AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-im
February 16, 2009 - March 10, 2009
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob-tcw" <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: System Objectives |
Chase,
Our IPS system is done and fully compatable with the Garmin series of
products. We are now in the process of preparing the documentation
including updated instructions sheets and application notes showing the
installation of various Garmin products being powered through an IPS system.
Both IPS products are in stock.
Best regards,
Bob Newman
TCW Technologies, LLC.
----- Original Message -----
From: "westexflyboy" <airplanedriver(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 9:46 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: System Objectives
>
>
>
> rnewman(at)tcwtech.com wrote:
>> we are presently working together on
>> the wiring diagrams for use of IPS products with the Garmin 900x &
>> 530/430 series of products.
>
>
> Bob, are you saying the ICP is ready for Garmin transceivers as is, or are
> you working on a modified version?
>
> --------
> Chase Snodgrass
> Presidio, Texas
> www.flybigbend.com
> Simultaneous RV-10 twins under construction
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=230491#230491
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ROGER & JEAN CURTIS" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Fuse or Current Limiter on SeaRey amphib? |
A friend of mine, who is not on the list and built a SeaRey amphibian,
wanted me to ask the following question.
"Reference Figure Z-15, Ground Systems (Sheet 1/2), Rev K, 04/20/05 -
Why no
fuse or current limiter at the battery terminal or battery contactor to
protect the 2AWG wire from a dead short along the distance back to the
engine/alternator on a pusher/seaplane? (In his case that distance is
15'.)
Thanks,
Ken Firestone
This has been discussed on several occasions on this list.
You
can search the archives.
It has always been common practice for TC and experimental
aircraft
to not fuse the Fat Wires. If reasonable care is taken to install them
correctly, then the risk is exceedingly low.
Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "marcausman" <marc(at)verticalpower.com> |
Well, first let me say the VP systems do a lot more than just replace switches
and breakers. The more advanced the system, the "more" it does. In a nutshell,
you get more electrical system features for simpler wiring. Lots of details on
our web site so I won't go into it here.
As far as backups, there are multiple levels of backups built into the system.
Your backup strategy depends on your mission. A basic VFR aircraft really doesn't
need backups, especially if you carry a hand held radio and have an EFIS with
backup battery.
However, more advanced aircraft usually incorporate multiple attitude sources,
multiple radios, etc. Redundancy or backups in the core electrical system is no
different.
We always recommend to customers to install backups for CRITICAL systems (typically
EFIS/attitude source, but is determined by the builder) so the pilot can
continue safely while in flight. The backup may be an internal battery, or it
may be a backup circuit wired directly to the battery bus. This methodology has
the VP system as the primary switching system, and a separate and different
system to provide backup power to critical avionics. A example for comparison
might be having your EFIS as the primary attitude source, and an electric gyro
as a backup. This is very common and accepted practice and is the same for the
VP system.
--------
Marc Ausman
http://www.verticalpower.com
RV-7 IO-390 Flying
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=230541#230541
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fuse or Current Limiter on SeaRey amphib? |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
It's not clear from the description of the SeaRay's architecture, but it
sounds similar to many production (and owner-built) airplanes. My 182 has
its battery located behind the baggage compartment. The contactor is
mounted to the battery box, and then there's a long run of heavy gauge
wire to the starter contactor and other buses near the front of the
airplane.
The rationale is that the contactor provides protection for that wire. If
you smell smoke, you turn off the master - de-energizing the heavy wire.
It's exceedingly unlikely on any single flight that you'd lose control of
the contactor (not being able to make its output cold), _and_ have a hard
fault on the heavy cable.
Matt-
>
>
> A friend of mine, who is not on the list and built a SeaRey amphibian,
> wanted me to ask the following question.
>
>
> "Reference Figure Z-15, Ground Systems (Sheet 1/2), Rev K, 04/20/05 - Why
> no
> fuse or current limiter at the battery terminal or battery contactor to
> protect the 2AWG wire from a dead short along the distance back to the
> engine/alternator on a pusher/seaplane? (In his case that distance is
> 15'.)
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Ken Firestone
>
>
> This has been discussed on several occasions on this list. You
> can search the archives.
>
>
> It has always been common practice for TC and experimental
> aircraft
> to not fuse the Fat Wires. If reasonable care is taken to install them
> correctly, then the risk is exceedingly low.
>
>
> Roger
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "marcausman" <marc(at)verticalpower.com> |
cjay wrote:
> I think a lot of people are going to be cautious for awhile because everthing
flows through a self contained box. This simplifies design and installation;
but a bit of faith is required until people start getting comfortable with the
concept. I think they've got a good track record so far.
>
> cjay
We get a lot of calls from people who think there should be no single points of
failure anywhere on the aircraft. Actually, there are many single points of failure
that will keep you from flying or make you want to land the plane soon
(the engine being the most obvious).
>From the point of view of your example, the VP is no different than the graphical
engine monitors that everyone installs today. If it fails, you are not going
flying. You don't just lose one instrument, like you did with steam gages,
you lose them all. But the reduced weight, simplified installation, better alarming,
higher reliability etc. make that a compelling trade-off and people elect
to go with the newer digital systems.
The VP is better in this regard, in that you CAN wire up backups to maintain safety
in case of failure.
So, would you go flying if any of these failed on the ground:
- graphical engine monitor
- flap motor stuck down
- single magneto or EI
- prop governor
- brake system
- starter contactor
- battery contacator
- starter motor
Do you have backups for ANY of these installed in the plane?
Just some things to ponder when thinking about new technology. :D These bridges
have been crossed before and you decide whether steam gages/VORs or EFIS/GPS/graphical
engine monitors/Vertical Power is the way to go.
--------
Marc Ausman
http://www.verticalpower.com
RV-7 IO-390 Flying
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=230544#230544
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe Dubner <jdubner(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Old transponder interface details |
Etienne,
The transponder inputs are TTL logic levels with inverted polarity
(active low). The converter should use open collector outputs as all
encoders do AFAIK but I don't see any problem using active outputs
unless you intend to parallel additional encoders.
I built a similar converter some years ago and you may find something it
it that is helpful.
http://www.mail2600.com/EncoderConverter/EncoderConverter.html
Best,
Joe
Independence, OR
Aircraft Position: http://www.mail2600.com/position
Aircraft Last Track: http://www.mail2600.com/track
Etienne Phillips wrote:
>
>
> Hi All
>
> I'm building a converter from the serial protocol used by Garmin to the
> old Gilham encoding used by the older transponders. I'm lacking detail
> on the voltages used to send a transponder the encoded altitude. I'm
> using a old Narco AT 150 TSO... The binary values for each pin is pretty
> much done, so I'm looking for the electrical details now.
>
> Can anyone help me out?
>
> Thanks
> Etienne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul McAllister <l_luv2_fly(at)yahoo.com> |
Hi Jim,
No doubt by now you have seen a number of posts about the advantage of dual
path ways that the eBuss configuration offers.- As you probably recall I
took a lightening hit in my Europa, and among the many electrical things t
hat died in the next few milliseconds was the main contactor.
I can't can't tell you how happy I was when I reached over to that eBuss sw
itch, turned it on and a few essential things sprung into life.
Cheers,- Paul
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: System Objectives |
At 12:01 AM 2/16/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>I have three desired objectives for my RV-10's with dual electronic ignition:
>
>1. Reliability
>2. Low pilot workload to manage failures
>3. Ability to use radios and EFIS prior to starting the engine (and
>leave them on during engine start)
>
>Z-14 architecture appears to meet objectives one and two. Z-14
>might meet the third objective if I use the main battery to start
>the engine, the aux battery to power the radios and displays, and I
>start the engine with the crossfeed contactor open.
>
>Perhaps operating instructions for Z-14 would help - Where can I find those?
Consider Z-13/8 with an aux battery added per
Z-30 or Z-35 (leaving aux battery contactor open
during cranking).
Alternatively, you can do Z-10/8 (Z-13/8 with
brown-out protection battery). All these architectures
are shown in Appendix Z, Revision 12A to the 'Connection
found at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Rev12A/AppZ_Rev12A.pdf
Someplace in the piles of things-to-do or in-
process is a set of checklists for all the Z-Figures.
I'll see if I can find it an perhaps finish it up.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Old transponder interface details |
| From: | Etienne Phillips <etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com> |
That is most useful. Thanks very much!
2009/2/16 Joe Dubner
>
> Etienne,
>
> The transponder inputs are TTL logic levels with inverted polarity (active
> low). The converter should use open collector outputs as all encoders do
> AFAIK but I don't see any problem using active outputs unless you intend to
> parallel additional encoders.
>
> I built a similar converter some years ago and you may find something it it
> that is helpful.
> http://www.mail2600.com/EncoderConverter/EncoderConverter.html
>
> Best,
> Joe
> Independence, OR
> Aircraft Position: http://www.mail2600.com/position
> Aircraft Last Track: http://www.mail2600.com/track
>
>
> Etienne Phillips wrote:
>
>> etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com>
>>
>> Hi All
>>
>> I'm building a converter from the serial protocol used by Garmin to the
>> old Gilham encoding used by the older transponders. I'm lacking detail on
>> the voltages used to send a transponder the encoded altitude. I'm using a
>> old Narco AT 150 TSO... The binary values for each pin is pretty much done,
>> so I'm looking for the electrical details now.
>>
>> Can anyone help me out?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Etienne
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cjay" <cgfinney(at)yahoo.com> |
marcausman wrote:
> Well, first let me say the VP systems do a lot more than just replace switches
and breakers. The more advanced the system, the "more" it does. In a nutshell,
you get more electrical system features for simpler wiring. Lots of details
on our web site so I won't go into it here.
>
> As far as backups, there are multiple levels of backups built into the system.
Your backup strategy depends on your mission. A basic VFR aircraft really doesn't
need backups, especially if you carry a hand held radio and have an EFIS
with backup battery.
>
> However, more advanced aircraft usually incorporate multiple attitude sources,
multiple radios, etc. Redundancy or backups in the core electrical system is
no different.
>
> We always recommend to customers to install backups for CRITICAL systems (typically
EFIS/attitude source, but is determined by the builder) so the pilot can
continue safely while in flight. The backup may be an internal battery, or it
may be a backup circuit wired directly to the battery bus. This methodology
has the VP system as the primary switching system, and a separate and different
system to provide backup power to critical avionics. A example for comparison
might be having your EFIS as the primary attitude source, and an electric gyro
as a backup. This is very common and accepted practice and is the same for
the VP system.
Marc,
I didn't mean to undervalue VP, I was trying to put it in perspective. At least
at its core it is the solid state devices, but certainly one of your big advantages
is once you've gone digital, you've got a vast new potential in software
control. Now we get to set our switches and breaker settings like programming
our VCR... well maybe that's not a good analogy, I still can't figure how
do do mine right...
cjay
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=230628#230628
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul McAllister <l_luv2_fly(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | LED Strobes & FAR Requirements |
Hi all,
I noticed a lot of manufacturers offering LED Strobes at Airventure last ye
ar.
I was wondering how do I determine if the light output meets or exceeds a T
SP'd Xenon strobe.- I seem to recall that there was a minimum requirement
stated in Joules, but I can't be sure.
Does anyone know how I could go about making such a comparison ?
Thanks,- Paul
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | aux battery and diode alternative? |
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
Bob:
My RV-7A is wired per Z-13/8 and I want to modify it to avoid EFIS brow
nout
during starting. I have reviewed Z-35 and Z-10/8, but Z-35 adds a swit
ch
to my panel that I would like to avoid, and Z-10/8 appears to add
complexity/parts count with two relays and two fuses along the alterna
te
feed path from the battery bus to the ebus. If all I need to do is kee
p a
single EFIS screen on during start up, cant I simplify things by just
connecting the aux battery to the EFIS and keep it charged by having an
additional connection from either the main bus or battery bus with a di
ode
to prevent discharge during starting? Im probably missing something, b
ut
doesnt seem like I am gaining anything by the addition of relays.
thanks
Erich
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: System Objectives |
| From: | "westexflyboy" <airplanedriver(at)gmail.com> |
We're planning to use dual LSE Plasma III's and all glass panels, which is why
we're leaning toward Z-14. Best I can tell P-mags are not available for the
six cylinder Lycoming. (?)
I see my options as follows: install a small battery behind the panel strictly
for pre-start ops, or install the IPS device suggested by Bob Newman.
Bob, I am eager to see those checklists.
--------
Chase Snodgrass
Presidio, Texas
www.flybigbend.com
Simultaneous RV-10 twins under construction
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=230708#230708
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MICHAEL LARKIN <mlas(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: System Objectives |
Chase,
I run a dual LSE Plasma III and have an all glass panel. I too used a
version of the Z-14 . It's good news that the P-mags are not
available for the 6's, they suck. I just got my 11th P-mag failure in
the field. The out come was good. Plane OK, pilot ok. Engine not so
ok. Timing runaway, CHT's over 600 deg for aprox. 5 minutes on what
was a new engine (not anymore). The pilot had problems with isolating
the mags because of a faulty key switch and was forced to land. I
have seen enough failures to say no to anyone who wants to use this
product, it could cost you your life. I know I'll here the blind
followers that will follow the company and its product into the dirt,
but I care about saving life. Most builders don't understand the
implications of an extremely advanced timing point. It would be
better if the ignition system would just shut off. When the timing go
out of range to the advanced side, it's a single point failure! If
you have your head about you, you may be able to isolate the problem
and secure the faulted system. If you don't you may end up landing
out. Like my last failure, it may be dark. Fortunately he had an
airport nearby. The funny part (sarcasm), this pilot has seen several
failures with his P-mags and has fallen into the trap of just changing
them out. Sooner or later you run out of rope and fate becomes the
hunter. If he chooses to stay with the product one has to wonder what
will happen next. Good luck to all you P-mag drivers, may fate be
your friend.
I know I got a bit off point, but I have taken so much grief from the
P-mag Gestapo that I had to say something.
Back on point, you may find that the second battery will be helpful
for battery starts with fuel injection systems on hot summer days.
Especially if you have dual electronic ignitions installed.
Mike Larkin
Larkin Aviation Consulting
On Feb 17, 2009, at 11:38 AM, westexflyboy wrote:
> >
>
> We're planning to use dual LSE Plasma III's and all glass panels,
> which is why we're leaning toward Z-14. Best I can tell P-mags are
> not available for the six cylinder Lycoming. (?)
>
> I see my options as follows: install a small battery behind the
> panel strictly for pre-start ops, or install the IPS device
> suggested by Bob Newman.
>
> Bob, I am eager to see those checklists.
>
> --------
> Chase Snodgrass
> Presidio, Texas
> www.flybigbend.com
> Simultaneous RV-10 twins under construction
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=230708#230708
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Figure Z-10/8 compared to Z-11 + Aux Battery and Diode |
Bridge Rectifier
| From: | Paul Eckenroth <N509RV(at)eckenroth.com> |
I had previously written asking for advice on trouble shooting my system
which is based on Z-11 with the addition of a aux battery to prevent brown
out during engine starts.
"I have a RV9A wired as per Z-11 with a 7A aux battery as an EFIS keep alive
during start. Lately the EFIS has been graying out during engine start
which implies that the aux battery is being tapped for other than the
electronics during engine start.
The batteries are isolated using two diode bridge rectifiers from B&C. The
E bus which feed the EFIS and other electronics gets it's power from the
main bus through one of the bridge rectifiers. Both of the batteries power
the main bus through individual contactors. The E bus is also powered
through the second bridge rectifier by both batteries direct and then
controlled by the E buss switch. Normal start is main battery contactor on,
aux battery contactor off, and E bus switch on. This should isolate the aux
battery to the E bus until the aux battery contactor is turned on after
engine start.
I have checked both diode assemblies to see that they are allowing current
to flow in the correct direction and they are not allowing backfeed.
Everything
checks out properly using the voltmeter. However it seems to me that the
problem must lie with the diodes since they are the only link between the
batteries with the aux battery contactor off. Can a diode function
correctly under low load conditions and then temporarily break down under
start conditions."
The replies to my questions were that the diode cannot sometimes fail and is
the aux battery fully charged. This did not solve my problem. I discussed
my schematic with an EE friend who thought the problem was due to the 2
diodes feeding one buss and that a diode could temporarily leak back if the
voltage on the anode was a certain amount less than the voltage on the
cathode. This would be the condition with two batteries feeding the same
buss with voltage drop from the diodes. He thought that this could be enough
to sometimes brown out the EFIS. If this is true then my system design
needs to be changed.
I notice that the new Z-10/8 utilizes a brown out battery with the use of a
relay to isolate the two batteries during engine start. I can easily change
over to this schematic and will if the 2 diodes are the problem.
I know there is a lot of education and experience out there. Can my
problem be due to the design utilizing the 2 diodes.
Regards
Paul Eckenroth
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Floyd" <fwilkes(at)gvtc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Figure Z-10/8 compared to Z-11 + Aux Battery and |
Diode Bridge Rectifier
Paul,
Do you have the aux battery connected to the connected to the "external
backup power" on pin 15 or just to the keep alive on pin 2. When I only
had one battery, I would get the brown out you mention. When I added
the aux battery connected to pin 15, my problems went away.
Floyd Wilkes
601XL
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Eckenroth
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 3:07 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Figure Z-10/8 compared to Z-11 + Aux
Battery and Diode Bridge Rectifier
I had previously written asking for advice on trouble shooting my
system which is based on Z-11 with the addition of a aux battery to
prevent brown out during engine starts.
"I have a RV9A wired as per Z-11 with a 7A aux battery as an EFIS keep
alive
during start. Lately the EFIS has been graying out during engine
start which implies that the aux battery is being tapped for other than
the electronics during engine start.
The batteries are isolated using two diode bridge rectifiers from B&C.
The E bus which feed the EFIS and other electronics gets it's power
from the main bus through one of the bridge rectifiers. Both of the
batteries power the main bus through individual contactors. The E bus
is also powered through the second bridge rectifier by both batteries
direct and then controlled by the E buss switch. Normal start is main
battery contactor on, aux battery contactor off, and E bus switch on.
This should isolate the aux battery to the E bus until the aux battery
contactor is turned on after engine start.
I have checked both diode assemblies to see that they are allowing
current
to flow in the correct direction and they are not allowing backfeed.
Everything checks out properly using the voltmeter. However it seems to
me that the problem must lie with the diodes since they are the only
link between the batteries with the aux battery contactor off. Can a
diode function correctly under low load conditions and then temporarily
break down under start conditions."
The replies to my questions were that the diode cannot sometimes fail
and is the aux battery fully charged. This did not solve my problem. I
discussed my schematic with an EE friend who thought the problem was due
to the 2 diodes feeding one buss and that a diode could temporarily leak
back if the voltage on the anode was a certain amount less than the
voltage on the cathode. This would be the condition with two batteries
feeding the same buss with voltage drop from the diodes. He thought that
this could be enough to sometimes brown out the EFIS. If this is true
then my system design needs to be changed.
I notice that the new Z-10/8 utilizes a brown out battery with the use
of a relay to isolate the two batteries during engine start. I can
easily change over to this schematic and will if the 2 diodes are the
problem.
I know there is a lot of education and experience out there. Can my
problem be due to the design utilizing the 2 diodes.
Regards
Paul Eckenroth
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | DC Power Switch on Z-13/8 |
I am using Z13/8 along with Z-25 for a IR Alternator.
Behavior: When I pull the 5 amp alt breaker with my DC switch on Alt, it
completely dumps my main power bus.
Question: Is this by design? Is there a way to trip the Alt without
providing a blackout? I would prefer to shut down the main gracefully if
the alternator trips.
(this may be me...) On Z-24 the DC Switch terminal (5) leads to the
master battery contactor. As shown this did not work for me. I switched
2 & 5 as shown on Z-13 and this appeared to fix the problem. I am not
sure if this is a diagram error or I have a wire crossed?
Thanks,
Glenn
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Figure Z-10/8 compared to Z-11 + Aux Battery and |
Diode Bridge Rectifier
| From: | Paul Eckenroth <N509RV(at)eckenroth.com> |
Floyd
My aux battery is used through the E Buss. The idea being that it would add
to the endurance in addition to keeping the EFIS alive during engine start.
This was based on diodes keeping the two batteries segregated. I could go
directly to the EFIS but would then have to add a switch.
Paul
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Floyd wrote:
> Paul,
>
> Do you have the aux battery connected to the connected to the "external
> backup power" on pin 15 or just to the keep alive on pin 2. When I only had
> one battery, I would get the brown out you mention. When I added the aux
> battery connected to pin 15, my problems went away.
>
> Floyd Wilkes
> 601XL
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Paul Eckenroth
> *To:* aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 3:07 PM
> *Subject:* AeroElectric-List: Figure Z-10/8 compared to Z-11 + Aux Battery
> and Diode Bridge Rectifier
>
> I had previously written asking for advice on trouble shooting my system
> which is based on Z-11 with the addition of a aux battery to prevent brown
> out during engine starts.
>
> "I have a RV9A wired as per Z-11 with a 7A aux battery as an EFIS keep
> alive
> during start. Lately the EFIS has been graying out during engine start
> which implies that the aux battery is being tapped for other than the
> electronics during engine start.
>
> The batteries are isolated using two diode bridge rectifiers from B&C. The
> E bus which feed the EFIS and other electronics gets it's power from the
> main bus through one of the bridge rectifiers. Both of the batteries power
> the main bus through individual contactors. The E bus is also powered
> through the second bridge rectifier by both batteries direct and then
> controlled by the E buss switch. Normal start is main battery contactor on,
> aux battery contactor off, and E bus switch on. This should isolate the aux
> battery to the E bus until the aux battery contactor is turned on after
> engine start.
>
> I have checked both diode assemblies to see that they are allowing current
> to flow in the correct direction and they are not allowing backfeed. Everything
> checks out properly using the voltmeter. However it seems to me that the
> problem must lie with the diodes since they are the only link between the
> batteries with the aux battery contactor off. Can a diode function
> correctly under low load conditions and then temporarily break down under
> start conditions."
>
> The replies to my questions were that the diode cannot sometimes fail and
> is the aux battery fully charged. This did not solve my problem. I
> discussed my schematic with an EE friend who thought the problem was due to
> the 2 diodes feeding one buss and that a diode could temporarily leak back
> if the voltage on the anode was a certain amount less than the voltage on
> the cathode. This would be the condition with two batteries feeding the
> same buss with voltage drop from the diodes. He thought that this could be
> enough to sometimes brown out the EFIS. If this is true then my system
> design needs to be changed.
>
> I notice that the new Z-10/8 utilizes a brown out battery with the use of a
> relay to isolate the two batteries during engine start. I can easily
> change over to this schematic and will if the 2 diodes are the problem.
>
>
> I know there is a lot of education and experience out there. Can my
> problem be due to the design utilizing the 2 diodes.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Paul Eckenroth
>
> *
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c*
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Old transponder interface details |
| From: | Etienne Phillips <etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com> |
Hi Joe
I noticed that the encoding is somewhat different to Gray coding, despite
the terms Gilham and Gray being used interchangably in all the aviation
documentation.
offset, taking the binary value, and XOR-ing it with the same binary
right-shifted by one position. All is well for the first few values, but
after the 5th value (-800 odd), the two codes diverge, with Gray being
000000111, and Gilham being 000000100...
Do you by any chance have the method for generating Gilham code? I've spent
days looking for it on the web, but without any success! I've also tried to
distill the solution looking a the table on your website, also without any
joy.
Thanks
Etienne
2009/2/17 Etienne Phillips
> That is most useful. Thanks very much!
>
>
> 2009/2/16 Joe Dubner
>
>>
>> Etienne,
>>
>> The transponder inputs are TTL logic levels with inverted polarity (active
>> low). The converter should use open collector outputs as all encoders do
>> AFAIK but I don't see any problem using active outputs unless you intend to
>> parallel additional encoders.
>>
>> I built a similar converter some years ago and you may find something it
>> it that is helpful.
>> http://www.mail2600.com/EncoderConverter/EncoderConverter.html
>>
>> Best,
>> Joe
>> Independence, OR
>> Aircraft Position: http://www.mail2600.com/position
>> Aircraft Last Track: http://www.mail2600.com/track
>>
>>
>> Etienne Phillips wrote:
>>
>>> etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Hi All
>>>
>>> I'm building a converter from the serial protocol used by Garmin to the
>>> old Gilham encoding used by the older transponders. I'm lacking detail on
>>> the voltages used to send a transponder the encoded altitude. I'm using a
>>> old Narco AT 150 TSO... The binary values for each pin is pretty much done,
>>> so I'm looking for the electrical details now.
>>>
>>> Can anyone help me out?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Etienne
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: aux battery and diode alternative? |
| From: | "jayb" <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com> |
RV10 auto sag power circuit is attached.
Fused power from the Main bus contactor activates relay whenever main bus power
is present. Relay supplies power from small battery to desired devices.
Relay output drives GRT HX displays, one AHRS and an EIS (not shown for some reason).
Output is protected by a fusible link.
A Schottky diode is used to charge the small battery.
The relay could be eliminated in favor of a switch but this setup doesn't require
any intervention to work. If the relay were to fail the symptom would be EFIS
screens "browning out" during engine start.
Cheers,
Jay
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=230818#230818
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/rv10_sag_pwr_866.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Figure Z-10/8 compared to Z-11 + Aux Battery |
and Diode Bridge Rectifier
At 03:07 PM 2/17/2009, you wrote:
>I had previously written asking for advice on trouble shooting my
>system which is based on Z-11 with the addition of a aux battery to
>prevent brown out during engine starts.
>
>"I have a RV9A wired as per Z-11 with a 7A aux battery as an EFIS keep alive
>during start. Lately the EFIS has been graying out during engine
>start which implies that the aux battery is being tapped for other
>than the electronics during engine start.
>
>The batteries are isolated using two diode bridge rectifiers from
>B&C. The E bus which feed the EFIS and other electronics gets it's
>power from the main bus through one of the bridge rectifiers. Both
>of the batteries power the main bus through individual
>contactors. The E bus is also powered through the second bridge
>rectifier by both batteries direct and then controlled by the E buss
>switch. Normal start is main battery contactor on, aux battery
>contactor off, and E bus switch on. This should isolate the aux
>battery to the E bus until the aux battery contactor is turned on
>after engine start.
>
>I have checked both diode assemblies to see that they are allowing current
>to flow in the correct direction and they are not allowing
>backfeed. Everything checks out properly using the
>voltmeter. However it seems to me that the problem must lie with
>the diodes since they are the only link between the batteries with
>the aux battery contactor off. Can a diode function correctly under
>low load conditions and then temporarily break down under start conditions."
>
>The replies to my questions were that the diode cannot sometimes
>fail and is the aux battery fully charged. This did not solve my
>problem. I discussed my schematic with an EE friend who thought the
>problem was due to the 2 diodes feeding one buss and that a diode
>could temporarily leak back if the voltage on the anode was a
>certain amount less than the voltage on the cathode. This would be
>the condition with two batteries feeding the same buss with voltage
>drop from the diodes. He thought that this could be enough to
>sometimes brown out the EFIS. If this is true then my system
>design needs to be changed.
>
>I notice that the new Z-10/8 utilizes a brown out battery with the
>use of a relay to isolate the two batteries during engine start. I
>can easily change over to this schematic and will if the 2 diodes
>are the problem.
Are your sure the battery is good? If the
diodes are preventing back-feed to the system
during cranking -AND- EFIS supply voltage
falls anyhow, then it seems the battery is
incapable of doing it's job.
Put a voltmeter on aux battery during cranking
and note that it should not drop below 12.0
volts for a fully charge battery.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "glen matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Airworthiness Directives |
Hi All-
This article from EAA tries to clarify some of the diction that gets
crossed up and mis-applied as legalese gets translated to hangar speak.
Some of the highlights are that FAA will never issue an AD against an
Experimental aircraft. It can, and does, issue AD's against appliances etc
used in experimentals. Compliance with AD's issued against your particular
installed goodies is not required, but addressing the AD is.
This brings up 2 points: First, the difference between "compliance" and
"addressing". For example, I have an RSA injector that falls under the
recent flurry of AD's. The AD calls for work to be performed by an A&P.
If I do the work and certify the system safe, I have addressed the AD
without having complied with it, as I am not an A&P. This course of action
is entirely acceptable to the administrator, even if all his minions are
not quite in step with his intentions.
