AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ib
August 09, 2008 - August 27, 2008
Subject: AeroElectric-List: need a tool spec on vacation
I'm at the beach and Tower informs me my transponder has quit working
(again!) I am 99% sure from past trouble with this thing that I can fix it
by removing, cleaning and reinstalling the Garmin adapter in the Narco tray,
but need a foot-long Allen wrench to reach in there, and don't have it with
me. One can buy most anything at the beach these days, but I need the size
to look for at the hardware store: what is the dimension of the hex screw
that holds radios in avionics trays? 3/32"? Thanks for the help. I'm sure
they'll let me back out of the class D with an inop transponder, but it's
just not right having stuff not functioning.
-Stormy / Bill B.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
9:02 AM
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I-Phone Inclinometer |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Or that Saint Christopher medal on a chain you hang from your compass now.
--------
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=197619#197619
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator part number? |
> Followup: Another member on the List has turned me on to
> the following website:
>
>http://www.motorcarparts.com/catalog.htm
>
Followup to the followup. I may have an opportunity
to examine failure analysis data for various automotive
alternators that would give us some insight as to
the smoothest way to integrate these devices into
OBAM aircraft.
Does anyone has a part number to share taken from
a label on their current installed alternator
or perhaps off a carton or invoice for having purchased
the alternator? I'd like to know what it is and perhaps
a little background on how you selected and acquired
the alternator.
We can plug the numbers into the big data-base-in-the-
sky and see what spits out. It may be significant,
it may not . . . but interesting in any case.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Article from AOPA on Glass EFIS failures |
>
>
>Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) wrote:
>>(Corvallis)"
>>
>>Ahh yes...As I tell my engineers who want every cool gadget going on
>>their sysytems..."Every component is an expensive point of failure"
Yeah, I recall a gray-beard telling me 30 years ago about what he
called "the rule of tens". He was counseling me about specing
1% established reliability resistors even if the electrical
performance wasn't needed. He said it cost us 50 cents to bring
it in, $5 to find a bad one at the board level, $50 to find a bad
one at the ATP level, $500 to find it on the airplane, and a
whole lot more if somebody's airplane get's bent or people
get hurt (1975 prices!). The value of good parts goes beyond
the price of buying the part . . . more significant still was
the value of not having a part there in the first place. Parts
count reduction was a powerful tool for $risk$ reduction.
Lines of code, quantities of parts . . . it's good not to
have more than necessary to meet design goals..
>Proper software engineering requires the same sort of methodical, tedious
>system review and modularity that we expect to put in our electrical
>design. In the end, that is exactly what it is, a lot of tiny electrical
>switches going off all over the place. The fault scenarios are often
>difficult to identify. Even people who should know better often forget this.
Yes, and the MBA/Regulatory solution to this is "standardize"
whether it's DO-xxx, ACzzz, ISO9xxx, FARxxxetc. The concept
is devilishly and deceptively simple. "Document the path to
Nirvana and anyone who can read will achieve the golden goal."
I've watched the production lines at local GA manufacturing
erode from experienced skill and pride of craftsmanship to
certificated ignorance and apathy. The same thing is happening
in engineering. Nobody designs anything any more, they write
specs (per the ISO approve P&P manual) and farm it out.
Problem is that the folks they farm it out to are just as
P&P driven as the folks who write the specs. When it doesn't
work quite right, everyone gets that deer-in-the-headlights
look while the customer of a $14M$ airplane is out in the lobby
tapping his toe awaiting delivery. "This can't be happening
. . . the specs say that it's supposed to work and yea verily,
it must be so!"
The poor sap who gets to write "real" code must follow the
top-down design document that was mandated to him irrespective
of his personal and perhaps accurate assessment of how bad it is.
Managers of "The Word According to ISO" may personally worship
individual abilities of a guy who can heard a tiny ball around
a big field better than anyone else, or the strange but obviously
talented inventor, the entertainer who enthralls thousands,
or the guy who can pick up a toolbox and 'scope and seems
to be able to fix anything. Yet if any individual working
under the "Gospel According to ISO" strays from the path of
documented excellence, he or she is promptly brought back in
line . . . if not fired.
If the likes of Edison, Kettering, Gates or Kay had been saddled
with modern business and product development dogma, the
technology we enjoy today would have a VERY different
appearance and utility.
The last two years of my tenure at H-B included an effort
to fund and execute a real IR&D activity intended to
produce a universal fuel gaging module. A device that could be
programmed to work in anything from a Bonanza to the
4000. Even had a team of capable and willing participants
lined up. "Nope, can't be messing with that kind of stuff.
It's not our core competency."
A year after I left, I participated in a response
to a request for proposal for development of just such a
gizmo. Eureka! I might get to work on this after all!
We put the proposal in about 10 weeks ago and everybody
was all smiles. It's been hung up in supply chain because
the P&P manual doesn't cover some of the unique features
of our proposal . . . (sigh)
If Frank Hedrick were still running the show, we'd
be flying our first-cut prototype by now and fine
tuning performance based on real-time feedback from
flight test pilots and instrumentation . . . not
waiting for the top-down writers to conjure up a new
route to Nirvana.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator part number? |
ND 100211-1680 which crosses to 612270 on the site.
An industrial 40 amp unit that is small, light, and relatively modern.
It was largely chosen for its low 40 amp output in case it ever ran away
and to allow loading it down if the voltage was high. Then I found out
about OVP protection. However all my lights and pitot heat can indeed
load it higher than 40 amps which I like. I think it was around $150
new. 212 hours on it so far and rock steady at 14.3 volts. Unlike some
newer units, it will draw field current anytime the IGN lead is powered,
even if the alternator is not rotating.
Ken
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>> Followup: Another member on the List has turned me on to
>> the following website:
>>
>> http://www.motorcarparts.com/catalog.htm
>>
>
>
>
> Followup to the followup. I may have an opportunity
> to examine failure analysis data for various automotive
> alternators that would give us some insight as to
> the smoothest way to integrate these devices into
> OBAM aircraft.
>
> Does anyone has a part number to share taken from
> a label on their current installed alternator
> or perhaps off a carton or invoice for having purchased
> the alternator? I'd like to know what it is and perhaps
> a little background on how you selected and acquired
> the alternator.
>
> We can plug the numbers into the big data-base-in-the-
> sky and see what spits out. It may be significant,
> it may not . . . but interesting in any case.
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I-Phone Inclinometer |
| From: | "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com> |
Actually Ron has a reasonable question.
All of the modern inertial platforms use MEMS-based accelerometers
not gyros as sensors. The problem with MEMS chips is that they drift
and require correction or compensation. Often the drift correction
can be done with a GPS ala BlueMountain, etc.
So... some enterprising programmer could, with the new GPS
capabilities in the development software now in beta, create an
emergent AI, better in theory that the GPS only system like in the
Garmin 496.
I'm not an engineer, but I played one in grad school for 4 years
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=197792#197792
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I-Phone Inclinometer |
| From: | Etienne Phillips <etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com> |
On 11 Aug 2008, at 2:25 AM, rampil wrote:
>
> All of the modern inertial platforms use MEMS-based accelerometers
> not gyros as sensors. The problem with MEMS chips is that they drift
> and require correction or compensation. Often the drift correction
> can be done with a GPS ala BlueMountain, etc.
>
All the electronic systems I've come across (MGL and Dynon in
particular) use both accelerometers and "solid-state" gyros, and some
even use an electronic compass and airspeed. The SS gyros only output
the rate of change of direction whereas the accelerometers, compass
and airspeed measurements give an absolute value at any time. If the
gyros have even a very slight offset error, this will be integrated
over time to be a constant change in direction, which is compared
Etienne
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I-Phone Inclinometer |
| From: | "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com> |
Etienne,
SS Gyros are in fact MEMS accelerometers.
Actually SS Gyro is an oxymoron since a gyro implies gyroscopic
which implies spinning parts (hard to be solid state at the same time).
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEMS_gyroscope
http://www.sensorsmag.com/articles/0203/14/
http://www.analog.com/en/mems-and-sensors/imems-gyroscopes/adxrs610/products/product.html
etc., etc.
To my knowledge, the inertial platforms of BMA, Dynon, Avidyne (entegra), and Garmin
(G1000) are all MEMS-based. No Gyro components at all.
See for ref:http://www.flyingmag.com/article.asp?section_id=12&article_id=869
or look up the tech specs on the individual systems
PS: The iPhone would need a 3axis sensor to do an inertial platform.
I dont know if thats what's inside.
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=197865#197865
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | John Deere dynamo |
| From: | "Beemer" <bmwebb(at)cox.net> |
Hi all,
I have a question concerning using a dynamo at higher engine speeds. I am looking
at reducing my FWF weight, and considering some of the smaller alternator installs.
I am currently using a ND IR alt, which is fine, but in lurking around,
I'm becoming rather concerned about the weaknesses of these units. Unfortunately,
not much else is available in this class; i.e. size and weight. All of
the externally regulated alternators I've seen are much too large and heavy for
my application.
I'm installing Z-13RB on my new plane, and plan on incorporating Z-24 alt disconnect
contactor in line with the OV module.
However, my Suzuki G10 three cylinder runs at 5000rpm in cruise, and 5500rpm on
takeoff. The JD AM877557 PM alt puts out 20amps at 2500rpm. I'm running double
that. Short of re-doing my belt drive setup with a 12 inch pulley, what are
the ramifications of running this little alt at these speeds? by the looks of
it, the small pulley on the unit would spin it up to 10,000 rpm. I'm aware of
the mechanical limits (bearings, etc), my question concerns the power output to
the system.
Any help would be much appreciated.
Bradley
Kitfox 2/3
Middle Georgia
--------
Beemer
KF2 (and now an M3!)
Middle Georgia
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=197887#197887
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/jd_am877557_dynamo_211.bmp
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Z-Diagram using Kilovac EV200? |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
I seem to recall seeing a Z diagram using one of the 'newer' contactors like a
Kilovac EV 200 or Gigavac GX11. Could someone point me to that diagram, either
the name or link on Bob's website.
Thank you,
Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=197888#197888
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | John Deere dynamo |
| From: | "Beemer" <bmwebb(at)cox.net> |
Hi all,
I have a question concerning using a dynamo at higher engine speeds. I am looking
at reducing my FWF weight, and considering some of the smaller alternator installs.
I am currently using a ND IR alt, which is fine, but in lurking around,
I'm becoming rather concerned about the weaknesses of these units. Unfortunately,
not much else is available in this class; i.e. size and weight. All of
the externally regulated alternators I've seen are much too large and heavy for
my application.
I'm installing Z-13RB on my new plane, and plan on incorporating Z-24 alt disconnect
contactor in line with the OV module.
However, my Suzuki G10 three cylinder runs at 5000rpm in cruise, and 5500rpm on
takeoff. The JD AM877557 PM alt puts out 20amps at 2500rpm. I'm running double
that. Short of re-doing my belt drive setup with a 12 inch pulley, what are
the ramifications of running this little alt at these speeds? by the looks of
it, the small pulley on the unit would spin it up to 10,000 rpm. I'm aware of
the mechanical limits (bearings, etc), my question concerns the power output to
the system.
Any help would be much appreciated.
Bradley
Kitfox 2/3
Middle Georgia
--------
Beemer
KF2 (and now an M3!)
Middle Georgia
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=197889#197889
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/jd_am877557_dynamo_211.bmp
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I-Phone Inclinometer |
| From: | "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com> |
As it turns out, the iPhone uses a monolithic 3 axis sensor, digitally
sampled 8 bit outputs scaled to +/- 2 g or 8 g with 400Hz serial output.
Sounds like the makings of an inertial platform to me!
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=197910#197910
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I-Phone Inclinometer |
| From: | "David Glauser" <david.glauser(at)xpsystems.com> |
Several folks are experimenting already:
http://blog.medallia.com/2007/08/fun_with_the_iphone_accelerome.html
"As it turns out, the iPhone has a built-in LIS302DL, a tiny 3-axis
accelerometer. While some have attempted to use it from within the
Safari browser (the Tilt game detects changes to the width of the
browser page; it is basically used as a 1-bit input device), its
potential is still somewhat untapped. After a rather lengthy bout of
reverse-engineering (I had barely touched ARM assembly before this), I
finally figured out how to access the raw data from the accelerometer
itself, as can be seen in the video above. Source code is posted here.
(update: yes, it is possible to access the accelerometer directly
through UIKit without this hack -- however, you'll be locked to the
default sample rate, which is too slow for some of the fun stuff)"
http://www.tuaw.com/2007/09/10/iphone-coding-using-the-accelerometer/
dg
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
rampil
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 9:37 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: I-Phone Inclinometer
As it turns out, the iPhone uses a monolithic 3 axis sensor, digitally
sampled 8 bit outputs scaled to +/- 2 g or 8 g with 400Hz serial output.
Sounds like the makings of an inertial platform to me!
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=197910#197910
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David M" <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: I-Phone Inclinometer |
Freescale (used to be Motorola) makes a ton of these MEMS accelerometers. I
have one on one of their sample boards that also has several other goodies
for experimentation. It was like $99 or so, including the class for the
cpu. However, CodeWarrior is the only software they use for demo'ing and it
is SO arcane it's practically like pulling teeth every time I want to use
it. Also, the laptop that has all their routines has crashed, of course.
Dang laptops. Anyway, ...
If there is anything I can do to help, let me know.
I plan to use the accelerometer, or one similar, for wing leveling and etc
for a Mustang II.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Glauser" <david.glauser(at)xpsystems.com>
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 12:16 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: I-Phone Inclinometer
>
>
> Several folks are experimenting already:
>
> http://blog.medallia.com/2007/08/fun_with_the_iphone_accelerome.html
>
> "As it turns out, the iPhone has a built-in LIS302DL, a tiny 3-axis
> accelerometer. While some have attempted to use it from within the
> Safari browser (the Tilt game detects changes to the width of the
> browser page; it is basically used as a 1-bit input device), its
> potential is still somewhat untapped. After a rather lengthy bout of
> reverse-engineering (I had barely touched ARM assembly before this), I
> finally figured out how to access the raw data from the accelerometer
> itself, as can be seen in the video above. Source code is posted here.
> (update: yes, it is possible to access the accelerometer directly
> through UIKit without this hack -- however, you'll be locked to the
> default sample rate, which is too slow for some of the fun stuff)"
>
>
> http://www.tuaw.com/2007/09/10/iphone-coding-using-the-accelerometer/
>
>
> dg
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> rampil
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 9:37 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: I-Phone Inclinometer
>
>
> As it turns out, the iPhone uses a monolithic 3 axis sensor, digitally
> sampled 8 bit outputs scaled to +/- 2 g or 8 g with 400Hz serial output.
>
> Sounds like the makings of an inertial platform to me!
>
> --------
> Ira N224XS
>
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Relay Tyco EV200 |
Hello,
On the scrounge again.......... Can anyone North American tell me
where to acquire an EV200 12Vdc contactor? I understand that it has a hold
circuit which reverts to I think 0.14A coil hold value which I can manage. I
have been attempting to incorporate a racing car shutoff as main battery
contact because I can't budget for more in view of circuit demands.
Any or all available dealers received with thanks........
Ferg
Europa A064
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Borger <rlborger(at)mac.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Relay Tyco EV200 |
Ferg,
Try these sources:
www.evparts.com/prod-SL2570.htm
http://www.evsource.com/tls_relays.php
They are not inexpensive bits...
Good building and great flying,
Bob Borger
Europa Kit #A221 N914XL, XS Mono, Intercooled 914, Airmaster C/S
http://www.europaowners.org/N914XL
(99.9% done) Presently fighting gremlins in the instrument panel.
3705 Lynchburg Dr.
Corinth, TX 76208
Home: 940-497-2123
Cel: 817-992-1117
On Aug 11, 2008, at 13:50, Fergus Kyle wrote:
>
> Hello,
> On the scrounge again.......... Can anyone North American tell me
> where to acquire an EV200 12Vdc contactor? I understand that it has
> a hold
> circuit which reverts to I think 0.14A coil hold value which I can
> manage. I
> have been attempting to incorporate a racing car shutoff as main
> battery
> contact because I can't budget for more in view of circuit demands.
> Any or all available dealers received with thanks........
> Ferg
> Europa A064
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Relay Tyco EV200 |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
Here is another link, seem less expensive.
http://www.marineboatsupplies.com/blue-9012-solenoid-series-250a1224v-p-3535.html
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=197956#197956
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Relay Tyco EV200 |
Here's one source...
Fergus Kyle wrote:
>
> Hello,
> On the scrounge again.......... Can anyone North American tell me
> where to acquire an EV200 12Vdc contactor? I understand that it has a hold
> circuit which reverts to I think 0.14A coil hold value which I can manage. I
> have been attempting to incorporate a racing car shutoff as main battery
> contact because I can't budget for more in view of circuit demands.
> Any or all available dealers received with thanks........
> Ferg
> Europa A064
>
>
> Agelesswings certifies that no virus is in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Relay Tyco EV200 |
Here's one source:
www.evparts.com/prod-SL2570.htm
I just googled "EV200 12 Vdc contactor"
And got over 200 pages...might be a lower cost version there someplace.
Harley Dixon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fergus Kyle wrote:
>
> Hello,
> On the scrounge again.......... Can anyone North American tell me
> where to acquire an EV200 12Vdc contactor? I understand that it has a hold
> circuit which reverts to I think 0.14A coil hold value which I can manage. I
> have been attempting to incorporate a racing car shutoff as main battery
> contact because I can't budget for more in view of circuit demands.
> Any or all available dealers received with thanks........
> Ferg
> Europa A064
>
>
> Agelesswings certifies that no virus is in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I-Phone Inclinometer |
| From: | Etienne Phillips <etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com> |
> On 11 Aug 2008, at 3:20 PM, rampil wrote:
>>
>>
>> Etienne,
>> SS Gyros are in fact MEMS accelerometers.
>> Actually SS Gyro is an oxymoron since a gyro implies gyroscopic
>> which implies spinning parts (hard to be solid state at the same
>> time).
>>
>> See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEMS_gyroscope
>> http://www.sensorsmag.com/articles/0203/14/
>> http://www.analog.com/en/mems-and-sensors/imems-gyroscopes/
>> adxrs610/products/product.html
>>
>> etc., etc.
>>
and
On 11 Aug 2008, at 8:28 PM, David M wrote:
>
> I plan to use the accelerometer, or one similar, for wing leveling
> and etc for a Mustang II.
>
> David
>
How does an accelerometer know which way is up in a co-ordinated turn?
My understanding of a "solid-state gyro" (please correct me if I'm
wrong), is that it contains a sprung vibrating weight which, like a
pendulum, is adverse to changing the axis of it's motion. The sensor
part of the device measures the deviation of the weights axis of
vibration against the casing of the unit, and from that can calculate
the rate of change in direction of the casing...
An accelerometer (again, according to my understanding) has a similar
sensor between a non-vibrating sprung weight, and the deviation of
the weight from the centre of the casing can then be used to
determine the acceleration of the casing.
Etienne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: John Deere dynamo |
>
>Hi all,
>I have a question concerning using a dynamo at higher engine speeds. I am
>looking at reducing my FWF weight, and considering some of the smaller
>alternator installs. I am currently using a ND IR alt, which is fine, but
>in lurking around, I'm becoming rather concerned about the weaknesses of
>these units.
Can you give us your perceptions of "weakness"?
> Unfortunately, not much else is available in this class; i.e. size and
> weight. All of the externally regulated alternators I've seen are much
> too large and heavy for my application.
>
>I'm installing Z-13RB on my new plane, and plan on incorporating Z-24 alt
>disconnect contactor in line with the OV module.
??? I got lost here. Z-24 speaks to classic,
wound field alternators like ND . . . are you
looking for a wound field or permanent magnet
fielded machine?
>However, my Suzuki G10 three cylinder runs at 5000rpm in cruise, and
>5500rpm on takeoff. The JD AM877557 PM alt puts out 20amps at 2500rpm. I'm
>running double that. Short of re-doing my belt drive setup with a 12 inch
>pulley, what are the ramifications of running this little alt at these speeds?
Mechanically, no problem. Raising the speed increased the
AC voltage to be "rectified and regulated" down to
14v for operating your equipment. There ARE switch-mode
regulator designs that would handle this job nicely
but that's a whole separate development program.
> by the looks of it, the small pulley on the unit would spin it up to
> 10,000 rpm. I'm aware of the mechanical limits (bearings, etc), my
> question concerns the power output to the system.
Valid concerns as I've suggested above. Those things
run 20-30 VAC output at 5000 rpm so you need to plan
on 2x that at 10,000. Increasing speed is a good way
to get more energy OUT of the PM package as long as
the electronics can handle it but it's doubtful that
any regulator presently exists that fill your
requirements.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-Diagram using Kilovac EV200? |
>
>I seem to recall seeing a Z diagram using one of the 'newer' contactors
>like a Kilovac EV 200 or Gigavac GX11. Could someone point me to that
>diagram, either the name or link on Bob's website.
You can substitute contactors in any of the Z-figures.
I think I did a "special" Z-14 way back when . . . but
it simply depicts the flying lead connections to the
EV series contactors. The Gigavac is terminal connections.
There would be no changes to the Z-figures.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/Gigavac_GX11.gif
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: I-Phone Inclinometer |
>
>Etienne,
>SS Gyros are in fact MEMS accelerometers.
>Actually SS Gyro is an oxymoron since a gyro implies gyroscopic
>which implies spinning parts (hard to be solid state at the same time).
Correct. The devices are not accelerometers but rotational
rate sensors. Same sensed stimulus that your turn/bank
or turn-coordinator responds to.
>See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEMS_gyroscope
>http://www.sensorsmag.com/articles/0203/14/
>http://www.analog.com/en/mems-and-sensors/imems-gyroscopes/adxrs610/products/product.html
>
>etc., etc.
>
>To my knowledge, the inertial platforms of BMA, Dynon, Avidyne (entegra),
>and Garmin (G1000) are all MEMS-based. No Gyro components at all.
>
>See for ref:http://www.flyingmag.com/article.asp?section_id=12&article_id=869
>
>or look up the tech specs on the individual systems.
There are a variety of MEMS sensors responsive to
apparent gravity vectors which ARE true accelerometers.
There are a number of "digital inclinometers" on the market
that utilize two and three axis sensors of this variety.
Unlike precision accelerometers of yesteryear, these things
have a frequency response that goes down to DC. Imminently
suited to inclinometer service.
The rotational rate sensors are finding their way into
high-end GPS receivers to resolve vehicular turning
rate to let the guidance software know that you've
REALLY turned the corner it suggested. Less expensive
units need several seconds of new GPS data to resolve a
new course over the ground to confirm that the turn was
made.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James Robinson <jbr79r(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-Diagram using Kilovac EV200? |
Hi Bob
I missed part of this thread.- Are these better contactor or ?
--- On Mon, 8/11/08, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Z-Diagram using Kilovac EV200?
Date: Monday, August 11, 2008, 4:36 PM
>
>I seem to recall seeing a Z diagram using one of the 'newer'
contactors
>like a Kilovac EV 200 or Gigavac GX11. Could someone point me to that
>diagram, either the name or link on Bob's website.
You can substitute contactors in any of the Z-figures.
I think I did a "special" Z-14 way back when . . . but
it simply depicts the flying lead connections to the
EV series contactors. The Gigavac is terminal connections.
There would be no changes to the Z-figures.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/Gigavac_GX11.gif
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I-Phone Inclinometer |
Etienne,
I am well underway designing my own Lateral Stabilization System (more
commonly know as a wing leveler) using MEMS Gyros and Accelerometer.
There is a lot of assumptions made and it takes a lot of studying to
understand the use and limitations of such devices. For one thing, the
capability of the MEMS units vary from cheap toy quality to very expensive
top quality units. So one can not just lump them all together in terms of
capability (or cost {:<()
For example, a lot of folks believe that in a coordinated, level turn the
accelerometer is useless in defining the attitude of the aircraft. It
depends on the accelerometer, but a two axis accelerometer of sufficient
sensitvity can indeed tell you that you are in a turn of X deg bank. The
reason is that, of course, in a coordinated turn the number of G's you pull
is dependent on your bank angle. The old 60 deg = 2 G example comes to
mind. So if your accelerometer is measuring 2 Gs then you are not straight
and level and are most likely in a 60 deg bank. But, an accelerometer is not
very good in attitude rapid changes which the gyro excels at. On the other
hand, the gyro has inherent drift which if integrated over time becomes very
large. So the gyro for rapid sensing and the accelerometer for the steady
state is an approach taken by many. So the right combination draws on the
strengths of both types to overcome the weakness of the others.
However, not just any accelerometer can do that - its only recently that
some of the MEM accelerometers have been developed with sufficient
sensitivity - measurable in milli gs!! that this has been fairly easy to do.
But, even so, I never really understood how complex the entire area is until
I started on this project and really got into it. Does Cascade PID with
poles and zeros ring your chimes {:>)? But, it is interesting and fun
regardless of the outcome.
I have my circuit board designed and components just ordered. Now working
on the software to try to make it all work. We, will see.
So jump in and get started - your mind will like you for it {:>)
Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com
http://www.andersonee.com
http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW
http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Etienne
Phillips
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: I-Phone Inclinometer
> On 11 Aug 2008, at 3:20 PM, rampil wrote:
>>
>>
>> Etienne,
>> SS Gyros are in fact MEMS accelerometers.
>> Actually SS Gyro is an oxymoron since a gyro implies gyroscopic
>> which implies spinning parts (hard to be solid state at the same
>> time).
>>
>> See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEMS_gyroscope
>> http://www.sensorsmag.com/articles/0203/14/
>> http://www.analog.com/en/mems-and-sensors/imems-gyroscopes/
>> adxrs610/products/product.html
>>
>> etc., etc.
>>
and
On 11 Aug 2008, at 8:28 PM, David M wrote:
>
> I plan to use the accelerometer, or one similar, for wing leveling
> and etc for a Mustang II.
>
> David
>
How does an accelerometer know which way is up in a co-ordinated turn?
My understanding of a "solid-state gyro" (please correct me if I'm
wrong), is that it contains a sprung vibrating weight which, like a
pendulum, is adverse to changing the axis of it's motion. The sensor
part of the device measures the deviation of the weights axis of
vibration against the casing of the unit, and from that can calculate
the rate of change in direction of the casing...
An accelerometer (again, according to my understanding) has a similar
sensor between a non-vibrating sprung weight, and the deviation of
the weight from the centre of the casing can then be used to
determine the acceleration of the casing.
Etienne
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3267 (20080714) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3267 (20080714) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: John Deere dynamo |
Beemer wrote:
> However, my Suzuki G10 three cylinder runs at 5000rpm in cruise, and 5500rpm
on takeoff. The JD AM877557 PM alt puts out 20amps at 2500rpm. I'm running double
that. Short of re-doing my belt drive setup with a 12 inch pulley, what are
the ramifications of running this little alt at these speeds? by the looks of
it, the small pulley on the unit would spin it up to 10,000 rpm. I'm aware of
the mechanical limits (bearings, etc), my question concerns the power output
to the system.
>
> Any help would be much appreciated.
>
Have you considered running a motorcycle generator coaxially?
http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/EngineGeneratorParts.jpg
http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/EngineGeneratorTest.jpg
http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/EngineGeneratorMount.jpg
http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/EngineGeneratorMounted2.jpg
http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/EngineGeneratorAirIntakeAndCooling.jpg
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: John Deere dynamo |
Bradley
I have a couple of hundred hours on a JD 20 amp PM alternator spinning
at about 8500 rpm with the JD regulator. Occasionally up to around
11,000 rpm. My somewhat hazy memory is that it needs more like 6500 rpm
to put out 20 amps. Someone (Langford??) has a website with a bunch of
info on using these. I fitted a multi-v pulley that probably loads the
bearings a bit less than the original single v pulley.
From memory the unit is around 4.5 lb plus regulator compared to around
6 lb for the conventional 40 amp ND alternator that I mentioned earlier,
so not a big weight saver. I don't have any reason to think either is
more reliable. In fact it seems that the JD regulator will fail if you
start the engine with a totally dead or disconnected battery. A small OV
relay will suffice on the JD unit instead of a heavy contactor though
and mine is wired between the alternator and the regulator. There are
smaller PM units available such as Kubota units.
Ken
Beemer wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I have a question concerning using a dynamo at higher engine speeds. I am looking
at reducing my FWF weight, and considering some of the smaller alternator
installs. I am currently using a ND IR alt, which is fine, but in lurking around,
I'm becoming rather concerned about the weaknesses of these units. Unfortunately,
not much else is available in this class; i.e. size and weight. All of
the externally regulated alternators I've seen are much too large and heavy
for my application.
>
> I'm installing Z-13RB on my new plane, and plan on incorporating Z-24 alt disconnect
contactor in line with the OV module.
>
> However, my Suzuki G10 three cylinder runs at 5000rpm in cruise, and 5500rpm
on takeoff. The JD AM877557 PM alt puts out 20amps at 2500rpm. I'm running double
that. Short of re-doing my belt drive setup with a 12 inch pulley, what are
the ramifications of running this little alt at these speeds? by the looks of
it, the small pulley on the unit would spin it up to 10,000 rpm. I'm aware of
the mechanical limits (bearings, etc), my question concerns the power output
to the system.
>
> Any help would be much appreciated.
>
> Bradley
> Kitfox 2/3
> Middle Georgia
>
> --------
> Beemer
> KF2 (and now an M3!)
> Middle Georgia
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Igntion Switches------ (Electrical Grimlens) |
8/1/2008
Hello Tim, While I am pondering your situation I will pass your info on to
the experts on the Matronics aeroelectric-list to see what they can come up
with.
'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
understand knowledge."
--------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "F. Tim Yoder" <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com>
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 5:33 PM
Subject: Re: Igntion Switches------ (Electrical Grimlens)
> {#} Replies are directed back to kisbuilders(at)angus.mystery.com
> {#} To reply to the author, write to "F. Tim Yoder"
>
>
> Hi OC,
>
> Two things;
>
> First, I flew my TR-1, with a friend, to OSH on the 26th and returned the
> 31st. We actually flew into FLD From Mesa AZ (FFZ). Their were noticabley
> fewer people in the crowd but the number of planes on the ramp at OSH and
> FLD seemed about the same as last year. I flew from Mesa, AZ to FLD, about
> 1350 nm and back using 125.1 GAL. in 19.8 HRS. That works out to 6.32 GPH,
> not bad! My TR-1 has the IO-240 B1B and I flew at 2550 RPM slightly rich
> of
> peak. Also, I have the Light Speed Elect. Ign. on one side.
>
> Second, I need some help!
> A couple of months ago I noticed that after starting my engine the elect.
> oil pressure needle would jump when I turned on the Altinator switch,
> sometimes. Now I notice it doing that every time I start up. also, I find
> that ocasionally when the oil temp. is hot the needle will pulse from
> 45psi
> to 35psi. Then yesterday, the first flight after returning from OSH, I
> flew
> to another local airport for cheeper fuel. My radio transmitted normally
> leaving however, when I transmitted at the destination airport it was
> garbled and unreadable. I noticed that the TX symbel was flashing during
> my
> transmissions. My reception was clear. After fueling I transmitted and the
> radio appeared to be okay. When I got back to my home field my
> transmissions
> were garbled again. When I got back to the hanger I determined the
> following.
> At idle RPM I could hear a little of the clicking noise during test
> transmissions.
> The co-pilot PTT did the same thing.
> I also noticed that the oil pressure needle would jump when I pushed the
> PTT.
> I pulled all the circut breakers one at a time and was unable to eliminate
> the problem.
> With the radio off the oil pressure needle jumps when I cycle the
> altinator
> switch.
>
> I hope this information might allow you to give me some suggestions on
> what
> might be going on.
> Personally I think it's Voo Doo & Black Magic!
>
> Thanks, Tim
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: John Deere dynamo |
| From: | "Beemer" <bmwebb(at)cox.net> |
nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net wrote:
>
>
>
> >>>Can you give us your perceptions of "weakness"?
>
Only what I've read of your attitude/opinion (for lack of a better term) on them
around the list. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the overall impression that
you do not believe IR alternators belong on aircraft. Of course, it is possible
that you don't agree with how John Q Builder tends to install them, i.e.
no OV protect, no Alt disconnect contactor, etc. I get this from some old postings
on the subject, and the deletion of any schematics that show IR alternator
installations. I should add that there isn't much available for my type of
engine (Geo Metro auto conversion), and weight is a significant issue up on the
nose of the Kitfox.
>
> >>> ??? I got lost here. Z-24 speaks to classic,
> >>>wound field alternators like ND . . . are you
> >>>looking for a wound field or permanent magnet
> >>>fielded machine?
>
What I'm looking for, ultimately, is to shave about 10lbs from the nose of my aircraft.
To that end, I'm exploring options for various components. More specifically,
I'm looking for 20-40 reliable amps for my electrically dependent FI
engine. Beyond that, I'm open to suggestions.
I was referring to the old Z-24 that depicted the alternator disconnect contactor
for the IR alternator, driven by the alt field wire, that completely disconnects
the alternator from the battery (system) in case of OV condition. That's
what I'm running now on my current install. The note on the new Z-24 again leads
me to believe you are not in favor of IR alternators on aircraft. Again, correct
me if I'm wrong here.
