AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-iv
July 02, 2009 - July 15, 2009
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Forum Search Problem & RSS Feed Question |
| From: | "Noah" <sgninc(at)cox.net> |
> Don't think I did. This is a reply to the original
> from my trash bin just as it came to me about 8:00 this
> morning
Hmmm, maybe this forum works differently than I am used to. In the forums I am
familiar with, when you start a thread, your post is the first in the thread.
When I look at this thread on the matronics website,
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251177#251177
my initial post is nowhere to be found, and your post is the first one in the thread,
quoting my post. The thread with my post as the thread starter is now
an orphan:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=59831
Perhaps this is just a weirdness of matronics, I don't know.
--------
Highest Regards,
Noah Forden
RV-7A
Rhode Island
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251197#251197
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Forum Search Problem & RSS Feed Question |
At 01:11 PM 7/2/2009 Thursday, you wrote:
>
>
>> Don't think I did. This is a reply to the original
>> from my trash bin just as it came to me about 8:00 this
>> morning
>
>
>Hmmm, maybe this forum works differently than I am used to. In the forums I am
familiar with, when you start a thread, your post is the first in the thread.
When I look at this thread on the matronics website,
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251177#251177
>my initial post is nowhere to be found, and your post is the first one in the
thread, quoting my post. The thread with my post as the thread starter is now
an orphan:
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=59831
>
>Perhaps this is just a weirdness of matronics, I don't know.
>
>--------
>Highest Regards,
>
>Noah Forden
>RV-7A
>Rhode Island
The "weirdness" stems from the fact that the Matronics Lists are both an Email
Distribution List and a web-based Forum interface. Messages are automatically
cross-posted between the two mediums and most of the time it works as advertised.
Every once in a while, though, the utility that takes the incoming email
and cross posts it to the forums can't figure out if the message thread already
exists on the forums and this is when you end up with what appear to be duplicate
threads on the forums. I think that the utility trys to use the email
MessageID: header to do the threading. Most email programs will try to keep the
MessageID: intact if a person "replies" to a message. But sometimes they don't.
I think this might be when the threading issues occur.
Matt Dralle
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AEC Products - Future Z Revisions? |
At 02:44 PM 7/2/2009, you wrote:
>Given:
>Electrically Dependent Engine
>Internally Regulated Alternator
>Z-19 + Z-24
>AEC 9005 Discontinued
>AEC 9004 & AEC 9011 to be available at a later date.
>Question:
>How to best accomplish OV/LV Control with Automatic Aux Battery
>Contactor Control?
>My thoughts:
>AEC 9011 doesn't appear to have an output capable of the Aux Battery
>Contactor Automatic control, and therefore might not be appropriate
>in this example as an alternate replacement for the AEC 9005.
Yes it does and yes it COULD be used that way
but . . .
>It appears that the #1 terminal of the AEC 9004 might be used to not
>only control the Alternator OV Disconnect Contactor but also to
>offer automatic control of the Aux Battery Contactor.
No, you don't want to mix these functions
PARTICULARLY when they're managed by a common
microcontroller. Independence and separation is
a keystone for non-propagating, failure-tolerant
design.
>Or would something such as the LVWAABM by Eric Jones have to be
>employed in addition to the AEC 9004?
Yes, any of the lv-warn, aux battery management
products can be teamed with the ACE9004. Note that
the AEC9011 monitors for lv conditions on both
the main bus (+14v input terminal) and on any
second input of your choice. In this case, I'd
make it the aux battery bus. If you want to use
BOTH batteries for cranking, then both battery
switches are ON from start to finish in flight.
If the aux battery is used to support electro-
whizzies not designed to live in the world of
GA aircraft the aux battery switch stays off
until after the engine is started. Then, you are
discouraged from leaving the aux battery switch
OFF by a flashing light that reminds you that it
is not being charged. The AEC9011 would not
be used to manage b-lead disconnection. The
AEC9004 has features that manage timing of
the power to the b-lead contactor in addition
to clamping off any resulting load-dump transient.
This is orchestrated by software in a dedicated
controller that is can be pre-flight testable.
The AEC9011 gets preflight tested in that both
LV lights flash on first power up and stop
flashing as their respective watch-points rise
above 13.0 volts. The AEC9011 used to manage
an aux battery system would not offer an automatic
contactor control pin, only a warning light.
This lets you do the job with a less expensive
switch that is either OFF or ON.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dale Rogers <dale.r(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Forum Search Problem & RSS Feed Question |
Noah,
Firefox is free, and it co-exists quite nicely on the same
system with IE, even if IE remains the default browser.
It's worth the small investment of your time to go to
http://www.mozilla.com/
and download the latest version and compare it with the
MickeySoft product you're currently using
Dale R.
COZY MkIV #0497
Noah wrote:
>
> Thanks for the responses guys.
>
> Bob, just curious why you started a new thread rather than respond to my original
post, keeping this discussion all in one thread?
>
> Kevin, I'm using IE-7, and you suggest a reasonable workaround by opening a new
tab. Sometimes, however, opening a new tab can take up to 30 seconds do display
anything. In any event, I'm still not clear why I can do this without issue
on other forums (VAF for instance) and why it's different here. Perhaps
Matt can fix this. Google Chrome also does not exhibit this behavior.
>
> Another feature I like on some other forums is that from the home page or search
results page, you can "hover over" the thread title to read the first couple
of sentences of the first post. VERY handy to see if it's something worth
reading without taking the time to click in, wait, read, and click back out.
It's all about reducing mouse clicks, you know!
>
> --------
> Highest Regards,
>
> Noah Forden
> RV-7A
> Rhode Island
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <berkut13(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Race timing help |
Just pull up Google.com and type "DG-100" in. Hundreds of vendors.
-James
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Humphrey
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Race timing help
James,
Where can you buy one?
Thanks,
Mike H
----- Original Message -----
From: berkut13(at)berkut13.com
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 2:49 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Race timing help
Many of us in the SARL (www.sportairrace.org) purchased low cost GPS
data loggers to analyze our own performance. It records at 1sec
(programmable) resolution, Lat, Long, Speed, and Alt for about 5hrs,
more at lower res. The data can then be uploaded into Google Earth and
viewed. It is very easy to mark the crossing of start/finish lines,
turn points, etc. From that, you can derive your TRUE course timing -
much more accurately than a human centric process. Eventually, the
races will be timed off of these units instead of human timers and turn
point observers.
http://www.globalsat.com.tw/eng/product_detail_00000090.htm
This is the one I use, many others are out there. Be sure the one
you choose has the ability to output or export to .GPX format. This is
the "standard" GPS data format that is expected by most data formatting
sites and programs. I also use http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/ to
colorize my track by speed, add a semi-transparent wall connected to the
ground, and other things. Very neat stuff. It sure lets you know if
you blow a turn or wander in altitude/heading. My closest competitor
and I share our data and superimpose our tracks on GoogleEarth to see
how each others performance compared.
At less than $100...this things are golden in my book!
James Redmon
Berkut #013/Race 13
www.berkut13.com
2007 SARL Silver National Champion
----- Original Message -----
From: Greg Young
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 9:54 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Race timing help
I just participated in a type club speed event (without lawyers
we'd call it a race) and the time keeping got unbelievably screwed up
for such a small group (18 planes). Even though there are classes and
staggered starts we got folks crossing the finish tip to tip at pattern
altitude. Suffice to say that human errors on both the pilots and timers
parts caused a lot of grief. Sooo... what kind of technology is out
there to assist? All we really need is start and finish times for each
plane. It could be plane based, ground based or a combo but it needs to
be affordable for 20-30 planes to use and able to deliver the results
quickly, e.g. a download and analysis of everyone's 396/496 bread crumb
trail probably won't do. I was kinda thinking of giant barcodes under
the wing and a 10 KW scanner at the finish point;-) Hopefully someone
knows of something simpler, cheaper and more elegant. What's available?
Thanks,
Greg Young
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
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Simon Wilson" <simon(at)sertech.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Forum Search Problem & RSS Feed Question |
Noah,
I think you answered your own question a few posts ago. Google Chrome. Use
chrome make it your default browser (Options page, Basic Tab). Chrome is so
much faster than anything else it isn't funny anymore. I am a programmer and
chrome is some of the slickest code I have seen. It seems to support
everything except a couple of remote control programs like logmein. This is
also about to change. Use Chrome isn't fast fast fast.
Simon Wilson
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dale
Rogers
Sent: Friday, 3 July 2009 9:42 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Forum Search Problem & RSS Feed Question
Noah,
Firefox is free, and it co-exists quite nicely on the same
system with IE, even if IE remains the default browser.
It's worth the small investment of your time to go to
http://www.mozilla.com/
and download the latest version and compare it with the
MickeySoft product you're currently using
Dale R.
COZY MkIV #0497
Noah wrote:
>
> Thanks for the responses guys.
>
> Bob, just curious why you started a new thread rather than respond to my
original post, keeping this discussion all in one thread?
>
> Kevin, I'm using IE-7, and you suggest a reasonable workaround by opening
a new tab. Sometimes, however, opening a new tab can take up to 30 seconds
do display anything. In any event, I'm still not clear why I can do this
without issue on other forums (VAF for instance) and why it's different
here. Perhaps Matt can fix this. Google Chrome also does not exhibit this
behavior.
>
> Another feature I like on some other forums is that from the home page or
search results page, you can "hover over" the thread title to read the first
couple of sentences of the first post. VERY handy to see if it's something
worth reading without taking the time to click in, wait, read, and click
back out. It's all about reducing mouse clicks, you know!
>
> --------
> Highest Regards,
>
> Noah Forden
> RV-7A
> Rhode Island
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John" <rv6a(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mono Plug in Stereo Jack |
Hi
Getting close to doing the first flight in my RV6A. I have wired the comm
jacks for use with a stereo headset, but for enhanced safety, I would like
to wear my helicopter helmet for the first couple of flights. The helmet is
mono with a single jack and although I have the adapter for use in an
aircraft, I am unsure as to whether I will have any compatability issues re:
mono to stereo, or whether there is any risk of causing damage.
Appreciate any guidance provided.
Thanks
John Crate
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: self weighing our planes |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
There have been a lot of good suggestions here.
If you want to know the whole story, use the search facility at USPTO.com, which
is the US patent and trademark office....always a first stop for technological
issues.
Search "aircraft weighing" or similar strings. This search takes a couple minutes
but will give you all the relevant patents. Anything filed before July3, 1989
is yours to use in any way you want. You can use more recent stuff, but don't
commercialize or advertise it.
You must download and install AlternaTIFF: http://www.alternatiff.com/ to see and print the full images. It is well worth a few minutes to figure out how to do this.
My other fav source is the NACA/NASA Technical Report Server:
http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/search.jsp
This goes back to the start of aviation and is well worth a look.
"The problem with the world is that only the intelligent people want to be
smarter, and only the good people want to improve."
- Eolake Stobblehouse
--------
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=251306#251306
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wade Roe" <wroe1(at)dbtech.net> |
| Subject: | Spike catcher diode |
I have the stock Van's master and starter contactors. Does anyone know
if either of these items have internal diodes? Also, what size diode
should be used on the starter contactor assuming an external is needed?
I'm referencing AEC Z-13/8. Thanks!
Wade Roe
SOUTHERN CARBIDE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
7739 Unity Road M&D Industrial Park
Tuscaloosa, AL 35401
205-248-6700
205-248-6372 fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Race timing help |
| From: | Ian <ixb(at)videotron.ca> |
They use photographs for horses! How about using a high resolution
camera photographing a clock and the finish line at the same time? You
would need to be able to recognize every aircraft from underneath. Some
cameras will allow multiple shots at the high resolution needed, or you
could take digital video if you think you'd have enough information.
Ian Brown
> I just participated in a type club speed event (without lawyers we'd
> call it a race) and the time keeping got unbelievably screwed up for
> such a small group (18 planes). Even though there are classes and
> staggered starts we got folks crossing the finish tip to tip at
> pattern altitude. Suffice to say that human errors on both the pilots
> and timers parts caused a lot of grief. Sooo... what kind of
> technology is out there to assist? All we really need is start and
> finish times for each plane. It could be plane based, ground based or
> a combo but it needs to be affordable for 20-30 planes to use and able
> to deliver the results quickly, e.g. a download and analysis of
> everyone's 396/496 bread crumb trail probably won't do. I was kinda
> thinking of giant barcodes under the wing and a 10 KW scanner at the
> finish point;-) Hopefully someone knows of something simpler, cheaper
> and more elegant. What's available?
>
> Thanks,
> Greg Young
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Henry Trzeciakowski" <hammer408(at)comcast.net> |
Bob:
I'm using adel clamps to hold my wire bundle runs. Some of the wire
bundles in the clamps are "full" - tight. My question is, how "full or
tight" should the wire bundles be in the clamps? In one case, I'm using
a # 8 clamp where the wires are tightly packed. When I replaced with a
#9, the wire bundle is loose. How tight or loose should the wire bundles
be in the clamps?
Thanks
Henry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "glen matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | RE: self weighing our planes |
glen matejcek
aerobubba(at)earthlink.net
> So, how can strain gauges ever work in a plane while it is moving (as
> someone earlier wished for...to determine LANDING WEIGHT for example!)
Well, if strain gauges were to be used my guess would be to put them on the
spars, subtract the stabilizer load from the wing load and then factor by
the g load.
> But that does beg the question as to what's the
> value of knowing that you're over-gross/out-of-CG
> AFTER takeoff?
That was my first question. As I recall, the answer given was to get a
measured weight in flight to determine accurate performance numbers. The
bus continuously displayed buffet margins, cruise speeds, best glide speed,
and the low speed raster. I don't know how much of that can be calculated
and displayed without determining the weight of the aircraft. An
independent AoA is pretty straight forward, but displaying performance
hacks numerically without knowing the weight of the plane seems like it'd
be a little trickier. It also occurs to me that the glide ratio of that
plane varied with weight (due to flexure of the structure causing a change
in the geometric twist of the wing ) which would factor into best economy
and glide calculations.
> I've done flight testing on most of the Airbus family, and this is the
> first I've ever heard of this. The fly-by-wire Airbus aircraft do
> have a backup CG calculation that uses airspeed, weight and stabilizer
> angle. This serves to crosscheck the CG that is calculated from the
> crew entered values of zero fuel weight and CG. Maybe this is what
> you were thinking of.
Given a fighting chance, I can pooch just about anything, but I just went
and took a quick look at some old training docs and they do say the plane
calculated it's weight after lift off.
> As an example, if the lift off speed was ten knots higher than had been
>
> calculated I would be twenty thousand pounds heavier than the paperwork
> showed. By using that new weight to establish climb and cruise numbers,
> the
> airplane would deliver the performance required. Hopefully, modern techni
> ques
> for gathering the data for weight manifests have improved drastically in
> the
> thirty-five plus years since I flew those charters, but it worked well for
>
> me!
>
About 10 years ago my employer of that moment darn near lost a 737 at LGA.
At V1 the F/O pulled the yoke all the way to the stop, yet the nose stayed
firmly on the ground. Fortunately, he had the presence of mind to start
running nose up trim. They got airborne before getting wet, but not by
much. After returning for the landing they found 5,000 undocumented pounds
in the forward bin....
>
>
> Perhaps knowing something about the weight and CG in case you need to
make a landing,
> especially an emergency landing? JR
>
I have yet to see Sully's presentation, but having that and related info
instantly available was likely a factor in the Hudson river event. I don't
recall if it was the 'bus or a different glass cockpit in my past, but one
of them would give you a glide range circle instead of an altitude
intercept arc when you spun the altitude alerter down to ground level. If
that function was available on the 'bus, it could have been an aid in
determining if to a return to LGA (or TEb or EWR) was feasible.
>
> But is it not an FAA mandate (and a damned good
> idea) that the pilot know that weight and balance
> limits have been checked BEFORE takeoff?
>
Certainly. But load reports can be significantly off, you can burn an
awful lot of gas enroute, totalizers can be inaccurate or inop, fuel gauges
can err, fuel can be lost, and so on. If 767's could weigh themselves, the
odds of a Gimli Glider - type episode would probably be reduced. It's just
one more tool, whose greatest utility might not be realized until the
unforeseen occurs.
>
> It has to do with something like: "The best laid plans of mice and men
>
AMEN!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: self weighing our planes |
| From: | Dan Morrow <DanFM01(at)butter.toast.net> |
A point just to prevent confusion. USPTO.com is a private site that
offers patent related services. The government site is USPTO.gov
>
> There have been a lot of good suggestions here.
>
> If you want to know the whole story, use the search facility at USPTO.com, which
is the US patent and trademark office....always a first stop for technological
issues.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251306#251306
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: self weighing our planes |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Slightly off topic--but there is a little electronic gauge that hot rods use that
measures acceleration. Reduced take-off acceleration hampers your ability to
get the bird into the air. It could be caused by any of a number of issues such
as excess weight--and would be good to know.
--------
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=251334#251334
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Audio panel for nav audio |
----- Message d'origine -----
De: Buckaroo Banzai
Date: Mercredi, Juillet 1, 2009 10:13 pm
Objet: Re: AeroElectric-List: Audio panel for nav audio
> Gilles,
>
> The nav audio is available from the SL-30 without an audio panel.
> You can also access the menus to adjust the volume of the nav audio
> relative to the volume of the com audio. I have my nav volume set
> at 80 percent so that I always hear the com audio over the nav
> audio. I've been flying the airplane with this arrangement for 5
> years.
Greg,
Thank you for responding.
Did you connect the nav and com outputs direct to the phones (do't have the installation
manual at hand at the moment).
Thanks,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 03:17 PM 7/3/2009, you wrote:
>Bob:
>
>I'm using adel clamps to hold my wire bundle runs. Some of the wire
>bundles in the clamps are "full" - tight. My question is, how "full
>or tight" should the wire bundles be in the clamps? In one case,
>I'm using a # 8 clamp where the wires are tightly packed. When I
>replaced with a #9, the wire bundle is loose. How tight or loose
>should the wire bundles be in the clamps?
>
If one number is obviously loose, then the next number
down has to be the right one. They can have a pretty
firm grip on things. The rubber liners are more
compliant than Tefzel.
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: Spike catcher diode |
At 11:09 AM 7/3/2009, you wrote:
>I have the stock Van's master and starter contactors. Does anyone
>know if either of these items have internal diodes? Also, what size
>diode should be used on the starter contactor assuming an external
>is needed? I'm referencing AEC Z-13/8. Thanks!
The master certainly would not. The starter MIGHT
and would say so stamped on the under side of
the mounting flange. In any case, two suppressors
are better than no suppressors.
There are no rectifier diodes you can pick that
will be at-risk for electrical overload. My personal
favorites are the electrical over-kill (but
mechanically robust) 1N540x series. These
are really inexpensive and available from
Radio Shack and others . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/RS_Diodes.jpg
The 1A, 1N400x series are electrically quite
adequate but more fragile.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: self weighing our planes |
On 3-Jul-09, at 13:18 , glen matejcek wrote:
> >
>
>> I've done flight testing on most of the Airbus family, and this is
>> the
>> first I've ever heard of this. The fly-by-wire Airbus aircraft do
>> have a backup CG calculation that uses airspeed, weight and
>> stabilizer
>> angle. This serves to crosscheck the CG that is calculated from the
>> crew entered values of zero fuel weight and CG. Maybe this is what
>> you were thinking of.
>
> Given a fighting chance, I can pooch just about anything, but I just
> went
> and took a quick look at some old training docs and they do say the
> plane
> calculated it's weight after lift off.
