open fr om the resulting> explosion. Hmmm . . . guess we need to agree on the word> "backfire" which I use as ignition on the intake side of the> cylinders. D oes this make the exhaust side explosion a> "foreward fire"?????> > In the common public vernacular, a loud report from a> vehicle is referred to as " backfire" . . . I suppose because> it blows flames out the back of the car . . .> > Oh well, I THINK we know what we're talking about!!!!> > Bob . . . =================> > > _________________________________________________________________ Explore the seven wonders of the world BRE ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: JS-AIR Strobe Power pack with Whelen fixtures
Date: Feb 22, 2007
From: robertbuls(at)aol.com
I don't have them installed on my Velocity yet but do have them to install. I have seen them in operation on another Velocity. They are at least as bright (I think brighter than) as a standard Whelen strobe/nav light and give the option of strobe pattern; ie single flash, double or triple flash, possibly more. Plus, the lights are enclosed under an aerodynamic clear lens. Way cooler looking than that clunky Whelen clump. Bob -----Original Message----- From: jeffrey_davidson(at)earthlink.net To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 5:12 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: JS-AIR Strobe Power pack with Whelen fixtures Does anyone have experience using the JS-AIR XPAK 604-HR power pack with the Whelan A650 position/strobe light fixtures? The JS-AIR is considerably cheaper and uses less amperage that the Whelen power pack. Jeff Davidson ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Subject: Re: P
Mags
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
That's good info. Thanks for passing it along.. I would have guessed that afterburning refers to a desirable method of increasing thrust on turbojets, but that's what I get for guessing I suppose. Looking around on the google, afterburning appears to be a feature whereas afterfiring appears to be a fault. I probably haven't looked enough yet... Regards, Matt- > In FAA terms a backfire would be fire in the intake which would go "back" > through the carb or throttle body. "afterfiring" or "afterburning" is the > term for burning in the exhaust. From a mechanics standpoint it would be > nice to keep them straight because the items to check for damage after a > backfire are different than an afterfire. > > Deems > > >> Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:25:52 -0600> To: >> aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com> From: nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Subject: Re: >> Magneto failure in general, Was: AeroElectric-List: Re: P Mags> > I've >> experienced this on the ground when doing mag checks> where I >> inadvertently turned off both mags during a run-up> and then got them >> back on while the engine was still> turning. Folks have done this in >> their cars too and I've> heard of mufflers being split open from the >> resulting> explosion. Hmmm . . . guess we need to agree on the word> >> "backfire" which I use as ignition on the intake side of the> cylinders. >> Does this make the exhaust side explosion a> "foreward fire"?????> > In >> the common public vernacular, a loud report from a> vehicle is referred >> to as "backfire" . . . I suppose because> it blows flames out the back >> of the car . . .> > Oh well, I THINK we know what we're talking >> about!!!!> > Bob . . .=================> > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Explore the seven wonders of the world > BRE ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Deems Herring <dsleepy47(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: P
Mags
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Check chapter 10 of AC65-12A for descriptions of the terms and causes. Yes an Afterburner is for dumping fuel into the exhaust of jet engines for incr eased thrust. The term afterburn in reference to piston engines probably wa s in use before jet engines. Deems > Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 17:38:19 -0700> Subject: RE: Magneto failure in ge neral, Was: AeroElectric-List: Re: P Mags> From: mprather(at)spro.net> To: aer att Prather" > > That's good info. Thanks for passing it along.. I would have guessed> that afterburning refers to a desirable meth od of increasing thrust on> turbojets, but that's what I get for guessing I suppose. Looking around> on the google, afterburning appears to be a featu re whereas afterfiring> appears to be a fault. I probably haven't looked en ough yet...> > > Regards,> > Matt-> _________________________________________________________________ Discover the new Windows Vista E ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Michel Creek" <mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: P
Mags
Date: Feb 22, 2007
I'm installing the GS-Air LED position lights and strobes powered by Aero Flash power supplies mounted at the wing tip. I've powered up the position lights and strobes and I'm very happy with the light output of each and the low current draw of the LED's. I went with the single flash PS to keep current draw as low as possible for the strobes. Each wing tip strobe uses 1.5 amps and the LED's are like 0.5 amps. Mike C. -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt Prather Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 4:38 PM Subject: RE: Magneto failure in general, Was: AeroElectric-List: Re: P Mags That's good info. Thanks for passing it along.. I would have guessed that afterburning refers to a desirable method of increasing thrust on turbojets, but that's what I get for guessing I suppose. Looking around on the google, afterburning appears to be a feature whereas afterfiring appears to be a fault. I probably haven't looked enough yet... Regards, Matt- > In FAA terms a backfire would be fire in the intake which would go "back" > through the carb or throttle body. "afterfiring" or "afterburning" is the > term for burning in the exhaust. From a mechanics standpoint it would be > nice to keep them straight because the items to check for damage after a > backfire are different than an afterfire. > > Deems > > >> Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:25:52 -0600> To: >> aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com> From: nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Subject: Re: >> Magneto failure in general, Was: AeroElectric-List: Re: P Mags> > I've >> experienced this on the ground when doing mag checks> where I >> inadvertently turned off both mags during a run-up> and then got them >> back on while the engine was still> turning. Folks have done this in >> their cars too and I've> heard of mufflers being split open from the >> resulting> explosion. Hmmm . . . guess we need to agree on the word> >> "backfire" which I use as ignition on the intake side of the> cylinders. >> Does this make the exhaust side explosion a> "foreward fire"?????> > In >> the common public vernacular, a loud report from a> vehicle is referred >> to as "backfire" . . . I suppose because> it blows flames out the back >> of the car . . .> > Oh well, I THINK we know what we're talking >> about!!!!> > Bob . . .=================> > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Explore the seven wonders of the world > BRE ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Schlatterer" <billschlatterer(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: P-mags and the RV-7 Off Field Landing
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Darwin, just curious, if he had powered it down but not grounded it, would the timing from the self power generator be the same or different? Since there are really three modes, 1) powered 2) unpowered and 3) grounded and really off,....... would the timing revert to some fixed mechanical advance in the power off but not grounded mode? I have one P-Mag and a Slick but not yet flying so I am curious? Thanks Bill S _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Darwin N. Barrie Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 9:25 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: P-mags and the RV-7 Off Field Landing The gentleman this happened to is a good friend. I received the call that he has went down and all was safe. I also have dual Pmags on my plane and have had no problems at all in 185 hours. After he was home safe, I asked him if he had switched between Mags to see if he could isolate the problem. He did not and said he didn't think of it. I agree that the chance of both failing is very slim. Switching each mag off individually should be part of your check list if a problem arrises. I personally don't power them off on ground run but only do the L/R/Both checks. As Bob said don't paint Emagair with such a wide brush. These guys are responsive to our needs and have never denied or made any effort to hide an issue. I continue to have 100% confidence in this system. As with any aspect of flying, it is critical to know what to do when something goes wrong. Darwin N. Barrie Chandler AZ RV7 N717EE ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dr. Andrew Elliott" <a.s.elliott(at)cox.net>
Subject: Connecting to heated pitot tube
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Recently picked up a used heated pitot tube for the plane. Was wondering if anyone has a good suggestion for how to connect the power wires to it? There are two steel pins with a diameter of ~.072". Of course, these can get pretty hot in operation. I think new ones come with some kind of bakelite connector. Thanks, Andy Elliott, Mesa, AZ N601GE (reserved) 601XL/TD/QB, Corvair, building... ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 2007
Subject: P Mags
From: James H Nelson <rv9jim(at)juno.com>
Hi Harley, I'll give it a try tomorrow. I'm adding a 6 position fuse holder as I ran out of fuses to do things... Checking out the panel for things to work so I can close it up soon. Jim Nelson RV9-A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Morgan" <zk-vii(at)rvproject.gen.nz>
Subject: RE: Battery Charging - CTEK XS3600
Date: Feb 23, 2007
Hi Bob, Something that has been provided as an option over here in NZ is this brand, sounds like it is at the 'upper' end of the segment, or at least that is where it is being pitched :-) http://www.ctek.com/EN/home.asp - "Multi XS3600, max 3.6 amp, ideally matched to 1.2 to 120 Ah batteries" Have you seen these in the USA at all, another one for the testing pile perhaps. Regards, Carl -- ZK-VII - RV 7A QB - finishing? - New Zealand http://www.rvproject.gen.nz/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2007
From: David Abrahamson <dave(at)abrahamson.net>
Subject: Re: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags
I am running a Slick mag (4371) and a Lightspeed Plasma II+ electronic ignition on my TMXO-360. Haven't started the engine yet, so I don't know what a Lightspeed failure and good mag, or mag failure and good Lightspeed, would sound like/do to the RPM, CHT, and EGT. Nevertheless, here's my thinking. I am pretty sure that the second case (mag failure) would be undetectable in flight, or hard to detect since the Lightspeed does most of the ignition work. Should I get a MP drop, EGT rise, and roughness in flight, however, I'd probably be justified in first suspecting a Lightspeed failure. Emergency action would be to turn the Lightspeed switch to OFF to see if there was any change in the fault conditions. If not, assume I'm on my one mag and divert to an airport with services. However, if the engine ran rougher, turn the Lightspeed switch back on, enrich, carb heat on, see what happens, divert. Lastly, if engine quits, implying mag failure, pull mixture to idle cut-off, wait 10 seconds, turn Lightspeed back on, slowly move mixture to full rich (maintain glide slope, declare emergency, locate rabbit's foot), and hope for the engine to come back on. Does that sound right? Thanks. David ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2007
Subject: Re: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
It's possible that a mag can fail in such a way that it's timing is dramatically off. In such a case, it would make sense to turn off the magneto and fly just on your LSE. I don't see that in your procedure. Regards, Matt- > > > I am running a Slick mag (4371) and a Lightspeed Plasma II+ > electronic ignition on my TMXO-360. Haven't started the engine yet, > so I don't know what a Lightspeed failure and good mag, or mag > failure and good Lightspeed, would sound like/do to the RPM, CHT, and > EGT. Nevertheless, here's my thinking. I am pretty sure that the > second case (mag failure) would be undetectable in flight, or hard to > detect since the Lightspeed does most of the ignition work. Should I > get a MP drop, EGT rise, and roughness in flight, however, I'd > probably be justified in first suspecting a Lightspeed > failure. Emergency action would be to turn the Lightspeed switch to > OFF to see if there was any change in the fault conditions. If not, > assume I'm on my one mag and divert to an airport with > services. However, if the engine ran rougher, turn the Lightspeed > switch back on, enrich, carb heat on, see what happens, > divert. Lastly, if engine quits, implying mag failure, pull mixture > to idle cut-off, wait 10 seconds, turn Lightspeed back on, slowly > move mixture to full rich (maintain glide slope, declare emergency, > locate rabbit's foot), and hope for the engine to come back on. > Does that sound right? Thanks. David > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Contactor arc suppression diodes?
>Comments/Questions: I am building an RV-6A I bought my master cantacter >and starter relay from VANS Aircraft. I have read several of the posts on >your website and I am confused about the diode that should go across the >contactor coils, > >I want to use plan Z13-8, I have two P-Mags. > >1 Should a resister be in series with the diode? No . . . >2 If so what value and wattage ? N/a >3 What is the best diode to use? Anything you can find is electrically adequate. My personal favorites are the 1N5400 series devices. While electrically super-robust to the task, you can get them locally at Radio Shack. See http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId 62577&cp These are two in a package for $1.39 They are pictured in the various applications shown here: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/s701-1.jpg http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/s701-2.jpg I favor them for their mechanical robustness and ease of installation compared to the smaller devices. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one wishes to be "world class" at ) ( anything, what ever you do must be ) ( exercised EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 23, 2007
Subject: Re: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags
Good Morning David, Sounds Good To Me! However, I am not familiar as to what Lightspeed uses to adjust it's timing so it is difficult for me to evaluate your scenario. Does the Lightspeed unit adjust it's timing based on reading some parameter of the actual combustion event or does it adjust based on mapped parameters? I am sure you are aware that if you have fixed timing for both ignition systems and one fails, there will be a substantial increase in EGT. Given the existence of a good all cylinder EGT system, it is easy to find a faulty spark plug or bad harness lead by observing the action of the EGTs. If all is well, the EGTs on each cylinder will rise about the same amount when one ignition system is not firing.. If one plug or harness lead is bad, the EGT will stay nice and steady when the good one is lighting the fire and drop precipitously when the bad plug should be firing the cylinder. If you could educate me on the operation of the Lightspeed, I would certainly appreciate the education! Happy Skies, Old Bob AKA Bob Siegfried Ancient Aviator Stearman N3977A Brookeridge Air Park LL22 Downers Grove, IL 60516 630 985-8503 In a message dated 2/23/2007 6:31:25 A.M. Central Standard Time, dave(at)abrahamson.net writes: I am running a Slick mag (4371) and a Lightspeed Plasma II+ electronic ignition on my TMXO-360. Haven't started the engine yet, so I don't know what a Lightspeed failure and good mag, or mag failure and good Lightspeed, would sound like/do to the RPM, CHT, and EGT. Nevertheless, here's my thinking. I am pretty sure that the second case (mag failure) would be undetectable in flight, or hard to detect since the Lightspeed does most of the ignition work. Should I get a MP drop, EGT rise, and roughness in flight, however, I'd probably be justified in first suspecting a Lightspeed failure. Emergency action would be to turn the Lightspeed switch to OFF to see if there was any change in the fault conditions. If not, assume I'm on my one mag and divert to an airport with services. However, if the engine ran rougher, turn the Lightspeed switch back on, enrich, carb heat on, see what happens, divert. Lastly, if engine quits, implying mag failure, pull mixture to idle cut-off, wait 10 seconds, turn Lightspeed back on, slowly move mixture to full rich (maintain glide slope, declare emergency, locate rabbit's foot), and hope for the engine to come back on. Does that sound right? Thanks. David

**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re:P-mags and the RV-7 Off Field Landing
Date: Feb 23, 2007
From: "Stucklen, Frederic W UTPWR" <Fred.Stucklen(at)UTCPower.com>
Bob, I think there is confusion between "putting the PMAG into the Test/Setup mode" and cycling the "P" lead to the OFF mode. Both the PMAG and EMAG are put into the test/setup mode ONLY by cycling the POWER off, then, with the "P" lead grounded, cycling the power back ON again. Once the "P" lead ground is removed,with the power ON, the test/Setup mode is exited, and cannot be re-entered unless the above power/P lead sequence has been repeated. If the "P" lead is grounded while the engine is running, it will always disable the ignition. Switching it ON again, while the engine is running, (removing the ground) will cause the ignition to resume normal operation. Unless there was some other failure in BOTH PMAGs at the same time (highly unlikely), the only other way to possibly effect PMAG timing in flight, is to enter into the Test/Setup Mode with the serviced bulletined software installed (and even this fact has not been totally proven). Because of the fact that PMAGs generate their own power while the engine is running (at an RPM at or above the minimum RPM for the PMAG to generate self power), it is impossible to get them into the setup mode while in flight, unless the engine were to stop turning, or fall below the minimum RPM to generate power to the PMAG.. I don't have all the facts for this off field landing, but in order for PMAGS to have caused an engine timing problem, the following would have had to have happened: 1. The Serviced Bulletined software would have to be in one or both PMAGS. 2. The ignition switch would have had to be placed into the OFF position while in flight (both "P" leads grounded). 3. The engine RPM's would have had to be reduced to something under 600RPM (or the minimum to have both PMAGs supply their own power). 4. Aircraft power to the PMAGS would need to be removed while in flight. 5. Aircraft power tot he PMAGs restored, with the ignition switch still in the OFF position. The above sequence assumes that the vacuum advance hose was hooked up. If it wasn't, there is absolutely no way that the timing could have changed while in flight...... IMO, I find it highly unlikely that the PMAG timing has caused the engine problem that brought down the RV-7. But I will delay total judgment until all the flight condition related details are learned. There are other engine related failures that could have caused this off field landing: 1. A bad set of ignition wires 2. An sparkplug with a hotspot ( I've had auto plug related failures that caused pre-ignition, that caused a precautionary landing) 3. A fuel related problem.... Fred Stucklen RV-6A N926RV 720 Hrs Two PMAGs..... From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Subject: Re: P Mags > > >Yes, OFF being the Plead is grounded. > >I certainly would not advocate trying to put the E/pmag in test mode in >flight, too complex and to lengthy to think through. How does one do this? Perhaps I'm behind the curve on this but I thought that powering up a Emagair product with the p-lead grounded offered the mechanic a built in "buzzer" used to set the mechanical timing. Are there "test" functions beyond this capability? >All you need to do is shut one unit down hard..I.e ground the P >lead...If it gets better great, if not simply repeat in the other >e/pmag. > >I have a small bone of contention with the most recent incident. The >story goes the timing was so advanced the charge simply puffed thru the >open exhaust valve, implying this is a relatively harmless event. In my >reading of the effects of excessively advanced timing it seems this can >be very destructive pre-ignition. Remember that I and our friend saw >very high oil temps and CHT's. According to my reading of some of the >maintenance articles published by engine shops, preignition is caused by >the charge being ignited while the piston is still travelling UP the >bore. The piston then has to compress the rapidly expanding (and hot) >charge. If someone observes high temps . . . then this implies that the condition existed for some period of time. From onset of a problem to the time that any temperature becomes "high" has to be on the order of minutes. The image painted by these words suggests a sort of mental paralysis . . . the fact that the pilot chose an off-field landing further suggests that he didn't have a good understanding of how his equipment worked nor did he have a "plan" for dealing with things that have proven to be in-flight diagnosed and dealt with toward the goal of a happy ending. >Apparently the very high cylinder pressures can then force this hot >charge past the rings and heat the oil directly. It also adds >considerable stress to the bottom end bearings. Higher than those pressures/stresses that occur when timing is optimized for maximum realization of available energy from the fuel? >As you can see from the above description this stuation can be very >destructive. I didn't want folks to think this was a relatively harmless >situation as it could (from what has been explained to me) destroy the >engine in short order. I'm not sure that the combustion physics teamed with knowledge of the strengths of engine components and stresses encountered in NORMAL operations support the notion that the engine is mechanically at risk for the hypothesized failure. George Braley - are you watching this thread? Can you help with a dissertation on the underlying simple-ideas? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: mags / EIS debate
Date: Feb 23, 2007
On 22 Feb 2007, at 14:30, Charlie England wrote: > Interesting coincidence, posted on another list yesterday... > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [ThorpList] Rough Engine > Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 22:05:09 -0600 > From: <hkaribian(at)yahoo.com> > Reply-To: thorplist(at)yahoogroups.com > To: thorp t18 (thorp t18) > > > My rough engine turned out to be mag coils. Started up and ran fine > when > cold but after flying a while my electronic tach started jumping all > over the gage, and I mistakenly assumed instrument problems, until the > engine quit and put me down on a dirt road in the woods. Charlie. Do you know what type engine and ignition system he has? As near as I can tell from the postings on the Thorp List, his latest Thorp has a rotary engine, so I doubt it has a magneto. Or was he talking about a problem on his first Thorp? Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) Ottawa, Canada http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags
Date: Feb 23, 2007
David, I'm using one mag and one Lightspeed Plasma II+ also on an IO-360. I can almost guarantee that if the Lightspeed unit fails you will know it immediately by the sound of the engine. I've tried turning off one or the other in cruise and the difference between a mag being off and the Lightspeed being off is very audible. And when switching from mag only to mag and Lightspeed together you can feel the difference in the seat of your pants. Your only issue here is, as you have said, telling if there has been a mag failure. Bill Glasair Super IIS ----- Original Message ----- From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 8:01 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags Good Morning David, Sounds Good To Me! However, I am not familiar as to what Lightspeed uses to adjust it's timing so it is difficult for me to evaluate your scenario. Does the Lightspeed unit adjust it's timing based on reading some parameter of the actual combustion event or does it adjust based on mapped parameters? I am sure you are aware that if you have fixed timing for both ignition systems and one fails, there will be a substantial increase in EGT. Given the existence of a good all cylinder EGT system, it is easy to find a faulty spark plug or bad harness lead by observing the action of the EGTs. If all is well, the EGTs on each cylinder will rise about the same amount when one ignition system is not firing.. If one plug or harness lead is bad, the EGT will stay nice and steady when the good one is lighting the fire and drop precipitously when the bad plug should be firing the cylinder. If you could educate me on the operation of the Lightspeed, I would certainly appreciate the education! Happy Skies, Old Bob AKA Bob Siegfried Ancient Aviator Stearman N3977A Brookeridge Air Park LL22 Downers Grove, IL 60516 630 985-8503 In a message dated 2/23/2007 6:31:25 A.M. Central Standard Time, dave(at)abrahamson.net writes: I am running a Slick mag (4371) and a Lightspeed Plasma II+ electronic ignition on my TMXO-360. Haven't started the engine yet, so I don't know what a Lightspeed failure and good mag, or mag failure and good Lightspeed, would sound like/do to the RPM, CHT, and EGT. Nevertheless, here's my thinking. I am pretty sure that the second case (mag failure) would be undetectable in flight, or hard to detect since the Lightspeed does most of the ignition work. Should I get a MP drop, EGT rise, and roughness in flight, however, I'd probably be justified in first suspecting a Lightspeed failure. Emergency action would be to turn the Lightspeed switch to OFF to see if there was any change in the fault conditions. If not, assume I'm on my one mag and divert to an airport with services. However, if the engine ran rougher, turn the Lightspeed switch back on, enrich, carb heat on, see what happens, divert. Lastly, if engine quits, implying mag failure, pull mixture to idle cut-off, wait 10 seconds, turn Lightspeed back on, slowly move mixture to full rich (maintain glide slope, declare emergency, locate rabbit's foot), and hope for the engine to come back on. Does that sound right? Thanks. David ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike" <mlas(at)cox.net>
Subject: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags
Date: Feb 23, 2007
The LSE ignition system uses manifold pressure for detection for the timing advance. Their is an option for electrically advancing the system as well. But I haven=92t used that function. Mike -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of BobsV35B(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 7:02 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags Good Morning David, Sounds Good To Me! However, I am not familiar as to what Lightspeed uses to adjust it's timing so it is difficult for me to evaluate your scenario. Does the Lightspeed unit adjust it's timing based on reading some parameter of the actual combustion event or does it adjust based on mapped parameters? I am sure you are aware that if you have fixed timing for both ignition systems and one fails, there will be a substantial increase in EGT. Given the existence of a good all cylinder EGT system, it is easy to find a faulty spark plug or bad harness lead by observing the action of the EGTs. If all is well, the EGTs on each cylinder will rise about the same amount when one ignition system is not firing.. If one plug or harness lead is bad, the EGT will stay nice and steady when the good one is lighting the fire and drop precipitously when the bad plug should be firing the cylinder. If you could educate me on the operation of the Lightspeed, I would certainly appreciate the education! Happy Skies, Old Bob AKA Bob Siegfried Ancient Aviator Stearman N3977A Brookeridge Air Park LL22 Downers Grove, IL 60516 630 985-8503 In a message dated 2/23/2007 6:31:25 A.M. Central Standard Time, dave(at)abrahamson.net writes: I am running a Slick mag (4371) and a Lightspeed Plasma II+ electronic ignition on my TMXO-360. Haven't started the engine yet, so I don't know what a Lightspeed failure and good mag, or mag failure and good Lightspeed, would sound like/do to the RPM, CHT, and EGT. Nevertheless, here's my thinking. I am pretty sure that the second case (mag failure) would be undetectable in flight, or hard to detect since the Lightspeed does most of the ignition work. Should I get a MP drop, EGT rise, and roughness in flight, however, I'd probably be justified in first suspecting a Lightspeed failure. Emergency action would be to turn the Lightspeed switch to OFF to see if there was any change in the fault conditions. If not, assume I'm on my one mag and divert to an airport with services. However, if the engine ran rougher, turn the Lightspeed switch back on, enrich, carb heat on, see what happens, divert. Lastly, if engine quits, implying mag failure, pull mixture to idle cut-off, wait 10 seconds, turn Lightspeed back on, slowly move mixture to full rich (maintain glide slope, declare emergency, locate rabbit's foot), and hope for the engine to come back on. Does that sound right? Thanks. David _____ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. "http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List"http://www.matroni cs.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List "http://forums.matronics.com"http://forums.matronics.com -- 2/8/2007 -- 2/8/2007 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jerry Grimmonpre" <jerry(at)mc.net>
Subject: Converting Old Cat Whisker Antenna To VOR/LOC/GS
Date: Feb 23, 2007
Bob ... I have an old never installed cat whisker vor antenna. The whiskers are 24" stainless molded into what looks to be bakelite. Two stainless #4 studs protruding and go through a 1" diameter phenolic disk with nuts, check nuts and fiber lock nuts. The old, I mean old paper work, describes the antenna as vor 108-117.8 Mhz dated 1/76. It describes how not to drill holes where it says "DO NOT DRILL HOLES IN THIS AREA" (a rectangle molded into the bakelite). Mfd by The Antenna Specialists Co. My fondest hope is to modify the reception so as to receive vor/loc/gs ... can this be done and how? I have an antenna splitter from Ant to G/S and Nav. I can solder, follow directions, links and pointing if the lights are turned up bright. Can you help with this? Many thanks ... Jerry Grimmonpre Huntley, IL ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2007
From: Bill Dube <William.P.Dube(at)noaa.gov>
Subject: Re: Will SVLA charge on a sustaining voltage?