>
>
> >>> Mechanically, no problem. Raising the speed increased the
> >>>AC voltage to be "rectified and regulated" down to
> >>>14v for operating your equipment. There ARE switch-mode
> >>>regulator designs that would handle this job nicely
> >>> but that's a whole separate development program.
>
That's why I'm asking. I should point out that I'm not very electrically/electronically
savvy (..got to know my limitations). That's why you, this list, and
Aeroelectric.com are such valuable resources for me. I'm asking the advice of
those much smarter than I on such things.
>
>
> >>>Valid concerns as I've suggested above. Those things
> >>>run 20-30 VAC output at 5000 rpm so you need to plan
> >>>on 2x that at 10,000. Increasing speed is a good way
> >>>to get more energy OUT of the PM package as long as
> >>>the electronics can handle it but it's doubtful that
> >>>any regulator presently exists that fill your
> >>>requirements.
> >>>
> >>>Bob . . .
>
My electronics are minimal. I'm running an EFIS that draws about 100mA max, my
GPS and Radio are handhelds that are plugged in to charge, and a small portable
intercom. I've got Kuntzleman strobes and LED Navs, and two 55watt landing lights.
If it all dies, my pressure driven AoA gives me speed, and a ball keeps
me centered, the rest is VFR (blue up/brown down). GPS gets me to "Nearest",
and my radio will last a while all by itself. I'm strictly Day VFR, with no provision
or desire to night or IFR. Night someday, NEVER IFR in this plane. So
my number one concern is keeping the EFI and fuel pump running. My new plane will
have Z-13RB installed to this end. I don't even plan to put in the endurance
bus, as I've got nothing that needs it. It even works to the end of having
the second small battery in the back to help offset the CG of the heavier engine,
rather than just putting in dead weight.
In the end, I think the JD dynamo will not be cost effective. For what they cost,
I'd be shelling out $40 per lb for the weight savings. Probably not worth it
overall.
Bradley
--------
Beemer
KF2 (and now an M3!)
Middle Georgia
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198116#198116
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
To 'Mikef', Harley and Bob Borger:
Many thanks for having come back so quickly to my request.
I tried to acquire an EV200 with the coil control which allows it to
reduce to 1.7W of hold current in light of an apparent shortage of output
from my 914. I fiddled with several race-car shut-off switches to conserve
current, because I just couldn't afford 1A for the life of the plane.
Finding the right model was difficult as mods and model revisions clouded
the language. I now use the race-car switches and will operate one EV200,
perhaps two to do the job.
I have a GIGAVAC GX11BAA contactor in my palm right now, which takes
about an amp to hold the relay in. Make me an offer.
Again many thanks.
Ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity? |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
I am close to completing my not-so-little Z-19 upgrade and have a question about
battery choices.
I originally had an Odyssey 545 14 AH battery, weight about 12 lbs. It cranked
the engine fine but I am not sure how much life it would supply in a dead alternator
condition (I know this is important and plan to test/quantify).
A buddy loaned me an Odyssey 310 (8AH, 6lb) and I was thinking that two of these
would make a light, compact package. And paralleled for starting would work,
I'm sure. Also, the 310 has very small terminals (size M4), I see that as a challenge
to making a good connection.
But in searching this list I can find no mention of batteries used smaller than
about 12 AH capacity, so I am wondering if there is some lower AH practical limit
I should not go below?
Adding a second 545 is doable but I would be obviously giving up useful payload
capacity (which the Z-19 system has already reduced).
Suggestions are appreciated, thanks in advance,
Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198206#198206
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Fogarty at Lakes & Leisure Realty" <jfogarty(at)tds.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity? |
Mike, I have had a dead alternator in my Cardinal and all I did was look
for the nearest airport and then landed, the next day was a nice vfr day and
I few home on the same dead alternator and now dead battery, the plane does
not care, it is just what works for you. I would save the weight.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 3:05 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity?
>
> I am close to completing my not-so-little Z-19 upgrade and have a question
> about battery choices.
>
> I originally had an Odyssey 545 14 AH battery, weight about 12 lbs. It
> cranked the engine fine but I am not sure how much life it would supply in
> a dead alternator condition (I know this is important and plan to
> test/quantify).
>
> A buddy loaned me an Odyssey 310 (8AH, 6lb) and I was thinking that two of
> these would make a light, compact package. And paralleled for starting
> would work, I'm sure. Also, the 310 has very small terminals (size M4), I
> see that as a challenge to making a good connection.
>
> But in searching this list I can find no mention of batteries used smaller
> than about 12 AH capacity, so I am wondering if there is some lower AH
> practical limit I should not go below?
>
> Adding a second 545 is doable but I would be obviously giving up useful
> payload capacity (which the Z-19 system has already reduced).
>
> Suggestions are appreciated, thanks in advance,
>
> Mike
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198206#198206
>
>
> --
> Checked by AVG.
> 5:50 AM
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity? |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
Jim,
I think I am a bit more limited, my engine (Suzuki 1.3L) must have power to run
(either alternator or battery). No mag magic for me. I am all about saving the
weight but trying to stay with the good ideas of the Z-19 design (dual batteries).
Thanks,
Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198233#198233
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott R. Shook" <sshook(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Standard Circuit Breaker Spacing |
Is there a standard CB spacing requirement for Klixon 7277 push/pull
breakers?
I know there is a 1" on center vertical spacing requirement - is there a
horizontal spacing requirement?
Scott R. Shook
RV-7A (Building)
N696JS (Reserved)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity? |
Mike
I use two 8 AH Dekka AGM batteries on my 2.2 liter subaru with Z-14. One
of them will crank the engine fine and with EFI it starts immediately.
However they normally automatically parallel for cranking. At least 500
starts over a couple of years so far and still going strong. Of course
with Z-14, one dead alternator is not an issue even with an electrically
dependent engine.
Ken
mikef wrote:
>
> I am close to completing my not-so-little Z-19 upgrade and have a question about
battery choices.
>
> I originally had an Odyssey 545 14 AH battery, weight about 12 lbs. It cranked
the engine fine but I am not sure how much life it would supply in a dead alternator
condition (I know this is important and plan to test/quantify).
>
> A buddy loaned me an Odyssey 310 (8AH, 6lb) and I was thinking that two of these
would make a light, compact package. And paralleled for starting would work,
I'm sure. Also, the 310 has very small terminals (size M4), I see that as a
challenge to making a good connection.
>
> But in searching this list I can find no mention of batteries used smaller than
about 12 AH capacity, so I am wondering if there is some lower AH practical
limit I should not go below?
>
> Adding a second 545 is doable but I would be obviously giving up useful payload
capacity (which the Z-19 system has already reduced).
>
> Suggestions are appreciated, thanks in advance,
>
> Mike
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity? |
| From: | "Beemer" <bmwebb(at)cox.net> |
Mike,
I have the same question for my Kitfox with a G10 Suzi, I am planning to install
Z-19RB, and have issues with weight. Right now, I'm planning on installing a
17ah in the tail for the Primary Eng bus, and a 12ah behind the seat for the
Secondary bus.
My real question is how long will they last once the alt goes dead? no way to know,
unless we figure out how much amperage the ECM, coil, and fuel pump are using.
Right now, I have no idea.
I suppose it's a situation where an 8ah and a 12ah, or two 8ah would work, but
would it leave enough time, say 15-30 minutes to descend and reach an airport?
No idea.
I don't want to carry more weight than I have to, but I don't want to design in
an off-field landing, either. I guess if we were to figure out how much juice
is being used to keep the engine alive, we could calculate the time given by
the battery size(s).
Sound right?
Bradley
--------
Beemer
KF2 (and now an M3!)
Middle Georgia
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198343#198343
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity? |
Obviously current draw is a critical number that is best measured by
you. However in general the number for most auto engines is in the 8 to
15 amp range from what I've seen for 3 or 4 cyl. engines. Higher with
some EFI engines. Perhaps a bit less with a carb. and gravity fuel feed.
The cruise number may be significantly higher than at idle. I would
expect there are some Suzi users that have measured this.
If you have independent low voltage warning and change out the battery
every two years, I still would not count on more than 50% of rated
energy out of a battery. ie 4AH out of an 8AH battery which means be on
the ground within 15 min. with an 8 AH battery and a 15 amp load.
Regular battery capacity testing might extend that a bit but I don't
know anyone who does that. Testing at the required load or running the
engine at cruise rpm until it quits will tell the story with some
further degradation as the battery ages. In extreme temperatures, don't
count on even 50% capacity. The battery AH rating is usually for a lower
current than you will need, so you can't count on gettng 8AH of useful
energy out of an 8AH rated battery even at room temperature.
Ken
Beemer wrote:
>
> Mike,
> I have the same question for my Kitfox with a G10 Suzi, I am planning to install
Z-19RB, and have issues with weight. Right now, I'm planning on installing
a 17ah in the tail for the Primary Eng bus, and a 12ah behind the seat for the
Secondary bus.
>
> My real question is how long will they last once the alt goes dead? no way to
know, unless we figure out how much amperage the ECM, coil, and fuel pump are
using. Right now, I have no idea.
>
> I suppose it's a situation where an 8ah and a 12ah, or two 8ah would work, but
would it leave enough time, say 15-30 minutes to descend and reach an airport?
No idea.
>
> I don't want to carry more weight than I have to, but I don't want to design
in an off-field landing, either. I guess if we were to figure out how much juice
is being used to keep the engine alive, we could calculate the time given by
the battery size(s).
>
> Sound right?
> Bradley
>
> --------
> Beemer
> KF2 (and now an M3!)
> Middle Georgia
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity? |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
Ken,
Your conservative approach is probably a good one to begin estimating. I plan to
experiment with actual battery only run times to back up the theory.
I am also thinking about purchasing one of those West Mountain battery testers.
At $109 it is probably money well spent. I know we go on forever with the 'little
extras' in OBAM but I don't want to be looking for a field and thinking 'damn,
just $109.....' .
Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198424#198424
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity? |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
Ken and others,
That is good info on the battery usage. I'll look into the Dekka, I especially
like the larger battery contacts as compared to the PC310 M4 bolts (they are so
small they can hardly be called bolts....). I also replied in another thread,
that I think the purchase of the West Mountain battery tester is probably money
well spent (or something similar bought or built). Auto conversion guys like
me need to know that if the alternator goes south, there really is a backup
of some duration.
Bob K has good guidelines for determining battery capacity, and I think taking
the extra step with a quantitative measure is good.
Fly safe,
Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198427#198427
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity? |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
Ken,
You wrote: 8 AH Dekka AGM batteries
Can you describe the battery terminals on these Dekka batteries? Even a digital
photo would be helpful. I have #2 welding cable with #2 lug terminals from the
main contactor to the main battery terminals. I'm a bit concerned my existing
battery terminals are too small for long term use & vibration resistance.
Thanks,
Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198438#198438
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity? |
They are 3/16" bolts I believe. Might be a metric size and a bit larger
but the bolts come with the battery. I have #4 welding cables on them
which they are quite suitable for. Should be some pics on the Dekka
site. They are made by East Penn battery in PA I think. I picked up the
cable end terminals from a marina. I doubt there is an advantage to #2
cables on these little batteries unless you have a very long cable run.
They are sturdy terminals but obviously smaller cables stress them less.
Ken
mikef wrote:
>
> Ken,
>
> You wrote: 8 AH Dekka AGM batteries
>
> Can you describe the battery terminals on these Dekka batteries? Even a digital
photo would be helpful. I have #2 welding cable with #2 lug terminals from
the main contactor to the main battery terminals. I'm a bit concerned my existing
battery terminals are too small for long term use & vibration resistance.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: John Deere dynamo |
>
>
>nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net wrote:
> >
> > > >>>Can you give us your perceptions of "weakness"?
>
>Only what I've read of your attitude/opinion (for lack of a better term)
>on them around the list. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the overall
>impression that you do not believe IR alternators belong on aircraft.
That's a popular myth promulgated mostly by two individuals
who are demonstrably un-qualified to judge my work.
They appear to have never read and/or understood design
goals I (and hundreds of my colleagues) have embraced as
aircraft system integrators and component designers for 30+ years.
> Of course, it is possible that you don't agree with how John Q Builder
> tends to install them, i.e. no OV protect, no Alt disconnect contactor,
> etc. I get this from some old postings on the subject, and the deletion
> of any schematics that show IR alternator installations. I should add
> that there isn't much available for my type of engine (Geo Metro auto
> conversion), and weight is a significant issue up on the nose of the Kitfox.
I'm not sure you understand the spirit and intent of
my offerings here on the List and elsewhere. I think we
can agree that airplanes, with all the potential for
utility and pleasure, are exceedingly unforgiving machines.
The environment in which we operate them can be equally
unforgiving. Everything I've bolted to an airplane has
these design goals in mind. (1) Utility (function as
specified/advertised). (2) Weight. (3) Cost of ownership.
and last but not least (4) Risk Mitigation.
In categories 1-3, the stock automotive alternator is
a stellar performer and quite suited to the task aboard
airplanes but with two shortcomings"
In the category of UTILITY: ON/OFF control at any time
under any conditions without risk to itself or other
components in the system. This is how alternators/generators
have functioned in aircraft since day-one. There are both
operational and risk mitigation advantages for giving the pilot
and OV protection systems a means of managing alternator operations . . .
and RISK MITIGATION: I have seen no design to data for
which the risk of OV runaway is zero. Further, the potential
for a high-energy even in a runaway alternator is significant.
See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/When_is_110V_not_Over_Voltage.pdf
Since day one in aircraft, independent monitoring of bus voltage
COMBINED with the ability to shut an alternator/generator off
at will relieves the system designer of a time-consuming
and costly effort of designing, proving and maintaining a system
reliability in the 10-to-the-minus-9-failures-per-flight-hour
category (FAA-speak for 'never happens').
Failure tolerance is integral to every design and goes directly
to both Cost of Ownership and Risk Mitigation.
Example: I'm working on a line of smart actuators that communicate
on serial data busses, move flight surfaces, and while failure to
move does not generate a serious situation for aircraft and
crew, a failure that produces an un-commanded is bad. The neat
thing is that there are flight systems management computers
on all these aircraft that control everything. Hence Level-A
qualification for software. Normally, an actuator such as
we've proposed would require Level-A qualification too . . .
except.
Since Level-A software already exists that sends me commands
and monitors my response to those commands, all I need to
do is place the entire monitoring duties on the machines already
endowed with the ability to monitor abnormal behavior. I
provide a hard discrete enable line to that computer that
actually powers the level shifters between low level logic
and the motor drivers. If that 28v disappears, the actuator
cannot move.
Now, my software can be crafter to Level-C or even Level-D
because it has no ability to generate hazardous conditions
that are not already being monitored and controlled by another
part of the system qualified to Level-A.
By making my part of the program failure tolerant without
adding risk to the overall flight system, costs of ownership
goes down, and parts-count goes down (driving reliability
up). But even if my gizmo craps every 1000 hours, it's not
a safety of flight issue - only a cost of ownership issue.
>
> > >>> ??? I got lost here. Z-24 speaks to classic,
> > >>>wound field alternators like ND . . . are you
> > >>>looking for a wound field or permanent magnet
> > >>>fielded machine?
>
>What I'm looking for, ultimately, is to shave about 10lbs from the nose of
>my aircraft. To that end, I'm exploring options for various components.
>More specifically, I'm looking for 20-40 reliable amps for my electrically
>dependent FI engine. Beyond that, I'm open to suggestions.
If I were building an airplane, it WOULD have a
stock automotive alternator with Z-24 installed as
an interim solution to get flying and laying the
ground work for installation of a permanent solution
at a later date as described in:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Adapting_IR_Alternators_to_Aircraft.pdf
>I was referring to the old Z-24 that depicted the alternator disconnect
>contactor for the IR alternator, driven by the alt field wire, that
>completely disconnects the alternator from the battery (system) in case of
>OV condition. That's what I'm running now on my current install. The note
>on the new Z-24 again leads me to believe you are not in favor of IR
>alternators on aircraft. Again, correct me if I'm wrong here.
Why would I have even crafted Z-24 if I were attempting
to quash the use of IR alternators? And why would I
follow up the Z-24 interim with the new-and-improved
alternative? I'll suggest that these two drawings are
a positive if not enthusiastic endorsement of the
value offered by a host of automotive alternator
products.
No, I have never said that IR alternators do not belong
on aircraft. I have said that I cannot RECOMMEND them because
the current state of our art does not allow me to integrate
them in satisfaction of the design goals cited above.
Z-24 was a first crack at meeting those design goals.
It has some short comings which are discussed in detail in
publications on my website. Those short comings will
be addressed in due course.
>
> > >>> Mechanically, no problem. Raising the speed increased the
> > >>>AC voltage to be "rectified and regulated" down to
> > >>>14v for operating your equipment. There ARE switch-mode
> > >>>regulator designs that would handle this job nicely
> > >>> but that's a whole separate development program.
> >
>That's why I'm asking. I should point out that I'm not very
>electrically/electronically savvy (..got to know my limitations). That's
>why you, this list, and Aeroelectric.com are such valuable resources for
>me. I'm asking the advice of those much smarter than I on such things.
First, there are ways to make ANY selection of engine driven
power source suited to use in the aircraft environment.
Further, if you choose not to embrace my design goals, then
there is still good value to be received from bolting a stock
automotive alternator to your airplane. As long as you
understand and accept the risks and perhaps lack of utility
compared to the majority of the GA fleet, then I have
no heartburn with it. But if you're being mis-advised into
believing there is little or no increased risks as
compared to contemporary aircraft design philosophies,
you owe it to yourself to at least elevate your understanding
to the level needed to make a well considered decision.
Don't do anything based on my (or anyone else's recommendations)
unless you understand and personally embrace the design
goals that go along with those recommendations.
>My electronics are minimal. I'm running an EFIS that draws about 100mA
>max, my GPS and Radio are handhelds that are plugged in to charge, and a
>small portable intercom. I've got Kuntzleman strobes and LED Navs, and two
>55watt landing lights. If it all dies, my pressure driven AoA gives me
>speed, and a ball keeps me centered, the rest is VFR (blue up/brown down).
>GPS gets me to "Nearest", and my radio will last a while all by itself.
>I'm strictly Day VFR, with no provision or desire to night or IFR. Night
>someday, NEVER IFR in this plane. So my number one concern is keeping the
>EFI and fuel pump running. My new plane will have Z-13RB installed to this
>end. I don't even plan to put in the endurance bus, as I've got nothing
>that needs it. It even works to the end of having the second small battery
>in the back to help offset the CG of the heavier engine, rather than just
>putting in dead weight.
Sounds like a 3.5# SD-8 would do nicely for you. There are
thousands of LongEz and VariEz aircraft flying with this
machine as the only source of engine driven power.
>In the end, I think the JD dynamo will not be cost effective. For what
>they cost, I'd be shelling out $40 per lb for the weight savings. Probably
>not worth it overall.
But if you wanted to put a little 35 or 40A wound
field alternator on, that would not be a bad
decision either . . . internally or externally
regulated.
Let's channel this discussion toward establishing
your design goals and then meeting them. Please set
aside any notions that I or anyone else here on the
list is going to twist your arm to do anything except
perhaps those things which are overtly foolhardy or
dangerous.
Have you completed a load analysis of just what
your energy requirements are?
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Load_Analysis/Blank_Form.pdf
This form is designed to facilitate a study of your
true energy needs. Until those are known, may I
suggest that alternator selection for the purpose
of minimizing weight is premature?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
>
>To 'Mikef', Harley and Bob Borger:
> Many thanks for having come back so quickly to my request.
> I tried to acquire an EV200 with the coil control which allows it to
>reduce to 1.7W of hold current in light of an apparent shortage of output
>from my 914. I fiddled with several race-car shut-off switches to conserve
>current, because I just couldn't afford 1A for the life of the plane.
>Finding the right model was difficult as mods and model revisions clouded
>the language. I now use the race-car switches and will operate one EV200,
>perhaps two to do the job.
> I have a GIGAVAC GX11BAA contactor in my palm right now, which takes
>about an amp to hold the relay in. Make me an offer.
> Again many thanks.
There's a simple circuit you can add to the Gigavac that
will emulate EV-200 functionality -AND- with some judicious
design, will eliminate the noise issues associated with
the EV-200.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W Livingston" <livingjw(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: I-Phone Inclinometer |
I believe that all of these SS gyros use a vibrating beam and measure the
angular rate by measuring the twist induced by Coriolis force. See
"Vibrating structure gyro" in the Wikipedia.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert
L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 6:45 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: I-Phone Inclinometer
>
>Etienne,
>SS Gyros are in fact MEMS accelerometers.
>Actually SS Gyro is an oxymoron since a gyro implies gyroscopic
>which implies spinning parts (hard to be solid state at the same time).
Correct. The devices are not accelerometers but rotational
rate sensors. Same sensed stimulus that your turn/bank
or turn-coordinator responds to.
>See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEMS_gyroscope
>http://www.sensorsmag.com/articles/0203/14/
>http://www.analog.com/en/mems-and-sensors/imems-gyroscopes/adxrs610/product
s/product.html
>
>etc., etc.
>
>To my knowledge, the inertial platforms of BMA, Dynon, Avidyne (entegra),
>and Garmin (G1000) are all MEMS-based. No Gyro components at all.
>
>See for
ref:http://www.flyingmag.com/article.asp?section_id=12&article_id=869
>
>or look up the tech specs on the individual systems.
There are a variety of MEMS sensors responsive to
apparent gravity vectors which ARE true accelerometers.
There are a number of "digital inclinometers" on the market
that utilize two and three axis sensors of this variety.
Unlike precision accelerometers of yesteryear, these things
have a frequency response that goes down to DC. Imminently
suited to inclinometer service.
The rotational rate sensors are finding their way into
high-end GPS receivers to resolve vehicular turning
rate to let the guidance software know that you've
REALLY turned the corner it suggested. Less expensive
units need several seconds of new GPS data to resolve a
new course over the ground to confirm that the turn was
made.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sam Hoskins" <sam.hoskins(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity? |
I purchased one of the West Mountain units for the same reason that you are
concerned about, Mike. It's a nifty tool.
I was surprised to find the 11 a.h. battery I had laying around the shop was
actually only good for 7 a.h.
Sam
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:06 PM, mikef wrote:
>
> Ken,
>
> Your conservative approach is probably a good one to begin estimating. I
> plan to experiment with actual battery only run times to back up the theory.
>
> I am also thinking about purchasing one of those West Mountain battery
> testers. At $109 it is probably money well spent. I know we go on forever
> with the 'little extras' in OBAM but I don't want to be looking for a field
> and thinking 'damn, just $109.....' .
>
> Mike
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198424#198424
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity? |
>I purchased one of the West Mountain units for the same reason that you
>are concerned about, Mike. It's a nifty tool.
>
>I was surprised to find the 11 a.h. battery I had laying around the shop
>was actually only good for 7 a.h.
>Sam
Keep in mind that the nameplate capacity of any battery is based on
some published discharge rate. For most of the SVLA industry, the
published capacity is at a 20 hour rate. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Batteries/Panasonic/lc-rd1217p.pdf
Note in the box under "Characteristics" we find a RANGE of
capacity values that runs from 17 a.h. at 850 mA discharge
down to 10 a.h. at a 10 Amp discharge.
There is also a plot of battery capacity vs. discharge rate.
Here's an enlarged copy.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/17AH_12V_Capacity_vs_Load.gif
When sizing your battery selection you need to know the current
draw of your alternator-only loads. Then go into the data
for the battery under consideration and extrapolate the battery
capacity AT THAT LOAD. As noted, one can test a battery
under various loads using devices like the West Mountain
cap tester. I have two of those things. Not only are they
useful as programmable load cap testers, you can put them
into a very low current mode (0.01A) and use them as a
data acquisition system.
For example, when studying the performance of the various
battery charger product, the West Mountain cap tester
was used to acquire voltage plots like these:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/Battery_Minder_Recharge.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/Battery_Tender_Recharge.pdf
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Battery_Chargers/Schumacher_Chargers/SC2500-50AH.jpg
The AA alkaline battery studies I've published over the
past several years use this same piece of test equipment
and associated software to gather a publish families of
performance curves on various battery products. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/AA_Battery_Tests_80622.jpg
Like yourself, I've found the West Mountain Radio battery
tester to be very useful.
http://westmountainradio.com/CBA_ham.htm
Keep in mind also that your battery has a service-life.
The industry benchmark for battery sizing is to pick
a device with about 125% more capacity-at-load than
you need for meeting design goals. Then replace the battery
when it falls to 80% of as-new capacity so that those
design goals are maintained.
Obviously, these considerations will drive you to
install a battery with a name-plate rating that is
substantially larger than the service rating that
meets your design goals.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dale Rogers <dale.r(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: IR to ER alternator mod |
Hi All - and, specifically, gmcjetpilot,
Admittedly, I'm a little late coming to this party. Even though I've
only been reading the list for about half a year, available time has me
currently with 90 unread messages in the queue.
There are a couple of things that I've found rather irritating about
these exchanges. One has been the verbosity about peripheral issues
(~I'm more qualified than /you are/you think I am/ ~) and precious
little about the core issues of OBAM aircraft electrical systems. It
seems that at least two of the "dissenters" (my characterization) have
forgotten what OBAM stands for and that this is supposed to be a forum
for DIY activity. In most other venues for experimental aviation, the
focus of responses is on "here is how I did it, and these were its
limitations" - with a bit of "here's how I intend to do it; what are the
likely drawbacks?"
At least two participants here seem to want to promote their own
enterprises, via messages of: "I've done it better, and if you'll come
to my website, I'll sell you a solution." I don't see that as in the
spirit of DIY. Again, in other similar venues, the message is more
like: "here's how I solved the issue; here's what you need to know to
implement the same solution; AND, if doing it yourself is beyond your
current capabilities, or capabilities you're willing to acquire along
the way, I'll sell you a kit or a finished solution."
Does it sound like I'm asking you to give away the store? No.
Giving away precise knowledge is the nature of a ~cooperative~
undertaking; we trade what we've learned for knowledge that others have
acquired. The rising tide lifts all boats, including some who will
always be behind the knowledge curve and never have anything to
contribute - except, possibly, verification of someone else's solution.
That has value, too, though, doesn't it?
To sum, if a person is not willing to share a new schematic, and/or
list of components, and/or concrete test results ... I don't understand
why you're here, except to SPAM the list on behalf of your business. My
email has a "twit file" function which spares me having to wade through
the bloviations of such posters. It's apparently time to implement it
for this list.
Cedat Fortuna Peritis,
Dale R.
Mesa, AZ
COZY MkIV #497, Ch. 12
Ch's. 13, 16, 22 & 23 in-progress
http://www.canardzone.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1388
http://canardaviationforum.dmt.net/showthread.php?t=1588
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dale Rogers <dale.r(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 30 Amp switch? |
Bob,
May I make a suggestion? Years from now, someone searching through
the archives (or their own G-mail) will read:
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> if you need to put your hands on a suitable product
> right away and there's a Radio Shack handy, you
> might consider this device:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/69mypb
>
> Bob . . .
and discover that the tinyurl has expired. Including the RS part # in
the text - in this case, 275-001- will give them something to search for
on the RS site.
Dale R.
COZY MkIV #0497
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: John Deere dynamo |
| From: | "Beemer" <bmwebb(at)cox.net> |
nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net wrote:
>
>
>
> That's a popular myth promulgated mostly by two individuals
> who are demonstrably un-qualified to judge my work.
> They appear to have never read and/or understood design
> goals I (and hundreds of my colleagues) have embraced as
> aircraft system integrators and component designers for 30+ years.
Well, my design goals are different than someone building a Lancair IV. They are
also different than Cessna's. I think the overall objective should be the same
- supply me 12 volts and don't hurt me. I see that you are leading us toward
this objective.
I have no desire to re-hash opinion differences nor point fingers. I want to wire
my Kitfox.
>
> I'm not sure you understand the spirit and intent of
> my offerings here on the List and elsewhere. I think we
> can agree that airplanes, with all the potential for
> utility and pleasure, are exceedingly unforgiving machines.
> The environment in which we operate them can be equally
> unforgiving. Everything I've bolted to an airplane has
> these design goals in mind. (1) Utility (function as
> specified/advertised). (2) Weight. (3) Cost of ownership.
> and last but not least (4) Risk Mitigation.
>
> In categories 1-3, the stock automotive alternator is
> a stellar performer and quite suited to the task aboard
> airplanes but with two shortcomings"
>
> In the category of UTILITY: ON/OFF control at any time
> under any conditions without risk to itself or other
> components in the system. This is how alternators/generators
> have functioned in aircraft since day-one. There are both
> operational and risk mitigation advantages for giving the pilot
> and OV protection systems a means of managing alternator operations . . .
>
> and RISK MITIGATION: I have seen no design to data for
> which the risk of OV runaway is zero. Further, the potential
> for a high-energy even in a runaway alternator is significant.
> See:
>
> http://aeroelectric.com/articles/When_is_110V_not_Over_Voltage.pdf
>
> Since day one in aircraft, independent monitoring of bus voltage
> COMBINED with the ability to shut an alternator/generator off
> at will relieves the system designer of a time-consuming
> and costly effort of designing, proving and maintaining a system
> reliability in the 10-to-the-minus-9-failures-per-flight-hour
> category (FAA-speak for 'never happens').
>
> Failure tolerance is integral to every design and goes directly
> to both Cost of Ownership and Risk Mitigation.
>
>
>
> By making my part of the program failure tolerant without
> adding risk to the overall flight system, costs of ownership
> goes down, and parts-count goes down (driving reliability
> up). But even if my gizmo craps every 1000 hours, it's not
> a safety of flight issue - only a cost of ownership issue.
>
>
I don't see any debate here. I'm not a fan of the "more is better" philosophy.
KISS is the rule on the K'fox. I'm agonizing over following Z-19RB, but with my
EFI engine, I feel the redundancy outweighs the complicity.
>
> If I were building an airplane, it WOULD have a
> stock automotive alternator with Z-24 installed as
> an interim solution to get flying and laying the
> ground work for installation of a permanent solution
> at a later date as described in:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Adapting_IR_Alternators_to_Aircraft.pdf
>
>
Wow. Telling statement, that. It quite well answers the question "What would Bob
do...?"
>
>
> Why would I have even crafted Z-24 if I were attempting
> to quash the use of IR alternators? And why would I
> follow up the Z-24 interim with the new-and-improved
> alternative? I'll suggest that these two drawings are
> a positive if not enthusiastic endorsement of the
> value offered by a host of automotive alternator
> products.
>
> No, I have never said that IR alternators do not belong
> on aircraft. I have said that I cannot RECOMMEND them because
> the current state of our art does not allow me to integrate
> them in satisfaction of the design goals cited above.
> Z-24 was a first crack at meeting those design goals.
> It has some short comings which are discussed in detail in
> publications on my website. Those short comings will
> be addressed in due course.
>
But you just said you would use one, yet not recommend one. Am I mis-interpreting
this somehow?
>
> First, there are ways to make ANY selection of engine driven
> power source suited to use in the aircraft environment.
> Further, if you choose not to embrace my design goals, then
> there is still good value to be received from bolting a stock
> automotive alternator to your airplane. As long as you
> understand and accept the risks and perhaps lack of utility
> compared to the majority of the GA fleet, then I have
> no heartburn with it. But if you're being mis-advised into
> believing there is little or no increased risks as
> compared to contemporary aircraft design philosophies,
> you owe it to yourself to at least elevate your understanding
> to the level needed to make a well considered decision.
> Don't do anything based on my (or anyone else's recommendations)
> unless you understand and personally embrace the design
> goals that go along with those recommendations.
>
>
By installing Z-13RB with Z-24 integrated, I'm providing for the bad alternator
all together, by disconnecting it from the system entirely. From then on, I am
carried by the battery(s), and need to design enough ah margin to get me home
or nearest, anyway.
>
> Sounds like a 3.5# SD-8 would do nicely for you. There are
> thousands of LongEz and VariEz aircraft flying with this
> machine as the only source of engine driven power.
>
Ummm, I'm sure they're great units, and would do fine. But I can't use the gear
drive.
>
> But if you wanted to put a little 35 or 40A wound
> field alternator on, that would not be a bad
> decision either . . . internally or externally
> regulated.
>
> Let's channel this discussion toward establishing
> your design goals and then meeting them. Please set
> aside any notions that I or anyone else here on the
> list is going to twist your arm to do anything except
> perhaps those things which are overtly foolhardy or
> dangerous.
>
> Have you completed a load analysis of just what
> your energy requirements are?
>
> See:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Load_Analysis/Blank_Form.pdf
>
> This form is designed to facilitate a study of your
> true energy needs. Until those are known, may I
> suggest that alternator selection for the purpose
> of minimizing weight is premature?
>
> Bob . . .
No ones talking me into anything. I'm trying to decide how to proceed on my new
airplane.
I haven't analyzed it. I have no idea how to check the ECM and coil draw. Right
now I have 55amps, Z-24, and 17ah running the motor just fine. I have two readily
available alternator options, both 40amp, one weighs 6.5lbs, the other 4.5
lbs. I'm just trying to figure out if there's a better way to wire up the new
airplane. If I can install the JD dynamo with external reg, spin it up to 9000rpm,
and live to tell the tale, I'll consider it on its merits. But I would
like to know if it's feasible to do so, or a bad choice due to something I'm not
being told by the advertising.