Fascinating. Do the docs give any clue what the data source is for
this calculation?
The aircraft does know the crew-entered zero fuel weight and it knows
the fuel quantity sensed by the fuel indication system. It does
continuously calculate the current gross weight from that data, and
this is the weight that is used to display minimum flap/slat retract
speeds, green dot speed, etc.
--
Kevin Horton (Grounded)
RV-8 (Flying)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vern Little" <rv-9a-online(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Living without an audio panel |
Here's a link to Vx Aviation's web site: www.vx-aviation.com. We make
the world's smallest audio panel, cable of handling 10 inputs and
connecting to any radio or intercom system with or without auxiliary
inputs. The biggest advantage is it's compact size and light weight.
All of the circuitry is contained in a 25-pin connector backshell,
including 4 channels with volume controls and six channels fixed level.
The fixed level inputs are normally connected to instruments that have
their own volume controls.
My direct contact is vx ""at"" vx-aviation.com.
Thanks,
Vern Little
Vx Aviation
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 7:46 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Living without an audio panel
At 08:28 AM 7/2/2009, you wrote:
I know this has been discussed before, please excuse, I am still
confused.
My intercom will accept one monaural input.
I want to simply "twist" all the low level audio outputs together
from the various boxes to the intercom (then solder or crimp). This
will make the volume control on the box and its on-off switch the
control for that unit.
What do I put in line between the intercom input and each box?
resistor, diode, snapjack, or do I need a small isolation amplifier?
Try series resistors as passive mixing devices. This
will take some fiddling but it may get you by. This
is described in figure 18-4 and associated text of
the 'Connection.
Alternatively, consider a small mixing (audio iso)
amplifier. An exemplar DIY project is offered at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/DIY/Audio_Isolation_Amplifier.pdf
there's a number of off-the-self products out there
too. Somebody announced their new offerings here
on the List a few weeks ago.
I've had a number of requests for the ECB to
build an amplifier from scratch. I'm putting the
bare ECB back on the website catalog in a few
minutes.
On switching the comm, I assume I need a 4pdt (on-on) to
switch=====-mic, ptt, indicator light, and audio low so I
don't get confused which comm I am listening to while transmitting?
Or is there a simple way to maybe add a resistor to the switch so
that the non-transmitting comm is still on but with a reduced output?
I don't know if that's available even in the super-whizzy
audio panels. It can be done but certainly calls for a
lot of development effort.
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: Living without an audio panel |
Here's a link to Vx Aviation's web site: www.vx-aviation.com. We make
the world's smallest audio panel, cable of handling 10 inputs and
connecting to any radio or intercom system with or without auxiliary
inputs. The biggest advantage is it's compact size and light weight.
All of the circuitry is contained in a 25-pin connector backshell,
including 4 channels with volume controls and six channels fixed level.
The fixed level inputs are normally connected to instruments that have
their own volume controls.
My direct contact is vx ""at"" vx-aviation.com.
Thanks,
Vern Little
Vx Aviation
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 7:46 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Living without an audio panel
At 08:28 AM 7/2/2009, you wrote:
I know this has been discussed before, please excuse, I am still
confused.
My intercom will accept one monaural input.
I want to simply "twist" all the low level audio outputs together
from the various boxes to the intercom (then solder or crimp). This
will make the volume control on the box and its on-off switch the
control for that unit.
What do I put in line between the intercom input and each box?
resistor, diode, snapjack, or do I need a small isolation amplifier?
Try series resistors as passive mixing devices. This
will take some fiddling but it may get you by. This
is described in figure 18-4 and associated text of
the 'Connection.
Alternatively, consider a small mixing (audio iso)
amplifier. An exemplar DIY project is offered at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/DIY/Audio_Isolation_Amplifier.pdf
there's a number of off-the-self products out there
too. Somebody announced their new offerings here
on the List a few weeks ago.
I've had a number of requests for the ECB to
build an amplifier from scratch. I'm putting the
bare ECB back on the website catalog in a few
minutes.
On switching the comm, I assume I need a 4pdt (on-on) to
switch=====-mic, ptt, indicator light, and audio low so I
don't get confused which comm I am listening to while transmitting?
Or is there a simple way to maybe add a resistor to the switch so
that the non-transmitting comm is still on but with a reduced output?
I don't know if that's available even in the super-whizzy
audio panels. It can be done but certainly calls for a
lot of development effort.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: self weighing our planes |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Google "weight and balance computer"
Everything is there. DON'T Miss the Librascope analog weight and balance computer.
You can Google that too.
--------
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=251370#251370
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Johnson" <pinetownd(at)volcano.net> |
| Subject: | RE: self weighing our planes |
The C-130s I flew at the tail end of the Vietnam war all had fancy and
expensive weight and balance computers. The system measured the weight
on each wheel and displayed the airplane's gross weight and center of
gravity.
I don't know of any that worked, however. The common belief was that
the computer went out of calibration after the first landing. All
loadmasters I knew used a wooden slide rule specially designed for the
C-130. So far as I know, the slide rule never went out of calibration.
On the other hand, one of our primary engine gauges was the amount of
torque the jet engine was applying to the propeller. I don't know, but
it may have been based on strain gauges. The torque meters always
seemed to be accurate and stable.
Dennis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RE: self weighing our planes |
Good Evening Dennis,
Most engine torque meters get their information from sensors mounted within
the reduction gear housing on the engine. It measures the amount of
pressure applied to the ring gear. Works quite well and is very reliable.
First developed for large radials during WWII. Works good on turbo props as
well.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
In a message dated 7/3/2009 7:54:38 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
pinetownd(at)volcano.net writes:
The C-130s I flew at the tail end of the Vietnam war all had fancy and
expensive weight and balance computers. The system measured the weight on
each wheel and displayed the airplane's gross weight and center of gravity.
I don't know of any that worked, however. The common belief was that the
computer went out of calibration after the first landing. All loadmasters
I knew used a wooden slide rule specially designed for the C-130. So far
as I know, the slide rule never went out of calibration.
On the other hand, one of our primary engine gauges was the amount of
torque the jet engine was applying to the propeller. I don't know, but it may
have been based on strain gauges. The torque meters always seemed to be
accurate and stable.
Dennis
(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
0126575x1222585087x1201462804/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd
JulystepsfooterNO62)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Switch wiring conundrum |
| From: | "Mark R. Supinski" <mark.supinski(at)gmail.com> |
Hello everyone-
I've been wracking my brain trying to figure out a way to control my EFI
injectors using a single 2-XX switch. I can't find a way to do what I want
to do (perhaps there is no way).
Here's what I'm trying to accomplish:
I have 2 banks of injectors. I need to be able to wire them such that I
have a single 3 position switch (Primary - Both - Secondary). That part is
easy enough using a 2-10. Here's the added trick: whenever Both is not
selected, I need to tie a certain line on the EFI to ground. (This lets the
EFI know one bank is offline & it automatically doubles the fuel flow
through the remaining bank.)
The suggested implementation from the EFI manufacturer is to wire each bank
to a 2-3. One side of 2-3 control whether the bank gets power, the other
side controls whether the EFI line ties to ground. When an injector bank
has failed, the pilot is "guessing" which bank to take offline. If he
guesses right, the engine smooths out & all is well for a no-sweat landing.
If he guesses wrong, the engine runs off & he must quickly restore power to
the bank he just turned off & remove power from the "other" bank. Using two
separate switches for this seems like a recipe for frantically flipping
switches to try to get the engine back on if the pilot guesses wrong. My
idea is that if it is a single pri-both-sec switch, it is much easier to
simply reverse the position of the single switch you already have a hold of
should the guess be wrong.
Hopefully someone is cleverer than I am and can figure out how to do this
without requiring 2 switches! Or, at least I can find out it is impossible
& I can resign myself to having two switches.
Thanks,
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Switch wiring conundrum |
Hi Mark,
There isn't as much of a problem with the two switch solution as you
are imagining. When you turn off one bank and the engine doesn't run
better, you already have your hand on that switch and can immediately
turn it back on. Then just turn off the second switch (which is
probably, or should be, right next to it).
Bob W.
"Mark R. Supinski" wrote:
> Hello everyone-
>
> I've been wracking my brain trying to figure out a way to control my EFI
> injectors using a single 2-XX switch. I can't find a way to do what I want
> to do (perhaps there is no way).
>
> Here's what I'm trying to accomplish:
>
> I have 2 banks of injectors. I need to be able to wire them such that I
> have a single 3 position switch (Primary - Both - Secondary). That part is
> easy enough using a 2-10. Here's the added trick: whenever Both is not
> selected, I need to tie a certain line on the EFI to ground. (This lets the
> EFI know one bank is offline & it automatically doubles the fuel flow
> through the remaining bank.)
>
> The suggested implementation from the EFI manufacturer is to wire each bank
> to a 2-3. One side of 2-3 control whether the bank gets power, the other
> side controls whether the EFI line ties to ground. When an injector bank
> has failed, the pilot is "guessing" which bank to take offline. If he
> guesses right, the engine smooths out & all is well for a no-sweat landing.
> If he guesses wrong, the engine runs off & he must quickly restore power to
> the bank he just turned off & remove power from the "other" bank. Using two
> separate switches for this seems like a recipe for frantically flipping
> switches to try to get the engine back on if the pilot guesses wrong. My
> idea is that if it is a single pri-both-sec switch, it is much easier to
> simply reverse the position of the single switch you already have a hold of
> should the guess be wrong.
>
> Hopefully someone is cleverer than I am and can figure out how to do this
> without requiring 2 switches! Or, at least I can find out it is impossible
> & I can resign myself to having two switches.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark
>
--
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: | "Roger" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch wiring conundrum |
Hello everyone-
I've been wracking my brain trying to figure out a way to control my
EFI injectors using a single 2-XX switch. I can't find a way to do what
I want to do (perhaps there is no way).
Here's what I'm trying to accomplish:
I have 2 banks of injectors. I need to be able to wire them such that
I have a single 3 position switch (Primary - Both - Secondary). That
part is easy enough using a 2-10. Here's the added trick: whenever
Both is not selected, I need to tie a certain line on the EFI to ground.
(This lets the EFI know one bank is offline & it automatically doubles
the fuel flow through the remaining bank.)
The suggested implementation from the EFI manufacturer is to wire each
bank to a 2-3. One side of 2-3 control whether the bank gets power, the
other side controls whether the EFI line ties to ground. When an
injector bank has failed, the pilot is "guessing" which bank to take
offline. If he guesses right, the engine smooths out & all is well for
a no-sweat landing. If he guesses wrong, the engine runs off & he must
quickly restore power to the bank he just turned off & remove power from
the "other" bank. Using two separate switches for this seems like a
recipe for frantically flipping switches to try to get the engine back
on if the pilot guesses wrong. My idea is that if it is a single
pri-both-sec switch, it is much easier to simply reverse the position of
the single switch you already have a hold of should the guess be wrong.
Hopefully someone is cleverer than I am and can figure out how to do
this without requiring 2 switches! Or, at least I can find out it is
impossible & I can resign myself to having two switches.
Thanks,
Mark
I think you are overlooking an important point. With one switch you
have a "single point of failure", which cauld kill both EFI's
simultaneously. My preference/recommendation is TWO switches.
Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch wiring conundrum |
My first thought would be to use a transistor or NAND gate chip to
reverse the logic of the on signal.
Second thought is that you may not want to flick switches in a hurry. I
run independent systems and it does take a second to fill the second
fuel rail if I don't prime it first. By that I mean the second fuel rail
seems to get the fuel very slowly sucked out of it during cruise.
Third thought is that I would not use a single switch point of failure
for both injectors anyway. Note that it is no big deal if the engine
gets double the required fuel for a short period. It will still run and
make power during that time. Another option is to use a mechanical bar
arranged to mechanically operate two or more switches simultaneously.
Ken
Mark R. Supinski wrote:
> Hello everyone-
>
> I've been wracking my brain trying to figure out a way to control my EFI
> injectors using a single 2-XX switch. I can't find a way to do what I
> want to do (perhaps there is no way).
>
> Here's what I'm trying to accomplish:
>
> I have 2 banks of injectors. I need to be able to wire them such that I
> have a single 3 position switch (Primary - Both - Secondary). That part
> is easy enough using a 2-10. Here's the added trick: whenever Both is
> not selected, I need to tie a certain line on the EFI to ground. (This
> lets the EFI know one bank is offline & it automatically doubles the
> fuel flow through the remaining bank.)
>
> The suggested implementation from the EFI manufacturer is to wire each
> bank to a 2-3. One side of 2-3 control whether the bank gets power, the
> other side controls whether the EFI line ties to ground. When an
> injector bank has failed, the pilot is "guessing" which bank to take
> offline. If he guesses right, the engine smooths out & all is well for
> a no-sweat landing. If he guesses wrong, the engine runs off & he must
> quickly restore power to the bank he just turned off & remove power from
> the "other" bank. Using two separate switches for this seems like a
> recipe for frantically flipping switches to try to get the engine back
> on if the pilot guesses wrong. My idea is that if it is a single
> pri-both-sec switch, it is much easier to simply reverse the position of
> the single switch you already have a hold of should the guess be wrong.
>
> Hopefully someone is cleverer than I am and can figure out how to do
> this without requiring 2 switches! Or, at least I can find out it is
> impossible & I can resign myself to having two switches.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "glen matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | RE: self weighing our planes |
> Fascinating. Do the docs give any clue what the data source is for
>this calculation?
No, it's just a one-liner that says it happens. I was curious as to how
this is accomplished as well, but that detail doesn't seem to be in the
pilot docs. Or, at least my non-exhaustive search didn't turn it up.
glen matejcek
aerobubba(at)earthlink.ne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: self weighing our planes |
At 08:24 PM 7/3/2009, you wrote:
>Good Evening Dennis,
>
>Most engine torque meters get their information from sensors mounted
>within the reduction gear housing on the engine. It measures the
>amount of pressure applied to the ring gear. Works quite well and
>is very reliable. First developed for large radials during
>WWII. Works good on turbo props as well.
>
>Happy Skies,
>
>Old Bob
>
>In a message dated 7/3/2009 7:54:38 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
>pinetownd(at)volcano.net writes:
>The C-130s I flew at the tail end of the Vietnam war all had fancy
>and expensive weight and balance computers. The system measured the
>weight on each wheel and displayed the airplane's gross weight and
>center of gravity.
>
>I don't know of any that worked, however. The common belief was
>that the computer went out of calibration after the first
>landing. All loadmasters I knew used a wooden slide rule specially
>designed for the C-130. So far as I know, the slide rule never went
>out of calibration.
>
>On the other hand, one of our primary engine gauges was the amount
>of torque the jet engine was applying to the propeller. I don't
>know, but it may have been based on strain gauges. The torque
>meters always seemed to be accurate and stable.
Yes, these are situations where the strain sensors are
housed within protected environments and VERY important,
spend a lot of time with zero stress on them. i.e. the
sensors are much less likely to creep (acquire offsets
to calibration), offsets are easily spotted if they
happen (gage doesn't read zero when then engine is
stopped). Most important, the elements in which strain
is measured can be tailored to the task. I.e. The
full scale capabilities of the strain gage can be
exploited.
I think the earliest torque measuring systems were
pure hydraulic. The reaction force in a gearbox was
impressed on a piston that compressed a fluid
where pressure gages at the other ends of plumbing
could be calibrated in values of torque. I think
they're still hydraulic but with a pressure transducer
mounted on the gear box as opposed to taking a tube
into the cockpit.
This is an example of an ideal application of
a strain gage where the force to be quantified is
unidirectional by design and relatively free of
noise.
The vast majority of pressure transducer designs
use some form of strain sensor on a diaphram.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Patents/Silicon_Pressure_Gage_4287772.pdf
Since 1960 or so, a new silicon chip strain
sensor has been under development that has a much
higher output voltage. I suspect that very few
new transducer products use wire-wound or foil
strain gages any more.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Switch wiring conundrum |
| From: | "Mark R. Supinski" <mark.supinski(at)gmail.com> |
Well, that's certainly something to stew on.
I wish I had better information on what the failure modes for these
injectors really were. For instance -- do injectors fail open or fail
closed? Wiring in the switching is optional in the manual - implying I could
happily go flying with no ability to disable injector banks in flight. I
truly do not have room for two switches without making radical changes. I
think I have to go stare at the drawings and the physical panel some more &
either come to terms with no switches or two switches...
Thanks all-
Mark
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Roger wrote:
>
>
> Hello everyone-
>
> I've been wracking my brain trying to figure out a way to control my EFI
> injectors using a single 2-XX switch. I can't find a way to do what I want
> to do (perhaps there is no way).
>
> Here's what I'm trying to accomplish:
>
> I have 2 banks of injectors. I need to be able to wire them such that I
> have a single 3 position switch (Primary - Both - Secondary). That part is
> easy enough using a 2-10. Here's the added trick: whenever Both is not
> selected, I need to tie a certain line on the EFI to ground. (This lets the
> EFI know one bank is offline & it automatically doubles the fuel flow
> through the remaining bank.)
>
> The suggested implementation from the EFI manufacturer is to wire each bank
> to a 2-3. One side of 2-3 control whether the bank gets power, the other
> side controls whether the EFI line ties to ground. When an injector bank
> has failed, the pilot is "guessing" which bank to take offline. If he
> guesses right, the engine smooths out & all is well for a no-sweat landing.
> If he guesses wrong, the engine runs off & he must quickly restore power to
> the bank he just turned off & remove power from the "other" bank. Using two
> separate switches for this seems like a recipe for frantically flipping
> switches to try to get the engine back on if the pilot guesses wrong. My
> idea is that if it is a single pri-both-sec switch, it is much easier to
> simply reverse the position of the single switch you already have a hold of
> should the guess be wrong.
>
> Hopefully someone is cleverer than I am and can figure out how to do this
> without requiring 2 switches! Or, at least I can find out it is impossible
> & I can resign myself to having two switches.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark
>
> I think you are overlooking an important point. With one switch you have
> a "single point of failure", which cauld kill both EFI's simultaneously. My
> preference/recommendation is TWO switches.
>
> Roger
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: self weighing our planes |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> I suspect that very few
> new transducer products use wire-wound or foil
> strain gages any more.
>
Most now use piezoelectric elements. Squeeze a piece of quartz crystal
and its resonant frequency changes in proportion to the pressure
applied. A relatively simple circuit measures the difference between
the strained piece of quartz and a reference piece.
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: self weighing our planes |
Only most of the high precision sensors use the quartz crystal sensing
technology. Very accurate and stable but expensive technology for
pressure sensing.
The vast majority of pressure sensors out there at moderate prices ($50
to $500) use some form of piezoresistive silicon strain gauges - either
mono-crystalline or poly-crystalline designs. And as Bob noted, sensors
based on silicon have significantly higher sensitivity. The typical
bonded strain gauge bridge has a full scale sensitivity of 3mV/V (mV of
output at full scale strain/pressure per volt of excitation) while the
typical mono-crystalline silicon strain gauge bridge has at least 10
mV/V and 20 mV/V is relatively easy. Bridges using poly-crystalline
silicon fall somewhere in the middle of the above two technologies.
The low end pressure sensors still use resistive elements - cheap
technology but not very accurate or linear.
Dick Tasker
Ernest Christley wrote:
>
>
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>> I suspect that very few
>> new transducer products use wire-wound or foil
>> strain gages any more.
>>
>
> Most now use piezoelectric elements. Squeeze a piece of quartz
> crystal and its resonant frequency changes in proportion to the
> pressure applied. A relatively simple circuit measures the difference
> between the strained piece of quartz and a reference piece.