To charge a lead-acid battery 100%, you must go to to at least 13.8 volts. It will take _forever_ at this voltage. To charge it more quickly, and to help remove any sulfation, you have to go above 14 volts. Ideally, you would want to go to 14.7 volts (or a bit more,) let the current taper off, then go to 13.8 volts to maintain the charge. Bill Dube' Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > After a 3.0A discharge to 11.0 volts where the battery > delivered at total of 11.2 ah of capacity, I connected > the battery to a 13.0 volt power supply and waited 18+ > hours until the 're-charge' current was down to under > 30 milliampers. > > A subsequent 3.0A discharge produced only 8.8 AH of > useful output. The same battery is back on a Battery > Tender Jr for another charge/discharge cycle. > > This experiment suggests that there's something to > the notion of carrying the battery's recharge profile > up to the point where rate-of-change for voltage takes > the upward inflection which is the battery's way of > letting the outside world know that it's getting pretty > close to full. > > > Bob . . . > > ---------------------------------------- > ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) > ( what ever you do must be exercised ) > ( EVERY day . . . ) > ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) > ---------------------------------------- > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "springcanyon" <springcanyon(at)methow.com>
Subject: How to connect to 2" aluminium tube?
Date: Feb 23, 2007
I used 1/2" copper tape (purchased from stained-glass store) with adhesive back. I attached several strips to the plastic tank, soldered them together with aircraft wire then attached the wire to the filler neck. I don't know if it works, but it looks real good! Don Owens I want to ground a 2" aluminium tube used below the fuel filler of a Europa (plastic). I suppose I could weld a tab on it, or was thinking could order a few Adel clamps (with aluminium straps), and discard the rubber and see if I could get proper size and connect the ground wire to mounting screw after I cleaned off any finish on areas I want to conduct. Any other ideas? There are hoses clamped on this elbow at both ends, I am looking for a way to dissipate static charge. Think by sneaking a flat thin piece of aluminium half under the clamp and attaching to this would be an OK resolution? Thx. Ron Parigoris -- 10:22 AM -- 1:26 PM ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 23, 2007
Subject: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags
Good Afternoon Mike, Very interesting! I guess I will have to check their website and see if I can figure out what they are doing. Do you run one LSE and a magneto or two LSEs? If you do run one of each, have you noticed what the EGTs do during a pre takeoff run up/ignition check and how that changes if a high cruise power ignition system check is performed in flight? I would assume that the pre takeoff check would have all EGTs rise when either ignition system is off and fall when they are both operating. Does it do that? For the high power check, I would assume the change night be variable based on any number of factors including the altitude. If the engine uses LSEs only, I would imagine the EGTs would react the same as with dual magnetos. Any thought? Happy Skies, Old Bob AKA Bob Siegfried Ancient Aviator Stearman N3977A Brookeridge Air Park LL22 Downers Grove, IL 60516 630 985-8503 In a message dated 2/23/2007 11:34:59 A.M. Central Standard Time, mlas(at)cox.net writes: The LSE ignition system uses manifold pressure for detection for the timing advance. Their is an option for electrically advancing the system as well. But I haven't used that function. Mike

**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2007
From: Bill Bradburry <bbradburry(at)allvantage.com>
Subject: How to solder Mini DIN connectors
I could use little assistance... I am trying to solder the pins on a mini din connector and I melted the plastic on the first one! The pins do not look like they are removable, but if the plastic is that easy to melt... Can someone give me a little advice? Thanks, Bill B ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: How to solder Mini DIN connectors
From: "N395V" <n395v(at)hughes.net>
Date: Feb 23, 2007
Get a good crimper, some pins and new connectors. Crimp don't solder. -------- Milt N395V F1 Rocket www.excaliburaviation.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p'958#96958 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2007
Subject: Re: How to solder Mini DIN connectors
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
Assuming it needs to be solder.. How hot is your iron (how many watts)? Having a hot/high wattage iron means the area of the pin where the soldering needs to be done can get hot quickly enough to melt the solder while the end of the pin embedded in the plastic remains cool enough to not melt the plastic. A slow/small iron will take relatively longer to locally heat the pin enough to melt the solder, and the extra time will heat the whole pin more - melting the plastic. Use a freshly cleaned iron tip. And freshly tin the tip. The iron can transfer heat faster if the tip has tin on it. Another trick I have used with some amount of success is to take a pair of small forceps and grip the pin being soldered right where the pin goes into the plastic. This creates a heat sink which causes there to be steeper temperature gradient along the length of the pin. At least that's the theory I use to explain it to myself.. The trick is to get onto and off of the pin as quickly as possible. Use a hot, clean, freshly tinned iron.. Matt- > > > I could use little assistance... > I am trying to solder the pins on a mini din connector and I melted the > plastic on the first one! The pins do not look like they are removable, > but if the plastic is that easy to melt... > Can someone give me a little advice? > > Thanks, > Bill B > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2007
From: Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: mags / EIS debate
Kevin Horton wrote: > > > On 22 Feb 2007, at 14:30, Charlie England wrote: > >> Interesting coincidence, posted on another list yesterday... >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: [ThorpList] Rough Engine >> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 22:05:09 -0600 >> From: <hkaribian(at)yahoo.com> >> Reply-To: thorplist(at)yahoogroups.com >> To: thorp t18 (thorp t18) >> >> >> >> My rough engine turned out to be mag coils. Started up and ran fine when >> cold but after flying a while my electronic tach started jumping all >> over the gage, and I mistakenly assumed instrument problems, until the >> engine quit and put me down on a dirt road in the woods. > > Charlie. > > Do you know what type engine and ignition system he has? As near as I > can tell from the postings on the Thorp List, his latest Thorp has a > rotary engine, so I doubt it has a magneto. Or was he talking about a > problem on his first Thorp? > > Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) > Ottawa, Canada > http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 I don't know of anyone actually flying a T-18 with a rotary at this time. There are a couple that are in the works. I went back through some other posts from him & all refer to valves, pistons, etc & in one post he mentions that he is flying an O-320. To add some validity to this story, I had 2 mags fail within a couple of hours of flight due to bad coils. This was about 15 years ago; there is an old AD on that mag due to insulation failure in the coils. Sorry, I don't remember the make/model of the mag; the plane is long gone (it was also a Thorp). Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2007
From: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos(at)verizon.net>
Subject: P mag troubles.
Ah...the pitfalls of using software for safety critical functions!!! An ASIC or PAL design (ala Light Speed or Unison) with a positive hardware lockout for setting the timing may have been a wiser choice to eliminate (99.999%) this kind of "failure". Time will tell, I'm still intrigued by them and may yet install one in place of my magneto. In the meantime I guess I'll stick with one mag and one LSE CDI, at least until it's time for mag overhaul. Dean Psiropoulos RV-6A N197DM Closing on 1st flight ---------------------original message----------------------------- >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: P Mags >From: "Stucklen, Frederic W UTPWR" <Fred.Stucklen(at)UTCPower.com> > >Interesting problem... EMAG does have a service bulletin out on their >latest software change. See http://emagair.com/Service%20Notes.htm This is >for software updates that occurred between 12/06 and 2/07, and it involves >how the engine timing is set while in the setup mode. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Converting Old Cat Whisker Antenna To VOR/LOC/GS
> >Bob ... >I have an old never installed cat whisker vor antenna. The whiskers are >24" stainless molded into what looks to be bakelite. Two stainless #4 >studs protruding and go through a 1" diameter phenolic disk with nuts, >check nuts and fiber lock nuts. The old, I mean old paper work, >describes the antenna as vor 108-117.8 Mhz dated 1/76. It describes how >not to drill holes where it says "DO NOT DRILL HOLES IN THIS AREA" (a >rectangle molded into the bakelite). Mfd by The Antenna Specialists Co. > >My fondest hope is to modify the reception so as to receive vor/loc/gs ... >can this be done and how? I have an antenna splitter from Ant to G/S and >Nav. I can solder, follow directions, links and pointing if the lights >are turned up bright. A comm antenna is generally mounted vertically out the top or bottom of the airplane to most closely match the polarization of comm facilities both ground based and airborne (vertical). VOR/LOC/GS signals are horizontally polarized which is why you see the dual cat whiskers mounted in a horizontal plane on older airplanes. You can use the antenna you've described but with degrade performance. The optimum length for the VOR/LOC reception is LONGER than for a Comm antenna . . . about 26". So using this antenna as is will further degrade performance due to not being centered at the frequency band of interest. Now, I can't quantify 'degraded' . . . you can give it a try, go fly it and see if it does what you need to have done. If you find that you're not hearing VOR stations as far out as you'd like, you'll have to do something different. LOC/GS signals are so strong that a wet string hung out the window would probably work okay so I suspect you'll find the antenna is reasonably useful off the approach end of a runway. Let us know what you discover. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: David Abrahamson <dave(at)abrahamson.net>
Subject: Re: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags
Thanks. Very glad that someone out there has the same setup as me. When you turned off the mag in flight, what effect did you see? If it's slight/minimal, perhaps this means that mag failure in flight won't be noticed until you get on the ground. One other question is, what is your shutdown procedure or pre-shutdown procedure? Do you pull to idle cutoff and then switch both the mag and LSE off, or do you shut one or the other off and then pull to idle cutoff? I'm implying that shutting the LSE off prior to shutdown would test the mag, and then you could pull to idle cutoff, still burning up the fuel left in the system. Lastly, if you would show me your emergency procedure checklist relating to the engine, I'd be very interested. Thanks. David ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: David Abrahamson <dave(at)abrahamson.net>
Subject: Re: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags
I do cover that eventuality in "Lastly, if the engine quits...", but running a diagnosis that stops a rough-running -- but otherwise healthy engine, obviously needs to be refined. The core issue, I think, is how you figure out the mag has failed/malfunctioned in flight if the symptoms are very subtle, as I suspect they are if the LSE is firing away lustily. I've asked Bill Hibbing what his experience is with shutting off the mag in flight, and I plan to test that myself when I take flight in a couple of months. It may be that your only safe alternative is to shut off the mag to see if that makes any difference, enrich and add carb heat, and if the roughness persists, land and test the mag on the ground. David ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 24, 2007
Subject: Re: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags
Good Morning David, Considering the vast array of engine monitoring equipment that is available today, don't you think that we should be able to get a lot of information from those systems that most of us use? I find that most of my impending spark plug, harness and magneto problems give good early warnings on the engine monitoring equipment during a high power inflight ignition system check. With a bit of monitoring, many mechanical aberrations can also be detected way before the engine gets rough. Happy Skies, Old Bob AKA Bob Siegfried Ancient Aviator Stearman N3977A Brookeridge Air Park LL22 Downers Grove, IL 60516 630 985-8503 In a message dated 2/24/2007 7:43:36 A.M. Central Standard Time, dave(at)abrahamson.net writes: --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: David Abrahamson I do cover that eventuality in "Lastly, if the engine quits...", but running a diagnosis that stops a rough-running -- but otherwise healthy engine, obviously needs to be refined. The core issue, I think, is how you figure out the mag has failed/malfunctioned in flight if the symptoms are very subtle, as I suspect they are if the LSE is firing away lustily. I've asked Bill Hibbing what his experience is with shutting off the mag in flight, and I plan to test that myself when I take flight in a couple of months. It may be that your only safe alternative is to shut off the mag to see if that makes any difference, enrich and add carb heat, and if the roughness persists, land and test the mag on the ground. David

**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Nathan Davis" <ndavis(at)tiptontel.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 18 Msgs - 02/23/07
Date: Feb 24, 2007
Bob, Exactly what does your answer have to do with his question? I'm confused, I don't think he wanted to use it as a com antenna, just vor/loc/gs...help me here. Nathan Davis > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Converting Old Cat Whisker Antenna To > VOR/LOC/GS > > > >> >>Bob ... >>I have an old never installed cat whisker vor antenna. The whiskers are >>24" stainless molded into what looks to be bakelite. Two stainless #4 >>studs protruding and go through a 1" diameter phenolic disk with nuts, >>check nuts and fiber lock nuts. The old, I mean old paper work, >>describes the antenna as vor 108-117.8 Mhz dated 1/76. It describes how >>not to drill holes where it says "DO NOT DRILL HOLES IN THIS AREA" (a >>rectangle molded into the bakelite). Mfd by The Antenna Specialists Co. >> >>My fondest hope is to modify the reception so as to receive vor/loc/gs ... >>can this be done and how? I have an antenna splitter from Ant to G/S and >>Nav. I can solder, follow directions, links and pointing if the lights >>are turned up bright. > > A comm antenna is generally mounted vertically out the top or bottom of > the airplane > to most closely match the polarization of comm facilities both ground > based and > airborne (vertical). VOR/LOC/GS signals are horizontally polarized which > is why > you see the dual cat whiskers mounted in a horizontal plane on older > airplanes. > You can use the antenna you've described but with degrade performance. > The optimum > length for the VOR/LOC reception is LONGER than for a Comm antenna . . . > about 26". > So using this antenna as is will further degrade performance due to not > being centered > at the frequency band of interest. > > Now, I can't quantify 'degraded' . . . you can give it a try, go fly it > and > see if it does what you need to have done. If you find that you're not > hearing > VOR stations as far out as you'd like, you'll have to do something > different. > LOC/GS signals are so strong that a wet string hung out the window would > probably work okay so I suspect you'll find the antenna is reasonably > useful off the approach end of a runway. Let us know what you discover. > > Bob . . . > > > ---------------------------------------- > ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) > ( what ever you do must be exercised ) > ( EVERY day . . . ) > ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) > ---------------------------------------- > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: compromised VOR/LOC/GS antenna performance
> >Bob, > >Exactly what does your answer have to do with his question? I'm confused, >I don't think he wanted to use it as a com antenna, just vor/loc/gs...help >me here. Yes . . . and I offered the information that it was (1) not long enough for optimum performance in the VOR/LOC range of frequencies . . . and (2) that classic mounting schemes for this antenna (top or bottom of fuselage) produced a cross-polarized pattern conflict. Comm stations are vertically polarized while VOR/LOC antennas on the ground are horizontally polarized. So unless he was willing to mount the antenna out the side of the fuselage, vertical fin or perhaps horizontally from the tip of a wing, cross- polarization losses are stacked on top of too-short loss of performance as a VOR/LOC antenna. The term "degraded" is non-quantified. It can only be interpreted to mean not-the-best-we-know-how-to-do. That's why I suggested that he go ahead and install the antenna, add the coupler for GS and go fly it. There's nothing like the repeatable experiment to to quantify performance against system requirements. In these times when 99% of radio navigation is by GPS, it may be that he only needs the VOR/LOC/GS equipment to work for approaches where signal availability at the airplane is always strong. Under these conditions, the "degraded" performance may not be an issue. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jerry Grimmonpre" <jerry(at)mc.net>
Subject: Re: Converting Old Cat Whisker Antenna To VOR/LOC/GS
Date: Feb 24, 2007
For 'lectric Bob and Reply to Old Bob ... Good Morning Mentors! Yes ... information does get tangled at times. This older, never installed V cat whisker antenna, is going on the belly of my RV4. The airplane was never equipped with a VOR/LOC/GS receiver so I am retrofitting. ACS wants within a breath of $400 for their V shaped cat whisker NAV/LOC/GS antenna. I believe the difference in the ACS V shaped antenna and my V shaped cat whisker lies within the balun design and maybe a bit of electronics soldered together. The difference easily qualifies this conversion as $time$ well spent ... saving over $300. What I need is info from Bob N on what to do with a plain VOR/NAV V shaped cat whisker antenna to convert it a NAV/LOC/GS receiver fed through a AV-570 Diplexer. Hope this helps ... Jerry Old Bob ... the PBGC debacle didn't touch me ... I'm blessed. The RV8A project continues but temporarily on the back burner, deferred by the RV4 mods. I got the 4 to keep the skills up, have some fun and to witness good/bad build practices for the 8. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Shielded wires with modern ignition systems . . .