Bradley
--------
Beemer
KF2 (and now an M3!)
Middle Georgia
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198613#198613
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | SD-8 + Key West rectifier/regulator ? |
| From: | Bob Bittner <rbittner(at)us.ibm.com> |
The surprising but apparent inability for the B&C SD-8 to self-activate
makes me wonder if a simple solution is a different regulator/rectifier.
The Key West product works fine with the Rotax PM alternators and without
any battery. Anyone out there know specs enough on both units to know if
they wouldn't or might work together?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed Mueller <ed(at)muellerartcover.com> |
| Subject: | Re: John Deere dynamo |
If you have the engine actually running, can't you turn all the other
electrics off and measure the draw of the ECM and coil?
Ed
On Aug 14, 2008, at 5:15 PM, Beemer wrote:
>
>
> nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> That's a popular myth promulgated mostly by two individuals
>> who are demonstrably un-qualified to judge my work.
>> They appear to have never read and/or understood design
>> goals I (and hundreds of my colleagues) have embraced as
>> aircraft system integrators and component designers for 30+ years.
>
>
> Well, my design goals are different than someone building a Lancair
> IV. They are also different than Cessna's. I think the overall
> objective should be the same - supply me 12 volts and don't hurt me. I
> see that you are leading us toward this objective.
>
> I have no desire to re-hash opinion differences nor point fingers. I
> want to wire my Kitfox.
>
>
>>
>> I'm not sure you understand the spirit and intent of
>> my offerings here on the List and elsewhere. I think we
>> can agree that airplanes, with all the potential for
>> utility and pleasure, are exceedingly unforgiving machines.
>> The environment in which we operate them can be equally
>> unforgiving. Everything I've bolted to an airplane has
>> these design goals in mind. (1) Utility (function as
>> specified/advertised). (2) Weight. (3) Cost of ownership.
>> and last but not least (4) Risk Mitigation.
>>
>> In categories 1-3, the stock automotive alternator is
>> a stellar performer and quite suited to the task aboard
>> airplanes but with two shortcomings"
>>
>> In the category of UTILITY: ON/OFF control at any time
>> under any conditions without risk to itself or other
>> components in the system. This is how alternators/generators
>> have functioned in aircraft since day-one. There are both
>> operational and risk mitigation advantages for giving the pilot
>> and OV protection systems a means of managing alternator
>> operations . . .
>>
>> and RISK MITIGATION: I have seen no design to data for
>> which the risk of OV runaway is zero. Further, the potential
>> for a high-energy even in a runaway alternator is significant.
>> See:
>>
>> http://aeroelectric.com/articles/When_is_110V_not_Over_Voltage.pdf
>>
>> Since day one in aircraft, independent monitoring of bus voltage
>> COMBINED with the ability to shut an alternator/generator off
>> at will relieves the system designer of a time-consuming
>> and costly effort of designing, proving and maintaining a system
>> reliability in the 10-to-the-minus-9-failures-per-flight-hour
>> category (FAA-speak for 'never happens').
>>
>> Failure tolerance is integral to every design and goes directly
>> to both Cost of Ownership and Risk Mitigation.
>>
>>
>>
>> By making my part of the program failure tolerant without
>> adding risk to the overall flight system, costs of ownership
>> goes down, and parts-count goes down (driving reliability
>> up). But even if my gizmo craps every 1000 hours, it's not
>> a safety of flight issue - only a cost of ownership issue.
>>
>>
>
>
> I don't see any debate here. I'm not a fan of the "more is better"
> philosophy. KISS is the rule on the K'fox. I'm agonizing over
> following Z-19RB, but with my EFI engine, I feel the redundancy
> outweighs the complicity.
>
>
>>
>> If I were building an airplane, it WOULD have a
>> stock automotive alternator with Z-24 installed as
>> an interim solution to get flying and laying the
>> ground work for installation of a permanent solution
>> at a later date as described in:
>>
>> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/
>> Adapting_IR_Alternators_to_Aircraft.pdf
>>
>>
>
>
> Wow. Telling statement, that. It quite well answers the question "What
> would Bob do...?"
>
>
>>
>>
>> Why would I have even crafted Z-24 if I were attempting
>> to quash the use of IR alternators? And why would I
>> follow up the Z-24 interim with the new-and-improved
>> alternative? I'll suggest that these two drawings are
>> a positive if not enthusiastic endorsement of the
>> value offered by a host of automotive alternator
>> products.
>>
>> No, I have never said that IR alternators do not belong
>> on aircraft. I have said that I cannot RECOMMEND them because
>> the current state of our art does not allow me to integrate
>> them in satisfaction of the design goals cited above.
>> Z-24 was a first crack at meeting those design goals.
>> It has some short comings which are discussed in detail in
>> publications on my website. Those short comings will
>> be addressed in due course.
>>
>
>
> But you just said you would use one, yet not recommend one. Am I
> mis-interpreting this somehow?
>
>
>>
>> First, there are ways to make ANY selection of engine driven
>> power source suited to use in the aircraft environment.
>> Further, if you choose not to embrace my design goals, then
>> there is still good value to be received from bolting a stock
>> automotive alternator to your airplane. As long as you
>> understand and accept the risks and perhaps lack of utility
>> compared to the majority of the GA fleet, then I have
>> no heartburn with it. But if you're being mis-advised into
>> believing there is little or no increased risks as
>> compared to contemporary aircraft design philosophies,
>> you owe it to yourself to at least elevate your understanding
>> to the level needed to make a well considered decision.
>> Don't do anything based on my (or anyone else's recommendations)
>> unless you understand and personally embrace the design
>> goals that go along with those recommendations.
>>
>>
>
>
> By installing Z-13RB with Z-24 integrated, I'm providing for the bad
> alternator all together, by disconnecting it from the system entirely.
> From then on, I am carried by the battery(s), and need to design
> enough ah margin to get me home or nearest, anyway.
>
>
>>
>> Sounds like a 3.5# SD-8 would do nicely for you. There are
>> thousands of LongEz and VariEz aircraft flying with this
>> machine as the only source of engine driven power.
>>
>
>
> Ummm, I'm sure they're great units, and would do fine. But I can't use
> the gear drive.
>
>
>>
>> But if you wanted to put a little 35 or 40A wound
>> field alternator on, that would not be a bad
>> decision either . . . internally or externally
>> regulated.
>>
>> Let's channel this discussion toward establishing
>> your design goals and then meeting them. Please set
>> aside any notions that I or anyone else here on the
>> list is going to twist your arm to do anything except
>> perhaps those things which are overtly foolhardy or
>> dangerous.
>>
>> Have you completed a load analysis of just what
>> your energy requirements are?
>>
>> See:
>>
>> http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Load_Analysis/Blank_Form.pdf
>>
>> This form is designed to facilitate a study of your
>> true energy needs. Until those are known, may I
>> suggest that alternator selection for the purpose
>> of minimizing weight is premature?
>>
>> Bob . . .
>
>
> No ones talking me into anything. I'm trying to decide how to proceed
> on my new airplane.
>
> I haven't analyzed it. I have no idea how to check the ECM and coil
> draw. Right now I have 55amps, Z-24, and 17ah running the motor just
> fine. I have two readily available alternator options, both 40amp, one
> weighs 6.5lbs, the other 4.5 lbs. I'm just trying to figure out if
> there's a better way to wire up the new airplane. If I can install the
> JD dynamo with external reg, spin it up to 9000rpm, and live to tell
> the tale, I'll consider it on its merits. But I would like to know if
> it's feasible to do so, or a bad choice due to something I'm not being
> told by the advertising.
>
> Bradley
>
> --------
> Beemer
> KF2 (and now an M3!)
> Middle Georgia
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198613#198613
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Curry" <currydon(at)bellsouth.net> |
Does anybody know where to buy a lens for a KT-70 transponder (-0101
version)? Any idea what the part number for the lens might be?
Thanks,
Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 30 Amp switch? |
>
>Bob,
>
> May I make a suggestion? Years from now, someone searching through the
> archives (or their own G-mail) will read:
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>> if you need to put your hands on a suitable product
>> right away and there's a Radio Shack handy, you
>> might consider this device:
>>
>>http://tinyurl.com/69mypb
>>
>> Bob . . .
>
>
>and discover that the tinyurl has expired. Including the RS part # in the
>text - in this case, 275-001- will give them something to search for on
>the RS site.
Hi Dale,
The header paragraph in the tinyurl.com front page
includes the following statement:
"By entering in a URL in the text field below, we will
create a tiny URL that will not break in email postings
and never expires."
Are you perhaps thinking of another service?
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: John Deere dynamo |
>
>I have no desire to re-hash opinion differences nor point fingers. I want
>to wire my Kitfox.
Understood.
>
>
>I don't see any debate here. I'm not a fan of the "more is better"
>philosophy. KISS is the rule on the K'fox. I'm agonizing over following
>Z-19RB, but with my EFI engine, I feel the redundancy outweighs the complicity.
No debated intended. Are you interested in any time, any
conditions ON/OFF and/or ov protection for your alternator
of choice?
> > If I were building an airplane, it WOULD have a
> > stock automotive alternator with Z-24 installed as
> > an interim solution to get flying and laying the
> > ground work for installation of a permanent solution
> > at a later date as described in:
> >
> >
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Adapting_IR_Alternators_to_Aircraft.pdf
> >
> >
>
>
>Wow. Telling statement, that. It quite well answers the question "What
>would Bob do...?"
Or anyone else who is interested in design goals cited . . .
> >
> >
> > Why would I have even crafted Z-24 if I were attempting
> > to quash the use of IR alternators? And why would I
> > follow up the Z-24 interim with the new-and-improved
> > alternative? I'll suggest that these two drawings are
> > a positive if not enthusiastic endorsement of the
> > value offered by a host of automotive alternator
> > products.
> >
> > No, I have never said that IR alternators do not belong
> > on aircraft. I have said that I cannot RECOMMEND them because
> > the current state of our art does not allow me to integrate
> > them in satisfaction of the design goals cited above.
> > Z-24 was a first crack at meeting those design goals.
> > It has some short comings which are discussed in detail in
> > publications on my website. Those short comings will
> > be addressed in due course.
> >
>
>
>But you just said you would use one, yet not recommend one. Am I
>mis-interpreting this somehow?
The time when I was unable to recommend them was BEFORE Z-24
was crafted . . . I've designed dozens of engine driven power
systems for both OBAM and TC aircraft. Until about 10 years
ago, the alternators of choice were externally regulated . . .
but mostly because that's the way we've been doing it for
quite some time.
The IR alternator was obviously future king-of-the-market
even in airplanes. The challenge was to figure out how
one could take any size, any brand, any pedigree IR
alternator and integrate it into an aircraft while not
giving up control and protection philosophies that have
served us well.
Z-24 was the first crack at it . . . but if the pilot
operates the system to turn the alternator OFF while
it's running loaded and at RPM, then there was risk
of a load-dump transient killing the alternator's own
regulator. A few folks experienced this unhappy event
which did place a cloud over the Z-24 control/protection
philosophy.
We went back to the drawing board and crafted a product
that will drop into an existing Z-24 installation that
takes care of the load-dump, protects the el-cheeso
contactor from arcing, provides any time, any
conditions ON/OFF control -AND- OV protection in
a single product.
>By installing Z-13RB with Z-24 integrated, I'm providing for the bad
>alternator all together, by disconnecting it from the system entirely.
> From then on, I am carried by the battery(s), and need to design enough
>ah margin to get me home or nearest, anyway.
Yes, as long as you don't exercise the ON/OFF switch
except at low rpm (pre takeoff, pre parking) then
Z-24 does offer OV protection.
> >
> > Sounds like a 3.5# SD-8 would do nicely for you. There are
> > thousands of LongEz and VariEz aircraft flying with this
> > machine as the only source of engine driven power.
> >
>
>
>Ummm, I'm sure they're great units, and would do fine. But I can't use the
>gear drive.
I didn't grasp until now that you were running an
automotive conversion . . . okay, how about the 3.5
pound cousin to the SD-8
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Alternators/Kubota.jpg
This critter is good for about 12-15A when turned
fast enough and assuming that the companion regulator-
rectifier isn't over-stressed by the higher input
operating voltage. I've prayed a bit over the
schematics for an exemplar device . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/3-Phase_PM_Rectifier_Regulator.gif
. . . and it seems likely that the device would
tolerate the higher rpm. In a few months, I'll have
a drive stand up and running and will be able to
test the hypothesis in the shop. If you're willing
to invest in the experiment, you can supply results
that would be of interest to lots of other folks
here on the List.
>I haven't analyzed it. I have no idea how to check the ECM and coil draw.
>Right now I have 55amps, Z-24, and 17ah running the motor just fine. I
>have two readily available alternator options, both 40amp, one weighs
>6.5lbs, the other 4.5 lbs. I'm just trying to figure out if there's a
>better way to wire up the new airplane. If I can install the JD dynamo
>with external reg, spin it up to 9000rpm, and live to tell the tale, I'll
>consider it on its merits. But I would like to know if it's feasible to do
>so, or a bad choice due to something I'm not being told by the advertising.
The risks for trying are low. The regulator's stability
might be less than idea and/or the regulator could fail due
to higher than design voltage. As long as you have OV protection,
risks are to the regulator only.
One thing we DO know is that automotive wound-field alternators
do live happily in airplanes running 10,000+ RPM. This is the
next-to-zero-risk approach.
How much time are you willing to invest in the experiment
to validate the 4.5# decision?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: SD-8 + Key West rectifier/regulator ? |
>
>The surprising but apparent inability for the B&C SD-8 to self-activate
>makes me wonder if a simple solution is a different regulator/rectifier.
>The Key West product works fine with the Rotax PM alternators and without
>any battery. Anyone out there know specs enough on both units to know if
>they wouldn't or might work together?
The Key West product is designed to handle the 18+ amp
output from a Rotax 912/914. It should work just fine
on the SD-8.
I'd really like to talk to the designer/manufacturer
of the Key West regulator but have yet to identify
anyone on net-searches. Has anyone on the list ever
installed a Kew West product? Did the accompanying literature
speak to who makes these critters?
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Starter Contactor |
| From: | "Beemer" <bmwebb(at)cox.net> |
Sorry if this has been covered before...
What is the purpose of the additional starter contactor on the drawings? If my
ND starter has a solenoid, isn't that the contactor from the start button? Why
would I install a second relay? Or is this for another type of starter that does
not have a solenoid?
Seems like more parts to fail...
Bradley
--------
Beemer
KF2 (and now an M3!)
Middle Georgia
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198648#198648
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Starter Contactor |
| From: | "Beemer" <bmwebb(at)cox.net> |
Disregard this, I just found Bob's article on the subject...via Google, no less.
Bradley
--------
Beemer
KF2 (and now an M3!)
Middle Georgia
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198652#198652
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dale Rogers <dale.r(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 30 Amp switch? |
Re:
>> May I make a suggestion? Years from now, someone searching through
>> the archives (or their own G-mail) will read:
>>
>> Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>>> if you need to put your hands on a suitable product
>>> right away and there's a Radio Shack handy, you
>>> might consider this device:
>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/69mypb
>>>
>>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>> and discover that the tinyurl has expired. Including the RS part #
>> in the text - in this case, 275-001- will give them something to
>> search for on the RS site.
>
> Hi Dale,
>
> The header paragraph in the tinyurl.com front page
> includes the following statement:
>
> "By entering in a URL in the text field below, we will
> create a tiny URL that will not break in email postings
> and never expires."
>
> Are you perhaps thinking of another service?
>
> Bob . . .
>
Nope. Just a non-optimal choice of words. After 28 years in the
computer industry, I have less than full confidence that a free service
like tinyurl will continue forever. Maybe they are well funded by a
subsidy from one of Gilby Productions' other operations. Maybe ...
Dale R.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Starter Contactor |
>
>Sorry if this has been covered before...
>
>What is the purpose of the additional starter contactor on the drawings?
>If my ND starter has a solenoid, isn't that the contactor from the start
>button? Why would I install a second relay? Or is this for another type of
>starter that does not have a solenoid?
>
>Seems like more parts to fail...
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/strtctr.pdf
also Figure Z-22 and associated note on page Z-4
of . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11M.pdf
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | No sidetone driving me insane! |
| From: | "keithmckinley" <keith.mckinley(at)townisp.com> |
Hi,
I've got an Icom a200 radio connected through a pm 1200 intercom.
When I got the plane it had no side tone at all. Pulled the radio and tried to
adjust the sidetone pot to no avail. Turned off intercom and still no side tone.
I've tried numerous different headsets. I did notice what seems to be a disconnected
wire(s) at the molex connector but don't no if that's an issue. The wiring
job is shoddy to begin with but I'd hate to rip it out and start new if it's
actually a radio issue.
radio transmits and receives just fine and the intercom is awesome at canceling
out noise in my very loud warbird.
Just hoping for some last chance advice before I send the radio out for a bench
test.
Thanks,
Keith
--------
Wizard
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198719#198719
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Measuring "wiggly" currents . . . |
>
>If you need to know actual current draw, check out
>www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_03482369000P. DC clamp-on ammeter, works
>well for this kind of situation, not too expensive. Just be sure you're
>clamping around the wire that you really want to read. It's easy to get on
>the wrong side of a terminal. (Don't ask how I know -- I know!)
This brings up a topic that I've been meaning to do an article
on . . . but not all ammeters are the same . . . and some are
decidedly unsuitable for some kinds of measurements.
When we're sizing batteries and alternators, the REAL questions
go to deducing the amount of ENERGY we need to store and generate.
You can buy ENERGY meters but they are decidedly more expensive
than the common mulitmeters and very few folks really need to
make detailed energy studies.
To review, energy is power over an interval of time. Like
the Joule is 1 watt for one second, i.e. 1 watt-second.
You pay for killowatt-hours recorded on the meter at the
back of your house. While an alternator may be rated at
60A and 14v (840 watts) the energy you need from it is
spread over a period of a flight and might turn out to
be something like 600 watt-hours. A tidy number that
accumulates total consumption that doesn't care if the
current draw was 210 amps for seconds, 5 amps for minutes,
16.2 amps most of the time an 31 amps for a few minutes.
Making measurements to deduce energy requirements can
have some pitfalls . . . from two major sources. Accuracy
of the instruments at the levels of interest and response
of the instrument for integrating the true energy measurement
from a reading that is anything but steady.
Light bulbs, fans, radios, etc. tend to have steady
current draw requirements. Their energy requirements are
pretty accurately measured with the product of volts
x amps x time. some devices in the airplane do not
present steady, current draw signatures. Placing an
ammeter in series with these devices is problematic.
First, digital multimeters have some electronics that
does an analog to digital conversion for display. This
is a stone simple task . . . when the stimulus to be
measured is steady. But depending on the instruments
choice for a/d processing, currents that wiggle can
cause erroneous if not wild swings in displayed readings.
Systems like electronic fuel injection, pulse pumps,
ignition systems, and strobes tend to demand current
from the system with jumpy characteristics. Years
ago I wrestled with these measurements by crafting
an operational amplifier integrator that was fed by
an ammeter shunt in series with the measurement of
interest. The first time I did this was to deduce
the batter size needed for this machine:
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/Mobilizer_3s.jpg
During a patient load-unload cycle the current draw
of the various motors was all over the place. But
the integrator would sum the current values per
unit time whereupon I could multiply by battery voltage
and deduce watt-seconds of energy per patient handling cycle.
It's exactly this kind of measurement philosophy that's
needed to deduce energy requirements for the "jumpy"
systems aboard your airplane.
This has always been a bit of tone in my shoe when
dealing with suppliers of accessories to aircraft.
The product data sheets give max current draws (sizes
wire and breakers) but for things like strobes
and pumps, there was no integrated total-energy
value (sizes batteries in the alternator out mode).
How does all this relate to the topic at hand?
First, it is unlikely that a clamp-on DC ammeter
of the type cited will be very useful for measuring
current draw of an EFCI. First because the measurement
of interest is large compared to the accuracy of
the device. If it has a published accuracy of
say 3% of full scale for a 50A scale, that's
plus or minus 1.5 amps. Furthermore, the electronics
within the instrument may not handle the wiggly
nature of current draw for injectors that get
pulsed at 10A for milliseconds and once per
cylinder-firing.
A modern version of the instrumentation I described
above would be useful. A 10A, 50Mv shunt would
provide the current sample. We would want to
put a gain of 100 on the 50Mv signal to get it
up to the 5 volt range. The output of the gain
stage would drive an integrator with a low dielectric
absorption capacitor (like a Panasonic ECQE1106K).
With a 1M integrating resistor and 10uF capacitor,
our amplified shunt signal would drive the charge
on the capacitor to 5 volts in 10 seconds. This
is the order of magnitude for integrator gain
and time constant useful to our tasks. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/Ammeter_for_Wiggly_Currents.pdf
Hooking this shunt in series with your wiggly
system power, let us assume that you get
a reading of 3.6 volts at the end of ten seconds.
We know that 10A for 10 seconds raises our instrument's
output to 5 volts. The reading of 3.6 volts represents an
integrated current value of 10 x 3.6/5.0 or 7.2
amps. It matters not how much the measurement
thrashes around, as far as your BATTERY is concerned,
it needs to deliver 7.2A x 12v x 2 = 173 watt-
hours of energy to keep that puppy running for
two hours.
When you have the integrated value of current
draw for ALL endurance loads, you're prepared
to go into the battery performance charts and
select a battery that meets your design goals.
I know this is a lot of info that most folks
don't need. But if anyone is interested in getting
the real numbers on their system's performance,
this kind of tool is quite useful. But be aware
also that the plain vanilla ammeters have
limitations for accuracy at levels of interest
and performance for dynamic (wiggly) loads.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Choices - what is too small AH capacity? |
>
>Ken,
>
>You wrote: 8 AH Dekka AGM batteries
>
>Can you describe the battery terminals on these Dekka batteries? Even a
>digital photo would be helpful. I have #2 welding cable with #2 lug
>terminals from the main contactor to the main battery terminals. I'm a bit
>concerned my existing battery terminals are too small for long term use &
>vibration resistance.
The driving considerations for battery selection are
(1) capacity at endurance loads, (2) internal impedance
at cranking loads and (3) ability of the terminals to
carry cranking currents.
(1) Capacity is another discussion.
(2) For a battery to be a successful engine cranking
source, 10 milliohms new is a pretty fair benchmark
for maximum internal impedance. I mention this
because there are very compact technologies with
limited capacity (1 a.h. or so) that will dump over
1000 amps of short circuit current! Smoke from a
flash-in-the-pan blew through the marketplace
about 10 years ago when Bolder Technologies
attempted to launch a thin metal film battery about
the size of a c-cell. A host of products sprang
up using this device. "Start Stick" was shown around
OSH several years. I think Sears marketed a very
compact car cranking accessory for a time. These
cells didn't make it for reasons of process limitations.
They couldn't keep a good electrical grip on the
edges of the films . . . and had some sealing problems
too. They're gone now, but they (or something similar)
will be back.
For the moment, our practical choices for cranking
batteries are probably not smaller than 10 a.h.
or so. B&C has a little 12 a.h. battery that will
crank engines:
http://www.bandc.biz/BC103-1.pdf
Concorde used to have a 10 a.h. device that would
crank but I don't see it listed any more.
(3) Terminals. You can get a 17 a.h. battery
with .25" faston tabs, and fat-wire connection
posts. Both batteries are capable of cranking
engines with respect to internal construction
but fast-on tabs are obviously not capable of
delivering that kind of current.
IF you find a battery with a very low internal
impedance, then terminals should be on the order
of 1/4" bolts through hefty metal tabs -OR-
10-32 (4mm) minimum screws into brass inserts.
To prevent damage to your battery's connections
due to vibration and stress . . . make all
connections to batteries with 4AWG welding
cable between battery(-) and ground; battery(+)
and battery contactor. This is a good thing
to do even if the rest of your airplane is wired
with 00 fat-wires.
After (2) and (3) are satisfied, then capacity
is a function of meeting design goals for weight,
cost of ownership, and battery-only endurance.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: No sidetone driving me insane! |
>
>
>Hi,
>
>I've got an Icom a200 radio connected through a pm 1200 intercom.
>
>When I got the plane it had no side tone at all. Pulled the radio and
>tried to adjust the sidetone pot to no avail. Turned off intercom and
>still no side tone.
>
>I've tried numerous different headsets. I did notice what seems to be a
>disconnected wire(s) at the molex connector but don't no if that's an
>issue. The wiring job is shoddy to begin with but I'd hate to rip it out
>and start new if it's actually a radio issue.
>
>radio transmits and receives just fine and the intercom is awesome at
>canceling out noise in my very loud warbird.
>
>Just hoping for some last chance advice before I send the radio out for a
>bench test.
Sidetone is not subject to variations in headsets.
If you can hear anything else in the headsets and
no sidetone, then it's not the headsets.
I looked at the installation manual and didn't spot
any mention of sidetone . . . are you sure this
radio supports it?
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rochester dual indicator |
| From: | "bouguy" <boullu.guy(at)libertysurf.fr> |
hi ,
i have a Rochester dual indicator , Oil temp and Oil Press ,
Cessna Part N S3279-1 coming from a 28volts Skyhawk .
i would like to use it but as i have no Parts catalog , am not
able to determine probe and sender references .
is somebody able to help me ?
thanks a lot ,
Guy , Barracuda builder .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198887#198887
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: No sidetone driving me insane! |
| From: | "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com> |
Assuming that the hardware supports sidetone(and I think all intercoms
do), then lessee:
shoddy amateur wiring with obvious failed connectors vs. solid state
radio.....
In all of aircraft, it's not what you want to do, you do what needs to
be done.
Take your time, get it right, and if you can't replace the crappy
molex connectors, at least solder them after crimping
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198914#198914
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: No sidetone driving me insane! |
| From: | "keithmckinley" <keith.mckinley(at)townisp.com> |
sidetone is supported by intercom and radio.
I think I'll pull the radio for a bench test....had enough
Keith
--------
Wizard
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198920#198920
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
| Subject: | Re: No sidetone driving me insane! |
A good crimp with the proper tool is just as good as a solder joint. Now
when you solder a crimped joint you create a single stress joint at the
solder point. Unless you provide some stress/flex relief (shrink wrap tube),
you're asking for trouble down the road.
Bruce
www.Glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of rampil
Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 9:54 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: No sidetone driving me insane!
Assuming that the hardware supports sidetone(and I think all intercoms do),
then lessee:
shoddy amateur wiring with obvious failed connectors vs. solid state
radio.....
In all of aircraft, it's not what you want to do, you do what needs to be
done.
Take your time, get it right, and if you can't replace the crappy molex
connectors, at least solder them after crimping
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198914#198914
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rochester dual indicator |
>
>hi ,
>
>i have a Rochester dual indicator , Oil temp and Oil Press ,
>Cessna Part N S3279-1 coming from a 28volts Skyhawk .
>
>i would like to use it but as i have no Parts catalog , am not
>able to determine probe and sender references .
>
>is somebody able to help me ?
>
>thanks a lot ,
The S-number is probably one you read off the cluster. That
a Cessna Standards number that I can go look up and tell you
what the specs are for the instrument and probably the Rochester
number it was supplied under to Cessna. It will probably
reference the companion sensors too and those can be
researched. However . . .
Can I try to talk you out of using these parts? You're assuming
that these are good parts in spite of their pedigree. If one
of them is bad now or in the future, where will you get a
replacement? There's a host of alternative gages in the automotive
and aviation worlds that are of equal quality but modern design
and production. Check out these devices:
http://aircraftspruce.com/catalog/inpages/mitchoilpress.php
http://aircraftspruce.com/catalog/inpages/mitchoiltemp.php
http://www.autometer.com/cat_gaugedetail.aspx?ref=search&gid=3723
http://www.autometer.com/cat_gaugedetail.aspx?ref=search&gid=3727
If you're building a 28v airplane, you can easily craft a 28v to
14v down-regulator to supply power to the modern automotive
instruments.
If you REALLY want to use the salvage parts, I'll see what
I can find out for you.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 30 Amp switch? |
Dale Rogers wrote:
>
> Re:
>>
>> The header paragraph in the tinyurl.com front page
>> includes the following statement:
>>
>> "By entering in a URL in the text field below, we will
>> create a tiny URL that will not break in email postings
>> and never expires."
>>
>> Are you perhaps thinking of another service?
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>
>
> Nope. Just a non-optimal choice of words. After 28 years in the
> computer industry, I have less than full confidence that a free
> service like tinyurl will continue forever. Maybe they are well
> funded by a subsidy from one of Gilby Productions' other operations.
> Maybe ...
>
> Dale R.
He's right you know, Bob. You've got to be able to read computer
industry speak, which doesn't necessarily correspond with any known
language. Words like "never" and "forever" are loosely translated to
"for as long as we feel like it". You should plan accordingly.
On another completely unrelated note, mpja.com has some nice
panel-mounted temp guages for $3.95 that have a remote probe. The
supplied battery will cost that much at the corner drug store. One for
OAT, one for carb temp and half a dozen more for various temps that I'd
want to measure, and I'd still not be into serious money.
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe Garner <jgarner(at)dslextreme.com> |
| Subject: | Re: No sidetone driving me insane! |
One thing you might check is where the headset is
wired to. Most radios have a headset AND a
speaker output, they are not the same. Speaker is
muted with transmit and headset has sidetone.
This bit me when I installed a SL30! Still have
to go under the panel and move that pin...
HTH, Joe
keithmckinley wrote:
> "keithmckinley"
>
> Hi,
>
> I've got an Icom a200 radio connected through a
> pm 1200 intercom.
>
> When I got the plane it had no side tone at
> all. Pulled the radio and tried to adjust the
> sidetone pot to no avail. Turned off intercom
> and still no side tone.
>
> I've tried numerous different headsets. I did
> notice what seems to be a disconnected wire(s)
> at the molex connector but don't no if that's
> an issue. The wiring job is shoddy to begin
> with but I'd hate to rip it out and start new
> if it's actually a radio issue.
>
> radio transmits and receives just fine and the
> intercom is awesome at canceling out noise in
> my very loud warbird.
>
> Just hoping for some last chance advice before
> I send the radio out for a bench test.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Keith
>
> -------- Wizard
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: John Deere dynamo |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> This critter is good for about 12-15A when turned
> fast enough and assuming that the companion regulator-
> rectifier isn't over-stressed by the higher input
> operating voltage. I've prayed a bit over the
> schematics for an exemplar device . . .
>
> http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/3-Phase_PM_Rectifier_Regulator.gif
>
>
Bob, this is a switching type regulator, isn't it?
I'm using a PM generator, and I'm unsure about the regulator that came
with the kit. From what I can gather, it appears that Harley-Davidson is
still using linear regulators. I'd rather avoid that extra heat and
wear if possible.
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dale Rogers <dale.r(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 30 Amp switch? |
Ernest Christley wrote:
>
>
> On another completely unrelated note, mpja.com has some nice
> panel-mounted temp guages for $3.95 that have a remote probe. The
> supplied battery will cost that much at the corner drug store. One
> for OAT, one for carb temp and half a dozen more for various temps
> that I'd want to measure, and I'd still not be into serious money.
Ernest, was that item # 16370 ME?
Dale R.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | The accelerating impediments to data retrieval . . |
.
>>
>>Nope. Just a non-optimal choice of words. After 28 years in the
>>computer industry, I have less than full confidence that a free service
>>like tinyurl will continue forever. Maybe they are well funded by a
>>subsidy from one of Gilby Productions' other operations. Maybe ...
>>
>>Dale R.
>
>He's right you know, Bob. You've got to be able to read computer industry
>speak, which doesn't necessarily correspond with any known
>language. Words like "never" and "forever" are loosely translated to "for
>as long as we feel like it". You should plan accordingly.
>
>On another completely unrelated note, mpja.com has some nice panel-mounted
>temp guages for $3.95 that have a remote probe. The supplied battery will
>cost that much at the corner drug store. One for OAT, one for carb temp
>and half a dozen more for various temps that I'd want to measure, and I'd
>still not be into serious money.
Absolutely! If Matt were to meet an untimely demise,
what would the future of the Lists and their archives
hold? Same goes for me and aeroelectric.com
In fact, I'm already wrestling with a reorganization plan
for the website and cursing decisions that drove some of
the present configuration. A recent search on yahoo for
"aeroelectric.com" preoduced 42,000 hits. If I alter it
for the sake of 'improvements', no doubt a large number
of archived links will be broken.
I'm resigned to living within the present organizational
structure . . . or creating a new one that mirrors the
old one while improvements will be added to the new
one only.
Ultimately, we're probably best off by anchoring our
short term (5-10 years?) in the functionality of
search engines that update continuously. After a
few years of co-existence, the 'old' section
of the website could be taken down after mirrored
'new' section is adequately scanned and cataloged
by the search engines. But all archived links will
be trashed.
Like the cylinder, 78, 33, 45, wire, tape, cassette
and no doubt the CD . . . staying agile and useful in
the recording, storage, search and retrieval of
information is a never ending effort. Worse yet,
the rate at which things are being replaced is
accelerating.
Hold on to your hats!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | COTS (commercial off the shelf) OAT indicator? |
>
>Ernest Christley wrote:
>>
>>
>>On another completely unrelated note, mpja.com has some nice
>>panel-mounted temp guages for $3.95 that have a remote probe. The
>>supplied battery will cost that much at the corner drug store. One for
>>OAT, one for carb temp and half a dozen more for various temps that I'd
>>want to measure, and I'd still not be into serious money.