>
--
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.
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Switch wiring conundrum |
| From: | Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins(at)gmail.com> |
Mark - FWIW, I went through this same conundrum earlier this year. I
finally grasped the fact that two switches would be the most reliable.
Sam
www.samhoskins.blogspot.com
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Mark R. Supinski
wrote:
> Well, that's certainly something to stew on.
>
> I wish I had better information on what the failure modes for these
> injectors really were. For instance -- do injectors fail open or fail
> closed? Wiring in the switching is optional in the manual - implying I could
> happily go flying with no ability to disable injector banks in flight. I
> truly do not have room for two switches without making radical changes. I
> think I have to go stare at the drawings and the physical panel some more &
> either come to terms with no switches or two switches...
>
> Thanks all-
>
> Mark
>
> On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Roger wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello everyone-
>>
>> I've been wracking my brain trying to figure out a way to control my EFI
>> injectors using a single 2-XX switch. I can't find a way to do what I want
>> to do (perhaps there is no way).
>>
>> Here's what I'm trying to accomplish:
>>
>> I have 2 banks of injectors. I need to be able to wire them such that I
>> have a single 3 position switch (Primary - Both - Secondary). That part is
>> easy enough using a 2-10. Here's the added trick: whenever Both is not
>> selected, I need to tie a certain line on the EFI to ground. (This lets the
>> EFI know one bank is offline & it automatically doubles the fuel flow
>> through the remaining bank.)
>>
>> The suggested implementation from the EFI manufacturer is to wire each
>> bank to a 2-3. One side of 2-3 control whether the bank gets power, the
>> other side controls whether the EFI line ties to ground. When an injector
>> bank has failed, the pilot is "guessing" which bank to take offline. If he
>> guesses right, the engine smooths out & all is well for a no-sweat landing.
>> If he guesses wrong, the engine runs off & he must quickly restore power to
>> the bank he just turned off & remove power from the "other" bank. Using two
>> separate switches for this seems like a recipe for frantically flipping
>> switches to try to get the engine back on if the pilot guesses wrong. My
>> idea is that if it is a single pri-both-sec switch, it is much easier to
>> simply reverse the position of the single switch you already have a hold of
>> should the guess be wrong.
>>
>> Hopefully someone is cleverer than I am and can figure out how to do this
>> without requiring 2 switches! Or, at least I can find out it is impossible
>> & I can resign myself to having two switches.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> I think you are overlooking an important point. With one switch you
>> have a "single point of failure", which cauld kill both EFI's
>> simultaneously. My preference/recommendation is TWO switches.
>>
>> Roger
>>
>> *
>>
>> ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> *
>>
>>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Switch wiring conundrum |
Hi Mark,
>From one of your messages, I understand you stated you simply do not have
room for the two switch set up. While as indicated in the manual, you can
indeed go flying without a disable switch, I think you will find that the
benefits of the two switch system is worth additional effort. In event you
do have a problem with one bank of injectors or the other, you can disable
or turn them off and continue running more or less normally on the remaining
bank.
Here is what may not be apparent, the two switch system does more than just
turn on/off one of the other set of injectors (if that was all it did you
could accomplish the same thing by just having a power switch for each bank)
, it also grounds the EC's "Cold Start" function. When that is grounded it
automatically doubles the pulse duration to your injectors. True one bank
is now disabled, so it does not turn on, but the other bank has its flow
rated doubled.
So without it, if you turn off one set, then the same pulse duration is
now being sent to half as many injectors, therefore your fuel flow is cut
in half - meaning you are going to have to reach very quickly for that
mixture control and crank it up to full rich. I do not recall, but I think
the mixture control will only vary your flow by perhaps 25% (I could be
wrong about this), so you may have difficulty getting the initial fuel flow
back by mixture along - at the very least you are going to have to be
messing with your mixture control during a period when things might be a bit
stressful..
However, if you do have the two switch set up wired as recommended, the when
you switch off on bank of injectors, it will AUTOMATICALLY double the pulse
duration to the remaining bank of injectors thereby giving you close to
your original fuel flow (provided of course your single bank of injectors
are large enough to provide 75-100% of the total fuel flow you need). In
my rotary installation (which has four rather large injectors in two banks),
I have found the fuel flow easily provided more than adequate power on only
one bank.
Also, the disable feature can be great for trouble shooting injectors or
installation - not to mention that when you turn off /disable the injectors,
there is no fuel being pumped into the engine as it winds down.
If you truly can not find a way to place two DPDT switches - then a DP3T
switch might (I have not looked at it to see) provide a way to combine it
into one switch, but as several have mentioned, then that becomes a single
point of failure.
Decisions, decisions, decisions - not to mention compromises and
alternatives and redundancy all makes this a somewhat challenging endeavor.
Good luck.
Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com
<http://www.andersonee.com> http://www.andersonee.com
<http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html>
http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html
http://www.flyrotary.com/
<http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm>
http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW
http://www.rotaryaviation.com/Rotorhead%20Truth.htm
<http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html>
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark R.
Supinski
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 11:55 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Switch wiring conundrum
Hello everyone-
I've been wracking my brain trying to figure out a way to control my EFI
injectors using a single 2-XX switch. I can't find a way to do what I want
to do (perhaps there is no way).
Here's what I'm trying to accomplish:
I have 2 banks of injectors. I need to be able to wire them such that I
have a single 3 position switch (Primary - Both - Secondary). That part is
easy enough using a 2-10. Here's the added trick: whenever Both is not
selected, I need to tie a certain line on the EFI to ground. (This lets the
EFI know one bank is offline & it automatically doubles the fuel flow
through the remaining bank.)
The suggested implementation from the EFI manufacturer is to wire each bank
to a 2-3. One side of 2-3 control whether the bank gets power, the other
side controls whether the EFI line ties to ground. When an injector bank
has failed, the pilot is "guessing" which bank to take offline. If he
guesses right, the engine smooths out & all is well for a no-sweat landing.
If he guesses wrong, the engine runs off & he must quickly restore power to
the bank he just turned off & remove power from the "other" bank. Using two
separate switches for this seems like a recipe for frantically flipping
switches to try to get the engine back on if the pilot guesses wrong. My
idea is that if it is a single pri-both-sec switch, it is much easier to
simply reverse the position of the single switch you already have a hold of
should the guess be wrong.
Hopefully someone is cleverer than I am and can figure out how to do this
without requiring 2 switches! Or, at least I can find out it is impossible
& I can resign myself to having two switches.
Thanks,
Mark
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3267 (20080714) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David M." <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: self weighing our planes |
That is one reason I tried to come up with something. What if your
runway isn't long enough for you to hold that 9 degrees until liftoff?
I would like to know my weight per wheel (and can then easily calculate
CG) *before* I even start moving, in case I have to leave someone behind. :)
Or maybe dump a little fuel. Don't know how I'd to that on an OBAM but
I'd figure something out rather than take off way too heavy. If I'm
just going around the block that means I'll be landing way too heavy, too.
David
BobsV35B(at)aol.com wrote:
> Good Morning aerobubba,
>
> Any of us can do the same if we wish to go to the trouble of getting
> highly accurate calibration of all factors involved. For any specific
> weight and any specific angle of attack there will be just one speed
> at which the aircraft will leave the ground.
>
> If we note that speed and adjust for all the other pertinent factors
> we will have the weight.
>
> I have used that technique to some degree when flying the DC-8 in a
> charter operation. I found that if my weight really was what the
> paperwork said it was and I initiated rotation when the book said I
> should, the DC-8 would leave the surface at a nine degree nose up
> attitude. When I started to find airplanes in the charter operation
> that didn't do what I expected, I began to evaluate each takeoff very
> carefully.
>
> If I rotated to nine degrees and it did not fly, I held the nine
> degrees until it did lift off. I would then add two thousand pounds
> to whatever my weight manifest said for each knot above the normal
> lift off speed that I attained by holding the nine degrees. If I then
> added that extra weight to my performance calculations, all became
> normal.
>
> As an example, if the lift off speed was ten knots higher than had
> been calculated I would be twenty thousand pounds heavier than the
> paperwork showed. By using that new weight to establish climb and
> cruise numbers, the airplane would deliver the performance required.
> Hopefully, modern techniques for gathering the data for weight
> manifests have improved drastically in the thirty-five plus years
> since I flew those charters, but it worked well for me!
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
>
> Downers Grove, IL
> LL22
> Stearman N3977A
>
> <<>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch wiring conundrum |
FWIW here is my opinion on electronic injectors:
The most likely failure mode is low flow due clogging or zero flow due
to a wiring fault. Clogging/leaking risk is likely raised on some
aircraft due to using filters that are not as fine as in automobiles.
Coil failure resulting in no flow or continuous (stuck on) flow is rare
but both have been known to occur I'm told. I consider a stuck on
injector or a leaking injector to have no serious consequence for
aviation other than a rough idle after landing. And of coarse some fire
risk when on the ground or at idle.
ie. the major risk is a wiring problem or blown fuse/relay caused by a
wiring problem.
Ken
Mark R. Supinski wrote:
> Well, that's certainly something to stew on.
>
> I wish I had better information on what the failure modes for these
> injectors really were. For instance -- do injectors fail open or fail
> closed?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RE: self weighing our planes |
Good Evening David,
Sorry if you got the impression that I was suggesting using my procedure as
a means of checking the weight of your aircraft prior to a takeoff!
My comment was in response to a note which said that the Airbus supplied a
weight figure following takeoff. The submitter seemed to wonder how that
could be done, I was just mentioning one way such a determination could be
made.
As to what to do if I found find nine degrees wasn't going to get me
airborne, that really depends on how much runway is left and how bad the crash
will be if I abort.
Fortunately for me, I was flying a four engine airplane and our performance
numbers were based on having three running and the most critical engine
failed at the most inopportune time. That meant that if all four were still
running, we had some wiggle room if the aircraft was over the weight shown
on the weight manifest.
It was my experience with some very poor data being provided on charter
trips that got me to develop my little checking procedure and, as I could
verify sloppy work by those who provided the data, I could take steps to get
the quality of the data improved.
I do not recommend ever operating intentionally at any loading not approved
for the airplane, but there are simple methods that we can use to help
keep everyone honest and on their toes.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
In a message dated 7/4/2009 5:29:04 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
ainut(at)hiwaay.net writes:
That is one reason I tried to come up with something. What if your runway
isn't long enough for you to hold that 9 degrees until liftoff?
I would like to know my weight per wheel (and can then easily calculate
CG) *before* I even start moving, in case I have to leave someone behind. :)
Or maybe dump a little fuel. Don't know how I'd to that on an OBAM but
I'd figure something out rather than take off way too heavy. If I'm just
going around the block that means I'll be landing way too heavy, too.
David
_BobsV35B(at)aol.com_ (mailto:BobsV35B(at)aol.com) wrote:
Good Morning aerobubba,
Any of us can do the same if we wish to go to the trouble of getting
highly accurate calibration of all factors involved. For any specific weight and
any specific angle of attack there will be just one speed at which the
aircraft will leave the ground.
If we note that speed and adjust for all the other pertinent factors we
will have the weight.
I have used that technique to some degree when flying the DC-8 in a
charter operation. I found that if my weight really was what the paperwork said
it was and I initiated rotation when the book said I should, the DC-8 would
leave the surface at a nine degree nose up attitude. When I started to find
airplanes in the charter operation that didn't do what I expected, I began
to evaluate each takeoff very carefully.
If I rotated to nine degrees and it did not fly, I held the nine degrees
until it did lift off. I would then add two thousand pounds to whatever my
weight manifest said for each knot above the normal lift off speed that I
attained by holding the nine degrees. If I then added that extra weight to
my performance calculations, all became normal.
As an example, if the lift off speed was ten knots higher than had been
calculated I would be twenty thousand pounds heavier than the paperwork
showed. By using that new weight to establish climb and cruise numbers, the
airplane would deliver the performance required. Hopefully, modern techniques
for gathering the data for weight manifests have improved drastically in the
thirty-five plus years since I flew those charters, but it worked well for
me!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
Downers Grove, IL
LL22
Stearman N3977A
<<>>
(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!
JulystepsfooterNO62)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Icom A-210 intercom |
| From: | "chris Sinfield" <chris_sinfield(at)yahoo.com.au> |
Hi
speaking of intercoms, I just bought a new Icom 210 and want to put it into my
2 seater. Does the 2 place VOX system work OK should I have a seperate 2 place
intercom.
I just want to be able to talk to my pax, TX from either position and have an MP3
input. to both..
Chris.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251546#251546
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Switch wiring conundrum |
| From: | "Mark R. Supinski" <mark.supinski(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks to everyone for their thoughts.
I "bit the bullet" and celebrated the 4th of July by spending a delightful 5
hours under my instrument panel moving components / rewiring / etc to
shoe-horn in room for another switch -- which got in there with 0.05" to
spare. God then smiled on me & miraculously there were even two new 2-3
switches squirreled away in the back of the tool chest to allow me to
directly replace the old 2-10.
Mark
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Ken wrote:
>
> FWIW here is my opinion on electronic injectors:
>
> The most likely failure mode is low flow due clogging or zero flow due to a
> wiring fault. Clogging/leaking risk is likely raised on some aircraft due to
> using filters that are not as fine as in automobiles.
>
> Coil failure resulting in no flow or continuous (stuck on) flow is rare but
> both have been known to occur I'm told. I consider a stuck on injector or a
> leaking injector to have no serious consequence for aviation other than a
> rough idle after landing. And of coarse some fire risk when on the ground or
> at idle.
>
> ie. the major risk is a wiring problem or blown fuse/relay caused by a
> wiring problem.
>
> Ken
>
> Mark R. Supinski wrote:
>
>> Well, that's certainly something to stew on.
>> I wish I had better information on what the failure modes for these
>> injectors really were. For instance -- do injectors fail open or fail
>> closed?
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joseph Czachorowski" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Electrical Problem |
Guys,
I have a 2007 C-182T Skylane. After about 240 hours on the bird I got
an electrical problem. The Skylane has a G1000 in it. After starting
the plane and sitting on the ground at idle (approx 1000 RPM) the "M
BAT" starts to show a discharge after awhile (approx -1.5 amps). The
volts are good at 28 volts (the plane has a 24 volt bat). I can turn
the ALT off and the M BAT shows a bigger discharge (as it should). As
soon as I put the ALT back on line, the M BAT shows a positive charge
followed by a discharge to -1.5 amps. Volts are a steady 28 with the
ALT on. I don't think it's a ALT problem.
I changed the Gill bat hoping it was a battery problem. Nope. Same
problem exists with the new bat installed. I'm thinking the next thing
to check would be the shunts (there are 2...one for the STBY BAT and one
for the M BAT). Anyone have any other ideas?
Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis & Anne Glaeser" <glaesers(at)wideopenwest.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical Problem |
Joe,
I instruct in C172s with G1000s and that happens on a regular basis. I
don't think it's really a problem, it basically means the battery is fully
charged and at low RPMs it's actually supplying a few electrons more than
the alternator. As long as it goes away as soon as the RPMs come up, I
don't consider it an issue. Hopefully Bob will confirm.
Dennis Glaeser
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Electrical stuff for sale. |
I still have a few things leftover from the completion of my RV-6A project.
All electrical parts are new in the package (if they came in a package).
See below and contact me off list if there is anything you need:
Dean Psiropoulos
N197DM
Tarpon Sprgs, FL
1) Rocky Mountain Instrument - Micro Encoder (Unassembled Kit), fits std 3
1/8 inch instrument hole, displays airspeed, altitude, VSI, OAT, Altitude
alerting, misc warnings. Half the price of new at $450.00
2) Wingtip/Windscreen antenna kit - originally sold through Van's $10.00
3) Control Cables, Black Knob Friction Lock (for throttle control) $30 each
a) ACS Products, A800BL0445-V, 44.5 inches long (RV-6 with
carburetor)
b) ACS Products, A800BL0505-V, 50.5 inches long (RV, FWD facing
sump)
4) Control Cables, Black Knob with bare wire ends (used for carb/cabin heat
control) $15.00 each
a) ACS Products, A740BL0720, 6 feet long (Black Knob no button)
b) ACS Products, A740BL0720, 6 feet long (Black Knob no button)
5) Cable Safe, bulkhead penetration/mount for control cable, (for 1/4 in OD
cable). Fits control cables in (4) above $5.00
6) Gooseneck Chart Light with separate Dimmer control (B&C GCL) $50.00
7) Ray Allen Rocker Switch (4 wire, for electric trim servo control)$15.00
8) Ray Allen LED bar graph indicator (shows trim servo position). $60.00
9) Lighted Rocker Switch, Amber lens Carling Brand SPST, 1 piece (.55 x
1.125 hole) $2.50
10) Lighted Rocker Switch, red LED, SPST, 1 piece (.512 x .752 hole) $2.50
11) 2 Large Terminal blocks, (10 connections), #8 screws, $5.00 each
12) 1 Large Terminal block, (16 connections), #8 screws, $5.00
13) Flexible fuel line, std 3/8 inch with firesleeve, 15 inches long (Van's
part VA-129) $30.00 (never installed)
14) Wood prop install kit for 0-360 engine:
a) Aluminum machined spacer, 2 1/4 inch, $200.00
b) Aluminum crush plate and AN steel bolts $140.00
15) Wood prop for 0-360, 70x82, Ed Sterba, mfg 2006, 6 hours TT $450.00
16) Van's fiberglass spinner, fits 70x82 Sterba wood prop, painted metallic
silver $100.00
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David M." <ainut(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: self weighing our planes |
No problem. I understood and thanks for the info.
And thanks everyone for the help! This is great stuff.
David
BobsV35B(at)aol.com wrote:
> Good Evening David,
>
> Sorry if you got the impression that I was suggesting using my
> procedure as a means of checking the weight of your aircraft prior to
> a takeoff!
>
> My comment was in response to a note which said that the Airbus
> supplied a weight figure following takeoff. The submitter seemed to
> wonder how that could be done, I was just mentioning one way such a
> determination could be made.
>
> As to what to do if I found find nine degrees wasn't going to get me
> airborne, that really depends on how much runway is left and how bad
> the crash will be if I abort.
>
> Fortunately for me, I was flying a four engine airplane and our
> performance numbers were based on having three running and the most
> critical engine failed at the most inopportune time. That meant that
> if all four were still running, we had some wiggle room if the
> aircraft was over the weight shown on the weight manifest.
>
> It was my experience with some very poor data being provided on
> charter trips that got me to develop my little checking procedure and,
> as I could verify sloppy work by those who provided the data, I could
> take steps to get the quality of the data improved.
>
> I do not recommend ever operating intentionally at any loading not
> approved for the airplane, but there are simple methods that we can
> use to help keep everyone honest and on their toes.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
>
> <<>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Finch" <rgf(at)dcn.davis.ca.us> |
| Subject: | Electrical Problem |
Also, I find the Gill batteries-at least their non-flooded batteries-really
inferior to Concord and probably other brands. I gave up on Gills, the
Concord battery I use is working well past the life of a Gill.
Ralph
Davis, CA
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Joseph
Czachorowski
Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2009 11:16 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electrical Problem
Guys,
I have a 2007 C-182T Skylane. After about 240 hours on the bird I got an
electrical problem. The Skylane has a G1000 in it. After starting the
plane and sitting on the ground at idle (approx 1000 RPM) the "M BAT" starts
to show a discharge after awhile (approx -1.5 amps). The volts are good at
28 volts (the plane has a 24 volt bat). I can turn the ALT off and the M
BAT shows a bigger discharge (as it should). As soon as I put the ALT back
on line, the M BAT shows a positive charge followed by a discharge to -1.5
amps. Volts are a steady 28 with the ALT on. I don't think it's a ALT
problem.