>Comments/Questions: Bob, >Please confirm that I have this right or suggest corrections. I am >building a Zenith CH601-HD with Jabiru 3300A using an electrical system >similar to Z-20. However, I am using the Aircraft Spruce A-510-2 Ignition >Switch. Is the following wiring correct? Both mags are connected to the >switch via shielded 20 AWG wire. Yes > The mag wires are sheilded with a pigtail only at one end. Yes > I chose to ground the pigtails at the switch end because the electronic > mags are in a plastic case. Oops, if they're electronic mags, then perhaps shielding is not necessary. Unlike with a magneto the "p-lead" (primary- lead) does not carry the gawd-awful high voltage waveform that makes the classic magneto p-lead a potential noise source. >So the pigtails are attached to the center ground screw on the switch. >The shielding on the wire to the starter contactor is also grounded to >the same switch screw. Why are you shielding this lead? >At the contactor end the shielding is grounded to the lower >stud on the forest of tabs ground block. There's no need to shield any wires connected to the starter contactor . . . >So the p-lead ground goes from the mags to the switch to >the ground block. . . . and I'm not convinced that the control lead to any form of electronic ignition benefits from shielding. For example, on pages 6 and 22 of E-Mag's installation manual at: http://emagair.com/Manual%20L113v29.pdf The pictures and schematics are notably devoid of shielded wire . . . and I would be disappointed if they called out the use of shielded wire. You'll need to ask the manufacturer for your system as to the need for shielded wire > Does this work out OK? Thanks ... Jeff Davidson (Novice Electrician) Don't think it's at all necessary. Without specific instructions from your ignition manufacturer my recommendation is that no shielded wire is necessary and all system ground wires be taken to a common ground point on the firewall. P.S. I dug up the installation manual for the 3300 on the 'net. The wiring diagram DOES NOT call for shielded wire to the ignition controls. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one wishes to be "world class" at ) ( anything, what ever you do must be ) ( exercised EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Doug Windhorn" <N1DeltaWhiskey(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Fire wall passthrough
Date: Feb 24, 2007
Bob, This link shows a nice PHYSICAL solution to passing power through a bulkhead, but uses a reinforced nylon insulator and attach flanges, so it does not provide any kind of fire resistance for the opening. http://bluesea.com/category/9/productline/overview/11 Seems to me that someone could come up with a product that emulates this, but uses a fire resistive insulator shroud. Can you suggest a more suitable alternative? Doug Windhorn ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Converting Old Cat Whisker Antenna To VOR/LOC/GS
>For 'lectric Bob >and >Reply to Old Bob ... Good Morning Mentors! >Yes ... information does get tangled at times. > >This older, never installed V cat whisker antenna, is going on the belly >of my RV4. The airplane was never equipped with a VOR/LOC/GS receiver so >I am retrofitting. ACS wants within a breath of $400 for their V shaped >cat whisker NAV/LOC/GS antenna. I believe the difference in the ACS V >shaped antenna and my V shaped cat whisker lies within the balun design >and maybe a bit of electronics soldered together. The difference easily >qualifies this conversion as $time$ well spent ... saving over $300. > >What I need is info from Bob N on what to do with a plain VOR/NAV V >shaped cat whisker antenna to convert it a NAV/LOC/GS receiver fed through >a AV-570 Diplexer. Not a thing. The 'Connection's antenna chapter describes the v-shaped dipole antenna that has appeared hundreds of thousands of airplanes since VOR stations started popping up in the 1940's\ http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Antenna/VOR_Whiskers.pdf There are many variations on the theme for these horizontally polarized antennas. They can have a wildly variable range of market prices as well. This version offered from Edmo http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Antenna/VOR_Whiskers_AV-532.jpg lists for $120 while this version . . . http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Antenna/VOR-GS_CI-157P.jpg lists for over $400. The later version is touted to have a "ferrite" balun that eliminates the need for the coaxial BALUN commonly often on its plebeian cousins. Bottom line is that without some pretty sophisticated test equipment, the average user will not be able to tell if their VOR antenna does or does not have a BALUN. At Cessna in the 60s we were building our own antennas for both Comm and VOR. For a time, we fabricated a coaxial cable BALUN for the VOR antenna but abandoned the practice when (1) pilots couldn't tell if one was installed or not and (2) the additional labor and risks for field failures due to the funky manufacturing process involved. All we had back then was PVC/PolyE insulated RG58 which was exceedingly difficult to work with as a BALUN material. RG-400/142 are much more solder-friendly. If one wishes to fabricate their own "cat whisker" VOR/LOC antenna using guidelines taken from the pictures, it will work just fine with the center conductor of the coax attached to one whisker and the shield attached to the other whisker. Overall length of each whisker (including pigtails) to the coax needs to be on the order of 26" If you want to add a BALUN to your Smiley Jack's $6.95 DIY VOR/LOC antenna, it's not hard to do. Here's a page that describes one of several processes . . . but one that works better than the "ferrite BALUN" in the gold plated antenna from Aircraft Spruce. This will raise the cost of your antenna to $8.95 http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Antenna/VOR-LOC_ANT_w_BALUN.pdf This antenna (like all VOR/LOC antennas - including yours) can be used in conjunction with the VOR/LOC/GS splitter to provide a signal to all of your ILS receivers. You can add a BALUN to your installation too if you wish. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Fire wall passthrough
> > >Bob, > >This link shows a nice PHYSICAL solution to passing power through a >bulkhead, but uses a reinforced nylon insulator and attach flanges, so it >does not provide any kind of fire resistance for the opening. > >http://bluesea.com/category/9/productline/overview/11 > >Seems to me that someone could come up with a product that emulates this, >but uses a fire resistive insulator shroud. > >Can you suggest a more suitable alternative? I wish. There's a lot of whippy variations on the theme out there. I've added your find to the list at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/FireWall_Feedthru_Not1.jpg http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/FireWall_Feedthru_Not2.jpg I've not spent a lot of time on it but I'll ask around out at RAC. There might be some whippy new machineable electrical insulation materials that one could cut the bushings out of. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
Subject: Rotax 912 Electrical System
From: Jeffrey A Beachy <beachyjeff(at)juno.com>
Okay electrical gurus, if you can talk this builder through his electrical phobias, Ill be both impressed and grateful. Heres the scoop. I am building a Zenith CH701 with a Rotax 912ULS. This will be for day VFR. My Electrical list: Falcon Vertical Card Compass Tachometer Skyshops Electric Flaps w/indicator Electric Trim (RAC servo) w/indicator Flight Data Systems GT-50 clock Microair M760 Comm Microair T2000 Transponder w/encoder PM501 Intercom Standard Zenith Supplied Engine Instruments consisting of: Oil PSI Oil Temp Water Temp Voltmeter L Fuel / R Fuel indicators Hobbs meter (working off an oil pressure sender from Lockwood Aviation) Lowrance 2000C GPS mounted on panel in an AirGizmos Panel Dock One 12v plug-in power source (for computer, etc) (cigarette lighter without the lighter part) I also have strobes and nav lights. My plan so far is to use the following: Switches: Master Switch, 25amp Toggle Circuit Breaker (which, if I am following this correctly, is used to bring the battery onlinethe alternator is always online and protected by a 40 amp fuse?) Strobes, 10 amp Toggle Circuit Breaker Nav Lights, 10 amp Toggle Circuit Breaker Radio/Transponder Circuit, 5 amp Toggle Circuit Breaker These 4 switches/circuit breakers will be on one bus bar. Circuit Breakers: Elec trim, 1 amp Elec Flaps, 5 amp Instruments, 5 amp These will be on a second bus bar Do I also need a circuit breaker to protect the bus bar? Do I need to protect the 12v plug-in power source? I also purchased a MaxiFuse 40 amp since I understand the Rotax alternator circuit requires one. I have read Aeroelectric Connection, which was very helpful, but I still dont feel comfortable planning my electrical system without some help. For me, its a bit like writing a novel in French, a language of which I have just the faintest smattering of knowledge. So, I need a schematic? I have Bob Nuckolls Z-16 to help, along with one from Zenith and one from the Europa Build Manual. The areas that make little sense to me are the Master Switch/Starting Relay/Regulator Rectifier. Once I get to the bus bar, it seems simple enough. So, where do I begin? Jeff Beachy Zenith CH701, 85% complete ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: "Michael T. Ice" <aurbo(at)ak.net>
Subject: Re: Rotax 912 Electrical System
Jeff, Have you already bought all of those switch CB's? If not buy just plain toggle switches and stick to the Z-16 plan. If so you might toss them in a box and buy regular toggle switches any way, that is exactly what I did. The Z plans are pretty easy to figure out if you follow them. The Bus bars are fuse panels, easy enough to buy and then you can plug in any size of blade fuse you want. The Master Switch S700-2-10 toggle switch is dirt simple and works terrific. I bought a pre-made wire harness for my RV with all the swichable circuit breakers and found it very limiting and primitive. After finding myself about to put in one more inline fuse I yanked it all out and dug out the Z-11 schematic and made a list of items need and ordered them from, www.bandc.biz/, and I am very glad that I did. The Z plans allow for easy additions and upgrades of Electro whizzies just by running a couple of wires and plugging in another fuse of the right size. If your going to do circuit breakers and traditional bus bars then it isn't the Z-16. Mike Ice RV-9 wiring complete, working on the canopy Anchorage, Alaska .----- Original Message ----- From: Jeffrey A Beachy To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 1:46 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Rotax 912 Electrical System Okay electrical gurus, if you can talk this builder through his electrical phobias, I'll be both impressed and grateful. Here's the scoop. I am building a Zenith CH701 with a Rotax 912ULS. This will be for day VFR. My Electrical list: Falcon Vertical Card Compass Tachometer Skyshops Electric Flaps w/indicator Electric Trim (RAC servo) w/indicator Flight Data Systems GT-50 clock Microair M760 Comm Microair T2000 Transponder w/encoder PM501 Intercom Standard Zenith Supplied Engine Instruments consisting of: Oil PSI Oil Temp Water Temp Voltmeter L Fuel / R Fuel indicators Hobbs meter (working off an oil pressure sender from Lockwood Aviation) Lowrance 2000C GPS mounted on panel in an AirGizmos Panel Dock One 12v plug-in power source (for computer, etc) (cigarette lighter without the lighter part) I also have strobes and nav lights. My plan so far is to use the following: Switches: Master Switch, 25amp Toggle Circuit Breaker (which, if I am following this correctly, is used to bring the battery online-the alternator is always online and protected by a 40 amp fuse?) Strobes, 10 amp Toggle Circuit Breaker Nav Lights, 10 amp Toggle Circuit Breaker Radio/Transponder Circuit, 5 amp Toggle Circuit Breaker These 4 switches/circuit breakers will be on one bus bar. Circuit Breakers: Elec trim, 1 amp Elec Flaps, 5 amp Instruments, 5 amp These will be on a second bus bar Do I also need a circuit breaker to protect the bus bar? Do I need to protect the 12v plug-in power source? I also purchased a MaxiFuse 40 amp since I understand the Rotax alternator circuit requires one. I have read Aeroelectric Connection, which was very helpful, but I still don't feel comfortable planning my electrical system without some help. For me, it's a bit like writing a novel in French, a language of which I have just the faintest smattering of knowledge. So, I need a schematic? I have Bob Nuckoll's Z-16 to help, along with one from Zenith and one from the Europa Build Manual. The areas that make little sense to me are the Master Switch/Starting Relay/Regulator Rectifier. Once I get to the bus bar, it seems simple enough. So, where do I begin? Jeff Beachy Zenith CH701, 85% complete ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: Lynn Riggs <riggs_la(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Fire wall passthrough
You mite take a look at this site. http://www.epm-avcorp.com/index.html > > >Bob, > >This link shows a nice PHYSICAL solution to passing power through a >bulkhead, but uses a reinforced nylon insulator and attach flanges, so it >does not provide any kind of fire resistance for the opening. > >http://bluesea.com/category/9/productline/overview/11 > >Seems to me that someone could come up with a product that emulates this, >but uses a fire resistive insulator shroud. > >Can you suggest a more suitable alternative? I wish. There's a lot of whippy variations on the theme out there. I've added your find to the list at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/FireWall_Feedthru_Not1.jpg http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/FireWall_Feedthru_Not2.jpg I've not spent a lot of time on it but I'll ask around out at RAC. There might be some whippy new machineable electrical insulation materials that one could cut the bushings out of. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- Lynn A. Riggs riggs_la(at)yahoo.com St. Paul, MN BH #656 Kit #22 http://home.comcast.net/~lariggs/wsb/html/view.cgi-home.html-.html --------------------------------- It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Subject: Re: Rotax 912 Electrical System
Michael T. Ice a crit : > *Jeff,* > ** > > ** > *The Z plans are pretty easy to figure out if you follow them. The Bus > bars are fuse panels, easy enough to buy and then you can plug in any > size of blade fuse you want. * > ** > *The Master Switch S700-2-10 toggle switch is dirt simple and works > terrific.* Jeff and all, I followed figure Z16 with the addition of a dual battery for our electrically dependant 914 installation, and we have been very happy with it for more than two years now. The Z figure philosophy is really worth studying. Regards, Gilles Thesee http://contrails.free.fr ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Converting Old Cat Whisker Antenna To VOR/LOC/GS
Decided that the posting and supplementary drawing was lacking for clarity. I've crafted a comic book on 1:1 BALUN fabrication for VOR/LOC/GS antennas at . . . http://aeroelectric.com/articles/BALUN/Balun_Fabrication.html Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags
Date: Feb 24, 2007
David, With the Lightspeed operating I doubt if you'd notice anything if the mag failed. When I shutdown on the ground I just pull the mixture although shutting down with just the mag operating sounds like something I may have to try. As far as an engine emergency I have just 3 steps. 1. FLY THE AIRPLANE. 2. Take up a nearest toward the nearest suitable airport. 3. Turn off the fuel and declare an emergency in case of a destructive failure. Otherwise, troubleshoot if time permits. We did have an interesting case withaCirrus powered by Continental. It seems that the gear on one of the mags stripped and it was firing all over the place. Unfortunately the person that was flying it at the time didn't bother to check the mags and flew for 200 miles in this condition. It destroyed the engine and it could have been prevented if he had simply switched them off one at a time. I don't really know why he didn't land when it happened and he's very lucky that the Feds didn't get wind of it as it was a sure violation. Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Abrahamson" <dave(at)abrahamson.net> Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 7:05 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags > > > Thanks. Very glad that someone out there has the same setup as me. When > you turned off the mag in flight, what effect did you see? If it's > slight/minimal, perhaps this means that mag failure in flight won't be > noticed until you get on the ground. One other question is, what is your > shutdown procedure or pre-shutdown procedure? Do you pull to idle cutoff > and then switch both the mag and LSE off, or do you shut one or the other > off and then pull to idle cutoff? I'm implying that shutting the LSE off > prior to shutdown would test the mag, and then you could pull to idle > cutoff, still burning up the fuel left in the system. Lastly, if you > would show me your emergency procedure checklist relating to the engine, > I'd be very interested. Thanks. > David > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <frank.phyllis(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Shielded wires with modern ignition systems . .
.
Date: Feb 24, 2007
The ROTAX 912ULS wiring diagram (with electron mags) shows shielded wire for the ignition with a ground at both ends. I assume this diagram should be followed? Frank -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 1:14 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Shielded wires with modern ignition systems . . . >Comments/Questions: Bob, >Please confirm that I have this right or suggest corrections. I am >building a Zenith CH601-HD with Jabiru 3300A using an electrical system >similar to Z-20. However, I am using the Aircraft Spruce A-510-2 Ignition >Switch. Is the following wiring correct? Both mags are connected to the >switch via shielded 20 AWG wire. Yes > The mag wires are sheilded with a pigtail only at one end. Yes > I chose to ground the pigtails at the switch end because the electronic > mags are in a plastic case. Oops, if they're electronic mags, then perhaps shielding is not necessary. Unlike with a magneto the "p-lead" (primary- lead) does not carry the gawd-awful high voltage waveform that makes the classic magneto p-lead a potential noise source. >So the pigtails are attached to the center ground screw on the switch. >The shielding on the wire to the starter contactor is also grounded to >the same switch screw. Why are you shielding this lead? >At the contactor end the shielding is grounded to the lower >stud on the forest of tabs ground block. There's no need to shield any wires connected to the starter contactor . . . >So the p-lead ground goes from the mags to the switch to >the ground block. . . . and I'm not convinced that the control lead to any form of electronic ignition benefits from shielding. For example, on pages 6 and 22 of E-Mag's installation manual at: http://emagair.com/Manual%20L113v29.pdf The pictures and schematics are notably devoid of shielded wire . . . and I would be disappointed if they called out the use of shielded wire. You'll need to ask the manufacturer for your system as to the need for shielded wire > Does this work out OK? Thanks ... Jeff Davidson (Novice Electrician) Don't think it's at all necessary. Without specific instructions from your ignition manufacturer my recommendation is that no shielded wire is necessary and all system ground wires be taken to a common ground point on the firewall. P.S. I dug up the installation manual for the 3300 on the 'net. The wiring diagram DOES NOT call for shielded wire to the ignition controls. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one wishes to be "world class" at ) ( anything, what ever you do must be ) ( exercised EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Shielded wires with modern ignition systems .
. . > >The ROTAX 912ULS wiring diagram (with electron mags) shows shielded wire >for the ignition with a ground at both ends. I assume this diagram >should be followed? Hmmmm . . . I'd recommend you ground at the engine end only and use the shields to provide ground for the mag switches. Nonetheless, there are thousands of airplanes flying wired "per instructions" that function fine but with a non-zero risk of problems with ground loops. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jerry Grimmonpre" <jerry(at)mc.net>
Subject: Re: Converting Old Cat Whisker Antenna To VOR/LOC/GS
Date: Feb 25, 2007
'lectric Bob ... Your info is useful by inspiring the production of change. I now set out to convert this simple $50 ebay cast-off VOR NAV antenna into something more useful. Many thanks for your gift of time and experience ... Jerry ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 4:24 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Converting Old Cat Whisker Antenna To VOR/LOC/GS ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Shielded wires with modern ignition systems . .
.
From: "jetboy" <sanson.r(at)xtra.co.nz>
Date: Feb 24, 2007
The Jabiru mags are not "electronic ignition" as commonly classified. they do have a transistor switch inside. Although shielding the P lead is not necessary, best practice is to run in shielded lead, ground the shield at mag end to a spare thread hole (on the alternator statorplate will do). At the mag switch end, the shield is connected to the gnd terminal of the switch, but not connected to the airframe here. during running, there are over 200v of spikes on these lines. Refer to the files section on Yahoo Jabiru/engines group, "radio noise" , look for jab.coil primary - a photo of the trace on the P lead. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jabiruengines/files/Radio%20noise/ -------- Ralph - CH701 / 2200a Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=97171#97171 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carlos Trigo" <trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt>
Subject: Re: Converting Old Cat Whisker Antenna To VOR/LOC/GS
Date: Feb 25, 2007
I always like to learn something each day, but this time I'm missing this one. I could not find the word BALUN in my English-Portuguese dictionary. Can anyone please explain its meaning. Thanks Carlos > > > Decided that the posting and supplementary drawing was > lacking for clarity. I've crafted a comic book on > 1:1 BALUN fabrication for VOR/LOC/GS antennas at . . . > > http://aeroelectric.com/articles/BALUN/Balun_Fabrication.html > > Bob . . . > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Neal George" <neal.george(at)mchsi.com>
Subject: Re: Converting Old Cat Whisker Antenna To VOR/LOC/GS
Date: Feb 25, 2007
Carlos - BALUN is a combination of two words - balanced and unbalanced. Here's a little primer on the subject... http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/pdf/8004019.pdf Neal RV-7 N8ZG wiring -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carlos Trigo Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 4:54 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Converting Old Cat Whisker Antenna To VOR/LOC/GS --> I always like to learn something each day, but this time I'm missing this one. I could not find the word BALUN in my English-Portuguese dictionary. Can anyone please explain its meaning. Thanks Carlos > > > Decided that the posting and supplementary drawing was lacking for > clarity. I've crafted a comic book on > 1:1 BALUN fabrication for VOR/LOC/GS antennas at . . . > > http://aeroelectric.com/articles/BALUN/Balun_Fabrication.html > > Bob . . . > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: David Abrahamson <dave(at)abrahamson.net>
Subject: Re: Magneto failure in general, Was: P Mags
You're right, I'm sure. The last airplane I owned was an Archer III in which I had an Insight GEM installed. My RV7 has a GRT dual efis with EIS and I have not had a chance to devote time to learning about all the information I will be presented with, or how I am going to interpret all that data. There is much to learn, but I figure that I need to develop emergency procedures based on my current experience set (feel, sound, EGT, CHT), knowing that I will/will need to refine these procedures as I learn to best interpret a full screen of graphical engine information. David ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net>
Subject: Engine monitoring, was Magneto failure in general,
Was: P Mags It is indeed valuable to get immediate notification of a parameter that is out of limits. However those limits have to be broad enough to avoid nuisance warnings. One improvement is that I can program my EIS with a minimum in flight oil pressure separately from minimum on the ground or at idle. However I have traded away the ability to visualize a normal range (or mark what is normal in cruise) on an analog gauge which I find easier than trying to remember a digital number. I consider that a good trade but for me there is some value in both digital and analog indications. It seems to me that the next step is software that builds a record of normal parameters and then compares the present readings to the long term norms so that it can automatically flag a subtle trend that may indicate future problems. An example might be comparing present oil pressure to a table or graph of what it has been at that rpm and temperature for the last 50 hours and also to the manufacturers absolute limit. A slight falling trend might indicate oil contamination, plugged filter, degrading sensor, or something more serious that I would not notice without automatic recording and automatic comparisons by the software. A few guys do something similar by downloading info continuously to a laptop and checking it after the flight. . There is a huge danger of getting your eyes and mind entrapped inside the cockpit by glass displays. Superior engine monitoring is something that a computer should be able to do for us with minimal human assistance or training. Ken David Abrahamson wrote: > > > You're right, I'm sure. The last airplane I owned was an Archer III > in which I had an Insight GEM installed. My RV7 has a GRT dual efis > with EIS and I have not had a chance to devote time to learning about > all the information I will be presented with, or how I am going to > interpret all that data. There is much to learn, but I figure that I > need to develop emergency procedures based on my current experience > set (feel, sound, EGT, CHT), knowing that I will/will need to refine > these procedures as I learn to best interpret a full screen of > graphical engine information. > David > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Converting Old Cat Whisker Antenna To VOR/LOC/GS
> > >I always like to learn something each day, but this time I'm missing this one. > >I could not find the word BALUN in my English-Portuguese dictionary. >Can anyone please explain its meaning. > >Thanks >Carlos Excellent point sir. I've added some data to the front of the article to address your question and to expand on the usefulness of adding a BALUN to the antenna system. See latest revision at: http://aeroelectric.com/articles/BALUN/Balun_Fabrication.html Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Shielded wires with modern ignition systems
. . . > >The Jabiru mags are not "electronic ignition" as commonly classified. they >do have a transistor switch inside. > >Although shielding the P lead is not necessary, best practice is to run in >shielded lead, ground the shield at mag end to a spare thread hole (on the >alternator statorplate will do). At the mag switch end, the shield is >connected to the gnd terminal of the switch, but not connected to the >airframe here. > >during running, there are over 200v of spikes on these lines. Refer to the >files section on Yahoo Jabiru/engines group, "radio noise" , look for >jab.coil primary - a photo of the trace on the P lead. > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jabiruengines/files/Radio%20noise/ Excellent data sir! Thank you. I'm disappointed to hear about it though . . . you would think that a company so obviously dedicated to the use of modern machining and manufacturing techniques would go a step further with their ignition system. Having said that, I'll have to acknowledge that their decisions may well have been based on a considered trade off between cost and performance . . . and using shielded ignition control leads has been a standard practice in aviation since the first radio went into an airplane perhaps 95 years ago! Okay, based on expanded knowledge offered by our brother Ralph, we know that optimal wiring for the engine is POORLY explained on page 10 of the Jabiru 3300 installation manual. Ralph correctly cites the need for shielded wire and I concur with the techniques he suggested above. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Z-25 capacitor failure
I have incorporated Z-25 into my installation, and pursuant to B&C's instructions, have located the filter cap inside the cockpit, along with the regulator. Just staring at the diagram and the installation, I realize that the cap is still connected to the regulator output even if the crowbar trips and the relay opens. So, what's the failure mode of a computer grade cap hard-wired to a runaway dynamo alternator? Smoke leakage? Loud bang? Shrapnel and chemical burns? Maybe the SD-8 is magnetically incapable of exceeding the 50v rating of the cap even if the regulator goes T/U? Should the cap go on the battery-side of the OV control relay instead of the SD-8 side? -Bill B ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Subject: Re: Z-25 capacitor failure
Bill Boyd a crit : > > I realize that the cap is still connected to the regulator output even > if the crowbar trips and the relay opens. So, what's the failure mode > of a computer grade cap hard-wired to a runaway dynamo alternator? > Smoke leakage? Loud bang? Shrapnel and chemical burns? > > Maybe the SD-8 is magnetically incapable of exceeding the 50v rating > of the cap even if the regulator goes T/U? Should the cap go on the > battery-side of the OV control relay instead of the SD-8 side? Bill, Have a look at the last version of figure Z16. We raised the capacitor issue 2 or 3 years ago, and Bob made the appropriate changes to the Rotax figure. The Rotax alternator is capable of nearly 100V peak to peak. I still have to change the ship's circuit in accordance, to avoid what I believe might be a loud bang behind the panel in the event of a regulator runaway. Regards, Gilles Thesee http://contrails.free.fr ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Z-25 capacitor failure
Okay, Gilles, I see what was done in figure Z-16, moving the relay connections to break the raw AC line out of the SD-8. If I insert the relay there, I lose the ability to power my alternator warning LED from the normally-closed pole of the relay. I wonder if it might be easier to reconnect the capacitor downstream of the relay. Come to think of it, my system is configured to have at all times at least one if not two batteries across the SD-8 regulated output, so I think maybe tossing out the capacitor altogether would make the most sense, from a safety and weight/complexity standpoint. Too bad I've already gone to the trouble of installing it. -Bill On 2/25/07, Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr> wrote: > > Bill Boyd a crit : > > > > I realize that the cap is still connected to the regulator output even > > if the crowbar trips and the relay opens. So, what's the failure mode > > of a computer grade cap hard-wired to a runaway dynamo alternator? > > Smoke leakage? Loud bang? Shrapnel and chemical burns? > > > > Maybe the SD-8 is magnetically incapable of exceeding the 50v rating > > of the cap even if the regulator goes T/U? Should the cap go on the > > battery-side of the OV control relay instead of the SD-8 side? > > Bill, > > Have a look at the last version of figure Z16. > We raised the capacitor issue 2 or 3 years ago, and Bob made the > appropriate changes to the Rotax figure. The Rotax alternator is capable > of nearly 100V peak to peak. > I still have to change the ship's circuit in accordance, to avoid what I > believe might be a loud bang behind the panel in the event of a > regulator runaway. > > > Regards, > Gilles Thesee > http://contrails.free.fr > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net>
Subject: Re: Z-25 capacitor failure
Bill FWIW I run a small ov relay on the AC side on my 20 amp J.Deere PM setup. It also has a dedicated battery. Adding the capacitor made no difference that I could detect as far as noise from the strobes or anything else so I did not install a capacitor. The only issue I've had was when I tried to charge a completely dead battery. The dead battery would not accept any significant current at first. I surmise that the regulator could not arrest the rapidly rising voltage fast enough and the OV relay quite rightly tripped as the voltage rose. Unfortunately the regulator was damaged. Subsequently I added transorb protection to hopefully hold the voltage down until the ovp reacts if I'm ever foolish enough to do that again. Alternatively a large capacitor might also have saved the $100. regulator so I'd probably leave it in if I had one already installed. Depending on rpm, this alternator will output well above 100 VAC if it is not loaded. Ken Bill Boyd wrote: > > > Okay, Gilles, I see what was done in figure Z-16, moving the relay > connections to break the raw AC line out of the SD-8. If I insert the > relay there, I lose the ability to power my alternator warning LED > from the normally-closed pole of the relay. I wonder if it might be > easier to reconnect the capacitor downstream of the relay. > > Come to think of it, my system is configured to have at all times at > least one if not two batteries across the SD-8 regulated output, so I > think maybe tossing out the capacitor altogether would make the most > sense, from a safety and weight/complexity standpoint. Too bad I've > already gone to the trouble of installing it. > > -Bill > > On 2/25/07, Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr> wrote: > >> <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr> >> >> Bill Boyd a crit : >> > >> > I realize that the cap is still connected to the regulator output even >> > if the crowbar trips and the relay opens. So, what's the failure mode >> > of a computer grade cap hard-wired to a runaway dynamo alternator? >> > Smoke leakage? Loud bang? Shrapnel and chemical burns? >> > >> > Maybe the SD-8 is magnetically incapable of exceeding the 50v rating >> > of the cap even if the regulator goes T/U? Should the cap go on the >> > battery-side of the OV control relay instead of the SD-8 side? >> >> Bill, >> >> Have a look at the last version of figure Z16. >> We raised the capacitor issue 2 or 3 years ago, and Bob made the >> appropriate changes to the Rotax figure. The Rotax alternator is capable >> of nearly 100V peak to peak. >> I still have to change the ship's circuit in accordance, to avoid what I >> believe might be a loud bang behind the panel in the event of a >> regulator runaway. >> >> >> Regards, >> Gilles Thesee >> http://contrails.free.fr > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Z-25 capacitor failure
It's a shame you've already installed it; there would probably be very little weight or size penalty if you had used a cap with a higher voltage rating. Charlie Bill Boyd wrote: > > Okay, Gilles, I see what was done in figure Z-16, moving the relay > connections to break the raw AC line out of the SD-8. If I insert the > relay there, I lose the ability to power my alternator warning LED > from the normally-closed pole of the relay. I wonder if it might be > easier to reconnect the capacitor downstream of the relay. > > Come to think of it, my system is configured to have at all times at > least one if not two batteries across the SD-8 regulated output, so I > think maybe tossing out the capacitor altogether would make the most > sense, from a safety and weight/complexity standpoint. Too bad I've > already gone to the trouble of installing it. > > -Bill > > On 2/25/07, Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr> wrote: >> <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr> >> >> Bill Boyd a crit : >> > >> > I realize that the cap is still connected to the regulator output even >> > if the crowbar trips and the relay opens. So, what's the failure mode >> > of a computer grade cap hard-wired to a runaway dynamo alternator? >> > Smoke leakage? Loud bang? Shrapnel and chemical burns? >> > >> > Maybe the SD-8 is magnetically incapable of exceeding the 50v rating >> > of the cap even if the regulator goes T/U? Should the cap go on the >> > battery-side of the OV control relay instead of the SD-8 side? >> >> Bill, >> >> Have a look at the last version of figure Z16. >> We raised the capacitor issue 2 or 3 years ago, and Bob made the >> appropriate changes to the Rotax figure. The Rotax alternator is capable >> of nearly 100V peak to peak. >> I still have to change the ship's circuit in accordance, to avoid what I >> believe might be a loud bang behind the panel in the event of a >> regulator runaway. >> >> >> Regards, >> Gilles Thesee >> http://contrails.free.fr ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca>
Subject: Mono gear collapse
Date: Feb 25, 2007
Graeme, Thanks for the clarifications - much as I surmised - the lowering mechanism won't stop an overcentre interruption, or a collapse. This brings me back to my original question: That there may be a structural intervention which IS strong enough to inhibit collapse. Of course this means a second (or more) action to prepare for landing but I don't mind the extra work! The distance-twixt-rubber-bumper-ends is intriguing.............. Ferg Kyle Europa A064 914 Classic ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: "Greg Campbell" <gregcampbellusa(at)gmail.com>
Subject: LED Landing Lights again...