>
>Ernest, was that item # 16370 ME?
>Dale R.
Yeah, those critters have been around for awhile. I bought
one a number of years ago to evaluate. That version used
a forward biased diode as a temperature sensor. It was pretty
good for non-industrial/aviation use. There are some new,
more sensitive, VERY linear temperature sensors that could
be applied to products like this. In fact, the would push
suitability of the device's operating range up high enough
to use for oil temperature measurement too.
Next time a put in an order to MPJA, I'll pick one up
and check it out.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: John Deere dynamo |
>
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>>
>> This critter is good for about 12-15A when turned
>> fast enough and assuming that the companion regulator-
>> rectifier isn't over-stressed by the higher input
>> operating voltage. I've prayed a bit over the
>> schematics for an exemplar device . . .
>>
>>http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/3-Phase_PM_Rectifier_Regulator.gif
>>
>Bob, this is a switching type regulator, isn't it?
Uhhh . . . I guess you could call it that. It's not the
legacy switch-mode regulator where duty-cycle controlled
switches, inductors, capacitors and catch diodes do high
efficiency voltage shifting.
These are simple series switches that either reduce
throughput by delaying the time between waveform zero-
crossing and the firing of an SCR at the optimum later
time to throttle throughput. It's exceedingly simple
and adequate to the task if not terribly efficient.
These regulators use single junction diodes AND
4-layer SCRs. Total voltage drop in the on-state,
especially in a 14v system chews up quite a chunk
of system efficiency. They're better at the higher
voltages so a 28v version is not quite so bad.
I've often thought about rewinding one of these
things for say 60-80 volts of 3-phase AC output
that would then be rectified and conditioned by
a REAL switch-mode supply. But pencilling the numbers
wasn't a BIG improvement in efficiency and a BIG
increase in parts-count.
>I'm using a PM generator, and I'm unsure about the regulator that came
>with the kit. From what I can gather, it appears that Harley-Davidson is
>still using linear regulators. I'd rather avoid that extra heat and wear
>if possible.
I doubt that any one does a true linear regulator
at these power levels. They HAVE moved from the
pure shunt (waste what you don't need) type of
regulator common to 1970 designs) to a series
configuration that does not waste as much energy
overall. The only heat issue is in keeping the
regulator itself cool . . . and as you can see
in pictures of the various products offered, the
BIG guys are in cast housings with fins. There
are no significant wear advantages between the
various offerings as long as things stay cool
enough.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | The Word According to ISO (Off Topic) |
>
>Bob et al.,
>
>I too had a thousand similar experiences in industry. Recently in the
>Worcester Business Journal I published a rebuttal to a "Business Leader"
>who believed the solution to all our problems is to hire more foreign
>H-1B's. (For anyone interested I will email you my flame job).
Yes, I'd like to read it . . .
>My advise to young engineers/designers: Don't work for ANY company for
>more than five years unless you own a serious piece of it. Period. Don't
>even think about it. And as soon as you can, start your OWN company. You
>might not make a fortune, but you won't have to work for jerks and you'll
>wake up in the morning with a contented soul, happy to start the day.
My approach has not been so direct . . . but in the same
spirit. In my capacity as subject matter lead I was tasked
several times by the chief scientist at RAC/H-B to take new
hire EE's on a familiarization tour of the facilities.
I would take them to places that their hire-on job might
never go. They needed to be aware of every activity/opportunity
on the square-mile . . . ESPECIALLY those opportunities to
get their hands dirty working on a real life project!
At lunch, I would inquire as to the vision they have for
their own future, "What would you like to be doing 5 years
from now?"
These discussions would go into quite a bit of detail and
I would let them know where things on the square-mile might
support their goals . . . as well as any inability of the
current organization to support those goals.
Several times during our encounter I would re-enforce the
notion that everything they'd done up to now was but
the beginning of their education. If at any time they
found themselves stagnant in the acquisition of new
knowledge/skills, it was time to re-assess the relationship.
I told them to call me at any time and I'd arrange lunch
with the chief scientist to discuss how we (the company)
and the disenchanted engineer might set things back on
track. If it could not be done, they were given to understand
that the chief scientist, myself, and perhaps a dozen others
within the organization would help them make a useful
transition to another situation, even if outside the company.
>"THE VERY BIG STUPID" is a thing which breeds by eating
>The Future. Have you seen it? It sometimes disguises itself as a
>good-looking quarterly bottom line, derived by closing the R&D
>Department.
>--Frank Zappa
We sorta avoided looking like a financial albatross by
placing contract testing facilities under the auspices
of engineering. It was gratifying to see that we always
showed a positive cash flow at the end of the year . . .
We also got "credit" for stopping the bleed when a
field failures problem was resolved through the efforts
of our in-house talents.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 30 Amp switch? |
Ernest Christley wrote:
>
> On another completely unrelated note, mpja.com has some nice
> panel-mounted temp guages for $3.95 that have a remote probe. The
> supplied battery will cost that much at the corner drug store. One for
> OAT, one for carb temp and half a dozen more for various temps that I'd
> want to measure, and I'd still not be into serious money.
>
>
Not so fast Ernest. I found that item, at least I guess it's the right
one. "Requires 1 "LR1130" button cell. (Not included)", so you've
probably doubled your cost. :)
Bob W.
--
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 - http://www.bob-white.com
3.8 Hours Total Time and holding
Cables for your rotary installation - http://roblinstores.com/cables/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Do you suppose this is why elephants are afraid of |
them?
As if bird's nests weren't bad enough, now we have . . .
http://tinyurl.com/5vmasm
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <jamesbaldwin(at)dc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | B&C alterator problem |
Bob and others -
I have a newly purchased RV8 with a B&C 40 amp alternator and automotive style
blade fuses. Good grounding with a firewall mounted ground bus which is then
routed to the engine. The digital ammeter indicates a running load of 6-7 amps.
The battery is a Concorde dry cell mounted on the firewall. On two separate
occasions the 15 amp alternator field fuse has blown without any additional
or noted transient loads being placed on the alternator. The builder had this
happen to him also and he thought it was the battery so he replaced it. The
new, year old Concorde battery has great cranking power so I am not looking at
this as a potential problem. The only other problem I have noted is when using
all of the lights, strobes, fuel pump and electric flaps the main 40 amp C/B
popped once. Ignoring this as an overload my real problem appears to be the
field fuse. Why does the 15 amp field fuse blow and what's the smartest way
to diagnose this problem? Thank you. JBB
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | LEDs for strobes and position lights |
| From: | "corvairkelso" <corvairkelso(at)yahoo.com> |
In response to a previous question about using LED for position lights and strobe, check www.luxeonstar.com. I have used their rebel stars in the white tri-emitter powered by their power supply, called a buck puck successfully. The buck pucks imput 12 volts fine and output a fixed current, 700ma in my case. I am using a group of five stars, for about 1400 lumens per side. Luneon III stars are available in both red and green for position lights. Mounting was a challenge, finally using NAPA 549SWD surface mount dome light as a container for them. I used the lambertain style, which is 140 degree of coverage . This is my first posting so please forgive any errors and for being unable to provide an actual link to the referenced web site.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199040#199040
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rochester dual indicator |
| From: | "bouguy" <boullu.guy(at)libertysurf.fr> |
Hi Bob ,
these instruments are not old and are 2 1/4 standard dimensions ;
they are not embedded in a cluster ; look at the attachement .
so if i need to change them there will be no problem !
they are fitting the latest C172 i have seen .
if you may have information on senders it will be great ;
if not i will try to find another solution , but for the time i
try to save money .
thanks for your help ,
Boullu guy .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199046#199046
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/rochester_17_08_08_003_105.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Speedy11(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: LEDs for strobes and position lights |
Corvairkelso,
It sounds like you solved the mounting problem. I've been experimenting for
some time with various LEDs for position and taxi light but with little
success on a mounting solution. I finally gave up and bought the high dollar
Whelen units. I found it wasn't worth my $time$ to continue the experiment.
Do you have and photos posted for us to see?
Stan Sutterfield
In response to a previous question about using LED for position lights and
strobe, check www.luxeonstar.com. I have used their rebel stars in the white
tri-emitter powered by their power supply, called a buck puck successfully.
The buck pucks imput 12 volts fine and output a fixed current, 700ma in my
case. I am using a group of five stars, for about 1400 lumens per side.
Luneon III stars are available in both red and green for position lights.
Mounting was a challenge, finally using NAPA 549SWD surface mount dome light as
a
container for them. I used the lambertain style, which is 140 degree of
coverage
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00030000000007 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Do you suppose this is why elephants are afraid |
of them?
>>As if bird's nests weren't bad enough,<<
I know that all too well...luckily it was my car, not my plane. But the
incident has me being sure that every exposed hole is taped over or
plugged whenever I leave the hangar now! My left wing is being painted
here in my garage at home, but, since this is where the chipmunks live,
even that has tape over the aileron rod hole and the tunnel where the
wiring to the wing tip goes. Both ends of it!
Two years ago, I started logging 16 mpg tanks of gas instead of the
usual 20-21 in my Mazda RX8. Found a chipmunk had crawled up the air
intake tube and tore apart the air filter to make a nice comfy, little
home! The car had only been idle for three days, so they can work pretty
fast!
Besides the well matted down filter material, it was full of seeds and
other edibles that chippies like to munch on while relaxing after a hard
day of hunting for new homes. Luckily, nothing got THROUGH the filter,
and it was just a matter of vacuuming out the filter box and replacing
the filter. This incident did give me the opportunity to finally replace
the factory filter with a K&N. To prevent future critter visits I also
mounted a piece of 1/2 wire cloth over the air inlet.
Guess that's why they suggest you plug all the holes in your plane
before you leave it for any length of time...who knows what little
critter's real estate agent might sell him on the comfortable, protected
little spaces in our planes!
Harley
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> As if bird's nests weren't bad enough, now we have . . .
>
> http://tinyurl.com/5vmasm
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: B&C alterator problem |
>
>Bob and others -
>I have a newly purchased RV8 with a B&C 40 amp alternator and automotive
>style blade fuses. Good grounding with a firewall mounted ground bus
>which is then routed to the engine. The digital ammeter indicates a
>running load of 6-7 amps. The battery is a Concorde dry cell mounted on
>the firewall. On two separate occasions the 15 amp alternator field fuse
>has blown without any additional or noted transient loads being placed on
>the alternator. The builder had this happen to him also and he thought it
>was the battery so he replaced it. The new, year old Concorde battery has
>great cranking power so I am not looking at this as a potential
>problem. The only other problem I have noted is when using all of the
>lights, strobes, fuel pump and electric flaps the main 40 amp C/B popped
>once. Ignoring this as an overload my real problem appears to be the
>field fuse. Why does the 15 amp field fuse blow and what's the smartest
>way to diagnose this problem? Thank you. JBB
The first problem is that the original builder did not
understand the physics of the system he/she was crafting
and chose not to study and understand why the z-figures
were designed the way they are.
A 40A breaker on a 40A alternator is UNDERSIZED. The
nameplate rating of an alternator is for worst-case
conditions. I.e. minimum rpm for full output and max
ambient operating temperature. Under less stressful
conditions, the alternator may deliver 15 to 25%
more current.
This says that the 60A breaker on the b-lead of 60A
alternators in 100,000 GA aircraft is DESIGNED to
nuisance trip. Suggest you replace the 40A breaker
with a 30-50A current limiter out on the firewall.
There should not be a field fuse with an LR series
regulator. These us crowbar OV protection and are
designed to work downstream of a breaker only. Is
the recommended 5A breaker also installed? IF so,
the wiring between the breaker and the bus needs
little if any protection. The z-figures recommend
a fusible link . . . exceedingly robust compared
to the fuse.
Now we need to figure out what's irritating the
OV protection system. Do I presume correctly that
the regulator also came from B&C (LR3 series?) or
is there some other combination of regulator/ov
in place?
I'll assume that since the field protection is being
nuisance tripped, there is some form of crowbar
ov protection in place. The ov protection may
be an older version that was sensitive to some
forms of normal bus transients. The designs at
both B&C and AeroElectric Connection were modified
to eliminate that condition . . . the system you're
working with may need to be updated.
This is not a condition unique to 'crowbar' ov
protection. EVERY ov protection system has some
form of comparator between bus voltage and
some stable reference. When a setpoint is exceeded,
it sends a signal to some form of disconnect
device (relay, transistor, scr, etc). There is
a dynamic component to ov protection too . . .
voltage excursions above the setpoint are allowed
as long as they do not exceed certain time
intervals. It's the fine tuning of the dynamic
sensitivity that makes some products prone to
nuisance trips. I've probably designed two dozen
or more OV protection systems in my career, I've
only had to re-tune two of them. In one case,
the transient condition generated by the aircraft
was greater than the Mil-STD-704 guidelines
to which the product was crafted.
Tell us what regulator/ov combination is installed.
If an LR3, what's the manufacturing date? If
an AEC crowbar module, what colors of wires does
it have. Older versions are red/black, newer
are orange/black.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: LEDs for strobes and position lights |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
A remarkable coincidence perhaps--I just listed a bunch of these on Ebay:
LuxDrive Powerpuck LED pwr supply 700 ma
Ebay item number: 180278091883
or: http://tiny.cc/aujh1
I used these for my white LED tail light but changed to linear regulators. My loss
is your gain.
"it's faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, and more money...."
--Cowboy Poet Tom T. Hall
--------
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=199072#199072
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rochester dual indicator |
>
>Hi Bob ,
>
>these instruments are not old and are 2 1/4 standard dimensions ;
>they are not embedded in a cluster ; look at the attachement .
>
>so if i need to change them there will be no problem !
>
>they are fitting the latest C172 i have seen .
>
>if you may have information on senders it will be great ;
>if not i will try to find another solution , but for the time i
>try to save money .
Understand. I was not aware that Rochester was still
building for Cessna . . . but it doesn't surprise me.
I guess I should have picked up on the magnitude of
the S-number you quoted. When I worked there, the
current production products were in the 1000's range.
I'll see what I can find out about these parts.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Johnson" <pinetownd(at)volcano.net> |
| Subject: | Landing Light Pops Breaker |
The April issue of EAA's Sport Aviation magazine had a "technical"
column about an airplane that regularly popped the landing light circuit
breaker. The author said he found several high resistance connections
in the circuit and solved the problem by cleaning those connections and
making them low resistance. The current issue, August, has an excellent
letter to the editor that questions how a high resistance connection
(presumably not at the circuit breaker's terminals) could cause a high
amperage condition that would trip the breaker.
When I read the original article, I also didn't understand how a high
resistance connection could increase the amperage in a landing light
circuit and just figured that it was yet another example of bad advice
in a Sport Aviation "technical" article. I enjoy the magazine, but I
have found so much faulty technical information in it that I don't pay
much attention to their technical articles.
However, the author's response to the question reiterated that a high
resistance connection can increase the amperage enough to cause the
circuit breaker to trip.
I'm a beginner on things like this, but I've studied Bob's book and this
newsgroup since beginning my homebuilt project five years ago, and
cannot understand how the author could be right. However, I've learned
from this list that some components try to consume constant power and
that reducing the voltage to them increases the current in order to keep
the power constant. But I think a tungsten filament landing light is a
simple resistor (although very temperature sensitive). I think if I put
a resistor in series with a landing light, the amps would go down, not
up, and the amount of light produced would decrease.
So what's the truth? And why?
Best,
Dennis
Lancair Legacy, 150 hours, did all my own wiring (also assembly,
body-work, paint, instrument panel, etc)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 30 Amp switch? |
Bob White wrote:
>
> Ernest Christley wrote:
>
>
>
>> On another completely unrelated note, mpja.com has some nice
>> panel-mounted temp guages for $3.95 that have a remote probe. The
>> supplied battery will cost that much at the corner drug store. One for
>> OAT, one for carb temp and half a dozen more for various temps that I'd
>> want to measure, and I'd still not be into serious money.
>>
>>
>>
> Not so fast Ernest. I found that item, at least I guess it's the right
> one. "Requires 1 "LR1130" button cell. (Not included)", so you've
> probably doubled your cost. :)
>
> Bob W.
>
>
Hmmm? I paid 3.95, and it included the button cell. Taped to the side
of the LCD so that it wouldn't be run down when I got it. Go figure.
YMMV.
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 30 Amp switch? |
Dale Rogers wrote:
>
> Ernest Christley wrote:
>>
>>
>> On another completely unrelated note, mpja.com has some nice
>> panel-mounted temp guages for $3.95 that have a remote probe. The
>> supplied battery will cost that much at the corner drug store. One
>> for OAT, one for carb temp and half a dozen more for various temps
>> that I'd want to measure, and I'd still not be into serious money.
>
> Ernest, was that item # 16370 ME?
> Dale R.
>
16370-MI in the catalogue I'm looking at.
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing Light Pops Breaker |
>The April issue of EAA's Sport Aviation magazine had a "technical" column
>about an airplane that regularly popped the landing light circuit
>breaker. The author said he found several high resistance connections in
>the circuit and solved the problem by cleaning those connections and
>making them low resistance. The current issue, August, has an excellent
>letter to the editor that questions how a high resistance connection
>(presumably not at the circuit breaker's terminals) could cause a high
>amperage condition that would trip the breaker.
>
>When I read the original article, I also didn't understand how a high
>resistance connection could increase the amperage in a landing light
>circuit and just figured that it was yet another example of bad advice in
>a Sport Aviation "technical" article. I enjoy the magazine, but I have
>found so much faulty technical information in it that I don't pay much
>attention to their technical articles.
Understand . . . and agree. I quit writing for S.A. some
years ago after an article I reviewed for Jack Cox wound up
getting published anyhow. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/rules/review.html
S.A. used to be the flagship publication of EAA and
dedicated to the best we know how to do. Sadly, it
now seems to be a cash cow for advertising sales
and a venue where wanna-be's get published. When
you have a high-volume, directed-market technical
publication that won't even pay a rudimentary writer's
fee or seek peer review of articles . . . well . . .
what you see is what you get.
>
>However, the author's response to the question reiterated that a
>high resistance connection can increase the amperage enough to
>cause the circuit breaker to trip.
>
Good for you! I don't know how many times I've seen
words in ostensibly authoritative works that suggest
"cleaning and re-tightening" junctions in order to
cure a variety of ills . . . including the opening of
breakers or fuses. See bottom of page 4 and top of
5 on . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/richter/response_2.pdf
and upper left corner of page 2
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Wired_for_Disaster.pdf
These words are written by folks who's esteem in
our society has been artificially elevated for
reasons other than their understanding of physics
and practical processes.
Unless a high resistance junction is showing signs
of impending failure due to heating . . . then its
effects are limited simply to increasing path resistance.
An increase in path resistance LOWERS overall power
consumed by devices on that pathway . . . but indeed
may concentrate power dissipation (heating) in a
localized area (joints, worn contacts) that precipitate
a failure at that location . . . but it certainly doesn't
cause breakers to open. Unless . . .
Here's a case where a switch failure DID first manifest
itself by opening a breaker . . . when it was TURNED
OFF. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Anatomy_of_a_Switch_Failure/Anatomy_of_a_Switch_Failure.html
Of course, this was a double failure . . . the switch
had not yet failed to conduct in the closed position
. . . but heating effects induced a second failure.
A distortion of the internal parts that ultimately
produced the short that tripped the breaker.
We've studied on these pages how an increased path
resistance contributes to instability of the voltage
regulator on alternators where field supply current
and bus voltage sense share the same pathway.
But aside from this demonstrable effect, I'm aware
of no other case where increased path resistance
due to real or imagined join degradation will cause
breakers or fuses to nuisance trip.
>I'm a beginner on things like this, but I've studied Bob's book and this
>newsgroup since beginning my homebuilt project five years ago, and cannot
>understand how the author could be right. However, I've learned from this
>list that some components try to consume constant power and that reducing
>the voltage to them increases the current in order to keep the power
>constant. But I think a tungsten filament landing light is a simple
>resistor (although very temperature sensitive). I think if I put a
>resistor in series with a landing light, the amps would go down, not up,
>and the amount of light produced would decrease.
Correct. The resistance of the lamp will decrease as
it gets dimmer . . . but not in inverse proportion
to decrease in voltage . . . i.e. current draw
STILL goes down, total power consumed still goes
down, just not like it would if a simple resistive
load were involved.
>So what's the truth? And why?
You were pretty close to it when your skepticism
based on what you understood raised some flags . . .
and you asked questions. With respect to the original
article: if one assumes the author of the original
article was not lying, then SOMETHING he did caused
the problem to go away. He may have moved some
wiring that cleared an intermittent short . . . but
believed that cleaning the connections was what
really did it. We'll never know since the "crime scene"
was not properly processed and is now probably compromised
to a degree that true root cause is no longer discoverable.
But a goodly portion of 135,000 EAA members will join him
in his erroneous beliefs.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vernon Little" <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Landing Light Pops Breaker |
Bob, and others.
There are a class of devices that can cause increased current with increased
resistance in the power circuit.
Some devices use switching power supplies which are constant-power devices.
What this means is that if input voltage increases, the current drain
decreases and vice versa. This negative resistance effect can cause
instability, and designers need to take it into consideration.
The best example I have is that my strobe power circuit had a faultly
(resistive) switch which caused current in the circuit to increase, and
tripped the breaker. The strobe supply was attempting to make up for the
voltage drop in the switch by increasing it's drain current. The fix was to
replace the switch and the burned terminals. I had two switches fail in
similar manners in different within the first year of operation of my RV-9A.
One was returned to the vendor for failure analysis, but I never heard back.
I first experienced this type of problem when designing switch mode power
supplies for cyclotron equipment. Everything worked fine until battery
internal resistances increased, then voltage/current oscillations would
start. Cheap fix was to put a fixed load on the input of the power supply
and waste a lot of energy to stabilize the load. Not recommended for
aircraft!
Vern Little
-----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: August 17, 2008 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Landing Light Pops Breaker
-->
>The April issue of EAA's Sport Aviation magazine had a "technical"
>column
>about an airplane that regularly popped the landing light circuit
>breaker. The author said he found several high resistance connections in
>the circuit and solved the problem by cleaning those connections and
>making them low resistance. The current issue, August, has an excellent
>letter to the editor that questions how a high resistance connection
>(presumably not at the circuit breaker's terminals) could cause a high
>amperage condition that would trip the breaker.
>
>When I read the original article, I also didn't understand how a high
>resistance connection could increase the amperage in a landing light
>circuit and just figured that it was yet another example of bad advice in
>a Sport Aviation "technical" article. I enjoy the magazine, but I have
>found so much faulty technical information in it that I don't pay much
>attention to their technical articles.
Understand . . . and agree. I quit writing for S.A. some
years ago after an article I reviewed for Jack Cox wound up
getting published anyhow. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/rules/review.html
S.A. used to be the flagship publication of EAA and
dedicated to the best we know how to do. Sadly, it
now seems to be a cash cow for advertising sales
and a venue where wanna-be's get published. When
you have a high-volume, directed-market technical
publication that won't even pay a rudimentary writer's
fee or seek peer review of articles . . . well . . .
what you see is what you get.
>
>However, the author's response to the question reiterated that a high
>resistance connection can increase the amperage enough to cause the
>circuit breaker to trip.
>
Good for you! I don't know how many times I've seen
words in ostensibly authoritative works that suggest
"cleaning and re-tightening" junctions in order to
cure a variety of ills . . . including the opening of
breakers or fuses. See bottom of page 4 and top of
5 on . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/richter/response_2.pdf
and upper left corner of page 2
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Wired_for_Disaster.pdf
These words are written by folks who's esteem in
our society has been artificially elevated for
reasons other than their understanding of physics
and practical processes.
Unless a high resistance junction is showing signs
of impending failure due to heating . . . then its
effects are limited simply to increasing path resistance.
An increase in path resistance LOWERS overall power
consumed by devices on that pathway . . . but indeed
may concentrate power dissipation (heating) in a
localized area (joints, worn contacts) that precipitate
a failure at that location . . . but it certainly doesn't
cause breakers to open. Unless . . .
Here's a case where a switch failure DID first manifest
itself by opening a breaker . . . when it was TURNED
OFF. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Anatomy_of_a_Switch_Failure/Anatomy_of_
a_Switch_Failure.html
Of course, this was a double failure . . . the switch
had not yet failed to conduct in the closed position
. . . but heating effects induced a second failure.
A distortion of the internal parts that ultimately
produced the short that tripped the breaker.
We've studied on these pages how an increased path
resistance contributes to instability of the voltage
regulator on alternators where field supply current
and bus voltage sense share the same pathway.
But aside from this demonstrable effect, I'm aware
of no other case where increased path resistance
due to real or imagined join degradation will cause
breakers or fuses to nuisance trip.
>I'm a beginner on things like this, but I've studied Bob's book and
>this
>newsgroup since beginning my homebuilt project five years ago, and cannot
>understand how the author could be right. However, I've learned from this
>list that some components try to consume constant power and that reducing
>the voltage to them increases the current in order to keep the power
>constant. But I think a tungsten filament landing light is a simple
>resistor (although very temperature sensitive). I think if I put a
>resistor in series with a landing light, the amps would go down, not up,
>and the amount of light produced would decrease.
Correct. The resistance of the lamp will decrease as
it gets dimmer . . . but not in inverse proportion
to decrease in voltage . . . i.e. current draw
STILL goes down, total power consumed still goes
down, just not like it would if a simple resistive
load were involved.
>So what's the truth? And why?
You were pretty close to it when your skepticism
based on what you understood raised some flags . . .
and you asked questions. With respect to the original
article: if one assumes the author of the original
article was not lying, then SOMETHING he did caused
the problem to go away. He may have moved some
wiring that cleared an intermittent short . . . but
believed that cleaning the connections was what
really did it. We'll never know since the "crime scene"
was not properly processed and is now probably compromised
to a degree that true root cause is no longer discoverable.
But a goodly portion of 135,000 EAA members will join him
in his erroneous beliefs.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Landing Light Pops Breaker |
>
>
>Bob, and others.
>There are a class of devices that can cause increased current with increased
>resistance in the power circuit.
>Some devices use switching power supplies which are constant-power devices.
>What this means is that if input voltage increases, the current drain
>decreases and vice versa. This negative resistance effect can cause
>instability, and designers need to take it into consideration.
Sure . . . but let's put this into perspective. These are
not unlike the oscillating voltage regulators we discussed
earlier. But let's consider a system designed to run on 14v
at 3A (42w input) and protected with a 5A breaker. If series
resistance of a switch or other joint dropped say 2 volts,
then the system would compensate and current would rise
to 42/12 = 3.5A
From the outside looking in, things would appear normal
but the high resistance location would now be dissipating
2 x 3.5 = 7 watts! This is probably 4 or 5 times more than
the power it took to slowly toast the switch in the failure
analysis I cited. The situation would not last long . . . and
still wouldn't pop the breaker.
Suppose we have a 28v 42w system that runs 1.5A. Hmmm . . .
I suppose we could protect that line with a 2A breaker
but those things are expensive . . . the 22AWG feeder
is still happy at 5A breaker. But yeah, let's say a
3A breaker. Now some high resistance condition that would
push the 3A breaker has to drop 14v at 3A or 42 watts
of dissipation! It's toasted in a hurry . . .
>The best example I have is that my strobe power circuit had a faultly
>(resistive) switch which caused current in the circuit to increase, and
>tripped the breaker. The strobe supply was attempting to make up for the
>voltage drop in the switch by increasing it's drain current. The fix was to
>replace the switch and the burned terminals. I had two switches fail in
>similar manners in different within the first year of operation of my RV-9A.
>One was returned to the vendor for failure analysis, but I never heard back.
I recall that you sent an S700-2-10 switch back to B&C
for loose terminals. In that case, voltage excursions caused
by the loose terminals were probably upsetting the regulation
stability so badly as to cause a true ov condition that tripped
the system and opened the breaker. Breaker popping was a
secondary effect and not caused directly by an increased load
by a constant power device.
Were you the one that sent me the strobe switch cited
in the failure analysis I posted?
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Anatomy_of_a_Switch_Failure/Anatomy_of_a_Switch_Failure.html
Again, breaker popping was a secondary effect
of the overheating of the switch that deformed the contact
support teeter-totter. These switches are normally good
for 10A or more in the closed state . . . but this switch
obviously failed at the pivot bridge as indicated by
heating patterns . . . this was happening with no more
than 1/2 volt of drop internal to the switch. So if your
strobe needed 5A average at 14v it would need only 5.2
amps at the "reduced" voltage. Yet the 5A at 1/2 volt
was 2.5 watts of heating on the switch's innards. Not
enough to 'smoke' it but enough to heat the components
to eventual failure but it took a number of hours but didn't
cause smoke in the cockpit.
>I first experienced this type of problem when designing switch mode power
>supplies for cyclotron equipment. Everything worked fine until battery
>internal resistances increased, then voltage/current oscillations would
>start. Cheap fix was to put a fixed load on the input of the power supply
>and waste a lot of energy to stabilize the load. Not recommended for
>aircraft!
That was a true negative resistance problem but those
generally happen under conditions that are far below those
needed to trip breakers that have any headroom at all.
Your perception of the behavior of constant-power systems
is accurate but increased resistance situations sufficient
to put a switch at risk are too small to be a likely
cause of breaker popping.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Search for Gremlins |
8/17/2008
To reply to the author, write to "F. Tim Yoder"
Report on this weekends search for Gremlins;
I spent several hours under the panel checking all the ground buss
connections, breaker and switch grounds. I loosened the connections to the
amp, volt, oil temp and oil pressure gauges, wiggled the terminals and re
tightened. I did the same thing to the alternator and removed the regulator
spades and replaced them.I removed the radio, cleaned the connectors and re
installed it. I checked the ground straps from the engine to the motor
mount. I spent some time looking for something,anything wrong.
I started the plane and found that I had not ran off any Gremlins. When I
turn on the Alt. the oil pressure dropped from 75# to 60# then settled on
70#, this takes about one second. As soon as I turn off the Alt. the oil
pressure goes back to 75#. With the radio and Alt. on the oil pressure
needle drops a needle width when I key the radio. Again, with the Alt. off
keying the radio does not effect the oil pressure gauge which was back to
75#.
I did not fly so I didn't have any radio issues. I think I need to find the
cause of the apparent load on the oil pressure gauge first.
Oh, the Amp. meter is a little positive at idle and the voltage is showing
a charge of about 14.4V and 13.5V with at Alt. off.
I'll appreciate any suggestions.
Thanks again, Tim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John McKiernan" <rockyjs(at)mchsi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LEDs for strobes and position lights |
I just began flying using 700ma buck puck power supplies and 2 parallel 3
series K2 Stars. The power supplies are hitting my VHF radios with a lot of
RFI. I've got some .1uf capacitors and ferrite beads to try and clean these
up. I know of one other new aircraft that wound up removing the power
supply and using a series resistor after cleaning up the noise, but losing
some range on his radios. I'd like to solve the issue using the power
supply. Anyone have any experience with cleaning these devices up?
Thanks
Rocky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Etienne Phillips" <etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LEDs for strobes and position lights |
Hi John
There are 2 options that I would consider doing if I were in your
position...
1) Put a 1Ohm resistor in the supply line, and a range of 4 or 5 capacitors
from 0.1uF to 10,000uF right at the supply to the regulator. This should
create a very wide-band filter on the supply line. This won't help if the
noise in your radio is coming from EMI through the receiver (rather than
through the power line). This is a fairly quick and easy mod to make though.
2) Build yourself a linear (i.e. not switching) regulator to replace the
BuckPuck. They're fairly simple to set up, and pretty robust. Assuming a
forward bias of the Luxeons to be 3.9V @1A, using a properly heat-sinked
7810 with a 2.2Ohm 5W resistor in series with 2 Luxeons will give you a very
clean supply. However, if your bus voltage drops below about 10V, these
babies are going to get a bit dim.
But that's just me. Maybe someone will come up with a better suggestion?
Etienne
2008/8/18 John McKiernan
> I just began flying using 700ma buck puck power supplies and 2 parallel 3
> series K2 Stars. The power supplies are hitting my VHF radios with a lot of
> RFI. I've got some .1uf capacitors and ferrite beads to try and clean these
> up. I know of one other new aircraft that wound up removing the power
> supply and using a series resistor after cleaning up the noise, but losing
> some range on his radios. I'd like to solve the issue using the power
> supply. Anyone have any experience with cleaning these devices up?
>
> Thanks
>
> Rocky
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LEDs for strobes and position lights |
>I just began flying using 700ma buck puck power supplies and 2 parallel 3
>series K2 Stars. The power supplies are hitting my VHF radios with a lot
>of RFI. I ve got some .1uf capacitors and ferrite beads to try and clean
>these up. I know of one other new aircraft that wound up removing the
>power supply and using a series resistor after cleaning up the noise, but
>losing some range on his radios. I d like to solve the issue using the
>power supply. Anyone have any experience with cleaning these devices up?
Are you sure the noise is coming in through the
antenna? If the noise is conducted, the filtering
process could be different.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Search for Gremlins |
>
>8/17/2008
>
>To reply to the author, write to "F. Tim Yoder"
>
>Report on this weekends search for Gremlins;
>
>I spent several hours under the panel checking all the ground buss
>connections, breaker and switch grounds. I loosened the connections to the
>amp, volt, oil temp and oil pressure gauges, wiggled the terminals and re
>tightened. I did the same thing to the alternator and removed the regulator
>spades and replaced them.I removed the radio, cleaned the connectors and re
>installed it. I checked the ground straps from the engine to the motor
>mount. I spent some time looking for something,anything wrong.