I changed the Gill bat hoping it was a battery problem. Nope. Same
problem exists with the new bat installed. I'm thinking the next thing to
check would be the shunts (there are 2...one for the STBY BAT and one for
the M BAT). Anyone have any other ideas?
Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Electrical Problem |
>
>Guys,
>
> I have a 2007 C-182T Skylane. After about 240 hours on the bird
> I got an electrical problem. The Skylane has a G1000 in it. After
> starting the plane and sitting on the ground at idle (approx 1000
> RPM) the "M BAT" starts to show a discharge after awhile (approx
> -1.5 amps). The volts are good at 28 volts (the plane has a 24
> volt bat). I can turn the ALT off and the M BAT shows a bigger
> discharge (as it should). As soon as I put the ALT back on line,
> the M BAT shows a positive charge followed by a discharge to -1.5
> amps. Volts are a steady 28 with the ALT on. I don't think it's a
> ALT problem.
>
> I changed the Gill bat hoping it was a battery
> problem. Nope. Same problem exists with the new bat
> installed. I'm thinking the next thing to check would be the
> shunts (there are 2...one for the STBY BAT and one for the M
> BAT). Anyone have any other ideas?
Yes. Your ammeter reading is out of calibration. As long as the
bus voltage is above 27 volts, there's no way your battery
could be delivering energy, I.e. show a discharge reading
on the battery ammeter.
Are those true "shunts"
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Instruments/20-50_Shunt.jpg
or are your current sensors really hall effect transducers?
http://media.digikey.com/photos/Honeywell%20Photos/CSLA2CD.jpg
If hall sensors, it's likely that your G1000 battery current
sensor system has a -1.5A or greater offset that displays a
discharge even when the battery is charged and perhaps still
taking in some energy.
Temporarily run the battery cable OUTSIDE the hall
sensor. With all wires outside the sensor, it should
read zero all the time. Check the manual for any zero
adjust features that might be available. Alternatively,
ignore it. Battery ammeters are of limited usefulness
anyhow. Your original battery was probably okay if it
was still cranking the engine well. I think I'd opt to
ignore the reading.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Boddicker <trumanst(at)neitel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Icom A-210 intercom |
Chris,
Mine is wired as you indicate you want yours done. It works as
advertised.
The only thing, is setting the squelch level for the intercom to
break, is not well explained. After getting the values set, there is
no method to save the setting. If turned off, it will go back to
default, which is too low for my plane. Once reset again, pushing the
button IN saves the changes. I just guessed.
I am having issues with the radio receiving though. Sent it back last
fall. They changed the firmware, and re-seated some boards. It has
worked fine till yesterday. It will not receive. If turned off, and
back on, it works fine. But for how long? I will call tech support
once again. They know my voice.
Kevin Boddicker
Tri Q 200 N7868B 135 hours
Luana, IA.
On Jul 4, 2009, at 11:09 PM, chris Sinfield wrote:
>
>
> Hi
> speaking of intercoms, I just bought a new Icom 210 and want to put
> it into my 2 seater. Does the 2 place VOX system work OK should I
> have a seperate 2 place intercom.
> I just want to be able to talk to my pax, TX from either position
> and have an MP3 input. to both..
>
> Chris.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251546#251546
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John F. Herminghaus" <catignano(at)tele2.it> |
| Subject: | Ground planes again |
Bob,
One last question. With a carbon fiber can the ground plane be on the
inside or should be on the outside.
Regards,
John Herminghaus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Icom A-210 intercom |
| From: | Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins(at)gmail.com> |
Kevin - funny you should mention that. Yesterday I was running the engine
with the intercom turned on, for the first time. I couldn't adjust the VOX
squelch enough to prevent it coming on, anywhere above 1,500 RPM. They
don't seem to have enough range in the adjustment. Let me know if you hear
anything from their Tech Support.
Sam
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Kevin Boddicker wrote:
> Chris,Mine is wired as you indicate you want yours done. It works as
> advertised.
> The only thing, is setting the squelch level for the intercom to break, is
> not well explained. After getting the values set, there is no method to save
> the setting. If turned off, it will go back to default, which is too low for
> my plane. Once reset again, pushing the button IN saves the changes. I just
> guessed.
> I am having issues with the radio receiving though. Sent it back last fall.
> They changed the firmware, and re-seated some boards. It has worked fine
> till yesterday. It will not receive. If turned off, and back on, it works
> fine. But for how long? I will call tech support once again. They know my
> voice.
>
> Kevin Boddicker
> Tri Q 200 N7868B 135 hours
> Luana, IA.
>
>
> On Jul 4, 2009, at 11:09 PM, chris Sinfield wrote:
>
> chris_sinfield(at)yahoo.com.au>
>
> Hi
> speaking of intercoms, I just bought a new Icom 210 and want to put it into
> my 2 seater. Does the 2 place VOX system work OK should I have a seperate
> 2 place intercom.
> I just want to be able to talk to my pax, TX from either position and have
> an MP3 input. to both..
>
> Chris.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251546#251546
>
>
> - The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
> --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> http://forums.matronics.com
> - List Contribution Web Site -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> --> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
| Subject: | Ground planes again |
I don't think it matters.
Bruce
www.Glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John
F. Herminghaus
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2009 2:30 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ground planes again
Bob,
One last question. With a carbon fiber can the ground plane be on the
inside or should be on the outside.
Regards,
John Herminghaus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Ground planes again |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
I agree..
However, since the carbon fiber is somewhat conductive and therefore
shielding in nature, I might be concerned if the thickness of the surface
(including any foam/honeycomb core material) were significant.
Significant depends on what frequency the antenna operates at. The higher
the frequency, the more critical. If it's vhf it probably won't have any
major tuning effect. If transponder, I suspect a noticeably de-tuning
effect might be noticed. I would also guess that any de-tuning can be
addressed with a slightly longer radiator. You would need proper
equipment to check that out.
Regards,
Matt-
>
> I don't think it matters.
>
> Bruce
> www.Glasair.org
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John
> F. Herminghaus
> Sent: Monday, July 06, 2009 2:30 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ground planes again
>
>
>
> Bob,
>
> One last question. With a carbon fiber can the ground plane be on the
> inside or should be on the outside.
>
> Regards,
>
> John Herminghaus
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Boddicker <trumanst(at)neitel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Icom A-210 intercom |
Sam,
I got mine to work but had to set the squelch to 25 (I think) and
then push the button to save it. If I did not save it and turned it
off, it would default to 15. The default setting would open up
squelch and I could hear the background noise.
I don't know for sure what RPM, but on TO roll it would open.
My visit with tech support today was to identify my lack of
reception. I have no other problems. That I know about. I left a
message with the service manager. He is to call me back. Looks like
another trip to the service dept. for my A 210. I asked them about a
replacement radio. Tech support skirted that issue fairly fast.
Kevin
On Jul 6, 2009, at 1:41 PM, Sam Hoskins wrote:
> Kevin - funny you should mention that. Yesterday I was running the
> engine with the intercom turned on, for the first time. I couldn't
> adjust the VOX squelch enough to prevent it coming on, anywhere
> above 1,500 RPM. They don't seem to have enough range in the
> adjustment. Let me know if you hear anything from their Tech Support.
>
> Sam
>
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Kevin Boddicker
> wrote:
> Chris,
> Mine is wired as you indicate you want yours done. It works as
> advertised.
> The only thing, is setting the squelch level for the intercom to
> break, is not well explained. After getting the values set, there
> is no method to save the setting. If turned off, it will go back to
> default, which is too low for my plane. Once reset again, pushing
> the button IN saves the changes. I just guessed.
> I am having issues with the radio receiving though. Sent it back
> last fall. They changed the firmware, and re-seated some boards. It
> has worked fine till yesterday. It will not receive. If turned off,
> and back on, it works fine. But for how long? I will call tech
> support once again. They know my voice.
>
> Kevin Boddicker
> Tri Q 200 N7868B 135 hours
> Luana, IA.
>
>
> On Jul 4, 2009, at 11:09 PM, chris Sinfield wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Hi
>> speaking of intercoms, I just bought a new Icom 210 and want to
>> put it into my 2 seater. Does the 2 place VOX system work OK
>> should I have a seperate 2 place intercom.
>> I just want to be able to talk to my pax, TX from either position
>> and have an MP3 input. to both..
>>
>> Chris.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251546#251546
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> - The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
>> --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
>> http://forums.matronics.com
>> - List Contribution Web Site -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?
> AeroElectric-List
> a>http://forums.matronics.com
> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <joeing701(at)internet.is> |
| Subject: | Connection of the starter relay (STARTER SOLENOID 22735) |
Hello Bob Nuckolls.
I have been having a starter problems on my Rotax 912 lately. The starter
is the original Rotax starter. The starter has always needed more than
normal power to start the aircraft. I have been connecting a booster
battery every time I start the engine cold.
The Regulator/Rectifier from Ducati stopped charging, so I replaced it with
the Schicke GR6. Charged the new battery and still the same heavy load on
the starter. In my search for the problem, I checked all electrical
connection and noticed when looking at a drawing from your site that the
Starter contactor (STARTER SOLENOID 22735 from Aircraft Spruce) is wired
with the diode between the grounding poles, i.e. one to the starter switch,
diode between poles and the other to the ground.
When I connected the contactor at the time of building, I was adviced to
just connect the one pole, i.e. from starter switch to the pole and the
diode directly to ground on the mounting bracket for the contactor. Is this
correct or should I change it to the same as on your drawings?
Could this hook-up be the cause for a bad starter?
I removed the starter yesterday and it has been overheating and a few wires
have soot and melted connections. The engine has 250 hrs. total time on it.
Hope you can help,
Regards,
Johann G.
Iceland.
Zenith 701
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com |
| Subject: | Re: Icom A-210 intercom (Question) |
Are you Gents happy with the intercom on the Icom A-210?
-
I gather the squelch is OK if set or may be not good for loud cockpit?
-
Good bad ugly, would you do it again or would you add a dedicated intercom?
-
Thanks George.=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Boddicker <trumanst(at)neitel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Icom A-210 intercom (Question) |
The intercom function on my unit has been fine. Once I got the
squelch set. The directions were not very clear. Or I did not read
them correctly. I think the translation leaves something to be desired.
I am having a problem with reception. It is intermittent. Sent it
back once, and now have to send it back again. I loose reception, and
it is hard to tell. After a while of silence, I realize that it is
quiet. Change frequencies to AWOS or such, and get part of a
reception, then out. Cycle the switch Off-On and then receive the
broadcast.
The support has been good, but the radio is getting more flight time
than the plane. They seem hesitant to replace it with a new one. Hope
I don't have to get serious with them.
Kevin Boddicker
Tri Q 200 N7868B 135 hours
Luana, IA.
On Jul 7, 2009, at 5:37 AM, gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com wrote:
> Are you Gents happy with the intercom on the Icom A-210?
>
> I gather the squelch is OK if set or may be not good for loud cockpit?
>
> Good bad ugly, would you do it again or would you add a dedicated
> intercom?
>
> Thanks George.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Icom A-210 intercom (Question) |
| From: | Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins(at)gmail.com> |
Kevin - have you ruled out the antenna & connections by trying another one?
Like you, I also tried building the Mike Dwyer, but could never get the VSWR
dialed in properly. I finally bought a Bob Archer.
Sam
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Kevin Boddicker wrote:
> The intercom function on my unit has been fine. Once I got the squelch set.
> The directions were not very clear. Or I did not read them correctly. I
> think the translation leaves something to be desired.I am having a problem
> with reception. It is intermittent. Sent it back once, and now have to send
> it back again. I loose reception, and it is hard to tell. After a while of
> silence, I realize that it is quiet. Change frequencies to AWOS or such, and
> get part of a reception, then out. Cycle the switch Off-On and then receive
> the broadcast.
> The support
> has been good, but the radio is getting more flight time than the plane. They
seem hesitant to replace it with a new one.
> Hope I don't have to get serious with them.
>
> Kevin Boddicker
> Tri Q 200 N7868B 135 hours
> Luana, IA.
>
>
> On Jul 7, 2009, at 5:37 AM, gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Are you Gents happy with the intercom on the Icom A-210?
>
> I gather the squelch is OK if set or may be not good for loud cockpit?
>
> Good bad ugly, would you do it again or would you add a dedicated intercom?
>
> Thanks George.
>
> *
>
> 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/contribution
> *
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Connection of the starter relay (STARTER SOLENOID |
22735)
| From: | "nuckollsr" <bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
Hmmm . . . sounds like more than one problem.
First, you can KNOW if your rectifier/regulator is working properly with an accurate
voltmeter. The absolute minimum bus voltage after you've been flying for
awhile is 13.8 volts. The best voltage setting for use on airplanes or other
low duty-cycle vehicles (a few hours per week) is 14.2 to 14.4 volts.
Your battery should be checked for load-bearing ability. Use a service station
style load tester like
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Battery_Testers/HF91129_4.jpg
For a 17 a.h. battery, crank the load current up until the battery voltage as read
on the meter is 9 volts. Keep adjusting the current to maintain 9 volt reading
for 15 seconds (this particular device has built in timer) and not the current
after the time has expired. A healthy 17 a.h. battery will still be putting
out 300 plus amps. A 12 a.h. battery will be in the 200 amp range. Test
values below these numbers will give rise to suspicions of poor cranking performance
due to battery condition.
The fact that you need to jumper the battery for routine starting says the battery
is not being properly charged, the batter is going soft, the starter is drawing
an inordinate amount of current or some combination of these three. Cooked
wires says they're too small or the starter is drawing too much current . .
. or some combination of these two. Check your starter current while cranking
(use jumpers if necessary) by measuring with . . .
http://www.hoytmeter.com/products/Models_629_Starter_Current_Indicators.html
Compare your readings with another airplane with same engine/starer. But I would
suspect that anything over 150 amps is too much and suggests a starter motor
problem.
The existence of a diode (or lack thereof) on the starter contactor has no effect
on the considerations cited above.
Bob . . .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251931#251931
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rodney Dunham <rdunhamtn(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Connection of the starter relay (STARTER SOLENOID |
22735)
Johann=2C
I built a Rotax 912 powered SkyRanger and a Jabiru 3300 powered Sonex.
I noticed in the Schicke GR6 documentation that they suggested using 6AWG w
ire for power and ground. Some of my friends have used this gauge wire and
they too have "weak starter" issues. My power and ground wires are 4AWG wel
ders cable soldered on like this...
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/big_term.pdf
The trick is to jam as much solid copper wire as you can into the lug prior
to soldering=2C get the solder flowing and get out before you overdo it.
My starters spin rapidly=2C my motors always start quickly (even in the col
d) and the wires don't get hot.
One other tip... The "internal" ground may be poor. Be sure to brighten all
mounting nuts/bolts/studs and apply antioxidant grease (Vaseline will do i
n a pinch) and re-torque to specs. Don't over-torque.
Hope this helps and hope anyone more knowledgeable than myself can correct
any misinformation I may have posted.
Rodney in Tennessee
_________________________________________________________________
Lauren found her dream laptop. Find the PC that=92s right for you.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/choosepc/?ocid=ftp_val_wl_290
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Boddicker <trumanst(at)neitel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Icom A-210 intercom (Question) |
I have tried another one, but not to test this problem.
I did send Mike Dwyer my VSWR numbers and he said they were on the
money. I built his antenna, and used new high $ coax and ends from
SteinAir.
I have also talked to others on 122.75 at a distance of over 150
miles. It was not loud, but clear. I think there is an internal
problem with this unit. I will let you know when it comes back from
Icom. I am sending it in today.
Kevin
On Jul 7, 2009, at 7:05 AM, Sam Hoskins wrote:
> Kevin - have you ruled out the antenna & connections by trying
> another one? Like you, I also tried building the Mike Dwyer, but
> could never get the VSWR dialed in properly. I finally bought a
> Bob Archer.
>
> Sam
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Kevin Boddicker
> wrote:
> The intercom function on my unit has been fine. Once I got the
> squelch set. The directions were not very clear. Or I did not read
> them correctly. I think the translation leaves something to be
> desired.
> I am having a problem with reception. It is intermittent. Sent it
> back once, and now have to send it back again. I loose reception,
> and it is hard to tell. After a while of silence, I realize that it
> is quiet. Change frequencies to AWOS or such, and get part of a
> reception, then out. Cycle the switch Off-On and then receive the
> broadcast.
> The support has been good, but the radio is getting more flight
> time than the plane. They seem hesitant to replace it with a new
> one. Hope I don't have to get serious with them.
>
> Kevin Boddicker
> Tri Q 200 N7868B 135 hours
> Luana, IA.
>
>
> On Jul 7, 2009, at 5:37 AM, gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> Are you Gents happy with the intercom on the Icom A-210?
>>
>> I gather the squelch is OK if set or may be not good for loud
>> cockpit?
>>
>> Good bad ugly, would you do it again or would you add a dedicated
>> intercom?
>>
>> Thanks George.
>>
>>
>>
>> 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/contribution
>>
>
>
> ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?
> AeroElectric-List
> a>http://forums.matronics.com
> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wade Roe" <wroe1(at)dbtech.net> |
| Subject: | Spike catcher diode |
On the stock Van's battery contactor, there is only three terminals (two
5 1/6 and one 3/16 front and center). I am unsure where to install the
IN5400 diode. Can anyone comment on proper placement? Also, what about
the diode placement on the Van's stock starter contactor? Please excuse
my very "green" hands regarding electronics.learning!
Thanks!
Wade Roe
EAA 557
Aeronca 7AC flying
RV-7 nearing completion
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Spike catcher diode
At 11:09 AM 7/3/2009, you wrote:
I have the stock Van's master and starter contactors. Does anyone know
if either of these items have internal diodes? Also, what size diode
should be used on the starter contactor assuming an external is needed?
I'm referencing AEC Z-13/8. Thanks!
The master certainly would not. The starter MIGHT
and would say so stamped on the under side of
the mounting flange. In any case, two suppressors
are better than no suppressors.
There are no rectifier diodes you can pick that
will be at-risk for electrical overload. My personal
favorites are the electrical over-kill (but
mechanically robust) 1N540x series. These
are really inexpensive and available from
Radio Shack and others . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/RS_Diodes.jpg
The 1A, 1N400x series are electrically quite
adequate but more fragile.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Spike catcher diode |
Hi Wade,
You need to put the diode directly across the coil with the cathode
(the end marked with a stripe) connected to +12V. On a three terminal
contactor, +12V is on the terminal connected to the battery. Then
connect the anode to the small terminal used to actuate the relay.
Attached drawings lifted out of one of Bob's publications.
"Wade Roe" wrote:
> On the stock Van's battery contactor, there is only three terminals (two
> 5 1/6 and one 3/16 front and center). I am unsure where to install the
> IN5400 diode. Can anyone comment on proper placement? Also, what about
> the diode placement on the Van's stock starter contactor? Please excuse
> my very "green" hands regarding electronics.learning!
>
> Thanks!
>
> Wade Roe
>
> EAA 557
> Aeronca 7AC flying
> RV-7 nearing completion
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III
> Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 1:33 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Spike catcher diode
>
> At 11:09 AM 7/3/2009, you wrote:
>
>
> I have the stock Van's master and starter contactors. Does anyone know
> if either of these items have internal diodes? Also, what size diode
> should be used on the starter contactor assuming an external is needed?