The second issue is that if one were to choose to not actually address
relevant AD's, the AD police are not going to swoop down on you, and most
likely no one official will ever know. However, should you find yourself
in a court of law, perhaps after an accident or incident, your position
would be indefensible and you will be 'careless and reckless' just for
starters. This is because the Federal court considers the FAA to be the
reigning authority on all things aeronautical, and as such the FAA's
opinion is precisely the one that we should all adopt. That is not to say
that individual employees of the FAA can't be found in error, but the FAA
generally won't be. As an aside, this legal concept (whose name I can't
recall at teh moment) is why the AIM essentially becomes regulatory once
you find yourself in court. After all, the AIM is how the FAA feels things
should be done. If you get into trouble while operating outside of teh
AIM's guidance, well, you were de facto 'careless and reckless'. It's
perhaps not so much an FAA thing as a legal / court system thing.
I understand this is a hot topic that some people can get really cranked up
about. There is a certain amont of PC speak in the article that might come
across as a bit ambiguous when viewed from some perspectives, but I can
assure you that if anyone is still a disbeliever they can call up EAA HQ
and go right to the horses mouth to get the history and evolution of this
situation. As with many of the things we deal with in aviation, the core
concept is really pretty simple and entirely safety related.
>From: "Larry Portouw" <Larry(at)portouw.com>
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Airworthiness Directives
>
>"For those of us who are outside the USA, in the rest of the world and not
>in the
>
>EAA, is there anything relevant in it for us Others?
>
>Chris
>
>Sydney Australia"
>
glen matejcek
aerobubba(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: DC Power Switch on Z-13/8 |
At 04:19 PM 2/17/2009, you wrote:
>
>I am using Z13/8 along with Z-25 for a IR Alternator.
>
>Behavior: When I pull the 5 amp alt breaker with my DC switch on Alt, it
>completely dumps my main power bus.
>
>Question: Is this by design? Is there a way to trip the Alt without
>providing a blackout? I would prefer to shut down the main gracefully if
>the alternator trips.
>
>(this may be me...) On Z-24 the DC Switch terminal (5) leads to the
>master battery contactor. As shown this did not work for me. I switched
>2 & 5 as shown on Z-13 and this appeared to fix the problem. I am not
>sure if this is a diagram error or I have a wire crossed?
You probably have it wired improperly. With a progressive
transfer switch, full down should be OFF . . . no connections
closed through either side of the switch. Mid position should
close the battery contactor and bring the bus up. Pulling the
ALT breaker should have no effect on BAT only operations.
Full up position should add the alternator if the breaker
is closed . . . otherwise, nothing happens. Of course, the
engine has to be running for the bus voltage to come up and
turn off the LV Warning lights . . . but even with the enigine
not running, you should hear the b-lead contactor close when
you go from mid to full up positions. Pulling the alt breaker
should open the b-lead contactor only leaving the battery
contactor closed and the bus still hot.
See Note 15 of
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Rev12A/AppZ_Rev12A.pdf
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Page" <jpx(at)Qenesis.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 11 Msgs - 02/17/09 |
Paul,
When I bought my Cessna a few years ago, the very first thing I did
was install Whelen wing tip strobes, the brightest multiflash ones
they offered. My purpose was to increase my visibility during day vfr
flight to minimize the risk of collision.
I later discovered the strobes had little effect. I was visiting the
local control tower and asked the controllers what made an airplane
most visible. They said in all cases they can see the aircraft before
the strobes become apparent. I watched some arrivals and sadly, it is
true.
So now my objective with strobes is night vfr visibility. Although
nav lights are visible from a great distance, something that flashes
is far easier to identify as an aircraft. Unfortunately, the strobes
on my Cessna are so bright, I can rarely use them at night, even
though the tubes themselves are not directly visible. So I fly with
them off most of the time, defeating the purpose :-(
Also, the glass covers over my strobe tubes always have condensed
moisture on the inside. I suspect this dims them somewhat.
I also tried to do a brightness comparison of LED versus strobe tubes.
The manufacturers are not co-operative, providing data in a form
difficult to compare.
My conclusion was that if you want the brightest possible, strobe
tubes are it, especially when fired by higher-powered electronics.
The Aveoflash LED units slightly exceed the FAR requirements
horizontally, but are not as bright in other directions that don't
matter.
At night, the Aveoflash units should be excellent, since super-bright
is perhaps a disadvantage. During the day, it doesn't matter anyway.
There is a huge savings in installation effort and runtime current, so
these are what I will be using.
Jeff Page
Dream Aircraft Tundra #10
> From: Paul McAllister <l_luv2_fly(at)yahoo.com>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: LED Strobes & FAR Requirements
>
> I noticed a lot of manufacturers offering LED Strobes at Airventure
> last year.
>
> I was wondering how do I determine if the light output meets or exceeds a T
> SP'd Xenon strobe.- I seem to recall that there was a minimum requirement
> stated in Joules, but I can't be sure.
>
> Does anyone know how I could go about making such a comparison ?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vern Little" <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Sky-tec starters - elimination of Starter Contactor |
Bob, Sky-tec's web site has information on wiring up their starters without
starter contactors. In addition, they seem to directly contradict the
recommendation of Van's aircraft on how to wire a starter contactor if one
is used.
See http://www.skytecair.com/Wiring_diag.htm for more information.
I plan on using an automotive relay instead of a 30A pushbutton switch to
activate the solenoid as they recommend, but the principle is the same. The
folklore that I'm used to is that you need an upside-down starter contactor
to be immune from large G-loads activating the starter. Seems if you
eliminate the contactor, this is not a problem. Of course, this all depends
on the design and reliability of the Sky-tec internal solenoid.
I've asked Sky-tec for clarification on the potential failure mechanisms of
their solenoids (G loading etc.), but have had no response.
Any opinions on elimination of the contactor? For bonus marks, how about
commenting on Van's recommendation of using the I contact in the starter
contactor to feed the starter motor solenoid (both pics on the link above)?
Thanks,
Vern Little
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 11 Msgs - 02/17/09 |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Too bright? It should be relatively easy to make LED's any "dimness"
desired - just by controlling peak current.. To some extent this is
possibly true with tube style strobes, but I think they will have a
minimum brightness floor, below which they just won't flash. Whether
that's dim enough, I don't know. LED "strobe" manufacturers could easily
incorporate a "night ground" mode which would dim them enough to not be
disruptive but be bright enough to still draw attention and increase
visibility.
Regards,
Matt-
>
> Paul,
>
> When I bought my Cessna a few years ago, the very first thing I did
> was install Whelen wing tip strobes, the brightest multiflash ones
> they offered. My purpose was to increase my visibility during day vfr
> flight to minimize the risk of collision.
>
> I later discovered the strobes had little effect. I was visiting the
> local control tower and asked the controllers what made an airplane
> most visible. They said in all cases they can see the aircraft before
> the strobes become apparent. I watched some arrivals and sadly, it is
> true.
>
> So now my objective with strobes is night vfr visibility. Although
> nav lights are visible from a great distance, something that flashes
> is far easier to identify as an aircraft. Unfortunately, the strobes
> on my Cessna are so bright, I can rarely use them at night, even
> though the tubes themselves are not directly visible. So I fly with
> them off most of the time, defeating the purpose :-(
>
> Also, the glass covers over my strobe tubes always have condensed
> moisture on the inside. I suspect this dims them somewhat.
>
> I also tried to do a brightness comparison of LED versus strobe tubes.
> The manufacturers are not co-operative, providing data in a form
> difficult to compare.
>
> My conclusion was that if you want the brightest possible, strobe
> tubes are it, especially when fired by higher-powered electronics.
>
> The Aveoflash LED units slightly exceed the FAR requirements
> horizontally, but are not as bright in other directions that don't
> matter.
>
> At night, the Aveoflash units should be excellent, since super-bright
> is perhaps a disadvantage. During the day, it doesn't matter anyway.
> There is a huge savings in installation effort and runtime current, so
> these are what I will be using.
>
> Jeff Page
> Dream Aircraft Tundra #10
>
>> From: Paul McAllister <l_luv2_fly(at)yahoo.com>
>> Subject: AeroElectric-List: LED Strobes & FAR Requirements
>>
>> I noticed a lot of manufacturers offering LED Strobes at Airventure
>> last year.
>>
>> I was wondering how do I determine if the light output meets or exceeds
>> a T
>> SP'd Xenon strobe.- I seem to recall that there was a minimum
>> requirement
>> stated in Joules, but I can't be sure.
>>
>> Does anyone know how I could go about making such a comparison ?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joe" <fran5sew(at)banyanol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Figure Z-10/8 compared to Z-11 + Aux Battery and |
Diode Bridge Rectifier
Paul,
I have tested diodes at work that check out fine with a voltmeter but
fail under load. I think the reason is that the voltmeter is testing
the diode with 1.5 volts, whereas the actual circuit operates at a much
higher voltage. So using a voltmeter is not a good test. Here is a
test you can try: Disconnect the main battery to eliminate any
possibility that it is affecting your tests. Connect one lead of a 12
volt test light to the aux battery negative or ground. With the other
lead, touch each terminal of the diode. The light should illuminate on
the battery side of the diode but not on the other side. The fact that
you are using two diodes should not cause the symptoms that you
describe.
Joe Gores
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sky-tec starters - elimination of Starter Contactor |
At 10:16 AM 2/18/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Bob, Sky-tec's web site has information on wiring up their starters
>without starter contactors. In addition, they seem to directly
>contradict the recommendation of Van's aircraft on how to wire a
>starter contactor if one is used.
>
>See http://www.skytecair.com/Wiring_diag.htm for more information.
With all due respect to Skytec . . . the diagram offered
by Van's is technically correct and practical solution
for eliminating delayed starter dis-engagement reported
by many builders . . .
Emacs!
>I plan on using an automotive relay instead of a 30A pushbutton
>switch to activate the solenoid as they recommend, but the principle
>is the same.
Correct. You can do without external contactor providing
a robust current control path for the extra-ordinary inrush
demands of the built in contactor
See also . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/strtctr.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z22-23K.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Starter/PM_Starter_w_RunOn_Relay.pdf
>The folklore that I'm used to is that you need an upside-down
>starter contactor to be immune from large G-loads activating the starter.
Urban myth . . .
> Seems if you eliminate the contactor, this is not a problem. Of
> course, this all depends on the design and reliability of the
> Sky-tec internal solenoid.
I have no reason to suspect that the built in
contactor on a Skytec is any better/worse than
any other built in contactor.
See also . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z22-23K.pdf
>I've asked Sky-tec for clarification on the potential failure
>mechanisms of their solenoids (G loading etc.), but have had no response.
G-loading concerns for contators are bogus.
>Any opinions on elimination of the contactor? For bonus marks, how
>about commenting on Van's recommendation of using the I contact in
>the starter contactor to feed the starter motor solenoid (both pics
>on the link above)?
It's a slick implementation of features offered in
automotive contacts and has much to recommend it.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Figure Z-10/8 compared to Z-11 + Aux Battery |
and Diode Bridge Rectifier
At 11:21 AM 2/18/2009, you wrote:
>Paul,
>I have tested diodes at work that check out fine with a voltmeter
>but fail under load. I think the reason is that the voltmeter is
>testing the diode with 1.5 volts, whereas the actual circuit
>operates at a much higher voltage. So using a voltmeter is not a
>good test. Here is a test you can try: Disconnect the main battery
>to eliminate any possibility that it is affecting your
>tests. Connect one lead of a 12 volt test light to the aux battery
>negative or ground. With the other lead, touch each terminal of the
>diode. The light should illuminate on the battery side of the diode
>but not on the other side. The fact that you are using two diodes
>should not cause the symptoms that you describe.
>Joe Gores
I'd be pleased to put my hands on any diode
that exhibits any failure mode. I'll pay $5 plus
postage for any carcass you can send me.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vern Little" <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sky-tec starters - elimination of Starter Contactor |
Thanks, Bob. I am using Z22 with diodes (like your last figure), only
the ground of the relay goes to an oil pressure switch to prevent
accidental operation of the starter when the engine is running (don't
ask!).
I understand the run-on problem is due to self-generation of the
starter, and Van's prevents this by splitting the solenoid current from
the primary feed. Clever use of the "I" terminal on the contactor.
Since Skytec is pretty adamant in their wiring diagrams, I suspect that
they have not experienced run-on problems... but who knows?
My choice of a relay vs. contactor comes down to whether I want a hot
battery lead connected to the starter for the full duration of flight.
I suppose that if it ever came off the starter and shorted that bad
things may happen. I just have to mitigate or accept this risk.
Thanks for your help.
Vern
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Sky-tec starters - elimination of
Starter Contactor
At 10:16 AM 2/18/2009, you wrote:
Bob, Sky-tec's web site has information on wiring up their starters
without starter contactors. In addition, they seem to directly
contradict the recommendation of Van's aircraft on how to wire a starter
contactor if one is used.
See http://www.skytecair.com/Wiring_diag.htm for more information.
With all due respect to Skytec . . . the diagram offered
by Van's is technically correct and practical solution
for eliminating delayed starter dis-engagement reported
by many builders . . .
I plan on using an automotive relay instead of a 30A pushbutton
switch to activate the solenoid as they recommend, but the principle is
the same.
Correct. You can do without external contactor providing
a robust current control path for the extra-ordinary inrush
demands of the built in contactor
See also . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/strtctr.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z22-23K.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Starter/PM_Starter_w_RunOn_Relay.p
df
The folklore that I'm used to is that you need an upside-down
starter contactor to be immune from large G-loads activating the
starter.
Urban myth . . .
Seems if you eliminate the contactor, this is not a problem. Of
course, this all depends on the design and reliability of the Sky-tec
internal solenoid.
I have no reason to suspect that the built in
contactor on a Skytec is any better/worse than
any other built in contactor.
See also . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z22-23K.pdf
I've asked Sky-tec for clarification on the potential failure
mechanisms of their solenoids (G loading etc.), but have had no
response.
G-loading concerns for contators are bogus.
Any opinions on elimination of the contactor? For bonus marks, how
about commenting on Van's recommendation of using the I contact in the
starter contactor to feed the starter motor solenoid (both pics on the
link above)?
It's a slick implementation of features offered in
automotive contacts and has much to recommend it.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: LED Strobes & FAR Requirements |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Paul,
I wrote up a paper on this some years ago:
www.PerihelionDesign.com/downloads/aircraft_beacons_using_leds.pdf
But beware--I have some work to do on this. At the time LEDs could not quite do
the job. They can now. So my conclusion needs revision and I am adding and revising
some other details. The power and angle stuff is correct.
"...Beans for supper tonight, six o'clock.
Navy beans cooked in Oklahoma ham...
Got to eat 'em with a spoon, raw onions
and cornbread; nothing else...."
--Will Rogers
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=230863#230863
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Figure Z-10/8 compared to Z-11 + Aux Battery and |
Diode Bridge Rectifier
| From: | Paul Eckenroth <N509RV(at)eckenroth.com> |
Bob and all who responded
The diodes were tested using the multimeter and also using the 12V battery.
Everything functions as it should. No voltage is detected on the terminals
that should be blocked. Also when using the E switch to llight the E Buss
the Main Buss stays dark. I have removed leads and started and flown with
the aux battery only powering the E Buss without issues. Unless someone has
any other ideas I believe I will rewire so that the aux battery directly
powers the E buss during start eliminating a diode at that point.
I am very curious as to the assertion of my EE friend that two diodes
powering the same buss from two different power sources (batteries) can
reverse direction (backfeed) if the anode voltage is less than the cathode
which would possiblly explain my problem. Can anyone specifically address
this.
Also, when I adjust my wiring I intend to feed both batteries through the
bridge diode and through the E Buss switch. I am assuming that both
batteries and the diode voltage drop is better than the main battery only
without the diode voltage drop for endurance. I would be interested in
other opinions.
Thanks for all the comments.
Paul
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
>
> At 11:21 AM 2/18/2009, you wrote:
>
>> Paul,
>> I have tested diodes at work that check out fine with a voltmeter but fail
>> under load. I think the reason is that the voltmeter is testing the diode
>> with 1.5 volts, whereas the actual circuit operates at a much higher
>> voltage. So using a voltmeter is not a good test. Here is a test you can
>> try: Disconnect the main battery to eliminate any possibility that it is
>> affecting your tests. Connect one lead of a 12 volt test light to the aux
>> battery negative or ground. With the other lead, touch each terminal of the
>> diode. The light should illuminate on the battery side of the diode but not
>> on the other side. The fact that you are using two diodes should not cause
>> the symptoms that you describe.
>> Joe Gores
>>
>
> I'd be pleased to put my hands on any diode
> that exhibits any failure mode. I'll pay $5 plus
> postage for any carcass you can send me.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ----------------------------------------)
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joe" <fran5sew(at)banyanol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Figure Z-10/8 compared to Z-11 + Aux Battery and |
Diode Bridge Rectifier
Paul,
I think your EE friend is mistaken about diodes conducting when reversed
biased, no matter if there are one or two or more diodes. Are you sure
that aux battery contactor is open during engine cranking? Have you
tried disconnecting a wire off from it to see if the E-buss voltage
still drops during starting? I was wondering if any part of the aux
battery ground circuit is shared with the starting curent from the main
battery? Have you checked for bad connectons? It is difficult to
comment on your proposed changes without having a schematic to view and
understand better.
Bob,
I admit that diodes rarely fail. The one that failed at work was in an
industrial battery charger for 48 volt electric hi-lo. The charger put
out 150 amps when initially connected to a discharged battery. The
batteries are as big as a school teachers desk and were located remotely
from the chargers. One time I shut off the 480V supply to change a fuse
but forgot to unplug the dead battery. My wrench shorted out between
the fuse stud and an aluminum heat sink. The wrench immediately welded
itself in place and turned red hot. Luckily I was wearing leather
gloves. I was leaving the area as the wrench turned white hot and
vaporized the center section of the wrench. Lessons learned: disconnect
ALL power sources before working on equipment. And even "dead"
batteries have some power left in them.
Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul McAllister <l_luv2_fly(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LED Strobes & FAR Requirements |
Hi Eric,
Thanks for sharing your analysis.- What prompted me to think about this a
gain was the discussion thread about xenon strobe lights and radio noise.
- If LED's are now viable then is getting close to the time to retire xen
on flashes, high voltage cables, and inverters, along with the RFI and exce
ss weight.
Thanks again,- Paul=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: odd TX problem |
| From: | "McFarland, Randy" <Randy.McFarland(at)novellus.com> |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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net> |
| Subject: | Re: odd TX problem |
The 430 is drawing 10A when transmitting, drawing down the bus voltage
enough to "kill" the transponder. Verify your alternator is putting out
full power.
Bret Smith
RV-9A N16BL
Blue Ridge, Ga
www.FlightInnovations.com <http://www.flightinnovations.com/>
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
McFarland, Randy
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: odd TX problem
I have 240 hrs on an RV7A experimental.
Just developed an interesting problem. When I transmit on mt Garmin 430
it momentarily turns the Garmin 327 transponder Off. Then 327 will come
back on until the next time I key the Mic again.
Help, Ideas, wild ass guesses?
Randy
----- Original Message -----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wed Feb 18 11:12:05 2009
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: LED Strobes & FAR Requirements
Paul,
I wrote up a paper on this some years ago:
www.PerihelionDesign.com/downloads/aircraft_beacons_using_leds.pdf
But beware--I have some work to do on this. At the time LEDs could not
quite do the job. They can now. So my conclusion needs revision and I am
adding and revising some other details. The power and angle stuff is
correct.
"...Beans for supper tonight, six o'clock.
Navy beans cooked in Oklahoma ham...
Got to eat 'em with a spoon, raw onions
and cornbread; nothing else...."
--Will Rogers
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=230863#230863
=EF=BD=EF=BD~=EF=BD=EF=BD,=03g=EF=BD=EF=BD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "S. Ramirez" <simon(at)synchdes.com> |
| Subject: | Re: odd TX problem |
Even so, the battery should fill in the gap. Assuming the engine is
running and both sources are available, I bet there is a high resistance
somewhere. By high resistance, I mean a half Ohm or so in the wiring or
connections.
Simon Ramirez
Copyright 2009
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bret
Smith
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 9:43 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: odd TX problem
The 430 is drawing 10A when transmitting, drawing down the bus voltage
enough to "kill" the transponder. Verify your alternator is putting out
full power.
Bret Smith
RV-9A N16BL
Blue Ridge, Ga
www.FlightInnovations.com <http://www.flightinnovations.com/>
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
McFarland, Randy
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: odd TX problem
I have 240 hrs on an RV7A experimental.
Just developed an interesting problem. When I transmit on mt Garmin 430
it momentarily turns the Garmin 327 transponder Off. Then 327 will come
back on until the next time I key the Mic again.
Help, Ideas, wild ass guesses?
Randy
----- Original Message -----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wed Feb 18 11:12:05 2009
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: LED Strobes & FAR Requirements
Paul,
I wrote up a paper on this some years ago:
www.PerihelionDesign.com/downloads/aircraft_beacons_using_leds.pdf
But beware--I have some work to do on this. At the time LEDs could not
quite do the job. They can now. So my conclusion needs revision and I am
adding and revising some other details. The power and angle stuff is
correct.
"...Beans for supper tonight, six o'clock.
Navy beans cooked in Oklahoma ham...
Got to eat 'em with a spoon, raw onions
and cornbread; nothing else...."
--Will Rogers
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=230863#230863
http://www.
nbsp; the Web
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
_p; generous bsp;
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
================
=EF=BD=EF=BD~=EF=BD=EF=BD,
_____
g=EF=BD=EF=BD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: odd TX problem |
Good Evening Brett,
I am certainly no electronics expert, but I do have a lot of experience
using transmitters when the generator is not putting out any power at all.
Since the transmitting load is an intermittent load, it is not even require
d
to be considered when we figure whether or not the generator/alternator is
of an adequate size to use in our airplanes. For loads like transmitting,
actuating the landing gear, operating electric flaps, or even a landing ligh
t,
the idea is that the battery should be able to carry all of those intermitte
nt
loads. If the voltage is going so low that it knocks the Transponder off the
line when the transmitter is keyed, there is something wrong beyond a small
or
under performing alternator.
Happy Skies
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
628 West 86th Street
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
In a message dated 2/18/2009 8:47:26 P.M. Central Standard Time,
smithhb(at)tds.net writes:
The 430 is drawing 10A when transmitting, drawing down the bus voltage
enough to "kill" the transponder. Verify your alternator is putting out fu
ll
power.
Bret Smith
RV-9A N16BL
Blue Ridge, Ga
_www.FlightInnovations.com_ (http://www.flightinnovations.com/)
____________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McFarlan
d, Randy
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: odd TX problem
I have 240 hrs on an RV7A experimental.
Just developed an interesting problem. When I transmit on mt Garmin 430 it
momentarily turns the Garmin 327 transponder Off. Then 327 will come back o
n
until the next time I key the Mic again.
Help, Ideas, wild ass guesses?
Randy
----- Original Message -----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wed Feb 18 11:12:05 2009
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: LED Strobes & FAR Requirements
Paul,
I wrote up a paper on this some years ago:
www.PerihelionDesign.com/downloads/aircraft_beacons_using_leds.pdf
But beware--I have some work to do on this. At the time LEDs could not quit
e
do the job. They can now. So my conclusion needs revision and I am adding
and revising some other details. The power and angle stuff is correct.
"...Beans for supper tonight, six o'clock.
Navy beans cooked in Oklahoma ham...
Got to eat 'em with a spoon, raw onions
and cornbread; nothing else...."
--Will Rogers
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
_http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=230863#230863_
(http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=230863#230863)
http://www.nbsp; the Web
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
_p; generous bsp;
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
================
=EF=BD=EF=BD~=EF=BD=EF=BD,=03g=EF=BD=EF=BD
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
ttp:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgI
D
%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Meyers <bobmeyers(at)meyersfamily.org> |
| Subject: | Z-11 with a permanent magnet alternator |
Hi Bob,
I love this list and how active you are on it.
I am trying to finalize my electrical plan for my Aerovee powered
Sonex. I used Z-11 as my starting point but I have one remaining issue.
Since the 20 amp alternator on the Aerovee is a permanent magnet type,
I do not need to wire up the alt field as I would with a regular
alternator. The problem I have then is how do I kill the alternator if
I want to kill the master bus?
Do I need to? I would think so. With the master off and the battery
disconnected by the contactor, the alternator would still be powering
the master bus. Should I put a relay or contactor on the DC output
from the supplied regulator? I could connect the DC output to the
battery directly, which would allow the master bus to be killed by the
battery contactor but the alternator would still be live.
What are your thoughts?
Bob Meyers
Building Sonex 982SX Web Site Index http://meyersfamily.org/Sonex982.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Help needed obtaining filter |
| From: | rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US |
Any ideas on how to filter out 100 milivolt spike that is very very sharp
with a duration of ~ 75 miliseconds coming from Kuntzleman strobe power
supply, then radiating off power lines and getting into my antenna?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Getting closer
to resolve to my tick, tick, ticking coming from Kuntzleman strobe. First
off It is the Vertex VXA-700 that is currently breaking squelch. I called
factory today and they said when you put an aircraft antenna on them, they
are sensitive and there is nothing they know of they can do to help me
out..
Next is high voltage from power supply, believe it or
not, using the shielded cable from Kuntzleman, doesn't matter much if you
have 1 foot or 25 feet, it just doesn't radiate that much.
The
Kuntzleman power supply radiates a lot no matter how you ground things,
but 8 feet away with antenna under worst case and 6 feet away under best
case eliminates tick, tick, ticking. So power supplies will live in
wingtips away from antennas.
The power wires are the culprit
at the moment! First off I am running Vertex on internal battery so it is
not dirty radio supply power causing the problem, it is RF jumping off the
supply lines getting into antenna!
Using shielded wire for
supply has more RF jumping off compared to twisted pair no matter how I
grounded shield! Can't explain it but it is so. Twisted pair is slightly
better than untwisted pair, running a separate ground wire to case of
power supplymakes no difference compared to grounding box to black
supply wire.
Using twisted pair with optimum grounding,
now has ticking only happening on lower and higher frequencies.
Observing supply power at battery on a scope, there are very very sharp
spikes 100 milivolts, with a duration of about 75 miliseconds that equate
perfectly to Vertex VXA-700 breaking squelch.
Anyone have any
ideas on how I can filter this out? And where to get parts needed?
I guess I will need two filters, one for each power supply at the
wingtips.
I ripped a choke bout an inch in diameter off a
junk copier laying around hangarand tried it in series with positive
at power supply, and also tried wrapping both twisted pair through it 3
times (all that would fit) with no change at all.
I see
Aircraft Spruce sells a DC line filter:
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/lsStrobeNoiseEl.php
More expensive (need 2) and heavier that I would like
Ron P.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: LED Strobes & FAR Requirements |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
> Thanks for sharing your analysis. What prompted me to think about this again
was the discussion thread about xenon strobe lights and radio noise. If LED's
are now viable then is getting close to the time to retire xenon flashes, high
voltage cables, and inverters, along with the RFI and excess weight. Thanks again,
Paul
Paul,
That's right. I prototyped a design that uses caps at each strobe. The power supply
is 12.5 VDC. The sync pulse is generated at the strobe switch and is simply
a 1 ms break in the DC power to the strobes. The strobe LEDs were red Luxeons,
but could be white.
As you said, no power supply, no HV, no noise, weighs nothing, lasts forever (more
or less).
I looked at a system of strobes where there were a number of flush lights instead
of protruding domes. This makes sense if you have LEDs. No solution or suggestions
yet, and I don't intend to market such a product.
--------
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=231024#231024
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MICHAEL LARKIN <mlas(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: odd TX problem |
Brent,
First go direct to the supply side of the CB and check the line
voltage while transmititng using the negative thermal of the battery
as you ground. If the voltage is being pulled low (more then a 1/2 a
volt) you have resistance on the bus somewhere. Next do the same
thing at the battery. IF you are still pulling the voltage at the
battery, you have a bad battery. A 10 amp draw should not pull the
battery down more then .5 volts. If the line voltage is good start
checking your ground bus. This is a good place to start.
Mike Larkin
On Feb 18, 2009, at 7:43 PM, Bret Smith wrote:
> The 430 is drawing 10A when transmitting, drawing down the bus
> voltage enough to "kill" the transponder. Verify your alternator is
> putting out full power.
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A N16BL
> Blue Ridge, Ga
> www.FlightInnovations.com
>
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> ] On Behalf Of McFarland, Randy
> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 9:13 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: odd TX problem
>
> I have 240 hrs on an RV7A experimental.
> Just developed an interesting problem. When I transmit on mt Garmin
> 430 it momentarily turns the Garmin 327 transponder Off. Then 327
> will come back on until the next time I key the Mic again.