There should be no ground straps from engine to motor mount. Only
one fat-wire jumper from crankcase to your single-point ground on
the firewall.
>I started the plane and found that I had not ran off any Gremlins. When I
>turn on the Alt. the oil pressure dropped from 75# to 60# then settled on
>70#, this takes about one second. As soon as I turn off the Alt. the oil
>pressure goes back to 75#. With the radio and Alt. on the oil pressure
>needle drops a needle width when I key the radio. Again, with the Alt. off
>keying the radio does not effect the oil pressure gauge which was back to
>75#.
>
>I did not fly so I didn't have any radio issues. I think I need to find the
>cause of the apparent load on the oil pressure gauge first.
It sounds like a ground loop issue driven by too much resistance
between crankcase and the oil pressure instrument ground. Try
removing the existing ground wire for the instrument and
grounding the instrument directly to the crankcase.
If this makes the wiggle go away, I'll suggest you remove all
jumpers from engine to mount and add one fat-jumper between
crankcase and ground block.
>Oh, the Amp. meter is a little positive at idle and the voltage is showing
>a charge of about 14.4V and 13.5V with at Alt. off.
Those numbers are right in the ballpark.
>I'll appreciate any suggestions.
>
>Thanks again, Tim
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Mills" <smills(at)e2psi.com> |
| Subject: | AT165 Headset noise |
Alas my AT50 gave up the ghost and had to be replaced. Well of course, we
all know where this is headed. I now have a new annoying sound in my
headset. While it is more noticeable when on the ground as opposed to flying
it is always there. It's related to the reply function of the transponder. I
have read the other posts regarding this issue and, while mine is similar
I'd like to give some of the specifics.
1. If I turn the new transponder (Narco AT165) to standby, the noise
goes away.
2. Turn transponder back on and turn comm radio off (ICOM A200) noise
goes away. In all cases the intercom is still working (Flightcom 403)
3. Adjusting volume knob on the A200 makes the noise louder/softer.
So it would appear that the problem is related to interference between the
AT165 and the ICOM A200. This is where I'm stumped. The AT50 never gave this
problem. The encoder was not changed (Trans-Cal).
Is the issue with inductive coupling in the wiring or is the power output of
the AT165 a problem for the ICOM? Although these weren't problems with the
AT50.
The Antennas are bottom mounted on an RV9A. The transponder is up by the
right fuel tank vent and the com is centered under the pilot's seat, they're
about 30 inches apart. Nowhere do the cables ever cross or run together
except at the radio stack where they come in from opposite sides anyhow. I
used RG 400 for this installation.
What's the fix for this? Where do I start troubleshooting? All help is
greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Scott Mills
N339A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Etienne Phillips" <etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LEDs for strobes and position lights |
And then I would read your mail properly to see that you're using K2 Stars
and not Luxeon III's, which have a slightly different Voltage / Current
ratio... Doh.
There are 2 types of K2 Stars... The 100 lumen and the 75 lumen.
The so-called 100 Lumen can actually be driven up to 140 lumen, at 1.5A,
which makes the 7810 a bad choice if you want to drive it at 1.5A.
Same methodology applies though. Regulate to a known voltage, just above the
series voltage of however many LEDs you choose, then use a resistor to
regulate the current and step down the voltage the last bit.
2008/8/18 Etienne Phillips
> Hi John
>
> There are 2 options that I would consider doing if I were in your
> position...
>
> 1) Put a 1Ohm resistor in the supply line, and a range of 4 or 5 capacitors
> from 0.1uF to 10,000uF right at the supply to the regulator. This should
> create a very wide-band filter on the supply line. This won't help if the
> noise in your radio is coming from EMI through the receiver (rather than
> through the power line). This is a fairly quick and easy mod to make though.
>
> 2) Build yourself a linear (i.e. not switching) regulator to replace the
> BuckPuck. They're fairly simple to set up, and pretty robust. Assuming a
> forward bias of the Luxeons to be 3.9V @1A, using a properly heat-sinked
> 7810 with a 2.2Ohm 5W resistor in series with 2 Luxeons will give you a very
> clean supply. However, if your bus voltage drops below about 10V, these
> babies are going to get a bit dim.
>
> But that's just me. Maybe someone will come up with a better suggestion?
>
> Etienne
>
> 2008/8/18 John McKiernan
>
>> I just began flying using 700ma buck puck power supplies and 2 parallel
>> 3 series K2 Stars. The power supplies are hitting my VHF radios with a lot
>> of RFI. I've got some .1uf capacitors and ferrite beads to try and clean
>> these up. I know of one other new aircraft that wound up removing the power
>> supply and using a series resistor after cleaning up the noise, but losing
>> some range on his radios. I'd like to solve the issue using the power
>> supply. Anyone have any experience with cleaning these devices up?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Rocky
>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LEDs for strobes and position lights |
Everyone...
As long as we're back on this topic again, has anyone visited the
AveoFlash guys when they were at Oshkosh this year?
And, if so, what are your opinions of their product for wingtip strobe
and position lighting?
www.aveoaviationlights.com/products/AveoFlash/index.php
Still considering them...
Harley Dixon
Long EZ N28EZ (working on the engine for awhile...before I go back to
sanding the wing!)
Hangar 29, Airport
Canandaigua, NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AT165 Headset noise |
I don't have a clue what in the AT165 might do with your Icom. However,
one thought would be to bypass your intercom or just turn the intercom
off. Intercoms are well known for picking up stray RF in the cockpit and
amplifying for your listening annoyance. I also suspect Icom might be
more responsive than Narco on inquiry. Narco does have toll free number,
so it can't hurt to call.
Scott Mills wrote:
>
> Alas my AT50 gave up the ghost and had to be replaced. Well of course,
> we all know where this is headed. I now have a new annoying sound in
> my headset. While it is more noticeable when on the ground as opposed
> to flying it is always there. Its related to the reply function of
> the transponder. I have read the other posts regarding this issue and,
> while mine is similar Id like to give some of the specifics.
>
> 1. If I turn the new transponder (Narco AT165) to standby, the noise
> goes away.
>
> 2. Turn transponder back on and turn comm radio off (ICOM A200) noise
> goes away. In all cases the intercom is still working (Flightcom 403)
>
> 3. Adjusting volume knob on the A200 makes the noise louder/softer.
>
> So it would appear that the problem is related to interference between
> the AT165 and the ICOM A200. This is where Im stumped. The AT50 never
> gave this problem. The encoder was not changed (Trans-Cal).
>
> Is the issue with inductive coupling in the wiring or is the power
> output of the AT165 a problem for the ICOM? Although these werent
> problems with the AT50.
>
> The Antennas are bottom mounted on an RV9A. The transponder is up by
> the right fuel tank vent and the com is centered under the pilots
> seat, theyre about 30 inches apart. Nowhere do the cables ever cross
> or run together except at the radio stack where they come in from
> opposite sides anyhow. I used RG 400 for this installation.
>
> Whats the fix for this? Where do I start troubleshooting? All help is
> greatly appreciated.
>
> Regards,
>
> Scott Mills
>
> N339A
>
> *
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | LEDs for strobes and position lights |
| From: | "John Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Loved them, don't know if the lumens are enough at a distance. From 10
feet they were great. Let's try 1,000 yards.
Do not want them in their encased plastic bezel. Would like to install
them in my own covers.
John Cox
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Harley
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 7:43 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: LEDs for strobes and position lights
Everyone...
As long as we're back on this topic again, has anyone visited the
AveoFlash guys when they were at Oshkosh this year?
And, if so, what are your opinions of their product for wingtip strobe
and position lighting?
www.aveoaviationlights.com/products/AveoFlash/index.php
Still considering them...
Harley Dixon
Long EZ N28EZ (working on the engine for awhile...before I go back to
sanding the wing!)
Hangar 29, Airport
Canandaigua, NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Mills" <smills(at)e2psi.com> |
| Subject: | AT 165 Noise in headset |
Bob, et all
Alas my AT50 gave up the ghost and had to be replaced. Well of course we all
know where this is headed. I now have a new annoying sound in my headset.
While it is more noticeable when on the ground as opposed to flying it is
always there. It is related to the reply function of the transponder.
Anytime the LCD is blinking "RCV" I hear the noise. Here are some of the
specifics.
1. If I turn the new transponder (Narco AT165) to standby noise goes
away.
2. Turn transponder back on and turn comm radio off (ICOM A200) noise
goes away. In all cases the intercom is still working (Flightcom 403)
3. Adjusting volume knob on the A200 makes the noise louder/softer.
So it would appear that the problem is related to interference between the
AT165 and the ICOM A200. The A200 sits on top of the AT165 in the radio
stack. (These are the only two radios I have) This is where I'm stumped. The
AT50 never gave this problem. The encoder was not changed (Trans-Cal).
Is the issue with inductive coupling in the wiring or is the power output of
the AT165 a problem for the ICOM? Could it be the multiplexing LCD display
causing the interference? These weren't problems with the AT50.
The Antennas are bottom mounted on an RV9A. The transponder is up by the
right fuel tank vent and the com is centered under the pilot's seat, they're
about 30 inches apart. Nowhere do the cables ever cross or run together
except at the radio stack where they come in from opposite sides anyhow. I
used RG 400 for this installation.
Is there a simple fix for this? Where do I start troubleshooting? All help
is greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Scott Mills
N339A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Mills" <smills(at)e2psi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AT165 Headset noise |
I tried that. The noise does not appear to be coming through the intercom.
What is interesting is that whenever the "RCV" blinks on the AT 165 I get
this static noise. It seems as though the LCD on the transponder is causing
the interference in the ICOM. Could this be a multiplexer in the AT 165
wreaking havoc with ICOM? Not sure. Would and RF filter help? If so where
should I connect it?
Scott
I don't have a clue what in the AT165 might do with your Icom. However,
one thought would be to bypass your intercom or just turn the intercom
off. Intercoms are well known for picking up stray RF in the cockpit and
amplifying for your listening annoyance
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott R. Shook" <sshook(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | LEDs for strobes and position lights |
I loved them. I thought the price was right too. When I figured in the
LED's, power-pucks, assembly (was going to do something like Jeff did for
his RV - http://www.jeffsrv-7a.com/LEDPROJECT1.htm ), strobe tubes, strobe
power supply, and tail light - the price was about the same.
Scott R. Shook
RV-7A (Building)
N696JS (Reserved)
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Harley
Sent: Monday, 18 August, 2008 07:43
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: LEDs for strobes and position lights
Everyone...
As long as we're back on this topic again, has anyone visited the AveoFlash
guys when they were at Oshkosh this year?
And, if so, what are your opinions of their product for wingtip strobe and
position lighting?
www.aveoaviationlights.com/products/AveoFlash/index.php
Still considering them...
Harley Dixon
Long EZ N28EZ (working on the engine for awhile...before I go back to
sanding the wing!)
Hangar 29, Airport
Canandaigua, NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <berkut13(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AT 165 Noise in headset |
How are your headset/mic jacks mounted? Are they insulated from
airframe? Could you be picking up a ground loop during transmit?
James Redmon
Berkut #013/Race 13
www.berkut13.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Scott Mills
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 8:32 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: AT 165 Noise in headset
Bob, et all
Alas my AT50 gave up the ghost and had to be replaced. Well of course
we all know where this is headed. I now have a new annoying sound in my
headset. While it is more noticeable when on the ground as opposed to
flying it is always there. It is related to the reply function of the
transponder. Anytime the LCD is blinking "RCV" I hear the noise. Here
are some of the specifics.
1. If I turn the new transponder (Narco AT165) to standby noise
goes away.
2. Turn transponder back on and turn comm radio off (ICOM A200)
noise goes away. In all cases the intercom is still working (Flightcom
403)
3. Adjusting volume knob on the A200 makes the noise
louder/softer.
So it would appear that the problem is related to interference between
the AT165 and the ICOM A200. The A200 sits on top of the AT165 in the
radio stack. (These are the only two radios I have) This is where I'm
stumped. The AT50 never gave this problem. The encoder was not changed
(Trans-Cal).
Is the issue with inductive coupling in the wiring or is the power
output of the AT165 a problem for the ICOM? Could it be the multiplexing
LCD display causing the interference? These weren't problems with the
AT50.
The Antennas are bottom mounted on an RV9A. The transponder is up by
the right fuel tank vent and the com is centered under the pilot's seat,
they're about 30 inches apart. Nowhere do the cables ever cross or run
together except at the radio stack where they come in from opposite
sides anyhow. I used RG 400 for this installation.
Is there a simple fix for this? Where do I start troubleshooting? All
help is greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Scott Mills
N339A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "F. Tim Yoder" <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Search for Gremlins |
Hello Bob,
Thank you for your suggestions. I will try grounding the oil pressure gauge
directly to the engine case and report the results.
FYI, my plane is a KIS two place all composite that I have been flying for
about 10 yrs. She has a little over 300 hrs. on her. This is a new problem
.As far as I know .I didn't add or change any operating systems prior to
these symptoms showing up.
Thank You Again, Tim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net>
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 7:17 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Search for Gremlins
>
> >
> >8/17/2008
> >
> >To reply to the author, write to "F. Tim Yoder"
> >
> >Report on this weekends search for Gremlins;
> >
> >I spent several hours under the panel checking all the ground buss
> >connections, breaker and switch grounds. I loosened the connections to
the
> >amp, volt, oil temp and oil pressure gauges, wiggled the terminals and re
> >tightened. I did the same thing to the alternator and removed the
regulator
> >spades and replaced them.I removed the radio, cleaned the connectors and
re
> >installed it. I checked the ground straps from the engine to the motor
> >mount. I spent some time looking for something,anything wrong.
>
> There should be no ground straps from engine to motor mount. Only
> one fat-wire jumper from crankcase to your single-point ground on
> the firewall.
>
>
> >I started the plane and found that I had not ran off any Gremlins. When I
> >turn on the Alt. the oil pressure dropped from 75# to 60# then settled on
> >70#, this takes about one second. As soon as I turn off the Alt. the oil
> >pressure goes back to 75#. With the radio and Alt. on the oil pressure
> >needle drops a needle width when I key the radio. Again, with the Alt.
off
> >keying the radio does not effect the oil pressure gauge which was back to
> >75#.
> >
> >I did not fly so I didn't have any radio issues. I think I need to find
the
> >cause of the apparent load on the oil pressure gauge first.
>
> It sounds like a ground loop issue driven by too much resistance
> between crankcase and the oil pressure instrument ground. Try
> removing the existing ground wire for the instrument and
> grounding the instrument directly to the crankcase.
>
> If this makes the wiggle go away, I'll suggest you remove all
> jumpers from engine to mount and add one fat-jumper between
> crankcase and ground block.
>
>
> >Oh, the Amp. meter is a little positive at idle and the voltage is
showing
> >a charge of about 14.4V and 13.5V with at Alt. off.
>
> Those numbers are right in the ballpark.
>
>
> >I'll appreciate any suggestions.
> >
> >Thanks again, Tim
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ----------------------------------------)
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <jamesbaldwin(at)dc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: B&C alterator problem (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) |
> Bob and others -
> >I have a newly purchased RV8 with a B&C 40 amp alternator and automotive
> >style blade fuses. Good grounding with a firewall mounted ground bus
> >which is then routed to the engine. The digital ammeter indicates a
> >running load of 6-7 amps. The battery is a Concorde dry cell mounted on
> >the firewall. On two separate occasions the 15 amp alternator field fuse
> >has blown without any additional or noted transient loads being placed on
> >the alternator. The builder had this happen to him also and he thought it
> >was the battery so he replaced it. The new, year old Concorde battery has
> >great cranking power so I am not looking at this as a potential
> >problem. The only other problem I have noted is when using all of the
> >lights, strobes, fuel pump and electric flaps the main 40 amp C/B popped
> >once. Ignoring this as an overload my real problem appears to be the
> >field fuse. Why does the 15 amp field fuse blow and what's the smartest
> >way to diagnose this problem? Thank you. JBB
The first problem is that the original builder did not
understand the physics of the system he/she was crafting
and chose not to study and understand why the z-figures
were designed the way they are.
A 40A breaker on a 40A alternator is UNDERSIZED. The
nameplate rating of an alternator is for worst-case
conditions. I.e. minimum rpm for full output and max
ambient operating temperature. Under less stressful
conditions, the alternator may deliver 15 to 25%
more current.
This says that the 60A breaker on the b-lead of 60A
alternators in 100,000 GA aircraft is DESIGNED to
nuisance trip. Suggest you replace the 40A breaker
with a 30-50A current limiter out on the firewall.
There should not be a field fuse with an LR series
regulator. These us crowbar OV protection and are
designed to work downstream of a breaker only. Is
the recommended 5A breaker also installed? IF so,
the wiring between the breaker and the bus needs
little if any protection. The z-figures recommend
a fusible link . . . exceedingly robust compared
to the fuse.
Now we need to figure out what's irritating the
OV protection system. Do I presume correctly that
the regulator also came from B&C (LR3 series?) or
is there some other combination of regulator/ov
in place?
I'll assume that since the field protection is being
nuisance tripped, there is some form of crowbar
ov protection in place. The ov protection may
be an older version that was sensitive to some
forms of normal bus transients. The designs at
both B&C and AeroElectric Connection were modified
to eliminate that condition . . . the system you're
working with may need to be updated.
This is not a condition unique to 'crowbar' ov
protection. EVERY ov protection system has some
form of comparator between bus voltage and
some stable reference. When a setpoint is exceeded,
it sends a signal to some form of disconnect
device (relay, transistor, scr, etc). There is
a dynamic component to ov protection too . . .
voltage excursions above the setpoint are allowed
as long as they do not exceed certain time
intervals. It's the fine tuning of the dynamic
sensitivity that makes some products prone to
nuisance trips. I've probably designed two dozen
or more OV protection systems in my career, I've
only had to re-tune two of them. In one case,
the transient condition generated by the aircraft
was greater than the Mil-STD-704 guidelines
to which the product was crafted.
Tell us what regulator/ov combination is installed.
If an LR3, what's the manufacturing date? If
an AEC crowbar module, what colors of wires does
it have. Older versions are red/black, newer
are orange/black.
Bob . . .
Bob -
Thank you for opening up the design issues I hadn't even considered. I will return
home next week and provide the more detailed information you request. It
is a B&C voltage protection device of some sort I have seen and he used a "Z"
design but I'll have to get you the specifics. Thank you. JBB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul McAllister <l_luv2_fly(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | LED Landing lights |
Hi all,
I am returning to the list after a multi year hiatus. I completed my Europa 914
in 2004 using many of the design principals from Bob's book.
Anyhow what has prompted my return is my curiosity about the many LED landing lights
and strobe light replacements I saw at the Oshkosh air show this year.
The Europa doesn't lend its self well for the placement of landing lights, but
I was thinking that I could craft something up myself that would work.
Which brings me to my question. Does anyone on the list know what LED devices
and reflectors are being used for LED landing lights. If so, I would appreciate
it if someone could let me know.
Thanks, Paul McAllister
Europa N378PJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | LED Landing lights |
| From: | James H Nelson <rv9jim(at)juno.com> |
Paul,
Do you have the Mono-wheel? If so, use the speed fairing around
the outrigger to mount the landing light. Bob Berube at Flight
Crafters did a landing light in teh leading edge of the wing. I don't
know who well it worked but the LED version should run cooler and thus
not effect the foam in a foam wing. Other wise, cut an opening in the
leading edge and and access opening in the back of it. That will work.
Jim Nelson
____________________________________________________________
Can't pay your bills? Click here to learn about filing for bankruptcy.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nfvZVjJ2OnTgLvUUGBTXGGzXcopY5DUkATuGftUJRA8DPaJ/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | High resistance pops breaker? |
| From: | "user9253" <fran5sew(at)banyanol.com> |
There was a "TECHNICAL COUNSELOR" article written in the April 2008 issue of Sport
Aviation about the landing light tripping a circuit breaker due to high resistance
connections. You can read the complete article here:
http://www.eaa.org/sportaviation/2008/april/0804_tc.pdf
In the August 2008 issue, a letter to the editor questions why a higher resistance
would result in higher current. Following is the "TECHNICAL COUNSELOR" author's
reply in the Aug 2008 Sport Aviation:
George's Reply:
Using Ohm's and Watt's laws, if a connection resistance increases, the voltage
drop across that resistance increases, which increases the current draw and power
demands on the circuit. The power draw of the engine and the lamp increase
as voltage drops. Adding to this issue is the fact that an engine-operated landing
light is marginal at best in terms of the circuit breaker rating; that is,
with the motor drive and the lamp, you're already close to the trip set point.
As the resistance increases in the contact stacksin this case because of corrosion
... the voltage drops across each of these series connections and in
turn causes the motor to see less voltage and draw more current to reach its power,
which in turn would trip the breaker in concert with the light turning on,
using voltage from the same source. Since the watts for the motor and lamp
remain relatively constant, the current rises.
As such, when you add in the voltage drop across even minor resistances in a stack
of contacts, due to the voltage drop, the current draw over the entire circuit
increases to the point where the circuit breaker trips.George Wilhelmsen
George Wilhelmsen holds a commercial certificate with an instrument rating and
has more than 1,000 hours of flight experience. He has a bachelors degree in engineering
technology with a background in DC, analog, and digital controls. He
flies a Beech Debonair.
End of quotes. Now this is Joe writing. The landing light in question had an
electric motor to retract the light into the wing when not in use. Motors do
draw more current when operated at less than design voltage. Perhaps the author
understands ohm's law but just did not explain it very well. I got the impression
that he was saying that a lamp uses more current if the electrical connections
have higher resistance. That is not true. I wonder, could this possibly
be the same George?
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199509#199509
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dale Rogers <dale.r(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: High resistance pops breaker? |
user9253 wrote:
>
> There was a "TECHNICAL COUNSELOR" article written in the April 2008 issue of
Sport Aviation about the landing light tripping a circuit breaker due to high
resistance connections.
...
> George's Reply:
> Using Ohm's and Watt's laws, if a connection resistance increases, the voltage
drop across that resistance increases, which increases the current draw and
power demands on the circuit. The power draw of the engine and the lamp increase
as voltage drops.
...
> George Wilhelmsen holds a commercial certificate with an instrument rating and
has more than 1,000 hours of flight experience. He has a bachelors degree in
engineering technology with a background in DC, analog, and digital controls.
He flies a Beech Debonair.
>
> End of quotes. Now this is Joe writing. The landing light in question had an
electric motor to retract the light into the wing when not in use. Motors do
draw more current when operated at less than design voltage. Perhaps the author
understands ohm's law but just did not explain it very well. I got the impression
that he was saying that a lamp uses more current if the electrical connections
have higher resistance. That is not true. I wonder, could this possibly
be the same George?
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
This is what happens when one writes an answer before s/he's had hir
morning cocoa/coffee (I've done that a few times myself.)
True enough, the high resistance connection does increase the voltage
~drop~ across the connection, but it is - in effect - subtracted from
the voltage across the total circuit; it becomes a circuit of series
loads. It's a shame that got past the proof-readers into a magazine with
world-wide distribution.
Dale R.
COZY MkIV #0497
Ch.12; Ch's 13, 16, 22 & 23 in-progress
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DeWitt Whittington <dewittw(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Vertical Power VP-50 with an Egg 3.6L engine and Z19RB |
At Oshkosh this year I spoke to a fellow Sportsman builder, Tim Dyer,
who asked if I had considered the Vertical Power VP-50 which sells
for about $1500. I knew about the VP-200 which is $6495 and had
considered it out of my price range. However, after looking at the
detailed data available on the VP web site, the VP-50 really does
look interesting and possibly affordable since there are three of us
building this Sportsman. www.verticalpower.com
So I posted a question on the Vertical Power forum about using the
VP-50 with the Bob Nuckolls Z19RB schematic. Here is the reply I got
within 2 hours from Marc Ausman, Mr. Vertical Power:
Vertical Power
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 223
Default
VP-50 with Subaru engine
You can use the VP-50 in the same manner as the VP-100 is used with
the Subaru engine. In the docs section of our web site, you'll see a
Subaru section. Use the VP-100 diagram as a reference - it is
essentially the Z-19 diagram, but we designed it with Eggenfellner.
The way we recommend wiring is as follows:
- the wiring specific for the Subaru engine is handled separately
from the VP system.
- the VP system is used to power all the other stuff on your aircraft.
- the VP system is used to monitor the voltage of both batteries. On
the VP-50, use J8 pin 12 input to monitor the aux battery voltage.
<http://www.verticalpower.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=988>
Reply With Quote
Any thoughts from anyone else?
Dee Whittington
DeWitt (Dee) Whittington
406 N Mulberry St
Richmond, VA 23220-3320
(804) 358-4333 phone and fax
SKYPE: hilltopkid
dee.whittington(at)gmail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "F. Tim Yoder" <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Search for Gremlins |
Hello Bob,
I did as you suggested and ran a temporary ground wire from the oil pressure
inst. to the crankcase. THE WIGGLE WENT AWAY!
I'll remove the engine to engine mount jumpers and add a fat ground wire
from the grounding buss to the crankcase per your recommendation.
Your time and effort, like O.C. Baker's, sure saves a lot of us a ton of
time and money.
Many Thanks, Tim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net>
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 7:17 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Search for Gremlins
>
> >
> >8/17/2008
> >
> >To reply to the author, write to "F. Tim Yoder"
> >
> >Report on this weekends search for Gremlins;
> >
> >I spent several hours under the panel checking all the ground buss
> >connections, breaker and switch grounds. I loosened the connections to
the
> >amp, volt, oil temp and oil pressure gauges, wiggled the terminals and re
> >tightened. I did the same thing to the alternator and removed the
regulator
> >spades and replaced them.I removed the radio, cleaned the connectors and
re
> >installed it. I checked the ground straps from the engine to the motor
> >mount. I spent some time looking for something,anything wrong.
>
> There should be no ground straps from engine to motor mount. Only
> one fat-wire jumper from crankcase to your single-point ground on
> the firewall.
>
>
> >I started the plane and found that I had not ran off any Gremlins. When I
> >turn on the Alt. the oil pressure dropped from 75# to 60# then settled on
> >70#, this takes about one second. As soon as I turn off the Alt. the oil
> >pressure goes back to 75#. With the radio and Alt. on the oil pressure
> >needle drops a needle width when I key the radio. Again, with the Alt.
off
> >keying the radio does not effect the oil pressure gauge which was back to
> >75#.
> >
> >I did not fly so I didn't have any radio issues. I think I need to find
the
> >cause of the apparent load on the oil pressure gauge first.
>
> It sounds like a ground loop issue driven by too much resistance
> between crankcase and the oil pressure instrument ground. Try
> removing the existing ground wire for the instrument and
> grounding the instrument directly to the crankcase.
>
> If this makes the wiggle go away, I'll suggest you remove all
> jumpers from engine to mount and add one fat-jumper between
> crankcase and ground block.
>
>
> >Oh, the Amp. meter is a little positive at idle and the voltage is
showing
> >a charge of about 14.4V and 13.5V with at Alt. off.
>
> Those numbers are right in the ballpark.
>
>
> >I'll appreciate any suggestions.
> >
> >Thanks again, Tim
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ----------------------------------------)
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Search for Gremlins |
Hello Bob,
Thank you for your suggestions. I will try grounding the oil pressure gauge
directly to the engine case and report the results.
FYI, my plane is a KIS two place all composite that I have been flying for
about 10 yrs. She has a little over 300 hrs. on her. This is a new problem
.As far as I know .I didn't add or change any operating systems prior to
these symptoms showing up.
Thank You Again, Tim
>
>
>Hello Bob,
>
>I did as you suggested and ran a temporary ground wire from the oil pressure
>inst. to the crankcase. THE WIGGLE WENT AWAY!
>
>I'll remove the engine to engine mount jumpers and add a fat ground wire
>from the grounding buss to the crankcase per your recommendation.
>
>Your time and effort, like O.C. Baker's, sure saves a lot of us a ton of
>time and money.
>
> Many Thanks, Tim
I'm pleased that it was such a simple fix. I'm also pleased
that you brought it up here on the List! In spite of our
reverence for The Word according to ISO: (1) cleaning the
spot where a terminal goes to structure and (2)
testing with a super-duper $high$ bonding meter, there
is often too little attention paid to ground system
architecture. "Grounding" is probably one of the least
understood technologies in vehicular systems design.
It gets worse every year with new design goals by the
special interest groups. One bunch of guys worry about
power distribution. Another bunch worries about
antenna performance. Yet another worries about lightning.
Another gets paid for sifting the sands on EMC/RFI
issues. Finally, there's the structures guys who
are more worried about corrosion and do their best
to insulate the important parts that the rest of
the guys are trying to keep connected together!
Fortunately for us in OBAM aircraft land, there
are some pretty simple recipes for success that tend
to yield consistent results over thousands of
airplanes. I've tried to gather those ingredients
together in chapter 5 and keep watching for new
things to add. Your willingness to share your
experience here validates one of the recipes
and is much appreciated.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Vertical Power VP-50 with an Egg 3.6L engine |
and Z19RB
>At Oshkosh this year I spoke to a fellow Sportsman builder, Tim Dyer, who
>asked if I had considered the Vertical Power VP-50 which sells for about
>$1500. I knew about the VP-200 which is $6495 and had considered it out
>of my price range. However, after looking at the detailed data available
>on the VP web site, the VP-50 really does look interesting and possibly
>affordable since there are three of us building this
>Sportsman. www.verticalpower.com
>So I posted a question on the Vertical Power forum about using the VP-50
>with the Bob Nuckolls Z19RB schematic. Here is the reply I got within 2
>hours from Marc Ausman, Mr. Vertical Power:
>Vertical Power
>
>Join Date: Jan 2007
>Posts: 223
>17d450e8.jpg VP-50 with Subaru engine
>You can use the VP-50 in the same manner as the VP-100 is used with the
>Subaru engine. In the docs section of our web site, you'll see a Subaru
>section. Use the VP-100 diagram as a reference - it is essentially the
>Z-19 diagram, but we designed it with Eggenfellner.
>The way we recommend wiring is as follows:
>- the wiring specific for the Subaru engine is handled separately from the
>VP system.
>- the VP system is used to power all the other stuff on your aircraft.
>- the VP system is used to monitor the voltage of both batteries. On the
>VP-50, use J8 pin 12 input to monitor the aux battery voltage.
>
><http://www.verticalpower.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=988>17d45127.jpg
>
>Any thoughts from anyone else?
Good evening my friend. I missed getting to OSH this year
but I WILL be there next year. If you still have the same
cell phone number, I'll bug you as soon as I hit the field.
We'll have to get together some evening.
I'm quite certain that the Vertical Power products perform
as advertised are well thought out and there are no safety
issues.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: High resistance pops breaker? |
>
>user9253 wrote:
>>
>>There was a "TECHNICAL COUNSELOR" article written in the April 2008 issue
>>of Sport Aviation about the landing light tripping a circuit breaker due
>>to high resistance connections.
>...
>>George's Reply:
>>Using Ohm's and Watt's laws, if a connection resistance increases, the
>>voltage drop across that resistance increases, which increases the
>>current draw and power demands on the circuit. The power draw of the
>>engine and the lamp increase as voltage drops.
>...
>>George Wilhelmsen holds a commercial certificate with an instrument
>>rating and has more than 1,000 hours of flight experience. He has a
>>bachelors degree in engineering technology with a background in DC,
>>analog, and digital controls. He flies a Beech Debonair.
>>
>>End of quotes. Now this is Joe writing. The landing light in question
>>had an electric motor to retract the light into the wing when not in
>>use. Motors do draw more current when operated at less than design
>>voltage. Perhaps the author understands ohm's law but just did not
>>explain it very well. I got the impression that he was saying that a
>>lamp uses more current if the electrical connections have higher
>>resistance. That is not true. I wonder, could this possibly be the same
>>George.
>>
>>--------
>>Joe Gores
>>
>
>This is what happens when one writes an answer before s/he's had hir
>morning cocoa/coffee (I've done that a few times myself.)
>
>True enough, the high resistance connection does increase the voltage
>~drop~ across the connection, but it is - in effect - subtracted from the
>voltage across the total circuit; it becomes a circuit of series loads.
>It's a shame that got past the proof-readers into a magazine with
>world-wide distribution.
It is not an automatic thing that motors draw more
current as the voltage goes down. There is a motor
torque constant (Kt) which is the effort delivered
at the shaft stated as a ratio of torqe/amps.
See:
http://www.portescap.com/catalog/35GLT%20spec%20page%207.08.pdf
Note the seven items under "Intrinsic Parameters". These
numbers enable the designer to predict any motor's performance
in a design. The item were interested in is the line
labeled mNm/A or millinewton-meters per amp.
Now, if the motor is driving a load where torque demand
is a function of speed, then the current draw of the motor
will be right in step with that function. So, let's visualize
a motorized landing light. If we crank it slower, would we
expect it to take more torque? Similarly, hydraulic pumps
resist rotation pretty much in proportion to the pressure
being exerted by the pump . . . if the flow in the system
goes down due to reduced speed, would we expect the pressure
to automatically get bigger?