> I'm referencing AEC Z-13/8. Thanks!
>
> The master certainly would not. The starter MIGHT
> and would say so stamped on the under side of
> the mounting flange. In any case, two suppressors
> are better than no suppressors.
>
> There are no rectifier diodes you can pick that
> will be at-risk for electrical overload. My personal
> favorites are the electrical over-kill (but
> mechanically robust) 1N540x series. These
> are really inexpensive and available from
> Radio Shack and others . . .
>
> http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/RS_Diodes.jpg
>
> The 1A, 1N400x series are electrically quite
> adequate but more fragile.
>
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ---------------------------------------
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
--
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: | "Bob Leffler" <rv(at)thelefflers.com> |
| Subject: | Spike catcher diode |
Vertical Power has a nice document explaining contactor wiring.
http://www.verticalpower.com/docs/Contactor_Wiring.pdf
bob
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wade Roe
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 11:54 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Spike catcher diode
On the stock Van's battery contactor, there is only three terminals (two 5
1/6 and one 3/16 front and center). I am unsure where to install the IN5400
diode. Can anyone comment on proper placement? Also, what about the diode
placement on the Van's stock starter contactor? Please excuse my very
"green" hands regarding electronics.learning!
Thanks!
Wade Roe
EAA 557
Aeronca 7AC flying
RV-7 nearing completion
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Spike catcher diode
At 11:09 AM 7/3/2009, you wrote:
I have the stock Van's master and starter contactors. Does anyone know if
either of these items have internal diodes? Also, what size diode should be
used on the starter contactor assuming an external is needed? I'm
referencing AEC Z-13/8. Thanks!
The master certainly would not. The starter MIGHT
and would say so stamped on the under side of
the mounting flange. In any case, two suppressors
are better than no suppressors.
There are no rectifier diodes you can pick that
will be at-risk for electrical overload. My personal
favorites are the electrical over-kill (but
mechanically robust) 1N540x series. These
are really inexpensive and available from
Radio Shack and others . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/RS_Diodes.jpg
The 1A, 1N400x series are electrically quite
adequate but more fragile.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
- The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
--> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
--> http://forums.matronics.com
- List Contribution Web Site -
Thank you for your generous support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
--> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wade Roe" <wroe1(at)dbtech.net> |
| Subject: | Spike catcher diode |
Thanks for the comments. The Vertical Power doc. is nicely done.
Wade Roe
EAA 557
Aeronca 7AC flying
RV-7 nearing completion
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob
Leffler
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 12:00 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Spike catcher diode
Vertical Power has a nice document explaining contactor wiring.
http://www.verticalpower.com/docs/Contactor_Wiring.pdf
bob
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wade
Roe
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 11:54 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Spike catcher diode
On the stock Van's battery contactor, there is only three terminals (two
5 1/6 and one 3/16 front and center). I am unsure where to install the
IN5400 diode. Can anyone comment on proper placement? Also, what about
the diode placement on the Van's stock starter contactor? Please excuse
my very "green" hands regarding electronics.learning!
Thanks!
Wade Roe
EAA 557
Aeronca 7AC flying
RV-7 nearing completion
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Spike catcher diode
At 11:09 AM 7/3/2009, you wrote:
I have the stock Van's master and starter contactors. Does anyone know
if either of these items have internal diodes? Also, what size diode
should be used on the starter contactor assuming an external is needed?
I'm referencing AEC Z-13/8. Thanks!
The master certainly would not. The starter MIGHT
and would say so stamped on the under side of
the mounting flange. In any case, two suppressors
are better than no suppressors.
There are no rectifier diodes you can pick that
will be at-risk for electrical overload. My personal
favorites are the electrical over-kill (but
mechanically robust) 1N540x series. These
are really inexpensive and available from
Radio Shack and others . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/RS_Diodes.jpg
The 1A, 1N400x series are electrically quite
adequate but more fragile.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
- The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
--> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
--> http://forums.matronics.com
- List Contribution Web Site -
Thank you for your generous support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
--> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron Quillin <rjquillin(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Inspection camera |
Huge long thread here and perhaps I missed some of the discussion...
HF had them on sale plus I had a 20% off coupon; had to bite.
Finally got around to playing with it.
Pretty cute, but...
The manual has no mention of focal distances.
For some reason I expected some form of adjustment; nada.
About the closest it seemed to focus was ~4 inches.
Tried to read some text and stamped serial numbers; nearly impossible.
Were any planning on using this for any form of detailed inspection,
or just a "what's in there" look-see?
As cute as it is, I'm finding it difficult to find an application
where any detail at all is required.
Others having different results?
Ron Q.
At 15:21 6/17/2009, you wrote:
>I played with it last night and took the monitor two rooms away from
>the camera and still had a picture...
>
>
>It looks like the newer models that Ridgid is still selling under
>their own name, no longer have that option.
>
>Harley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron Quillin <rjquillin(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Inspection camera |
Apologies; found more of the thread.
Looks like others too are also finding close work not great.
Any further opinions?
>Huge long thread here and perhaps I missed some of the discussion...
>HF had them on sale plus I had a 20% off coupon; had to bite.
>Finally got around to playing with it.
>Pretty cute, but...
>The manual has no mention of focal distances.
>For some reason I expected some form of adjustment; nada.
>About the closest it seemed to focus was ~4 inches.
>Tried to read some text and stamped serial numbers; nearly impossible.
>
>Were any planning on using this for any form of detailed inspection,
>or just a "what's in there" look-see?
>
>As cute as it is, I'm finding it difficult to find an application
>where any detail at all is required.
>Others having different results?
>
>Ron Q.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <ronburnett(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Inspection camera |
In my hangar we fight mud dobbers and I will look through the wing inspection holes
and be able to tell them at 4" or greater. It'll be worth it for me for
just that use.
Ron Burnett
N1131B-8A Moscow Mills, MO
--
---- Ron Quillin wrote:
============
Apologies; found more of the thread.
Looks like others too are also finding close work not great.
Any further opinions?
>Huge long thread here and perhaps I missed some of the discussion...
>HF had them on sale plus I had a 20% off coupon; had to bite.
>Finally got around to playing with it.
>Pretty cute, but...
>The manual has no mention of focal distances.
>For some reason I expected some form of adjustment; nada.
>About the closest it seemed to focus was ~4 inches.
>Tried to read some text and stamped serial numbers; nearly impossible.
>
>Were any planning on using this for any form of detailed inspection,
>or just a "what's in there" look-see?
>
>As cute as it is, I'm finding it difficult to find an application
>where any detail at all is required.
>Others having different results?
>
>Ron Q.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | luigit(at)freemail.it |
| Subject: | First come/first serve |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Inspection camera |
>>About the closest it seemed to focus was ~4 inches...<<
I think I did mention that in one of the emails I sent. In response to
other concerns over the camera's diameter being too large to fit in a
spark plug hole, I also mentioned that there is a 9 mm camera and
extension available for the Ridgid unit, that might fit the HF one. I
believe that smaller camera version was listed as having a shorter focal
length.
So, if we can find out if the smaller, 9mm camera works with this unit,
we can kill two birds...fitting in small holes, and focal distance.
>>Were any planning on using this for any form of detailed
inspection,or just a "what's in there" look-see?<<
I originally got it so that I could find dropped washers, nuts, sockets,
etc. (done that many times!) inside the wing spar on my Long EZ, instead
of fishing around with a mirror in one hand, a flashlight in another,
and the grabbing device in my third... I was happy to see that this
camera came with a magnet and a fishing hook.
Will also be handy for inspecting fuel tanks when I get the filler holes
cut, the hell hole, inside the cowling when attached, checking for
insects and chipmunk and mouse storage locations (I recently found a
whole walnut shoved into the wingtip light mounting hole on one
wing...probably a squirrel, but I didn't need the camera to see it). I
really wasn't concerned with viewing anything much closer than a few
inches.
Already used it at a friends house to locate some small parts that were
dropped behind her entertainment center. We used to have to move that
behemoth to retrieve anything! Also used it to see behind my desk here
(it's a huge oak desk that has the computer side mounted at a right
angle to the rest of the desk, so it fits in the corner against TWO
walls...almost impossible to move and difficult to see behind without
laying down on top of the desk..after taking the time to clear it off.
I feel I've received my money's worth already!
Harley
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ronburnett(at)charter.net wrote:
>
> In my hangar we fight mud dobbers and I will look through the wing inspection
holes and be able to tell them at 4" or greater. It'll be worth it for me for
just that use.
> Ron Burnett
> N1131B-8A Moscow Mills, MO
> --
>
>
> ---- Ron Quillin wrote:
>
> ============
> Apologies; found more of the thread.
> Looks like others too are also finding close work not great.
>
> Any further opinions?
>
>
>> Huge long thread here and perhaps I missed some of the discussion...
>> HF had them on sale plus I had a 20% off coupon; had to bite.
>> Finally got around to playing with it.
>> Pretty cute, but...
>> The manual has no mention of focal distances.
>> For some reason I expected some form of adjustment; nada.
>> About the closest it seemed to focus was ~4 inches.
>> Tried to read some text and stamped serial numbers; nearly impossible.
>>
>> Were any planning on using this for any form of detailed inspection,
>> or just a "what's in there" look-see?
>>
>> As cute as it is, I'm finding it difficult to find an application
>> where any detail at all is required.
>> Others having different results?
>>
>> Ron Q.
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Spike catcher diode |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
This issue has been argued here for years, so spare me your flames Bob.
Today, no electronic engineer recommends diodes for contactor coil suppression.
They are not the best, nor the second, nor the third, nor even fourth best way
to do the job.
Mechanical relays and contactors depend upon magnetism generated by an electric
current running through a wire coil. When the current stops, the magnetic field
collapses. But the relay does not know the difference between a wire coil moving
in a magnetic field (as in a generator) or a magnetic field moving in a
wire coil (as in a collapsing magnetic field). Thus a large voltage1000V to 1500V
typicallyis induced in the coil. This current goes the same direction the
original current didso it slows the contact openingallowing arcing, chatter, bouncing,
contact welding and even re-closure! Perihelion Design sells 18V 600W
Bi-Directional Zener Transient Voltage Suppressors P6KE18CA (for 14.5V systems)
that provide the most modern technical solution to relay coil suppression.
See my website or buy your own. The Gigavac GX11 contactor already has bidirectional
zeners for coil suppression. Gee, I wonder why!?
This issue has been argued here for years, so ignore me Bob.
"When I look up at the night sky and think about the billions of stars out there,
I think to myself: I'm amazing."
- Peter Serafinowicz
--------
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=252099#252099
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Spike catcher diode |
At 10:53 AM 7/7/2009, you wrote:
>On the stock Van=92s battery contactor, there is
>only three terminals (two 5 1/6 and one 3/16
>front and center). I am unsure where to install
>the IN5400 diode. Can anyone comment on proper
>placement? Also, what about the diode placement
>on the Van=92s stock starter contactor? Please
>excuse my very =93green=94 hands regarding electronics=85learning!
One of the battery contactor's large terminals
should be marked "BAT". The diode's banded end
connects to this terminal. The other end goes
to the 3/16" terminal.
This was the image of Van's starter contactor
from his website.
Emacs!
The right small terminal is marked "I" and
is not used. The left small terminal is power
from the starter push button on the panel.
The banded end of the diode connects to
this terminal also. The other end connects to
one of the contactor's mouning bolts
which is also airframe ground.
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: Icom A-210 intercom |
At 01:41 PM 7/6/2009, you wrote:
>Kevin - funny you should mention that. Yesterday I was running the
>engine with the intercom turned on, for the first time. I couldn't
>adjust the VOX squelch enough to prevent it coming on, anywhere
>above 1,500 RPM. They don't seem to have enough range in the
>adjustment. Let me know if you hear anything from their Tech Support.
Keep in mind that adjustable VOX systems are WATCHING for
an increase in signal from the microphone which it ASSUMES
is YOU TALKING. Depending on microphone's signal to noise
radio (ability to cancel background noise), increases
in cabin noise will cause the VOX system to open up and
requires resetting the threshold level.
I've never encountered a microphone/intercom combination
that did not require readjustment for engine off versus
climb versus level flight conditions. If the microphone
noise canceling abilities are poor, then some VOX systems
will be unable to make the distinction between your voice
and other noises in the cabin. Cabin noise varies greatly
from one airplane to another.
I worked with a customer some years ago to add a
combination of active frequency filters and a software
driven threshold detector that could make a distinction
between syllabic voice signals and the relatively
constant characteristics of cabin noise. But even this
system could be undone if you didn't use a pretty good
noise cancelling microphone with it.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LARRY SHARRATT <sandlar1(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Altitude Encoder Readout |
Don't know if this is the proper forum for this, but here goes:
Some years ago, maybe 15 or so, there was an article in Sport Aviation regarding
a kit for a panel-mounted device which would give a constant display of what
the encoder was sending. Since then, I haven't heard of any such instrument,
except what's incorporated in the newer transponders. Does anyone on this forum
know of any such self-contained instrument that could be used with the older
transponders/encoders?
Thanks
Larry Sharratt
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Spike catcher diode |
Wade,
Which approach (Zeners, Diodes or nothing) you choose is up to you. On
my website link below you can see where I employed Van's "blue" starter
diode (I have an extra contactor 'cause it's IR) which uses the same
approach. As Bob indicated I snaked the other end around the contactor
to the mounting bolt. Van's little direction sheet is quite clear -
don't deviate from it. In my case the solenoids are mounted on carbon
fiber so I use a ground back to the FG. I haven't decided if I'm going
to use zeeners, diodes or just replace the solenoid on some scheduled
basis. I've yet to see anything from anyone which shows how much longer
(days, weeks or years) a solenoid lasts by adding these gadgets. The
problem is real, but actual life expectancy needs to be measured to
satisfy my interest. If you are the typical pilot which flies 35 hours /
year it will fail from sitting around before it fails from arching.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_hkAHk0Xu6wo/SdymLdP-KbI/AAAAAAAAA1A/rF4p8Xvi2U
U/s1600-h/IMG_1312.JPG
Glenn
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wade
Roe
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 11:54 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Spike catcher diode
On the stock Van's battery contactor, there is only three terminals (two
5 1/6 and one 3/16 front and center). I am unsure where to install the
IN5400 diode. Can anyone comment on proper placement? Also, what about
the diode placement on the Van's stock starter contactor? Please excuse
my very "green" hands regarding electronics...learning!
Thanks!
Wade Roe
EAA 557
Aeronca 7AC flying
RV-7 nearing completion
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Spike catcher diode
At 11:09 AM 7/3/2009, you wrote:
I have the stock Van's master and starter contactors. Does anyone know
if either of these items have internal diodes? Also, what size diode
should be used on the starter contactor assuming an external is needed?
I'm referencing AEC Z-13/8. Thanks!
The master certainly would not. The starter MIGHT
and would say so stamped on the under side of
the mounting flange. In any case, two suppressors
are better than no suppressors.
There are no rectifier diodes you can pick that
will be at-risk for electrical overload. My personal
favorites are the electrical over-kill (but
mechanically robust) 1N540x series. These
are really inexpensive and available from
Radio Shack and others . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/RS_Diodes.jpg
The 1A, 1N400x series are electrically quite
adequate but more fragile.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
- The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
--> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
--> http://forums.matronics.com
- List Contribution Web Site -
Thank you for your generous support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
--> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Grounding question |
Hi Bob and all,
A buddy asked for help in adapting the wiring of his factory built Rotax 912 S
aircraft.
He wishes something more similar to fig Z16
His battery, contactor, regulator and capacitor are under the seats, whereas the
ground bus is on the firewall.
The factory originally grounded the regulator and battery contactor direct at the
minus post of the battery.
Is it advisable to retain this configuration, or would it be better to ground those
at the ground bus on the firewall, and retain only one fat ground wire running
from the fwl to the minus pole of the battery.
Thanks in advance for your help,
Best regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Spike catcher diode |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
My thinking is that going without spike protection will cause the
controlling switch to have a shorter service life. The high voltage is
across the coil... ANY of the spike protection methods will provide the
controlling switch with a relatively easy life.
The question of WHICH protection method is about RELAY performance and
life. Then too I would expect many of the relays in the airplane to not
particularly care about which protection method is employed. Many of them
aren't switching very high current, at least not very often. The
alternator relay should last "forever" as it should rarely if ever be
asked to switch the alternator when it's making much current.
The starter relay is the one that regularly gets hit hard - switching
hundreds of amps in many aircraft each flight. Setting that relay up to
open and close as succinctly as possible should help its service life. I
would think electrically operated landing gear controlling relays would be
the next one in terms of severity of duty.
Regards,
Matt-
> Wade,
>
>
> Which approach (Zeners, Diodes or nothing) you choose is up to you. On
> my website link below you can see where I employed Van's "blue" starter
> diode (I have an extra contactor 'cause it's IR) which uses the same
> approach. As Bob indicated I snaked the other end around the contactor
> to the mounting bolt. Van's little direction sheet is quite clear -
> don't deviate from it. In my case the solenoids are mounted on carbon
> fiber so I use a ground back to the FG. I haven't decided if I'm going
> to use zeeners, diodes or just replace the solenoid on some scheduled
> basis. I've yet to see anything from anyone which shows how much longer
> (days, weeks or years) a solenoid lasts by adding these gadgets. The
> problem is real, but actual life expectancy needs to be measured to
> satisfy my interest. If you are the typical pilot which flies 35 hours /
> year it will fail from sitting around before it fails from arching.
>
>
> http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_hkAHk0Xu6wo/SdymLdP-KbI/AAAAAAAAA1A/rF4p8Xvi2U
> U/s1600-h/IMG_1312.JPG
>
>
> Glenn
>
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wade
> Roe
> Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 11:54 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Spike catcher diode
>
>
> On the stock Van's battery contactor, there is only three terminals (two
> 5 1/6 and one 3/16 front and center). I am unsure where to install the
> IN5400 diode. Can anyone comment on proper placement? Also, what about
> the diode placement on the Van's stock starter contactor? Please excuse
> my very "green" hands regarding electronics...learning!
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> Wade Roe
>
>
> EAA 557
>
> Aeronca 7AC flying
>
> RV-7 nearing completion
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III
> Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 1:33 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Spike catcher diode
>
>
> At 11:09 AM 7/3/2009, you wrote:
>
>
> I have the stock Van's master and starter contactors. Does anyone know
> if either of these items have internal diodes? Also, what size diode
> should be used on the starter contactor assuming an external is needed?
> I'm referencing AEC Z-13/8. Thanks!
>
>
> The master certainly would not. The starter MIGHT
> and would say so stamped on the under side of
> the mounting flange. In any case, two suppressors
> are better than no suppressors.
>
> There are no rectifier diodes you can pick that
> will be at-risk for electrical overload. My personal
> favorites are the electrical over-kill (but
> mechanically robust) 1N540x series. These
> are really inexpensive and available from
> Radio Shack and others . . .
>
> http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/RS_Diodes.jpg
>
> The 1A, 1N400x series are electrically quite
> adequate but more fragile.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ---------------------------------------
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
> - The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
> --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> --> http://forums.matronics.com
>
> - List Contribution Web Site -
> Thank you for your generous support!
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Altitude Encoder Readout |
Any chance you need an excuse to acquire an MRX traffic detector ;)
The MRX will display transponder code and the altitude you are
transmitting but it's around $500. A MRX plus a new bottom end
transponder made more sense to me than spending the same or more for a
more expensive transponder though. There are enough units around that
you could likely borrow one if the need is short term.