> Help, Ideas, wild ass guesses?
> Randy
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Wed Feb 18 11:12:05 2009
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: LED Strobes & FAR Requirements
>
>
>
> Paul,
>
> I wrote up a paper on this some years ago:
>
> www.PerihelionDesign.com/downloads/aircraft_beacons_using_leds.pdf
>
> But beware--I have some work to do on this. At the time LEDs could
> not quite do the job. They can now. So my conclusion needs revision
> and I am adding and revising some other details. The power and angle
> stuff is correct.
>
> "...Beans for supper tonight, six o'clock.
> Navy beans cooked in Oklahoma ham...
> Got to eat 'em with a spoon, raw onions
> and cornbread; nothing else...."
> --Will Rogers
>
> --------
> Eric M. Jones
> www.PerihelionDesign.com
> 113 Brentwood Drive
> Southbridge, MA 01550
> (508) 764-2072
> emjones(at)charter.net
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=230863#230863
>
>
> http://www.nbsp; the Web
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> _p; generous bsp;
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ">http://www.matronics.com/c===============
=
>
>
> =EF=BD=EF=BD~=EF=BD=EF=BD,=03g=EF=BD=EF=BD
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-11 with a permanent magnet alternator |
At 10:43 PM 2/18/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>I love this list and how active you are on it.
>
>I am trying to finalize my electrical plan for my Aerovee powered
>Sonex. I used Z-11 as my starting point but I have one remaining issue.
>
>Since the 20 amp alternator on the Aerovee is a permanent magnet type,
>I do not need to wire up the alt field as I would with a regular
>alternator. The problem I have then is how do I kill the alternator if
>I want to kill the master bus?
If you have a small, PM altenrator, then Z16 is the more appropriate
architecture.
>Do I need to? I would think so. With the master off and the battery
>disconnected by the contactor, the alternator would still be powering
>the master bus. Should I put a relay or contactor on the DC output
>from the supplied regulator?
Yes, that is a feature of Z-16 and other designs that
feature alternators with no external control over the
field.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Help needed obtaining filter |
At 11:48 PM 2/18/2009, you wrote:
>Any ideas on how to filter out 100 milivolt spike that is very very
>sharp with a duration of ~ 75 miliseconds coming from Kuntzleman
>strobe power supply, then radiating off power lines and getting into
>my antenna?
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Getting closer to resolve to my tick, tick, ticking coming from
>Kuntzleman strobe. First off It is the Vertex VXA-700 that is
>currently breaking squelch. I called factory today and they said
>when you put an aircraft antenna on them, they are sensitive and
>there is nothing they know of they can do to help me out..
>
>Next is high voltage from power supply, believe it or not, using the
>shielded cable from Kuntzleman, doesn't matter much if you have 1
>foot or 25 feet, it just doesn't radiate that much.
>
>The Kuntzleman power supply radiates a lot no matter how you ground
>things, but 8 feet away with antenna under worst case and 6 feet
>away under best case eliminates tick, tick, ticking. So power
>supplies will live in wingtips away from antennas.
>
>The power wires are the culprit at the moment! First off I am
>running Vertex on internal battery so it is not dirty radio supply
>power causing the problem, it is RF jumping off the supply lines
>getting into antenna!
I just checked over the Kuntzleman website . . . remarkably
lacking in
>Using shielded wire for supply has more RF jumping off compared to
>twisted pair no matter how I grounded shield! Can't explain it but
>it is so. Twisted pair is slightly better than untwisted pair,
>running a separate ground wire to case of power supply makes no
>difference compared to grounding box to black supply wire.
>
>Using twisted pair with optimum grounding, now has ticking only
>happening on lower and higher frequencies.
Shielding and twisting has limited if any value in
mitigation of radiated emissions. Frankly, this
is something that needs to go back to the manufacturer.
The website speaks to noise with these words:
"Our strobe driver units are designed with filtering and internal
shielding to keep radio interference to a minimum, however
occasionally noise will be heard over the radio or intercom. This
noise is almost always caused by the way the systems have been installed."
That's our first clue. I'd have a hard time selling
any product to the TC aviation where variability of
installation causes a system integration issue.
On the same website we find:
"AFTER CHECKING items 2, 6, & 7 a small AM radio can be used as
follows. Turn on and tune between two stations. Hold the radio near
the strobe driver box. A clicking of the strobe trigger circuit
should be heard. If not, then trouble is in the driver box and it
should be returned to Kuntzleman Electronics for repair. If it is
heard move the radio to near the strobe head, that same clicking will
be heard and the problem is the bulb unit. New bulb units are
available from Kuntzleman Electronics."
The two statements are somewhat at odds with each other
and perhaps an indication of the source of your problem.
I'm betting that better filtering of the DC
power leads while STILL INSIDE the driver box
is called for.
How much current does this system draw? I didn't
find any info on their website.
>Observing supply power at battery on a scope, there are very very
>sharp spikes 100 milivolts, with a duration of about 75 miliseconds
>that equate perfectly to Vertex VXA-700 breaking squelch.
>
>Anyone have any ideas on how I can filter this out? And where to get
>parts needed?
>
>I guess I will need two filters, one for each power supply at the wingtips.
??? Which system do you have? My sense of your
description is that you've found a centrally locate
power supply to be the source of noise . . . this
is consistent with the Kunzleman description of
using an AM radio to see if the power supply
is functional.
>I ripped a choke bout an inch in diameter off a junk copier laying
>around hangar and tried it in series with positive at power supply,
>and also tried wrapping both twisted pair through it 3 times (all
>that would fit) with no change at all.
>
>I see Aircraft Spruce sells a DC line filter:
Chokes are ALWAYS used in conjunction with
capacitors. See chapter 16 in the 'Connection.
I have an off the shelf filter you can try.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9006/
It's good for 3A continuous which MAY be adequate
to your task.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "glen matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | SD-8 self-excitation |
Hi All-
I'm having a senior moment, and not having any success with the archive.
Why was the SD-8 self-excitation feature deleted?
TIA,
glen matejcek
aerobubba(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Etienne Phillips <etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: SD-8 self-excitation |
For some reason, none of the posts had a "View this topic online
at..." link at the bottom of it.
What would you like to know? I've got all the messages stored locally.
Etienne
On 19 Feb 2009, at 7:52 PM, glen matejcek wrote:
>
>
> Hi All-
>
> I'm having a senior moment, and not having any success with the
> archive.
> Why was the SD-8 self-excitation feature deleted?
>
> TIA,
>
>
> glen matejcek
> aerobubba(at)earthlink.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Meyers <bobmeyers(at)meyersfamily.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-11 with a permanent magnet alternator |
Thanks Bob,
With the word Rotax in the title I never even looked at Z16. My
apologies.
Having looked at it and Z17 as well, Z17 shows a voltage regulator
with three leads - two AC in and one DC out - which looks like the
configuration of the regulator supplied with my Aerovee. It seems Z16
is specific to the regulator supplied with the Rotax.
Unless I am missing something, the Z17 configuration is what I will
look at.
Thanks again.
Bob Meyers
Building Sonex 982SX Web Site Index http://meyersfamily.org/Sonex982.html
On Feb 19, 2009, at 10:23 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> >
>
> At 10:43 PM 2/18/2009, you wrote:
>> >
>>
>> Hi Bob,
>>
>> I love this list and how active you are on it.
>>
>> I am trying to finalize my electrical plan for my Aerovee powered
>> Sonex. I used Z-11 as my starting point but I have one remaining
>> issue.
>>
>> Since the 20 amp alternator on the Aerovee is a permanent magnet
>> type,
>> I do not need to wire up the alt field as I would with a regular
>> alternator. The problem I have then is how do I kill the alternator
>> if
>> I want to kill the master bus?
>
> If you have a small, PM altenrator, then Z16 is the more appropriate
> architecture.
>
>
>> Do I need to? I would think so. With the master off and the battery
>> disconnected by the contactor, the alternator would still be powering
>> the master bus. Should I put a relay or contactor on the DC output
>> from the supplied regulator?
>
>
> Yes, that is a feature of Z-16 and other designs that
> feature alternators with no external control over the
> field.
>
>
> 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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: SD-8 self-excitation |
At 11:52 AM 2/19/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Hi All-
>
>I'm having a senior moment, and not having any success with the archive.
>Why was the SD-8 self-excitation feature deleted?
It's still "in" . . . just fell in a crack. I'll
get the website archives and Appendix-Z fixed
shortly.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "glen matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | RE:SD-8 self-excitation |
Thanks, guys
glen matejcek
aerobubba(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: SD-8 self-excitation |
At 11:52 AM 2/19/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Hi All-
>
>I'm having a senior moment, and not having any success with the archive.
>Why was the SD-8 self-excitation feature deleted?
>
>TIA,
Fixed it. Also incorporated changes suggested by
many of the List's readers. Thanks guys.
Latest iteration of Appendix Z has been posted
at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Rev12A/AppZ_Rev12A_1.pdf
The self excitation data for the SD-8 was revived
along with a number of suggested clean-up tasks.
The Page-Per-System drawings have also been updated
to reflect the data in Appendix Z, Rev 12A, Change 1.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Plane Power R1224 to regulate B&C SD-20? |
| From: | "rckol" <rckol(at)kaehlers.com> |
The Plane Power R1224 regulator seems to provide the same functionality as the
more expensive B&C LS1 regulator (except for temperature compensation). Would
it would be suitable for regulating a B&C SD-20 in a Z12 system?
TIA
--------
rck
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=231393#231393
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Plane Power R1224 to regulate B&C SD-20? |
At 11:51 AM 2/21/2009, you wrote:
>
>The Plane Power R1224 regulator seems to provide the same
>functionality as the more expensive B&C LS1 regulator (except for
>temperature compensation). Would it would be suitable for
>regulating a B&C SD-20 in a Z12 system?
>
>TIA
Yes . . . assuming a 14v system. If you're installing
a 28v system, you MUST use the B&C regulator. It was
specifically designed to accommodate an alternator with
a 14v field winding in a 28v system. The SD-20 can
be used in either 14/28v but needs a special regulator
for 28v.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ianrat" <ianrat(at)powerup.com.au> |
I have been playing around with some high powered LEDS.
I would like to use them as landing lights. I have purchased an off the shelve
power unit, the problem is that it is creating radio interference.
Would any one have a layout for a supply that may not give off interference or
any other suggestions. [Question]
Thank you
Ianrat
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=231449#231449
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US |
If anyone is interested, I put up some info on Pepboys Fog LEDs:
http://www.europaowners.org/modules.php?set_albumName=album271&op=modload&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_album.php
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plane Power R1224 to regulate B&C SD-20? |
| From: | "rckol" <rckol(at)kaehlers.com> |
Thanks,
Upon closer inspection, the PlanePower regulator does not provide overcurent warning
on its status lamp, like the B&C would if set up for it. But I suppose
the same information could be determined by monitoring the alternator output current
from a shunt.
--------
rck
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=231492#231492
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | BMA EFIS/One for Sale on E-Bay |
I am very reluctantly selling my Blue Mountain Avionics EFIS/One with
AutoPilot I purchased in 2003 for my Express 2000 project. This project
has run out of time and money so I need to part with this awesome piece
of avionics gear. It is currently listed on e-bay at:
*http://tinyurl.com/de7fqh . *I have set the reserve price WAY LESS
than half my investment. Someone will pick up a real steal. Good luck.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Plane Power R1224 to regulate B&C SD-20? |
At 09:40 AM 2/22/2009, you wrote:
>
>Thanks,
>
>Upon closer inspection, the PlanePower regulator does not provide
>overcurent warning on its status lamp, like the B&C would if set up
>for it. But I suppose the same information could be determined by
>monitoring the alternator output current from a shunt.
Yes. That's what loadmeters do for you. We offer
a small package suited to the SD-8 or any other
size alternator. The shunts are custom calibrated
to your alternator.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9007/
https://matronics.com/aeroelectric/Catalog/AECcatalog.html
The B&D SB-1 has a hall-effect loadmeter circuit
built in . . . but instead of displaying as a
value on the panel, it drives a "alternator overload"
light if the current goes above 20A.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 with dual Lightspeed III and SD-8 |
So I finally got around to looking at the wiring diagrams for the LSE units.
Been a while and something hasn't been sitting right. Looking at the diagram
I'm a bit confused why you would need a pullable breaker to reset the system
in an OV or any other condition. There is only one power input to the unit so
cycling the power switch should accomplish the exact same thing. Am I missing
something or did this become a big deal for no real reason.
http://www.lightspeedengineering.com/Images/PlasmaINPUT.pdf
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Sausen On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 7:49 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Z-14 with dual Lightspeed III and SD-8
Hmm, not a big fan of replacing one failure mode with another. I see a relay
as being a bit of a step back and probably more likely to fail than to see an
OV event. Maybe something as simple as using a 15amp breaker instead of a fuse
would be less complex and eliminate the problem of a fuse blowing faster than
a breaker, albeit more expensive.
Michael
-----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: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 5:16 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Z-14 with dual Lightspeed III and SD-8
t 03:41 PM 2/3/2009, you wrote:
>Sausen)"
>
> Like I said, slightly larger fuse. :) Normal operation lists an
> LSEIII at 7.5AMP requirement with a 10Amp fuse. My reasoning is
> that doubling the initial fuse would allow the breaker to go first
> under normal circumstances. I do agree that a slo-blo type fuse
> would probably decrease the likeliness of the fuse blowing first.
The fuse would need to be a LOT bigger. Crow-baring
a 5A breaker would open a 20-30A up-stream fuse.
This is because the I(square)*R time constant for
opening a breaker is MUCH larger than for fuses
of the same size. You can easily do this experiment
for your self. Go out to your car's battery and hook
an in-line fuse holder in series with a 5A breaker.
Put about 5 feet of 20AWG wire in the loop too to
limit max current.
Connect this combination across your car battery
and see how large the fuse has to be to stay closed
while the breaker trips. This is why we have fusible
links upstream of crowbar ov protection breakers in
all the Z-figures.
> I would just assume deal with this back at the batteries but it's
> not practical to have the CB's back there with no easy way to reset
> when I'm flying alone troubleshooting an overly quiet engine. I
> could feed one LSE from the main bus and the second directly from a
> battery which would probably cover most circumstances.
The big band-aid is to install a separate high
current relay to the battery through a LARGE
in line fuse . . . probably 30A. Run 14AWG wire
from the relay up to the panel mounted 5A breaker.
Continue on with what-ever wire is called out
to continue on to the ignition system. Now you
need switches to control right and left ignition
system relays at the battery. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/Battery_Feed_for_Ignition.pdf
This approach could be blessed in a TC aircraft
as providing circuit protection commensurate with
wire sizes AND making the system max-cold when
the switches are OFF.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 with dual Lightspeed III and SD-8 |
At 08:18 PM 2/22/2009, you wrote:
>Sausen)"
>
> So I finally got around to looking at the wiring diagrams for the
> LSE units. Been a while and something hasn't been sitting
> right. Looking at the diagram I'm a bit confused why you would
> need a pullable breaker to reset the system in an OV or any other
> condition. There is only one power input to the unit so cycling
> the power switch should accomplish the exact same thing. Am I
> missing something or did this become a big deal for no real reason.
>
>http://www.lightspeedengineering.com/Images/PlasmaINPUT.pdf
>
>Michael
Someone suggested that the LSE system had some form
of crowbar ov protection built in . . . i.e. it was
EXPECTED to open its own breaker in case of an OV
event. If you had fuses . . . particularly remotely
mounted fuses, this would be difficult if not
impossible.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Williams, MD" <rwayne(at)gamewood.net> |
I have a WX worx receiver and combined comm/EM antenna. It looks like the WX
worx and the antenna use male SMA connectors. What coax should I use?
Thanks!
Wayne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris <toaster73(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | E-bus and sd-8 alternator connections Z-13/8 Q |
Bob,
I am laying out my RV-10 wiring based on the Z-13/8 Q. My battery is behind the
bagage area as is my master contactor. Z-13/8 Q shows the SD-8 going to the
battery side of the contactor. My battery bus will be next to the battery and
I will run the e-bus supply wire from there foward to the panel.
Question: Instead of running another wire all the way back to the master contactor
from the SD-8 could I just run from the SD-8 to the E-bus which is under
the panel?
With this arrangment I would activate e-buss when needed and then sd-8, otherwise
sd-8 would be dormant and only supply power when e-buss is activated.
Thanks
Chris Lucas
RV-10
#40072
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Any recommendations for camera system to be mounted |
in vertical fin?
| From: | rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US |
Any recommendations for camera to be mounted in vertical fin?
I
have a Europa XS and want to mount a camera forward facing in the rudder
cap. It is about a foot forward of a Bob archer SA-006 big "E"
antenna.
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Any recommendations for camera system to be mounted |
in vertical fin?
I used a waterproof bullet camera that was capable of fairly low lux. I
have it hooked up to a DVR that I mounted in the baggage compartment called
a ChaseCam PDR100. From there the ChaseCam outputs to the aux input on my
Alpine AV system for a POV. I'll also be hooking up audio to the DVR from
the pilot position on the intercom. The DVR will automatically start with
the master switch and it's configured to write over the oldest file when f
ull. That gives it more than enough capacity for even a long trip.
www.chasecam.com<http://www.chasecam.com>
Michael
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectr
ic-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 9:43 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Any recommendations for camera system to be mou
nted in vertical fin?
Any recommendations for camera to be mounted in vertical fin?
I have a Europa XS and want to mount a camera forward facing in the rudder
cap. It is about a foot forward of a Bob archer SA-006 big "E" antenna.
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 08:12 AM 2/23/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>I have a WX worx receiver and combined comm/EM antenna. It looks like the WX
>worx and the antenna use male SMA connectors. What coax should I use?
>Thanks!
What does the installation recommend? You can get sma connectors
for about any of the popular coaxes. If your kit came with
connectors, then you'd need to know which versions were supplied.
Their is a high probability that any connectors supplied will
be compatible with the common preference for RF-400 or RG-141 coax.
However, it is possible that some other product fits your connectors.
If no connectors are supplied, and no recommendations are cited
in the manual, then RG-400 and compatible connectors would
be my guess . . . although there are some new, lower loss
coaxes that would work well at those frequencies.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Another "There I Was" story that shouldn't have been |
| From: | Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins(at)gmail.com> |
This time in a Cherokee. Read the story that is titled "Best Short
Feature".
http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/publications/callback/cb_350.htm
Wouldn't happen in a Bob Nuckolls inspired OBAM aircraft.
Sam
www.samhoskins.blogspot.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 08:12 AM 2/23/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>I have a WX worx receiver and combined comm/EM antenna. It looks like the WX
>worx and the antenna use male SMA connectors. What coax should I use?
>Thanks!
What does the installation recommend? You can get sma connectors
for about any of the popular coaxes. If your kit came with
connectors, then you'd need to know which versions were supplied.
Their is a high probability that any connectors supplied will
be compatible with the common preference for RF-400 or RG-141 coax.
However, it is possible that some other product fits your connectors.
If no connectors are supplied, and no recommendations are cited
in the manual, then RG-400 and compatible connectors would
be my guess . . . although there are some new, lower loss
coaxes that would work well at those frequencies.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: E-bus and sd-8 alternator connections Z-13/8 |
Q
At 11:06 AM 2/23/2009, you wrote:
>
>Bob,
>I am laying out my RV-10 wiring based on the Z-13/8 Q. My battery
>is behind the bagage area as is my master contactor. Z-13/8 Q shows
>the SD-8 going to the battery side of the contactor. My battery bus
>will be next to the battery and I will run the e-bus supply wire
>from there foward to the panel.
> Question: Instead of running another wire all the way back to the
> master contactor from the SD-8 could I just run from the SD-8 to
> the E-bus which is under the panel?
>With this arrangment I would activate e-buss when needed and then
>sd-8, otherwise sd-8 would be dormant and only supply power when
>e-buss is activated.
I've pondered this a bit . . . I think you will
be okay with that modification.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stan Blanton" <s.blanton(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Pitot heat relay |
Bob,
For a pitot heat relay would a P&B VF4 style 30amp (Digikey PB687-ND) relay
be suitable or would a solid state relay such as Perihelion sells be better?
Thanks,
Stan Blanton
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Using a key Ignition switch with a Rotax 912 |
| From: | "rckol" <rckol(at)kaehlers.com> |
I have decided to use a keyed switch for the starter contactor only, as a safety
measure, not a security measure.
MacMaster-Carr has small and inexpensive keyed security switches available in a
two position SPST momentary contact version that would seem to do the job.
http://www.mcmaster.com/#key-switches/=qsw33
Has anyone had any good or bad experiences with these?
--------
rck
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=231854#231854
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Williams, MD" <rwayne(at)gamewood.net> |
Bob:
Thanks for the reply. I apologize for my misspelling. It should have been
XM (not EM). It did not come with any connectors but I did find out it needs
to be 50 ohms. The supplied antenna has a permanently connected cable the
size of a single shielded wire. I'll try the RF400. Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Using a key Ignition switch with a Rotax |
912
At 01:08 PM 2/24/2009, you wrote:
>
>I have decided to use a keyed switch for the starter contactor only,
>as a safety measure, not a security measure.
>
>MacMaster-Carr has small and inexpensive keyed security switches
>available in a two position SPST momentary contact version that
>would seem to do the job.
>
>http://www.mcmaster.com/#key-switches/=qsw33
>
>
>Has anyone had any good or bad experiences with these?
What are your concerns? As a safety switch, it never
has to SWITCH a load, only guarantee an open or close
circuit exists before the starter button is pushed.
This is about the most relaxed duty you can require
of any switch.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pitot heat relay |
At 11:33 AM 2/24/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>
>Bob,
>
>For a pitot heat relay would a P&B VF4 style 30amp (Digikey PB687-ND) relay
>be suitable or would a solid state relay such as Perihelion sells be better?
>
>Thanks,
In single engine aircraft, this device probably has
the lowest operational duty cycle of any other
accessory . . . no, second lowest. The baggage
compartment light is lower.
Some form of relay is useful because the popular
toggle switches are not well suited to the peculiar
warm-up current profile.
The VF4 would be fine . . . as would any other
device rated for this 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)aeroelectric.com> |
At 01:22 PM 2/24/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Bob:
>Thanks for the reply. I apologize for my misspelling. It should have been
>XM (not EM). It did not come with any connectors but I did find out it needs
>to be 50 ohms. The supplied antenna has a permanently connected cable the
>size of a single shielded wire. I'll try the RF400. Thanks.
How long a run from receiver to antenna? RG-400 is noteworthy
for it's stiffness. How important is it that the wire have
some degree of flexibility? Is there receiver permanently
mounted to the panel?
Also, is the supplied antenna an "active" device? Many GPS
antennas have pre-amplifiers built into their bases. You need
to be sure that any proposed replacement antenna will perform
as needed.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Pengilly" <peter(at)sportingaero.com> |
| Subject: | Any recommendations for camera system to be mounted |
in vertical fin?
I have a camera from a company called Xtreme Recall
(http://www.xtremerecall.com/), they were very helpful.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US
Sent: 24 February 2009 02:43
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Any recommendations for camera system to be
mounted in vertical fin?
Any recommendations for camera to be mounted in vertical fin?
I have a Europa XS and want to mount a camera forward facing in the rudder
cap. It is about a foot forward of a Bob archer SA-006 big "E" antenna.
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Using a key Ignition switch with a Rotax 912 |
| From: | "rckol" <rckol(at)kaehlers.com> |
I had it in mind to use the momentary contact version of the key switch to replace
the push button starter switch, so it would actually be switching the current
to the starter contactor.
My concerns are whether these are quality items that would be expected to perform
well in the extremes of temperatures that it will see (Wisconsin winters to
desert heat).
--------
rck
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=231943#231943
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris" <toaster73(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: E-bus and sd-8 alternator connections Z-13/8 |
Q
Thanks, I'll press on.
-Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: E-bus and sd-8 alternator connections Z-13/8
Q
>
>
> At 11:06 AM 2/23/2009, you wrote:
>>
>>Bob,
>>I am laying out my RV-10 wiring based on the Z-13/8 Q. My battery is
>>behind the bagage area as is my master contactor. Z-13/8 Q shows the SD-8
>>going to the battery side of the contactor. My battery bus will be next to
>>the battery and I will run the e-bus supply wire from there foward to the
>>panel.
>> Question: Instead of running another wire all the way back to the master
>> contactor from the SD-8 could I just run from the SD-8 to the E-bus which
>> is under the panel?
>>With this arrangment I would activate e-buss when needed and then sd-8,
>>otherwise sd-8 would be dormant and only supply power when e-buss is
>>activated.
>
> I've pondered this a bit . . . I think you will
> be okay with that modification.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ----------------------------------------)
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Any recommendations for camera system to be |
mounted in vertical fin?
| From: | rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US |
Hi Michael, This is Ron's building partner Wayne. Thanks for the
lead here, I was reading through the forum on chaseCam and came across the
VHF radio interfearance post. The company is working on improving
EMI and they don't currently have any UL or CE ratings; did you notice any
noise when operating your system? Thanks, Wayne
> I used a waterproof bullet camera that was capable of fairly low
lux. I
> have it hooked up to a DVR that I mounted in the baggage
compartment
> called a ChaseCam PDR100.
>From there the
ChaseCam outputs to the aux
> input on my Alpine AV system for a
POV. I'll also be hooking up audio
> to the DVR from the pilot
position on the intercom. The DVR will
> automatically start with
the master switch and it's configured to write
> over the oldest
file when full. That gives it more than enough capacity
> for
even a long trip.
>
>
www.chasecam.com<http://www.chasecam.com>
>
>
Michael
>
>
>
From:
owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US
> Sent: Monday, February 23,
2009 9:43 PM
> To: AeroelectricList
> Subject:
AeroElectric-List: Any recommendations for camera system to be
>
mounted in vertical fin?
>
> Any recommendations for
camera to be mounted in vertical fin?
>
> I have a
Europa XS and want to mount a camera forward facing in the rudder
> cap. It is about a foot forward of a Bob archer SA-006 big
"E" antenna.
>
> Thx.
> Ron Parigoris
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Andrew Butler <andrewbutler(at)ireland.com> |
Hello,
I am installing my ANL mounting base on my firewall. I have a 60 AMP alternator
and my loading chart shows a continuous load of approx. 30A with max load (landing
config. lights plus flaps, fuel pump etc.) of up to 47 or 48A.
Is a 40A ANL suffient or should I install a 50A or 60A ANL?
Best regards,
Andrew.
RV71700
Galway
Ireland.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 05:07 AM 2/25/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Hello,
>
>I am installing my ANL mounting base on my firewall. I have a 60 AMP
>alternator and my loading chart shows a continuous load of approx.
>30A with max load (landing config. lights plus flaps, fuel
>pump etc.) of up to 47 or 48A.
>
>Is a 40A ANL suffient or should I install a 50A or 60A ANL?
>
>Best regards,
ANL current limiters are exceedingly robust with
respect to their ratings. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Fuses_and_Current_Limiters/Bussman/ANL_Specs.pdf
Bussman only makes 35, 50 and 80A values in the
lower ratings at the time the data sheet was published.
Other manufacturers may have other selections in
this range. If you can put your hands on even a 35A
ANL, it will be fine for your application since it
carries 80A continuously.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
Andrew,
If you're pulling 30 amps all day long a 30 amp ANL won't even flinch and probably
your best bet for that rating.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Butler
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 6:08 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: ANL Sizing
Hello,
I am installing my ANL mounting base on my firewall. I have a 60 AMP alternator
and my loading chart shows a continuous load of approx. 30A with max load (landing
config. lights plus flaps, fuel pump etc.) of up to 47 or 48A.
Is a 40A ANL suffient or should I install a 50A or 60A ANL?
Best regards,
Andrew.
RV71700
Galway
Ireland.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Barter" <kesleyelectric(at)chooseblue.coop> |
| Subject: | SD-8 crowbar breaker |
Bob,
I have noticed that the z-figures that incorporate the SD-8 show a 5 amp
breaker for the aux. alternator crowbar. The instructions from B&C call for
a 2 amp breaker to be used with the SD-8 OV protection. As I recall, there
has been some discussion in the past about nuisance tripping and upgrading
the breaker size. I know that the diagrams are suggested architecture only,
not component or wire size, but I wondered about this.
Tom Barter
Kesley, IA
Avid Magnum - wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Voltmeter too bright |
| From: | rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US |
I have very small (perhaps two sugar cubes side by side) rectangular
cubeLED voltmeter (blue in color) that is now mounted on my
passenger headrest panel to monitor E-Bus.