I won't say that ALL motor driven systems demand the
same or more torque as speed goes down . . . but it's
an unusual system. Further, it's definitely not a system that
is raising or lowering a landing light against friction,
gravity and air-loads.
Motors slow down for two reasons, reduction in supply voltage
which is linked to the Back EMF constant. If torque demands
are the same, current will be the same.
The motor slows down because it is loaded heavier. Torque
goes up, losses in the motor terminal resistance goes up
and what's left over is treated just like a reduction
in supply voltage. Kt is still in play here and if the
torque is high enough, it may very well cause a breaker
to open.
But increases in series resistance alone are almost
never a recipe for tripping breakers.
Now, it occurs to me that the "high resistance joint"
was in fact a loose connection . . . i.e. an "intermittent
low resistance joint". Here's a case where rattling a
motor + lamp inrush currents MIGHT account for a
continuous stressing of a breaker with a series
of high current loads with a duty-cycle too low to
heat up the lamp+spin the motor but sufficiently
irritating to a breaker to trip it.
In this case, calling it a "high-resistance joint"
causes the wrong physics to be applied to the hypothetical
analysis. Low average duty cycle voltage to a motor-
lamp combination not only piles the admittedly
high lamp inrush on top of the low back-emf of a
non or very slowly spinning motor.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: B&C alterator problem (Robert L. Nuckolls, |
III)
>
> Tell us what regulator/ov combination is installed.
> If an LR3, what's the manufacturing date? If
> an AEC crowbar module, what colors of wires does
> it have. Older versions are red/black, newer
> are orange/black.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>Bob -
>Thank you for opening up the design issues I hadn't even considered. I
>will return home next week and provide the more detailed information you
>request. It is a B&C voltage protection device of some sort I have seen
>and he used a "Z" design but I'll have to get you the specifics. Thank
>you. JBB
Great! Looking forward to slaying this dragon with
you.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | For sale LR3C-14 B&C regulator |
| From: | eddyfernan(at)aol.com |
For sale used B&C LR3C-14 linear regulator in like new condition sells for $228
will let go for $175 with shipping included in the US.
Eddy Fernandez
RV9A
954-914-5579 cell
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Do you suppose this is why elephants are afraid |
of them?
I'm appreciating my cat more and more everyday.
Each evening, my buddy waits for me to walk down to the hangar. He
heels up and we walk down. If I let him in, he immediately dives into
the insulated walls and starts the hunt. If I don't let him in, he
works the hangar perimeter then takes a nap on top of the AC unit until
I'm finished.
Whether it's 30min or 4 hours, when I leave, he's waiting. He heels up,
we walk home and he comes in for bite and a scritch.
Haven't seen a dropping in the hangar since we started our routine... if
I could just get him to bring the newspaper in the morning.
Bill & Cuddles
Harley wrote:
> >>As if bird's nests weren't bad enough,<<
>
> I know that all too well...luckily it was my car, not my plane. But
> the incident has me being sure that every exposed hole is taped over
> or plugged whenever I leave the hangar now! My left wing is being
> painted here in my garage at home, but, since this is where the
> chipmunks live, even that has tape over the aileron rod hole and the
> tunnel where the wiring to the wing tip goes. Both ends of it!
>
> Two years ago, I started logging 16 mpg tanks of gas instead of the
> usual 20-21 in my Mazda RX8. Found a chipmunk had crawled up the air
> intake tube and tore apart the air filter to make a nice comfy, little
> home! The car had only been idle for three days, so they can work
> pretty fast!
>
> Besides the well matted down filter material, it was full of seeds and
> other edibles that chippies like to munch on while relaxing after a
> hard day of hunting for new homes. Luckily, nothing got THROUGH the
> filter, and it was just a matter of vacuuming out the filter box and
> replacing the filter. This incident did give me the opportunity to
> finally replace the factory filter with a K&N. To prevent future
> critter visits I also mounted a piece of 1/2 wire cloth over the air
> inlet.
> Guess that's why they suggest you plug all the holes in your plane
> before you leave it for any length of time...who knows what little
> critter's real estate agent might sell him on the comfortable,
> protected little spaces in our planes!
>
> Harley
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> As if bird's nests weren't bad enough, now we have . . .
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/5vmasm
>>
>> Bob . . .
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Titsworth" <rtitsworth(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Do you suppose this is why elephants are afraid |
of them?
Ref the attached article.
".Hall says that without actually opening up the plane and looking inside
there would have been no way of knowing the mice were there before takeoff."
Hmmm, WRONG. Checking the carb heat during the run-up (as instructed by the
POH) would have sucked the stuff into the carb BEFORE takeoff.
FAA hazardous attitude anecdote: the rules are there for a reason.
_____
As if bird's nests weren't bad enough, now we have . . .
http://tinyurl.com/5vmasm
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joe" <fran5sew(at)banyanol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: High resistance pops breaker? |
Bob,
If I understand correctly, as the landing-light-retract motor slows due
to increased circuit resistance (and thus lower voltage at the motor),
the motor current will not increase because the torque required to
operate the retract mechanism is the same as before. The power (watts)
of the motor is less because power equals speed times torque, and the
speed has decreased. The total energy used to operate the mechanism
will be about the same because it is a function of power and time. Even
though the motor is less powerful operating at a lower voltage, it runs
for a longer time and thus uses about the same total power as it would
operating at a higher voltage for a shorter time.
It seems to me that a slower motor develops less back-EMF and
therefore would allow more current to flow. But on the other hand,
higher resistance in the circuit counteracts that. I do not know how to
calculate that, so I will take your word for it that the current stays
the same. Suppose there are no high resistance connections and one
compares the motor current at two different voltages, say 14 volts
compared to 11 volts with a failed alternator. What happens to the
motor current as the supply voltage drops? From what you wrote, I
assume that the current will not increase.
I am not trying to contradict anything that you said. I just want to
understand. My experience has been with AC motors that try to maintain
their synchronous speed by increasing current draw when heavily loaded
or when operated at a lower voltage. DC motors do not have any certain
speed that they strive for.
Joe Gores
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: High resistance pops breaker? |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
I was going to test this but it soon became apparent that the problem was beyond
mere testing.
One consideration that I have not seen is that breakers wear out. "I squared T"
or current squared X time" is how breakers blow, but the problem has many back
alleys of complication. Once a beaker has tripped at above a specified current,
the breaker will be degraded and trip thereafter usually at a lower current.
All breakers have a one-time maximum trip current. (This is what is wrong with
crowbar OVPs).
So--can a landing light blow a circuit breaker below the specified lamp current
if there are some high-resistance connections? My guess is "yes" but it depends
on the breaker, the lamp, the nature of the loose connections, the wire, and
myriad other variables. The likely culprit is the breaker.
"When trouble arises and things look bad,
there is always one individual who perceives
a solution and is willing to take command.
Very often, that individual is crazy.
--Dave Barry"
--------
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=199727#199727
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: LED Landing lights |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Paul McAllister was the first buyer of my LED position lights and tail lights, then after a horrendous run-in with some lightning, was also the second buyer. The tale of this episode in on Bob's AeroElectric Connection website http://tiny.cc/1utIH . The damage photos still frighten me! My third buyer landed in Texas USING only the LED position lights when his halogen landing lights had a circuit problem. This may have set an historic milestone in aviation lighting.
But I have decided not to enter the field of LED landing lights, even though I am a big promoter of them. There is NO WAY for me to make money in the field because of the thousands of people busily engaged in developing solutions. Chinese companies are making exact drop-in replacements for any lamp you can think of, and many you can't. See: http://tiny.cc/h2Alq
Also I recommend dealing with: Deal Extreme at http://tiny.cc/kzx8A
--------
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=199744#199744
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | paul wilson <pwmac(at)sisna.com> |
| Subject: | Molex wire splice recall |
1. Electrical Wire Splices Recalled Due to Shock and Fire Hazards
NEWS from CPSC
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
Office of Information and Public Affairs
Washington, DC 20207
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 20, 2008
Release #08-367
Firm's Recall Hotline: (800) 624-4320
CPSC Recall Hotline: (800) 638-2772
CPSC Media Contact: (301) 504-7908
Electrical Wire Splices Recalled Due to Shock and Fire Hazards
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product
Safety Commission, in cooperation with the firm
named below, today announced a voluntary recall
of the following consumer product. Consumers
should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.
Name of Product: Electrical Wire Splices (also known as Butt Splice
Connectors)
Units: About 53,000
Manufacturer: Molex, of Lisle, Ill.
Hazard: The splice can fail to hold the wires
adequately together, posing a shock and fire hazard to consumers.
Incidents/Injuries: Gardner Bender has received
one report of a recalled butt splice failing to
hold wires together. No injuries have been reported.
Description: The recalled butt splices are used
to connect electrical wires to one another. They
are typically used for wiring small electrical
appliances, like audio equipment, or in
automotive applications. The splices are yellow
insulated vinyl and measure about one inch long
and =BC inch wide. They were intended for use with
12-10 AWG wire. 12-10 is stamped on the side of
the splices. Model numbers 10-126, or 21-126, and
Gardner Bender are printed on the product's
packaging. They were sold in packages of 8 or 50.
Sold at: Electrical distributors, hardware
stores, and home centers nationwide from June
2005 through April 2008 for between $1 and $5.
Manufactured in: United States
Remedy: Consumers should immediately stop using
products that contain the recalled butt splices
and contact the firm for free replacement splices.
Consumer Contact: For additional information,
contact Gardner Bender at (800) 624-4320 between
8 a.m. and 5 p.m. CT Monday through Friday, or
visit the firm's Web site at www.gardnerbender.com
To see this recall on CPSC's web site, including
pictures of the recalled product, please go to:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml08/08367.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Bendix IN-224A Pinout or wiring diagram |
| From: | "KELLY-CRAPSE, RICHARD W (RICK), ATTGNS" <rc8653(at)att.com> |
I need a pinout for the IN-224A that we are trying to use with a KX-170B
and KNS-80. Owner did not have an indicator. Seems the ocean swallowed
his last plane. Anybody have that pinout?
Thanks,
Rick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joemotis(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Molex wire splice recall |
If you do not tug test a crimped connection before putting it in service,
you will have a failure over time, guaranteed.
My personal reflection on this is as we get older, that old nemesis
arthritis starts to kick in and we just do not squeeze the Sta-Kon pliers with
the
crushing grip of our youth.
Joe Motis
No Archivos, eh!
**************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bendix IN-224A Pinout or wiring diagram |
| From: | Ron Quillin <rjquillin(at)gmail.com> |
At 11:58 8/21/2008, you wrote:
>I need a pinout for the IN-224A that we are trying to use with a KX-170B
>and KNS-80.
Verify IN224A and not IN244A.
I have 244.
Ron Q.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John F. Herminghaus" <catignano(at)tele2.it> |
| Subject: | Printed circuits |
Bob,
I know that this subject has been discussed before, but can't find it.
In short, what do you recommend to clean printed circuit boards after
assembly?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Printed circuits |
John F. Herminghaus wrote:
>
>
> Bob,
>
> I know that this subject has been discussed before, but can't find
> it. In short, what do you recommend to clean printed circuit boards
> after assembly?
Depends on the flux you use. Some are water soluble. Depending on the
components added, these can go in the dishwasher as long as you don't
add any of the detergent.
RadioShack flux comes off with alcohol, but MEK is faster.
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bob noffs" <icubob(at)newnorth.net> |
| Subject: | engine compartment wiring |
hi all, what is everyone doing to secure wires in the engine
compartment? wire ties rated for the high temp. are made of gold [or
petroleum products]. are the ''lacing '' materials suitable?
any input is appreciated.
bob noffs
woodruff, wi.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: No sidetone driving me insane! |
| From: | "keithmckinley" <keith.mckinley(at)townisp.com> |
THANK YOU JOE GARNER!
You were absolutely right. The person who wired this system used the speaker out
terminal to the headsets instead of the headset jack out.
Problem solved, life is good!
Next beers are on me!
Keith
--------
Wizard
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 0074#200074
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Shannon" <rshannon(at)CRUZCOM.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: engine compartment wiring |
On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 5:20 AM, bob noffs wrote:
> hi all, what is everyone doing to secure wires in the engine
> compartment? wire ties rated for the high temp. are made of gold [or
> petroleum products]. are the ''lacing '' materials suitable?
> any input is appreciated.
> bob noffs
> woodruff, wi.
>
Bob,
As you know, there are several considerations, including potential damage
from vibration, chafe, high heat, fire, etc. I have used fire retardant
loom/spiral wrap and/or sleeving for all significant bundles, and everything
on or near the engine -- mostly tied together and tied down with Tefzel tie
wraps from Steinair. In two locations, I've supported large, enclosed
bundles with double Adel clamps, in both cases to ensure clearance from
things below (a mixture cable, and an intake hose.) For two wire bundles on
the firewall (both inside fire retardant materials) I've used single Adel
clamps. One small wire bundle (oil pressure & temp) that runs under the
cylinder heads and not too far from exhaust pipes is in Thermo-Sleeve, for
extra protection from constant high heat in that area.
Normal lacing is not appropriate for FWF, where it can get quite hot even in
normal operation, to say nothing of fire situations.
By all means, consider the wiring standards in AC43.13. They include
standoffs, separation from fuel lines or other plumbing & heat sources,
mounting requirements, bend radius issues, etc. You may want to depart from
some of those standards here and there, but it's a good place to start.
There are several pictures of my FWF wiring, which is nearing completion, on
my web site.
Ron
http://n254mr.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: engine compartment wiring |
Bob
FWIW I used Adel clamps for heavy cables, bundles, and where it seemed
appropriate. With dual EFI, I have a lot of wiring and I've had no
problem at all where I've tied things with lacing. I also have a fair
bit of the silicone self adhering tape protecting things where there is
risk of chafing. In fact silicone tape under the lacing seems to work
well as the lacing then grips well and there is no chafing that I can
detect. I guess I have one or two nylon wire ties as well (silicone tape
under them) but they have stood up fine for a couple of years now. They
are not exposed to exhaust radiant heat. After looking carefully at some
certified installations, I concluded that almost anything you are happy
with is probably just fine if you inspect it occasionally...
Ken
bob noffs wrote:
> hi all, what is everyone doing to secure wires in the engine
> compartment? wire ties rated for the high temp. are made of gold [or
> petroleum products]. are the ''lacing '' materials suitable?
> any input is appreciated.
> bob noffs
> woodruff, wi.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: High resistance pops breaker? |
>
>I was going to test this but it soon became apparent that the problem was
>beyond mere testing.
>
>One consideration that I have not seen is that breakers wear out. "I
>squared T" or current squared X time" is how breakers blow, but the
>problem has many back alleys of complication. Once a beaker has tripped at
>above a specified current, the breaker will be degraded and trip
>thereafter usually at a lower current. All breakers have a one-time
>maximum trip current. (This is what is wrong with crowbar OVPs).
I've heard this idea handed down from sage-to-
acolyte over campfire and beers for decades. My
brother-in-law was told this by a journeyman electrician
while he was getting his ticket to string wire . . .
but my friends at Cutler-Hammer, Klixon, Mechanical
Products and others cannot embrace this legend.
I'll refer the readers to Mil-C-5809G available at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Mil-Specs/5809G.pdf
and specifically to paragraph 4.7.14 where products
qualified to military applications (and most commercial
aircraft applications) are subjected to huge interruption
current tests from both a closed condition (breaker opens
due to operational fault) and open condition (breaker
is closed into a pre-existing fault) trip test.
Referring to one of many specs for the breakers
recommended for aircraft at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Circuit_Breaker/MS3320.pdf
In Table III we find the range of interrupt current tests
that each size breaker is subjected to. Note that
the numbers (particularly categories C & D for 28v
systems) are in the thousands of amps. Many times higher
than stress to a crowbar-tripped breaker. Yet after being
subject to these tests, they are required to past the
200% overload trip calibration.
An interesting feature of the interrupt current test,
only one or two devices out of a larger QPL sample
are subjected to this test while greater numbers of
parts are tested more rigorously for other qualities.
Could it be that risk for failure due to interruption
current stress is so low that folks never seem to fail
it . . . while other qualities of a breaker demand
closer monitoring?
For the benefit of our readers, know that for a
manufacturer to sustain membership in the club of qualified
suppliers, a sampling of their continuous production output
receives the same battery of tests every so often in their
production cycle. For devices strongly affected variables
in materials and process, qualified products lists (QPL)
are maintained wherein the various manufacturer's pay their
procedural dues to stay listed. Fall off that list and the
military cannot purchase your product no matter how good
you were when initiated into the club.
I have offered this documentation before and not
one of my detractors had commented on it. For folks
who are so invested in manufacturer's data sheets
as infallible, I'm mystified as to the ease with which
repeatable experiments levied by qualification test
plans and membership on qualified products list are
so easily ignored . . .
Finally, 5A Klixon breakers incorporated into production
test stands for alternators/regulators fitted with
crowbar OV protection were subjected to hundreds
of crowbar events over a period of years . . . with
no observed degradation of breaker performance. It would
be interesting to retrieve one of those breakers and
run the 200% trip time test on them.
>So--can a landing light blow a circuit breaker below the specified lamp
>current if there are some high-resistance connections? My guess is "yes"
>but it depends on the breaker, the lamp, the nature of the loose
>connections, the wire, and myriad other variables. The likely culprit is
>the breaker.
Hmmmm . . . . connections, lamp, breaker, wire, and
"myriad of other variables". This shopping list of
'maybes' implies a sage understanding but without
transfer of understanding to your readers.
How can the condition of wire exacerbate breaker
tripping? If the breaker is not undersized by error of
system design, how does the breaker itself participate
in a scenario of nuisance tripping? 99.999% of all
breakers run the lifetime of an airplane never being
called upon to do their job. Qualification demands
thousands of demonstrated operations before they are
allowed on the airplane. Share with us a rationale
for your assertion: "likely culprit is the breaker".
If we are deprived of some knowledge/understanding
of physics, repeatable experiments or artfully analyzed
failures, please help us out.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: High resistance pops breaker? |
>Bob,
>
>If I understand correctly, as the landing-light-retract motor slows due to
>increased circuit resistance (and thus lower voltage at the motor), the
>motor current will not increase because the torque required to operate the
>retract mechanism is the same as before.
Correct.
> The power (watts) of the motor is less because power equals speed times
> torque, and the speed has decreased. The total energy used to operate
> the mechanism will be about the same because it is a function of power
> and time.
Correct.
>Even though the motor is less powerful operating at a lower voltage, it
>runs for a longer time and thus uses about the same total power as it
>would operating at a higher voltage for a shorter time.
Correct.
>It seems to me that a slower motor develops less back-EMF and therefore
>would allow more current to flow.
If all other variables are the same, then the only way the motor
slows down is by increasing the load on the motor. Increased
torque translates to increased current. Now, the only reason
the motor slows down is because of resistance in the loop drops
the effective motor-supply voltage due to losses in the system.
> But on the other hand, higher resistance in the circuit counteracts
> that. I do not know how to calculate that, so I will take your word for
> it that the current stays the same.
I appreciate your profession of faith but it is
not necessary to make your own understanding
subservient to mine. Take a peek at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Misc_PDF/Motors_as_Energy_Converters.pdf
This is but one of thousands of down-loadable
treatments of this topic available on the 'net.
I just got home from a three day trip to a client's
facility to bring this same information to their
non-electrical engineering staff. Everybody walked
out of the discussions with a good working knowledge
of motor performance.
Note that the speed torque curve for this motor
has SLOPE. I.e, more torque results in increased
current flow which increases the drop in effective
applied voltage that is manifested by a lower RPM.
The speed torque curves for a motor ASSUME constant
terminal voltage at the motor. This is a necessary
constraint on scope of data because the motor
manufacturer has no control over EXTERNAL resistance
in the system. However the system designer is
obligated to include both internal and external
resistance to anticipate as-installed motor
performance.
Stall torque (and current) is a function of applied
voltage divided by total resistance. This is plain
ol' Ohm's law. One may readily deduce that the slope
of the curve is made steeper by increasing total
resistance; flatter by reducing total resistance. But
the current demanded by the motor for any condition
is firmly locked to effort in the motor shaft.
Note that for any given torque, there is a predictable
level of current demanded by the motor. Whether or not
the motor can sustain speed necessary for performance
at that load is directly affected by TOTAL circuit
resistance. The astute system designer draws a NEW
speed torque curve that has the same no-load speed
but a steeper slope and therefore lower stall torque
combined with a higher sensitivity of speed to torque.
If we could build a super-conducting motor, the
speed-torque plot would be a horizontal line. But
if the motor were super-conducting and external
wiring was not, the "flat line" motor would perform
to a new curve that has some small, but predictable
and perhaps significant slope.
>Suppose there are no high resistance connections and one compares the
>motor current at two different voltages, say 14 volts compared to 11 volts
>with a failed alternator. What happens to the motor current as the supply
>voltage drops? From what you wrote, I assume that the current will not
>increase.
Correct. The speed of the motor is given by:
RPM = (Eapplied - I*Rtotal)/(Volts/RPM)
Where
I*Rtotal describes depression of effective voltage
due to losses.
Volts/RPM describes the CEMF constant Ke
and I is a function of torque at the motor shaft.
One may easily deduce that with all other things
constant, an increase in torque reflects as a
proportionate increase in I resulting in more
losses through R. Speed MUST therefore go down
as the effect of a decrease in effective operating
voltage.
Here's a more detailed discussion of motor
characteristics for those who are interested.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Misc_PDF/Motors_as_Energy_Converters.pdf
> I am not trying to contradict anything that you said. I just want to
> understand. My experience has been with AC motors that try to maintain
> their synchronous speed by increasing current draw when heavily loaded or
> when operated at a lower voltage.
AC motors are more like a transformer-in-motion. Shaft
effort is a function of voltage induced in rotor conductors
by the low frequency AC difference between rotating
magnetic field in stator windings as "primaries" and
conductors in the squirrel cage as "secondary" windings.
The coupling coefficient for energy rises as the DIFFERENCE
frequency (hence increase in delta-velocity between ac
mains stator and induced currents in rotor) get larger
when rotor speed goes down due to loading. The physics which
control behavior of the induction motor are quite apart from
that of DC motors. While the two technologies operate on the
same rudimentary rules of magnetics and current flow, one
cannot accurately predict all behaviors of one from even the most
complete understanding of the other.
> DC motors do not have any certain speed that they strive for.
Yes, they do. In AC motors, no-load (synchronous) speed
is driven by line frequency and numbers of poles in the
stator windings. In a DC motor, no-load speed is a
function of applied voltage divided by Ke when losses
are quite low. As I mentioned earlier, if losses could be
driven to zero, then speed torque would be a flat line
defined by Eapplied/Ke. I think there's a TON of confusion out
there about DC motors based on folks real life experiences
and observations of AC motors. They're entirely different
technologies.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Printed circuits |
>
>
>Bob,
>
>I know that this subject has been discussed before, but can't find it.
>In short, what do you recommend to clean printed circuit boards after
>assembly?
There are some solders that offer water soluble fluxes but
unless you went to special effort to acquire this product,
you're not going to be able to simply run your boards through
the dishwasher.
I've removed "plastic" fluxes with carburetor cleaner in
spray cans from Wally World. I've bought it by the case
for under $1 a can. This is essentially strong but not
terribly aggressive solvent like lacquer thinner. You can
also try mild solvents like brush cleaners that are not
unlike starter fluid for charcoal. Denatured alcohol used
in shellacs is a good mild solvent that may work with your
flux.
Be cautious with aggressive solvents like acetone, mek
methyl chloride, etc. These can attack the binders in your
board's fiberglas as well as some finishes and plastics
used to fabricate the components. I use aggressive solvents
for spot cleaning . . . dampen a q-tip and rub locally.
You can use a brush dipped in solvent to dissolve flux
residue and flotsam it captures. Do a final rinse with
new, clean solvent and blow dry with your shop air or
a heat gun set on cold. After all acceptance tests are
complete, mask off connector pins and rotating parts.
Spray with a coat of Krylon Crystal Clear Glaze.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Bendix IN-224A Pinout or wiring diagram |
>ATTGNS"
>
>I need a pinout for the IN-224A that we are trying to use with a KX-170B
>and KNS-80. Owner did not have an indicator. Seems the ocean swallowed
>his last plane. Anybody have that pinout?
Didn't find a IN-224 but did find IN-244. You can get it
at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Installation_Data/IN-244.pdf
Hope this is the one you're really looking for!
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Molex wire splice recall |
>1. Electrical Wire Splices Recalled Due to Shock and Fire Hazards
>
>Hazard: The splice can fail to hold the wires adequately together, posing
>a shock and fire hazard to consumers.
>
>Incidents/Injuries: Gardner Bender has received one report of a recalled
>butt splice failing to hold wires together. No injuries have been reported.
>
>Description: The recalled butt splices are used to connect electrical
>wires to one another. They are typically used for wiring small electrical
>appliances, like audio equipment, or in automotive applications. The
>splices are yellow insulated vinyl and measure about one inch long and
>inch wide. They were intended for use with 12-10 AWG wire. 12-10 is
>stamped on the side of the splices. Model numbers 10-126, or 21-126, and
>Gardner Bender are printed on the product's packaging. They were sold in
>packages of 8 or 50.
>
>Sold at: Electrical distributors, hardware stores, and home centers
>nationwide from June 2005 through April 2008 for between $1 and $5.
Well gee . . . do we (or anyone else) know if this
splice was properly applied; right wire size, right
tool, right process?
There is MUCH more to this story than is knowable from
the announcement. A review of Gardner Bender's tools
at:
http://www.gardnerbender.com/pdf/products/Hand_tools.pdf
suggest that their termination/splicing products at:
http://www.gardnerbender.com/pdf/products/Terminals_wire.pdf
show that these are low-tech devices and tools not
intended to deliver consistent, gas-tight crimps combined
with insulation support. None of these products and tools
are suited for use in anything but the most benign of
environments and especially not with solid wire. It would
not surprise me that the failure cited in the recall was
a result of misapplication of wire, terminal and/or tool.
To initiate a recall on a single incident is suspicious
-------------
If you do not tug test a crimped connection before putting it in service,
you will have a failure over time, guaranteed.
My personal reflection on this is as we get older, that old nemesis
arthritis starts to kick in and we just do not squeeze the Sta-Kon pliers
with the crushing grip of our youth.
Joe Motis
Joe, the tools and materials we SHOULD be using will conform
to performance standards set by design goals of the terminal
designer as described in:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/terminal.pdf
applied to STRANDED wire with tools tested for compatibility
with both terminals and wire for achieving gas-tight
connections. No "testing" is necessary if one has done
their homework before hammering on the airplane.
The Gardner-Bender products were not designed to those
goals nor do their tools provide sculptured dies
closed against hard stops with ratcheting handled
tools.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Printed circuits |
| From: | Ron Quillin <rjquillin(at)gmail.com> |
At 11:48 8/23/2008, you wrote:
> Be cautious with aggressive solvents like acetone, mek
> methyl chloride, etc. These can attack the binders in your
> board's fiberglas as well as some finishes and plastics
> used to fabricate the components. I use aggressive solvents
> for spot cleaning . . . dampen a q-tip and rub locally.
NASA really likes Isopropyl and Ethanol; both are spec'd in
NASA-STD-8739.4 for PWB fabrication and cleaning.
> You can use a brush dipped in solvent to dissolve flux
> residue and flotsam it captures. Do a final rinse with
> new, clean solvent and blow dry with your shop air or
> a heat gun set on cold. After all acceptance tests are
> complete, mask off connector pins and rotating parts.
> Spray with a coat of Krylon Crystal Clear Glaze.
Also consider HumiSeal 1B73 for an Acrylic MIL spec conformal. Used
it for years.
Chase also makes a newer Acrylic 1B31 that's easier to work with, and
a polyurethane 1A33.
All three are qualified to MIL-I-46058C.
http://www.humiseal.com/
Ron Q.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Forhan <ohioip(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Tachometer Noise |
I have a Jabiru 2200 engine and a VDO tachometer. I'm coupling one alternator lead
to the tacho signal input. It works fine at lower rpms, but at about 2000
RPM it becomes very erratic. I searched around the internet and found some discussion
of the problem as being noise related with general suggestions to install
noise filters, series resistors, etc. to correct the problem but few details
on the circuit configuration. The most detailed info I saw described a 1 uF
coupling capacitor between the alternator and the tach with a 10K resistor and
a clamping diode connected to ground on the tach side of the capacitor. Has
anyone on the list tackled this problem?
Thanks,
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tachometer Noise |
| From: | "jetboy" <sanson.r(at)xtra.co.nz> |
The earlier Jabirus used a magnetic pickup at the ringear driving a VDO tach /
digital hourmeter and they later changed to the same pickup placed near metal
tabs on the flywheel (and different rpm calibration setting for this) This is
the normal way for larger diesel engines and the like.
You are likely to have trouble using the alternator wires as source because none
of them connect to ground and the regulator will cause extra pulses on the lines
as it does its job. I do connect across the windings and use a digital frequency
counter for calibration of my other system, and that works OK
Ralph
--------
Ralph - CH701 / 2200a
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 0217#200217
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Tachometer Noise |
>
>The earlier Jabirus used a magnetic pickup at the ringear driving a VDO
>tach / digital hourmeter and they later changed to the same pickup placed
>near metal tabs on the flywheel (and different rpm calibration setting for
>this) This is the normal way for larger diesel engines and the like.
>
>You are likely to have trouble using the alternator wires as source
>because none of them connect to ground and the regulator will cause extra
>pulses on the lines as it does its job. I do connect across the windings
>and use a digital frequency counter for calibration of my other system,
>and that works OK
>
>Ralph
An excellent response Ralph. I've always been a bit
mystified by some system designer's decisions to attempt
a stable deduction of alternator fundamental frequencies
when combined with a horrid mix of strong components of
other noises! Then one must deal with belt/gearing
ratios to scale the resulting signal to some number that
represents real crankshaft RPM.
The next worse signal source is magneto p-leads, but
we've learned to deal with those to a reasonably
successful degree.
Mike, there ARE some things that could be tried
which are something of a shot-in-the-dark. Without
doing a lucid examination of the signals the tachometer
is attempting to resolve, it's difficult to offer
you a high-probability "fix".
The absolutely best signal for tachometer success
comes from some form of dedicated sensor. Magnetic,
optical, closed contacts, etc. etc. But of
course, these need to be added to an existing engine
and one would really LIKE to get say 20 pulses per
engine revolution for the easiest crafting of
supporting electronics.
The instability might be a function of levels, or
as Ralph mentioned, the effects of extraneous
stimulus from the voltage regulator.
The fact that your instability happens at the higher
RPMs suggest these causes as good candidates. If
I were to take a 95% probability shot as suggesting
some signal conditioning, I'd go for a band-pass
filter (op amp and hand-full of jelly-bean parts)
combined with a squaring section (over-driven op
amp) as a means by which undesirable signals can
be filtered out from the signal-of-interest.
However, it MAY be that simple combinations of
resistors, capacitors and perhaps some zener
diodes would make your present combination useable
using some parts from Radio Shack.
Question: How much $time$ do you want or are
willing to spend? We KNOW that your present
system can be made to function as needed . . . but
it MIGHT evolve into quite a 'science project'.
If you're interested in expanding your knowledge
base . . . particularly with a goal of sharing
your discoveries with others and don't mind the
$time$, I'm sure that I and others her on the
List would be glad to give you suggestions.
On the other hand, if you're driving toward
first-light-under-the-wheels, perhaps a more
conservative approach is indicated . . . an
alternate pick-off scheme would be quick and
a sure bet.
Continue to search the web for situations where
others have encountered the same problem and
have discovered a 'fix'. If you don't get some
encouragement from that effort, make the choice
between doing a low-risk change of technologies
-OR- exploring signal conditioning alternatives
with the present setup.
Are you an electron-chaser of any degree? Do
you own or have access to a bench power supply,
and perhaps a 'scope? Do you know from the
VDO data what kind of signal the instrument
expects to see? Since this system runs from a
undetermined belt or gear ratio, does the
instrument have some form of calibration
pot? We'll need to know a lot more about the
instrument itself to narrow down the range
of techniques that could be applied to the
problem. What's the VDO part number? Perhaps
I or someone else can discover some useful
things about this critter.
One thing that would help is for me (or
perhaps Ralph) to put our hands on the instrument.
A few minutes on the bench would tell us what
kind of pristine signal the tach likes to see
and would put some bounds on the approach to
crafting a useful filter. There's NOTHING
that replaces NUMBERS to design to.
I (and perhaps others on the List) have an interest
in deducing a filter that would make your system work.
But we could spend a lot of YOUR $time$ to make
that happen and we're 100.0% sure of success. Only
you are in a position to make the well considered choice.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Stearns <steve(at)tomasara.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Printed circuits |
Bob and group,
Questions follow my personal experiences below:
I've had good results with both 99% Rubbing Alcohol and commercial
spray-on flux remover on common rosin flux. Whenever I use a
traditional rosin flux solder (or solder wick for that matter) I clean
it off completely.