I recall seeing a teardrop shaped LED taxi light combined with a strobe head. Has anybody seen any progress on LED headlights that would be suitable for use as landing lights? I'm getting ready to work on my cowl and was hoping there might be something out there by now. Eric - you always seem to know what's coming coming up in the LED market. Any ideas? Thanks! Greg ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jerry Grimmonpre" <jerry(at)mc.net>
Subject: Fw: Questions
Date: Feb 26, 2007
Bob ... Forwarded question from my son to the AeroElectric list Thanks for your answer ... Jerry Grimmonpre ----- Original Message ----- From: GARY GRIMMONPRE Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 4:32 PM Subject: Questions I have a question about the placement of a diode on a continuous duty relay that only has one small lug on the outside that is looking for a ground through the battery switch to close the big contacts in the relay. The relays illustrated in the s701-1.jpg and s701-2.jpg files only show the routing of diodes on relays with two small lugs on the outside. The relays I have only have one small lug. I read the whole "Lets talk about starter solenoids" article to try and figure out how to orient a diode in the system I have and still came up with a blank. Could you shed some light on this for those of us who have this same system already installed and don't want to change wiring. Is a diode really needed in the system described? The battery master solenoid I have gets power internally from the battery side lug and gets its ground from the master switch, I'm sorry if I'm repeating myself. Thanks for your insight.. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: "Bill Boyd" <sportav8r(at)GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Z-25 capacitor failure
'Tis a dilemma, Charlie. The cap is mounted to the panel that's going into the plane soon, along with lots of other electrical goodies. It can be removed with minor re-wiring annoyance. The cap is as-supplied by B&C, and while I am at work now and can't check it, I recall the rating as 50WVDC. The bigger question is whether I need the cap in the circuit. It's a standby alternator, I will always have the big alternator to recharge an accidentally-drained battery, and will always have the battery hard-wired to the relay that controls DC output from the SD-8. I am increasingly convinced the cap is superfluous in my application, but not certain that it isn't needed, somehow, to stabilize and protect the regulator when the SD-8 is running un-loaded. I think even then, it's not required. Can someone clarify that? I'd move the relay to the AC side of the regulator except that would render my LED trouble light for the SD-8 unworkable as built, and my home-brew annunciator is all built up now; too late for any easy changes to it. I want to keep the capability of alerting me when that crowbar relay opens. I realize the low voltage that would soon develop would be eventual notice of failure, by way of EIS alarms, if the unit crowbarred while acting as the sole source of battery charging power, but I prefer to keep the annunciation system as -is. That means not moving the relay, I guess. Sheesh... -Bill B On 2/25/07, Charlie England wrote: > > It's a shame you've already installed it; there would probably be very > little weight or size penalty if you had used a cap with a higher > voltage rating. > > Charlie > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: "Michael T. Ice" <aurbo(at)ak.net>
Subject: Re: Fw: Questions
Jerry, I hope you get a better answer than what I am going to supply. My very basic understanding is that the diodes are there to protect your switches from wearing out. There is supposed to be some sort of arcing that goes on when you turn the switch on and off which can be lessened or nullified with a diode. How much longer will your switch last? Is it worth it for the $time$ spent worrying about it? Good questions? Anyone? Mike Ice RV-9 Anchorage, Alaska ----- Original Message ----- From: Jerry Grimmonpre To: AeroElectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 4:43 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fw: Questions Bob ... Forwarded question from my son to the AeroElectric list Thanks for your answer ... Jerry Grimmonpre ----- Original Message ----- From: GARY GRIMMONPRE To: Jerry Grimmonpre Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 4:32 PM Subject: Questions I have a question about the placement of a diode on a continuous duty relay that only has one small lug on the outside that is looking for a ground through the battery switch to close the big contacts in the relay. The relays illustrated in the s701-1.jpg and s701-2.jpg files only show the routing of diodes on relays with two small lugs on the outside. The relays I have only have one small lug. I read the whole "Lets talk about starter solenoids" article to try and figure out how to orient a diode in the system I have and still came up with a blank. Could you shed some light on this for those of us who have this same system already installed and don't want to change wiring. Is a diode really needed in the system described? The battery master solenoid I have gets power internally from the battery side lug and gets its ground from the master switch, I'm sorry if I'm repeating myself. Thanks for your insight.. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: Bob White <bob@bob-white.com>
Subject: Re: Fw: Questions
Any time you interrupt the current in a coil, the magnetic field collapse induces a voltage in the coil. The voltage induced is dependent on how fast the field changes and is the opposite polarity to the applied voltage that caused the current flow. It can produce arching in the switch as you have surmised. Since this voltage is the opposite polarity, it will forward bias a diode placed across the coil with the anode connected to the negative terminal and the cathode connected to the positive terminal. The diode is a low resistance load for the induced voltage which limits it to the forward voltage of the diode. On the solenoids with a single terminal that needs to be grounded to activate the coil, the other side of the coil is connected internally to one of the contact terminals. That terminal must be connected to the battery for proper operation. Proper placement of the suppression diode is cathode to the battery terminal and anode to the terminal to the switch. It is a good idea to include the diode. Bob W. "Michael T. Ice" wrote: > Jerry, > > I hope you get a better answer than what I am going to supply. My very basic understanding is that the diodes are there to protect your switches from wearing out. There is supposed to be some sort of arcing that goes on when you turn the switch on and off which can be lessened or nullified with a diode. How much longer will your switch last? Is it worth it for the $time$ spent worrying about it? Good questions? Anyone? > > Mike Ice > RV-9 > Anchorage, Alaska > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jerry Grimmonpre > To: AeroElectric-list(at)matronics.com > Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 4:43 AM > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fw: Questions > > > Bob ... > > Forwarded question from my son to the AeroElectric list > Thanks for your answer ... > Jerry Grimmonpre > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: GARY GRIMMONPRE > To: Jerry Grimmonpre > Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 4:32 PM > Subject: Questions > > I have a question about the placement of a diode on a continuous duty relay that only has one small lug on the outside that is looking for a ground through the battery switch to close the big contacts in the relay. The relays illustrated in the s701-1.jpg and s701-2.jpg files only show the routing of diodes on relays with two small lugs on the outside. The relays I have only have one small lug. I read the whole "Lets talk about starter solenoids" article to try and figure out how to orient a diode in the system I have and still came up with a blank. Could you shed some light on this for those of us who have this same system already installed and don't want to change wiring. Is a diode really needed in the system described? The battery master solenoid I have gets power internally from the battery side lug and gets its ground from the master switch, I'm sorry if I'm repeating myself. Thanks for your insight.. > > > > -- N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 - http://www.bob-white.com First Flight: 11/23/2006 7:50AM - 3.3 Hours Total Time Cables for your rotary installation - http://www.roblinphoto.com/shop/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: Sam Marlow <sam(at)fr8dog.net>
Subject: Re: Full Auto
I checked out that figure, and all the others as well, but It requires tripping the battery switch and a 1-3 E-Bus Alternate feed switch. It's not full auto switching. Isn't there something simpler? Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > >> >> I know I read it somewhere on the web, a fully auto Stby Alt system. >> All you have to do is reduce loads until the light goes out, and >> continue uninterrupted until your planned stop fuel stop. Anyone >> remember reading something like that? I'm ready for that step in my >> RV10, and don't want to continue with a overly complicated system. >> KISS is my aim! > > It's the B&C SD-20 with details at > http://bandc.biz > and you can check out Figure Z-12 at > http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11J.pdf > for a suggested architecture to go with it. > > Bob . . . > > ---------------------------------------- > ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) > ( what ever you do must be exercised ) > ( EVERY day . . . ) > ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) > ---------------------------------------- > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric Parlow" <ericparlow(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Garmin 396/496 Display?
Date: Feb 26, 2007
What would be required to "tap" into the Garmin 396/496 to send its display out to a 12" LCD? Or alternatively........... Could its weather info be extracted and displayed on another EFIS? ERic- RV-10, N104EP ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Denton" <bdenton(at)bdenton.com>
Subject: Garmin 396/496 Display?
Date: Feb 26, 2007
A PhD from MIT? >From what I have read, it would probably be easier to just shell out the $13K for the GMX200 display and the GDL69 XM receiver. It's not just a matter of splicing into a couple of wires... -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Eric Parlow Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 10:36 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 396/496 Display? What would be required to "tap" into the Garmin 396/496 to send its display out to a 12" LCD? Or alternatively........... Could its weather info be extracted and displayed on another EFIS? ERic- RV-10, N104EP ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: KLN-89B Installation Manual?
Date: Feb 26, 2007
A friend is having problems with his KLN-89B. I suspect a wiring problem. The installation was done by the previous owner, and my friend does not have the Installation Manual. I would be very appreciative if anyone could point me at an electronic copy of the KLN-89B Installation Manual. Thanks. Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) Ottawa, Canada http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net>
Subject: Re: Full Auto
Date: Feb 26, 2007
Sam, there is... www.verticalpower.com Bret Smith RV-9A "Wings" Blue Ridge, GA www.FlightInnovations.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Sam Marlow To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 11:03 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Full Auto I checked out that figure, and all the others as well, but It requires tripping the battery switch and a 1-3 E-Bus Alternate feed switch. It's not full auto switching. Isn't there something simpler? Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: I know I read it somewhere on the web, a fully auto Stby Alt system. All you have to do is reduce loads until the light goes out, and continue uninterrupted until your planned stop fuel stop. Anyone remember reading something like that? I'm ready for that step in my RV10, and don't want to continue with a overly complicated system. KISS is my aim! It's the B&C SD-20 with details at http://bandc.biz and you can check out Figure Z-12 at http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11J.pdf for a suggested architecture to go with it. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric Parlow" <ericparlow(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: BMA Power Board?
Date: Feb 26, 2007
What the are the list's thoughts on the BMA Power Board? See: http://www.bluemountainavionics.com/powerboard.php ERic-- RV-10, N104EP ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: KLN-89B Installation Manual?
Date: Feb 26, 2007
I received an Install Manual. Thanks Stein. Kevin On 26 Feb 2007, at 12:33, Kevin Horton wrote: > > > A friend is having problems with his KLN-89B. I suspect a wiring > problem. The installation was done by the previous owner, and my > friend does not have the Installation Manual. I would be very > appreciative if anyone could point me at an electronic copy of the > KLN-89B Installation Manual. > > Thanks. > > Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) > Ottawa, Canada > http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: BMA Power Board?
Eric Parlow wrote: > > > What the are the list's thoughts on the BMA Power Board? > The "list's" thoughts? I think the list has been diagnosed as a bipolar schizophrenic, with a multi-personality disorder and visions of grandeur. Sorry, couldn't resist. 8*) I think it is an expensive solution looking for a problem to solve...but I also have visions of grandeur (and of knowing what I'm talking about). -- ,|"|"|, Ernest Christley | ----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta Builder | o| d |o http://ernest.isa-geek.org | ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: Sam Marlow <sam(at)fr8dog.net>
Subject: 2 Grounds
Do I need a separate ground for the Avionics, including the phones. Or will the ganged firewall (cool side) ground block be satisfactory for all my grounds? I think the audio panel (GMA 340) has a ground block. Thanks, Sam Marlow ________________________________________________________________________________
From: CozyGirrrl(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 26, 2007
Subject: Re: BMA Power Board?
In a message dated 2/26/2007 1:51:14 PM Central Standard Time, echristley(at)nc.rr.com writes: I think it is an expensive solution looking for a problem to solve...but I also have visions of grandeur (and of knowing what I'm talking about). ============================================== Yes, but consider this, Greg's 2 passenger Jet-Cozy has a total of 5 or 6 switches not including the few on his stick grip and radios. I think he had simplicity in mind. ...Chrissi CG Products www.CozyGirrrl.com Cozy Mk-IV RG 13B-turbo Plans #957 Chapter? big pieces done, details, details

**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Steer" <steerr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Larger fuse link
Date: Feb 26, 2007
Hi, Bob. I need to put a fuse link in a 14 AWG wire - the endurance buss feed in Z-1. The fuselink article on your site says to contact you if fuse links larger than 22 AWG are needed. Is there an article for the larger fuse link? Thanks very much for your help. Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Garmin 396/496 Display?
Date: Feb 26, 2007
There are a large number of outfits selling software capable of displaying XM weather and GPS mapping info. Most of them are using tablet computers. Pax, Ed Holyoke -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Parlow Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 8:36 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 396/496 Display? What would be required to "tap" into the Garmin 396/496 to send its display out to a 12" LCD? Or alternatively........... Could its weather info be extracted and displayed on another EFIS? ERic- RV-10, N104EP ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "rtitsworth" <rtitsworth(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Z14 ground circuit question(s)
Date: Feb 27, 2007
Bob, etal, I'm building a composite aircraft (Lancair) with a Z-14 (dual alt, dual bat, dual bus) with batteries in the tail. I originally decided that a shared common ground wire back to the batteries was "reasonable safe" and an appropriate compromise on a true dual electric system as there are few likely failure modes for a well secured #2 Tefzel wire (the big ground wire). It "seems" the most likely potential failure is that one of the two end attach points would fail (disconnect) - at either the large ring terminal (crimped and soldered to the cable) or the nuts/studs used to connect them to the ground bus (forest of tabs). While perhaps relatively unlikely, in either of those failure scenarios, all my other dual bus redundancies are for naught. To date, my only countermeasure for this risk was (attempted) good workmanship. However, since neither ends is easily visible it seems I might always be wondering what if(????). Questions: #1) Would it be appropriate to use a nylon lock nut or a steel lock nut to secure the ground cable ring terminal to the ground stud(s)? #2) Would it be reasonable to think about a second smaller parallel "backup" ground wire which would be sized to only carry normal in-flight electrical loads. Any suggestions on how to design/connect this so it does not try to accept 1/2 of ground (return) current during engine start? Perhaps a "backup ground" switch - normally left in the off position. Or perhaps a settable breaker with one of the little red plastic rings holding it in the off position. #3) Would I be better off with two #5 ground cables simply wired in parallel - ie. creating redundant "ends" for roughly the same current capacity and weight. If so, how would I know if/when one failed (the smell of the other during engine start?). #4) Should I reconsider creating truly separate busses with independent ground returns? #5) I also got to looking at the single engine ground strap (ordered from B & C). If it came loose, both alternators go dead together. I'd still have ~40 amp hours of combined batter juice (when new). However, I'm considering two engine ground straps, which might also help further reduce any electrical resistance there during staring. #6) I'm planning on having a backup Airspeed, Altitude, and electric Attitude indicator. If I put a small local battery on the attitude indicator, then perhaps none of all the rest of the electrical equipment is "essential" anyway. Bring a flashlight with fresh/backup batteries, a handheld radio and perhaps a handheld GPS and forget all the above. Sorry for the long message - Comments? Rick ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 2007
From: Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net>
Subject: Re: Z14 ground circuit question(s)
Hi Rick FWIW I ran a #4 welding cable ground wire from each battery to its own 5/16" brass bolt on a forest of tabs ground plate on the firewall. Each of those bolts has a ground strap to the engine and I think that two ground straps is the most important thing to address your concerns. Ground straps do fail. And of course flexible cable for battery connections. My batteries are near the firewall so two ground wires was not a big issue. Even though I only need one ground wire to crank the engine I would expect to notice one electrical system starting to fluctuate or something if its ground wire connections started to degrade. With a long #4 ground wire from each battery I would also expect to notice slower cranking as one cable won't be doing much, and in my case one battery won't be doing much either. Now that it's cold around here, I can report that my two little 8 AH Dekka batteries crank my subaru just fine at -15C (5 F). One cranks it briskly in warm weather but I haven't tried that in cold temps. Ken rtitsworth wrote: > >Bob, etal, > >I'm building a composite aircraft (Lancair) with a Z-14 (dual alt, dual bat, >dual bus) with batteries in the tail. I originally decided that a shared >common ground wire back to the batteries was "reasonable safe" and an >appropriate compromise on a true dual electric system as there are few >likely failure modes for a well secured #2 Tefzel wire (the big ground >wire). > >It "seems" the most likely potential failure is that one of the two end >attach points would fail (disconnect) - at either the large ring terminal >(crimped and soldered to the cable) or the nuts/studs used to connect them >to the ground bus (forest of tabs). While perhaps relatively unlikely, in >either of those failure scenarios, all my other dual bus redundancies are >for naught. To date, my only countermeasure for this risk was (attempted) >good workmanship. However, since neither ends is easily visible it seems I >might always be wondering what if(????). > >Questions: > >#1) Would it be appropriate to use a nylon lock nut or a steel lock nut to >secure the ground cable ring terminal to the ground stud(s)? > >#2) Would it be reasonable to think about a second smaller parallel "backup" >ground wire which would be sized to only carry normal in-flight electrical >loads. Any suggestions on how to design/connect this so it does not try to >accept 1/2 of ground (return) current during engine start? Perhaps a >"backup ground" switch - normally left in the off position. Or perhaps a >settable breaker with one of the little red plastic rings holding it in the >off position. > >#3) Would I be better off with two #5 ground cables simply wired in parallel >- ie. creating redundant "ends" for roughly the same current capacity and >weight. If so, how would I know if/when one failed (the smell of the other >during engine start?). > >#4) Should I reconsider creating truly separate busses with independent >ground returns? > >#5) I also got to looking at the single engine ground strap (ordered from B >& C). If it came loose, both alternators go dead together. I'd still have >~40 amp hours of combined batter juice (when new). However, I'm considering >two engine ground straps, which might also help further reduce any >electrical resistance there during staring. > >#6) I'm planning on having a backup Airspeed, Altitude, and electric >Attitude indicator. If I put a small local battery on the attitude >indicator, then perhaps none of all the rest of the electrical equipment is >"essential" anyway. Bring a flashlight with fresh/backup batteries, a >handheld radio and perhaps a handheld GPS and forget all the above. > >Sorry for the long message - Comments? > >Rick > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Bob, Can you put Commtap back up?