Very nice display
and just theright brightness for daytime operation.
For night time operationit's a little too bright.
It is
a pottedtwo wire volt meter (first saw them in use on
motorcycles).
Anyone have a more eloquent idea (and where to
get materials) how to tame light output other than sticking on a piece of
shaded vinyl?
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Morgensen <john(at)morgensen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Using a key Ignition switch with a Rotax 912 |
rckol wrote:
>
> I had it in mind to use the momentary contact version of the key switch to replace
the push button starter switch, so it would actually be switching the current
to the starter contactor.
>
> My concerns are whether these are quality items that would be expected to perform
well in the extremes of temperatures that it will see (Wisconsin winters
to desert heat).
>
> --------
> rck
>
>
>
I found a keyed switch intended for marine use at the local NAPA store.
John Morgensen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Pienaar" <mjpienaar(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Lamar MC10 master control unit |
Hi All,
I cannot find much info on the Lamar MC10 master control unit on the
net. My questions are:
1. Is it worth making a box similar to theirs to put all the components
in even if it is just to make everything look tidy.
2. I think I can figure most of what they do but why are there 4
contactors.
3. Where do I source the manual reset circuit breakers that they use.
The circuit breaker has 2 lugs to bolt it down and 2 studs for the leads
and a small reset button.
Thanks for your help
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "raymondj" <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Voltmeter too bright |
Put a switch on it, so it's only active when you want to monitor the ebus
voltage.
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN
"Hope for the best,
but prepare for the worst."
----- Original Message -----
From: <rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US>
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:43 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Voltmeter too bright
>
>
> I have very small (perhaps two sugar cubes side by side) rectangular
> cube LED voltmeter (blue in color) that is now mounted on my
> passenger headrest panel to monitor E-Bus.
>
> Very nice display
> and just the right brightness for daytime operation.
>
> For night time operation it's a little too bright.
>
> It is
> a potted two wire volt meter (first saw them in use on
> motorcycles).
>
> Anyone have a more eloquent idea (and where to
> get materials) how to tame light output other than sticking on a piece of
> shaded vinyl?
>
> Thx.
> Ron Parigoris
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris" <toaster73(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: E-bus and sd-8 alternator connections Z-13/8 |
Q
I had one other thought...since I had the understanding that it would not be
good to run an alternator without the battery in line I would use a double
pole switch which would activate the e-bus alternate feed and alternator at
the same time thereby I would never have the chance to turn the alternator
(SD-8) on without the e-bus on. Is this wise (correct).
Thanks
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: E-bus and sd-8 alternator connections Z-13/8
Q
>
>
> At 11:06 AM 2/23/2009, you wrote:
>>
>>Bob,
>>I am laying out my RV-10 wiring based on the Z-13/8 Q. My battery is
>>behind the bagage area as is my master contactor. Z-13/8 Q shows the SD-8
>>going to the battery side of the contactor. My battery bus will be next to
>>the battery and I will run the e-bus supply wire from there foward to the
>>panel.
>> Question: Instead of running another wire all the way back to the master
>> contactor from the SD-8 could I just run from the SD-8 to the E-bus which
>> is under the panel?
>>With this arrangment I would activate e-buss when needed and then sd-8,
>>otherwise sd-8 would be dormant and only supply power when e-buss is
>>activated.
>
> I've pondered this a bit . . . I think you will
> be okay with that modification.
>
>
> 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> |
| Subject: | How to attach wire to D-sub female pin |
I need to attach wires (solder or crimp?) to female pins for the D-sub
connector, as shown here.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/D-Sub_Pin/D-Sub_A.jpg
I'm pretty sure only solder will work but want to check with the experts.
And what wire size is recommended, assuming 1 amp and say 1 or 2 foot run?
Thanks,
Ralph Finch
Davis, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: How to attach wire to D-sub female pin |
Hi Ralph,
Those are crimp pins. The tool from B&C works great.
Stock #: RCT-3
Bob W.
"Ralph Finch" wrote:
> I need to attach wires (solder or crimp?) to female pins for the D-sub
> connector, as shown here.
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/D-Sub_Pin/D-Sub_A.jpg
>
>
>
> I'm pretty sure only solder will work but want to check with the experts.
> And what wire size is recommended, assuming 1 amp and say 1 or 2 foot run?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Ralph Finch
>
> Davis, CA
>
>
>
>
--
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/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: How to attach wire to D-sub female pin |
Sorry, I didn't read the whole thing. 20 or 22 AWG wire will be
fine. That's the size range for the pin anyway. Picture is of a male
pin, but the crimp tool works on both the male and female version.
Bob W.
Bob White <bob@bob-white.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Ralph,
>
> Those are crimp pins. The tool from B&C works great.
> Stock #: RCT-3
>
> Bob W.
>
>
> "Ralph Finch" wrote:
>
> > I need to attach wires (solder or crimp?) to female pins for the D-sub
> > connector, as shown here.
> >
> > http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/D-Sub_Pin/D-Sub_A.jpg
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm pretty sure only solder will work but want to check with the experts.
> > And what wire size is recommended, assuming 1 amp and say 1 or 2 foot run?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> >
> > Ralph Finch
> >
> > Davis, CA
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
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/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Revision 12 pre-published release |
I've put copies of the Revision 12 pages up at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Rev12A/
. . . for your review. I'll be going to the printers
with it next week. In the mean time, knowing of any
potholes that folks can spot would be appreciated.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: SD-8 crowbar breaker |
At 08:51 AM 2/25/2009, you wrote:
>Bob,
>
>I have noticed that the z-figures that incorporate the SD-8 show a 5
>amp breaker for the aux. alternator crowbar. The instructions from
>B&C call for a 2 amp breaker to be used with the SD-8 OV
>protection. As I recall, there has been some discussion in the past
>about nuisance tripping and upgrading the breaker size. I know that
>the diagrams are suggested architecture only, not component or wire
>size, but I wondered about this.
The size of the breaker has nothing to do with nuisance
tripping of the crowbar OV protection system. Either 2A
or 5A will work. I standardized on the 5A for all these
years because it's generally less expensive than the 2A.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Using a key Ignition switch with a Rotax |
912
At 08:29 PM 2/24/2009, you wrote:
>
>I had it in mind to use the momentary contact version of the key
>switch to replace the push button starter switch, so it would
>actually be switching the current to the starter contactor.
>
>My concerns are whether these are quality items that would be
>expected to perform well in the extremes of temperatures that it
>will see (Wisconsin winters to desert heat).
Starter contactors are generally intermittent duty
devices that are pretty hard on switches compared
to other forms of heavy duty relay. But the answer
to your question cannot be quantified. Suppose I told
you that the momentary, non-snap action switch is has
perhaps 1/10th the service life of a snap-action push-
button with heavy contacts.
Without know exactly how long EITHER switch lasts
in that application, you can't deduce the service
life of the other switch either. "Quality items"
is also non-quantified. I have no way to offer you
an opinion based on any understanding of simple-
ideas.
We should be striving to build failure-tolerant
airplanes. What are the consequences of failure
for this switch? Could you not jury-rig some temporary
means by which you energize the contactor to get the
engine started so you can go home?
This is an OBAM aircraft . . . you're allowed to
think in such terms. Our spam-can flying brethern
risk sanction for taking off with the wrong screw
holding the ash tray in place. Try anything you
think will meet your design goals . . . and put
something else in later if your first choice
proves to be a disappointment. NO switch will
last forever.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Why are antenna torroids painted different colors? |
| From: | rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US |
Just received torroids from Aircraft Sprucefor Quickie antenna kit
PN 11-0990 that I want to fool with on my Europa project.
They
are painted green then the Mfg. painted the face on one side white.
Why is one face painted white and do I need to concern myself with
which way I install them on RG-400 antenna cable?
Thx.
Ron
Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Finch" <rgf(at)dcn.davis.ca.us> |
| Subject: | How to attach wire to D-sub female pin |
Bob, thanks for the reply...sure glad I asked here first. Say, I don't have
the RCT-3, but tried the smallest hole on the coax crimper RCT-2
(http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?9X358218#RCT-2). It
seems to provide a firm crimp--I tugged on it and it didn't come apart--but
again, before charging ahead, want to make sure.
RF
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob White
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 7:58 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: How to attach wire to D-sub female pin
Hi Ralph,
Those are crimp pins. The tool from B&C works great.
Stock #: RCT-3
Bob W.
"Ralph Finch" wrote:
> I need to attach wires (solder or crimp?) to female pins for the D-sub
> connector, as shown here.
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/D-Sub_Pin/D-Sub_A.jpg
>
>
>
> I'm pretty sure only solder will work but want to check with the experts.
> And what wire size is recommended, assuming 1 amp and say 1 or 2 foot run?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Ralph Finch
>
> Davis, CA
>
>
>
>
--
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/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Any recommendations for camera system to be |
mounted in vertical fin?
Hmm, haven't noticed anything in testing but I'm not flying as of yet so no
t sure of the final outcome. Hopefully it is in a isolated enough location
(baggage compartment away from the radios) that it shouldn't be an issue i
f it does have a radiation problem. I'll report back once I'm to that poin
t.
Michael
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectr
ic-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 10:22 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Any recommendations for camera system to be
mounted in vertical fin?
Hi Michael, This is Ron's building partner Wayne. Thanks for the lead here
, I was reading through the forum on chaseCam and came across the VHF radio
interfearance post. The company is working on improving EMI and they don'
t currently have any UL or CE ratings; did you notice any noise when operat
ing your system? Thanks, Wayne
> I used a waterproof bullet camera that was capable of fairly low lux. I
> have it hooked up to a DVR that I mounted in the baggage compartment
> called a ChaseCam PDR100.
>From there the ChaseCam outputs to the aux
> input on my Alpine AV system for a POV. I'll also be hooking up audio
> to the DVR from the pilot position on the intercom. The DVR will
> automatically start with the master switch and it's configured to write
> over the oldest file when full. That gives it more than enough capacity
> for even a long trip.
>
> www.chasecam.com<http://www.chasecam.com>
>
> Michael
>
>
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US
> Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 9:43 PM
> To: AeroelectricList
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Any recommendations for camera system to be
> mounted in vertical fin?
>
> Any recommendations for camera to be mounted in vertical fin?
>
> I have a Europa XS and want to mount a camera forward facing in the rudde
r
> cap. It is about a foot forward of a Bob archer SA-006 big "E" antenna.
>
> Thx.
> Ron Parigoris
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joe" <fran5sew(at)banyanol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revision 12 pre-published release |
Bob,
I have sent a private email message to you with the subject,
"Aeroelectric Rev12A Battery".
Let me know if you want me to proof read more of Rev 12.
Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: How to attach wire to D-sub female pin |
Hi Ralph,
I would recommend going with the RCT-3. It gives you a 4 point crimp,
and will definitely make the proper crimp so that the pin will fit into
the connector body correctly. I don't have any experience using the
two sided crimp tool on these pins, but if you get an oval shape out of
it, it could cause problems either with installing the pins or removing
them later (which is a big advantage of the slip in pins).
Bob W.
"Ralph Finch" wrote:
>
> Bob, thanks for the reply...sure glad I asked here first. Say, I don't have
> the RCT-3, but tried the smallest hole on the coax crimper RCT-2
> (http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?9X358218#RCT-2). It
> seems to provide a firm crimp--I tugged on it and it didn't come apart--but
> again, before charging ahead, want to make sure.
>
> RF
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob White
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 7:58 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: How to attach wire to D-sub female pin
>
>
> Hi Ralph,
>
> Those are crimp pins. The tool from B&C works great.
> Stock #: RCT-3
>
> Bob W.
>
>
> "Ralph Finch" wrote:
>
> > I need to attach wires (solder or crimp?) to female pins for the D-sub
> > connector, as shown here.
> >
> > http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/D-Sub_Pin/D-Sub_A.jpg
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm pretty sure only solder will work but want to check with the experts.
> > And what wire size is recommended, assuming 1 amp and say 1 or 2 foot run?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> >
> > Ralph Finch
> >
> > Davis, CA
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
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/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve" <steveg(at)redmondair.com> |
| Subject: | How to attach wire to D-sub female pin |
Ralph,
I'm not sure I would trust the crimp on the d-sub pin from the coax crimper.
It may be tight, but it is certainly not the correct type of crimp for the
pin. Using the proper crimper can save problems in the future. The cost of
the proper crimper should be worth it since you will probably be using it
more as you wire your aircraft. The machined d-sub pins can also be used in
the smaller pin CPC connectors as well. The machined pins and sockets are
higher quality than the open barrel type of pins and again can prevent
phantom problems in the future.
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph
Finch
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 7:24 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: How to attach wire to D-sub female pin
Bob, thanks for the reply...sure glad I asked here first. Say, I don't have
the RCT-3, but tried the smallest hole on the coax crimper RCT-2
(http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?9X358218#RCT-2). It
seems to provide a firm crimp--I tugged on it and it didn't come apart--but
again, before charging ahead, want to make sure.
RF
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob White
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 7:58 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: How to attach wire to D-sub female pin
Hi Ralph,
Those are crimp pins. The tool from B&C works great.
Stock #: RCT-3
Bob W.
"Ralph Finch" wrote:
> I need to attach wires (solder or crimp?) to female pins for the D-sub
> connector, as shown here.
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/D-Sub_Pin/D-Sub_A.jpg
>
>
>
> I'm pretty sure only solder will work but want to check with the experts.
> And what wire size is recommended, assuming 1 amp and say 1 or 2 foot run?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Ralph Finch
>
> Davis, CA
>
>
>
>
--
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/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Finch" <rgf(at)dcn.davis.ca.us> |
| Subject: | How to attach wire to D-sub female pin |
Bob and Steve,
Many thanks for this! OK, another question, maybe I can get something right:
would the IDEAL 30-426
(http://www.idealindustries.com/prodDetail.do?prodId=30-426)
be a worthy replacement for the RCT-3? I can get the IDEAL crimper today
from
Frys for about the same price as the RCT-3; the latter would have several
days
delay shipping.
RF
Quoting Bob White <bob@bob-white.com>:
[Hide Quoted Text]
Hi Ralph,
I would recommend going with the RCT-3. It gives you a 4 point crimp,
and will definitely make the proper crimp so that the pin will fit into
the connector body correctly. I don't have any experience using the
two sided crimp tool on these pins, but if you get an oval shape out of
it, it could cause problems either with installing the pins or removing
them later (which is a big advantage of the slip in pins).
Bob W.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Borger <rlborger(at)mac.com> |
| Subject: | Re: How to attach wire to D-sub female pin |
Ralph,
No, the IDEAL 30-426 is for crimping open-barrel, sheet metal pins.
You need a tool like the RCT-3 designed to do a proper 4-point crimp
for the pin in your picture.
Check six ,
Bob Borger
Europa Kit #A221 N914XL, XS Mono, Intercooled 914, Airmaster C/S
http://www.europaowners.org/N914XL
Aircraft Flying!
3705 Lynchburg Dr.
Corinth, TX 76208
Home: 940-497-2123
Cel: 817-992-1117
On Feb 26, 2009, at 13:13, Ralph Finch wrote:
> >
>
> Bob and Steve,
>
> Many thanks for this! OK, another question, maybe I can get
> something right:
> would the IDEAL 30-426
> (http://www.idealindustries.com/prodDetail.do?prodId=30-426)
> be a worthy replacement for the RCT-3? I can get the IDEAL crimper
> today
> from
> Frys for about the same price as the RCT-3; the latter would have
> several
> days
> delay shipping.
>
> RF
> Quoting Bob White <bob@bob-white.com>:
>
> [Hide Quoted Text]
>
> Hi Ralph,
>
> I would recommend going with the RCT-3. It gives you a 4 point crimp,
> and will definitely make the proper crimp so that the pin will fit
> into
> the connector body correctly. I don't have any experience using the
> two sided crimp tool on these pins, but if you get an oval shape out
> of
> it, it could cause problems either with installing the pins or
> removing
> them later (which is a big advantage of the slip in pins).
>
> Bob W.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | How to attach wire to D-sub female pin |
You want a closed barrel tool. I bought one from Frys. I think it was made
by Eclipse. Looks like this:
Regards,
Greg Young
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On
> Behalf Of Ralph Finch
> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 1:14 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: How to attach wire to D-sub female pin
>
> -->
>
> Bob and Steve,
>
> Many thanks for this! OK, another question, maybe I can get
> something right:
> would the IDEAL 30-426
> (http://www.idealindustries.com/prodDetail.do?prodId=30-426)
> be a worthy replacement for the RCT-3? I can get the IDEAL
> crimper today from Frys for about the same price as the
> RCT-3; the latter would have several days delay shipping.
>
> RF
> Quoting Bob White <bob@bob-white.com>:
>
> [Hide Quoted Text]
>
> Hi Ralph,
>
> I would recommend going with the RCT-3. It gives you a 4
> point crimp, and will definitely make the proper crimp so
> that the pin will fit into the connector body correctly. I
> don't have any experience using the two sided crimp tool on
> these pins, but if you get an oval shape out of it, it could
> cause problems either with installing the pins or removing
> them later (which is a big advantage of the slip in pins).
>
> Bob W.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: How to attach wire to D-sub female pin |
I agree with Bob. You need the 4 point crimp tool for round machined
pins. Anything that squeezes in form 2 sides may cause grief in the
long run.
Bob W.
Robert Borger wrote:
>
> Ralph,
>
> No, the IDEAL 30-426 is for crimping open-barrel, sheet metal pins.
>
> You need a tool like the RCT-3 designed to do a proper 4-point crimp
> for the pin in your picture.
>
> Check six ,
> Bob Borger
> Europa Kit #A221 N914XL, XS Mono, Intercooled 914, Airmaster C/S
> http://www.europaowners.org/N914XL
> Aircraft Flying!
> 3705 Lynchburg Dr.
> Corinth, TX 76208
> Home: 940-497-2123
> Cel: 817-992-1117
>
> On Feb 26, 2009, at 13:13, Ralph Finch wrote:
>
> > >
> >
> > Bob and Steve,
> >
> > Many thanks for this! OK, another question, maybe I can get
> > something right:
> > would the IDEAL 30-426
> > (http://www.idealindustries.com/prodDetail.do?prodId=30-426)
> > be a worthy replacement for the RCT-3? I can get the IDEAL crimper
> > today
> > from
> > Frys for about the same price as the RCT-3; the latter would have
> > several
> > days
> > delay shipping.
> >
> > RF
> > Quoting Bob White <bob@bob-white.com>:
> >
> > [Hide Quoted Text]
> >
> > Hi Ralph,
> >
> > I would recommend going with the RCT-3. It gives you a 4 point crimp,
> > and will definitely make the proper crimp so that the pin will fit
> > into
> > the connector body correctly. I don't have any experience using the
> > two sided crimp tool on these pins, but if you get an oval shape out
> > of
> > it, it could cause problems either with installing the pins or
> > removing
> > them later (which is a big advantage of the slip in pins).
> >
> > 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/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ralph Finch <rgf(at)dcn.davis.ca.us> |
| Subject: | Re: How to attach wire to D-sub female pin |
Quoting Robert Borger :
>
> Ralph,
>
> No, the IDEAL 30-426 is for crimping open-barrel, sheet metal pins.
>
> You need a tool like the RCT-3 designed to do a proper 4-point crimp
> for the pin in your picture.
>
> Check six ,
> Bob Borger
> Europa Kit #A221 N914XL, XS Mono, Intercooled 914, Airmaster C/S
OK, I ordered the proper tool, and some replacement pins and sockets for the
improperly crimped ones. Thanks again, saved me from frustration down the
road.
Ralph Finch
Davis, CA USA
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: How to attach wire to D-sub female pin |
| From: | Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins(at)gmail.com> |
If I only had a very few pins, I would probably use the open barrel pins,
along with the Ideal crimp tool.
If you are going to do anymore than, say ten pins, you definitely want to go
with the right tool and machined pins.
Sam
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Bob White <bob@bob-white.com> wrote:
>
> I agree with Bob. You need the 4 point crimp tool for round machined
> pins. Anything that squeezes in form 2 sides may cause grief in the
> long run.
>
> Bob W.
>
> Robert Borger wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Ralph,
> >
> > No, the IDEAL 30-426 is for crimping open-barrel, sheet metal pins.
> >
> > You need a tool like the RCT-3 designed to do a proper 4-point crimp
> > for the pin in your picture.
> >
> > Check six ,
> > Bob Borger
> > Europa Kit #A221 N914XL, XS Mono, Intercooled 914, Airmaster C/S
> > http://www.europaowners.org/N914XL
> > Aircraft Flying!
> > 3705 Lynchburg Dr.
> > Corinth, TX 76208
> > Home: 940-497-2123
> > Cel: 817-992-1117
> >
> > On Feb 26, 2009, at 13:13, Ralph Finch wrote:
> >
> rgf(at)dcn.davis.ca.us
> > > >
> > >
> > > Bob and Steve,
> > >
> > > Many thanks for this! OK, another question, maybe I can get
> > > something right:
> > > would the IDEAL 30-426
> > > (http://www.idealindustries.com/prodDetail.do?prodId=30-426)
> > > be a worthy replacement for the RCT-3? I can get the IDEAL crimper
> > > today
> > > from
> > > Frys for about the same price as the RCT-3; the latter would have
> > > several
> > > days
> > > delay shipping.
> > >
> > > RF
> > > Quoting Bob White <bob@bob-white.com>:
> > >
> > > [Hide Quoted Text]
> > >
> > > Hi Ralph,
> > >
> > > I would recommend going with the RCT-3. It gives you a 4 point crimp,
> > > and will definitely make the proper crimp so that the pin will fit
> > > into
> > > the connector body correctly. I don't have any experience using the
> > > two sided crimp tool on these pins, but if you get an oval shape out
> > > of
> > > it, it could cause problems either with installing the pins or
> > > removing
> > > them later (which is a big advantage of the slip in pins).
> > >
> > > 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/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | How to attach wire to D-sub female pin |
At 01:13 PM 2/26/2009, you wrote:
>
>Bob and Steve,
>
>Many thanks for this! OK, another question, maybe I can get something right:
>would the IDEAL 30-426
>(http://www.idealindustries.com/prodDetail.do?prodId=30-426)
>be a worthy replacement for the RCT-3? I can get the IDEAL crimper today
>from
>Frys for about the same price as the RCT-3; the latter would have several
>days
>delay shipping.
No, this tool is for sheet metal, b-crimp pins. If you can't
get a 4-quad tool, it would be better to solder them on.
Tin the strands. Cut a piece of .032" solder and stick it
down inside the wire socket.
Heat the pin and push and hold the wire bottomed out
until it cools.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RScott <rscott(at)cascadeaccess.com> |
| Subject: | [Fwd: Fw: BEST BUMPER STICKER OF THE YEAR!] |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "F. Tim Yoder" <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com> |
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: Fw: BEST BUMPER STICKER OF THE YEAR!] |
Nothing came through.
----- Original Message -----
From: "RScott" <rscott(at)cascadeaccess.com>
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 1:04 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: [Fwd: Fw: BEST BUMPER STICKER OF THE YEAR!]
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: Fw: BEST BUMPER STICKER OF THE YEAR! |
| From: | jaybannist(at)cs.com |
Maybe that was the point.
-----Original Message-----
From: F. Tim Yoder <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com>
Sent: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 5:02 pm
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: [Fwd: Fw: BEST BUMPER STICKER OF THE YEAR!]
Nothing came through.
----- Original Message -----
From: "RScott" <rscott(at)cascadeaccess.com>
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 1:04 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: [Fwd: Fw: BEST BUMPER STICKER OF THE YEAR!]
>
>
>
_
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "r falstad" <bobair8(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Finding the Cause of an Intermittent |
I have a Garmin GNC250XL GPS/Comm, Garmin GTX320 transponder and PS
Engineering intercom in my VFR-only GlaStar. After about 140 hours, the
GPS/Comm has started to shut down and restart intermittently. It
happened once a couple of widely spaced times but is becoming more
frequent. Now it will shut down, restart and then shutdown less than a
minute or so later, repeating this cycle several times. It doesn't
happen on all flights and I may be able to fly for up to an hour before
it happens.
At first I thought it might be caused by heat (I don't have a cooling
fan). But it has happened under enough varying circumstances (and the
fact that the unit starts right up again immediately after it shuts
down), that I now wonder whether either the power or ground wire is
intermittent.
Before I start tearing things apart, I thought I'd ask the group for
their experience, thoughts and suggestions.
My first step would be to turn the radio on in the hangar and simply
start wiggling harnesses to see if I can induce a shut down. The
transponder and intercom (and other electrically driven items) all work
fine.
Any thoughts? Thanks.
Best regards,
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Finding the Cause of an Intermittent |
r falstad wrote:
> I have a Garmin GNC250XL GPS/Comm, Garmin GTX320 transponder and PS
> Engineering intercom in my VFR-only GlaStar. After about 140 hours,
> the GPS/Comm has started to shut down and restart intermittently. It
> happened once a couple of widely spaced times but is becoming more
> frequent. Now it will shut down, restart and then shutdown less than
> a minute or so later, repeating this cycle several times. It doesn't
> happen on all flights and I may be able to fly for up to an hour
> before it happens.
>
> At first I thought it might be caused by heat (I don't have a cooling
> fan). But it has happened under enough varying circumstances (and the
> fact that the unit starts right up again immediately after it shuts
> down), that I now wonder whether either the power or ground wire is
> intermittent.
>
> Before I start tearing things apart, I thought I'd ask the group for
> their experience, thoughts and suggestions.
>
> My first step would be to turn the radio on in the hangar and simply
> start wiggling harnesses to see if I can induce a shut down. The
> transponder and intercom (and other electrically driven items) all
> work fine.
>
> Any thoughts? Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Bob
I'd say that you've got the right idea. Just start out by gently tapping
stuff instead of giving it a hard yank or whack. Reason is not so much
to prevent damage, as to prevent re-seating a connector that might be
intermittent. If that happens, you might make the problem disappear for
weeks or months before it comes back.
One thing to watch for is sub-D pins that have partially backed out of
their shell. Another is having a component not completely seated in its
tray & the lock screw tightened. Either of these situations can cause an
intermittent that's really hard to find.
You could have an intermittent inside the radio. If external checks
don't reveal anything, try to borrow someone else's radio & plug it in
your tray (swap with them for a few flights).
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Why are antenna torroids painted different colors? |
At 11:56 PM 2/25/2009, you wrote:
>Just received torroids from Aircraft Spruce for Quickie antenna kit
>PN 11-0990 that I want to fool with on my Europa project.
>
>They are painted green then the Mfg. painted the face on one side white.
>
>Why is one face painted white and do I need to concern myself with
>which way I install them on RG-400 antenna cable?
They are not "polarity" sensitive. My best guess is that
this was a material identification marking scheme offered
by the original specifier of the core.
Cores can be fabricated in dozens of "standard" and an
infinite number of custom mixes depending on design
goals for the end product. As an example, here's a sampling
of common materials offered by one popular supplier
of cores to the hobby and manufacturing venues.
https://www.amidoncorp.com/categories/7
I've worked with cores in the past that were stripped
with bands of color not unlike a resistor. The
practice of color coding is becoming much less common
with the development of high-speed laser marking
machines. If parts we receive today are marked at
all, it will be with some combination of characters
unique to that part.
With respect to the usefulness of cores over an
antenna feedline, the practice is problematic.
Many commercial cables are fabricated with such
devices installed.
Emacs!
We read dozens of articles/conversations on the web
that suggest they are "good" and just as many who say
they're a "waste of time".
http://tinyurl.com/d8sakj
None the less, that doesn't discourage train-loads
of the things being offered and sold in a host
of types and sizes.
http://www.thefind.com/instruments/info-ferrite-core-radio
Bottom line is that any product that is vulnerable
to external noises -OR- is a potential generator
of deleterious noises should be filtered at the
wall of the box. We had a discussion about this concerning
strobe supply noises last week.
Any time the INSTALLER improves on the operation
of some system by putting band-aids of any kind on
interconnecting wires . . .there's something seriously
wrong with the design goals of the antagonist, victim
or both.
Sliding a few ferrite beads over an antenna coax have
been shown to produce no practical effects . . . i.e.
did not improve on the system's ability to coexist with
lots of other potential antagonists or victims. The
benefits ARE measurable . . . if you've got a screen
room and a boat-load of good test equipment. But the
effects are so small as to be difficult to measure.