I've had bad experiences with water-soluble fluxes in the past and so
avoid them like the plague (except, obviously, where mandated by a
client's manufacturing operations). Although they may have gotten
better in the recent years (to be replaced with problems related to
RoHS, no doubt). In the past they were very demanding of very complete
cleaning and, if not cleaned completely, tended to enable the slow
"growth" (metallurgically speaking, not biologically speaking) of a
white fuzz the was conductive and which resulted in field failures one
or more years after ship (this is going back to the late eighties,
however, and may be irrelevant with todays products). I'm dreading the
re-appearance of this kind of problem with tin growth once our solder
and parts have been purged of the dreaded lead that was so helpful in
controlling this problem.
My current flux-of-choice is Kestor's No-Clean flux and, per Kestor, I
don't remove it. However, I have found if I try to remove it with the
same chemicals used for rosin flux, I can get white residue (which I
view with great suspicion). Last I looked (a couple of years ago)
Kestor's web-site had a white paper on this issue which (as I remember)
basically concluded by not recommending any flux remover for this flux
and by recommending re-fluxing and re-heating to get rid of the white stuff.
In conclusion, I pay great attention to which flux I wish was removed
before deciding on a course of action.
My questions:
How do other's in this group deal with "no-clean" fluxes?
How important is it to clear-coat boards (I assume this greatly helps
when in a condensing atmosphere but I don't have experience with this
process)?
Can you clear-coat over "no-clean" flux or must it be removed?
Thanks in advance for your thoughts,
Steve Stearns
Boulder/Longmont, Colorado
CSA,EAA,IAC,AOPA,PE,ARRL,BARC (but ignorant none-the-less)
Restoring (since 1/07): N45FC O235 Longeze Cothern/Friling CF1 (~1000 Hrs)
Flying (since 9/86): N43732 A65 Taylorcraft BC12D
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Printed circuits |
>
>Bob and group,
>
>Questions follow my personal experiences below:
>
>I've had good results with both 99% Rubbing Alcohol and commercial
>spray-on flux remover on common rosin flux. Whenever I use a traditional
>rosin flux solder (or solder wick for that matter) I clean it off completely.
Yes, those are what I've referred to as "plastic"
fluxes. Originally real tree-rosin, modern encarnations
are synthetic but no less messy when the hard work
(make it function) is done.
>I've had bad experiences with water-soluble fluxes in the past and so
>avoid them like the plague (except, obviously, where mandated by a
>client's manufacturing operations). Although they may have gotten better
>in the recent years (to be replaced with problems related to RoHS, no
>doubt). In the past they were very demanding of very complete cleaning
>and, if not cleaned completely, tended to enable the slow "growth"
>(metallurgically speaking, not biologically speaking) of a white fuzz the
>was conductive and which resulted in field failures one or more years
>after ship (this is going back to the late eighties, however, and may be
>irrelevant with todays products). I'm dreading the re-appearance of this
>kind of problem with tin growth once our solder and parts have been purged
>of the dreaded lead that was so helpful in controlling this problem.
Right on. My all time favorite solder is Kester Resin
44 that I've stockpiled to a lifetime supply. It flows
well, fluxes well, and yes . . . it demands some attention
to cleaning when you're all done.
>My current flux-of-choice is Kestor's No-Clean flux and, per Kestor, I
>don't remove it. However, I have found if I try to remove it with the
>same chemicals used for rosin flux, I can get white residue (which I view
>with great suspicion). Last I looked (a couple of years ago) Kestor's
>web-site had a white paper on this issue which (as I remember) basically
>concluded by not recommending any flux remover for this flux and by
>recommending re-fluxing and re-heating to get rid of the white stuff.
Interesting! I've not experienced this stuff first
hand. I think one of my clients uses it on their
hand-assembly line. I'll inquire as to their post-
assy processes. The flux used on their pick-n-place
line is water soluble. This stuff is removed by an
expensive "dish washer" with some kind of proprietary
surfactants (probably dish soap).
They DO come out very clean and read to conformal
coat.
>In conclusion, I pay great attention to which flux I wish was removed
>before deciding on a course of action.
Sounds like a folk who's been-there-done-that.
>My questions: How do other's in this group deal with "no-clean" fluxes?
>How important is it to clear-coat boards (I assume this greatly helps when
>in a condensing atmosphere but I don't have experience with this process)?
I've never been tasked with crafting that process
but I'll ask around. I don't think anyone in production
uses a no-clean flux. There are just too many contaminant
and surface prep issues for coating that make post-solder
cleaning a really big issue. I was told by a Kester rep
many moons ago that the whole idea behind no-clean
flux was that it didn't leave reactive contaminants
behind . . . at least reactive at normal operating
temperatures and humidity. Obviously, to be a good
flux it had to be very reactive at solder temperatures.
>Can you clear-coat over "no-clean" flux or must it be removed?
That's what they told me . . . but it still LOOKED
like @!#@@#@$. That's why I've never embraced these
materials personally. Good ol' "44" and some moderately
strong solvents have served me and my sense of
craftsmanship well for decades.
>Thanks in advance for your thoughts,
You've raised some interesting questions. I'll see
what my friends in the industry can offer. In the
mean time, check out this resource at:
http://www.kester.com/en-us/datasheets/ds_dirdetail.aspx?location=Fluxes
This suite of products goes back at least 50 years
and includes the present offerings from Kester.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rocket2man <rocket2man(at)isp.com> |
Bob -
I'm working to provide more details for my RV8 electrical issue. The "Z
wiring diagram" I have for my airplane have "notes" indicated on the
drawing. Where do I find these? Thank you. JBB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Z diagram notes |
>
>Bob -
>I'm working to provide more details for my RV8 electrical issue. The "Z
>wiring diagram" I have for my airplane have "notes" indicated on the
>drawing. Where do I find these? Thank you. JBB
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11M.pdf
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Printed circuits (FOOEY) |
> You've raised some interesting questions. I'll see
> what my friends in the industry can offer. In the
> mean time, check out this resource at:
>
>http://www.kester.com/en-us/datasheets/ds_dirdetail.aspx?location=Fluxes
>
> This suite of products goes back at least 50 years
> and includes the present offerings from Kester.
Correction. I did find some posted data sheets on
Resin "44" as a flux . . . thought it was Kester's
site but I guess not. The link posted above is for
current production offerings only. Still a good
reference for how "water soluble", "no-clean" etc
should perform.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "F. Tim Yoder" <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Search for Gremlins |
With the success of the test of running a new ground wire from the oil
pressure gauge to the engine case, that removed the wiggle when I activated
the Alt., I did as you suggested and ran a new fat - ground wire (8 gauge)
from the engine case to the ground block. I then removed the original engine
to motor mount jumpers and temporary oil pressure ground wire. I started the
engine and wiggle came back. DRATS! I then removed all the ground wires from
the ground block, cleaned the blocks and re installed the grounds. O/P
needle still wiggles in the same way. The only part of the system I haven't
checked is the battery which is located behind the baggage compartment, I
planed to do that this week.
If this report leads you to any other suggestions I will certainly
appreciate them.
Tim
---- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net>
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 7:17 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Search for Gremlins
>
> >
> >8/17/2008
> >
> >To reply to the author, write to "F. Tim Yoder"
> >
> >Report on this weekends search for Gremlins;
> >
> >I spent several hours under the panel checking all the ground buss
> >connections, breaker and switch grounds. I loosened the connections to
the
> >amp, volt, oil temp and oil pressure gauges, wiggled the terminals and re
> >tightened. I did the same thing to the alternator and removed the
regulator
> >spades and replaced them.I removed the radio, cleaned the connectors and
re
> >installed it. I checked the ground straps from the engine to the motor
> >mount. I spent some time looking for something,anything wrong.
>
> There should be no ground straps from engine to motor mount. Only
> one fat-wire jumper from crankcase to your single-point ground on
> the firewall.
>
>
> >I started the plane and found that I had not ran off any Gremlins. When I
> >turn on the Alt. the oil pressure dropped from 75# to 60# then settled on
> >70#, this takes about one second. As soon as I turn off the Alt. the oil
> >pressure goes back to 75#. With the radio and Alt. on the oil pressure
> >needle drops a needle width when I key the radio. Again, with the Alt.
off
> >keying the radio does not effect the oil pressure gauge which was back to
> >75#.
> >
> >I did not fly so I didn't have any radio issues. I think I need to find
the
> >cause of the apparent load on the oil pressure gauge first.
>
> It sounds like a ground loop issue driven by too much resistance
> between crankcase and the oil pressure instrument ground. Try
> removing the existing ground wire for the instrument and
> grounding the instrument directly to the crankcase.
>
> If this makes the wiggle go away, I'll suggest you remove all
> jumpers from engine to mount and add one fat-jumper between
> crankcase and ground block.
>
>
> >Oh, the Amp. meter is a little positive at idle and the voltage is
showing
> >a charge of about 14.4V and 13.5V with at Alt. off.
>
> Those numbers are right in the ballpark.
>
>
> >I'll appreciate any suggestions.
> >
> >Thanks again, Tim
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ----------------------------------------)
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Search for Gremlins |
>
>
>With the success of the test of running a new ground wire from the oil
>pressure gauge to the engine case, that removed the wiggle when I activated
>the Alt., I did as you suggested and ran a new fat - ground wire (8 gauge)
>from the engine case to the ground block. I then removed the original engine
>to motor mount jumpers and temporary oil pressure ground wire. I started the
>engine and wiggle came back. DRATS!
8 AWG is small for the usual engine ground. I used
to fabricate custom case ground jumpers for builders
from three concentric conductors of copper braid
that added up to about an 0 AWG wire. But 8 AWG has
a resistance of just under a millohm/foot, it should
be okay. How long is the wire?
By the way, I'm not sure I recall what engine,
alternator and airplane combination we're talking about.
> I then removed all the ground wires from
>the ground block, cleaned the blocks and re installed the grounds. O/P
>needle still wiggles in the same way. The only part of the system I haven't
>checked is the battery which is located behind the baggage compartment, I
>planed to do that this week.
Where does the battery ground?
>If this report leads you to any other suggestions I will certainly
>appreciate them.
If push comes to shove, you can certainly leave the
oil pressure gage grounded to the engine. The stimulus
that upsets it is on the order of tens of millivolts.
Not enough to bother other accessories in your airplane -
only those instruments where sensors get grounded to
the crankcase. It would be interesting to see what
combination of 'fixes' makes the problem go away but
let's not spend a lot of $time$ on it . . . the
exercise at this point is more academic than practical.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Forhan <ohioip(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tachometer Noise |
Ralph & Bob-
Thanks much for your excellent advice. My motivation for asking came from the
fact that both Jabiru and VDO documentation discuss using the alternator as a
signal source. After experiencing the noise problem I surfed around the internet
and found comments to the effect that others had used a filter to stabilize
the system, but no one provided details of the filter configuration. Given
the number of Jabiru installations out there I expected to find a relatively easy,
ready-made solution.
Bob, in answer to your question, I am an electrical/electronics type and worked
in aerospace for many years, so on one hand I am intrigued by the problem and
am tempted to design a solution. But, at the end of the day, I think the best,
most reliable and most elegant solution is to just switch to a dedicated sensor
as you and Ralph suggest.
Thanks again,
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Stearns <steve(at)tomasara.com> |
| Subject: | Dry Cell Batteries? |
Bob and the group:
I did an aeroelectric search for "Dry Cell" and came up empty. A quick
(too quick, apparently) look at Concord's web-site comparing Dry Cells
to VRLA batteries indicated that for the same Amp-Hr rating, the Dry
Cells are a little heavier and significantly better in cold-cranking amps.
However, since I'm removing the starter as part of my LongEZ rebuild
that doesn't do much for me.
On the other hand, if Dry Cell batteries perform better than VRLA in
terms of durability (specifically shell-life, self-discharge and
tolerance of time spent sitting while discharged) I would be interested.
Any thoughts from the group on the advantages (if any) and disadvantages
(other than the obvious weight/cost. e.g. do they use the same charging
profile?) of a Dry Cell battery on a starterless airplane?
Best regards to all,
Steve Stearns
Boulder/Longmont, Colorado
CSA,EAA,IAC,AOPA,PE,ARRL,BARC (but ignorant none-the-less)
Restoring (since 1/07): N45FC O235 Longeze Cothern/Friling CF1 (~1000 Hrs)
Flying (since 9/86): N43732 A65 Taylorcraft BC12D
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Stearns <steve(at)tomasara.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Printed circuits |
Since the interest level seems high, I'll add a little more info....
> ** Right on. My all time favorite solder is Kester Resin
> 44 that I've stockpiled to a lifetime supply. It flows
> well, fluxes well, and yes . . . it demands some attention
> to cleaning when you're all done.
> **
I also use and prefer Kester 44 for use in hand soldering. Most of my
work these days, however, is with surface mount parts which I reflow.
Here I use Kester R276 No-Clean solder paste. Invariably I end of with
a mix of both fluxes as, after re-flow, I'll have to hand-solder the
through-hole parts or do some rework (I haven't had good luck with
no-clean solder-wick so I stick to the rosin based fluxes on my solder
wick as well). This gets cleaned with Isopropyl (via cotton swabs) or
with a mixture from a flux-remover pen (I haven't checked the MDS but I
suspect it's Isopropyl with a little MEK, it's a bit more aggressive
than the Isopropyl alone). Which results in some white residue from the
no-clean flux. So then I add Kester #951 from a flux pen (which I
recommend - good stuff) and reheat with hot air.
This sounds more time-consuming than it is. In reality it goes pretty
fast and I don't have to get up from my bench. My lab does not have a
good facility for appropriate board-level cleaning operations so when I
have to clean a whole board I do it outside...
Steve Stearns
Boulder/Longmont, Colorado
CSA,EAA,IAC,AOPA,PE,ARRL,BARC (but ignorant none-the-less)
Restoring (since 1/07): N45FC O235 Longeze Cothern/Friling CF1 (~1000 Hrs)
Flying (since 9/86): N43732 A65 Taylorcraft BC12D
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Tachometer Noise |
>
>Ralph & Bob-
>
>Thanks much for your excellent advice. My motivation for asking came from
>the fact that both Jabiru and VDO documentation discuss using the
>alternator as a signal source. After experiencing the noise problem I
>surfed around the internet and found comments to the effect that others
>had used a filter to stabilize the system, but no one provided details of
>the filter configuration. Given the number of Jabiru installations out
>there I expected to find a relatively easy, ready-made solution.
Agreed.
>Bob, in answer to your question, I am an electrical/electronics type and
>worked in aerospace for many years, so on one hand I am intrigued by the
>problem and am tempted to design a solution.
These things are always fun if not practical . . . but
then education was NEVER inexpensive. I presume this is
an analog tach . . . but without a cal-adjustment,
I'm mystified as to how calibration is accomplished.
If it's digital, then the HARD part is a multiply-by-
K-divide-by-N circuitry needed to scale the sensed
signal frequency to something that displays true
engine RPM. I'd be interested in seeing what folks
are using to make this happen.
In the analog world, we used to drive a transistor
with the distributor's ignition points signal
to get a pretty clean square wave at the collector.
A small capacitor and two diodes differentiate the
the edges of the square wave and depended on the
meter's inertia to integrate the frequency. A potentiometer
provided a means to calibrate the reading to display
RPM. I built a bucket full of these things for
the hot-rod guys using surplus meter movements.
>But, at the end of the day, I think the best, most reliable and most
>elegant solution is to just switch to a dedicated sensor as you and Ralph
>suggest.
Yeah, life IS that way sometimes. What does this
engine use for ignition triggering?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
>
>Bob and the group:
>
>I did an aeroelectric search for "Dry Cell" and came up empty. A quick
>(too quick, apparently) look at Concord's web-site comparing Dry Cells to
>VRLA batteries indicated that for the same Amp-Hr rating, the Dry Cells
>are a little heavier and significantly better in cold-cranking amps.
>
>However, since I'm removing the starter as part of my LongEZ rebuild that
>doesn't do much for me.
>
>On the other hand, if Dry Cell batteries perform better than VRLA in terms
>of durability (specifically shell-life, self-discharge and tolerance of
>time spent sitting while discharged) I would be interested.
>
>Any thoughts from the group on the advantages (if any) and disadvantages
>(other than the obvious weight/cost. e.g. do they use the same charging
>profile?) of a Dry Cell battery on a starterless airplane?
Don't know what's being called a "dry cell". I'm aware
of NO lead-acid technology that does not reside in
one of three categories (1) flooded - like on your
'65 chevy (2) gelled - like those on many wheelchairs
and other 'mess-sensitive' need for deep-cycle
batteries and (3) starved-electrolyte, valve-regulated
lead-acid, recombinant-gas, thin-film, glass-mat, etc. etc.
These are all names for essentially the same technology.
The reason you didn't find "dry cell" mentioned in the website
postings is because there's no such thing. ALL lead-acid
technologies use liquid water and sulfuric acid electrolyte.
The differences are whether the stuff is liquid and
(1) sorta contained but with vented caps, (2) immobililzed
by adding 'jello' or (3) immobilized by the wetting/
capillary action of a finely woven glass 'kleenex'.
Some folks like to call these "dry" . . . you CAN
drive a nail through the side of the battery and it
will not leak . . . but it is by no means dry.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/bat_thd.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/battery.pdf
Battery selection should not take up much of your
time. What's your battery maintenance program?
How much do you plan to depend on a battery?
If you're day-vfr only, buy the cheapest battery
you can find, run it 'til it craps. Engine cranking
is the primary concern and any sealed lead-acid
battery with terminals for fat wires will get your
engine started. CAPACITY is another matter. If you
plan to design and maintain a known level of
battery-only endurance for en route operations
then your first task is an energy analysis of
your battery-only endurance, pick a battery that
meets that requirement at 80% of rated capacity
(don't forget to further de-rate for load!), and
decide what protocols (preventative maintenance)
you'll adopt as owner-operator to make sure that
capacity is available to you at all times.
This exercise can be successfully carried out
with ANY battery brand or technology.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joe" <fran5sew(at)banyanol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: High resistance pops breaker? |
DC motors have the greatest torque and current when they are standing
still and voltage is first applied. According to my old college book on
basic electricity, a DC motor (with shunt winding) starting current can
be up to 100 times greater than the full load running current. For
larger motors, a resistance type motor-starter is used to limit the
starting current to prevent damage to the motor and also to prevent
excessive acceleration that could damage the load. Adding resistance to
the circuit during starting slows the acceleration and prolongs the
time that it takes for a motor to attain normal running speed.
Getting back to that Sport Aviation article that claimed that "High
Resistance Pops Breaker". The circuit breaker in that landing light
circuit might have been sized to trip if the motor current was high due
to a jammed landing-light retract mechanism. But due to the time-delay
characteristics of circuit breakers, the breaker would not trip during
normal motor starting even though the starting current is above the
breaker trip point for a short time. Is it possible that there is some
value of resistance (due to bad connections) that, when added to the
circuit, could allow motor-starting current to flow that is still above
the circuit breaker trip point, but for a prolonged period of time?
Could the author of that Sport Aviation article be correct that bad
connections did cause the circuit breaker to trip, but for entirely
different reasons than he stated. He said that bad connections made the
current go up. Perhaps the resistance made the current go down (but not
below the circuit breaker trip point) and prolonged the motor-starting
time long enough for breaker to trip.
Joe Gores
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dale Rogers <dale.r(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Search for Gremlins |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> Where does the battery ground?
>
>> If this report leads you to any other suggestions I will certainly
>> appreciate them.
May I expand on that? Look at the automotive world ...
The most difficult job the battery has is cranking the engine. All
modern automobiles - of which I am aware, anyway - run a large ground
cable (#4 - #00) straight from the battery to the engine. The starter
motor is grounded via the engine. Then the chassis is grounded to the
engine. Everything else is grounded to the engine, via the chassis or a
ground bus.
If you want a robust electrical system, that's a good starting point.
And yeah, I've been told before "that's cars; cars aren't airplanes".
Sorry - the physics works the same for both.
Dale R.
COZY MkIV #0497
Ch.12; Ch's 13, 16, 22 & 23 in-progress
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Laurence" <dr.laurence(at)mbdi.org> |
| Subject: | measuring capacitance. |
Bob and others,
Can one determine the inherent capacitance of a container of water with two
metal plates? Formula?
Peter Laurence
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger & Jean" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | measuring capacitance. |
Can one determine the inherent capacitance of a container of water with two
metal plates? Formula?
Peter Laurence
Peter,
What does this container of water and 2 metal plates have to do with my OBAM
aircraft???
Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
| Subject: | measuring capacitance. |
Testing capacitance fuel tank gauges, perhaps?
A little broader focus beyond "..my OBAM aircraft" would be helpful.
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger &
Jean
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 11:39 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: measuring capacitance.
Can one determine the inherent capacitance of a container of water with two
metal plates? Formula?
Peter Laurence
Peter,
What does this container of water and 2 metal plates have to do with my OBAM
aircraft???
Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Laurence" <dr.laurence(at)mbdi.org> |
| Subject: | measuring capacitance. |
Roger,
H2 generation
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger &
Jean
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 2:39 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: measuring capacitance.
Can one determine the inherent capacitance of a container of water with two
metal plates? Formula?
Peter Laurence
Peter,
What does this container of water and 2 metal plates have to do with my OBAM
aircraft???
Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: measuring capacitance. |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
A capacitor is a device which stores electrical energy by maintaining
separation between regions of differing charge - that is, two conductive
plates separated by an insulator.
Most real-world water is at least somewhat conductive (contaminated by
salts). The amount of contaminant which causes water to ionize and become
conductive is very low.
Coating the metal plates would allow a capacitive system to be built -
keeping there from being a short between the plates. Water between the
already insulated plates would further change the permittivity of the
system - changing it's capacitance.
So, is this question about a lab environment in which you can setup with
distilled water, and keep it clean? If so, then it is possible to
calculate the capacitance of system that has metal plates and water as the
dielectric.
If the concern is about how water effects the capacitive senders in a
modern fuel system, I think that's a different issue..
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
>
> Bob and others,
>
> Can one determine the inherent capacitance of a container of water with
> two
> metal plates? Formula?
>
>
> Peter Laurence
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger & Jean" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | measuring capacitance. |
Testing capacitance fuel tank gauges, perhaps?
Perhaps not?
A little broader focus beyond "..my OBAM aircraft" would be helpful.
I thought OBAM aircraft was what this forum was all about!
Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
| Subject: | measuring capacitance. |
My RV-8A has capacitance fuel gauges. But then that's MY OBAM aircraft.
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger &
Jean
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 2:51 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: measuring capacitance.
Testing capacitance fuel tank gauges, perhaps?
Perhaps not?
A little broader focus beyond "..my OBAM aircraft" would be helpful.
I thought OBAM aircraft was what this forum was all about!
Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: measuring capacitance. |
| From: | Ron Quillin <rjquillin(at)gmail.com> |
At 10:52 8/25/2008, you wrote:
>Can one determine the inherent capacitance of a container of water with two
>metal plates? Formula?
http://www.pa.msu.edu/courses/2001spring/PHY232/lectures/capacitors/twoplates.html
For DC or low frequencies you can use e= 80 for water.
Look up values here:
http://www.asiinstruments.com/technical/Dielectric%20Constants.htm#Section%20W
Ron Q.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: High resistance pops breaker? |
>DC motors have the greatest torque and current when they are standing
>still and voltage is first applied.
Yes, zero velocity = zero counter emf. Therefore in the instant of time
were the armature is just spinning up, current draw is applied voltage
divided by internal resistance. That's the lower most end of the speed-
torque curve and is usually called "stall current".
> According to my old college book on basic electricity, a DC motor
> (with shunt winding) starting current can be up to 100 times greater than
> the full load running current.
Yes, a shunt winding has a great deal in common with
modern PM motors for starters. The magnets are so strong
that fewer turns are needed in the armature to achieve
desired performance . . . the speed torque curve is
flatter and the stall current VERY significant.
> For larger motors, a resistance type motor-starter is used to limit the
> starting current to prevent damage to the motor and also to prevent
> excessive acceleration that could damage the load. Adding resistance to
> the circuit during starting slows the acceleration and prolongs the time
> that it takes for a motor to attain normal running speed.
Correct . . . artificial increase in slope of speed-torque
curve. Torque AND inrush current are reduced.
>Getting back to that Sport Aviation article that claimed that "High
>Resistance Pops Breaker". The circuit breaker in that landing light
>circuit might have been sized to trip if the motor current was high due to
>a jammed landing-light retract mechanism. But due to the time-delay
>characteristics of circuit breakers, the breaker would not trip during
>normal motor starting even though the starting current is above the
>breaker trip point for a short time. Is it possible that there is some
>value of resistance (due to bad connections) that, when added to the
>circuit, could allow motor-starting current to flow that is still above
>the circuit breaker trip point, but for a prolonged period of time? Could
>the author of that Sport Aviation article be correct that bad connections
>did cause the circuit breaker to trip, but for entirely different reasons
>than he stated. He said that bad connections made the current go
>up. Perhaps the resistance made the current go down (but not below the
>circuit breaker trip point) and prolonged the motor-starting time long
>enough for breaker to trip.
I pondered that for a bit but I don't think so. Acceleration
of a motor to full speed takes but tens of milliseconds. The
only landing light motors I've seen were split series field
motors . . . apply (+) to one field to retract, the other
field to extend. The effect of series windings is to limit
stall current (although torque tends to get better due to
increased field flux - assuming the magnetics are not saturated).
Starting current on these relatively small mechanisms is
short in duration and not spectacular.
If the motor were jammed . . . yeah, I can see this generating
a trip but a simple cleaning/tightening of joints in the wiring
can't account for an increase of current to an I(squared)*T
value necessary to trip a breaker.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Stearns <steve(at)tomasara.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
I'm pretty familiar with VRLA batteries. This looked like something new
but it could be that I got caught by marketing spin (I hate it when that
happens...). I'll do some more homework and will report back if I find
something interesting.
Steve Stearns
Boulder/Longmont, Colorado
CSA,EAA,IAC,AOPA,PE,ARRL,BARC (but ignorant none-the-less)
Restoring (since 1/07): N45FC O235 Longeze Cothern/Friling CF1 (~1000 Hrs)
Flying (since 9/86): N43732 A65 Taylorcraft BC12D
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Borger <rlborger(at)mac.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
Steve,
I think you are talking about the Odyssey "Dry Cell" battery series? If so, they
technology they use is "absorbed glass mat." The Odyssey folks call them "Dry
Cell" because if you were to break open the case, no electrolyte would run
out. It is totally contained within the glass mat material.
So, yes, a bit of advertising hype. But it is still an excellent battery. I have
an Odyssey 680 in my (under construction) Europa. The battery is 5 years
old. I've been using it to test the panel as it was installed. There were periods
as long as a year and a half where the battery sat unused. It held a charge
for those unused periods. After 5 years of such abuse, it still turns the
engine (Rotax 914) over quite briskly. Prior to first flight, I'm troubleshooting
a few last gremlins in the instrument panel and it will run the panel all
day long. When it's time to replace it, I'll have no hesitation replacing it
with another new Odyssey.
Just my two bits.
Bob Borger
http://www.europaowners.org/N914XL
On Tuesday, August 26, 2008, at 07:25AM, "Steve Stearns" wrote:
>
>I'm pretty familiar with VRLA batteries. This looked like something new
>but it could be that I got caught by marketing spin (I hate it when that
>happens...). I'll do some more homework and will report back if I find
>something interesting.
>
>Steve Stearns
>Boulder/Longmont, Colorado
>CSA,EAA,IAC,AOPA,PE,ARRL,BARC (but ignorant none-the-less)
>Restoring (since 1/07): N45FC O235 Longeze Cothern/Friling CF1 (~1000 Hrs)
>Flying (since 9/86): N43732 A65 Taylorcraft BC12D
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: High resistance pops breaker? ("High resistance" |
defined)
I've received a number of private e-mails on the
"high resistance" joint thing that illustrated a
disconnect between the various participants in the
discussion with respect to the likely characteristics
of a "high resistance" joint.
We've discussed on these pages (and in my seminars)
the need for gas-tight joining of two materials for
the purpose of making long lived connections. The
easiest way (non destructive) to deduce the quality
of a joint is with a device called a "Bonding Meter".
We have one here that I've used many times both for
my work in the OBAM aircraft community and at RAC/H-B.
It's a 4-wire ohmmeter operating on principals similar
to those devices described in . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/grnding.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/LowOhmsAdapter_3.pdf
The later article was crafted and published for the
benefit of technicians working RAC/H-B products attempting
to find degraded microswitches in landing gear position
indicating systems without pulling the devices off
the airplane.
My all time favorite tool is the T477W shown here
http://www.avtron.com/pdf/ate/t477w.pdf
Bought one of these for myself at a Boeing surplus
sale a few years back. This device uses an AC
signal to stress the joint under investigation.
It's MUCH easier to signal condition and measure
microvolts of AC than DC which is what makes this
instrument and it's close cousins so practical/
attractive.
When we speak of a "low resistance" connection in
"the business" . . . we're talking 500 MICRO-OHMS
max. It's not possible to get these values without
having pressing cleaned surfaces into intimate
contact with each other . . . i.e. gas tight. When
we speak of a "high resistance" joint, the bonding
meter says 600 uOhms or perhaps even 1-2 milliohms.
For most folk's way of thinking, this is still a
dead short (no such thing really - except in a
superconducting world). For those of us tasked with
crafting and maintaining a gas tight joint, loss of
bonding integrity is manifested in a 2x or greater
increase of normal resistance readings that are still quite
small in the grand scheme of things.
Now, how much resistance might one expect to see in
a joint where the two conductors are simply touched
but without a lot of pressure? It's still measured in
tens of milliohms . . . but for all practical purposes
a "good" but intermittent connection from the perspective
of troubleshooting things like retracting landing lights.
When a mechanic reports a "high resistance" connection
in some made-up joints (fast-on connection, ring terminal
over a screw, two pieces of brass bolted together) the
image I see in my head is a joint once measured in
micro-ohms having been elevated to the tens of milliohms.
In a cranking circuit, this joint would heat up, smoke,
and perhaps set things on fire when hit with 100+
amp loads.
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Failures/6041_Contactor_Failure.jpg
100 milliohms in series with the motor/lamp circuit
of our landing light example would have NO immediately
observable effect on landing light operations. Assuming
a 100W landing light (and I think many of those things
were 250w) the running current of 8A x 100 millohms
6.4 watts of HEAT being dumped into the joint. This kind
of stress causes localized heating that can begin to degrade
the materials locally over time. Not unlike the situation
that caused the switch failure discussed here:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Anatomy_of_a_Switch_Failure/Anatomy_of_a_Switch_Failure.html
So when we speak of "high resistance" joints, I'll suggest
that the increase in resistance is not great enough to
produce readily observable effects. One MIGHT deduce a
high resistance joint by measuring voltage drop under load
(an adaptation of the 4-wire milliohmmeter technique)
but while a 100 milliohm joint will eventually smoke something
over time, it's certainly not the proximate cause of increased
current flow that opens breakers, ect.
I mentioned an "intermittent" joints . . . a joint that makes
transient good/bad connection. These joints will degrade over
time due to heating effects of arcing but for the most part,
they manifest themselves in the form of flickering lights,
upset radios, and get fixed before the failures at the
connection become catastrophic. The term "high resistance"
to describe the intermittent joint would not be expected to
produce the same mental images on the part of both writer and
reader.
An intermittent joint offers a whole new thought process that
explores different dynamics than the slow-moving effects of
localized heating. It's sad that both writers and publishers
of the kinds of articles that started this thread haven't a clue
as to the nature of microscopic, simple-ideas that drive the physics
of the situation they're discussing. Further, they may use words
that in their mind describes apples while their readers perceive
oranges.
The end product often generates and propagates more mis-
understanding than if the article had never been written.
Unfortunately, much of what passes for sage advice
in the revered documents of our craft do not pass muster as
lucid words of understanding. Caveat emptor - without warranty
a buyer assumes all risks. You are a buyer of ideas when you
spend $time$ to read, assimilate and apply notions proffered
by the words and illustrations. Critical review is NEVER a
bad idea for anything you read from the wild . . . from ANY source
(including aeroelectric.com).
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
>
>Steve,
>
>I think you are talking about the Odyssey "Dry Cell" battery series? If
>so, they technology they use is "absorbed glass mat." The Odyssey folks
>call them "Dry Cell" because if you were to break open the case, no
>electrolyte would run out. It is totally contained within the glass mat
>material.
>
>So, yes, a bit of advertising hype. But it is still an excellent
>battery. I have an Odyssey 680 in my (under construction) Europa. The
>battery is 5 years old. I've been using it to test the panel as it was
>installed. There were periods as long as a year and a half where the
>battery sat unused. It held a charge for those unused periods. After 5
>years of such abuse, it still turns the engine (Rotax 914) over quite
>briskly. Prior to first flight, I'm troubleshooting a few last gremlins
>in the instrument panel and it will run the panel all day long. When it's
>time to replace it, I'll have no hesitation replacing it with another new
>Odyssey.
The Odyssey batteries are a product of the old
Gates-cum-Hawker-cum-EnerSys prismatic cell batteries
built here:
http://www.odysseyfactory.com/about.html
Got to tour this plant a few years ago while on
assignment with Raytheon/H-B. The full line of
their products can be seen at:
http://www.odysseybatteries.com/
Without a doubt, these products are at the leading
edge of battery quality and performance . . . with a price
to match. As I recall, about 700 folks running a highly
automated manufacturing process produces about 60,000
batteries a day!