Ken
LARRY SHARRATT wrote:
> Don't know if this is the proper forum for this, but here goes:
> Some years ago, maybe 15 or so, there was an article in Sport Aviation
> regarding a kit for a panel-mounted device which would give a constant
> display of what the encoder was sending. Since then, I haven't heard of
> any such instrument, except what's incorporated in the newer
> transponders. Does anyone on this forum know of any such self-contained
> instrument that could be used with the older transponders/encoders?
>
> Thanks
>
> Larry Sharratt
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Altitude Encoder Readout |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
I believe the article in question starts on page 66 of the Feb 1992 issue
of Sport Aviation.. I don't know if the plans/kits are still available.
If you are an EAA member, the article can be downloaded from the Sport
Aviation website.
Regards,
Matt-
> Don't know if this is the proper forum for this, but here goes:
> Some years ago, maybe 15 or so, there was an article in Sport Aviation
> regarding a kit for a panel-mounted device which would give a constant
> display of what the encoder was sending. Since then, I haven't heard of
> any such instrument, except what's incorporated in the newer transponders.
> Does anyone on this forum know of any such self-contained instrument that
> could be used with the older transponders/encoders?
>
> Thanks
>
> Larry Sharratt
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Icom A-210 intercom |
This seems to have been solved in the Flighttech intercom although in a
different manner. I believe he uses a telephone noise cancelling chip on
the mic. Anyway I find that it works perfectly for me with no detectable
background noise on the ground or in the air, and no delays or clipped
speech. Unlike VOX systems, no cabin noise comes through when talking
either!
It does not affect my VHF icom A200 transmissions as those don't route
through the intercom chip.
Ken
>
> I worked with a customer some years ago to add a
> combination of active frequency filters and a software
> driven threshold detector that could make a distinction
> between syllabic voice signals and the relatively
> constant characteristics of cabin noise. But even this
> system could be undone if you didn't use a pretty good
> noise cancelling microphone with it.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wade Roe" <wroe1(at)dbtech.net> |
| Subject: | Spike catcher diode |
Thanks for everyone's comments.
Wade Roe
-----Original Message----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:07 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Spike catcher diode
At 10:53 AM 7/7/2009, you wrote:
On the stock Van's battery contactor, there is only three terminals (two
5 1/6 and one 3/16 front and center). I am unsure where to install the
IN5400 diode. Can anyone comment on proper placement? Also, what about
the diode placement on the Van's stock starter contactor? Please excuse
my very "green" hands regarding electronics.learning!
One of the battery contactor's large terminals
should be marked "BAT". The diode's banded end
connects to this terminal. The other end goes
to the 3/16" terminal.
This was the image of Van's starter contactor
from his website.
Emacs!
The right small terminal is marked "I" and
is not used. The left small terminal is power
from the starter push button on the panel.
The banded end of the diode connects to
this terminal also. The other end connects to
one of the contactor's mouning bolts
which is also airframe ground.
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: Altitude Encoder Readout |
Larry Sharratt,
I purchased the kit and built it and it works great. I doubt that the
kit is available now but it would not hurt to ask. The name of the
company was Airpar. Contact:
Fred N Wimberly (703) 979-2483
PO Box 2755
617 21st St S
Arlington, VA 22202-2732
I still have the construction manual and parts list. However, this will
not do you much good without the PROM, the "brains" of the kit. The
PROM must be programmed with the gray code, not an easy task (beyond my
capability). If you really want to build an Altitude Encoder Read-Out
and Fred Wimberly can not help, then perhaps a knowledgeable person on
the AeroElectric website can help.
Joe Gores
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical Problem |
At 04:06 PM 7/5/2009, you wrote:
>Joe,
>
>I instruct in C172s with G1000s and that happens
>on a regular basis. I dont think its really a
>problem, it basically means the battery is fully
>charged and at low RPMs its actually supplying
>a few electrons more than the alternator. As
>long as it goes away as soon as the RPMs come
>up, I dont consider it an issue. Hopefully Bob will confirm
It's a good hypothesis but would be confirmed by
seeing the bus voltage fall below that value at
which the battery will deliver significant energy,
i.e. 13 volts.
Back when ALL our cars were fitted with generators
and most were fitted with battery ammeters, it was
quite common to see the battery ammeter go into
the discharge zone at curb idle . . . especially
at night with lights and perhaps heater blowers
turned on too.
As soon as the car began moving, generator speeds
would be sufficient to pick up all vehicle loads
and the battery ammeter might even show a short
duration "charge" transient as energy withdrawn
from the battery at the last stop light was replaced.
Ideally, after some significant interval of driving,
the battery becomes fully charged and the battery
ammeter needle assumes the "all is well" position
very close to zero with a slight + bias.
These same battery ammeters were never fitted with
zero adjusters. Therefore it is possible that some
devices would have different presentations for
the "all is well" condition . . . they might even
have a slight - (discharge) presentation.
Until one conducts a no-wires-inside-the-
hall-sensor experiment, the systems zero-current
presentation is not known. Alternators were praised
for their ability to maintain system voltage at
or above battery discharge thresholds. So unless
the bus voltage sags at idle due to ship's loads
exceeding alternator capability at that RPM, then
ammeter offset errors are suspected.
This is one of the "problems" with integrating
modern instrumentation technology into our airplanes.
System readings that used to be presented to us by
some fat needle on a tiny gage setting inside the
green arc have been replaced with digits and
decimal points. Unless those new instruments are
favored with offset and scale factor calibration
adjustments, then it's possible that their
presentations could be sufficiently in error as to
raise concerns. The way to resolve the issues is
with comparative measurements against other instruments
of known characeristics.
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: Switch wiring conundrum |
At 11:25 PM 7/4/2009, you wrote:
>Thanks to everyone for their thoughts.
>
>I "bit the bullet" and celebrated the 4th of July by spending a
>delightful 5 hours under my instrument panel moving components /
>rewiring / etc to shoe-horn in room for another switch -- which got
>in there with 0.05" to spare. God then smiled on me & miraculously
>there were even two new 2-3 switches squirreled away in the back of
>the tool chest to allow me to directly replace the old 2-10.
I think this is a good move my friend. In about a year,
I'll be able to share the unfortunate details on an electrical
system wherein the system designer took ingredients for
biscuits, bread, hot cereal, and dumplings and
stirred them into a new product that turned out to
be less than palatable . . . and was in fact
hazardous to health.
It's in our best interests to first consider the
manufacturer's instructions for integrating any critical
components into an airplane. But it does not automatically
follow that the manufacturer of a product is well versed
in the art of failure mode effects analysis and design
for failure tolerance. We should strive for the lightest,
least expensive and least numbers of parts that minimize
the need for pilot attention and intervention. I.e. the
elegant solution. EVERY design is fair game for critical
review.
There's no such thing as a SAFE airplane, automobile,
handgun or skateboard. There are considerations of design,
installation, operation and environment that always yield
to logical incorporation of simple-ideas into minimum risk
recipes for success.
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: Icom A-210 intercom |
At 11:09 PM 7/4/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Hi
>speaking of intercoms, I just bought a new Icom 210 and want to put
>it into my 2 seater. Does the 2 place VOX system work OK should I
>have a seperate 2 place intercom.
>I just want to be able to talk to my pax, TX from either position
>and have an MP3 input. to both..
I think the A210 shares an intercom feature with many
other compact comm radios like the Microair, X760, etc.
The intercom is a "hot mike" system using the radios
side-tone circuits that are energized with a push-to-talk
button. I.e., with the intercom button pressed, both
individuals hear each other and themselves speak.
Unless the noise cancelling capability of the headset
microphones is quite good, you would not want to leave
the system in the "intercom hot" condition all the time.
You'd get tired of listening to the cabin noise (or
even hearing the passenger chew his/her gum).
I've flown airplanes with PTT intercoms and personally,
like them. It cuts down on idle chatter (due to the
inconvenience of having to operated the button), and
eliminates the VOX setting creep induced by changes in
cabin noise levels.
Most folks don't like this feature . . . I note that
I didn't even show the PTT intercom button to pin
10 in my wiring diagrams. I'll suggest you give it
a try. You can always add a VOX based intercom later.
Your music system can be injected to one of the
aux audio input pins C, D or 3.
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: Altitude Encoder Readout |
At 08:55 AM 7/9/2009, you wrote:
>Larry Sharratt,
>
>I purchased the kit and built it and it works great. I doubt that
>the kit is available now but it would not hurt to ask. The name of
>the company was Airpar. Contact:
>Fred N Wimberly (703) 979-2483
>PO Box 2755
>617 21st St S
>Arlington, VA 22202-2732
>
>I still have the construction manual and parts list. However, this
>will not do you much good without the PROM, the "brains" of the
>kit. The PROM must be programmed with the gray code, not an easy
>task (beyond my capability). If you really want to build an
>Altitude Encoder Read-Out and Fred Wimberly can not help, then
>perhaps a knowledgeable person on the AeroElectric website can help.
I recall seeing various display projects over the years
but was unable to "put my hands" on one quickly. There
IS an interesting product designed by a friend of mine
that reads the output of your transponder's reply burst.
See:
http://www.airsport-corp.com/
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Spike catcher diode |
7/10/2009
Hello Glenn, You wrote: "I haven't decided if I'm going to use zeeners,
diodes or just replace the solenoid on some scheduled basis. I've yet to see
anything from anyone which shows how much longer (days, weeks or years) a
solenoid lasts by adding these gadgets. The problem is real, but actual life
expectancy needs to be measured to satisfy my interest."
I think that the primary purpose of a spike catcher device is to protect the
points in the switch controlling the current through the solonoid coil. The
switch points are much more fragile and susceptible to failure than the
solonoid contact points.
We frequently see reports of switch point failures, particularly in the
keyed ignition switches.
'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
understand knowledge."
==========================================
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Spike catcher diode
From: <longg(at)pjm.com>
Wade,
Which approach (Zeners, Diodes or nothing) you choose is up to you. On
my website link below you can see where I employed Van's "blue" starter
diode (I have an extra contactor 'cause it's IR) which uses the same
approach. As Bob indicated I snaked the other end around the contactor
to the mounting bolt. Van's little direction sheet is quite clear -
don't deviate from it. In my case the solenoids are mounted on carbon
fiber so I use a ground back to the FG. I haven't decided if I'm going
to use zeeners, diodes or just replace the solenoid on some scheduled
basis. I've yet to see anything from anyone which shows how much longer
(days, weeks or years) a solenoid lasts by adding these gadgets. The
problem is real, but actual life expectancy needs to be measured to
satisfy my interest. If you are the typical pilot which flies 35 hours /
year it will fail from sitting around before it fails from arching.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_hkAHk0Xu6wo/SdymLdP-KbI/AAAAAAAAA1A/rF4p8Xvi2U
U/s1600-h/IMG_1312.JPG
Glenn
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "rer51" <rer51(at)netscape.ca> |
| Subject: | Switch bezel nuts |
I am looking for a source for the switch bezel rings. I currently have a
mix of different one and would like to standardize them. So far every
supplier say that I must buy "new" complete switches to get the rings.
Help would be appreciated. Randy R. RV9A "gittin' close"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Neal George" <n8zg(at)mchsi.com> |
| Subject: | Switch bezel nuts |
Randy - I've bought loose switch nuts from both Stein and B&C.
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of rer51
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 6:02 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Switch bezel nuts
I am looking for a source for the switch bezel rings. I currently have a mix
of different one and would like to standardize them. So far every supplier
say that I must buy "new" complete switches to get the rings. Help would be
appreciated. Randy R. RV9A "gittin' close"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Ciolino" <johnciolino(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Switch bezel nuts |
Both Mouser(sp?) and Digikey sell individual bezel nuts
John Ciolino
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of rer51
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 7:02 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Switch bezel nuts
I am looking for a source for the switch bezel rings. I currently have a mix
of different one and would like to standardize them. So far every supplier
say that I must buy "new" complete switches to get the rings. Help would be
appreciated. Randy R. RV9A "gittin' close"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Spike catcher diode |
At 09:13 AM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
>
>This issue has been argued here for years, so spare me your flames Bob.
Please cite any posting I've made that could be
reasonably (or even unreasonably) described as a
"flame". They're all in the archives . . . cut and
paste a direct quotation please.
>Today, no electronic engineer recommends diodes
>for contactor coil suppression. They are not the
>best, nor the second, nor the third, nor even fourth best way to do the
job.
"The job" is not a constant . . . The means
by which "the job" is accomplished is also not
a constant. Many papers have been written on
replay performance and system integration issues.
Some were done by very competent designers who
were marginal writers/teachers. For example: In
the paper at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Tyco/Tyco-Paper_on_Coil_Suppressi
on.pdf
The paper opens with a concern for damage to
normally open contacts that are switching high-
inrush currents and attributes this to selection
of coil suppression technique. In fact, the damage
being cited is mostly a matter of contact bounce
during a stressful portion of the operating cycle
where contacts close, open and re-close
perhaps a dozen times (at the worst possible moment)
when the switched currents are many times higher than the
steady state ratings of the contacts.
Further, coil suppression has nothing to do with
contactor performance on energizing the coil, only
upon the de-energizing event.
Keep in mind too that these guys write about
RELAYS rated to advertised service life in tens of
thousands if not hundreds of thousands of cycles.
We're discussing battery and starter contactors
that will probably fail due to corrosion before they
die from service life stresses.
Finally, I did real studies of changes to contact
spreading velocity at de-energization for the
two most aggressive devices in the airplane . . .
battery and starter contactors. I thought I might
have obvserved a 2 or 3% increase in arcing time
for diode versus NO coil suppression. How does this
drive a decision to put the hex on the lowly diode
coil suppressor?
>Mechanical relays and contactors depend upon
>magnetism generated by an electric current
>running through a wire coil. When the current
>stops, the magnetic field collapses. But the
>relay does not know the difference between a
>wire coil moving in a magnetic field (as in a
>generator) or a magnetic field moving in a wire
>coil (as in a collapsing magnetic field). Thus a
>large voltage=941000V to 1500V typically=94is
>induced in the coil. This current goes the same
>direction the original current did=94so it slows
>the contact opening=94allowing arcing, chatter,
>bouncing, contact welding and even
>re-closure! Perihelion Design sells 18V 600W
>Bi-Directional Zener Transient Voltage
>Suppressors P6KE18CA (for 14.5V systems) that
>provide the most modern technical solution to relay coil suppression.
>
>See my website or buy your own. The Gigavac GX11
>contactor already has bidirectional zeners for
>coil suppression. Gee, I wonder why!?\
I can suggest a good reason why: Simple diodes are
polarity sensitive . . . I.e. if you build the diode
into the contactor, options for coil connection are
bounded by polarity of the diode. In starter
contactors where diodes are commonly built in, the
base of the contactor is always (-) so the built in
diode offers low risk for miswiring. Bi-directional
Transorbs are goof-proof.
The bi-directional zener offers a form of coil energy
suppression that is not polarity sensitive and dissipates
stored inductive energy in a combination of coil resistance
and I*E product of the zener. Further current tending
to keep the contactor closed after deenergizing has
a lower on-set value . . . hence the faster drop-out
response.
>This issue has been argued here for years, so ignore me Bob.
So why bring it up again? I've measured, demonstrated and
explained the value/function of the various coil transient
suppression methods on the devices we're talking about . . .
CONTACTORS.
http://tinyurl.com/mcgg87
On your website at:
http://www.periheliondesign.com/suppressors.htm
you say . . .
"Thus a large voltage=AD1000V to 1500V typically=ADis induced
in the coil. This current goes the same direction the original
current did=ADso it slows the contact opening=ADallowing arcing,
chatter, bouncing, contact welding and even re-closure!"
The first statement is correct, the voltage is high . . . but
fails to say where it goes or what devices are placed at risk.
A diode delays contact opening after the coil power is removed. But
differences in contact spreading velocity are so small (if they
exist at all) as to be difficult to measure. I challenge you to
go to the workbench and show me a setup that produces bounce,
chatter, increased arcing, tendencies to weld N.O. contacts
upon de-energization, and/or evidence of re-closure as a
consequence of simple diode coil suppression.
If not demonstrable, how about a hypothesis as to how
contacts that are moving away from each other are subject
to a force that accelerates the contact mass in the opposite
direction and effects re-closure? May I suggest this notion is
absurd the the extreme?
Your hypothesized 60v transient generated by simply turning
off a large load is also in error. This event happens during
the automotive definition of load dump that includes a
BATTERY DISCONNECT. Alternators that go through MPA's
rebuild facilities are tested for it's effect on the
alternator . . . believe me it can be a whole lot worse
than 60V. But this is rare in airplanes. What's the likelihood
that dropping a max rated load is exactly coincident with
opening the battery contactor? In your functional description
at:
http://www.periheliondesign.com/suppressors/Whackjack%20Manual.pdf
There's no mention of battery disconnect . . . hence the
60v number is hyperbolic persuasion. Your citation of
FAR 25.581 is equally hyperbolic. If you're going to evoke
lightning qualification issues to an RV, then believe me,
the task is about 100x more complex than adding a "WhackJack"
to the system.
I've managed numerous investigations into relay and switch
contact failures in 40+ years of hammering on airplanes.
It was not uncommon to discover things about some products
than the "engineers" and "manufacturer's reps" assigned to
support those products did not know. Quite often,
those individuals were tasked with supporting a legacy
product they didn't design and never integrated into
a system.
There's an archive of Tyco publications on the subject
at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Tyco/
These are largely factual and the ideas presented are useful
to consider where applicable . . . but they don't apply
to what we've been talking about.
If you choose to play in this sandbox, bring the right
shovel, bucket and support them with a willingness to explain
and teach. I'm sure that your products perform as they
are intended to by their designers. But their prophylactic
application to ward off the gremlins described on your
website is not consistent with what we have known about electrical
systems (and their component parts) in airplane for over 100 years.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Spike catcher diode |
>I haven't decided if I'm going to use zeeners, diodes or just
>replace the solenoid on some scheduled basis. I've yet to see
>anything from anyone which shows how much longer (days, weeks or
>years) a solenoid lasts by adding these gadgets.
The inclusion of coil suppression is for the benefit of the
controlling device (switch or push-button). From the time
that batteries and starters went into light airplanes (1945?)
until the rectifier diodes came to Cessna's attention (1963?)
there was no coil suppression on battery or starter contactors.
We had a devil of a time converting a leaded electronic component
into an airplane part. We COULD have attached the diodes like
this . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/s701-1.jpg
But somebody decided to mount the diodes on little strips
of phenolic sheet with eyelets at the ends to accept
screws and wires with terminals crimped on them. Added a
whole lot of labor and fragility to an otherwise inexpensive,
robust device. I note that the Cessna Service parts lists
still show a lot of "diode assemblies" for $15 to $50. So
I guess they're still sticking diodes on some form of
built-up assembly.
Even today, plain-vanilla diodes are used across contactors
in production aircraft.
> The problem is real, but actual life expectancy needs to be
> measured to satisfy my interest.
Excellent question. I don't recall that we were ever aware
of a service life "problem" with either contactors or their
controlling switches in the years before diodes. But I
recall Gordon Wood (our PhD physicist) putting a H-P peak-
reading voltmeter across a contactor coil, seeing a 500+ volt
reading and saying, "Hot damn . . . we need to do something
about that!" And we did.
Given that we were unaware of service life issues attributable
to LACK of DIODES, we were destined to be equally ignorant of
service life benefits after diodes were ADDED. But we sure took
care of that 500v spike! I don't think Gordo ever put a 'scope
on the system to see where the spike goes. I suspect he would
have seen this:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Spike_Catching/CH_Opening_No_Suppression.gif
Noise conducted to the bus is very low energy, low amplitude
compared to what the controlling switch sees.