The interference conditions we're likely to encounter
in practice will be so severe that the effects provided
by a few beads have a poor probability of solving
a problem.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: E-bus and sd-8 alternator connections Z-13/8 |
Q
At 08:53 PM 2/25/2009, you wrote:
>
>I had one other thought...since I had the understanding that it
>would not be good to run an alternator without the battery in line I
>would use a double pole switch which would activate the e-bus
>alternate feed and alternator at the same time thereby I would never
>have the chance to turn the alternator (SD-8) on without the e-bus
>on. Is this wise (correct).
>Thanks
No, the idea behind the self-excitation modification to
the as-supplied SD-8 rectifier/regulator was to assist
it's stand alone capability. The noise from an SD-8
sans battery isn't outrageous. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/SD-8_Noise_Data.pdf
On page 5 we see that the SD-8 lightly loaded (3A) with
10KuF capacitor of unknown pedigree and no battery was
about 1.9 volts Pk-Pk. On page 7 I measured only 160 mV
pk-pk with a new 47KuF capacitor and light load. Page
8 shows full load of about the same noise level.
Bottom line is that at worst you might hear some
130/260 Hz hum in the background if your capacitor
is soggy but at all other times, the SD-8 should
perform to design goals as a stand-alone energy
source.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dale Ellis <rv8builder(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Finding the Cause of an Intermittent |
before you do too much, try changing the Circuit Breaker (assuming that the device
is protected by a CB rather then a fuse). Or checking the conections on the
CB or fuse.
Just some thoughts.
Dale
-----Original Message-----
>From: Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>
>Sent: Feb 28, 2009 1:57 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Finding the Cause of an Intermittent
>
>
>r falstad wrote:
>> I have a Garmin GNC250XL GPS/Comm, Garmin GTX320 transponder and PS
>> Engineering intercom in my VFR-only GlaStar. After about 140 hours,
>> the GPS/Comm has started to shut down and restart intermittently. It
>> happened once a couple of widely spaced times but is becoming more
>> frequent. Now it will shut down, restart and then shutdown less than
>> a minute or so later, repeating this cycle several times. It doesn't
>> happen on all flights and I may be able to fly for up to an hour
>> before it happens.
>>
>> At first I thought it might be caused by heat (I don't have a cooling
>> fan). But it has happened under enough varying circumstances (and the
>> fact that the unit starts right up again immediately after it shuts
>> down), that I now wonder whether either the power or ground wire is
>> intermittent.
>>
>> Before I start tearing things apart, I thought I'd ask the group for
>> their experience, thoughts and suggestions.
>>
>> My first step would be to turn the radio on in the hangar and simply
>> start wiggling harnesses to see if I can induce a shut down. The
>> transponder and intercom (and other electrically driven items) all
>> work fine.
>>
>> Any thoughts? Thanks.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Bob
>
>I'd say that you've got the right idea. Just start out by gently tapping
>stuff instead of giving it a hard yank or whack. Reason is not so much
>to prevent damage, as to prevent re-seating a connector that might be
>intermittent. If that happens, you might make the problem disappear for
>weeks or months before it comes back.
>
>One thing to watch for is sub-D pins that have partially backed out of
>their shell. Another is having a component not completely seated in its
>tray & the lock screw tightened. Either of these situations can cause an
>intermittent that's really hard to find.
>
>You could have an intermittent inside the radio. If external checks
>don't reveal anything, try to borrow someone else's radio & plug it in
>your tray (swap with them for a few flights).
>
>Charlie
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "F. Tim Yoder" <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com> |
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: Fw: BEST BUMPER STICKER OF THE YEAR! |
Which side is the stickey side?
----- Original Message -----
From: jaybannist(at)cs.com
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 4:32 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: [Fwd: Fw: BEST BUMPER STICKER OF THE
YEAR!
Maybe that was the point.
-----Original Message-----
From: F. Tim Yoder <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com>
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 5:02 pm
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: [Fwd: Fw: BEST BUMPER STICKER OF THE
YEAR!]
Nothing came through.
----- Original Message -----
From: "RScott" <rscott(at)cascadeaccess.com>
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 1:04 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: [Fwd: Fw: BEST BUMPER STICKER OF THE YEAR!]
>
>
>
_
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at
http://www.cs.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Finch" <rgf(at)dcn.davis.ca.us> |
| Subject: | LED Strobe Question for Bob Nuckolls |
Hello Bob,
I have your 1000ma AEC9051 filtered BuckPuck and some Luxeon Star III and
Rebel Star LEDs (http://www.luxeonstar.com/). Also downloaded and read
through the various data sheets for your filtered setup, the BuckPucks, and
the Luxeon LEDs. The BuckPuck used in your AEC9051 is the -E model,
external control, which allows the output--and thus the LED--to be switched
on and off. The BuckPuck datasheet even has several simple circuit diagrams
showing how to reduce the current and set up strobed LEDs...but lacking in
their diagrams and my head is any knowledge of how to make a strobe (pulse)
logic circuit.
I'm thinking that the brightest neutral white LEDs (e.g. Endor Rebel - Cool
White, Tri-Emitter, 435 Lumens @ 700mA
http://www.luxeonstar.com/endor-rebel-cool-white-triemitter-435-lumens-700ma
-p-179.php), if pulsed, could substitute for a traditional gas tube strobe.
But it would need a logic circuit to pulse the BuckPuck control signal in a
strob-ish fashion...single, double, or triple wink, etc. Would you care to
design such a circuit and post? And maybe, if demand exists, offer it
builtin to your AEC9051s.
Thanks for reading--
Ralph Finch
Davis CA
RV-9A QB and slow-build ;-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Finding the Cause of an Intermittent |
This is a known problem with an older version of the operating system in the
250XL. I had the same problem and could reproduce it in the hangar without
any engine running, so no loose connections. I took it out of the tray and took
to the avionics shop. A call to Garmin said to update the system version and
that took care of it. It is not the data base card, but an internal program
that the avionics shop had to order and install for me. My 250XL was
purchased in 97 and started "rebooting" like you describe after I updated the
data
base card. It's probably an incompatibility between the old operating system
and new data base. Easy fix, though a shop charge for the installation.
John Greaves
Redding, CA
VariEze N81JG and RV7A N781JG
**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brooks Wolfe" <slipstream(at)wavecable.com> |
I'm a big fan of simplicity when it comes to emergency situations and the
procedures that go along with it. With that concept in mind, could the
switches for the E-bus alternate feed and the Aux Alt OFF/ON switches be
combined into one two-pole switch? It seems it might make a quicker
transition from normal configuration with the main alternator failed to
operating with the standby alternator powering battery bus and E-bus.
Brooks
RV-7
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joe" <fran5sew(at)banyanol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revision 12 pre-published release |
Bob, I sent you another private email with the subject "Aeroelectric
Rev12A Proofread".
Joe Gores
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Diode across main contactor fat terminals |
| From: | "user9253" <fran5sew(at)banyanol.com> |
On May 23, 2008, I posted a hypothetical question about Z-19 main battery charging current back feeding through the endurance bus and blowing fuses in the event that the main battery contactor fails and the pilot closes the endurance bus alternate feed switch. http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=184591&sid=86e2d2ac21d95a18ce267b57c4fcd85e
To prevent the above scenario, what if a diode were placed across the main contactor
fat terminals? If the contactor fails, this diode would prevent the main
battery from discharging. What are the disadvantages? If this diode shorted
out (diode failures are rare), then the pilot would lose the ability to shut
off the master switch in case of an electrical fire. However, current would
be limited by the lead size of the diode, similar to a fusible link. The chances
of an electrical fire and the diode failing on the same flight are extremely
remote. If one is concerned that the diode failure would go unnoticed at engine
shut down, then a warning chime could be connected to terminal 3 of the
master switch. I think the odds of the main contactor failing and associated
pilot error (with dangerous consequences) are greater than the odds of a diode
failing (with minimal consequences). What are your thoughts?
Joe
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232580#232580
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/contactor_diode_955.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "user9253" <fran5sew(at)banyanol.com> |
On page 50 of the April 2009 issue of Kitplanes Magazine, Bob Fritz installs Polyfuses
in his Jabiru. He said that Polyfuses are used to protect electric window
motors in cars. Have Polyfuses been proven in the field to be reliable?
If so, can we or should we be using them in our airplanes? The endurance bus
would be an ideal application for Polyfuses. They would protect the wiring by
limiting the current. If they open, they will automatically reset upon removal
of the overload condition. Bob Fritz put LEDs in parallel with the Polyfuses
to indicate an overload condition. Advantages of the Polyfuse are light weight,
low cost, do not take up panel space, and require no pilot action to reset.
What do you think?
Joe
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232584#232584
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Ensing" <densing(at)carolina.rr.com> |
The EXP BUS uses polyfuses. The unit is my RV-6A has been problem
free/working successfully for five years.
Dale Ensing
----- Original Message -----
From: "user9253" <fran5sew(at)banyanol.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 10:23 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Polyfuses
>
>
> On page 50 of the April 2009 issue of Kitplanes Magazine, Bob Fritz
> installs Polyfuses in his Jabiru. He said that Polyfuses are used to
> protect electric window motors in cars. Have Polyfuses been proven in the
> field to be reliable? If so, can we or should we be using them in our
> airplanes? The endurance bus would be an ideal application for Polyfuses.
> They would protect the wiring by limiting the current. If they open, they
> will automatically reset upon removal of the overload condition. Bob
> Fritz put LEDs in parallel with the Polyfuses to indicate an overload
> condition. Advantages of the Polyfuse are light weight, low cost, do not
> take up panel space, and require no pilot action to reset. What do you
> think?
> Joe
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232584#232584
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Revision 12 pre-published release |
| From: | "rckol" <rckol(at)kaehlers.com> |
Bob,
The discussion of Z14 is not consistent with the figure. The discussion indicates
that the Z14 drawing depicts a 60 amp primary and a 20 amp secondary alternator,
but the drawing itself shows (2) 40 amp alternators as you suggest might
be used with a twin engine aircraft.
--------
rck
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232599#232599
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Henry Trzeciakowski" <hammer408(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wiring / Relay Question |
Bob
I've placed my Battery Bus Firewall forward next to the Battery Contactor,
just above the 60 amp current limiter. I have a 14 g (15 amp) wire going
from battery bus thru firewall to a 7104 relay, as per the Heavy Duty E bus
configuration.
My question, should I use an additional relay or "something" between the
Battery Bus (15amp - 14 g wire)-firewall forward - and the relay which is
next to my E-Bus - mounted on sub-panel - for added safety?
Thanks
Henry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 6:18 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Revision 12 pre-published release
>
> I've put copies of the Revision 12 pages up at:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Rev12A/
>
> . . . for your review. I'll be going to the printers
> with it next week. In the mean time, knowing of any
> potholes that folks can spot would be appreciated.
>
>
> 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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LED Strobe Question for Bob Nuckolls |
At 09:03 PM 2/28/2009, you wrote:
>
>Hello Bob,
>
>I have your 1000ma AEC9051 filtered BuckPuck and some Luxeon Star III and
>Rebel Star LEDs (http://www.luxeonstar.com/). Also downloaded and read
>through the various data sheets for your filtered setup, the BuckPucks, and
>the Luxeon LEDs. The BuckPuck used in your AEC9051 is the -E model,
>external control, which allows the output--and thus the LED--to be switched
>on and off. The BuckPuck datasheet even has several simple circuit diagrams
>showing how to reduce the current and set up strobed LEDs...but lacking in
>their diagrams and my head is any knowledge of how to make a strobe (pulse)
>logic circuit.
>
>I'm thinking that the brightest neutral white LEDs (e.g. Endor Rebel - Cool
>White, Tri-Emitter, 435 Lumens @ 700mA
>http://www.luxeonstar.com/endor-rebel-cool-white-triemitter-435-lumens-700ma
>-p-179.php), if pulsed, could substitute for a traditional gas tube strobe.
>But it would need a logic circuit to pulse the BuckPuck control signal in a
>strob-ish fashion...single, double, or triple wink, etc. Would you care to
>design such a circuit and post? And maybe, if demand exists, offer it
>builtin to your AEC9051s.
We could do that. The question to be explored is whether or not
any combination of LEDs driven by a 1000mA Buck-Puck provides
adequate intensity to (1) be a useful anti-collison attention
getter and (2) satisfy requirements levied upon us by FAR91.205
I saw LED anti-collision products from the likes of Whelen,
Grimes, et. als. that circulated through the halls of Hawker-Beech
for probably the last ten years. They all went to the notion of
offering "approved" anti-collision lighting. I've not followed the
evolution of those products as they were never part of my work
assignment. But the last examples I saw were fitted with large
arrays (dozens) of LED emitters.
Of course, this technology is moving ahead at break-neck
speed and I would not be surprised if components now exist
that would make your suggestion practical. But the configuration
of devices to provide both intensity and spherical spread
of emissions needs to be addressed first. Doing electronics
to drive it will be easy.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z13 switches |
At 01:21 AM 3/1/2009, you wrote:
>I'm a big fan of simplicity when it comes to emergency situations
>and the procedures that go along with it. With that concept in
>mind, could the switches for the E-bus alternate feed and the Aux
>Alt OFF/ON switches be combined into one two-pole switch? It seems
>it might make a quicker transition from normal configuration with
>the main alternator failed to operating with the standby alternator
>powering battery bus and E-bus.
The combined functions into one switch offers a single
point of failure for more than one system. The
goal of the architecture published is to avoid
having a failure become an emergency. When the low
voltage light comes on, if it took you a minute
to change the system configuration for battery-only
running . . . the outcome of your flight would no
be altered.
Another way of saying it is to suggest that low
voltage in a failure tolerant design is never
an emergency that begs for speedy and perhaps
ill-considered or poorly executed actions.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Czygan <bczygan(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | LED position and landing lights |
What are the brightest LED's available? I'm thinking of position lights and also
wonder what is state of the art. Could LED's be used for a real landing and
taxi light or lights?
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Czygan <bczygan(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | LED position and landing lights |
What are the brightest LED's available? I'm thinking of position lights and also
wonder what is state of the art. Could LED's be used for a real landing and
taxi light or lights?
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 10:13 AM 3/1/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>The EXP BUS uses polyfuses. The unit is my RV-6A has been problem
>free/working successfully for five years.
>Dale Ensing
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "user9253" <fran5sew(at)banyanol.com>
>To:
>Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 10:23 AM
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Polyfuses
>
>
>>
>>On page 50 of the April 2009 issue of Kitplanes Magazine, Bob Fritz
>>installs Polyfuses in his Jabiru. He said that Polyfuses are used
>>to protect electric window motors in cars. Have Polyfuses been
>>proven in the field to be reliable? If so, can we or should we be
>>using them in our airplanes? The endurance bus would be an ideal
>>application for Polyfuses. They would protect the wiring by
>>limiting the current. If they open, they will automatically reset
>>upon removal of the overload condition. Bob Fritz put LEDs in
>>parallel with the Polyfuses to indicate an overload
>>condition. Advantages of the Polyfuse are light weight, low cost,
>>do not take up panel space, and require no pilot action to
>>reset. What do you think?
>>Joe
These are
http://www.matronics.com/search/
Search first on polyswitch and a second search
on polyfuse.
Also check this thread on the topic . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/expbusthd.html
We looked at polyfuses at both Gates-Learjet
and Beech/RAC/Hawker-Beech numerous times over
the years and to date, I'm aware of no practical
application of these parts into airframe wiring.
They were originally intended for and serve quite
nicely as overload protection devices inside and
soldered to the etched circuit broads of
an appliance.
The TC aircraft guys (including your humble
scribe) have yet to identify a warm-fuzzy use
for these capable devices of specific utility.
I experimented with some as back up temperature
limiters in an ice-detector installation a few
years ago. That was a 115VAC, 400Hz application.
We made them work but ultimately went another
route.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Leffler" <rv(at)thelefflers.com> |
| Subject: | LED Strobe Question for Bob Nuckolls |
25.1401 Anti-collision Lights states:
f) Minimum effective intensities for anticollision lights. Each
anticollision light effective intensity must equal or exceed the applicable
values in the following table.
------------------------------------------------------------
Effective
Angle above or below the horizontal plane intensity
(candles)
------------------------------------------------------------
0 to 5........................................ 400
5 to 10....................................... 240
10 to 20...................................... 80
20 to 30...................................... 40
30 to 75...................................... 20
------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't think that would be too difficult to do with Luxon Star IIIs.
Nova was able to get 660+ lumens with just 4 LEDs.
-----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: Sunday, March 01, 2009 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: LED Strobe Question for Bob Nuckolls
At 09:03 PM 2/28/2009, you wrote:
>
>Hello Bob,
>
>I have your 1000ma AEC9051 filtered BuckPuck and some Luxeon Star III and
>Rebel Star LEDs (http://www.luxeonstar.com/). Also downloaded and read
>through the various data sheets for your filtered setup, the BuckPucks, and
>the Luxeon LEDs. The BuckPuck used in your AEC9051 is the -E model,
>external control, which allows the output--and thus the LED--to be switched
>on and off. The BuckPuck datasheet even has several simple circuit diagrams
>showing how to reduce the current and set up strobed LEDs...but lacking in
>their diagrams and my head is any knowledge of how to make a strobe (pulse)
>logic circuit.
>1401
>I'm thinking that the brightest neutral white LEDs (e.g. Endor Rebel - Cool
>White, Tri-Emitter, 435 Lumens @ 700mA
>http://www.luxeonstar.com/endor-rebel-cool-white-triemitter-435-lumens-700m
a
>-p-179.php), if pulsed, could substitute for a traditional gas tube strobe.
>But it would need a logic circuit to pulse the BuckPuck control signal in a
>strob-ish fashion...single, double, or triple wink, etc. Would you care to
>design such a circuit and post? And maybe, if demand exists, offer it
>builtin to your AEC9051s.
We could do that. The question to be explored is whether or not
any combination of LEDs driven by a 1000mA Buck-Puck provides
adequate intensity to (1) be a useful anti-collison attention
getter and (2) satisfy requirements levied upon us by FAR91.205
I saw LED anti-collision products from the likes of Whelen,
Grimes, et. als. that circulated through the halls of Hawker-Beech
for probably the last ten years. They all went to the notion of
offering "approved" anti-collision lighting. I've not followed the
evolution of those products as they were never part of my work
assignment. But the last examples I saw were fitted with large
arrays (dozens) of LED emitters.
Of course, this technology is moving ahead at break-neck
speed and I would not be surprised if components now exist
that would make your suggestion practical. But the configuration
of devices to provide both intensity and spherical spread
of emissions needs to be addressed first. Doing electronics
to drive it will be easy.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | LED Strobe Question for Bob Nuckolls |
At 03:50 PM 3/1/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>25.1401 Anti-collision Lights states:
>
>f) Minimum effective intensities for anticollision lights. Each
>anticollision light effective intensity must equal or exceed the applicable
>values in the following table.
>------------------------------------------------------------
>Effective
>Angle above or below the horizontal plane intensity
>(candles)
>------------------------------------------------------------
>0 to 5........................................ 400
>5 to 10....................................... 240
>10 to 20...................................... 80
>20 to 30...................................... 40
>30 to 75...................................... 20
>------------------------------------------------------------
Keep in mind that these are contiguous coverage values
measured on a circle. Unlike the helical gas filled tubes
or even the halogen lamps of the old AeroFlash lights,
the LED tends to be pretty directional with the rated
output being measured on maximum output axis.
See:
http://www.philipslumileds.com/technology/radiationpatterns.cfm
So the trick is to select an array of emitters and
position them so that their patterns overlap to
offer the light levels cited above wherein you can
do a spherical study of the entire dome above the
fixture and get readings that comply with the
numbers in the chart.
This could easily take dozens of emitters . . .
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Rev 12A prepublication posting |
I just finished a revision to the Alternator chapter
and posted it along with change 1 to the Battery chapter
at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Rev12A/
Thanks to all who have participated in combing the nits
out of the text. I've received some additional responses
from the sharp-eyed proof readers for the Battery chapter
so I'll go to work on Change 2. Any assistance folks can
offer on the Alternator chapter is most welcome too.
I'm hoping to get the E-Book version to Rev 12 up on
the website early next week . . . and get the files off
to the printers for paper copies.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Pengilly" <peter(at)sportingaero.com> |
My EXPBUS had been problem free for 7 years but is now giving occasional
very short duration (momentary) power cuts. Really tricky to figure exactly
what is going on. I thinking of ripping it out and installing a regular fuse
block. Will also be much easier to add electrical items in the future.
Peter
RV-6A ~600 hours
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dale
Ensing
Sent: 01 March 2009 16:13
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Polyfuses
The EXP BUS uses polyfuses. The unit is my RV-6A has been problem
free/working successfully for five years.
Dale Ensing
----- Original Message -----
From: "user9253" <fran5sew(at)banyanol.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 10:23 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Polyfuses
>
>
> On page 50 of the April 2009 issue of Kitplanes Magazine, Bob Fritz
> installs Polyfuses in his Jabiru. He said that Polyfuses are used to
> protect electric window motors in cars. Have Polyfuses been proven in the
> field to be reliable? If so, can we or should we be using them in our
> airplanes? The endurance bus would be an ideal application for Polyfuses.
> They would protect the wiring by limiting the current. If they open, they
> will automatically reset upon removal of the overload condition. Bob
> Fritz put LEDs in parallel with the Polyfuses to indicate an overload
> condition. Advantages of the Polyfuse are light weight, low cost, do not
> take up panel space, and require no pilot action to reset. What do you
> think?
> Joe
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232584#232584
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Daniel Langhout <dllang(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LED Strobe Question for Bob Nuckolls |
Unfortunately, one rebel isn't even close to the required candela for a
compliant strobe. To meet the the most stressing effective candela
requirement (400 over an elevation range of +- 5 degrees) you really
need a peak intensity of at least 600 candela over these angles. This
is because the FAA's definition of effective candela is a function of
the duration of the flash and it works out that you generally wouldn't
want a flash duration of more than about 400 msecs and you would really
rather have less. The flash duration of your typical xeon flash tube is
much much shorter than that. At some point it becomes a "blink" instead
of a "flash". At any rate, I have been working with a setup that uses
12 of these rebels arranged in a 1" circle and pulsed at 1 amp. This
measured out at well over 750 candela on axis but the problem is that
because of the lambertian distribution pattern of these LED's, the
intensity falls off as you move off axis. At +- 60 degrees off axis,
your down to about 1/2 the intensity which in this case is about 375
candela. A typical setup using 2 wingtip lights and one tail light has
each wingtip light covering 110 degrees of azimuth and the tail light
covering the remaining 140 to get the total 360 degrees around the
aircraft. Now I believe that with the proper use of some reflectors to
focus the output into the angles where its needed that this setup has
enough output to meet the specs over a 110 to 140 degree azimuth - but
that's with 12 of these devices! This could be driven with 4 BuckPucks
controlled with a single Microchip PIC - in fact, that is the setup I
used in my initial fiddling with these things. There is a diagram of
how to hook this up in the BuckPuck documentation. The hardware is bone
simple, but of course you now get to provide the functionality via
software on the PIC. Pick your poison - hardware or software! I took
the software route because it's much easier to change or tweak the
functionality by modifying the code than by changing hardware.
There is a reason the market is not just covered up with LED aviation
anti collision lights - it's hard to do!
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
> At 09:03 PM 2/28/2009, you wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hello Bob,
>>
>> I have your 1000ma AEC9051 filtered BuckPuck and some Luxeon Star III
>> and
>> Rebel Star LEDs (http://www.luxeonstar.com/). Also downloaded and read
>> through the various data sheets for your filtered setup, the
>> BuckPucks, and
>> the Luxeon LEDs. The BuckPuck used in your AEC9051 is the -E model,
>> external control, which allows the output--and thus the LED--to be
>> switched
>> on and off. The BuckPuck datasheet even has several simple circuit
>> diagrams
>> showing how to reduce the current and set up strobed LEDs...but
>> lacking in
>> their diagrams and my head is any knowledge of how to make a strobe
>> (pulse)
>> logic circuit.
>>
>> I'm thinking that the brightest neutral white LEDs (e.g. Endor Rebel
>> - Cool
>> White, Tri-Emitter, 435 Lumens @ 700mA
>> http://www.luxeonstar.com/endor-rebel-cool-white-triemitter-435-lumens-700ma
>>
>> -p-179.php), if pulsed, could substitute for a traditional gas tube
>> strobe.
>> But it would need a logic circuit to pulse the BuckPuck control
>> signal in a
>> strob-ish fashion...single, double, or triple wink, etc. Would you
>> care to
>> design such a circuit and post? And maybe, if demand exists, offer it
>> builtin to your AEC9051s.
>
> We could do that. The question to be explored is whether or not
> any combination of LEDs driven by a 1000mA Buck-Puck provides
> adequate intensity to (1) be a useful anti-collison attention
> getter and (2) satisfy requirements levied upon us by FAR91.205
>
> I saw LED anti-collision products from the likes of Whelen,
> Grimes, et. als. that circulated through the halls of Hawker-Beech
> for probably the last ten years. They all went to the notion of
> offering "approved" anti-collision lighting. I've not followed the
> evolution of those products as they were never part of my work
> assignment. But the last examples I saw were fitted with large
> arrays (dozens) of LED emitters.
>
> Of course, this technology is moving ahead at break-neck
> speed and I would not be surprised if components now exist
> that would make your suggestion practical. But the configuration
> of devices to provide both intensity and spherical spread
> of emissions needs to be addressed first. Doing electronics
> to drive it will be easy.
>
>
> 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> |
| Subject: | LED Strobe Question for Bob Nuckolls |
My comments are interspersed in the quoted message:
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 3:34 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: LED Strobe Question for Bob Nuckolls
>
>
> Unfortunately, one rebel isn't even close to the required candela for a
> compliant strobe. To meet the the most stressing effective candela
> requirement (400 over an elevation range of +- 5 degrees) you really
> need a peak intensity of at least 600 candela over these angles. This
> is because the FAA's definition of effective candela is a function of
> the duration of the flash and it works out that you generally wouldn't
> want a flash duration of more than about 400 msecs and you would really
> rather have less. The flash duration of your typical xeon flash tube
> is much much shorter than that.
Assuming the LED's light output is constant over the flash duration, a
longer
duration works in our favor. At 200ms for instance the FAA's effective I
(measured
in cd) is 1/2 the LED output. That is, one might want to assume 800 cd
required.
> measured out at well over 750 candela on axis but the problem is that
> because of the lambertian distribution pattern of these LED's, the
> intensity falls off as you move off axis.
OK, but Luxeon makes high quality but cheap lenses to concentrate the light,
For instance this elliptical lens.
(http://www.luxeonstar.com/polymer-optics-6%C2%B0-x-25%C2%B0-collimator-with
-holder-fits-rebel-leds-p-423.php)
Also they can be overdriven and produce up to double their rated output
(Fig. 10 in
http://www.luxeonstar.com/polymer-optics-6%C2%B0-x-25%C2%B0-collimator-with-
holder-fits-rebel-leds-p-423.php)
> There is a reason the market is not just covered up with LED aviation
> anti collision lights - it's hard to do!
I still believe it's not that hard, but commercially unlikely...the only
market is the experimental
market.
Another possibility is forward recognition lights...a substitute for
wig-wagged landing lights.
One or two Rebel Stars in each wingtip, say one facing forward, one at an
outward angle, with
lens to focus the light further, blinking at 0.5 to 2 Hz....would it be
noticed from a few thousand
yards?
Would you mind posting the hardware diagram for the Microchip PIC you used?
Maybe an example code?
Hey, these are experimental airplanes :-)
Thanks,
Ralph Finch
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: LED position and landing lights |
| From: | rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US |
Hi Bill
"> What are the brightest LED's available? I'm thinking of
position lights
> and also wonder what is state of the art. Could
LED's be used for a real
> landing and taxi light or
lights?"
You can have a look at what I chose for Landing
and Taxi LEDs @
http://www.europaowners.org/modules.php?set_albumName=album271&op=modload&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_album.php
and LED position lights@
http://www.europaowners.org/modules.php?set_albumName=album278&op=modload&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_album.php
still batteling with Kuntzleman strobe noise, I traded in my Double
Magnum which was mounted in fuse, for two single units that strobe twice
as much each head but are now located at the wingtips. Getting close to a
resolution, but if i had to do it again would bite the bullet and get at
least a Whelen power supply. Note that I melted a lens by running the head
inside the hangar for over an hour chasing noise. The original power
supply drives head half as hard as the new singles, thus new power
supplies makes head getit get hotterl.