From: "discover" <923te(at)cox.net>
Date: Feb 27, 2007
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/commtap/commtap.html The link above to the roll your own comm tap doesn't work and I was hoping you could reload it. Several Fellow Grumman owners are wanting to tie in their handhelds and I wanted them to consider how to DIY Thanks Bob Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=97617#97617 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Steer" <steerr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: 2 Grounds
Date: Feb 27, 2007
Did you ever get an answer to this, Sam? I don't know if it applies to your situation, but I'm using an intercom in addition to my Microaire 760 radio. Bob kindly gave me a wiring diagram for hooking up the two together. That diagram specifically separated the signal ground from the power ground. Hope this helps. Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Marlow" <sam(at)fr8dog.net> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 11:32 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: 2 Grounds > > Do I need a separate ground for the Avionics, including the phones. Or > will the ganged firewall (cool side) ground block be satisfactory for all > my grounds? I think the audio panel (GMA 340) has a ground block. > Thanks, > Sam Marlow > > > -- > 3:16 PM > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: LED Landing Lights again...
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Date: Feb 27, 2007
Lexus has backed off on their introduction of high beam AND low beam in their Spring cars in the US (probably due to the DOT tests). Now only their low beam is LED. Audi R8 has low beam LEDs only as well I hear. Personally, I would avoid lamps made with dozens of smaller LEDs--but they would do in a pinch. You could use four of the brightest MR16 3W Cree LED lamps such as: http://www.theledlight.com/dcbulbs.html. They would be just short of 500 lumens and 25 degrees, but being 6000k white makes up for a lot. Or at least you can build in the sockets for MR16 lamps and wait for the technology to get better (and it is getting better very FAST). If you belong to an EAA chapter I would suggest getting together and buying samples of significant LED lamps from time to time to benchmark the technology. It would be money well spent. Lamps of 70-90 lumens/watt are now for sale. http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20050622/106025/ Expect the following-- Initially many will reject LED lights because they will not be as bright and they will be more expensive (you can't SEE energy savings or efficiency...). "Filament" cults will arise, clinging to the "Warmth" of filaments versus the LED's coldness. Some will claim the eye can see better or is more comfortable in "Filament-lighted" workplaces. Some rich people will have totally "Filament-Lighted" homes. Soon there will be filament light museums. Ah, yes...... "...Beans for supper tonight, six o'clock. Navy beans cooked in Oklahoma ham... Got to eat 'em with a spoon, raw onions and cornbread; nothing else...." --Will Rogers -------- 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=97648#97648 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Lamphere" <lamphere(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Hi-V/Lo-V Monitor
Date: Feb 27, 2007
I've tried calling the 316-685-8617 number for AEC a couple of days now - no answer. Does anyone know what the AEC 9005-101 Hi-V/Lo-V monitor costs? Unless I have missed it, the website doesn't give a price. Just the bare-bones PC card for a DIY version. Dave ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 2007
From: Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: LED Landing Lights again...
Terry Watson wrote: >p.s. More to the point of the AeroElectric list, I read somewhere -- most >likely here -- that the white or blue L.E.D. lights are less noticeable >during the daylight hours than the less natural yellow light of incandescent >bulbs, making L.E.D. landing lights less effective as attention-getters. >------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > besthongkong.com has 'warm white' LEDs that are closer to what a filament light creates. Nearly 150lm for it's 5-watts of consumption, and only about $12 each. -- ,|"|"|, Ernest Christley | ----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta Builder | o| d |o http://ernest.isa-geek.org | ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter C" <peterc(at)pipcom.com>
Subject: battery wiring
Date: Feb 27, 2007
In my 912 powered Rans, the battery is going just behind the firewall with the starter solenoid and manual master actually mounted right on the battery terminals.You have suggested a brass bolt thru the firewall to connect the ground cable from the battery and from engine ground. Might it be preferable if I ran the ground straight thru the firewall to the engine then had maybe a #10 wire from the battery to the firewall for the rest of the frame grounding? Thanks Peter ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 2007
From: Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Subject: Re: battery wiring
Peter C a crit : > In my 912 powered Rans, the battery is going just behind the firewall > with the starter solenoid and manual master actually mounted right on > the battery terminals.You have suggested a brass bolt thru the > firewall to connect the ground cable from the battery and from engine > ground. Might it be preferable if I ran the ground straight thru the > firewall to the engine then had maybe a #10 wire from the battery to > the firewall for the rest of the frame grounding? Peter, What advantage do you see in building a fireproof FWL pass-through for your big wire, vs just drilling for your ground bolt ? What exactly do you call "frame grounding" ? Remember that all the grounds from your aircraft system should be connected to the same point, and the ground stud and bus provide just what is needed. You may wish to see figure Z16, which was designed for the Rotax. Regards, Gilles http://contrails.free.fr ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter C" <peterc(at)pipcom.com>
Subject: battery wiring
Date: Feb 27, 2007
Gilles my thinking was to address maximum cranking capability while still providing a firewall ground with the #10 (or larger) wire. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Subject: Re: battery wiring
Peter C a crit : > Gilles my thinking was to address maximum cranking capability while > still providing a firewall ground with the #10 (or larger) wire. You won't have any cranking problem with 6 or 4 wires, ground stud and a recombinant gas battery. That's the way I wired our project, and we've been flying for two years now. Figure Z16 is really worth a close study. Regards, Gilles http://contrails.free.fr ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 2007
From: <sam.marlow(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: 2 Grounds
No, I didn't get an answer, and my grounds are just hanging waiting to be connected. If I just knew where? ---- Bill Steer wrote: > > Did you ever get an answer to this, Sam? I don't know if it applies to your > situation, but I'm using an intercom in addition to my Microaire 760 radio. > Bob kindly gave me a wiring diagram for hooking up the two together. That > diagram specifically separated the signal ground from the power ground. > > Hope this helps. > > Bill > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sam Marlow" <sam(at)fr8dog.net> > To: > Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 11:32 AM > Subject: AeroElectric-List: 2 Grounds > > > > > > Do I need a separate ground for the Avionics, including the phones. Or > > will the ganged firewall (cool side) ground block be satisfactory for all > > my grounds? I think the audio panel (GMA 340) has a ground block. > > Thanks, > > Sam Marlow > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > 3:16 PM > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: BMA Power Board?
From: "marcausman" <marc(at)verticalpower.com>
Date: Feb 27, 2007
Eric, if you're looking for ways to simplify wiring your -10 and have a very capable all-electric aircraft, take a look at www.verticalpower.com. There is lots of information on the web site. Regards, Marc -------- Marc Ausman http://www.verticalpower.com RV-7 IO-390 Flying Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=97737#97737 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 2007
From: John Coloccia <john(at)ballofshame.com>
Subject: Re: 2 Grounds
Bleary eyed, but still almost thinking straight, I'll take a shot at this.... Ground is ground is ground...however, the best grounding schemes would use wiring with 0 resistance and 0 length. Since we have to use real wire, the second best choice is to keep the avionics ground wires as short as possible to a single grounding point. That ground point then gets grounded to the firewall ground. This is good because it keeps everything very short AND it makes wiring a lot more convenient (only 1 wire going to the firewall). What you DON'T want to do is mount a piece of copper on the instrument panel, for example, and then tie that to the firewall ground because then you'll have caused a ground loop (you'll have ground coming from the panel metal also in this example). Wherever you tie them together, the only metal it should be touching (other than the other avionic ground wires) is the firewall ground. As far as a "signal" ground, I'm assuming we're talking about the serial lines? Anything that communicates with each other should have their signal grounds tied together. I'm not up to my avionics install yet but if avionics are anything like the real word, how you do this, exactly, is dependent on the specific thingy you're installing. In a perfect world, you would have a signal ground pin somewhere but I believe some avionics don't quite work this way. If you list the avionics you're trying to make play with each other, I'm sure someone probably has a good answer. -John www.ballofshame.com sam.marlow(at)adelphia.net wrote: > > No, I didn't get an answer, and my grounds are just hanging waiting to be connected. If I just knew where? > > ---- Bill Steer wrote: > >> >> Did you ever get an answer to this, Sam? I don't know if it applies to your >> situation, but I'm using an intercom in addition to my Microaire 760 radio. >> Bob kindly gave me a wiring diagram for hooking up the two together. That >> diagram specifically separated the signal ground from the power ground. >> >> Hope this helps. >> >> Bill >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Sam Marlow" <sam(at)fr8dog.net> >> To: >> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 11:32 AM >> Subject: AeroElectric-List: 2 Grounds >> >> >> >>> >>> Do I need a separate ground for the Avionics, including the phones. Or >>> will the ganged firewall (cool side) ground block be satisfactory for all >>> my grounds? I think the audio panel (GMA 340) has a ground block. >>> Thanks, >>> Sam Marlow >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 3:16 PM >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Banus" <mbanus(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: BMA Power Board?
Date: Feb 28, 2007
Eric, I have a powerboard I'm using with a duel battery electrical system (Z-X) with a Subaru in a Glasair II. As I'm not flying yet I can't give a performance assessment. But it has made it very easy to install the electrical system. I like the idea of the "polyswitches". I have also developed a circuit that lights a green LED above each switch when the switch is on and circuit closed. The LED turns red if the circuit opens with the switch on so I know if power is lost to a circuit. Mark Banus ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: Bruce Bell <brucebell74(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Test
Test ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: Dave N6030X <N6030X(at)DaveMorris.com>
Subject: Re: Hi-V/Lo-V Monitor
I don't know, but for $285, you can have a Hi-Lo voltage monitor and 16 additional voice warnings in your headset. "Check Bus Voltage", "Check Airspeed", "Check Fuel Pressure", etc. Very slick. http://www.buy-ei.com/Voice%20Annunciator%20AV-17.htm Dave Morris At 01:26 PM 2/27/2007, you wrote: > > >I've tried calling the 316-685-8617 number for AEC a couple of days >now - no answer. >Does anyone know what the AEC 9005-101 Hi-V/Lo-V monitor costs? >Unless I have missed it, the website doesn't give a price. Just the >bare-bones PC card for a DIY version. > >Dave > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Baluns and contactors . . .
>Hi Bob, > >I found your comment about the difference between a coax balun performance >vs. ferrite core balun somewhat contrary to my experience. I am building a >Long EZ and the port rudder has a coax balun (RG58) and the starboard side >has a ferrite balun. The side by side performance (before they were >mounted to the wings) difference between the two antennas is remarkable. By what means of measurement? Recall that thousands of airplanes are flying without benefit of a BALUN and the owners report "no problems" . . . The article wasn't intended to persuade anyone to adopt any particular configuration but was only ONE example of an easy way to go about it. Figures of merit between configurations are often so small that they cannot be deduced by operator observations and yield only to analysis by laboratory measurement. > >The drawing you have for the balun is not like the balun I built. My >design came from an old navy electronics manual and is significantly >different than what you have shown. In my schematic, the center conductor >between the two elements in the shrink wrap are tied together (actually >never broken), I'll send you a copy of the schematic if I can find it. There are a number of ways to make a useful connection between a feedline and an antenna . . . and a variety of ways that BALUNS can be fabricated. Each configuration has characteristics defined by the physics and performance defined by measurement. But it's unlikely that even side-by-side comparison by operator observation will produce a clear "winner". The point of the article was to offer an alternative to manufactured antennas (whether or not the BALUN is ferrite or even present) that tend to be pretty expensive. > >Different question. Master Contactor. Is the Cessna Contactor sufficient >for running start power through it ( I don't know how the Cessna is >wired)? Some folks on the web are saying no, that you need something that >will handle 300 amps. I have found some TYCO contactors rated that way - >but they are $90 vs $20 at ACS. There are "ratings" and then there are "ratings". Take a peek at the article on switches at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/swtchrat.pdf Relays and contactors are but remotely operated switches. In addition to make-break contacts, a relay or contactor has additional considerations concerning its solenoid or coils. There have been hundreds of thousands of airplanes built wherein the 70A "rated" RBMC/White-Rogers/Stancor contactors have offered satisfactory service life as a battery master relay even though it's routinely 'overloaded' during engine cranking. The ability of a device to "carry" current is several times better than the device's ability to 'switch' current . . . this is why starter contactors and battery contactors are built differently. See chapter in the 'Connection about continuous and intermittent duty contactors. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Full Auto
>I checked out that figure, and all the others as well, but It requires >tripping the battery switch and a 1-3 E-Bus Alternate feed switch. It's >not full auto switching. Isn't there something simpler? What is the design goal? What is the investment in $time$ needed to meet those goals? What is your perceived return on investment for having spent the $time$? The term "full auto" doesn't paint a lucid picture of the operation desired nor does it help us understand the goal. What kind of failure are you contemplating will benefit from the $time$ spent to achieve totally hands-off mitigation? When you have an alternator failure, how do you expect the outcome of flight to be significantly altered because you've added hardware to do it automatically as opposed to the repositioning of couple of switches in response to a low voltage warning light? If KISS is your true goal, the start with any activities that reduce parts count, weight, wiring complexity and cost of ownership. The Z-figures are purposely devoid of much in the way of automation because I can deduce no additional features that offer real return on investment. Bob . . . Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: 2 Grounds
> >Do I need a separate ground for the Avionics, including the phones. Or >will the ganged firewall (cool side) ground block be satisfactory for all >my grounds? I think the audio panel (GMA 340) has a ground block. >Thanks, >Sam Marlow See chapter on Grounds in the 'Connection and in particular the suggested architectures illustrated in Figure Z-15 in . . . http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11J.pdf The term "need" is not quantifiable. There are tens of thousands of vehicles including airplanes where various systems in power distribution and signal handling are "grounded" willy-nilly without consideration for the physics For every builder that touts a "need" there will be a half dozen who cite observations based on their own experiences that contradict the notion of "need". Bottom line is that there are reasons based in physics that show now potential for noise and/or degraded operation can be elevated by inattention to grounding. It's easy to do but if you don't wish to do it, probability of a PERCEIVED degradation of performance is low. HOWEVER when a build comes on the list citing some anomalous or noisy behavior, the first question that enters my mind is, "How are your grounds architectured?". If things are stuck down to the airframe without regard to practices and principles KNOWN to reduce risk, then identifying and fixing the problem can be much harder. None of us can tell you that you NEED to do anything but plenty of us who will sympathize with you should some noise problem present itself at some time in the future. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Larger fuse link
> >Hi, Bob. I need to put a fuse link in a 14 AWG wire - the endurance buss >feed in Z-1. The fuselink article on your site says to contact you if >fuse links larger than 22 AWG are needed. Is there an article for the >larger fuse link? > >Thanks very much for your help. No . . . larger fuse links are not recommended except in those few places where they're illustrated in the Z-figurs. An e-bus feeder of that size should come through a relay (mini-contactor) tapped off a fused slot on the battery bus a illustrated in: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/E-BusFatFeed.gif Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Bob, Can you put Commtap back up?
> >http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/commtap/commtap.html > >The link above to the roll your own comm tap doesn't work and I was hoping >you could reload it. Several Fellow Grumman owners are wanting to tie in >their handhelds and I wanted them to consider how to DIY > >Thanks Bob That comic book was crafted as a quick-n-dirty solution but upon later reflection, was not the best we know how to do. There are equivalent products on the market not the least of which is: http://www.tagpilotsupply.com/browseproducts/Antenna-Switchbox-(IC-ANT-SB).html I've got some ideas about a better way to go about it that will become a product this summer. If you'd like to pursue the original design, see these photos for guidance: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Antenna/ICOM_HH_Adapter_1.jpg http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Antenna/ICOM_HH_Adapter_2.jpg Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Hi-V/Lo-V Monitor
> > >I've tried calling the 316-685-8617 number for AEC a couple of days now - >no answer. That's my home office phone and there's generally nobody here during the day to answer it. I've got a daytime job too! Just got back about 4:00 this morning from a trip to Dayton on a noise filter design task for the boss. Was a VERY good trip. Took a lot of weight and cost out of fixing a noise problem on some really expensive airplanes! >Does anyone know what the AEC 9005-101 Hi-V/Lo-V monitor costs? Unless I >have missed it, the website doesn't give a price. Just the bare-bones PC >card for a DIY version. The bare boards are still available but the product is going to be replaced by this device: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9011/9011-700-1C.pdf One of these is flying and we're going to get a few more installed and flying before they go up on the website. This three channel device will sell for $60 to $80 depending on what options are desired. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: Dave N6030X <N6030X(at)DaveMorris.com>
Subject: Re: BMA Power Board?
LED indicators above switches makes the panel look very cool. I thought about that for my airplane, too. But once you fly a while, you realize that most switches control things that you will know right away either have power or don't have power. The fuel pump makes a nice thumping noise when it's got voltage. And it shows up on the fuel pressure gauge. It's pretty obvious when the instrument lights have power. The landing light in daylight might not be obvious, and neither are the strobes, but at night, there's no doubt whether they have voltage. The pitot heat when kicked on will make a nice jump in the voltmeter or ammeter. That really only leaves the "arm nukes" switch that I would need an LED indicator for. Don't make things too complicated or expensive for yourself. Dave Morris At 07:37 AM 2/28/2007, you wrote: >Eric, > > > I have a powerboard I'm using with a duel battery electrical > system (Z-X) with a Subaru in a Glasair II. As I'm not flying yet > I can't give a performance assessment. But it has made it very easy > to install the electrical system. I like the idea of the > "polyswitches". I have also developed a circuit that lights a green > LED above each switch when the switch is on and circuit closed. The > LED turns red if the circuit opens with the switch on so I know if > power is lost to a circuit. > > >Mark Banus > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric Parlow" <ericparlow(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: BMA Power Board?
Date: Feb 28, 2007
Mark, I also have the BMA Power Board (and EFIS/One) which is installed in my "not flying yet" RV-10. And it has made the installation much simpler and easier. My question was intended to get thoughts on the reliability/durability of the Power Board. It looks to have several single point failure modes. What back-up system are you using for when the Power Board malfunctions? I'd be very interested to see your wiring schematic as I'm working to finish mine before any final wiring starts. I plan to have all the essential components for safe IFR flight also powered thru a second bus independent of the Power Board. ERic-- RV-10 N104EP ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric Parlow" <ericparlow(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Details of BMA Power Board
Date: Feb 28, 2007
Here's more details on the BMA Power Board. http://www.bluemountainavionics.com/download_powerboard/power_board_installation_2_51.doc ERic-- RV-10 N104EP ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill and Marsha" <docyukon(at)ptcnet.net>
Subject: Pulse width modulation on linear actuators
Date: Feb 28, 2007
Bob I also am in need of a speed controller to slow down a linear actuator that I intend to use for my manually in-flight adjustable prop. I have a Werner Electric actuator rated at 1.3a no load and 5.9a full load (75 lbs) Full load speed .6 in. sec. no-load speed. 1 in sec.I should need only about 25 lbs force. My question is, If I use your Dimmer ckt, as shown in the earlier attached PDF link, What are the component values that should be used to build it. And can I expect app 1/3 force at 1/3 speed? Bill S. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net> > To: > Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 1:38 AM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Pulse width modulation on linear actuators > > >> >> >> >>> >>> >>>Can any one tell if the duty cycle on a PWM will equate at least roughly >>>with motor speed? ie will a 20% duty cycle slow the motor down to >>>approximately %20 or does it not work that way? I have a linear actuator >>>for >>>pitch trim that that travels 2"/sec, I need about .5"/sec. >> >> >> Probably. PM motors have field fields which makes >> RPM proportional to applied voltage. The RMS (power) >> available from any source is also proportional >> to duty cycle for a non-continuous flow. In any >> case, I presume you're going to make the duty cycle >> adjustable so whether it takes 25% duty cycle >> or 27% duty cycle to achieve exactly the speed you >> want is irrelevant. >> >> You can also use linear techniques. An adjustable >> but regulated voltage source not unlike the dimmers >> described in . . . >> >> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles//DimmerFabrication.pdf >> >> . . . may be considered also. How much current does >> your motor draw at full speed? >> >> Bob . . . >> >> ---------------------------------------- >> ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) >> ( what ever you do must be exercised ) >> ( EVERY day . . . ) >> ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) >> ---------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> >> > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: BMA Power Board?