If you are the typical pilot which flies 35 hours / year it will
fail from sitting around before it fails from arching.
Exactly! There's a ton of papers written to the task of
wringing the last few hours of service life from various products
rated in gazillions of cycles.
But if there was ever a low duty-cycle application for any
electro-whizzy, it's the personally owned light airplane,
snow-mobile, or bass boat.
Your perception of effects of age and environment being
more profound than effects of service life is quite
accurate!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Grounding question |
At 11:17 AM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
>
>Hi Bob and all,
>
>A buddy asked for help in adapting the wiring of his factory built
>Rotax 912 S aircraft.
>He wishes something more similar to fig Z16
>
>His battery, contactor, regulator and capacitor are under the seats,
>whereas the ground bus is on the firewall.
>The factory originally grounded the regulator and battery contactor
>direct at the minus post of the battery.
>Is it advisable to retain this configuration, or would it be better
>to ground those at the ground bus on the firewall, and retain only
>one fat ground wire running from the fwl to the minus pole of the battery.
>
>Thanks in advance for your help,
You will note that none of the Z-figures attaches
more than single, fat-wire to a battery terminal. I know
some manufacturers of electro-whizzies are fond
of asking builders to "hook my product right to the
battery terminals".
In the world of TC aircraft, we're sensitive to the
effects of wrench-monkies who routinely replace certain
articles over the lifetime of the airplane. Batteries
certainly get replaced about as often as tires. It's
not considered good practice to inject more variability
than necessary into the reliable opening/closing of
a fastener. Hence, batteries never get more than one
wire on their terminals. In some cases, we even eliminated
human-induced variability by designing batteries with
connectors on them!
Emacs!
The short answer is, I recommend you stay with the architecture
described in Z-16.
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: | Contactor question |
I'm currently planning a VP-200 Config 4 implementation in my RV-10 (similar
in concept to Z-14).
I'm at the stage where I need to install any required conduit, so I started
some high level physical power wire planning.
If I keep the battery and x-tie contactors in the rear with the batteries,
it appears that I have to run 13 wires from the firewall back to the
batteries, whereas if I locate the battery and x-tie contactors up front,
only 5 wires will need to be run to the batteries.
This appears to be a no-brainer decision to minimize the amount of wire to
be installed. Are there any issues with not having these contactors
co-located with the batteries (assuming appropriate wire gauges are used)?
I would be interested in talking with any RV-10 builders that are
considering a Config 4 implementation, as well as those that initially
thought about a Config 4 then switched to another config.
thanks,
bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John" <rv6a(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Using Mono Headset in Sterio Jack |
Hi Bob
Are there any issues to be concerned about if I was to use a mono
headset in jacks that are wired for stereo?
Thanks
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Using Mono Headset in Sterio Jack |
John wrote:
> Hi Bob
>
> Are there any issues to be concerned about if I was to use a mono
> headset in jacks that are wired for stereo?
>
> Thanks
>
> John
>
If you plug a mono plug in a stereo jack, the 2nd channel will be tied
to the ground 'sleeve' of the plug. It probably won't hurt the intercom
(it probably has series resistors in its outputs to protect against just
this issue) but it sure ain't gonna help.
There are several possible 'workarounds'. The simplest (which will lose
the right channel from the intercom) is to wire a stereo plug (tip &
sleeve only) to a mono inline jack. Leave the ring terminal of the
stereo plug unconnected. Use this adapter between the headset plug &
your intercom jack.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
7/10/2009
Below copied for your info from the BMA web site.
'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
understand knowledge."
===============================================
"Well, it's been fun. We developed a whole new class of machine, started an
industry, dominated it, and are now leaving it. BMA will be ceasing
production and spinning down. The best way to contact us is via email:
support(at)bluemountainavionics.com. Please don't call, since the office is
not staffed on a scheduled basis. We'll still be around to service, support
and assist as time permits, homebuilders helping other homebuilders, but BMA
is essentially closed. This website is paid up and will be around for a few
years at least, and there is some hope (and a fond desire) that we may
return to full production when the economy recovers. Database updates are
still be available on this site, and service, maintenance and repairs are
still available for all BMA products. We are actively seeking someone to
buy the code and continue development. If your interested, please email."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Contactor question |
At 04:01 PM 7/10/2009, you wrote:
>I'm currently planning a VP-200 Config 4 implementation in my RV-10
>(similar in concept to Z-14).
>
>I'm at the stage where I need to install any required conduit, so I
>started some high level physical power wire planning.
>
>If I keep the battery and x-tie contactors in the rear with the
>batteries, it appears that I have to run 13 wires from the firewall
>back to the batteries, whereas if I locate the battery and x-tie
>contactors up front, only 5 wires will need to be run to the batteries.
For Z-14 with rear mounted batteries consider
mounting the contactors aft and the crossfeed
contactor on the forward side of the firewall.
This provides a good power distribution location
for fat wires forward of the firewall.
If batteries are aft, then you have two fat wires
coming forward. Batteries are grounded locally.
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_1.jpg
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_2.jpg
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_3.jpg
This leaves two contactor wires plus what ever
wires come forward off the battery busses.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "The Kuffels" <kuffel(at)cyberport.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Using Mono Headset in Sterio Jack |
<< Are there any issues to be concerned about if I was to use a mono
headset in jacks that are wired for stereo? .. John >>
<< There are several possible 'workarounds'. The simplest (which will lose
the right channel from the intercom) is to wire a stereo plug (tip & sleeve
only) to a mono inline jack. .. Charlie >>
There is an even simpler, but not foolproof, workaround. Insert the mono
plug only to the first detent, not all the way in. It will stick out about
3/16 inch. This connects both sides of the mono headset to one stereo
channel. Be careful to not accidentally push the plug in all the way.
Tom Kuffel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Leffler" <rv(at)thelefflers.com> |
| Subject: | Contactor question |
Bob,
Thanks for the response, but I was asking a different question. Since I
wasn't clear, let me restate the question in a different way. I was looking
for feedback as to if there are any issues that would require the contactors
to be in close physical proximity to the batteries.
Vertical Power's Config 4 has a similar design concept as your Z-14, but is
different due to the utilization of VP's dual control units. The following
link is a schematic: http://www.verticalpower.com/docs/VP_Config_4.pdf I
wasn't asking how to run fatwires for Z-14.
Thanks,
bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 11:05 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Contactor question
At 04:01 PM 7/10/2009, you wrote:
>I'm currently planning a VP-200 Config 4 implementation in my RV-10
>(similar in concept to Z-14).
>
>I'm at the stage where I need to install any required conduit, so I
>started some high level physical power wire planning.
>
>If I keep the battery and x-tie contactors in the rear with the
>batteries, it appears that I have to run 13 wires from the firewall
>back to the batteries, whereas if I locate the battery and x-tie
>contactors up front, only 5 wires will need to be run to the batteries.
For Z-14 with rear mounted batteries consider
mounting the contactors aft and the crossfeed
contactor on the forward side of the firewall.
This provides a good power distribution location
for fat wires forward of the firewall.
If batteries are aft, then you have two fat wires
coming forward. Batteries are grounded locally.
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_1.jpg
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_2.jpg
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Battery_Install_OBrien_3.jpg
This leaves two contactor wires plus what ever
wires come forward off the battery busses.
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: | Contactor question |
At 05:56 AM 7/11/2009, you wrote:
>
>Bob,
>
>Thanks for the response, but I was asking a different question. Since I
>wasn't clear, let me restate the question in a different way. I was looking
>for feedback as to if there are any issues that would require the contactors
>to be in close physical proximity to the batteries.
For the battery contactors, yes. The legacy responsbility
for battery contactors is to provide pilot control of battery
energy as close as practical to each battery. All of the Z-figures
should have a (*) notation on the battery (+) leadwire that goes
to the contactor. This symbol suggests "make this wire a short
as practical".
The idea is that shutting off the battery contactors makes the
airplane max-cold with respect to high energy sources. The feeding
of "endurance busses" through 20A fuses directly from the battery
is not in concert with legacy design rules . . . but probably doesn't
present a serious issue.
>Vertical Power's Config 4 has a similar design concept as your Z-14, but is
>different due to the utilization of VP's dual control units. The following
>link is a schematic: http://www.verticalpower.com/docs/VP_Config_4.pdf I
>wasn't asking how to run fatwires for Z-14.
. . . and it doesn't matter if it was Z-14 or Config 4 as depicted.
Recommendations for contactor locations are the same. With no battery
busses, your wire count to the tail is 2-fat, 4-skinny. I can see where
your confusion came from. His schematic ties alternators and bus feeds
to the battery contactors. For rear mounted batteries it should be revised
to move the ship's fat wire feeds to the OTHER ends of the 4AWG wires
tied to the cross-feed condtactor on the firewall.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Noise Problem |
| From: | Ian <ixb(at)videotron.ca> |
Matt and listers,
I'd be interested if anyone has a method to suggest for recording my
annoying intercom problem, or any other suggestions as to the cause.
The intercom is otherwise working just fine.
Ian Brown
>
> Maybe it would only serve novelty purposes, but it would be interesting to
> me to be able to hear these various sounds. Has anyone tried to record
> anything like this? Share it on the web?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matt-
>
>
> >
> >
> > At 10:37 AM 6/30/2009, you wrote:
> >>
> >>It's pretty random. It's about the pitch of metal on metal. It almost
> >>sounds like someone is working in a workshop, throwing bits of scrap
> >>aluminum around. Completely random, but of the order of about one a
> >>second - certainly not a regular vibration type noise. Bursts of two or
> >>three and then silence for a couple of seconds. Apparently someone else
> >>has the same exact noise with the same behaviour on the Flightcom 403 in
> >>intercom mode. He described is as a bit like a snare drum which give
> >>you a feel for the pitch. It reduces with the squelch too.
> >
> > Hmmm . . . beats me. Were the problem in my shop, I'd
> > have to break out the 'scope and signal tracer and start
> > poking around the innards of things.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Contactor question (P.S) |
. . . and it doesn't matter if it was Z-14 or Config 4 as depicted.
Recommendations for contactor locations are the same. With no battery
busses, your wire count to the tail is 2-fat, 4-skinny. I can see where
your confusion came from. His schematic ties alternators and bus feeds
to the battery contactors. For rear mounted batteries it should be revised
to move the ship's fat wire feeds to the OTHER ends of the 4AWG wires
tied to the cross-feed contactor on the firewall.
Oh yeah, the rear mounted batteries in Config 4 would not tie to
the firewall ground but locally to structure as depcited in the
previously cited photographs.
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: | Contactor question (P.S) |
. . . and it doesn't matter if it was Z-14 or Config 4 as depicted.
Recommendations for contactor locations are the same. With no battery
busses, your wire count to the tail is 2-fat, 4-skinny. I can see where
your confusion came from. His schematic ties alternators and bus feeds
to the battery contactors. For rear mounted batteries it should be revised
to move the ship's fat wire feeds to the OTHER ends of the 4AWG wires
tied to the cross-feed contactor on the firewall.
Oh yeah, the rear mounted batteries in Config 4 would not tie to
the firewall ground but locally to structure as depcited in the
previously cited photographs.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vincent Himsl <vshimsl(at)live.com> |
| Subject: | Inaccurate RPM readings usingf Lightspeed Plasma II+ |
digital tack out and P-lead to Dynon D-180.
I have the digital pulse information from my Lightspeed plasma II+ electron
ic ignition feeding one input to my Dynon D-180 and a magneto P-lead tap th
rough 30 k resistor (per Dynon manual) to the other RPM input of my Dynon D
-180.
Problem is that with the P-lead Pulse per revolution set to 1=2C and the Pl
asm II+ Pulse / rev set to 2=2C my Dynon reads 2 to 3 hundred rpm low at 90
0 rpm (verified by Tru-Tach) and 4 to 6 hundred low at the high end (2100 t
o 2700 rpm).
I removed the Dynon and using a square wave generator providing 12 volt pk-
pk referenced to ground tested both inputs of the Dynon. It is right on. I
also dropped the voltage down to as little as 8 Volts Pk-Pk and the Dynon r
emained accurate.
Suspecting that the Dynon averages both inputs=2C I tested each input by re
moving the other. Both the Plasma II+ and the P-lead were reading low rpm's
compared to a tru-tac (which can be calibrated by aiming it at flourescent
lighting...pretty slick).
By Resetting the pulse rate of the Dynon to 1.5 for the Plasma II+=2C I get
readings that are consistently 60 rpm low. The P-lead with the recommende
d Dynon resistance of 30K reads 2 to 300 low.
My temporary fix at the moment is to remove the P-lead input to the Dynon f
rom the Magneto (Slick brand via aerosport) and keep the Plasma II+ input s
et to 1.5 pulses / rev even though the Lightspeed manual says it should be
2 pulses.
Has anyone else been down this road? If so would appreciate hearing the sol
ution before I haul a scope to the airport.
Regards=2C
Vince_Himsl
RV8 N8432 Flying! (10 hours)
_________________________________________________________________
Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail=AE.
http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tut
orial_QuickAdd_062009
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Inaccurate RPM readings usingf Lightspeed Plasma |
II+ digital tack out and P-lead to Dynon D-180.
| From: | Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins(at)gmail.com> |
Yes, I have been down that road. Long story short - the Dynon can only
handle one input. I think it reads one input or the other, switching back
and forth resulting in a confused signal.
Sam
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Vincent Himsl wrote:
> I have the digital pulse information from my Lightspeed plasma II+
> electronic ignition feeding one input to my Dynon D-180 and a magneto P-l
ead
> tap through 30 k resistor (per Dynon manual) to the other RPM input of my
> Dynon D-180.
>
> Problem is that with the P-lead Pulse per revolution set to 1, and the
> Plasm II+ Pulse / rev set to 2, my Dynon reads 2 to 3 hundred rpm low at
900
> rpm (verified by Tru-Tach) and 4 to 6 hundred low at the high end (2100 t
o
> 2700 rpm).
>
> I removed the Dynon and using a square wave generator providing 12 volt
> pk-pk referenced to ground tested both inputs of the Dynon. It is right o
n.
> I also dropped the voltage down to as little as 8 Volts Pk-Pk and the Dyn
on
> remained accurate.
>
> Suspecting that the Dynon averages both inputs, I tested each input by
> removing the other. Both the Plasma II+ and the P-lead were reading low
> rpm's compared to a tru-tac (which can be calibrated by aiming it at
> flourescent lighting...pretty slick).
>
> By Resetting the pulse rate of the Dynon to 1.5 for the Plasma II+, I get
> readings that are consistently 60 rpm low. The P-lead with the recommend
ed
> Dynon resistance of 30K reads 2 to 300 low.
>
> My temporary fix at the moment is to remove the P-lead input to the Dynon
> from the Magneto (Slick brand via aerosport) and keep the Plasma II+ inpu
t
> set to 1.5 pulses / rev even though the Lightspeed manual says it should
be
> 2 pulses.
>
> Has anyone else been down this road? If so would appreciate hearing the
> solution before I haul a scope to the airport.
>
> Regards,
> Vince_Himsl
> RV8 N8432 Flying! (10 hours)
>
> ------------------------------
> Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail=AE. See how.<http://w
indowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Qu
ickAdd_062009>
>
> *
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <berkut13(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | BMA products wanted |
All,
I understand that BMA is no more. Some of you out there may have some
of their products (or know someone who does) and wish to get out of an
un-supported technology and into something more reliable such as a Grand
Rapids or Dynon system. I have a offer for you...
I would like to purchase a limited number of specific units:
- EFIS/Lite Plus
- BMA Engine Pod
These are the only units being pursued at this time. They must be in
good operational condition - used units will be considered.
Please send me the specifics regarding your unit for evaluation. I'll
need specific model number, serial number for each item along with a
brief history of use or installation.
Thanks,
James Redmon
Berkut #013/Race 13
www.berkut13.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Angier M. Ames" <n4zq(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 9 pin d-sub connectors |
I need break an auto pilot servo wiring harness and reconnect using
male/female d-sub connectors and am looking for appropriate shells to
join together.
Any guidance would be appreciated.
Thanks
Angier Ames
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Angier M. Ames" <n4zq(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 9 pin d-sub connectors |
I need break an auto pilot servo wiring harness and reconnect using
male/female d-sub connectors and am looking for appropriate shells to
join together.
Any guidance would be appreciated.
Thanks
Angier Ames
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Neal George" <n8zg(at)mchsi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 9 pin d-sub connectors |
Angier -
Stein has connectors, pins, sockets, shells and tools.
http://steinair.com/connectors.htm
Neal
============
I need break an auto pilot servo wiring harness and reconnect using
male/female d-sub connectors and am looking for appropriate shells to
join together.
Any guidance would be appreciated.
Thanks
Angier Ames
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <berkut13(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BMA products wanted |
Also, please feel free to forward this email to other message boards as
you see fit.
Interested parties please respond to berkut13(at)berkut13.com directly.
Thanks,
James
----- Original Message -----
From: berkut13(at)berkut13.com
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2009 11:48 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: BMA products wanted
All,
I understand that BMA is no more. Some of you out there may have some
of their products (or know someone who does) and wish to get out of an
un-supported technology and into something more reliable such as a Grand
Rapids or Dynon system. I have a offer for you...
I would like to purchase a limited number of specific units:
- EFIS/Lite Plus
- BMA Engine Pod
These are the only units being pursued at this time. They must be in
good operational condition - used units will be considered.
Please send me the specifics regarding your unit for evaluation. I'll
need specific model number, serial number for each item along with a
brief history of use or installation.
Thanks,
James Redmon
Berkut #013/Race 13
www.berkut13.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 9 pin d-sub connectors |
| From: | Ian <ixb(at)videotron.ca> |
Try Digikey. I bought some from them recently. Fast service.
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Cat=1442709&keywords=CONN%20DB9%20PLASTIC%20SHELL
Ian Brown
>
> I need break an auto pilot servo wiring harness and reconnect using
> male/female d-sub connectors and am looking for appropriate shells to
> join together.
>
> Any guidance would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks
>
> Angier Ames
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 9 pin d-sub connectors |
At 08:33 AM 7/12/2009, you wrote:
>
>I need break an auto pilot servo wiring harness and reconnect using
>male/female d-sub connectors and am looking for appropriate shells to
>join together.
>
>Any guidance would be appreciated.
Here's a low cost, "compact" solution that's been used on
Ray-Allen trim actuators for a number of years.
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/macservo/macservo.html
You can get the solder connectors depicted in the comic
book from Radio Shack . . .
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2102866
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2102498
If you have access to the machined crimps pins separately,
they can be used with locally acquired housings . . .
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103806
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103805
Shells for the crimped on connectors are
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2102866
If you don't need the miniaturized connectors depicted in
the comic book, you can leave the connectors un-modified
and use the same shells on that process as well.
I don't recommend using open barrel crimp pins supplied by
Radio Shack. They're okay if you're skilled in the use of the
right tool to assemble them but I personally avoid them in
favor of machined pins and assembly processed described in
these pictures . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Connectors/D-Subminature/
using this (or an equivalent) tool . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Crimp_Tools/rct-3.jpg
I can supply a kit of shells, connectors and 20AWG crimp pins
for $14.00 plus first class mail of about $1.50.
If you want the kit, put an order in at . . .
https://matronics.com/aeroelectric/Catalog/AECcatalog.html
and enter "Mated pair D9 Connectors, pins and hoods @ 14.00"
in the comments box at bottom of the page.