Ron Parigoris
>
> Bill
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revision 12 pre-published release |
At 11:40 AM 3/1/2009, you wrote:
>
>Bob,
>
>The discussion of Z14 is not consistent with the figure. The
>discussion indicates that the Z14 drawing depicts a 60 amp primary
>and a 20 amp secondary alternator, but the drawing itself shows (2)
>40 amp alternators as you suggest might be used with a twin engine aircraft.
>
>--------
>rck
Yeah . . . but keep in mind that these are architecture
drawings, not recipes for success. Z-14 has been installed
on Twin Comanches down to RV-7s with a variety of mixes
for alternators (and in the case of the Comanche, starters
too).
I should probably remove all size designators from the
alternators. I'll mull that over for the next slice
to the Z-figures. Thanks for the input!
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Revision 12 pre-published release |
| From: | "McFarland, Randy" <Randy.McFarland(at)novellus.com> |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________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Revision 12 pre-published release |
| From: | "McFarland, Randy" <Randy.McFarland(at)novellus.com> |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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | B and C Starter relay |
Does anyone know how much current the B & C S702-1 starter relay draws at the "S"
terminal when active?
I know that the two large terminals will carry what I need - I'm trying to determine
if the 6A @ 12VDC capable switch that I would like to use is sufficient
or whether I need a relay to drive the starter relay.
Thanks,
Ralph Capen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
| Subject: | B and C Starter relay |
I don't know for sure but I would not go with an intermediate relay in any case
as you are adding parts count..I.e something else that can leave you stranded
far away from home if it goes wrong.
If you need to (and I doubt that you will because this is a short term load) I
would get a bigger switch.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph E. Capen
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 8:36 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: B and C Starter relay
-->
Does anyone know how much current the B & C S702-1 starter relay draws at the "S"
terminal when active?
I know that the two large terminals will carry what I need - I'm trying to determine
if the 6A @ 12VDC capable switch that I would like to use is sufficient
or whether I need a relay to drive the starter relay.
Thanks,
Ralph Capen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dale Rogers <dale.r(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: B and C Starter relay |
Ralph,
Do you have access to an ohm meter (or DMM)?
Measure the resistance of the relay coil (S-term to GND)
and divide 12v by the value you get and you will have
the amperes it draws.
Dale R.
Ralph E. Capen wrote:
>
> Does anyone know how much current the B & C S702-1 starter relay draws at the
"S" terminal when active?
>
> I know that the two large terminals will carry what I need - I'm trying to determine
if the 6A @ 12VDC capable switch that I would like to use is sufficient
or whether I need a relay to drive the starter relay.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | B and C Starter relay |
Frank,
I like your answer........
Ralph
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
>Sent: Mar 2, 2009 11:55 AM
>To: "aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com"
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: B and C Starter relay
>
>
>I don't know for sure but I would not go with an intermediate relay in any case
as you are adding parts count..I.e something else that can leave you stranded
far away from home if it goes wrong.
>
>If you need to (and I doubt that you will because this is a short term load) I
would get a bigger switch.
>
>Frank
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph E. Capen
>Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 8:36 AM
>To: Aeroelectric-list
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: B and C Starter relay
>
>-->
>
>Does anyone know how much current the B & C S702-1 starter relay draws at the
"S" terminal when active?
>
>I know that the two large terminals will carry what I need - I'm trying to determine
if the 6A @ 12VDC capable switch that I would like to use is sufficient
or whether I need a relay to drive the starter relay.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Ralph Capen
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: B and C Starter relay |
B&C's website states "Coil resistance is 2.5 ohms."
12 divided by 2.5 equals 4.8 - I guess this is my first electrical engineering
lesson?!
If this is correct, it does tell me that my switch is OK.....
-----Original Message-----
>From: Dale Rogers <dale.r(at)cox.net>
>Sent: Mar 2, 2009 12:00 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: B and C Starter relay
>
>
>Ralph,
>
> Do you have access to an ohm meter (or DMM)?
>Measure the resistance of the relay coil (S-term to GND)
>and divide 12v by the value you get and you will have
>the amperes it draws.
>
>Dale R.
>
>Ralph E. Capen wrote:
>>
>> Does anyone know how much current the B & C S702-1 starter relay draws at the
"S" terminal when active?
>>
>> I know that the two large terminals will carry what I need - I'm trying to determine
if the 6A @ 12VDC capable switch that I would like to use is sufficient
or whether I need a relay to drive the starter relay.
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
| Subject: | B and C Starter relay |
Yup!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph E. Capen
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: B and C Starter relay
-->
B&C's website states "Coil resistance is 2.5 ohms."
12 divided by 2.5 equals 4.8 - I guess this is my first electrical engineering
lesson?!
If this is correct, it does tell me that my switch is OK.....
-----Original Message-----
>From: Dale Rogers <dale.r(at)cox.net>
>Sent: Mar 2, 2009 12:00 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: B and C Starter relay
>
>
>Ralph,
>
> Do you have access to an ohm meter (or DMM)?
>Measure the resistance of the relay coil (S-term to GND) and divide 12v
>by the value you get and you will have the amperes it draws.
>
>Dale R.
>
>Ralph E. Capen wrote:
>> -->
>>
>> Does anyone know how much current the B & C S702-1 starter relay draws at the
"S" terminal when active?
>>
>> I know that the two large terminals will carry what I need - I'm trying to determine
if the 6A @ 12VDC capable switch that I would like to use is sufficient
or whether I need a relay to drive the starter relay.
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | B and C Starter relay |
| From: | John Cox <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
A great rule of thumb is to size your switch so any surge current does not
exceed 80% of its capacity.
John Cox
From: Ralph E. Capen
Sent: Mon 3/2/2009 10:00 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: B and C Starter relay
k.net>
B&C's website states "Coil resistance is 2.5 ohms."
12 divided by 2.5 equals 4.8 - I guess this is my first electrical engineer
ing lesson?!
If this is correct, it does tell me that my switch is OK.....
-----Original Message-----
>From: Dale Rogers <dale.r(at)cox.net>
>Sent: Mar 2, 2009 12:00 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: B and C Starter relay
>
>
>Ralph,
>
> Do you have access to an ohm meter (or DMM)?
>Measure the resistance of the relay coil (S-term to GND)
>and divide 12v by the value you get and you will have
>the amperes it draws.
>
>Dale R.
>
>Ralph E. Capen wrote:
link.net>
>>
>> Does anyone know how much current the B & C S702-1 starter relay draws a
t the "S" terminal when active?
>>
>> I know that the two large terminals will carry what I need - I'm trying
to determine if the 6A @ 12VDC capable switch that I would like to use is s
ufficient or whether I need a relay to drive the starter relay.
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: B and C Starter relay |
At 10:35 AM 3/2/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Does anyone know how much current the B & C S702-1 starter relay
>draws at the "S" terminal when active?
>
>I know that the two large terminals will carry what I need - I'm
>trying to determine if the 6A @ 12VDC capable switch that I would
>like to use is sufficient or whether I need a relay to drive the starter relay.
That switch will be fine. The contactor draws a lot more
that a continuous duty battery contactor (typically 4A
versus 1A) but the REAL concern for switch life has
to do with the catch diode being installed on the coil.
If B&C is buying the same part I used to sell as S702-1,
the diode is built in. If you look on the bottom mounting
plate, you should see some words speaking to "suppression"
stamped in the metal.
What kind of switch are you talking about? Does it have
a nice "snap" action?
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: B and C Starter relay |
It does have the "suppression" marks - good #1.
The switch has a real good push and release (momentary) action - I don't
have the number here - but I am happy with the action.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: B and C Starter relay
>
>
> At 10:35 AM 3/2/2009, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>Does anyone know how much current the B & C S702-1 starter relay draws at
>>the "S" terminal when active?
>>
>>I know that the two large terminals will carry what I need - I'm trying to
>>determine if the 6A @ 12VDC capable switch that I would like to use is
>>sufficient or whether I need a relay to drive the starter relay.
>
> That switch will be fine. The contactor draws a lot more
> that a continuous duty battery contactor (typically 4A
> versus 1A) but the REAL concern for switch life has
> to do with the catch diode being installed on the coil.
> If B&C is buying the same part I used to sell as S702-1,
> the diode is built in. If you look on the bottom mounting
> plate, you should see some words speaking to "suppression"
> stamped in the metal.
>
> What kind of switch are you talking about? Does it have
> a nice "snap" action?
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ----------------------------------------)
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Valovich, Paul" <pvalovich(at)dcscorp.com> |
| Subject: | Z13 / 8 Revisions - I've Been Gone |
Bob,
I wired my yet-to-fly RV-8A according to previous Z 13 architectures. Still
have some final tweaking to do - mainly involving lighting. For the past 9
months or so I have been doing other "stuff" on the airplane and have not
paid much attention to 'tron postings. However, I did download the latest Z
diagrams and a quick comparison shows a relay between the battery and E-bu
ses vice just a switch.
I'm sure there have been discussions and postings regarding this change, bu
t I can't seem to find them. Can you (again) provide a short summary regard
ing the logic for this change - and I guess more importantly, the dangers /
disadvantages of maintaining the previous wiring scheme? I was pretty happ
y with the previous E-bus logic. Have you discovered some sneak circuit tha
t will turn my wiring into a smoking mass of non-functionality?
Changing things after the fact may or may not be easy - it's just not somet
hing that mentally appeals to me right now. Canopy / cowl wars have been gi
ving me as much fun as I can stand.
Paul Valovich
N192NM Reserved (again)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: B and C Starter relay |
At 06:14 AM 3/3/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>It does have the "suppression" marks - good #1.
>The switch has a real good push and release (momentary) action - I
>don't have the number here - but I am happy with the action.
You're good to go . . .
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: B and C Starter relay |
Thanks!
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
>Sent: Mar 3, 2009 2:15 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: B and C Starter relay
>
>
>At 06:14 AM 3/3/2009, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>It does have the "suppression" marks - good #1.
>>The switch has a real good push and release (momentary) action - I
>>don't have the number here - but I am happy with the action.
>
> You're good to go . . .
>
>
> 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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z13 / 8 Revisions - I've Been Gone |
At 10:39 AM 3/3/2009, you wrote:
>Bob,
>I wired my yet-to-fly RV-8A according to
>previous Z 13 architectures. Still have some
>final tweaking to do mainly involving
>lighting. For the past 9 months or so I have
>been doing other stuff on the airplane and
>have not paid much attention to tron postings.
>However, I did download the latest Z diagrams
>and a quick comparison shows a relay between the
>battery and E-buses vice just a switch.
The original incarnation of the e-bus had a design
goal of using up fuel aboard in a battery only
scenario. When major flight instruments were still
vacuum powered, the notion of getting your electro-
whizzy loads down to 3 amps or so wasn't an
unreasonable thing to contemplate.
The 3A e-bus was easily powered up through a long
feeder from the always hot battery bus through
a 5A or so fuse. When Z-13/8 came along, the e-bus
loads of 8A or more could be supported . . . even
say 10-11 amps by using the alternator + battery
combined.
This pushed the long, always hot feeder to current
levels that made a flying fuzz uncomfortable . . .
traditionally, we've tried to keep always hot long
wires protected at 5A or below.
Hence the addition of Z-32, Heavy-Duty E-Bus Feed
which has been incorporated into the present version
of Z-13/8 as well. If your ebus loads are under 5A
or if you choose not to embrace the traditional
design goals, then you can leave the relay out and
simply wire and fuse your E-bus alternate feed wire
as necessary to support whatever loads you've
settled on.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wiring / Relay Question |
At 02:50 PM 3/1/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Bob
>
>I've placed my Battery Bus Firewall forward next to the Battery Contactor,
>just above the 60 amp current limiter. I have a 14 g (15 amp) wire going
>from battery bus thru firewall to a 7104 relay, as per the Heavy Duty E bus
>configuration.
I'm not sure I'm seeing a good mental image of
your installation. I presume the 60A limiter is
your b-lead protection, normally this goes next
to the starter contactor which is usually on
the upper port corner of the firewall co-located
with a loadmeter shunt (if you have one).
>My question, should I use an additional relay or "something" between the
>Battery Bus (15amp - 14 g wire)-firewall forward - and the relay which is
>next to my E-Bus - mounted on sub-panel - for added safety?
If you have a relay mounted next to the e-bus
inside the aircraft, then you have it on the wrong
end of the wire. The purpose of the e-bus
alternate feed relay is to serve as a sort of
mini-battery contactor for this feed line . . .
it should be mounted as close as practical
to the battery bus fuse that feeds it.
Do I interpret correctly that your battery bus
is under the cowl?
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Diode across main contactor fat terminals |
At 08:55 AM 3/1/2009, you wrote:
>
>On May 23, 2008, I posted a hypothetical question about Z-19 main
>battery charging current back feeding through the endurance bus and
>blowing fuses in the event that the main battery contactor fails and
>the pilot closes the endurance bus alternate feed switch.
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=184591&sid=86e2d2ac21d95a18ce267b57c4fcd85e
>To prevent the above scenario, what if a diode were placed across
>the main contactor fat terminals? If the contactor fails, this
>diode would prevent the main battery from discharging. What are the
>disadvantages?
The only time you can back-feed the e-bus to the battery
with energy from the main bus is if the alternator is running.
The progressive transfer switch used to orchestrate main
battery and alternator operations precludes having the
alternator ON with the battery OFF.
> If this diode shorted out (diode failures are rare), then the
> pilot would lose the ability to shut off the master switch in case
> of an electrical fire. However, current would be limited by the
> lead size of the diode, similar to a fusible link. The chances of
> an electrical fire and the diode failing on the same flight are
> extremely remote. If one is concerned that the diode failure would
> go unnoticed at engine shut down, then a warning chime could be
> connected to terminal 3 of the master switch. I think the odds of
> the main contactor failing and associated pilot error (with
> dangerous consequences) are greater than the odds of a diode
> failing (with minimal consequences). What are your thoughts?
>Joe
Adding a diode across the contactor defeats the purpose
of the contactor which is to provide complete disconnect
from the system when in the OFF position. Given that
your hypothesis for back-feeding the alternate feed path
is addressed by the configuration of the DC POWER MASTER
switch, I think your concerns are without foundation.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Circuit for driving LED warning lights from differential |
pressure transmitter?
aeroelectric-list:
I need a circuit (the receiver) for driving LED warning lights from
differential pressure transmitter. The differential pressure transmitter has
an
output of at the low pressure end of 4 mA varying continuously to 20 mA at the
high end. 12 volt DC system (aircraft battery) is the power supply. The
transmitter can withstand 35 volts DC. The total circuit (receiver) resistance
should be 100 ohms, given by the formula R Max = (V of power supply minus
10.0) divided by 20 mA DC . I would like to have the circuit (the receiver)
with flashing superbright red LED on at the lower range (adjustable "ON point"),
flashing superbright yellow at mid-range (adjustable "ON point"), and
superbright green at high range (adjustable "ON point"), each lit only when the
pressure is in its respective range. A dimmer sub-circuit would also help!
One terminal of the pressure transmitter connects to the positive terminal of
the 12 volt power supply (aircraft battery) and the other terminal of the
pressure transmitter connects to the receiver ("circuit") and from the receiver
to the negative terminal of the 12 volt power supply. I.e., simple series
arrangement.
Any help would be appreciated. Point me to sources (books or articles or
posts) or email me a circuit? I have a basic knowledge of electronics.
Don Schmiesing RV-8 N417DS
Any
**************Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a
recession.
(http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare00000002)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "marcausman" <marc(at)verticalpower.com> |
Technically there's nothing wrong with polyfuses. But I am not a fan of using them
in an aviation application because you cannot control them directly like you
can an electronic (solid state) circuit breaker or old-style circuit breaker.
At least when a fuse blows the circuit stays off.
--------
Marc Ausman
http://www.verticalpower.com
RV-7 IO-390 Flying
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=233378#233378
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 02:12 PM 3/5/2009, you wrote:
>
>Technically there's nothing wrong with polyfuses. But I am not a fan
>of using them in an aviation application because you cannot control
>them directly like you can an electronic (solid state) circuit
>breaker or old-style circuit breaker. At least when a fuse blows the
>circuit stays off.
Sure. We (the TC guys) never had an arugment
with the ability of the polyfuse to perform
as advertised. Our problem was delivering to
traditional design goals of which you mentioned
two, control and non-self re-setting. The other
problem was that the parts are not bolt-in, wire
up and play. You have to install them on some
manufactured assembly that incorporates an
etched circuit board for mounting the parts.
Even if we popped for the custom assembly, the
TOTAL cost of acquisition/ownership wasn't
that much better than what we were already
doing. The breaker as a mil-qualified bolt-in-
and-play parts require no special attention
to mix and match as needed. A customized assembly
has to be designed, qualified and becomes very
hard to change once approved for the airframe.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | What is a ON-ON-ON switch used for? |
| From: | rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US |
What is a ON-ON-ON switch used for?
We are in process of
balancing illumination on our bird at the moment.
I would
rather have a mini four pole triple throw switch than a four pole double
throw switch (center off)to accomplish task at hand.
Hmmm, Newark sells a mini four pole double throw switch with three
positions and it is called ON-ON-ON.
For under 4 bucks I
ordered one.
Not useful for me. The way it works iswith
thetoggle in the up position the center common is connected to the
lower ON. With toggle in the middle position the common is connected to
the upper ON, and with toggle in the down position the common is connected
to the upper ON.
In other words this switch does the exact same
thing with the toggle in the middle and down position. What exactly is a
switch like this used for with two positions doing exactly the same
thing?
I don't have much space (rotary switch?) is there such a
thing as a four pole, triple throw three position mini toggle switch with
three positions and 16 terminals?
If so where can you get
one?
I can make do with a 4 pole, double throw with center off
but the 4PTT would be "much more better" if such a thing
exists.
I want to control intensity of several different light
sources to achieve a "Day", "Night" and "Dark
night" level of intensity. Since all the light sources are different
(one linear regulator would not cut it), will choose resistors that are
close to what I want, and fit mini potentiometers to fine tune. A DPDT
could have up "Day", down "Night" and "Dark
night" could use middle to turn everything off. A triple throw would
allow me to have 3 intensities.
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Updating my Connection Book |
Hi folks,
I bought version 11 a couple of years ago. I am at the FWF portion of an RV
8 build and am starting to plan the wiring. I should say to begin with,
this book has been a true revelation about planning and executing a reliable
electrical system. I cannot begin to thank Bob for the work he has put into the
book and this site.
While I am perfectly fine with buying an entirely new copy, do I understand
correctly that I can keep my book up to date by downloading and printing the
files here:
_http://www.aeroelectric.com/Rev12A/_ (http://www.aeroelectric.com/Rev12A/)
Is there anything else I need to do to stay current?
I'm hoping to get the E-Book version to Rev 12 up on
the website early next week . . . and get the files off
to the printers for paper copies.
What is the E-Book version and how do I access that?
As a slightly off topic question, when are we going to see chapter 15
Pressure Measurement?
Regards,
Michael Wynn
RV 8 FWF
San Ramon, CA
I'm hoping to get the E-Book version to Rev 12 up on
the website early next week . . . and get the files off
to the printers for paper copies.
**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
www.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Updating my Connection Book |
Those are interim files that are being edited.
Don't download updates until they are officially
noted in the "Whats's New" section.
The E-book is an alternative to the paper book.
It will be offered for the first time at Revision 12.
Right now, about half the book is still in legacy
word processor formats and I need to get ALL of
the present material updated and in common format
before I add any new materials. Ch15 on pressure
and 19 on motors will be next after that.
Bob . . .
At 12:00 PM 3/6/2009, you wrote:
>Hi folks,
>
>I bought version 11 a couple of years ago. I am at the FWF portion
>of an RV 8 build and am starting to plan the wiring. I should say
>to begin with, this book has been a true revelation about planning
>and executing a reliable electrical system. I cannot begin to thank
>Bob for the work he has put into the book and this site.
>
>While I am perfectly fine with buying an entirely new copy, do I
>understand correctly that I can keep my book up to date by
>downloading and printing the files here:
>
><http://www.aeroelectric.com/Rev12A/>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Rev12A/
>
>Is there anything else I need to do to stay current?
>
>I'm hoping to get the E-Book version to Rev 12 up on
>the website early next week . . . and get the files off
>to the printers for paper copies.
>
>What is the E-Book version and how do I access that?
>
>As a slightly off topic question, when are we going to see chapter
>15 Pressure Measurement?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: What is a ON-ON-ON switch used for? |
At 11:39 AM 3/6/2009, you wrote:
>What is a ON-ON-ON switch used for?
>
>We are in process of balancing illumination on our bird at the moment.
>
>I would rather have a mini four pole triple throw switch than a four
>pole double throw switch (center off) to accomplish task at hand.
>
>Hmmm, Newark sells a mini four pole double throw switch with three
>positions and it is called ON-ON-ON.
>
>For under 4 bucks I ordered one.
>
>Not useful for me. The way it works is with the toggle in the up
>position the center common is connected to the lower ON. With toggle
>in the middle position the common is connected to the upper ON, and
>with toggle in the down position the common is connected to the upper ON.
>
>In other words this switch does the exact same thing with the toggle
>in the middle and down position. What exactly is a switch like this
>used for with two positions doing exactly the same thing?
They are not doing the same thing. ON-ON-ON is progressive
transfer as described in detail in the chapter on switches.
The 4-pole device can be wired to emulate a two-pole, three-position
switch.
>I don't have much space (rotary switch?) is there such a thing as a
>four pole, triple throw three position mini toggle switch with three
>positions and 16 terminals?
>
>If so where can you get one?
>I can make do with a 4 pole, double throw with center off but the
>4PTT would be "much more better" if such a thing exists.
>
>I want to control intensity of several different light sources to
>achieve a "Day", "Night" and "Dark night" level of intensity. Since
>all the light sources are different (one linear regulator would not
>cut it), will choose resistors that are close to what I want, and
>fit mini potentiometers to fine tune. A DPDT could have up "Day",
>down "Night" and "Dark night" could use middle to turn everything
>off. A triple throw would allow me to have 3 intensities.
>
>Thx.
>Ron Parigoris
Grayhill
#51PT30-01-4-03N
http://tinyurl.com/bsws4r
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: What is a ON-ON-ON switch used for? |
Ron
Have you considered putting a diode in series with each of your lighting
circuits and just using a single pole switch instead of four poles. A
0.6 volt drop from a 10 cent diode usually doesn't dim full brightness
very much with a 14+ volt supply. I might be missing something here
because I don't see how you will get more than two intensities plus off
from a double throw switch though.
I found it more satisfactory to fit 4 miniature pots. Electronic dimmers
can always be remotely located from the pots but I've got 4 LM317 based
dimmers in a space not much bigger than a cigarette pack and they
control incandescents, LED's, and EL strips nicely. Somewhat different
output voltage ranges for each type of light.
Ken
> I want to control intensity of several different light sources to
> achieve a "Day", "Night" and "Dark night" level of intensity. Since all
> the light sources are different (one linear regulator would not cut it),
> will choose resistors that are close to what I want, and fit mini
> potentiometers to fine tune. A DPDT could have up "Day", down "Night"
> and "Dark night" could use middle to turn everything off. A triple throw
> would allow me to have 3 intensities.
>
> Thx.
> Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Finch" <rgf(at)dcn.davis.ca.us> |
| Subject: | ACS's Lightsaver gadget |
Aircraft Spruce offers this gadget
(http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/lightsaver.php) to eliminate
the large current inrush to a cold tungsten filament, thus supposedly
greatly increasing lamp life. Sounds reasonable, but wonder what the
experts think. And I'm curious why it has to be mounted on a heat-sink
surface...does it consume lots of energy while the lamp is on?
"WHY INSTALL A LIGHTSAVER
Typical landing and taxi lights in aircraft utilize a lamp that has a
tungsten filament. Tungsten, which is a special metal, produces relatively
high efficiency white light when electrical current flows through it.
Tungsten wire is wound between two electrodes within the lamp. Unfortunately
the metal wire has an undesirable characteristic. The metal filament has an
extremely low electrical resistance when the temperature of the tungsten
filament is at ambient (25C). Once the lamp is turned on, the filament
resistance changes from close to 0 ohms (dead short) to 1.5 ohms. An
increase of approximately 100 times. The dead short condition causes a
massive inrush of current for several mille seconds. A typical 100 watt 12
volt lamp which when on draws 8 to 9 amps may see 800-1000 amps for that
split second depending on the charged condition of the aircrafts battery.
This causes severe stress to the lamp filament, which over repeated on/off
cycles results in a fracture (open) in the filament. This is why the failure
of the lamp typically occurs at turn on.
HOW A LIGHTSAVER WORKS
The Lightsaver prevents this massive inrush allowing the filament to draw
the rated current even at turn on with no change in typical light output
performance. The filament life increases up to 10 times due to reducing the
stress induced by inrush current. This is something the lamp manufacturers
don't want you to know. After all they are in the business of manufacturing
replacement lamps for your aircraft.
HOW IS THE LIGHTSAVER INSTALLED INTO MY AIRCRAFT?
The installation is simple. The Lightsaver is placed in series with the lamp
on either the positive or negative side of the electrical interconnection.
The Lightsaver must be mounted to a heat-conducting surface such as the
firewall of the aircraft. Mounting is accomplished using screws and nuts to
secure it to the firewall."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
Bob,
[And Ron] I tried the referred part no. and it seerms no longer to be in
stock. I didn't try to research further (lazy)......
Ferg
>I don't have much space (rotary switch?) is there such a thing as a
>four pole, triple throw three position mini toggle switch with three
>positions and 16 terminals?
>
>If so where can you get one?
>I can make do with a 4 pole, double throw with center off but the 4PTT
>would be "much more better" if such a thing exists.
>
>I want to control intensity of several different light sources to
>achieve a "Day", "Night" and "Dark night" level of intensity. Since all
>the light sources are different (one linear regulator would not cut
>it), will choose resistors that are close to what I want, and fit mini
>potentiometers to fine tune. A DPDT could have up "Day", down "Night"
>and "Dark night" could use middle to turn everything off. A triple
>throw would allow me to have 3 intensities.
>
>Thx.
>Ron Parigoris
Grayhill
#51PT30-01-4-03N
http://tinyurl.com/bsws4r
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vern Little" <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ACS's Lightsaver gadget |
These devices look like standard power resistors available from Digikey and
others.
What I use are inrush current limiters (also from Digikey) that have a
negative temperature coefficient so that they have a high resistance when
cold, but a low resistance when warm.
See
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/dksearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=KC023L-ND
These are the ones I used for my 75W halogen lamps.
The only side-effect may be that a wig-wag flasher may need to be modified
to slow down the flashing rate to ensure maximum lamp brightness during
operation.
I believe that they are better than resistors in this application.
Cheers
Vern Little
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ralph Finch" <rgf(at)dcn.davis.ca.us>
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 8:25 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: ACS's Lightsaver gadget
>
>
>
> Aircraft Spruce offers this gadget
> (http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/lightsaver.php) to
> eliminate
> the large current inrush to a cold tungsten filament, thus supposedly
> greatly increasing lamp life. Sounds reasonable, but wonder what the
> experts think. And I'm curious why it has to be mounted on a heat-sink
> surface...does it consume lots of energy while the lamp is on?
>
> "WHY INSTALL A LIGHTSAVER
> Typical landing and taxi lights in aircraft utilize a lamp that has a
> tungsten filament. Tungsten, which is a special metal, produces relatively
> high efficiency white light when electrical current flows through it.
> Tungsten wire is wound between two electrodes within the lamp.
> Unfortunately
> the metal wire has an undesirable characteristic. The metal filament has
> an
> extremely low electrical resistance when the temperature of the tungsten
> filament is at ambient (25C). Once the lamp is turned on, the filament
> resistance changes from close to 0 ohms (dead short) to 1.5 ohms. An
> increase of approximately 100 times. The dead short condition causes a
> massive inrush of current for several mille seconds. A typical 100 watt 12
> volt lamp which when on draws 8 to 9 amps may see 800-1000 amps for that
> split second depending on the charged condition of the aircrafts battery.
> This causes severe stress to the lamp filament, which over repeated on/off
> cycles results in a fracture (open) in the filament. This is why the
> failure
> of the lamp typically occurs at turn on.
>
> HOW A LIGHTSAVER WORKS
> The Lightsaver prevents this massive inrush allowing the filament to draw
> the rated current even at turn on with no change in typical light output
> performance. The filament life increases up to 10 times due to reducing
> the
> stress induced by inrush current. This is something the lamp manufacturers
> don't want you to know. After all they are in the business of
> manufacturing
> replacement lamps for your aircraft.