From: "h&jeuropa" <europa(at)triton.net>
Date: Feb 28, 2007
I have the BMA power board in our Europa (flying). It was primarily installed because of the PTC protection. The big drawback, is that the entire board is protected by a single fuse, 35A. I attempted to use the cool MOSFET switching transistors and make everything go thru the board. However, with nav lights, landing lite and strobes on, hitting transmit on the com blew the fuse. I moved many items to conventional fuses at that time. Now I am about to remove the BMA board. Using simple faston connectors I can make a board with all the PTC's I want and split them into the various busses too. I used Tyco 164 switches like BMA uses. They are available with up to 3 sets of contacts, 5A each so you can control most things with them. Use a simple relay for others (pitot heat etc). If you need the coolie hat stuff, I think that's available from Ray Allen - I'm not using that. Jim Butcher Europa N241BW Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=97994#97994 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Pulse width modulation on linear actuators
> > > >Bob I also am in need of a speed controller to slow down a linear >actuator that I intend to use for my manually in-flight adjustable prop. I >have a Werner Electric actuator rated at 1.3a no load and 5.9a full load >(75 lbs) Full load speed .6 in. sec. no-load speed. 1 in sec.I should need >only about 25 lbs force. My question is, If I use your Dimmer ckt, as shown >in the earlier attached PDF link, What are the component values that should >be used to build it. And can I expect app 1/3 force at 1/3 speed? There's a LOT of misconceptions about speed controllers for motors and their effects on performance . . . particularly under varying loads. A dropping resistor tends to be a constant current source and will it does slow the motor down, it also limits stall torque. A REGULATING adjustable voltage source such as the linear regulators (described on my website) will hold constant voltage irrespective of actuator load and therefore does not seriously limit the actuator's torque. Duty cycle (pulse width) controllers behave similarly. I think the dimmer circuit fabricated with an LM338K (5A regulator) will do what you want done. The values of components are probalby in the ball park for the voltage range you need too. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Garmin 430W manual
Date: Feb 28, 2007
I need a 430W Installation Manual too, as I want to make any wiring changes now, before the aircraft leaves the garage. Thanks, Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) Ottawa, Canada http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 khorton01(at)rogers.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Van's Ammeter
Listers, I have a Van's - 0 + ammeter. It is very sensitive to rapidly changing loads, especially to the strobe load. The needle is in constant vibration while the strobes are on and/or the landing/taxi light wig-wag is wig-wagging . Is there a reasonable means (preferably connected externally) for increasing its response time. Its external connections are gnd, power, and two terminals to the shunt. Thanks in advance for suggestions. Richard Dudley RV-6A flying ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: 2 Grounds
Bob, To quote you, chapter 18 page 11 of the connection (hope I am not violating your copy write) "The forest-of-ground-tabs technique described in Chapter 5 is entirely suitable and convenient for most equipment in the electrical system. However, while it is electrically correct to wire all the panel mounted equipment to the same ground block the total number of wires can be significant. Further, given that there are a number of small signal systems vulnerable to noise concentrated on the panel, it makes sense to create separate and co-located ground system for these potential victims. ..." Are you saying that the separate and co-located avionics ground system is acceptable because the potential for noise from this design is minimal, and the advantage of not running many separate grounds from all the avionics to the ground bus outweighs the minimal noise potential. Can I then make the conclusion, that if the ground bus were near the avionics, running the wires a single bus would be minimally superior? Larry Rosen Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > >> >> Do I need a separate ground for the Avionics, including the phones. >> Or will the ganged firewall (cool side) ground block be satisfactory >> for all my grounds? I think the audio panel (GMA 340) has a ground >> block. >> Thanks, >> Sam Marlow > > See chapter on Grounds in the 'Connection and in > particular the suggested architectures illustrated > in Figure Z-15 in . . . > > http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11J.pdf > > The term "need" is not quantifiable. There are tens > of thousands of vehicles including airplanes where > various systems in power distribution and signal > handling are "grounded" willy-nilly without consideration > for the physics > > For every builder that touts a "need" there will be > a half dozen who cite observations based on their > own experiences that contradict the notion of "need". > > Bottom line is that there are reasons based in physics > that show now potential for noise and/or degraded operation > can be elevated by inattention to grounding. It's easy > to do but if you don't wish to do it, probability of > a PERCEIVED degradation of performance is low. HOWEVER > when a build comes on the list citing some anomalous or > noisy behavior, the first question that enters my mind > is, "How are your grounds architectured?". > > If things are stuck down to the airframe without regard > to practices and principles KNOWN to reduce risk, then > identifying and fixing the problem can be much harder. > > None of us can tell you that you NEED to do anything > but plenty of us who will sympathize with you should > some noise problem present itself at some time in the > future. > > Bob . . . > > > ---------------------------------------- > ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) > ( what ever you do must be exercised ) > ( EVERY day . . . ) > ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) > ---------------------------------------- > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Van's Ammeter
> > >Listers, >I have a Van's - 0 + ammeter. It is very sensitive to rapidly changing >loads, especially to the strobe load. The needle is in constant vibration >while the strobes are on and/or the landing/taxi light wig-wag is >wig-wagging . Is there a reasonable means (preferably connected >externally) for increasing its response time. Its external connections >are gnd, power, and two terminals to the shunt. > >Thanks in advance for suggestions. > >Richard Dudley >RV-6A flying This instrument is a very low-impedance device (40mv full scale as I recall) in terms of adding damping. The really slick way to damp these devices is to put a drop of hi-viscosity silicone oil in the pivot bearings. We experimented with this at Cessna about 1965 . . . it worked really well. I think we had Stewart-Warner do that mod on future units but I don't recall now. There's a 50,000 cts "differential lock" oil that's popular with the electric race car crowd that costs about $5.00 for a 1 oz bottle. One drop on each bearing would damp it very nicely. The problem with doing the job electrically is that the source impedance for the driving signal is VERY low . . . like a few milliohms. It takes a whopping capacitor to add much time-constant at this low level. Try putting say a 10 ohm resistor in series with one of the shunt leads and the parallel the instrument with the biggest capacitor you can find. I've got some 330uf/6v tantalums you could try. About three of those in parallel would get 1000uF. This MIGHT be useful to try. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net>
Subject: 2 1/4 inch transponder
Date: Feb 28, 2007
I'm considering on using a 2 1/4 inch transponder such as Becker or Microair to free up space in my vertical stack. Does anyone have any experience, cautions or other advice regarding these "round" transponders? They are not as common as the Garmin but any good? Thanks Bevan RV7A finishing kit ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2007
From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Van's Ammeter
Bob, Thanks for the reply. I would prefer trying the external experiment before considering opening the meter. So, I'd like to take you up on your offer of the loan your capacitors to do the experiment. If it works, I'll replace your caps. Earlier, I tried to surpress RF which pinned the meter when I transmitted. A ferrite clamp on one lead did reduce the reaction. My address is RH Dudley 8425 Littleleaf Ct. Orlando, FL 32835 Thanks. Regards, Richard Dudley Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > >> >> >> Listers, >> I have a Van's - 0 + ammeter. It is very sensitive to rapidly >> changing loads, especially to the strobe load. The needle is in >> constant vibration while the strobes are on and/or the landing/taxi >> light wig-wag is wig-wagging . Is there a reasonable means >> (preferably connected externally) for increasing its response time. >> Its external connections are gnd, power, and two terminals to the >> shunt. >> >> Thanks in advance for suggestions. >> >> Richard Dudley >> RV-6A flying > > > This instrument is a very low-impedance device (40mv full > scale as I recall) in terms of adding damping. The really > slick way to damp these devices is to put a drop of hi-viscosity > silicone oil in the pivot bearings. We experimented with this > at Cessna about 1965 . . . it worked really well. I think > we had Stewart-Warner do that mod on future units but I > don't recall now. There's a 50,000 cts "differential lock" > oil that's popular with the electric race car crowd that costs > about $5.00 for a 1 oz bottle. One drop on each bearing > would damp it very nicely. > > The problem with doing the job electrically is that the > source impedance for the driving signal is VERY low . . . > like a few milliohms. It takes a whopping capacitor to > add much time-constant at this low level. Try putting say > a 10 ohm resistor in series with one of the shunt leads > and the parallel the instrument with the biggest capacitor > you can find. I've got some 330uf/6v tantalums you could > try. About three of those in parallel would get 1000uF. > This MIGHT be useful to try. > > Bob . . . > > > ---------------------------------------- > ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) > ( what ever you do must be exercised ) > ( EVERY day . . . ) > ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) > ---------------------------------------- > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Denton" <bdenton(at)bdenton.com>
Subject: Garmin 430W Install Manual
Date: Mar 01, 2007
Hi, Group... There seems to be a lot of interest in the 430W Install Manual. I emailed it to everyone who asked, but a lot of the emails bounced because the manual exceeded the recipients mailbox size limits. It is kinda big. Unfortunately, I have neither the software nor the time to "split" it. I considered putting it up somewhere so it could be downloaded, but I don't want Garmin coming after me for a copyright violation, and I don't want to jeopardize my relationship with my "guy" at Garmin who supplies me with stuff. Of course, if someone else posted it somewhere for the groups benefit... Thank you! Bill Denton bdenton(at)bdenton.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2007
From: LarryMcFarland <larry(at)macsmachine.com>
Subject: Re: 2 1/4 inch transponder
Hi Bevan, I've been using a Becker Transponder 2 1/4 inch for about 2 years now and really like the product. It's well built, very easy to use and install. There's been no problems with it. I looked at Microair before deciding that the Becker was a superior piece of workmanship. The manual was very well done. Larry McFarland - 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com B Tomm wrote: > > I'm considering on using a 2 1/4 inch transponder such as Becker or > Microair to free up space in my vertical stack. Does anyone have any > experience, cautions or other advice regarding these "round" > transponders? They are not as common as the Garmin but any good? > > Thanks > > Bevan > RV7A finishing kit > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2007
From: Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Subject: Re: 2 1/4 inch transponder
LarryMcFarland a crit : > > I've been using a Becker Transponder 2 1/4 inch for about 2 years now > and really like the product. It's well built, very easy to use and > install. > There's been no problems with it. I looked at Microair before > deciding that the Becker was a superior piece of workmanship. > The manual was very well done. Bevan, Larry and all, I'll second that. A breeze to install, more than two years flying now, and no problem. Becker products have an outstanding reputation in Europe. Regards, Gilles http://contrails.free.fr ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Doug Windhorn" <N1DeltaWhiskey(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: 2 Grounds
Date: Mar 01, 2007
Larry, I'll take a stab at attempting to clarify this. It makes sense to run all ground wires to a single ground point, including the avionics. What I believe Bob is saying is that common ground point for the avionics may be established near the avionics, then a single wire connects the avionics ground point to the "forest of tabs" on the firewall. In effect, this method uses the same ground point and the circuitry is virtually identical from a current flow standpoint. It precludes the possibility of alternate feed paths for the ground current, and may, to some miniscule degree, reduce the possibility of electromagnetic crosstalk. The avionics to firewall ground wire needs to be large enough to handle the combined current demand of all of the avionics. I see plusses and minuses with the remote avionics ground point. On the plus side is that the amount of wires from the panel to the firewall is reduced making, possibly, for a cleaner wiring job, lower weight (minimally), and so on. On the minus side is that failure of the connection between the avionics ground and the firewall ground wipes out all of the avionics (but a good installation should preclude this from being a significant concern). It is a wash in my view, and therefore, neither arrangement is necessarily "superior" to the other. Weigh your concerns and use the system you feel most comfortable with. Hope this helps. Doug Windhorn ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Rosen" <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> Sent: Wednesday, 28 February, 2007 18:01 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 2 Grounds > > > Bob, > > To quote you, chapter 18 page 11 of the connection (hope I am not > violating your copy write) > "The forest-of-ground-tabs technique described in Chapter 5 is entirely > suitable and convenient for most equipment in the electrical system. > However, while it is electrically correct to wire all the panel mounted > equipment to the same ground block the total number of wires can be > significant. > > Further, given that there are a number of small signal systems vulnerable > to noise concentrated on the panel, it makes sense to create separate and > co-located ground system for these potential victims. ..." > > Are you saying that the separate and co-located avionics ground system is > acceptable because the potential for noise from this design is minimal, > and the advantage of not running many separate grounds from all the > avionics to the ground bus outweighs the minimal noise potential. > > Can I then make the conclusion, that if the ground bus were near the > avionics, running the wires a single bus would be minimally superior? > > Larry Rosen > > > Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: >> >> >> >>> >>> Do I need a separate ground for the Avionics, including the phones. Or >>> will the ganged firewall (cool side) ground block be satisfactory for >>> all my grounds? I think the audio panel (GMA 340) has a ground block. >>> Thanks, >>> Sam Marlow >> >> See chapter on Grounds in the 'Connection and in >> particular the suggested architectures illustrated >> in Figure Z-15 in . . . >> >> http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11J.pdf >> >> The term "need" is not quantifiable. There are tens >> of thousands of vehicles including airplanes where >> various systems in power distribution and signal >> handling are "grounded" willy-nilly without consideration >> for the physics >> >> For every builder that touts a "need" there will be >> a half dozen who cite observations based on their >> own experiences that contradict the notion of "need". >> >> Bottom line is that there are reasons based in physics >> that show now potential for noise and/or degraded operation >> can be elevated by inattention to grounding. It's easy >> to do but if you don't wish to do it, probability of >> a PERCEIVED degradation of performance is low. HOWEVER >> when a build comes on the list citing some anomalous or >> noisy behavior, the first question that enters my mind >> is, "How are your grounds architectured?". >> >> If things are stuck down to the airframe without regard >> to practices and principles KNOWN to reduce risk, then >> identifying and fixing the problem can be much harder. >> >> None of us can tell you that you NEED to do anything >> but plenty of us who will sympathize with you should >> some noise problem present itself at some time in the >> future. >> >> Bob . . . >> >> >> ---------------------------------------- >> ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) >> ( what ever you do must be exercised ) >> ( EVERY day . . . ) >> ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) >> ---------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Van's Ammeter
> > >Bob, >Thanks for the reply. >I would prefer trying the external experiment before considering opening >the meter. >So, I'd like to take you up on your offer of the loan your capacitors to >do the experiment. If it works, I'll replace your caps. >Earlier, I tried to surpress RF which pinned the meter when I transmitted. >A ferrite clamp on one lead did reduce the reaction. ????? an RF sensitive ammeter ???? This doesn't sound like the instrument I looked at several years ago that came from Vans. Is this a powered device? More than two wires that only come from a shunt? >My address is >RH Dudley >8425 Littleleaf Ct. >Orlando, FL 32835 >Thanks. > >Regards, >Richard Dudley ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2007
From: Sam Marlow <sam(at)fr8dog.net>
Subject: Re: 2 Grounds
Thanks Doug for clarification! Sam Marlow Doug Windhorn wrote: > > > Larry, > > I'll take a stab at attempting to clarify this. It makes sense to run > all ground wires to a single ground point, including the avionics. > What I believe Bob is saying is that common ground point for the > avionics may be established near the avionics, then a single wire > connects the avionics ground point to the "forest of tabs" on the > firewall. > > In effect, this method uses the same ground point and the circuitry is > virtually identical from a current flow standpoint. It precludes the > possibility of alternate feed paths for the ground current, and may, > to some miniscule degree, reduce the possibility of electromagnetic > crosstalk. The avionics to firewall ground wire needs to be large > enough to handle the combined current demand of all of the avionics. > > I see plusses and minuses with the remote avionics ground point. On > the plus side is that the amount of wires from the panel to the > firewall is reduced making, possibly, for a cleaner wiring job, lower > weight (minimally), and so on. On the minus side is that failure of > the connection between the avionics ground and the firewall ground > wipes out all of the avionics (but a good installation should preclude > this from being a significant concern). It is a wash in my view, and > therefore, neither arrangement is necessarily "superior" to the > other. Weigh your concerns and use the system you feel most > comfortable with. > > Hope this helps. > > Doug Windhorn > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Rosen" <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> > To: > Sent: Wednesday, 28 February, 2007 18:01 > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 2 Grounds > > >> >> >> Bob, >> >> To quote you, chapter 18 page 11 of the connection (hope I am not >> violating your copy write) >> "The forest-of-ground-tabs technique described in Chapter 5 is >> entirely suitable and convenient for most equipment in the electrical >> system. However, while it is electrically correct to wire all the >> panel mounted equipment to the same ground block the total number of >> wires can be significant. >> >> Further, given that there are a number of small signal systems >> vulnerable to noise concentrated on the panel, it makes sense to >> create separate and co-located ground system for these potential >> victims. ..." >> >> Are you saying that the separate and co-located avionics ground >> system is acceptable because the potential for noise from this design >> is minimal, and the advantage of not running many separate grounds >> from all the avionics to the ground bus outweighs the minimal noise >> potential. >> >> Can I then make the conclusion, that if the ground bus were near the >> avionics, running the wires a single bus would be minimally superior? >> >> Larry Rosen >> >> >> Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Do I need a separate ground for the Avionics, including the phones. >>>> Or will the ganged firewall (cool side) ground block be >>>> satisfactory for all my grounds? I think the audio panel (GMA 340) >>>> has a ground block. >>>> Thanks, >>>> Sam Marlow >>> >>> See chapter on Grounds in the 'Connection and in >>> particular the suggested architectures illustrated >>> in Figure Z-15 in . . . >>> >>> http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11J.pdf >>> >>> The term "need" is not quantifiable. There are tens >>> of thousands of vehicles including airplanes where >>> various systems in power distribution and signal >>> handling are "grounded" willy-nilly without consideration >>> for the physics >>> >>> For every builder that touts a "need" there will be >>> a half dozen who cite observations based on their >>> own experiences that contradict the notion of "need". >>> >>> Bottom line is that there are reasons based in physics >>> that show now potential for noise and/or degraded operation >>> can be elevated by inattention to grounding. It's easy >>> to do but if you don't wish to do it, probability of >>> a PERCEIVED degradation of performance is low. HOWEVER >>> when a build comes on the list citing some anomalous or >>> noisy behavior, the first question that enters my mind >>> is, "How are your grounds architectured?". >>> >>> If things are stuck down to the airframe without regard >>> to practices and principles KNOWN to reduce risk, then >>> identifying and fixing the problem can be much harder. >>> >>> None of us can tell you that you NEED to do anything >>> but plenty of us who will sympathize with you should >>> some noise problem present itself at some time in the >>> future. >>> >>> Bob . . . >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------- >>> ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) >>> ( what ever you do must be exercised ) >>> ( EVERY day . . . ) >>> ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) >>> ---------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2007
From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Van's Ammeter
Bob, Yes, as I mentioned in my first e-mail, there are four connections, two in addition to the shunt for power and ground. Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > >> >> >> Bob, >> Thanks for the reply. >> I would prefer trying the external experiment before considering >> opening the meter. >> So, I'd like to take you up on your offer of the loan your capacitors >> to do the experiment. If it works, I'll replace your caps. >> Earlier, I tried to surpress RF which pinned the meter when I >> transmitted. A ferrite clamp on one lead did reduce the reaction. > > > ????? an RF sensitive ammeter ???? > > This doesn't sound like the instrument I looked at > several years ago that came from Vans. Is this a powered > device? More than two wires that only come from a shunt? > > >> My address is >> RH Dudley >> 8425 Littleleaf Ct. >> Orlando, FL 32835 >> Thanks. >> >> Regards, >> Richard Dudley > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Garmin 430W Install Manual
Date: Mar 01, 2007
From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mike.stewart(at)us.ibm.com>
Enjoy, http://www2.mstewart.net:8080/Downloads/downloads.htm Mike -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 11:04 AM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430W Install Manual Atlanta)" Well Im trying to get it and Ill post it for all. I cant even spell Garmen. Send it to me. Mike mstewartga(at)yahoo.com or mike.stewart(at)us.ibm.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Denton Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 9:55 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430W Install Manual Hi, Group... There seems to be a lot of interest in the 430W Install Manual. I emailed it to everyone who asked, but a lot of the emails bounced because the manual exceeded the recipients mailbox size limits. It is kinda big. Unfortunately, I have neither the software nor the time to "split" it. I considered putting it up somewhere so it could be downloaded, but I don't want Garmin coming after me for a copyright violation, and I don't want to jeopardize my relationship with my "guy" at Garmin who supplies me with stuff. Of course, if someone else posted it somewhere for the groups benefit... Thank you! Bill Denton bdenton(at)bdenton.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: 2 Grounds
> >Thanks Doug for clarification! >Sam Marlow > >Doug Windhorn wrote: >> >> >>Larry, >> >>I'll take a stab at attempting to clarify this. It makes sense to run >>all ground wires to a single ground point, including the avionics. >>What I believe Bob is saying is that common ground point for the avionics >>may be established near the avionics, then a single wire connects the >>avionics ground point to the "forest of tabs" on the firewall. >> >>In effect, this method uses the same ground point and the circuitry is >>virtually identical from a current flow standpoint. It precludes the >>possibility of alternate feed paths for the ground current, and may, to >>some miniscule degree, reduce the possibility of electromagnetic >>crosstalk. The avionics to firewall ground wire needs to be large enough >>to handle the combined current demand of all of the avionics. >> >>I see plusses and minuses with the remote avionics ground point. On the >>plus side is that the amount of wires from the panel to the firewall is >>reduced making, possibly, for a cleaner wiring job, lower weight >>(minimally), and so on. On the minus side is that failure of the >>connection between the avionics ground and the firewall ground wipes out >>all of the avionics (but a good installation should preclude this from >>being a significant concern). It is a wash in my view, and therefore, >>neither arrangement is necessarily "superior" to the other. Weigh your >>concerns and use the system you feel most comfortable with. >> >>Hope this helps. >> >>Doug Windhorn Right on Doug. Thanks. The single-point failure issue is addressed by the notation you'll find on Figure Z-15 illustrations for the panel ground bus where I show five separate, 20AWG wires to run from the panel ground bus down to the firewall ground. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "6440 Auto Parts" <sales(at)6440autoparts.com>
Subject: Re: Garmin 430W Install Manual
Date: Mar 01, 2007