But it's still an SVLA battery loaded with the same
water-acid mix used by their competitors.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
| From: | "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com> |
You don't have to be an old timer to remember that "dry cells"
are carbon - zinc flashlight batteries.
I love my Odyssey battery but it sounds like one of their marketing
folks stepped out on a limb without engineering support
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 0675#200675
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
A question related to Odessey batteries specifically, how can you determine the
number of 'cells' within the battery. I've not been able to find that in their
docs.
The reason I ask is that I just got a West Mountain CBA battery tester, and one
of the test parameters is the 'number of cells' . Not really sure how to answer
that, to build an accurate test.
Any suggestions are appreciated, thanks,
Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 0678#200678
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
>
>A question related to Odessey batteries specifically, how can you
>determine the number of 'cells' within the battery. I've not been able to
>find that in their docs.
>
>The reason I ask is that I just got a West Mountain CBA battery tester,
>and one of the test parameters is the 'number of cells' . Not really sure
>how to answer that, to build an accurate test.
ALL lead-acid batteries are composed of cells that
develop just over 2 volts per cell at room temperature.
Like the batteries used in our cars since day-one,
a 6v battery is 3 cells; a 12 battery is 6 cells,
etc.
I'm not sure why West Mountain puts that block into
their setup screen . . . the value placed in it has
no effect on how the test is run. It's a constant
current discharge + data acquisition system that will
yield the same plot irrespective of what values go
into the "battery type" and "cells" boxes.
I'm pleased that you've acquired one of these
very useful tools!
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Borger <rlborger(at)mac.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
Mike,
A single lead-acid cell will produce approximately 2.1 volts. For a 12 volt (
12.6 volts actually) battery that is 6 cells.
Check out "lead acid battery" in the Wikipedia.
Bob Borger
On Tuesday, August 26, 2008, at 11:17AM, "mikef" wrote:
>
>A question related to Odessey batteries specifically, how can you determine the
number of 'cells' within the battery. I've not been able to find that in their
docs.
>
>The reason I ask is that I just got a West Mountain CBA battery tester, and one
of the test parameters is the 'number of cells' . Not really sure how to answer
that, to build an accurate test.
>
>Any suggestions are appreciated, thanks,
>
>Mike
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 0678#200678
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
>
>You don't have to be an old timer to remember that "dry cells"
>are carbon - zinc flashlight batteries.
Hmmmm . . . I think the witch's brew of gooey stuff
in side was still moist and probably water based. I
also recall how badly they could leak! There was a time
that one battery manufacturer (Eveready I think) offered
to repair or replace any appliance that was trashed due
to leakage of their new and improved cells.
>I love my Odyssey battery but it sounds like one of their marketing
>folks stepped out on a limb without engineering support.
It's been my experience that the last folks marketing
wants to hear from are the engineers!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger & Jean" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
* AeroElectric-List message posted by: "mikef"
A question related to Odessey batteries specifically, how can you determine
the number of 'cells' within the battery. I've not been able to find that in
their docs.
The reason I ask is that I just got a West Mountain CBA battery tester, and
one of the test parameters is the 'number of cells' . Not really sure how to
answer that, to build an accurate test.
Any suggestions are appreciated, thanks,
Mike
Mike,
* Lead acid batteries, such as the odessey, are about 2 V per cell, which
means a 12V battery has 6 cells.
*
* Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Crimp Tool Alert |
I noticed another PIDG tool on the HF website that
I'd cited before but never put my hands on one. They
were on sale a few weeks ago so I purchased one for
$7.50.
It's a very capable clone of the $low$ tools that have
been out in the wild for 20 years . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Crimp_Tools/Harbor_Freight_93977.gif
. . . but with improvements that sculptured the dies
(particularly on the insulation grip side).
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Crimp_Tools/Harbor_Freight_97420.gif
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Crimp_Tools/Harbor_Freight_97420.jpg
I'm disappointed to report to you that while this tool
does do a good wire grip, crush height is too tall to
grip the smaller diameter wires we use in the airplanes.
Some of you may recall that we encountered this condition
once before. A Cleveland Tool crimper . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Crimp_Tools/CLEVELAND60A.jpg
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Crimp_Tools/CLEVELAND61A.jpg
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Crimp_Tools/CLEVELAND65A.jpg
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Crimp_Tools/CLEVELAND66A.jpg
The HF product is a great, low cost alternative to going
first class
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Crimp_Tools/AMP_T-Head_2.jpg
but in this case, the tool just doesn't cut it for purposes
close to our hearts.
I'll experiment with some modifications to the tool to see
if it can be shimmed . . . but then, if I spend more than
20 minutes on making it work, I've blown the cost of ownership
advantage for having acquired the low cost tool in the first
place!
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks for the battery cell info, it does help.
I am very glad to have gotten the CBA battery tester and look forward to using
it. I'll post feedback as I run some tests.
Sunday I fired up the engine on my new Z19 system and ground ran for a few minutes.
All smoke stayed in wires, major circuits worked as expected. Its a beautiful
thing.
Thanks again,
Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 0694#200694
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Page <jpx(at)Qenesis.com> |
Searching through the archives, the comment made was that the best
stripper is the Ideal 45-187, which naturally is discontinued.
Looking through their catalog shows a wide variety of apparently
almost identical strippers.
The 45-177 seems quite similar, but is missing the short stop latch
and wire stop. How useful are those features ? Should I be looking
for a 45-187 in the marketplace anyway ?
Non of the the strippers seem to handle the range of wire that is used
in aircraft. Do I need to buy two strippers to handle 10-14 gauge and
another for 16-26, or can I just swap blades (how much of a pain is
that ??) ?
What about the "Lite" strippers, smaller and easier to squeeze sounds
great. What is the downside ?
Additionally, I was unable to find any recommendations for Molex
0.062" contacts. How about the Sargent 3133-CT ?
Thanks !
Jeff Page
Dream Aircraft Tundra #10
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rocket2man <rocket2man(at)isp.com> |
| Subject: | B+C alternator problem |
From: <jamesbaldwin(at)dc.rr.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: B&C alterator problem (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
> > Bob and others -
>
>> > >I have a newly purchased RV8 with a B&C 40 amp alternator and automotive
>> > >style blade fuses. Good grounding with a firewall mounted ground bus
>> > >which is then routed to the engine. The digital ammeter indicates a
>> > >running load of 6-7 amps. The battery is a Concorde dry cell mounted on
>> > >the firewall. On two separate occasions the 15 amp alternator field fuse
>> > >has blown without any additional or noted transient loads being placed on
>> > >the alternator. The builder had this happen to him also and he thought it
>> > >was the battery so he replaced it. The new, year old Concorde battery has
>> > >great cranking power so I am not looking at this as a potential
>> > >problem. The only other problem I have noted is when using all of the
>> > >lights, strobes, fuel pump and electric flaps the main 40 amp C/B popped
>> > >once. Ignoring this as an overload my real problem appears to be the
>> > >field fuse. Why does the 15 amp field fuse blow and what's the smartest
>> > >way to diagnose this problem? Thank you. JBB
>>
The first problem is that the original builder did not
understand the physics of the system he/she was crafting
and chose not to study and understand why the z-figures
were designed the way they are.
A 40A breaker on a 40A alternator is UNDERSIZED. The
nameplate rating of an alternator is for worst-case
conditions. I.e. minimum rpm for full output and max
ambient operating temperature. Under less stressful
conditions, the alternator may deliver 15 to 25%
more current.
This says that the 60A breaker on the b-lead of 60A
alternators in 100,000 GA aircraft is DESIGNED to
nuisance trip. Suggest you replace the 40A breaker
with a 30-50A current limiter out on the firewall.
There should not be a field fuse with an LR series
regulator. These us crowbar OV protection and are
designed to work downstream of a breaker only. Is
the recommended 5A breaker also installed? IF so,
the wiring between the breaker and the bus needs
little if any protection. The z-figures recommend
a fusible link . . . exceedingly robust compared
to the fuse.
Now we need to figure out what's irritating the
OV protection system. Do I presume correctly that
the regulator also came from B&C (LR3 series?) or
is there some other combination of regulator/ov
in place?
I'll assume that since the field protection is being
nuisance tripped, there is some form of crowbar
ov protection in place. The ov protection may
be an older version that was sensitive to some
forms of normal bus transients. The designs at
both B&C and AeroElectric Connection were modified
to eliminate that condition . . . the system you're
working with may need to be updated.
This is not a condition unique to 'crowbar' ov
protection. EVERY ov protection system has some
form of comparator between bus voltage and
some stable reference. When a setpoint is exceeded,
it sends a signal to some form of disconnect
device (relay, transistor, scr, etc). There is
a dynamic component to ov protection too . . .
voltage excursions above the setpoint are allowed
as long as they do not exceed certain time
intervals. It's the fine tuning of the dynamic
sensitivity that makes some products prone to
nuisance trips. I've probably designed two dozen
or more OV protection systems in my career, I've
only had to re-tune two of them. In one case,
the transient condition generated by the aircraft
was greater than the Mil-STD-704 guidelines
to which the product was crafted.
Tell us what regulator/ov combination is installed.
If an LR3, what's the manufacturing date? If
an AEC crowbar module, what colors of wires does
it have. Older versions are red/black, newer
are orange/black.
Bob . . .
Bob -
Here are more specifics for this installation:
The wiring diagram provided by the builder (and it seems to be accurate) is the
"Z-1, Simple system with Toggle Mag Sw and Linear Regulator."
The battery is a Concorde RG 25XC.
The alternator is a B+C L40, s/n 010806.
The regulator/OV prot is a B+C LR-3, s/n 11920211.
The C/B from the alt output is only 40 amps! I'm guessing it should be bigger
based on your previous comments or I can use a current limiter you suggest but
I'll need to know which one/where are they available.
The alternator field fuse that has blown several times I rechecked and is 15 amps.
Does the "nuisance trip" scenario you speak of manifest as blowing the 15
amp fuse?
What else would you like to know and what do you think? Thank you. JBB
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
| From: | "Beemer" <bmwebb(at)cox.net> |
Is there a source for these batteries in an 8ah rating that does not have the fast-on
tabs, such as those used on wheelchairs? The smallest I've found with bolt-on
terminals is 17ah.
Thx,
Bradley
--------
Beemer
KF2 (and now an M3!)
Middle Georgia
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 0872#200872
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: B+C alternator problem |
>
>Bob -
>Here are more specifics for this installation:
>
>The wiring diagram provided by the builder (and it seems to be accurate)
>is the "Z-1, Simple system with Toggle Mag Sw and Linear Regulator."
Okay, this drawing was 'retired' at Z-9 or so and replaced
with Z-11. They are similar in many respects.
>The battery is a Concorde RG 25XC.
>The alternator is a B+C L40, s/n 010806.
>The regulator/OV prot is a B+C LR-3, s/n 11920211.
I don't recall how to read B&C's serial numbers
with respect to manufacturing date. But it may
well be that this one pre-dates the modifications
added later to reduce probability of nuisance
trips.
>
>The C/B from the alt output is only 40 amps! I'm guessing it should be
>bigger based on your previous comments or I can use a current limiter you
>suggest but I'll need to know which one/where are they available.
You can get the legacy current limiters and mounting
bases from B&C. Alternatively, a MAXI fuse holder from
the O'Rileys or some other parts store would do too.
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuse_Holders/MaxiFuse_Holder.jpg
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuses/maxi.gif
They can supply the fuse too. Use a 60A. Tie the
fuseholder onto the fat wire that feeds your starter
contactor and tie b-lead power into the system at
the starter contactor.
> The alternator field fuse that has blown several times I rechecked and
> is 15 amps. Does the "nuisance trip" scenario you speak of manifest as
> blowing the 15 amp fuse?
Yes. I dug back into the archives and found that
Z-1 suggested the 15A fuse protected feeder from
the fuseblock that was followed downstream by a
5A breaker on the panel. Later drawings suggested
a much more robust protection of the alternator field
breaker feed in the form of a fusible link . . . see
Z-11.
For your purposes now, replace the 15A fuse with
a 30A fuse. This will probably transfer the trip to
the breaker instead of the fuse. It seems likely that
the LR3 is seeing something that irritates it's ov
protection sensing.
The original design observed all the recommendations
for noise immunity but when we started installing this
system in the Bonanzas, one of the test pilots found that
if he turned both landing and taxi lights on at the same
time, he could trip the standby alternator ov system.
The noises generated by this event were pretty spectacular.
Inrush currents from two large lamps through the very bouncy
contacts of W31 breaker-switches put some really ugly
transients onto the bus. It was doubtful that anyone would
DO that thing but it wasn't difficult to modify the
circuit to ignore this stimulus. We modified the circuit
and have experienced no difficulties (that I'm aware of)
since.
>What else would you like to know and what do you think? Thank you. JBB
Call B&C at 316-283-8000 and see if they're interested
in updating your LR-3 with respect to noise immunity.
If push comes to shove, I can modify it for you but
let's see what they say first.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Finch" <rgf(at)dcn.davis.ca.us> |
I use Ideal 45-097:
http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?9X358218%20#45-097
The wire stop can be handy for multiple strips you want of the same length,
it's quickly removable, and only $7:
http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?9X358218%20#L-5270
The 45-097 uses replaceable dies which come in different wire sizes.
Not sure what you mean by 'recommendations for Molex 0.062" contacts'. I
bought a collection of Molex connectors recently at Frys.
Ralph Finch
RV-9A QB
Davis, CA
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Page
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 10:38 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Crimpers
Searching through the archives, the comment made was that the best
stripper is the Ideal 45-187, which naturally is discontinued.
Looking through their catalog shows a wide variety of apparently almost
identical strippers.
The 45-177 seems quite similar, but is missing the short stop latch and wire
stop. How useful are those features ? Should I be looking for a 45-187 in
the marketplace anyway ?
Non of the the strippers seem to handle the range of wire that is used in
aircraft. Do I need to buy two strippers to handle 10-14 gauge and another
for 16-26, or can I just swap blades (how much of a pain is that ??) ?
What about the "Lite" strippers, smaller and easier to squeeze sounds great.
What is the downside ?
Additionally, I was unable to find any recommendations for Molex 0.062"
contacts. How about the Sargent 3133-CT ?
Thanks !
Jeff Page
Dream Aircraft Tundra #10
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
>
>Is there a source for these batteries in an 8ah rating that does not have
>the fast-on tabs, such as those used on wheelchairs? The smallest I've
>found with bolt-on terminals is 17ah.
>
>Thx,
>Bradley
The field of choices drops rapidly when you go below
17 a.h. Few manufacturers of smaller batteries are
interested in the applications that include engine
cranking. Concorde used to have a smaller battery
with machine screw threaded brass terminals but I think
they've discontinued it.
B&C offers a 12 a.h. with fat-wire connections . . .
http://www.bandc.biz/BC103-1.pdf
I believe this is the Odyssey PC545
http://www.odysseybatteries.com/battery/pc545series.htm
aa56ea1.jpg
which has a 14 a.h. capacity at the 20 hr rate.
There is one smaller. The PC310 has fat-wire terminals
(4mm) and capable of cranking engines.
You can get the technical manual for the PC series
batteries at:
http://aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Batteries/Enersys_Hawker/Odyssey_PC_Series_TM.pdf
You'll note that the 310 is less than half the battery
than the popular PC625.
What are your requirements for capacity? Have you
done an energy study for battery-only endurance?
The 310 is not cheap and it's fragile compared to it's
larger siblings.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
>
>Searching through the archives, the comment made was that the best
>stripper is the Ideal 45-187, which naturally is discontinued.
>Looking through their catalog shows a wide variety of apparently
>almost identical strippers.
>
>The 45-177 seems quite similar, but is missing the short stop latch
>and wire stop. How useful are those features ? Should I be looking
>for a 45-187 in the marketplace anyway ?
No, the 177 is fine. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Tools/Ideal_Stripmaster/stripmaster.pdf
I've had stops on my strippers over the years . . . took 'em
of and pitched 'em. Not particularly useful at least to me.
>Non of the the strippers seem to handle the range of wire that is used
>in aircraft. Do I need to buy two strippers to handle 10-14 gauge and
>another for 16-26, or can I just swap blades (how much of a pain is
>that ??) ?
You DON'T want to disassemble these for the purpose
of stripping a few large wires. Get the 45-177. Review
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/strippers/strippers.html
and do something else for the very few numbers of larger
wires you need to strip.
>What about the "Lite" strippers, smaller and easier to squeeze sounds
>great. What is the downside ?
They're fine.
>Additionally, I was unable to find any recommendations for Molex
>0.062" contacts. How about the Sargent 3133-CT ?
Molex catalogs cite a low-cost tool HT
B&C offers an open-barrel crimp tool BCT-1 thata
will install the .062, .093 and similar pins from
all suppliers of the open-barrel pin product.
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/matenlok/matenlok.html
Don't buy a 45-177 yet. I'm negotiating for a bucket
full of industrial surplus tools that includes a
quantity of 4-quadrant crimp tools and Idea strippers
with Tefzel dies in them. They will be offered from
my website for a whole lot less than new.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
Search the Dekka line. Same thing as Odysey with bolt on terminials 8 AH.
Ken
Beemer wrote:
>
> Is there a source for these batteries in an 8ah rating that does not have the
fast-on tabs, such as those used on wheelchairs? The smallest I've found with
bolt-on terminals is 17ah.
>
> Thx,
> Bradley
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ROGER & JEAN CURTIS" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net> |
-----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, August 27, 2008 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Crimpers
>
>Searching through the archives, the comment made was that the best
>stripper is the Ideal 45-187, which naturally is discontinued.
>Looking through their catalog shows a wide variety of apparently
>almost identical strippers.
>
>The 45-177 seems quite similar, but is missing the short stop latch
>and wire stop. How useful are those features ? Should I be looking
>for a 45-187 in the marketplace anyway ?
No, the 177 is fine. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Tools/Ideal_Stripmaster/stripmaster
.pd
f
I've had stops on my strippers over the years . . . took 'em
of and pitched 'em. Not particularly useful at least to me.
>Non of the the strippers seem to handle the range of wire that is used
>in aircraft. Do I need to buy two strippers to handle 10-14 gauge and
>another for 16-26, or can I just swap blades (how much of a pain is
>that ??) ?
You DON'T want to disassemble these for the purpose
of stripping a few large wires. Get the 45-177. Review
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/strippers/strippers.html
and do something else for the very few numbers of larger
wires you need to strip.
>What about the "Lite" strippers, smaller and easier to squeeze sounds
>great. What is the downside ?
They're fine.
>Additionally, I was unable to find any recommendations for Molex
>0.062" contacts. How about the Sargent 3133-CT ?
Molex catalogs cite a low-cost tool HT
B&C offers an open-barrel crimp tool BCT-1 thata
will install the .062, .093 and similar pins from
all suppliers of the open-barrel pin product.
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/matenlok/matenlok.html
Don't buy a 45-177 yet. I'm negotiating for a bucket
full of industrial surplus tools that includes a
quantity of 4-quadrant crimp tools and Idea strippers
with Tefzel dies in them. They will be offered from
my website for a whole lot less than new.
Bob . . .
I have a CSA 0760. This is a ratchet type and is good for 22 - 10 AWG
wire.
Mine are old and have the manufacturer name Crimpcx. The current name
on
the internet is Pressmaster, appears to be exactly the same as the ones
I
have. These work very well, and the crimp pressure ratchet can be
adjusted
for proper crimp.
Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Voltage dropping resistor calculations |
Okay guys take it esy on the electrically ignorant. I have a Lowrance 2000C
GPS in my trike that just eats batteries. I get about an hour from 4 new
AA's. It was no problem when I was only flying that long one way, I'd just
carry four spares in my pocket and change them out before starting home.
When I started going further afield I decided to use one of the open slots
on the fuse panel and power it from ship's power instead. Since I had the
lighter cord that came with the GPS but no lighter recepticle on the trike,
I cut off the lighter plug, put on a couple of fastons on the ends of the
wires and was FD & H for the last year. I should add that I was smart enough
to look at the innards of the plug just to make sure there wasn't anything
inside that looked critical to powering the unit. There was one small
resistor, but it seemed to me it was for the LED and not the GPS. It was
while going through the manual some thirty hours since making the change to
onboard power that I began to worry there is no universal power adapter
built into the GPS. I fear that I may be pumping 12V into a 6V power supply.
This morning I pulled the + wire at the fuse panel and measured the current
draw at just slightly under .6 amps. If I understand Ohm's law, and there's
some doubt in my mind about that, I need a 10 ohm resistor to drop the
voltage, so a stop at Rat Shack was in order. I now have a pair of 10 ohm 1
watt resistors, and two questions.
Did I do the math correctly? Am I worrying about nothing? Seems to me the
GPS runs through the lighter cord just fine on 12 volts, but I sure would
hate to damage it by being stupid.
Thanks,
Rick Girard
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
>
>Search the Dekka line. Same thing as Odysey with bolt on terminials 8 AH.
>Ken
Do you have a specific part number for Deka? While looking
for them I found this "Power Star" product on Ebay
bb99768.jpg
It's a 9 a.h. device, probably at the 20hour rate. This makes
it a 4.5 a.h. battery for powering an e-bus for 3 hours . . .
i.e, about 1.5A ebus. Size is L = 5.91 x W = 3.39 H = 4.21
A 9 a.h. battery would weigh in at about 7-8 pounds.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Voltage dropping resistor calculations |
| From: | jon(at)finleyweb.net |
=0AFear not Rick, you are ok. I too have the 2000c wired directly into my
12V bus. I don't remember the exact specs but the unit is very tolerant of
voltage. Seems like it was anything from 6 to 24 volts (or something like
that - check the documentation to confirm).=0A=0A =0A=0AAlso, if you insta
ll a resistor, the 2000c's voltage display will no longer represent what is
on the ship's bus. This is not my primary voltage display but it is a nic
e backup.=0A=0A =0A=0AJon=0A=0A-----Original Message-----=0AFrom: "Richard
Girard" =0ASent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 2:33pm=0AT
o: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com=0ASubject: AeroElectric-List: Voltage dr
opping resistor calculations=0A=0A=0A=0AOkay guys take it esy on the electr
ically ignorant. I have a Lowrance 2000C GPS in my trike that just eats bat
teries. I get about an hour from 4 new AA's. It was no problem when I was o
nly flying that long one way, I'd just carry four spares in my pocket and c
hange them out before starting home. When I started going further afield I
decided to use one of the open slots on the fuse panel and power it from sh
ip's power instead. Since I had the lighter cord that came with the GPS but
no lighter recepticle on the trike, I cut off the lighter plug, put on a c
ouple of fastons on the ends of the wires and was FD & H for the last year.
I should add that I was smart enough to look at the innards of the plug ju
st to make sure there wasn't anything inside that looked critical to poweri
ng the unit. There was one small resistor, but it seemed to me it was for t
he LED and not the GPS. It was while going through the manual some thirty h
ours since making the change to onboard power that I began to worry there i
s no universal power adapter built into the GPS. I fear that I may be pumpi
ng 12V into a 6V power supply.=0AThis morning I pulled the + wire at the fu
se panel and measured the current draw at just slightly under .6 amps. If I
understand Ohm's law, and there's some doubt in my mind about that, I need
a 10 ohm resistor to drop the voltage, so a stop at Rat Shack was in order
. I now have a pair of 10 ohm 1 watt resistors, and two questions.=0ADid I
do the math correctly? Am I worrying about nothing? Seems to me the GPS run
s through the lighter cord just fine on 12 volts, but I sure would hate to
damage it by being stupid.=0A=0AThanks,=0ARick Girard=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Voltage dropping resistor calculations |
>Okay guys take it esy on the electrically ignorant. I have a Lowrance
>2000C GPS in my trike that just eats batteries. I get about an hour from 4
>new AA's. It was no problem when I was only flying that long one way, I'd
>just carry four spares in my pocket and change them out before starting
>home. When I started going further afield I decided to use one of the open
>slots on the fuse panel and power it from ship's power instead. Since I
>had the lighter cord that came with the GPS but no lighter recepticle on
>the trike, I cut off the lighter plug, put on a couple of fastons on the
>ends of the wires and was FD & H for the last year. I should add that I
>was smart enough to look at the innards of the plug just to make sure
>there wasn't anything inside that looked critical to powering the unit.
>There was one small resistor, but it seemed to me it was for the LED and
>not the GPS. It was while going through the manual some thirty hours since
>making the change to onboard power that I began to worry there is no
>universal power adapter built into the GPS. I fear that I may be pumping
>12V into a 6V power supply.
>This morning I pulled the + wire at the fuse panel and measured the
>current draw at just slightly under .6 amps. If I understand Ohm's law,
>and there's some doubt in my mind about that, I need a 10 ohm resistor to
>drop the voltage, so a stop at Rat Shack was in order. I now have a pair
>of 10 ohm 1 watt resistors, and two questions.
>Did I do the math correctly? Am I worrying about nothing? Seems to me the
>GPS runs through the lighter cord just fine on 12 volts, but I sure would
>hate to damage it by being stupid.
Hmmmm . . . if this was the cord supplied with the
unit, it seems that it SHOULD run on 12v . . . however,
the manual I found at:
http://www.lowrance.com/upload/Lowrance/Documents/Manuals/airMap2000c_0148-471_080504.pdf
page 11 says it runs on 6v using an external power cord
with cigar lighter adapter. This implies to me that the
power cord has a 14v to 6v down converter.
Recommend you do not use a resistor . . . too much
voltage variation with respect to current draw. Further,
the resistor would dissipate .6 at 6 to 8 volts for
a maximum of 5w . . . pretty warm for your 1 watt
devices. Better to craft a voltage regulator that
is not unlike the little variable dimmer supplies
we used to offer . . . and B&C still does. You can
get the parts at RS and wire like:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Dimmers/9013_Ins.pdf
In this case, you would replace the 910 ohm resistor
with a 1500 ohm resistor and just run it to ground
instead of taking it off the board to a control pot.
We'll be offering a filtered, regulated, step-down
supply that's jumper selectable for 9, 7.5, 6, 4.5 and
3 volts. If you're not in a big hurry, you can have
the proof-of-concept model. Probably late next week.
It's 2.1 x 2.1 inches footprint an looks like this
critter . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9006/9006-800-2.jpg
except that it will have metal mounting base and
a small array of jumper pins on top to select one
of 5 operating voltages.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dry Cell Batteries? |
Mine are ETX9 Dekka Power Sports batteries. As mentioned before one will
start my subaru fine but they normally auto parallel for cranking on my
bird as per Z-14. The cables bolt onto the top or the side of the
battery which is convenient. Next size up is the ETX12 at about the same
price. Made in USA.
Ken
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>>
>> Search the Dekka line. Same thing as Odysey with bolt on terminials 8 AH.
>> Ken
>
> Do you have a specific part number for Deka? While looking
> for them I found this "Power Star" product on Ebay
>
> bb99768.jpg
>
>
> It's a 9 a.h. device, probably at the 20hour rate. This makes
> it a 4.5 a.h. battery for powering an e-bus for 3 hours . . .
> i.e, about 1.5A ebus. Size is L = 5.91 x W = 3.39 H = 4.21
>
> *Truncated!*
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *This message exceeded the Maximum Message Size set in Account Settings,
> so we have only downloaded the first few lines from the mail server.*
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Voltage dropping resistor calculations |
I think Jon is right and you are fine. If there was any kind of voltage
dropping in the plug it would get noticeably warm like my cell phone
plug and I've never noticed the 2000c plug to get warm. And as mentioned
the 2000c will display the correct system voltage of 14.3 when I look.
Also notice that the display dims noticeably on 6v battery power
compared to using 12 volts and I believe the manual says that is normal.
The only batteries worth putting in my unit are 2000mah or larger NiMh.
Alkaline life seems to be measured in minutes. The black and white
model is much more battery friendly.
Ken
jon(at)finleyweb.net wrote:
> Fear not Rick, you are ok. I too have the 2000c wired directly into my
> 12V bus. I don't remember the exact specs but the unit is very tolerant
> of voltage. Seems like it was anything from 6 to 24 volts (or something
> like that - check the documentation to confirm).
>
> Also, if you install a resistor, the 2000c's voltage display will no
> longer represent what is on the ship's bus. This is not my primary
> voltage display but it is a nice backup.
>
> Jon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Richard Girard" <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 2:33pm
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Voltage dropping resistor calculations
>
> Okay guys take it esy on the electrically ignorant. I have a Lowrance
> 2000C GPS in my trike that just eats batteries. I get about an hour from
> 4 new AA's. It was no problem when I was only flying that long one way,
> I'd just carry four spares in my pocket and change them out before
> starting home. When I started going further afield I decided to use one
> of the open slots on the fuse panel and power it from ship's power
> instead. Since I had the lighter cord that came with the GPS but no
> lighter recepticle on the trike, I cut off the lighter plug, put on a
> couple of fastons on the ends of the wires and was FD & H for the last
> year. I should add that I was smart enough to look at the innards of the
> plug just to make sure there wasn't anything inside that looked critical
> to powering the unit. There was one small resistor, but it seemed to me
> it was for the LED and not the GPS. It was while going through the
> manual some thirty hours since making the change to onboard power that I
> began to worry there is no universal power adapter built into the GPS. I
> fear that I may be pumping 12V into a 6V power supply.
> This morning I pulled the + wire at the fuse panel and measured the
> current draw at just slightly under .6 amps. If I understand Ohm's law,
> and there's some doubt in my mind about that, I need a 10 ohm resistor
> to drop the voltage, so a stop at Rat Shack was in order. I now have a
> pair of 10 ohm 1 watt resistors, and two questions.
> Did I do the math correctly? Am I worrying about nothing? Seems to me
> the GPS runs through the lighter cord just fine on 12 volts, but I sure
> would hate to damage it by being stupid.
>
> Thanks,
> Rick Girard
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Henry Trzeciakowski" <hammer408(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push-to-Test Lamp |
Bob:
I've purchased 2 Push-to-Test Lamps: MS25041 (amber) for my Low Voltage
Warning Lamp and another one (blue) for Low Oil Pressure. The lamps have3
tabs, numbered 1-2-3 and I'm trying to determine how to wire this lamp:
which is ground, hot and common....
Any help or suggestions appreciated.
Henry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Ledbetter <bledbetter(at)hughes.net> |
Bob..
Looks like that link to for the 177 data should be
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Tools/Ideal_Stripmaster/Stripmaster.pdf
v. the ... /stripmaster.pdf
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Searching through the archives, the comment made was that the best
>> stripper is the Ideal 45-187, which naturally is discontinued.
>> Looking through their catalog shows a wide variety of apparently
>> almost identical strippers.
>>
>> The 45-177 seems quite similar, but is missing the short stop latch
>> and wire stop. How useful are those features ? Should I be looking
>> for a 45-187 in the marketplace anyway ?
>
> No, the 177 is fine. See:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Tools/Ideal_Stripmaster/stripmaster.pdf
>
>
> I've had stops on my strippers over the years . . . took 'em
> of and pitched 'em. Not particularly useful at least to me.
>
>> Non of the the strippers seem to handle the range of wire that is used
>> in aircraft. Do I need to buy two strippers to handle 10-14 gauge and
>> another for 16-26, or can I just swap blades (how much of a pain is
>> that ??) ?
>
> You DON'T want to disassemble these for the purpose
> of stripping a few large wires. Get the 45-177. Review
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/strippers/strippers.html
>
> and do something else for the very few numbers of larger
> wires you need to strip.
>
>
>> What about the "Lite" strippers, smaller and easier to squeeze sounds
>> great. What is the downside ?
>
> They're fine.
>
>> Additionally, I was unable to find any recommendations for Molex
>> 0.062" contacts. How about the Sargent 3133-CT ?
>
> Molex catalogs cite a low-cost tool HT
>
> B&C offers an open-barrel crimp tool BCT-1 thata
> will install the .062, .093 and similar pins from
> all suppliers of the open-barrel pin product.
>
> See:
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/matenlok/matenlok.html
>
> Don't buy a 45-177 yet. I'm negotiating for a bucket
> full of industrial surplus tools that includes a
> quantity of 4-quadrant crimp tools and Idea strippers
> with Tefzel dies in them. They will be offered from
> my website for a whole lot less than new.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Curry" <currydon(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push-to-Test Lamp |
I'm not Bob, but if I may, I'd like to provide at least a cursory
answer. I
just installed a pair of these lights (made by Dialight) in my aircraft
and
here's how we did it (the attached document is from Dialight and should
bear
this out). There are two hot terminals and one ground terminal. One of
the
hot terminals is for a switched input, so when the condition you are
trying
to alert yourself to (e.g., low oil pressure) occurs, the switch is
closed
on that wire, the circuit is completed, and the light lights. The other
hot
terminal is unswitched and is for the push-to-test feature; it allows
the
light to light when the lens is pressed even when the condition doesn't
exist. I believe it is the center terminal that is the ground. Hope
this
helps. Don
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-
> server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Henry Trzeciakowski
> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:58 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Push-to-Test Lamp
>
>
>
> Bob:
>
> I've purchased 2 Push-to-Test Lamps: MS25041 (amber) for my Low
Voltage
> Warning Lamp and another one (blue) for Low Oil Pressure. The lamps
have3
> tabs, numbered 1-2-3 and I'm trying to determine how to wire this
lamp:
> which is ground, hot and common....
>
> Any help or suggestions appreciated.
>
> Henry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
August 09, 2008 - August 27, 2008
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ib