>
> HOW IS THE LIGHTSAVER INSTALLED INTO MY AIRCRAFT?
> The installation is simple. The Lightsaver is placed in series with the
> lamp
> on either the positive or negative side of the electrical interconnection.
> The Lightsaver must be mounted to a heat-conducting surface such as the
> firewall of the aircraft. Mounting is accomplished using screws and nuts
> to
> secure it to the firewall."
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | ACS's Lightsaver gadget |
Can I assume these current limiters will also enable the switch that
controls the lights to last longer by reducing the arc on switch closure?
Or is the arc mostly on switch opening, where the current limiter will have
no benefit?
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Vern
Little
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 9:03 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: ACS's Lightsaver gadget
-->
These devices look like standard power resistors available from Digikey and
others.
What I use are inrush current limiters (also from Digikey) that have a
negative temperature coefficient so that they have a high resistance when
cold, but a low resistance when warm.
See
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/dksearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=KC023L-ND
These are the ones I used for my 75W halogen lamps.
The only side-effect may be that a wig-wag flasher may need to be modified
to slow down the flashing rate to ensure maximum lamp brightness during
operation.
I believe that they are better than resistors in this application.
Cheers
Vern Little
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ralph Finch" <rgf(at)dcn.davis.ca.us>
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 8:25 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: ACS's Lightsaver gadget
>
>
>
> Aircraft Spruce offers this gadget
> (http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/lightsaver.php) to
> eliminate
> the large current inrush to a cold tungsten filament, thus supposedly
> greatly increasing lamp life. Sounds reasonable, but wonder what the
> experts think. And I'm curious why it has to be mounted on a heat-sink
> surface...does it consume lots of energy while the lamp is on?
>
> "WHY INSTALL A LIGHTSAVER
> Typical landing and taxi lights in aircraft utilize a lamp that has a
> tungsten filament. Tungsten, which is a special metal, produces relatively
> high efficiency white light when electrical current flows through it.
> Tungsten wire is wound between two electrodes within the lamp.
> Unfortunately
> the metal wire has an undesirable characteristic. The metal filament has
> an
> extremely low electrical resistance when the temperature of the tungsten
> filament is at ambient (25C). Once the lamp is turned on, the filament
> resistance changes from close to 0 ohms (dead short) to 1.5 ohms. An
> increase of approximately 100 times. The dead short condition causes a
> massive inrush of current for several mille seconds. A typical 100 watt 12
> volt lamp which when on draws 8 to 9 amps may see 800-1000 amps for that
> split second depending on the charged condition of the aircrafts battery.
> This causes severe stress to the lamp filament, which over repeated on/off
> cycles results in a fracture (open) in the filament. This is why the
> failure
> of the lamp typically occurs at turn on.
>
> HOW A LIGHTSAVER WORKS
> The Lightsaver prevents this massive inrush allowing the filament to draw
> the rated current even at turn on with no change in typical light output
> performance. The filament life increases up to 10 times due to reducing
> the
> stress induced by inrush current. This is something the lamp manufacturers
> don't want you to know. After all they are in the business of
> manufacturing
> replacement lamps for your aircraft.
>
> HOW IS THE LIGHTSAVER INSTALLED INTO MY AIRCRAFT?
> The installation is simple. The Lightsaver is placed in series with the
> lamp
> on either the positive or negative side of the electrical interconnection.
> The Lightsaver must be mounted to a heat-conducting surface such as the
> firewall of the aircraft. Mounting is accomplished using screws and nuts
> to
> secure it to the firewall."
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ACS's Lightsaver gadget |
Mostly the latter. However, that is not to say that they won't benefit
the switch by limiting the current surge on turn-on.
B Tomm wrote:
>
> Can I assume these current limiters will also enable the switch that
> controls the lights to last longer by reducing the arc on switch closure?
> Or is the arc mostly on switch opening, where the current limiter will have
> no benefit?
>
> Bevan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Vern
> Little
> Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 9:03 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: ACS's Lightsaver gadget
>
> -->
>
> These devices look like standard power resistors available from Digikey and
> others.
>
> What I use are inrush current limiters (also from Digikey) that have a
> negative temperature coefficient so that they have a high resistance when
> cold, but a low resistance when warm.
>
> See
> http://search.digikey.com/scripts/dksearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=KC023L-ND
>
> These are the ones I used for my 75W halogen lamps.
>
> The only side-effect may be that a wig-wag flasher may need to be modified
> to slow down the flashing rate to ensure maximum lamp brightness during
> operation.
>
> I believe that they are better than resistors in this application.
>
> Cheers
> Vern Little
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ralph Finch" <rgf(at)dcn.davis.ca.us>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 8:25 AM
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: ACS's Lightsaver gadget
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> Aircraft Spruce offers this gadget
>> (http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/lightsaver.php) to
>> eliminate
>> the large current inrush to a cold tungsten filament, thus supposedly
>> greatly increasing lamp life. Sounds reasonable, but wonder what the
>> experts think. And I'm curious why it has to be mounted on a heat-sink
>> surface...does it consume lots of energy while the lamp is on?
>>
>> "WHY INSTALL A LIGHTSAVER
>> Typical landing and taxi lights in aircraft utilize a lamp that has a
>> tungsten filament. Tungsten, which is a special metal, produces relatively
>> high efficiency white light when electrical current flows through it.
>> Tungsten wire is wound between two electrodes within the lamp.
>> Unfortunately
>> the metal wire has an undesirable characteristic. The metal filament has
>> an
>> extremely low electrical resistance when the temperature of the tungsten
>> filament is at ambient (25C). Once the lamp is turned on, the filament
>> resistance changes from close to 0 ohms (dead short) to 1.5 ohms. An
>> increase of approximately 100 times. The dead short condition causes a
>> massive inrush of current for several mille seconds. A typical 100 watt 12
>> volt lamp which when on draws 8 to 9 amps may see 800-1000 amps for that
>> split second depending on the charged condition of the aircrafts battery.
>> This causes severe stress to the lamp filament, which over repeated on/off
>> cycles results in a fracture (open) in the filament. This is why the
>> failure
>> of the lamp typically occurs at turn on.
>>
>> HOW A LIGHTSAVER WORKS
>> The Lightsaver prevents this massive inrush allowing the filament to draw
>> the rated current even at turn on with no change in typical light output
>> performance. The filament life increases up to 10 times due to reducing
>> the
>> stress induced by inrush current. This is something the lamp manufacturers
>> don't want you to know. After all they are in the business of
>> manufacturing
>> replacement lamps for your aircraft.
>>
>> HOW IS THE LIGHTSAVER INSTALLED INTO MY AIRCRAFT?
>> The installation is simple. The Lightsaver is placed in series with the
>> lamp
>> on either the positive or negative side of the electrical interconnection.
>> The Lightsaver must be mounted to a heat-conducting surface such as the
>> firewall of the aircraft. Mounting is accomplished using screws and nuts
>> to
>> secure it to the firewall."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
Please Note:
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however,
that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced.
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vern Little" <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ACS's Lightsaver gadget |
If you look at switch ratings, when they are connected to a lamp load, the
rating is greatly reduced. This is because of the large inrush currents
when filaments are cold. The inrush current limiters will help limit this
current, boosting switch life.
Vern
----- Original Message -----
From: "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net>
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 9:45 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: ACS's Lightsaver gadget
>
>
> Can I assume these current limiters will also enable the switch that
> controls the lights to last longer by reducing the arc on switch closure?
> Or is the arc mostly on switch opening, where the current limiter will
> have
> no benefit?
>
> Bevan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Vern
> Little
> Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 9:03 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: ACS's Lightsaver gadget
>
> -->
>
> These devices look like standard power resistors available from Digikey
> and
> others.
>
> What I use are inrush current limiters (also from Digikey) that have a
> negative temperature coefficient so that they have a high resistance when
> cold, but a low resistance when warm.
>
> See
> http://search.digikey.com/scripts/dksearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=KC023L-ND
>
> These are the ones I used for my 75W halogen lamps.
>
> The only side-effect may be that a wig-wag flasher may need to be modified
> to slow down the flashing rate to ensure maximum lamp brightness during
> operation.
>
> I believe that they are better than resistors in this application.
>
> Cheers
> Vern Little
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ralph Finch" <rgf(at)dcn.davis.ca.us>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 8:25 AM
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: ACS's Lightsaver gadget
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Aircraft Spruce offers this gadget
>> (http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/lightsaver.php) to
>> eliminate
>> the large current inrush to a cold tungsten filament, thus supposedly
>> greatly increasing lamp life. Sounds reasonable, but wonder what the
>> experts think. And I'm curious why it has to be mounted on a heat-sink
>> surface...does it consume lots of energy while the lamp is on?
>>
>> "WHY INSTALL A LIGHTSAVER
>> Typical landing and taxi lights in aircraft utilize a lamp that has a
>> tungsten filament. Tungsten, which is a special metal, produces
>> relatively
>> high efficiency white light when electrical current flows through it.
>> Tungsten wire is wound between two electrodes within the lamp.
>> Unfortunately
>> the metal wire has an undesirable characteristic. The metal filament has
>> an
>> extremely low electrical resistance when the temperature of the tungsten
>> filament is at ambient (25C). Once the lamp is turned on, the filament
>> resistance changes from close to 0 ohms (dead short) to 1.5 ohms. An
>> increase of approximately 100 times. The dead short condition causes a
>> massive inrush of current for several mille seconds. A typical 100 watt
>> 12
>> volt lamp which when on draws 8 to 9 amps may see 800-1000 amps for that
>> split second depending on the charged condition of the aircrafts battery.
>> This causes severe stress to the lamp filament, which over repeated
>> on/off
>> cycles results in a fracture (open) in the filament. This is why the
>> failure
>> of the lamp typically occurs at turn on.
>>
>> HOW A LIGHTSAVER WORKS
>> The Lightsaver prevents this massive inrush allowing the filament to draw
>> the rated current even at turn on with no change in typical light output
>> performance. The filament life increases up to 10 times due to reducing
>> the
>> stress induced by inrush current. This is something the lamp
>> manufacturers
>> don't want you to know. After all they are in the business of
>> manufacturing
>> replacement lamps for your aircraft.
>>
>> HOW IS THE LIGHTSAVER INSTALLED INTO MY AIRCRAFT?
>> The installation is simple. The Lightsaver is placed in series with the
>> lamp
>> on either the positive or negative side of the electrical
>> interconnection.
>> The Lightsaver must be mounted to a heat-conducting surface such as the
>> firewall of the aircraft. Mounting is accomplished using screws and nuts
>> to
>> secure it to the firewall."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Ballin <dballin(at)gmail.com> |
I am trying to connect an RS232 gps output to many devices (4-5) and wanted
an easy foolproof method. I've considered just butt splicing them together
( hard if I want to add another later), butt splicing a few pigtails ( good
for later expansion), and I've thought about using a D-sub (more complicated
but easier to modify later). Of course I've also thought about soldering vs
using butt splice. Just too many ways to skin the cat. Anyone have a
better mousetrap?
thanks
Dan
Lancair Legacy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ACS's Lightsaver gadget |
At 10:25 AM 3/7/2009, you wrote:
>
>Aircraft Spruce offers this gadget
>(http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/lightsaver.php) to eliminate
>the large current inrush to a cold tungsten filament, thus supposedly
>greatly increasing lamp life. Sounds reasonable, but wonder what the
>experts think. And I'm curious why it has to be mounted on a heat-sink
>surface...does it consume lots of energy while the lamp is on?
>"WHY INSTALL A LIGHTSAVER
>Typical landing and taxi lights in aircraft utilize a lamp that has a
>tungsten filament. Tungsten, which is a special metal, produces relatively
>high efficiency white light when electrical current flows through it.
>HOW IS THE LIGHTSAVER INSTALLED INTO MY AIRCRAFT?
>The installation is simple. The Lightsaver is placed in series with the lamp
>on either the positive or negative side of the electrical interconnection.
>The Lightsaver must be mounted to a heat-conducting surface such as the
>firewall of the aircraft. Mounting is accomplished using screws and nuts to
>secure it to the firewall."
This is a stretch of factual data into a pretty good bucket
of floobydust. Yes, the cold resistance on an incandescent
lamp is quite low compared to it's operating resistance.
At the same time, when you close the switch, the lamp doesn't
see 14 volts either. There is resistance associated with
ship's wiring that adds to the cold resistance of the lamp.
Here's a trace I took on a 55W halogen lamp some years ago.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/Exemplar_Incandescent_Lamp_Inrush.gif
This was with SHORT leads on the workbench . . . and yes,
a 100w lamp would be a bit worse. However, I doubt that it
exceeds 100 Amps and no where near the 800 amps claimed in
the ad.
The thing about lamp life is a bit bogus too. Back in the
good ol' days when a 4509 tractor lamp was considered a
go landing light, they were indeed service life limited
by vibration and inrush cycling . . . but even then, how
many hours does a landing light burn per year as compared
to a tractor . . . or even headlights on your car?
Then halogens came to the cars . . . and some years later
to airplanes (aviation IS leading edge technology . . .
right? Yeah . . . right!). The inrush currents went up
slightly but the service life of the filaments went way up.
How often do you put new bulbs in your car these days?
I think my 2002 van has had one set of headlamps since
new.
Okay, how about this inrush mitigation if you're using
wig-wags? See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/Wig_Wag_Currents.jpg
Here's the same lamp as the first trace except flashed
at 500 mS intervals. Note that we do see the initial
inrush on first-power but the lamp doesn't have enough
time to cool off between flashes to repeat the inrush
on second and subsequent applications of power.
Further, I'm mystified by the picture of the device offered
by aircraft spruce. It appears to be the same package as
the RH series mil-spec power resistors. See:
http://www.alliedelec.com/Search/ProductView.aspx?IMG=895-0400
Of course, someone COULD package some device other
than a resistor in that housing but . . .
See:
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Cat=656273&keywords=inrush%20limiter
Run down the selections for current and hit on 8A.
Click on the KC023L-ND and you find a device that
can go in series with a 100W lamp that adds 1.3 ohms
of resistance to the lamp circuit when cold. Add
anther .2 ohms for lamp, perhaps .3 ohms for wiring
and we're up to 2.8 ohms. 14V/2.8 = 5A for the new
inrush. In operation, the KC023L resistance drops
to .04 ohms which means it tosses off about 300
millivolts of your lamp supply power.
Here's the ace-kicker. For a KC023L to do it's
job, it NEEDS TO BE ALLOWED TO GET HOT. That's
what causes its resistance to drop down to a handful
of milliohms. The device pictured in the ACS catalog
says it needs to be heat-sinked. Hmmmm . . . do
you suppose the product pictured is just a resistor?
Adding say .1 ohms fixed resistance to the circuit
would reduce that many hundreds of amps of claimed
inrush to something around 140 . . . assuming one
could ignore all the other resistances associated
with the wiring.
My first pass at this product's claims suggests that
first it is not offered with a full understanding
and explanation of the simple-ideas that control
incandescent lamp inrush but more important, it
ignores the relative ruggedness of modern halogen
lamps and the non-worry about using them in wig-wag
service.
If you really, Really, REALLY want to add inrush
limiting to your incandescent lamps, I'll suggest
you pick one from the Digikey listing cited above
for a whole lot less money. If you want my advice,
I was in a group of techno-wiennies that looked
into using these on the GP-180 at Lear. We did put
one in the nose gear taxi light fixture . . . and
discovered that you have to mount them so that
the DONT get heat-sinked . . . lest they blow
up. They need to warm up to work. They're a pain
in the arse to mount . . . not unlike polyfuses.
If the Lightsaver guys were offering a real, negative
tempco inrush limiter, it would be in some sort of
package that ALLOWED heating.
Bottom line . . . I'll suggest you save your money.
Return on investment for these things is poor
to nil.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ACS's Lightsaver gadget |
At 02:11 PM 3/7/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>If you look at switch ratings, when they are connected to a lamp
>load, the rating is greatly reduced. This is because of the large
>inrush currents when filaments are cold. The inrush current
>limiters will help limit this current, boosting switch life.
>
>Vern
Great point! . . . I missed this thought in my earlier posting.
Consider that when you "close" a switch, the contacts bounce
many times. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/switch_transition_S700-1.jpg
This bounce and transition trace on a Carling toggle
shows about 1.8 mS to travel from one condition to the
other. When I spread that bounce out to count the closures
there was about 6-7 as I recall. Relays can be even worse.
The heavier their contacts, the worse they bounce. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/S704-1_Contact_Bounce_without_Diode.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/S704-1_Contact_Bounce_with_Diode.jpg
These two traces are for the contacts of the plastic 30A
relay (S704). These things bounce like Tigger at a
birthday party.
What's more, all the bouncing happens in that very
tiny interval of high inrush for warming up the incandescent
lamp filament. This means that an 10A switch controlling
an 8A lamp sees perhaps a dozen or more 40A "hits"
every time you turn on a cold lamp.
That's why lamp ratings on switches are so heavily
de-rated. If you want to put an inrush limiter on
you landing lights, do it for the switch . . . not
the lamp.
Thanks for the heads-up Vern.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Henry Trzeciakowski" <hammer408(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wiring / Relay Question |
Bob:
Sorry for the confusion:
My battery bus IS firewall forward under the cowl. Looking at your Z-32
(Heavy Duty E-Bus Feed), I missed the "*" that represents the 6 inch rule.
My mounting is :
Battery Bus (under cowl)------(14awg )---FIREWALL ---- (14 awg)----s704-1
relay----to E-bus switch & E-Bus
( this run is about 2 1/2 feet from
Battery Bus to Relay)
I just need to ask the question - what harm would it be if I just left my
runs as depicted above. I am fused (15 amp) on the Battery side, so my
firewall penetration is protected. Or am I missing some other caveat ??
Henry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 5:59 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Wiring / Relay Question
>
> At 02:50 PM 3/1/2009, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >Bob
> >
> >I've placed my Battery Bus Firewall forward next to the Battery
Contactor,
> >just above the 60 amp current limiter. I have a 14 g (15 amp) wire going
> >from battery bus thru firewall to a 7104 relay, as per the Heavy Duty E
bus
> >configuration.
>
> I'm not sure I'm seeing a good mental image of
> your installation. I presume the 60A limiter is
> your b-lead protection, normally this goes next
> to the starter contactor which is usually on
> the upper port corner of the firewall co-located
> with a loadmeter shunt (if you have one).
>
>
> >My question, should I use an additional relay or "something" between the
> >Battery Bus (15amp - 14 g wire)-firewall forward - and the relay which
is
> >next to my E-Bus - mounted on sub-panel - for added safety?
>
> If you have a relay mounted next to the e-bus
> inside the aircraft, then you have it on the wrong
> end of the wire. The purpose of the e-bus
> alternate feed relay is to serve as a sort of
> mini-battery contactor for this feed line . . .
> it should be mounted as close as practical
> to the battery bus fuse that feeds it.
>
> Do I interpret correctly that your battery bus
> is under the cowl?
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ----------------------------------------)
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Stearns <steve(at)tomasara.com> |
| Subject: | Anti-rotation washers for thermocouple switch? |
Bob and Group,
I'm using a pair of Grayhill GH5602s for thermocouple switching (per a
link from Bob) and they will be mounted onto a foam-core panel
(Longeze...). I could really use a couple anti-rotation washers (a tab
on the O.D. and two flats on the ID with a nominal 1/4" ID) but haven't
found a source for them. I have tried similar washers with only a
single flat on the ID and they do not constrain the switch rotation.
Any suggestions?
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: ACS's Lightsaver gadget |
Interesting traces Bob,
What do you think would have the better reliability in the field for a
150W halogen landing light (without a surge suppressor), A S704-1 relay
with an ~16V transient suppressor for the catch diode, or a S701-1
switch connecting directly to the lamp?
I'm not sure how to trade off the bigger contacts, but they bounce
longer, dilemma...
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
> At 02:11 PM 3/7/2009, you wrote:
>
>> >
>> >
>> >If you look at switch ratings, when they are connected to a lamp
>> >load, the rating is greatly reduced. This is because of the large
>> >inrush currents when filaments are cold. The inrush current
>> >limiters will help limit this current, boosting switch life.
>> >
>> >Vern
>>
>
> Great point! . . . I missed this thought in my earlier posting.
> Consider that when you "close" a switch, the contacts bounce
> many times. See:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/switch_transition_S700-1.jpg
>
> This bounce and transition trace on a Carling toggle
> shows about 1.8 mS to travel from one condition to the
> other. When I spread that bounce out to count the closures
> there was about 6-7 as I recall. Relays can be even worse.
> The heavier their contacts, the worse they bounce. See:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/S704-1_Contact_Bounce_without_Diode.jpg
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/S704-1_Contact_Bounce_with_Diode.jpg
>
> These two traces are for the contacts of the plastic 30A
> relay (S704). These things bounce like Tigger at a
> birthday party.
>
> What's more, all the bouncing happens in that very
> tiny interval of high inrush for warming up the incandescent
> lamp filament. This means that an 10A switch controlling
> an 8A lamp sees perhaps a dozen or more 40A "hits"
> every time you turn on a cold lamp.
>
> That's why lamp ratings on switches are so heavily
> de-rated. If you want to put an inrush limiter on
> you landing lights, do it for the switch . . . not
> the lamp.
>
> Thanks for the heads-up Vern.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Wingtip Nav question |
In the Bob archer antenna install guide, it says that:
"If two VOR receivers are being installed one antenna
should be installed in each wing tip and each antenna
connected to a receiver. This type of installation
would produce twice as much signal into each receiver
and this much signal increase would mean an increase
of about 25% increase in VOR range."
Can someone explain how this could be so? Currently
I have one in a wingtip and one on the tail, but due
to some new antenna needs I may be moving my tail
antenna. I don't understand how having one in each
wingtip would affect performance, considering they're
being connected to separate receivers, and each receiver
may be tuned to whole separate VOR's.
I just don't get how it could be.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wingtip Nav question |
What it is saying is to use two antennas (one per receiver), rather than
one antenna with a splitter.
Dick Tasker
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> In the Bob archer antenna install guide, it says that:
>
> "If two VOR receivers are being installed one antenna
> should be installed in each wing tip and each antenna
> connected to a receiver. This type of installation
> would produce twice as much signal into each receiver
> and this much signal increase would mean an increase
> of about 25% increase in VOR range."
>
> Can someone explain how this could be so? Currently
> I have one in a wingtip and one on the tail, but due
> to some new antenna needs I may be moving my tail
> antenna. I don't understand how having one in each
> wingtip would affect performance, considering they're
> being connected to separate receivers, and each receiver
> may be tuned to whole separate VOR's.
>
> I just don't get how it could be.
>
>
--
Please Note:
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however,
that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced.
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ACS's Lightsaver gadget |
At 01:03 PM 3/8/2009, you wrote:
>
>Interesting traces Bob,
>
>What do you think would have the better reliability in the field for
>a 150W halogen landing light (without a surge suppressor), A S704-1
>relay with an ~16V transient suppressor for the catch diode, or a
>S701-1 switch connecting directly to the lamp?
>I'm not sure how to trade off the bigger contacts, but they bounce
>longer, dilemma...
Gee . . . you noticed! It's a credit to your curiosity
combined with an awareness of the need for trade-offs.
I an my contemporaries were faced with thousands of
such questions over our careers . . . with input from
a host of special interests that included marketing,
purchasing, inventory management, manufacturing
engineers and other systems guys who regarded every
one else's specialty as witchcraft.
Going for lower parts count is always a good lick.
The 150W lamp presents a problem of sorts. It takes
right at 9.5A in normal operation. But given what
we know of a switch's ability to CARRY current after
the bouncing is over, I'd bet that an S701 combined
with a Cantherm MF72-3D25 inrush limiter (3 ohms
cold) will limit your inrush to under 5 amps and toss
off only 9 x .044 = 0.37 volts in operation.
See:
http://www.cantherm.com/products/thermistors/cantherm_mf72.pdf
and
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=317-1234-ND
This would be the lowest parts count solution I can
deduce and I think it has a fair shot at satisfactory
performance.
I'll do some thinking about practical ways to mount
the inrush limiter so that it is well supported,
well connected, but not thermally deprived of the
ability to warm up.
In the GP-180, one of the guys crimped flexible
leadwires to the part, wrapped it with a couple
of layers of fiberglas door gasket for a wood
burning stove and clamped the assembly into the
inside surface of the Grimes lamp fixture housing.
Kinda clumsy but it worked. Their first efforts
took too much heat out of the thing which caused
catastrophic stresses from power dissipation.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wiring / Relay Question |
At 01:08 PM 3/8/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Bob:
>
>Sorry for the confusion:
>
>My battery bus IS firewall forward under the cowl. Looking at your Z-32
>(Heavy Duty E-Bus Feed), I missed the "*" that represents the 6 inch rule.
>My mounting is :
>
>Battery Bus (under cowl)------(14awg )---FIREWALL ---- (14 awg)----s704-1
>relay----to E-bus switch & E-Bus
> ( this run is about 2 1/2 feet from
>Battery Bus to Relay)
>
>I just need to ask the question - what harm would it be if I just left my
>runs as depicted above. I am fused (15 amp) on the Battery side, so my
>firewall penetration is protected. Or am I missing some other caveat ??
It would probably cause a bureaucrat with a rulebook
to fuss but the risks are low for doing as you've
suggested. I presume you have other wires coming through
the firewall along with the e-bus feeder that are
receiving due diligence with respect to wire protection
and firewall integrity?
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Etienne Phillips <etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wingtip Nav question |
2 antennae on one receiver and transmitter is not as easy as it seems.
You need to match the distance between the antennae to the frequency,
and direction you expect to be receiving from...
The length of cable inbetween the antennae is also important. Not for
the faint of heart... Best case is a signal strength that is about
80% as good as 1 antenna from all directions. Worst case is that it's
twice as potent in one direction, and completely dead 90 degrees out.
Unless you're trying to make a directional antennae array in which
case the best and worst cases swap around!
For navigation, I like non-directional antennae :-)
With this in mind, I have no idea what the install guide is referring
to. It may be that placing two non-connected VOR antennae right next
to each other causes them to interfere with one another, and by
mounting them as far apart as possible (on either wingtip) the
detrimental effects are halved.
On 08 Mar 2009, at 10:10 PM, Richard E. Tasker wrote:
>
>
> What it is saying is to use two antennas (one per receiver), rather
> than one antenna with a splitter.
>
> Dick Tasker
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Anti-rotation washers for thermocouple switch? |
>I'm using a pair of Grayhill GH5602s for thermocouple switching
>(per a link from Bob) and they will be mounted onto a foam-core
>panel (Longeze...). I could really use a couple anti-rotation
>washers (a tab on the O.D. and two flats on the ID with a nominal
>1/4" ID) but haven't found a source for them. I have tried similar
>washers with only a single flat on the ID and they do not constrain
>the switch rotation.
>
>Any suggestions?
Sure. Page 13 of
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Switches/Grayhill/56_Rotary.pdf
shows part number 50J1066 as suited to this purpose.
Digikey has the part in the catalog at:
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=50J1066-ND
but currently out of stock. Expected ship date later
this month.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Anti-rotation washers for thermocouple switch? |
>I'm using a pair of Grayhill GH5602s for thermocouple switching
>(per a link from Bob) and they will be mounted onto a foam-core
>panel (Longeze...). I could really use a couple anti-rotation
>washers (a tab on the O.D. and two flats on the ID with a nominal
>1/4" ID) but haven't found a source for them. I have tried similar
>washers with only a single flat on the ID and they do not constrain
>the switch rotation.
>
>Any suggestions?
Sure. Page 13 of
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Switches/Grayhill/56_Rotary.pdf
shows part number 50J1066 as suited to this purpose.
Digikey has the part in the catalog at:
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=50J1066-ND
but currently out of stock. Expected ship date later
this month.
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)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wingtip Nav question |
At 02:43 PM 3/8/2009, you wrote:
>
>In the Bob archer antenna install guide, it says that:
>
>"If two VOR receivers are being installed one antenna
>should be installed in each wing tip and each antenna
>connected to a receiver. This type of installation
>would produce twice as much signal into each receiver
>and this much signal increase would mean an increase
>of about 25% increase in VOR range."
I think he's trading off the options for numbers
of antennas installed versus the number of radios.
One antenna and a splitter drops energy to both
radios by 50% which translates into approximately
30% drop in range for BOTH receivers.
Each receiver having its own antenna recovers that
drop in range.