Not sure if this will help but you may give it a try. http://www2.mstewart.net:8080/Downloads/howtogetagarminmanual.htm The accual link to the 430 I think is http://www.garmin.com/manuals/143_InstallationManual.pdf Randy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Denton" <bdenton(at)bdenton.com> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 8:54 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430W Install Manual > > > Hi, Group... > > There seems to be a lot of interest in the 430W Install Manual. > > I emailed it to everyone who asked, but a lot of the emails bounced > because > the manual exceeded the recipients mailbox size limits. It is kinda big. > > Unfortunately, I have neither the software nor the time to "split" it. > > I considered putting it up somewhere so it could be downloaded, but I > don't > want Garmin coming after me for a copyright violation, and I don't want to > jeopardize my relationship with my "guy" at Garmin who supplies me with > stuff. > > Of course, if someone else posted it somewhere for the groups benefit... > > Thank you! > > Bill Denton > bdenton(at)bdenton.com > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "6440 Auto Parts" <sales(at)6440autoparts.com>
Subject: Re: Garmin 430W Install Manual
Date: Mar 01, 2007
Mike thanks for your efforts of putting these on your website. As far as I can tell you are the only one that offers this service for free. Randy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mike.stewart(at)us.ibm.com> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 11:19 AM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430W Install Manual > > > Enjoy, > http://www2.mstewart.net:8080/Downloads/downloads.htm > > Mike > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) > Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 11:04 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430W Install Manual > > Atlanta)" > > Well Im trying to get it and Ill post it for all. > I cant even spell Garmen. > Send it to me. > Mike > mstewartga(at)yahoo.com or mike.stewart(at)us.ibm.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill > Denton > Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 9:55 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Garmin 430W Install Manual > > > > Hi, Group... > > There seems to be a lot of interest in the 430W Install Manual. > > I emailed it to everyone who asked, but a lot of the emails bounced > because > the manual exceeded the recipients mailbox size limits. It is kinda big. > > Unfortunately, I have neither the software nor the time to "split" it. > > I considered putting it up somewhere so it could be downloaded, but I > don't > want Garmin coming after me for a copyright violation, and I don't want > to > jeopardize my relationship with my "guy" at Garmin who supplies me with > stuff. > > Of course, if someone else posted it somewhere for the groups benefit... > > Thank you! > > Bill Denton > bdenton(at)bdenton.com > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 2 Grounds
Date: Mar 01, 2007
From: "Glaeser, Dennis A" <dennis.glaeser(at)eds.com>
I ran Power grounds for each radio to the forest of tabs, and used the 'remote ground' for all of the signal connection 'lows' and shields. With this setup, I believe that the connection from the remote ground to the forest of tabs is non-critical (although I agree it's failure potential rivals my chances of winning the lottery :-) Dennis Glaeser ---------------------------------------------------- From: Doug Windhorn --- <-snip-> --- On the minus side is that failure of the connection between the avionics ground and the firewall ground wipes out all of the avionics (but a good installation should preclude this from being a significant concern). It is a wash in my view, and therefore, neither arrangement is necessarily "superior" to the other. Weigh your concerns and use the system you feel most comfortable with. Hope this helps. Doug Windhorn ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2007
From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: 18 AH Battery Test Data
Listers, FWIW I have been following the procedure of replacing my 18/17.X AH RG battery annually for the last two years. This year, I decided to do an endurance test on the "old" battery. Using an automotive two filament headlamp with the filaments in parallel, I was able to start at a current of 6.7 amps drain to simulate an endurance buss demand with a failed alternator. The battery has been used for one year including about 40 flight hours and 50 engine starts. The battery is a 17-18 AH sold by Batteries Plus sometimes with the name Xtreme Plus. My engine is an O-320 with 110 plus hours on it. These batteries turn the engine over very "smartly" only observed at temperatures above 60F. At the beginning of the test, the current was 6.7 A and at the end at 5.6 A . This decline is partly explained by the voltage decline as well as filament resistance decrease with temperature in the lamp. These results are consistent with the specification sheet provided for the Xtreme Plus batteries which predicts a two hour endurance at 6A. Regards, Richard Dudley ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2007
From: Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Subject: Switch drilling template
Hi all, Anyone can direct me to a drilling drawing or template I could print for a buddy to install his Otto T7 15/32 switches ? I remember seeing such a drawing, but can't remember where. Thanks in advance, Regards, Gilles http://contrails.free.fr ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric Newton" <enewton57(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: 2 Grounds
Date: Mar 01, 2007
I have a decidedly small and low tech avionics system. A single radio (ICOM A200) a single transponder (Colllins) and a single intercom (PS 1000). So with that simple of a system, I'll probably just run the ground wire from each component to the forest of tabs on the firewall. If I'm reading your post right, that's perfectly acceptable, right? Eric Newton - Long Beach, MS BH #682 http://mybearhawk.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Doug Windhorn To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 10:26 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 2 Grounds Larry, I'll take a stab at attempting to clarify this. It makes sense to run all ground wires to a single ground point, including the avionics. What I believe Bob is saying is that common ground point for the avionics may be established near the avionics, then a single wire connects the avionics ground point to the "forest of tabs" on the firewall. In effect, this method uses the same ground point and the circuitry is virtually identical from a current flow standpoint. It precludes the possibility of alternate feed paths for the ground current, and may, to some miniscule degree, reduce the possibility of electromagnetic crosstalk. The avionics to firewall ground wire needs to be large enough to handle the combined current demand of all of the avionics. I see plusses and minuses with the remote avionics ground point. On the plus side is that the amount of wires from the panel to the firewall is reduced making, possibly, for a cleaner wiring job, lower weight (minimally), and so on. On the minus side is that failure of the connection between the avionics ground and the firewall ground wipes out all of the avionics (but a good installation should preclude this from being a significant concern). It is a wash in my view, and therefore, neither arrangement is necessarily "superior" to the other. Weigh your concerns and use the system you feel most comfortable with. Hope this helps. Doug Windhorn ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Rosen" <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> To: Sent: Wednesday, 28 February, 2007 18:01 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 2 Grounds > > > Bob, > > To quote you, chapter 18 page 11 of the connection (hope I am not > violating your copy write) > "The forest-of-ground-tabs technique described in Chapter 5 is entirely > suitable and convenient for most equipment in the electrical system. > However, while it is electrically correct to wire all the panel mounted > equipment to the same ground block the total number of wires can be > significant. > > Further, given that there are a number of small signal systems vulnerable > to noise concentrated on the panel, it makes sense to create separate and > co-located ground system for these potential victims. ..." > > Are you saying that the separate and co-located avionics ground system is > acceptable because the potential for noise from this design is minimal, > and the advantage of not running many separate grounds from all the > avionics to the ground bus outweighs the minimal noise potential. > > Can I then make the conclusion, that if the ground bus were near the > avionics, running the wires a single bus would be minimally superior? > > Larry Rosen > > > Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: >> >> >> >>> >>> Do I need a separate ground for the Avionics, including the phones. Or >>> will the ganged firewall (cool side) ground block be satisfactory for >>> all my grounds? I think the audio panel (GMA 340) has a ground block. >>> Thanks, >>> Sam Marlow >> >> See chapter on Grounds in the 'Connection and in >> particular the suggested architectures illustrated >> in Figure Z-15 in . . . >> >> http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11J.pdf >> >> The term "need" is not quantifiable. There are tens >> of thousands of vehicles including airplanes where >> various systems in power distribution and signal >> handling are "grounded" willy-nilly without consideration >> for the physics >> >> For every builder that touts a "need" there will be >> a half dozen who cite observations based on their >> own experiences that contradict the notion of "need". >> >> Bottom line is that there are reasons based in physics >> that show now potential for noise and/or degraded operation >> can be elevated by inattention to grounding. It's easy >> to do but if you don't wish to do it, probability of >> a PERCEIVED degradation of performance is low. HOWEVER >> when a build comes on the list citing some anomalous or >> noisy behavior, the first question that enters my mind >> is, "How are your grounds architectured?". >> >> If things are stuck down to the airframe without regard >> to practices and principles KNOWN to reduce risk, then >> identifying and fixing the problem can be much harder. >> >> None of us can tell you that you NEED to do anything >> but plenty of us who will sympathize with you should >> some noise problem present itself at some time in the >> future. >> >> Bob . . . >> >> >> ---------------------------------------- >> ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) >> ( what ever you do must be exercised ) >> ( EVERY day . . . ) >> ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) >> ---------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Steer" <steerr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Switch drilling template
Date: Mar 01, 2007
There's one on page 11-16 of Bob's book. It's Figure 11-12. That's assuming the switches you mention are the same as the Carling switches described in the book. The 15/32 diameter is the same. Bill > Anyone can direct me to a drilling drawing or template I could print for a > buddy to install his Otto T7 15/32 switches ? > I remember seeing such a drawing, but can't remember where. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <bakerocb(at)cox.net>
Subject: GPS Antenna?
Date: Mar 01, 2007
3/1/2006 Hello Fellow Listers, I am trying to identify an object on the bottom of the fuselage of a Beech Sierra airplane. It is black plastic about the size of a cigar box. Embossed on the bottom of the box is an arrow pointing forward and the letters 3M. It was described at one time as a GPS antenna, but that does not make much sense to me. Why would a GPS antenna be on the bottom of the fuselage? I also am not able to locate any antenna created by 3M. Any good ideas? Many thanks. OC -- The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and understand knowledge. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2007
From: Earl_Schroeder <Earl_Schroeder(at)juno.com>
Subject: Re: GPS Antenna?
I have a similar looking box on my C-150. Mine is a 'loop' antenna for an old ADF. Earl bakerocb(at)cox.net wrote: > > > Hello Fellow Listers, I am trying to identify an object on the bottom > of the fuselage of a Beech Sierra airplane. It is black plastic about > the size of a cigar box. Embossed on the bottom of the box is an arrow > pointing forward and the letters 3M. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Doug Windhorn" <N1DeltaWhiskey(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: 2 Grounds
Date: Mar 01, 2007
Eric, Certainly a way that I could feel comfortable with (and the way I did mine). Doug ----- Original Message ----- From: Eric Newton To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, 01 March, 2007 16:31 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 2 Grounds I have a decidedly small and low tech avionics system. A single radio (ICOM A200) a single transponder (Colllins) and a single intercom (PS 1000). So with that simple of a system, I'll probably just run the ground wire from each component to the forest of tabs on the firewall. If I'm reading your post right, that's perfectly acceptable, right? Eric Newton - Long Beach, MS BH #682 http://mybearhawk.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Doug Windhorn To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 10:26 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 2 Grounds Larry, I'll take a stab at attempting to clarify this. It makes sense to run all ground wires to a single ground point, including the avionics. What I believe Bob is saying is that common ground point for the avionics may be established near the avionics, then a single wire connects the avionics ground point to the "forest of tabs" on the firewall. In effect, this method uses the same ground point and the circuitry is virtually identical from a current flow standpoint. It precludes the possibility of alternate feed paths for the ground current, and may, to some miniscule degree, reduce the possibility of electromagnetic crosstalk. The avionics to firewall ground wire needs to be large enough to handle the combined current demand of all of the avionics. I see plusses and minuses with the remote avionics ground point. On the plus side is that the amount of wires from the panel to the firewall is reduced making, possibly, for a cleaner wiring job, lower weight (minimally), and so on. On the minus side is that failure of the connection between the avionics ground and the firewall ground wipes out all of the avionics (but a good installation should preclude this from being a significant concern). It is a wash in my view, and therefore, neither arrangement is necessarily "superior" to the other. Weigh your concerns and use the system you feel most comfortable with. Hope this helps. Doug Windhorn ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Rosen" <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> To: Sent: Wednesday, 28 February, 2007 18:01 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 2 Grounds > > > Bob, > > To quote you, chapter 18 page 11 of the connection (hope I am not > violating your copy write) > "The forest-of-ground-tabs technique described in Chapter 5 is entirely > suitable and convenient for most equipment in the electrical system. > However, while it is electrically correct to wire all the panel mounted > equipment to the same ground block the total number of wires can be > significant. > > Further, given that there are a number of small signal systems vulnerable > to noise concentrated on the panel, it makes sense to create separate and > co-located ground system for these potential victims. ..." > > Are you saying that the separate and co-located avionics ground system is > acceptable because the potential for noise from this design is minimal, > and the advantage of not running many separate grounds from all the > avionics to the ground bus outweighs the minimal noise potential. > > Can I then make the conclusion, that if the ground bus were near the > avionics, running the wires a single bus would be minimally superior? > > Larry Rosen > > > Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: III" >> >> >> >>> >>> Do I need a separate ground for the Avionics, including the phones. Or >>> will the ganged firewall (cool side) ground block be satisfactory for >>> all my grounds? I think the audio panel (GMA 340) has a ground block. >>> Thanks, >>> Sam Marlow >> >> See chapter on Grounds in the 'Connection and in >> particular the suggested architectures illustrated >> in Figure Z-15 in . . . >> >> http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11J.pdf >> >> The term "need" is not quantifiable. There are tens >> of thousands of vehicles including airplanes where >> various systems in power distribution and signal >> handling are "grounded" willy-nilly without consideration >> for the physics >> >> For every builder that touts a "need" there will be >> a half dozen who cite observations based on their >> own experiences that contradict the notion of "need". >> >> Bottom line is that there are reasons based in physics >> that show now potential for noise and/or degraded operation >> can be elevated by inattention to grounding. It's easy >> to do but if you don't wish to do it, probability of >> a PERCEIVED degradation of performance is low. HOWEVER >> when a build comes on the list citing some anomalous or >> noisy behavior, the first question that enters my mind >> is, "How are your grounds architectured?". >> >> If things are stuck down to the airframe without regard >> to practices and principles KNOWN to reduce risk, then >> identifying and fixing the problem can be much harder. >> >> None of us can tell you that you NEED to do anything >> but plenty of us who will sympathize with you should >> some noise problem present itself at some time in the >> future. >> >> Bob . . . >> >> >> ---------------------------------------- >> ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) >> ( what ever you do must be exercised ) >> ( EVERY day . . . ) >> ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) >> ---------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > nbsp; Features Subscriptions href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www. p; available via href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: affordable panels
From: "Dennis Jones" <djones(at)northboone.net>
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Any one have feed back on there experience with Affordable Panels service or product? Thanks Jonsey Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98264#98264 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: affordable panels
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: eddyfernan(at)aol.com
I have a complete modular panel from Affordable panels and would recomend them as the way to go for your project. You can contact me off the list if you have any questions. Eddy RV9A 95 hours and loving it! -----Original Message----- From: djones(at)northboone.net Sent: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 3:05 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: affordable panels Any one have feed back on there experience with Affordable Panels service or product? Thanks Jonsey Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98264#98264 ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: Bobby Hester <bobbyhester(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: affordable panels
I have one in my plane and love it! Great service when I ordered mine about 3-4 yrs ago! There are pictures on my web site below :-) Click on them to enlarge. Surfing the web from Hopkinsville, KY My RV7A website: http://webpages.charter.net/bobbyhester/MyFlyingRV7A.htm Dennis Jones wrote: > >Any one have feed back on there experience with Affordable Panels service or product? > >Thanks >Jonsey > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98264#98264 > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Denton" <bdenton(at)bdenton.com>
Subject: GPS Antenna?
Date: Mar 02, 2007
At one time 3M owned Stormscope. Could it be an antenna for that product? -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of bakerocb(at)cox.net Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2007 10:11 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: GPS Antenna? 3/1/2006 Hello Fellow Listers, I am trying to identify an object on the bottom of the fuselage of a Beech Sierra airplane. It is black plastic about the size of a cigar box. Embossed on the bottom of the box is an arrow pointing forward and the letters 3M. It was described at one time as a GPS antenna, but that does not make much sense to me. Why would a GPS antenna be on the bottom of the fuselage? I also am not able to locate any antenna created by 3M. Any good ideas? Many thanks. OC -- The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and understand knowledge. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Subject: 2 Grounds
From: James H Nelson <rv9jim(at)juno.com>
Yup! That is what I did. Just get a large enough ground tab block. I had to run several wires thru the fire wall pass thru and use the ground tabs on the fire wall side. That is OK as there was a lot of unused tabs on that side anyway. I think I got the 24/24 block. Working out fine and I still have about a dozen empty tabs on the fire wall side to be used as necessary. Jim RV9-A QB (FWF bout done) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Subject: Affordable Panels
From: James H Nelson <rv9jim(at)juno.com>
Hi Dennis, You will like working with Fabian. He does a quality job and it is worth it. If you have to go behind your panel you will be very happy you put in the three piece unit. I bought the "tall" panel and I have GRT dual screens that fit nicely. I surrounded them with the A/S, Alt, VSI and TT Pictoral Pilot as my T&B / wing leveler. You can see my layout at www.websites.expercraft.com/jimn I'm about finished with the panel wiring and getting ready to put on the top skin. Fabian's pricing is also good. He sent me a CD for the large panel which I could go to my local Kinko's and have a full size print out of the panel. With that, you can use your cut outs to put items where you want. I literally used my caliper to fit things with in .025". He cut it exactly as I wanted and every thing fit. Its the way to go IMHO. Jim Nelson RV9-A ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net>
Subject: Re: 2 Grounds
Me too however the radio, intercom, and my strobe power supplies are all also grounded to their respective cases (as well as their ground pins) and therefore to the metal airframe. I can not hear the strobe whine in flight but it is obvious on the ground. Since various capacitors and chokes on the 12v strobe power supply did not help, I decided that this was a "feature" to remind me to turn them off after landing ;) Fortunately there is no transponder reply noise which has annoyed me on some other airplanes. Ken Doug Windhorn wrote: > Eric, > > Certainly a way that I could feel comfortable with (and the way I did > mine). > > Doug > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eric Newton <mailto:enewton57(at)cableone.net> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > > Sent: Thursday, 01 March, 2007 16:31 > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 2 Grounds > > I have a decidedly small and low tech avionics system. A single > radio (ICOM A200) a single transponder (Colllins) and a single > intercom (PS 1000). So with that simple of a system, I'll > probably just run the ground wire from each component to the > forest of tabs on the firewall. If I'm reading your post right, > that's perfectly acceptable, right? > > Eric Newton - Long Beach, MS > BH #682 > http://mybearhawk.com > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter C" <peterc(at)pipcom.com>
Subject: batteries
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Bob would you mind commenting on this? First battery selection. I can understand that AH capacity is a good measurement for people with "electric" airplanes that need emergency capacity but suppose your prime concern is cranking ability (amps/speed) as may be the case for those of us flying Rotax "magneto" engines. What specs should we be using to compare batteries or is it even possible considering the variation in how the numbers are derived between manufacturers? Don't I want something like a max cold cranking amps number (which also seems to be calculated differently between manufacturers)? Next, your Rotax diagram shows #4 wire. Would I get any noticeable benefit going to #2 if my runs are less than 3 feet? Finally, since cranking is my priority I plan to take a ground run directly from battery to starter then back to your style firewall ground. Worthwhile? My battery is on the floor between the rudder pedals. The starter solenoid has its battery post bolted right to the + battery post; a manual Hella switch is mounted with a short plate right on the neg battery post so there are only two cables + and - to starter with a third from starter to ground bolt on firewall. Like it? Thanks Peter ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Splitters for Sale
Listers, I have two different splitters that I do not need and would like to sell. They are: 1. DIM Antenna Technologies Type DM H22-1 Diplexer. From the Chief Aircraft catalog: "Single VOR and single GS. Will permit operation of one NAV and one glide slope receiver from one VOR antenna. VSWR 1.5:1. Weight 0.25 lbs." Has one BNC input and two BNC outputs. $45.00 2. Comant Industries CI 5120 Dual VOR/GS Splitter. Distributes input from one VOR/LOC/GS antenna to two VOR/LOC/GS receivers. BNC input and outputs. $30.00 I'll pay the shipping. Richard Dudley RV-6A flying ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Doug Windhorn" <N1DeltaWhiskey(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: batteries
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Peter, I have some comments for you to consider. Battery and wire size selection: Look for a battery, regardless of size, that has low internal resistance (such as the Odyssey brand) RG battery - that will likely have a bigger impact on starting than anything else in your circuit. What is the voltage drop you expect in #4 vs. #2 wire for a 6' run (out and back) while flowing about 250 amps? If you determine that, then you can answer your own question on wire size. Ground routing: Makes sense. The return wire from the starter ground to the firewall then could be much smaller, sized to handle the other loads that you might have and same as battery to fuse block/breaker bus for the positive side. Solenoid mounting: I think mounting anything to the battery posts other than a connector wire is asking for trouble. Vibration will tend to cause the solenoid weight to eventually work harden and break the battery post. Would recommend a much different approach here. Doug Windhorn ----- Original Message ----- From: Peter C To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, 02 March, 2007 7:30 Subject: AeroElectric-List: batteries Bob would you mind commenting on this? First battery selection. I can understand that AH capacity is a good measurement for people with "electric" airplanes that need emergency capacity but suppose your prime concern is cranking ability (amps/speed) as may be the case for those of us flying Rotax "magneto" engines. What specs should we be using to compare batteries or is it even possible considering the variation in how the numbers are derived between manufacturers? Don't I want something like a max cold cranking amps number (which also seems to be calculated differently between manufacturers)? Next, your Rotax diagram shows #4 wire. Would I get any noticeable benefit going to #2 if my runs are less than 3 feet? Finally, since cranking is my priority I plan to take a ground run directly from battery to starter then back to your style firewall ground. Worthwhile? My battery is on the floor between the rudder pedals. The starter solenoid has its battery post bolted right to the + battery post; a manual Hella switch is mounted with a short plate right on the neg battery post so there are only two cables + and - to starter with a third from starter to ground bolt on firewall. Like it? Thanks Peter ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter C" <peterc(at)pipcom.com>
Subject: Re: batteries
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Doug, thanks for your comments. OK, so I did the calculation and the difference in voltage drop is .34 volts between using 2 vs 4. I'd guess that this isn't significant but is it in cold temps? With regard to bolting to the battery lugs, I've also modified the battery case to provide additional support to the switch and solonoid. Peter ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Subject: Battery Tenders as recharging tools . . .