Having said that, know that under controlled flight
using the airways, VORs used and prescribed
changeover points along those airways insures a
healthy signal to the radios . . . irrespective of
relatively small losses in range alluded to by Bob's
statement.
>Can someone explain how this could be so? Currently
>I have one in a wingtip and one on the tail, but due
>to some new antenna needs I may be moving my tail
>antenna. I don't understand how having one in each
>wingtip would affect performance, considering they're
>being connected to separate receivers, and each receiver
>may be tuned to whole separate VOR's.
>
>I just don't get how it could be.
Everything we do in life is ultimately grounded in the
economics of energy management. Assuming all other
things equal, two antennas will deliver 2x the energy
to each radio versus one antenna and a splitter.
In real life, antenna patterns around the aircraft
will have more profound effects on range than numbers
of antennas versus radios. Wing-tip mounted antennas
cannot even come close to the overall performance of
a clear-field antenna either for gain or patterns.
In practice, they work just fine for the increasingly
rare instances that VOR navigation is truly useful.
Haven't turn a VOR receiver ON since I wrote this article
for Sport Aviation Article almost 12 years ago:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/nailgun.pdf
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wingtip Nav question |
They are VOR antennas for NAV radios. Last I knew the only VOR/NAV
transmissions come from the ground...
Dick Tasker
Etienne Phillips wrote:
>
>
> 2 antennae on one receiver and transmitter is not as easy as it seems.
>
> You need to match the distance between the antennae to the frequency,
> and direction you expect to be receiving from...
>
> The length of cable inbetween the antennae is also important. Not for
> the faint of heart... Best case is a signal strength that is about 80%
> as good as 1 antenna from all directions. Worst case is that it's
> twice as potent in one direction, and completely dead 90 degrees out.
>
> Unless you're trying to make a directional antennae array in which
> case the best and worst cases swap around!
>
> For navigation, I like non-directional antennae :-)
>
> With this in mind, I have no idea what the install guide is referring
> to. It may be that placing two non-connected VOR antennae right next
> to each other causes them to interfere with one another, and by
> mounting them as far apart as possible (on either wingtip) the
> detrimental effects are halved.
>
>
> On 08 Mar 2009, at 10:10 PM, Richard E. Tasker wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> What it is saying is to use two antennas (one per receiver), rather
>> than one antenna with a splitter.
>>
>> Dick Tasker
>>
>
>
--
Please Note:
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however,
that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced.
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Looking for cover photo . . . |
Revision 12A update pages have been posted. Individuals
with Revision 11 books are invited to update their documents
with printouts of these .pdf files.
http://aeroelectric.com/whatsnew.html
I'm looking for a photo of a homebuilt for the front
cover of the paper version of R12. It needs to be pretry
high resolution especially if the picture is
oriented landscape (long dimension horizontal)
mode 'cause of how it needs to get cropped.
This is sorta what I have in mind. The shot can be
on the ground but background for the inserted text
can't be too cluttered.
Emacs!
If anyone has an image they'd like to have considered
I'd be pleased to see it.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: What is a ON-ON-ON switch used for? |
| From: | rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US |
Hi Bob
Thx. for the reply.
>>(What is a
ON-ON-ON switch used for?)<<
"ON-ON-ON is
progressive transfer as described in detail in the chapter on
switches.The 4-pole device can be wired to emulate a two-pole,
three-position switch."
The switch I have is 4 pole,
double throw but is an on-on-on switch.
Unlike the switch you
depict in your book where although 2 positions are on-on, the second pole
has the two on positions at the opposite end of throw compared to the
first pole. I understand this switch can be wired to accomplish a tripple
throw function.
The switch I have has all four poles being
exactly the same, top and middle toggle position has com and one side
connected.I forget if it was the top or bottom row, dosen't matter
all the poles are the same row. Then when you put toggle in the bottom
position it connects com to the other side, again all poles are the
same.
My original question stands, what would a switch like
this be used for with two positions doing exactly the same thing?
Or perhaps the switch was built wrong and should have two of the four
poles assembled where the two on positions are opposite each other?
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Etienne Phillips <etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wingtip Nav question |
You are correct - but when dealing with aerials and radiation
patterns, it doesn't matter if you're talking about transmitting or
receiving...
As a side-note, if you have a DME instrument then you do transmit,
but it's a completely different frequency range (and therefore I'm
guessing has it's own antenna).
I agree with Bob Nuckolls though, having a single antenna, mounted in
a clear spot, is by far the best way of improving signal quality!
Good luck with your installation...
On 09 Mar 2009, at 2:54 AM, Richard E. Tasker wrote:
>
>
> They are VOR antennas for NAV radios. Last I knew the only VOR/NAV
> transmissions come from the ground...
>
> Dick Tasker
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <ronburnett(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Looking for cover photo . . . |
Bob,
Too bad an RV-12 isn't flying altho the photo you display is good.
Ron-
St. Charles, MO RV-6A finishing
---- "Robert L. Nuckolls wrote:
============
Revision 12A update pages have been posted. Individuals
with Revision 11 books are invited to update their documents
with printouts of these .pdf files.
http://aeroelectric.com/whatsnew.html
I'm looking for a photo of a homebuilt for the front
cover of the paper version of R12. It needs to be pretry
high resolution especially if the picture is
oriented landscape (long dimension horizontal)
mode 'cause of how it needs to get cropped.
This is sorta what I have in mind. The shot can be
on the ground but background for the inserted text
can't be too cluttered.
Emacs!
If anyone has an image they'd like to have considered
I'd be pleased to see it.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Stearns <steve(at)tomasara.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wiring / Relay Question |
And there's a third option, (maybe mentioned in your book?), and that is
to put a resistor in parallel with the landing light switch to keep the
bulb warm when off via a trickle current to serve the dual purpose of
reducing cold-filament in-rush and also to increase bulb vibrational
durability. But I don't know if the trickle current would be about the
same to serve both purposes and I don't know if you come out ahead on
bulb life with a trickle current when applied to such a low duty cycle bulb.
Bob, do you have any pro/con thoughts about this approach?
Seems like this approach would make it relatively straight forward to
add a "bulb failure" warning for the landing light bulb that would work
when the switch is off (i.e. when it's still light outside and you might
have time to order a new one before your next night flight) but I'm also
guessing most bulbs fail right at turn-on...
Until I can afford to install an HID landing light, it would be nice to
have both a very bright and a high confidence landing light (I only have
one) but with traditional halogens, life and brightness seem to need to
be traded off with each other...
Steve.
*
> **At 01:03 PM 3/8/2009, you wrote:
> >
> >Interesting traces Bob,
> >
> >What do you think would have the better reliability in the field for
> >a 150W halogen landing light (without a surge suppressor), A S704-1
> >relay with an ~16V transient suppressor for the catch diode, or a
> >S701-1 switch connecting directly to the lamp?
> >I'm not sure how to trade off the bigger contacts, but they bounce
> >longer, dilemma...
>
> Gee . . . you noticed! It's a credit to your curiosity
> combined with an awareness of the need for trade-offs.
> I an my contemporaries were faced with thousands of
> such questions over our careers . . . with input from
> a host of special interests that included marketing,
> purchasing, inventory management, manufacturing
> engineers and other systems guys who regarded every
> one else's specialty as witchcraft.
>
> Going for lower parts count is always a good lick.
> The 150W lamp presents a problem of sorts. It takes
> right at 9.5A in normal operation. But given what
> we know of a switch's ability to CARRY current after
> the bouncing is over, I'd bet that an S701 combined
> with a Cantherm MF72-3D25 inrush limiter (3 ohms
> cold) will limit your inrush to under 5 amps and toss
> off only 9 x .044 = 0.37 volts in operation.
>
> See:
>
> http://www.cantherm.com/products/thermistors/cantherm_mf72.pdf
>
> and
>
> http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=317-1234-ND
>
> This would be the lowest parts count solution I can
> deduce and I think it has a fair shot at satisfactory
> performance.
>
> I'll do some thinking about practical ways to mount
> the inrush limiter so that it is well supported,
> well connected, but not thermally deprived of the
> ability to warm up.
>
> In the GP-180, one of the guys crimped flexible
> leadwires to the part, wrapped it with a couple
> of layers of fiberglas door gasket for a wood
> burning stove and clamped the assembly into the
> inside surface of the Grimes lamp fixture housing.
> Kinda clumsy but it worked. Their first efforts
> took too much heat out of the thing which caused
> catastrophic stresses from power dissipation.
>
>
> Bob . . .
> **
*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
Please look at the attached spreadsheet and graphs.
This was from a flight Saturday. I now have 5.9 flight hours on it with another
.7 of ground run to verify stuff prior to first flight. I recall additional
running time on the test stand for original build and subsequent rebuild for the
crankshaft AD.
The airframe is a Van's RV6A with SamJames cowl/plenum and three blade MT constant
speed prop. The oil cooler is mounted behind #4 and both heaterbox take-offs
are behind #3.
The CHT and EGT graphs track fairly close to each other and the oil temp looks
good too. My oil consumption was about a quart and a half for the first three
hours and was almost none for this one-hour flight. I expected a longer oil
consumption period and still plan to fly the high power profiles for a while -
until I can verify reduced oil consumption with a few more flights.
Your comments on the data would be appreciated.
Thanks for a great engine,
Ralph Capen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wiring / Relay Question |
At 09:46 AM 3/9/2009, you wrote:
>
>And there's a third option, (maybe mentioned in your book?), and
>that is to put a resistor in parallel with the landing light switch
>to keep the bulb warm when off via a trickle current to serve the
>dual purpose of reducing cold-filament in-rush and also to increase
>bulb vibrational durability. But I don't know if the trickle
>current would be about the same to serve both purposes and I don't
>know if you come out ahead on bulb life with a trickle current when
>applied to such a low duty cycle bulb.
>Bob, do you have any pro/con thoughts about this approach?
That would work.
>Seems like this approach would make it relatively straight forward
>to add a "bulb failure" warning for the landing light bulb that
>would work when the switch is off (i.e. when it's still light
>outside and you might have time to order a new one before your next
>night flight) but I'm also guessing most bulbs fail right at turn-on...
Yeah . . . but the halogens are so much tougher
than the original sealed beams, it's now quite
likely that your modern lamps will run the lifetime
of the airplane. Wig-wag service is more stringent
but still.
>Until I can afford to install an HID landing light, it would be nice
>to have both a very bright and a high confidence landing light (I
>only have one) but with traditional halogens, life and brightness
>seem to need to be traded off with each other...
By the time you're ready to install HID, you'll probably
have to make a choice between HID and LED . . . those
little guys are romping right up the capabilities ladder.
Keep in mind that it takes VERY LITTLE exterior lighting
make an effective landing on a real runway. I once took
a guy flying in our J-3 using a 6v fisherman's lantern
(3 watts!) for forward lighting. It was plenty of light
to get the wheels on the ground gently.
Study your probable mission profiles before you
launch into expensive decisions. In the mean time
a halogen lamp with inrush limiting is the least
expensive, lowest energy (doesn't consume power
when OFF) way to go.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Looking for cover photo . . . |
| From: | "Rogers, Bob J." <BRogers(at)fdic.gov> |
How about this award-winning Mustang II?
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 9:56 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Looking for cover photo . . .
Revision 12A update pages have been posted. Individuals
with Revision 11 books are invited to update their documents
with printouts of these .pdf files.
http://aeroelectric.com/whatsnew.html
I'm looking for a photo of a homebuilt for the front
cover of the paper version of R12. It needs to be pretry
high resolution especially if the picture is
oriented landscape (long dimension horizontal)
mode 'cause of how it needs to get cropped.
This is sorta what I have in mind. The shot can be
on the ground but background for the inserted text
can't be too cluttered.
If anyone has an image they'd like to have considered
I'd be pleased to see it.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wingtip Nav question |
Well thanks guys for clearing up the wording in the install
guide. It makes perfect and obvious sense that using 2
antennas for 2 NAV's would be way better than 1 antenna
for each.
Now for a follow-up that's a bit tougher maybe...
I need to mount an ADS-B shark fin antenna...978mhz,
putting out 50W (similar to a transponder but those
crank out more like 150W).
If I have the choice of:
A) Move a perfectly working NAV Antenna in an ideal location
to a wingtip where I know the performance won't be as good,
and putting the ADS-B in place of it.
or
B) Mounting the ADS-B antenna about 2' from the NAV antenna
and leaving everything as-is.
or
C) Moving the Marker Beacon antenna to within a few inches
of the NAV antenna, and then putting the ADS-B antenna right
where the MB currently is.
Which one seems most reasonable? I know you generally want
to keep those powerful transmitters away from other stuff,
with being on totally separate freq's, how bad is it to
have a 978mhz transmitter 2' from the NAV. Will the SL-30's
circuitry filter well enough to not be a problem do you think?
Tell you what, if you're building a kit, take the time to
come up with locations for all the possible antenna types
you could ever have, because squeezing one in can be a chore
if you want to still live by the book.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
Etienne Phillips wrote:
>
>
> You are correct - but when dealing with aerials and radiation patterns,
> it doesn't matter if you're talking about transmitting or receiving...
>
> As a side-note, if you have a DME instrument then you do transmit, but
> it's a completely different frequency range (and therefore I'm guessing
> has it's own antenna).
>
> I agree with Bob Nuckolls though, having a single antenna, mounted in a
> clear spot, is by far the best way of improving signal quality!
>
> Good luck with your installation...
>
> On 09 Mar 2009, at 2:54 AM, Richard E. Tasker wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> They are VOR antennas for NAV radios. Last I knew the only VOR/NAV
>> transmissions come from the ground...
>>
>> Dick Tasker
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Wingtip Nav question |
| From: | "John Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Tim, your closing paragraph is invaluable. Most builders start with a
really rough Build budget, then throw caution to the wind after all the
"Golly Gee" stuff comes online. The antennas always seem to get the last
portion at the decision table.
A really progressive builder lists the avionics and their best possible
antenna needs, then conceptually generalizes antenna placement along the
ground plane or concealed under the surface. Once the antenna and its
location are known, building an AC43.13 compliant doubler makes the
plans built process even easier. The answer to this question will be
Well Watched.
I have always used you as the example of great cockpit inventory and
diverse functionality sprinkled with Midwestern practicality.
John C.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Olson
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 11:10 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wingtip Nav question
Well thanks guys for clearing up the wording in the install
guide. It makes perfect and obvious sense that using 2
antennas for 2 NAV's would be way better than 1 antenna
for each.
Now for a follow-up that's a bit tougher maybe...
I need to mount an ADS-B shark fin antenna...978mhz,
putting out 50W (similar to a transponder but those
crank out more like 150W).
If I have the choice of:
A) Move a perfectly working NAV Antenna in an ideal location
to a wingtip where I know the performance won't be as good,
and putting the ADS-B in place of it.
or
B) Mounting the ADS-B antenna about 2' from the NAV antenna
and leaving everything as-is.
or
C) Moving the Marker Beacon antenna to within a few inches
of the NAV antenna, and then putting the ADS-B antenna right
where the MB currently is.
Which one seems most reasonable? I know you generally want
to keep those powerful transmitters away from other stuff,
with being on totally separate freq's, how bad is it to
have a 978mhz transmitter 2' from the NAV. Will the SL-30's
circuitry filter well enough to not be a problem do you think?
Tell you what, if you're building a kit, take the time to
come up with locations for all the possible antenna types
you could ever have, because squeezing one in can be a chore
if you want to still live by the book.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wingtip Nav question |
Good Afternoon Tim,
I would probably change the location of many of your antennas, but we all
have different ideas as to where things should stick out from our aircraft.
However! Of the choices given, dump the marker beacon!!
I know of no situation where a marker beacon is of any use at all as long as
you have an IFR approved GPS.
Happy Skies
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
628 West 86th Street
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
In a message dated 3/9/2009 1:16:07 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
Tim(at)MyRV10.com writes:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Tim Olson
Well thanks guys for clearing up the wording in the install
guide. It makes perfect and obvious sense that using 2
antennas for 2 NAV's would be way better than 1 antenna
for each.
Now for a follow-up that's a bit tougher maybe...
I need to mount an ADS-B shark fin antenna...978mhz,
putting out 50W (similar to a transponder but those
crank out more like 150W).
If I have the choice of:
A) Move a perfectly working NAV Antenna in an ideal location
to a wingtip where I know the performance won't be as good,
and putting the ADS-B in place of it.
or
B) Mounting the ADS-B antenna about 2' from the NAV antenna
and leaving everything as-is.
or
C) Moving the Marker Beacon antenna to within a few inches
of the NAV antenna, and then putting the ADS-B antenna right
where the MB currently is.
Which one seems most reasonable? I know you generally want
to keep those powerful transmitters away from other stuff,
with being on totally separate freq's, how bad is it to
have a 978mhz transmitter 2' from the NAV. Will the SL-30's
circuitry filter well enough to not be a problem do you think?
Tell you what, if you're building a kit, take the time to
come up with locations for all the possible antenna types
you could ever have, because squeezing one in can be a chore
if you want to still live by the book.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
Etienne Phillips wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Etienne Phillips
>
>
> You are correct - but when dealing with aerials and radiation patterns,
> it doesn't matter if you're talking about transmitting or receiving...
>
> As a side-note, if you have a DME instrument then you do transmit, but
> it's a completely different frequency range (and therefore I'm guessing
> has it's own antenna).
>
> I agree with Bob Nuckolls though, having a single antenna, mounted in a
> clear spot, is by far the best way of improving signal quality!
>
> Good luck with your installation...
>
> On 09 Mar 2009, at 2:54 AM, Richard E. Tasker wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> They are VOR antennas for NAV radios. Last I knew the only VOR/NAV
>> transmissions come from the ground...
>>
>> Dick Tasker
>>
**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Henry Trzeciakowski" <hammer408(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wiring / Relay Question |
Yes Bob:
For my firewall penetration point I have a Stainless Steel flange and use
firesleeve inside the flange with another firesleeve outside clamped
together and packed with fireproof putty. Other wires include 8 awg wire
from 60 amp current limiter to main bus. From the Battery Bus - 14 awg (15
amp) to E-Bus relay ,hobbs meter, fuel boost, co monitor, 12 volt accessory
and ELT.
Henry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 12:15 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Wiring / Relay Question
>
> At 01:08 PM 3/8/2009, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >Bob:
> >
> >Sorry for the confusion:
> >
> >My battery bus IS firewall forward under the cowl. Looking at your Z-32
> >(Heavy Duty E-Bus Feed), I missed the "*" that represents the 6 inch
rule.
> >My mounting is :
> >
> >Battery Bus (under cowl)------(14awg )---FIREWALL ---- (14 awg)----s704-1
> >relay----to E-bus switch & E-Bus
> > ( this run is about 2 1/2 feet from
> >Battery Bus to Relay)
> >
> >I just need to ask the question - what harm would it be if I just left
my
> >runs as depicted above. I am fused (15 amp) on the Battery side, so my
> >firewall penetration is protected. Or am I missing some other caveat ??
>
> It would probably cause a bureaucrat with a rulebook
> to fuss but the risks are low for doing as you've
> suggested. I presume you have other wires coming through
> the firewall along with the e-bus feeder that are
> receiving due diligence with respect to wire protection
> and firewall integrity?
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ----------------------------------------)
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Allan Aaron" <aaaron(at)tvp.com.au> |
Ralph
I'm actually pleased that you misdirected it. I have an IO320 in my
mustang II with about 30 hours on it. I have a plenum and a similar oil
cooler and air inlet set-up, I believe. My EGT's and CHT's differ
between cylinders by about 85 degrees (with #3 being the hottest) -
yours seem really close. I wonder what is different?
Allan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph
E. Capen
Sent: Tuesday, 10 March 2009 1:35 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Engine Break-in
Please look at the attached spreadsheet and graphs.
This was from a flight Saturday. I now have 5.9 flight hours on it with
another .7 of ground run to verify stuff prior to first flight. I
recall additional running time on the test stand for original build and
subsequent rebuild for the crankshaft AD.
The airframe is a Van's RV6A with SamJames cowl/plenum and three blade
MT constant speed prop. The oil cooler is mounted behind #4 and both
heaterbox take-offs are behind #3.
The CHT and EGT graphs track fairly close to each other and the oil temp
looks good too. My oil consumption was about a quart and a half for the
first three hours and was almost none for this one-hour flight. I
expected a longer oil consumption period and still plan to fly the high
power profiles for a while - until I can verify reduced oil consumption
with a few more flights.
Your comments on the data would be appreciated.
Thanks for a great engine,
Ralph Capen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James Robinson <jbr79r(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine Break-in |
EGTs are balanced by injector size CHTs are refined by baffeling. You might consider
moving injectors from hot to cold EGT and see if the temps follow the
injectors. If that works consider Gami injectors. I have a six cyl Lyc and all
my cylinders are very close.
James Robinson
Glasair lll N79R
Spanish Fork UT U77
________________________________
From: Allan Aaron <aaaron(at)tvp.com.au>
Sent: Monday, March 9, 2009 2:55:32 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Engine Break-in
Ralph
I'm actually pleased that you misdirected it. I have an IO320 in my
mustang II with about 30 hours on it. I have a plenum and a similar oil
cooler and air inlet set-up, I believe. My EGT's and CHT's differ
between cylinders by about 85 degrees (with #3 being the hottest) -
yours seem really close. I wonder what is different?
Allan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph
E. Capen
Sent: Tuesday, 10 March 2009 1:35 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Engine Break-in
Please look at the attached spreadsheet and graphs.
This was from a flight Saturday. I now have 5.9 flight hours on it with
another .7 of ground run to verify stuff prior to first flight. I
recall additional running time on the test stand for original build and
subsequent rebuild for the crankshaft AD.
The airframe is a Van's RV6A with SamJames cowl/plenum and three blade
MT constant speed prop. The oil cooler is mounted behind #4 and both
heaterbox take-offs are behind #3.
The CHT and EGT graphs track fairly close to each other and the oil temp
looks good too. My oil consumption was about a quart and a half for the
first three hours and was almost none for this one-hour flight. I
expected a longer oil consumption period and still plan to fly the high
power profiles for a while - until I can verify reduced oil consumption
with a few more flights.
Your comments on the data would be appreciated.
Thanks for a great engine,
Ralph Capen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Neal George" <n8zg(at)mchsi.com> |
| Subject: | Wingtip Nav question |
Tim -
Option C.
Marker beacon and nav are both receive-only. They should be perfectly happy
side-by-side.
neal
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wingtip Nav question
Well thanks guys for clearing up the wording in the install
guide. It makes perfect and obvious sense that using 2
antennas for 2 NAV's would be way better than 1 antenna
for each.
Now for a follow-up that's a bit tougher maybe...
I need to mount an ADS-B shark fin antenna...978mhz,
putting out 50W (similar to a transponder but those
crank out more like 150W).
If I have the choice of:
A) Move a perfectly working NAV Antenna in an ideal location
to a wingtip where I know the performance won't be as good,
and putting the ADS-B in place of it.
or
B) Mounting the ADS-B antenna about 2' from the NAV antenna
and leaving everything as-is.
or
C) Moving the Marker Beacon antenna to within a few inches
of the NAV antenna, and then putting the ADS-B antenna right
where the MB currently is.
Which one seems most reasonable? I know you generally want
to keep those powerful transmitters away from other stuff,
with being on totally separate freq's, how bad is it to
have a 978mhz transmitter 2' from the NAV. Will the SL-30's
circuitry filter well enough to not be a problem do you think?
Tell you what, if you're building a kit, take the time to
come up with locations for all the possible antenna types
you could ever have, because squeezing one in can be a chore
if you want to still live by the book.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
Etienne Phillips wrote:
>
>
> You are correct - but when dealing with aerials and radiation patterns,
> it doesn't matter if you're talking about transmitting or receiving...
>
> As a side-note, if you have a DME instrument then you do transmit, but
> it's a completely different frequency range (and therefore I'm guessing
> has it's own antenna).
>
> I agree with Bob Nuckolls though, having a single antenna, mounted in a
> clear spot, is by far the best way of improving signal quality!
>
> Good luck with your installation...
>
> On 09 Mar 2009, at 2:54 AM, Richard E. Tasker wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> They are VOR antennas for NAV radios. Last I knew the only VOR/NAV
>> transmissions come from the ground...
>>
>> Dick Tasker
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
So here's a thought then for a potentially suitable application for these little
monsters where there is some $value$. Ignoring the fact that these are surface
mount creatures and a suitable and robust mounting mechanism would be needed,
what about a scenario where you have a rear mounted battery and need to
protect a wire in which a fuse would not be useable. Say if a device has a low
power requirement but for some reason has a crowbar circuit in it like maybe
a Lightspeed ignition. :P
Like I said before, I'm not keen on using a relay as that is nothing more than
a workaround in my mind and introduces a whole new failure mode plus a bunch
of additional wiring. The self resetting nature of the Polyfuse wouldn't be
a big deal as I would still want a master switch on each LSE. Checklist item
would be the best solution to addressing when to reset a "blown" ignition. More
importantly it would allow the crowbarred (is that a word) ignition to be reset
without the need to access a inaccessible fuse/breaker or use a relay to
shoe horn a breaker into an accessible location.
So can someone tell me why this would not work to address the recent revelations
around LSE's? I still would rather use a fuse or breaker but it seems to
be as good or better than some of the other alternatives (big wire, relay).
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 3:45 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Polyfuses
At 02:12 PM 3/5/2009, you wrote:
>
>Technically there's nothing wrong with polyfuses. But I am not a fan
>of using them in an aviation application because you cannot control
>them directly like you can an electronic (solid state) circuit
>breaker or old-style circuit breaker. At least when a fuse blows the
>circuit stays off.
Sure. We (the TC guys) never had an arugment
with the ability of the polyfuse to perform
as advertised. Our problem was delivering to
traditional design goals of which you mentioned
two, control and non-self re-setting. The other
problem was that the parts are not bolt-in, wire
up and play. You have to install them on some
manufactured assembly that incorporates an
etched circuit board for mounting the parts.
Even if we popped for the custom assembly, the
TOTAL cost of acquisition/ownership wasn't
that much better than what we were already
doing. The breaker as a mil-qualified bolt-in-
and-play parts require no special attention
to mix and match as needed. A customized assembly
has to be designed, qualified and becomes very
hard to change once approved for the airframe.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rosen <N205EN(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wingtip Nav question |
Tim,
Why don't you put the marker beacon antenna in the wing tip, just use a
40" piece of wire, and then mount the ADS-B antenna in the current
marker beacon location.
Larry Rosen
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> Well thanks guys for clearing up the wording in the install
> guide. It makes perfect and obvious sense that using 2
> antennas for 2 NAV's would be way better than 1 antenna
> for each.
>
> Now for a follow-up that's a bit tougher maybe...
>
> I need to mount an ADS-B shark fin antenna...978mhz,
> putting out 50W (similar to a transponder but those
> crank out more like 150W).
>
> If I have the choice of:
>
> A) Move a perfectly working NAV Antenna in an ideal location
> to a wingtip where I know the performance won't be as good,
> and putting the ADS-B in place of it.
>
> or
>
>
> B) Mounting the ADS-B antenna about 2' from the NAV antenna
> and leaving everything as-is.
>
> or
>
> C) Moving the Marker Beacon antenna to within a few inches
> of the NAV antenna, and then putting the ADS-B antenna right
> where the MB currently is.
>
>
> Which one seems most reasonable? I know you generally want
> to keep those powerful transmitters away from other stuff,
> with being on totally separate freq's, how bad is it to
> have a 978mhz transmitter 2' from the NAV. Will the SL-30's
> circuitry filter well enough to not be a problem do you think?
>
> Tell you what, if you're building a kit, take the time to
> come up with locations for all the possible antenna types
> you could ever have, because squeezing one in can be a chore
> if you want to still live by the book.
>
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
>
> Etienne Phillips wrote:
>>
>>
>> You are correct - but when dealing with aerials and radiation
>> patterns, it doesn't matter if you're talking about transmitting or
>> receiving...
>>
>> As a side-note, if you have a DME instrument then you do transmit,
>> but it's a completely different frequency range (and therefore I'm
>> guessing has it's own antenna).
>>
>> I agree with Bob Nuckolls though, having a single antenna, mounted in
>> a clear spot, is by far the best way of improving signal quality!
>>
>> Good luck with your installation...
>>
>> On 09 Mar 2009, at 2:54 AM, Richard E. Tasker wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> They are VOR antennas for NAV radios. Last I knew the only VOR/NAV
>>> transmissions come from the ground...
>>>
>>> Dick Tasker
>>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wingtip Nav question |
February 16, 2009 - March 10, 2009
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-im