From: James H Nelson <rv9jim(at)juno.com>
Where is a good place to buy the Schumacher chargers? Jim Nelson ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Backup Electric Vacuum Pump
From: "steveadams" <dr_steve_adams(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Mar 02, 2007
I know the trend is toward glass, however that can be a major project and expense for those of us with steam gauges. A backup electric AI costs about the same as a Dynon. I was wondering if anyone has tried putting in a simple electric vacuum pump as a backup to the engine driven pump. I don't know what kind of flow you would need to reliably power the gyros, but it seems it would be a relatively inexpensive and simple retrofit that could even be tied in to a switch to automatically power the pump when the vacuum pressure drops. I guess it would also be useful for those converting to glass, who could keep their old gyros as backup, and still get rid of the engine driven vacuum pump. I know there is a certified electric pump that costs over $1000, but there are a lot of non-aircraft air pumps that could probably do the job for a lot less. Any suggestions or experience with this? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98343#98343 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Battery Tenders as recharging tools . . .
> >Where is a good place to buy the Schumacher chargers? > >Jim Nelson Walmart automotive department. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: 2 Grounds
>I have a decidedly small and low tech avionics system. A single radio >(ICOM A200) a single transponder (Colllins) and a single intercom (PS >1000). So with that simple of a system, I'll probably just run the ground >wire from each component to the forest of tabs on the firewall. If I'm >reading your post right, that's perfectly acceptable, right? Yes. Taking all wires to the single point is a perfectly good thing to do. Extending the ground system up to the panel is useful for more complex installation where the total number of grounds gets up to a dozen or more. Bob .. . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Switch drilling template
> >There's one on page 11-16 of Bob's book. It's Figure 11-12. That's >assuming the switches you mention are the same as the Carling switches >described in the book. The 15/32 diameter is the same. > >Bill > >>Anyone can direct me to a drilling drawing or template I could print for >>a buddy to install his Otto T7 15/32 switches ? >>I remember seeing such a drawing, but can't remember where. There's also a suggested set of layouts at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Mechanical/Switches.pdf The standard toggles mount nicely on 0.8" centers. I'm going to be adding a drill fixture to the products on the website in about a week that will assist in drilling precision spaced and properly aligned holes at 0.7, 0.8 and 0.9 inch intervals. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Subject: Battery Tenders as recharging tools . . .
From: James H Nelson <rv9jim(at)juno.com>
Many thanks Bob. My charger from Napa does not seem to bring the charge up beyond 12.5v even when the charger has been on the battery for 5 days. Jim Nelson ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Subject: Backup Electric Vacuum Pump
Good Afternoon Steve, What I don't understand is why more folks don't use venturi's. They work well, are cheap and are very reliable. If they are mounted on the belly in the path of the airflow from the engine, they even have reasonable protection from ice. Many airplanes flew in heavy IFR weather for many years using nothing but a venturi to power all of the instruments. What gave venturi's a bad name was when foolish people started to mount them on the side of the fuselage instead in the airstream behind the engine. I have a small venturi powering a single T&B. If all else fails, I can easily control the airplane with just that one T&B. If I have any altitude information at all it is easy. Add a handheld GPS and I have more than the fanciest airplanes had in the thirties. I will say that very few people receive as much training as they should in the use of partial panel. Along that line, it is a LOT cheaper to take twenty hours of dual in partial panel operations than it is to buy any standby horizon. And the training will help in any airplane. One point though. Partial panel can be done with a turn coordinator, but I much prefer the classic T&B. It is about the most reliable mechanical instrument we have ever had. Some day, I am sure there will be a solid state turn indicator that will replace the T&B. However, until that time. Get a T&B, power it with a small venturi and spend a thousand bucks on dual training getting thoroughly familiar with using the T&B to control the airplane. Happy Skies, Old Bob AKA Bob Siegfried Ancient Aviator Stearman N3977A Brookeridge Air Park LL22 Downers Grove, IL 60516 630 985-8503 In a message dated 3/2/2007 2:19:29 P.M. Central Standard Time, dr_steve_adams(at)yahoo.com writes: I know the trend is toward glass, however that can be a major project and expense for those of us with steam gauges. A backup electric AI costs about the same as a Dynon. I was wondering if anyone has tried putting in a simple electric vacuum pump as a backup to the engine drove pump. I don't know what kind of flow you would need to reliably power the gyros, but it seems it would be a relatively inexpensive and simple retrofit that could even be tied in to a switch to automatically power the pump when the vacuum pressure drops. I guess it would also be useful for those converting to glass, who could keep their old gyros as backup, and still get rid of the engine driven vacuum pump. I know there is a certified electric pump that costs over $1000, but there are a lot of non-aircraft air pumps that could probably do the job for a lot less. Any suggestions or experience with this?

**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net>
Subject: Re: Backup Electric Vacuum Pump
The engine intake manifold works fine anytime you are not at full power. With some partial panel practice, an electric Turn & Bank is also a sufficient backup for most aircraft. Some folks like 3 items so you have a tie breaker when one goes wonky. I have a vacuum and an electric T&B plus a low vacuum warning from the EIS. Ken steveadams wrote: > >I know the trend is toward glass, however that can be a major project and expense for those of us with steam gauges. A backup electric AI costs about the same as a Dynon. I was wondering if anyone has tried putting in a simple electric vacuum pump as a backup to the engine driven pump. I don't know what kind of flow you would need to reliably power the gyros, but it seems it would be a relatively inexpensive and simple retrofit that could even be tied in to a switch to automatically power the pump when the vacuum pressure drops. I guess it would also be useful for those converting to glass, who could keep their old gyros as backup, and still get rid of the engine driven vacuum pump. I know there is a certified electric pump that costs over $1000, but there are a lot of non-aircraft air pumps that could probably do the job for a lot less. Any suggestions or experience with this? > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Backup Electric Vacuum Pump
> > >I know the trend is toward glass, however that can be a major project and >expense for those of us with steam gauges. A backup electric AI costs >about the same as a Dynon. I was wondering if anyone has tried putting in >a simple electric vacuum pump as a backup to the engine driven pump. I >don't know what kind of flow you would need to reliably power the gyros, >but it seems it would be a relatively inexpensive and simple retrofit that >could even be tied in to a switch to automatically power the pump when the >vacuum pressure drops. I guess it would also be useful for those >converting to glass, who could keep their old gyros as backup, and still >get rid of the engine driven vacuum pump. I know there is a certified >electric pump that costs over $1000, but there are a lot of non-aircraft >air pumps that could probably do the job for a lot less. Any suggestions >or experience with this? While in the employ of Electro-Mech in the early 80s we were among the several companies that brought electrically driven, stand-by vacuum pumps to the GA market. First, know that the energy required is not insubstantial. As I recall, our 28 volt offering drew about 6 amps of current. A 14 volt would be about twice that much. Second, you'll need to supply some sort of transfer valve in the plumbing. Be wary of automatic valves . . . a stuck transfer valve contributed to the sad outcome of this event: http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/N79NL.pdf Then there's the weight. I'm thinking that the s/b vacuum system adds about 6 pounds of weight. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: batteries
>Bob would you mind commenting on this? > >First battery selection. I can understand that AH capacity is a good >measurement for people with "electric" airplanes that need emergency >capacity but suppose your prime concern is cranking ability (amps/speed) >as may be the case for those of us flying Rotax "magneto" engines. What >specs should we be using to compare batteries or is it even possible >considering the variation in how the numbers are derived between >manufacturers? Don't I want something like a max cold cranking amps >number (which also seems to be calculated differently between manufacturers)? > >Next, your Rotax diagram shows #4 wire. Would I get any noticeable benefit >going to #2 if my runs are less than 3 feet? No > >Finally, since cranking is my priority I plan to take a ground run >directly from battery to starter then back to your style firewall ground. >Worthwhile? Probably not. > >My battery is on the floor between the rudder pedals. The starter solenoid >has its battery post bolted right to the + battery post; a manual Hella >switch is mounted with a short plate right on the neg battery post so >there are only two cables + and - to starter with a third from starter to >ground bolt on firewall. Please don't mount hardware directly to any battery post. 4AWG SOFT jumpers fabricated from welding cable are recommended. The only two in-flight failures of batteries I've encountered were broken off connection posts precipitated by too much mass mounted too rigidly to the posts. For the distances you're talking about, 4AWG will be fine. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Subject: Re: Switch drilling template
Robert L. Nuckolls, III a crit : > >> >> >> There's one on page 11-16 of Bob's book. It's Figure 11-12. That's >> assuming the switches you mention are the same as the Carling >> switches described in the book. The 15/32 diameter is the same. > There's also a suggested set of layouts at: > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Mechanical/Switches.pdf Bill and Bob, Thank you. I knew it was there, but memory is failing. Best regards, Gilles http://contrails.free.fr ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: "paul wilson" <pwmac(at)sisna.com>
Subject: Re: Battery Tenders as recharging tools .
I have a Black Decker version of the maintainer. Seems to work just like my two different Schumachers'. Now I see both in the local WalMart. Either are under $18. The Schumacher 1.5a has a 12/6v switch. It holds the batt at 13.2+v. The other Schumacher is a 12v only 1.0a unit and works the same way. Neither of these units like a significantly discharged batt. They just shut off. The B&D is 12v only has a 1a/2a switch & holds the batt at 12.9+v. All 3 units behave the same in that when they see less than the min setting they go into the charge mode to a voltage somewhat above 14v the shutoff until the batt discharges to the min values noted above. Paul ========= At 12:57 PM 3/2/2007, you wrote: Where is a good place to buy the Schumacher chargers? Jim Nelson Walmart automotive department. Bob . . . _________________________________ SISNA...more service, less money. http://www.sisna.com/exclusive/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: Bob White <bob@bob-white.com>
Subject: Re: Backup Electric Vacuum Pump
Hi Steve, I looked at a couple of things to generate a vacuum. Some cars in the early 90's had an electric smog pump. I bought one on ebay for about $100 and found that it pulled over 10 amps at 13 V and connecting it to the vacuum system left over from the removal of a Lycoming didn't provide enough vacuum to run a DG and an artificial horizon. There are vacuum pumps used to provide a vacuum in electric cars but they were more like $200-$300 and I wasn't willing to spend that much to experiment. There may be a setup that works but it isn't trivial. I bought a TruTrak ADI and it seems to work well. Unfortunately the heading info is GPS based so if you don't have a good GPS signal you don't have heading (actually track). If you must have a vacuum instrument, I think Old Bob's advice is good. Use a venturi to run a T&B Bob W. "steveadams" wrote: > > I know the trend is toward glass, however that can be a major project and expense for those of us with steam gauges. A backup electric AI costs about the same as a Dynon. I was wondering if anyone has tried putting in a simple electric vacuum pump as a backup to the engine driven pump. I don't know what kind of flow you would need to reliably power the gyros, but it seems it would be a relatively inexpensive and simple retrofit that could even be tied in to a switch to automatically power the pump when the vacuum pressure drops. I guess it would also be useful for those converting to glass, who could keep their old gyros as backup, and still get rid of the engine driven vacuum pump. I know there is a certified electric pump that costs over $1000, but there are a lot of non-aircraft air pumps that could probably do the job for a lot less. Any suggestions or experience with this? > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98343#98343 > > > > > > > > > > -- N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 - http://www.bob-white.com First Flight: 11/23/2006 7:50AM - 3.3 Hours Total Time Cables for your rotary installation - http://www.roblinphoto.com/shop/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark/Kara Phillips" <mphill(at)gcctv.com>
Subject: Re: affordable panels
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Fabian is very knowledgeable about his product and will go out of his way to help you. Very positive experience. Mark Phillips Williamsville Illinois ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis Jones" <djones(at)northboone.net> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 2:05 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: affordable panels > > > Any one have feed back on there experience with Affordable Panels service > or product? > > Thanks > Jonsey > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98264#98264 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: batteries
From: "europa flugzeug fabrik" <n3eu(at)oh.rr.com>
Date: Mar 02, 2007
N1DeltaWhiskey(at)comcast wrote: > What is the voltage drop you expect in #4 vs. #2 wire for a 6' run (out and back) while flowing about 250 amps? This is apparently about a Rotax 91x engine, though? The starter relay supplied with my kitplane for a 912/914 is 70A. More consistent with the kW spec of the starter motor. Maybe 50A average? Fred F. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98404#98404 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: John Morgensen <john(at)morgensen.com>
Subject: Re: affordable panels
I am still designing my panel but let me make a few points anyway: 1. The modular panel does cost some panel space and flexibility. That may or may not be significant. 2. If you have 2 big screens in your panel, then you have 2 large access holes for maintenance. I am leaning toward Van's standard panel. John Morgensen RV9A Mark/Kara Phillips wrote: > > > Fabian is very knowledgeable about his product and will go out of his > way to help you. Very positive experience. > > Mark Phillips > Williamsville Illinois > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis Jones" <djones(at)northboone.net> > To: > Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 2:05 AM > Subject: AeroElectric-List: affordable panels > > >> >> >> Any one have feed back on there experience with Affordable Panels >> service or product? >> >> Thanks >> Jonsey >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98264#98264 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "William Slaughter" <wslaughter(at)houston.rr.com>
Subject: Battery Tenders
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Bob, Speaking of Battery Tenders... I sent my Battery Tender Plus off to you via UPS on 2/22/07. Please let me know if you've received it or if I need to start tracking. William Slaughter -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 2:57 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery Tenders as recharging tools . . . > >Where is a good place to buy the Schumacher chargers? > >Jim Nelson Walmart automotive department. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Battery Tenders
> > >Bob, >Speaking of Battery Tenders... I sent my Battery Tender Plus off to you via >UPS on 2/22/07. Please let me know if you've received it or if I need to >start tracking. I received it, did a test with it and put it back into the mail today. I published a plot on a Battery Minder some months ago at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/Battery_Minder_Recharge.pdf Your Battery Tender did this recharge profile. http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/Battery_Tender_Recharge.pdf We can deduce that both of these products service the "top off" protocols and then drop to similar sustaining voltages. Thank you for donating the use of your charger for this experiment. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Battery Tenders as recharging tools .
> >I have a Black Decker version of the maintainer. Seems to work just like >my two different Schumachers'. Now I see both in the local WalMart. Either >are under $18. >The Schumacher 1.5a has a 12/6v switch. It holds the batt at 13.2+v. The >other Schumacher is a 12v only 1.0a unit and works the same way. Neither >of these units like a significantly discharged batt. They just shut off. This is "short circuit" protection kicking in. If you have a battery pulled lower than 5% of capacity (about 11 volts under moderate load) then the initial recharge current may convince some battery charging products that you've connected a 12 charger to a 6v battery . . . or a shorted battery. If you have a REALLY dead battery, hook a 12v/1A lightbulb in series with your charger for an hour or so. Like a #912 . . . http://tinyurl.com/yorhw3 . . . . As soon as the battery recovers enough that it doesn't fool the charger into a self-protective shutdown (anything above 10v or so) then the lamp can be removed so recharging/sustaining may be allowed to progress normally. >The B&D is 12v only has a 1a/2a switch & holds the batt at 12.9+v. All 3 >units behave the same in that when they see less than the min setting they >go into the charge mode to a voltage somewhat above 14v the shutoff until >the batt discharges to the min values noted above. Yup, that's how they're supposed to work. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chris Byrne" <jack.byrne(at)bigpond.com>
Subject: Stereo Input Jack
Date: Mar 03, 2007
I have a stereo jack to install for input to a GMA 340. The jack has one long lug which I will attach the white wire to. The jack has 2 shorter lugs, a bronze colour and a silver colour. I have a 3 wire cable from the GMA340 wired by the supplier. Which lug should the white/blue wire and the white/orange wire go to or dosnt it matter. The logic to the earphone jack is white/blue to tip and white/ orange to the ring if that helps. Thanks Chris Byrne SYDNEY ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Morgan" <zk-vii(at)rvproject.gen.nz>
Subject: Stereo Input Jack
Date: Mar 03, 2007
Hi Chris, Assuming your harness was made be Stark (which I think it was) and it is the same as mine.... DB44-340-J2:23 - Music 1 L In Audio In - White DB44-340-J2:24 - Music 1 R In Audio In - White/Orange DB44-340-J2:25 - Music 1 Return Audio In - White/Blue Standard 3.5 mm music jack Tip - Left Channel Ring - Right Channel Sleeve - Ground / Common HTH, Carl -- ZK-VII - RV 7A QB - finishing? - New Zealand http://www.rvproject.gen.nz/ -----Original Message----- From: Chris Byrne [mailto:jack.byrne(at)bigpond.com] Sent: Saturday, 3 March 2007 7:45 p.m. To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stereo Input Jack I have a stereo jack to install for input to a GMA 340. The jack has one long lug which I will attach the white wire to. The jack has 2 shorter lugs, a bronze colour and a silver colour. I have a 3 wire cable from the GMA340 wired by the supplier. Which lug should the white/blue wire and the white/orange wire go to or dosnt it matter. The logic to the earphone jack is white/blue to tip and white/ orange to the ring if that helps. Thanks Chris Byrne SYDNEY ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <bakerocb(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: GPS Antenna?
Date: Mar 03, 2007
3/3/2007 Thanks to all that responded. It is indeed a Stormscope antenna made by 3M back in the days when they were replacing Ryan as the manufacturer of that equipment. OC -- The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and understand knowledge. ----- Original Message ----- From: <bakerocb(at)cox.net> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 11:11 PM Subject: GPS Antenna? > 3/1/2006 > > Hello Fellow Listers, I am trying to identify an object on the bottom of > the fuselage of a Beech Sierra airplane. It is black plastic about the > size of a cigar box. Embossed on the bottom of the box is an arrow > pointing forward and the letters 3M. > > It was described at one time as a GPS antenna, but that does not make much > sense to me. Why would a GPS antenna be on the bottom of the fuselage? I > also am not able to locate any antenna created by 3M. > > Any good ideas? Many thanks. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 2007
From: Tim Lewis <Tim_Lewis(at)msm.umr.edu>
Subject: Garmin 530W Install manual
Does anyone have access to a Garmin 530W Install manual? I've tried <http://www2.mstewart.net:8080/Downloads/howtogetagarminmanual.htm>, but I haven't stumbled on to the correct file name yet. Thanks, Tim Lewis -- Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA) RV-6A N47TD -- 850 hrs RV-10 #40059 under construction ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: affordable panels
From: "Jekyll" <rcitjh(at)aol.com>
Date: Mar 03, 2007
Fabian is great to work with. The product is first rate and the service will leave you wondering why others can't do as well. The prices are VERY fair. Everything fit like a glove. Fabian worked with Stark on my behalf to ensure my harnesses were set up correctly for my installation. The 3-piece panel will greatly simplify future maintenance. I included a drawing of my panel to show you what you get. He'll first send a CAD of your prospective panel so you can evaluate and make necessary adjustments. When satisfied, let him know and he'll laser cut it and ship it out. I had him design and cut my panel then I did all the installation and wiring. I can't say enough about Affordable Panels. Jekyll Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98511#98511 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/grt_and_kmd_150_146.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jerry Grimmonpre" <jerry(at)mc.net>
Subject: Re: Backup Electric Vacuum Pump
Date: Mar 03, 2007
Hi Bob ... Couldn't agree more with the idea of using a venturi's to drive a single instrument. The idea of driving a vacuum driven horizon has pulled at me for some time. The group of three info providing life savers ... attitude, airspeed and altitude are all air driven and simple. The only one needing vacuum could easily be driven with an 8" venturi. The venturi does require high velocity air over and through it to pull the vacuum. My son and I were experimenting yesterday with a venturi 6" long X 2" diameter. It will drive a turn needle (as it's designed to do) but a horizon needs more beef to sustain it. I like the idea of putting the venturi in the cowl exit air and I will try that with a couple other venturi's. I also will create a gill type venturi which could be placed on the side of the fuselage, right beside the inst panel so the vacuum could be within about a foot of the horizon. When I have the mods completed on my RV4 (before Spring) it will be used for this test bed. The venturi is but one of these test items. Has anyone on the list messed with a gill type venturi? My fondest hope would be to create something made similar a NACA vent that could simply be bonded/riveted onto the sheet metal and plug in a vacuum line. Done! It's probably more involved than just that but it's the essence of the thought. You have to admit Bob, one peek at a vacuum horizon is worth 20 peeks at a T&B ... : ) Jerry Grimmonpre ----- Original Message ----- From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 4:00 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Backup Electric Vacuum Pump Good Afternoon Steve, What I don't understand is why more folks don't use venturi's. They work well, are cheap and are very reliable. If they are mounted on the belly in the path of the airflow from the engine, they even have reasonable protection from ice. Many airplanes flew in heavy IFR weather for many years using nothing but a venturi to power all of the instruments. What gave venturi's a bad name was when foolish people started to mount them on the side of the fuselage instead in the airstream behind the engine. I have a small venturi powering a single T&B. If all else fails, I can easily control the airplane with just that one T&B. If I have any altitude information at all it is easy. Add a handheld GPS and I have more than the fanciest airplanes had in the thirties. One point though. Partial panel can be done with a turn coordinator, but I much prefer the classic T&B. It is about the most reliable mechanical instrument we have ever had. Some day, I am sure there will be a solid state turn indicator that will replace the T&B. However, until that time. Get a T&B, power it with a small venturi and spend a thousand bucks on dual training getting thoroughly familiar with using the T&B to control the airplane. Happy Skies, Old Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 2007
From: Dave N6030X <N6030X(at)DaveMorris.com>
Subject: Re: Backup Electric Vacuum Pump
I don't know about you guys, but if I were building an experimental and had no Type Certificate I had to abide by, I would be spending my time figuring out how to build a bullet proof electrical system and getting rid of anything that had the word Vacuum in it. It's an old, archaic technology that, at the present date, serves ONLY to make gyros cheaper. The vacuum pumps are less reliable or long-lived than an alternator, and you're basically building a parallel power system for gyros that adds weight and complexity, hoses, filters, etc, and so on. If you've got redundant electrical, and you are now worrying about a backup vacuum system, you're basically building QUADRUPLE parallel systems to power gyros. That's insane to me. Build redundancy into the electrical system, use solid state gyros, eschew vacuum. Or was that "escrew"? Dave Morris Stuck in the 60's with a vacuum powered Mooney At 01:29 PM 3/3/2007, you wrote:

February 20, 2007 - March 03, 2007

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-gs