Finally, there are multiple sources for suitable materials
and tools cited by others in this thread.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Mauledriver Watson <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 9 pin d-sub connectors |
Two more notes:
The adhesive mentioned in Bob's comic strip I found as "Goop" "Contact
Adhesive and Sealant" in Home Depot/Lowes. It's not really a contact
adhesive as I know it but it's the same stuff Bob refers to. Perfect
adhesive for this kind of encapsulation and a nice addition to the
adhesive shelf.
If you take the machined pin D-sub approach, you may find the crimping
process works best if you double over the #24/26 wires used on the the
MAC servos. They are really thin wires. Bob led me to the doubling
over solution some months back. Seems to make the crimp more reliable.
Thanks again Bob.
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
> At 08:33 AM 7/12/2009, you wrote:
>>
>>
>> I need break an auto pilot servo wiring harness and reconnect using
>> male/female d-sub connectors and am looking for appropriate shells to
>> join together.
>>
>> Any guidance would be appreciated.
>
> Here's a low cost, "compact" solution that's been used on
> Ray-Allen trim actuators for a number of years.
>
> http://aeroelectric.com/articles/macservo/macservo.html
>
> You can get the solder connectors depicted in the comic
> book from Radio Shack . . .
>
> http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2102866
>
> http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2102498
>
> If you have access to the machined crimps pins separately,
> they can be used with locally acquired housings . . .
>
> http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103806
>
> http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103805
>
> Shells for the crimped on connectors are
>
> http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2102866
>
> If you don't need the miniaturized connectors depicted in
> the comic book, you can leave the connectors un-modified
> and use the same shells on that process as well.
>
> I don't recommend using open barrel crimp pins supplied by
> Radio Shack. They're okay if you're skilled in the use of the
> right tool to assemble them but I personally avoid them in
> favor of machined pins and assembly processed described in
> these pictures . . .
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Connectors/D-Subminature/
>
>
> using this (or an equivalent) tool . . .
>
> http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Crimp_Tools/rct-3.jpg
>
> I can supply a kit of shells, connectors and 20AWG crimp pins
> for $14.00 plus first class mail of about $1.50.
>
> If you want the kit, put an order in at . . .
>
> https://matronics.com/aeroelectric/Catalog/AECcatalog.html
>
> and enter "Mated pair D9 Connectors, pins and hoods @ 14.00"
> in the comments box at bottom of the page.
>
> Finally, there are multiple sources for suitable materials
> and tools cited by others in this thread.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ---------------------------------------
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RScott <rscott(at)cascadeaccess.com> |
| Subject: | [Fwd: Naval Air Operations in Afghanistan]] |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "al38kit" <alfranken(at)msn.com> |
Has anyone experience with the EXPbus 2...?
Thinking of using one in my rebuild of an Express. I plan to have a dual alternator
and battery set up.
Good or bad?
Al Kittleson
MII
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252779#252779
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 09:08 AM 7/13/2009, you wrote:
>
>Has anyone experience with the EXPbus 2...?
>
>Thinking of using one in my rebuild of an Express. I plan to have a
>dual alternator and battery set up.
>
>Good or bad?
Not "bad" . . . just poor return on investment.
Goto my website and use the Google search tool
to find instances of "exp"
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ian <ixb(at)videotron.ca> |
Relatively good experience with the product. Nothing good to say about
the support. There's one good guy there but he's impossible to get a
hold of.
You need to keep the EXP2BUS squeaky clean while installing it, and make
sure you can get at it for servicing, debugging. I made both mistakes -
got a shard of aluminum across two posts and blew a component, despite
having vacuumed the area carefully. Took six weeks to resolve.
Beware that there is an undocumented over-voltage protection jumper that
can shut down the board if your alternator puts out a tad too much
voltage. You're best to deselect that option according to their support
people, if you have alternate means of over-voltage protection.
Ian Brown
Bromont
Quebec
>
> Has anyone experience with the EXPbus 2...?
>
> Thinking of using one in my rebuild of an Express. I plan to have a dual alternator
and battery set up.
>
> Good or bad?
>
> Al Kittleson
> MII
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252779#252779
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Icom A-22 headphone adapter |
| From: | Richard Girard <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
I finally had a chance to test the handheld on the trike yesterday. Using an
ELT antenna in place of the rubber ducky, I can hear over 40 miles from 700
feet. Unfortunately I could not transmit at all. When the button is pushed
the RX flag goes out and the TX flag flashes briefly and that's all that
happens. This morning I disassembled the pushbutton and confirmed that both
switches are working and connected to the two condition mini plug.
1. When I checked the connection from the socket into which the push to
talk button connects I get no connection from either the point or the next
ring to ground.
2. When I plug in the push to talk the condition in 1 does not change.
3. When I push the button I get a connection from the point of the plug
to ground, the middle ring remains open.
If I understand correctly, when the radio is in receive mode the transmitter
is grounded and when the button is pushed the receiver is grounded and the
transmitter is opened. I should mention that I loaned this adapter to a
fellow with an A-4 who couldn't get it to work either, but he didn't do any
testing on it to try and diagnose the problem. Both of our radios work
without the adapter.
Does anyone have info to verify if the pushbutton on the head phone adapter
is working correctly so I can either get another if it's not or get the
radio fixed if it is.
Thanks,
Rick Girard
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ian <ixb(at)videotron.ca> |
Actually, I recall price and simplicity of the panel as two of my main
drivers, and they've actually both held true. The current price is $299
and for that you get the functionality of ten switches and ten circuit
breakers plus a whole load of other functionality.
Van's price for pull circuit breakers is $23 each, and you get ten.
Toggle switches are about eight bucks and you get ten.
You're ahead ten bucks before you begin to talk about wire, added
functionality, etc.
If the "investment" is purely financial, it's certainly not an expensive
way to go.
Only having one breaker to check (alt) is a time saving and an added
safety factor, in my mind. I am certainly not as well versed in
aero-electrics as the typical contributors to this list, but I'm content
with the product.
Ian
>
> At 09:08 AM 7/13/2009, you wrote:
> >
> >Has anyone experience with the EXPbus 2...?
> >
> >Thinking of using one in my rebuild of an Express. I plan to have a
> >dual alternator and battery set up.
> >
> >Good or bad?
>
> Not "bad" . . . just poor return on investment.
> Goto my website and use the Google search tool
> to find instances of "exp"
>
>
>
> 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 experience is reasonably poor. I would not use one in another aircraft. I
bought my aircraft with an Exp Bus 2 installed and have flown it for 7
years. Consider:
- Limited expansion potential. It is not possible to add additional
protected circuits as the number of "breakers" is fixed.
- Unable to implement a dual busbar system very easily - I'm sure there is a
way to do it but I haven't figured it out.
- Expensive for what it is. A fuse block is much cheaper and more versatile.
My system has still has a master relay. You really should fit the indicator
panel otherwise there is no indication if a "breaker" blows. At $350,
including a mounting bracket, it is expensive. A couple of fuse blocks will
do the same job.
- Intermittent faults. Very occasionally I have a momentary power outage
that has to be something to do with the Exp bus, although I have not been
able to find out what it is. Fault finding is difficult.
I am about to re-build my panel, the Exp Bus 2 will definitely not be flying
with me next year.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of al38kit
Sent: 13 July 2009 15:08
Subject: AeroElectric-List: EXPbus 2
Has anyone experience with the EXPbus 2...?
Thinking of using one in my rebuild of an Express. I plan to have a dual
alternator and battery set up.
Good or bad?
Al Kittleson
MII
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252779#252779
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Burnaby" <jonlaury(at)impulse.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Spike Catcher Diode |
As long as this subject has bubbled up, I'd like to know how to test my
contactors to see if they have internal SCD's. It's been nagging at me
for awhile and I'm nearing installing them.
Thanks,
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Schoen <flybill2usa(at)msn.com> |
Ian
I bought a EXP tray from ACS about 4 years ago for $424.00 plus a little sh
ipping. I stuck it in the panel of my RV-7 project and was going to use it
when my engine supplier suggested a different way of handling my dual elect
rical system that I understood better and elected not to use the EXP tray w
hich is still sitting in the hangar unused and I will sell it for $200 and
ship it if you are interested.
Bill Schoen
flybill2usa(at)msn.com
719 859-1424
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EXPbus 2
> From: ixb(at)videotron.ca
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Mon=2C 13 Jul 2009 12:51:05 -0400
>
>
> Actually=2C I recall price and simplicity of the panel as two of my main
> drivers=2C and they've actually both held true. The current price is $299
> and for that you get the functionality of ten switches and ten circuit
> breakers plus a whole load of other functionality.
>
> Van's price for pull circuit breakers is $23 each=2C and you get ten.
>
> Toggle switches are about eight bucks and you get ten.
>
> You're ahead ten bucks before you begin to talk about wire=2C added
> functionality=2C etc.
>
> If the "investment" is purely financial=2C it's certainly not an expensiv
e
> way to go.
>
> Only having one breaker to check (alt) is a time saving and an added
> safety factor=2C in my mind. I am certainly not as well versed in
> aero-electrics as the typical contributors to this list=2C but I'm conten
t
> with the product.
>
> Ian
>
uckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
> >
> > At 09:08 AM 7/13/2009=2C you wrote:
> > >
> > >Has anyone experience with the EXPbus 2...?
> > >
> > >Thinking of using one in my rebuild of an Express. I plan to have a
> > >dual alternator and battery set up.
> > >
> > >Good or bad?
> >
> > Not "bad" . . . just poor return on investment.
> > Goto my website and use the Google search tool
> > to find instances of "exp"
> >
> >
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> > ---------------------------------------
> > ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> > ( a thing wrong=2C gives it a superficial )
> > ( appearance of being right . . . )
> > ( )
> > ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> > ---------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "al38kit" <alfranken(at)msn.com> |
Thanks for the info. I found the Panel and annunciator on Ebay and bought it for
just over $200 total...I'm going to set it up on the bench and trip some circuits
and see how I like it...Thanks,
Al
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252829#252829
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Automotive blade fuses? |
| From: | "heisan" <justin(at)expertron.co.za> |
I am rapidly heading towards doing the electrical system on my project.
Since having a flap fuse blow during a go-around, not being able to climb away
until I replaced the fuse, I have decided that I would not like to use standard
glass fuses. The holders are fiddly, and it is difficult to determine the rating.
I would like to use automotive blade fuses. It is easy to visually identify a
blown fuse, easy to replace, and they are colour coded, so ratings are a snap.
Are there any disadvantages to using them, or any reasons not to use them?
Thanks,
Justin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252841#252841
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
I do not have an EXP2 bus, but, I assisted a guy who purchased an RV 6A
with an EXP2 bus. They had to jump start the aircraft at every stop despite
having put in a new battery to ferry it home. It turns out somebody had
shorted out the EXP2 board apparently by permitting the B lead of an
alternator to ground while the boards master switch was on. This caused a
short from battery to ground through the board, fried the on-board relay and
heated the traces on the circuit board so hot the solder coating flowed off
of the. They then made it worst by soldering a heavy jumper across the
socket that held the on-board relay. This ensured the battery could not be
disconnected from the alternator even with the master off (that was the
basic purpose of the fried relay)which what cause the battery to drain down
whenever the engine was not running.
But, that said, anybody can abuse an electrical system. The new owner
elected to replace the board and has had no problem since. However, other's
have mentioned some of its limitations (not easy to expand). But, it might
be better choice for some folks than trying to roll their own. The price is
certainly not unreasonable for what you get. However, there have been
reports of unexpected responses that appear to be fairly rare - but get your
attention when they happened.
One of the things that would worry me a bit, is you have high current traces
exposed on the PC board - it would not take much for a aluminum chip, screw,
piece of wire, washer, etc to lay across some traces and a ground trace
releasing the magic smoke.
YMMV.
Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com
http://www.andersonee.com
http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html
http://www.flyrotary.com/
http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW
http://www.rotaryaviation.com/Rotorhead%20Truth.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of al38kit
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 10:08 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: EXPbus 2
Has anyone experience with the EXPbus 2...?
Thinking of using one in my rebuild of an Express. I plan to have a dual
alternator and battery set up.
Good or bad?
Al Kittleson
MII
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252779#252779
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3267 (20080714) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3267 (20080714) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
| Subject: | Automotive blade fuses? |
Nope and just about every experimantal in the sky is using blade fuses and on multi
fuse bases.
They work great..You can eve get indicating fuses that light up once they have
blown..No real purpose to those however.
Frank
RV7a
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of heisan
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 2:19 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Automotive blade fuses?
-->
I am rapidly heading towards doing the electrical system on my project.
Since having a flap fuse blow during a go-around, not being able to climb away
until I replaced the fuse, I have decided that I would not like to use standard
glass fuses. The holders are fiddly, and it is difficult to determine the rating.
I would like to use automotive blade fuses. It is easy to visually identify a
blown fuse, easy to replace, and they are colour coded, so ratings are a snap.
Are there any disadvantages to using them, or any reasons not to use them?
Thanks,
Justin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252841#252841
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wade Roe <wroe1(at)dbtech.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Spike Catcher Diode |
I know that the Vans contactors do not have diodes. Not sure about
those from other sources.
Wade Roe
IPhone message
On Jul 13, 2009, at 1:37 PM, "John Burnaby"
wrote:
> As long as this subject has bubbled up, I'd like to know how to test
> my contactors to see if they have internal SCD's. It's been nagging
> at me for awhile and I'm nearing installing them.
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gordon Smith" <gordonrsmith921(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Z-19 Future Plans for use with Eggenfellner Engine |
Considering that AEC 9005-101 is no more and that AEC 9011-100-1 and AEC
9004-1 will be available in the future.
I really like the capability of what the 9011 will do for not only control
and enunciation of OV but also the monitoring of LV for 2 electrical
busses. (A side note - the REV B 02-04-06 drawing for the 9011 device shows
a redundant #6 connection).
If the internally regulated alternator used with this system is like the
Plane Power and the Enable/Field connection carries the field current (as
indicated in 'Lectric Bob's correspondence with plane power), I assume the
following:
* AEC9004 is not needed with the AEC 9011.
* The Special Disconnect Relay will break the field connection, which
would be powered to the relay from the 5A.CB and back to the ALT On Switch.
* The N.O. terminal on the Disconnect Relay, could be connected to
ground. This would open the 5A.CB when the relay was activated. This is
redundant, I am sure. But can it hurt? Does tripping of the 5A.CB at the
time of every pre-flight test/reset series cause a problem?
If the internally regulated alternator is not as above and the field current
cannot be broken; I assume that this is where AEC 9004 is needed. How is
this integrated into the above?
Two other related questions:
* I understand that Jan Eggenfellner recommends that both main
batteries should be used in parallel during an engine start. Is there any
reason that a "Brown-Out" addition should not be considered as was done in
converting Z-13/8 to Z-10/8? It only adds cost/weight of one more small
battery and one more small relay. A side benefit is that this would add
somewhat to the alternator out flight duration.
* In looking at Eggenfellner's most current recommendation for the
electrical power system to be used with his engines, I would like to
consider the following: Instead of one 4PDT switch to the engine, it makes
sense to me to have 2 4PST switches through a double power diode to each of
the 4 essential engine items (the 4th for me would be the propeller).
Eliminate the "Ignition Switch". This to me reduces parts count and
eliminates a single point of failure (double throw switch). Comments?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "SteinAir, Inc." <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | Automotive blade fuses? |
That is really what you should be using (is ATO blade type fuses) over the
glass fuses. From our experience, using glass fuses has many negatives and
they aren't something we'd really recommend for airplanes anymore.
One big benefit to the blad fuses is now you can get them with tiny LED's in
them that illuminate when the fuse "blows", basicacally you can see at a
glance if the fuse blow because it'll be lighted.
Cheers,
Stein
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of heisan
>Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 4:19 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Automotive blade fuses?
>
>
>I am rapidly heading towards doing the electrical system on my project.
>
>Since having a flap fuse blow during a go-around, not being able
>to climb away until I replaced the fuse, I have decided that I
>would not like to use standard glass fuses. The holders are
>fiddly, and it is difficult to determine the rating.
>
>I would like to use automotive blade fuses. It is easy to
>visually identify a blown fuse, easy to replace, and they are
>colour coded, so ratings are a snap.
>
>Are there any disadvantages to using them, or any reasons not to use them?
>
>Thanks,
>Justin
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252841#252841
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Mauledriver Watson <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
I am using blade fuses in my RV10 project but I can't speak to
advantages/disadvantages other than cost when compared to breakers. I
think you will find lot's of support here for these fuses and fuses in
general.
However, I had the same thought about my flaps. As a result, I will
have 4 pullable breakers in my Z-14
1) Flaps (so they can be reset)
2) Autopilot controllers and servo (as an emergency off switch)
3) LR3C Alternator Regulator number 1
4) LR3C " " number 2
I've built the panel, wired the fuse panel, and wired the breakers. So
far, so good with the plan.
Bill Watson
heisan wrote:
>
> I am rapidly heading towards doing the electrical system on my project.
>
> Since having a flap fuse blow during a go-around, not being able to climb away
until I replaced the fuse, I have decided that I would not like to use standard
glass fuses. The holders are fiddly, and it is difficult to determine the
rating.
>
> I would like to use automotive blade fuses. It is easy to visually identify
a blown fuse, easy to replace, and they are colour coded, so ratings are a snap.
>
> Are there any disadvantages to using them, or any reasons not to use them?
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252841#252841
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
On 13 Jul 2009, at 17:19, heisan wrote:
> >
>
> I am rapidly heading towards doing the electrical system on my
> project.
>
> Since having a flap fuse blow during a go-around, not being able to
> climb away until I replaced the fuse, I have decided that I would
> not like to use standard glass fuses. The holders are fiddly, and
> it is difficult to determine the rating.
You really ought to limit the full flap angle such that you can safely
do a go-around with flaps down, if needed, as there are a whole bunch
of other reasons why you could be unable to retract them someday -
e.g. flap motor failure, flap switch failure, ground wire failure,
shorted wiring, etc.
The type of wire over current protection to use should be considered
independently from the flap failure on go around case.
--
Kevin Horton (Grounded)
RV-8 (Flight Test Phase)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Spike Catcher Diode |
At 01:37 PM 7/13/2009, you wrote:
>As long as this subject has bubbled up, I'd like to know how to test
>my contactors to see if they have internal SCD's. It's been nagging
>at me for awhile and I'm nearing installing them.
The only contactors that I've sold with built in
diodes said so on the bottom of the mounting
bracket. If you have a 'scope it's easy to tell
in a simple bench test setup (or just keep your
fingers across the coil contacts while you break
the circuit . . . if you don't "jump" then
there's a diode installed.
Given that they are easy to get and inexpensive,
put them on unless you already KNOW that they're
present inside. Very few contactors come with them
built in . . . I had to search for the one I
sold.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jetech" <av8tor(at)hughes.net> |
I have a few questions on mounting a VHF wire (whip) antenna on my low wing tube
and fabric plane.
I was going to use the hand held stub antenna mounted on the bottom of the fuselage
but found my project plane has a 45 degree wire antenna that we are not going
to reuse. This antenna had the center coax wire connected to the antenna
stud and the shielding was connected to the metal panel that the antenna was
mounted to.
My plan is to clamp a bracket to the tubing to mount the antenna and run the shielding
to a nearby ground. Am I thinking correct on this? I know its not the
best installation but its for a hand held radio.
Also, the antenna is a 45 degree unit but I need to bend it beyond 45 to get ground
clearance, any problems doing this?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252882#252882
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Spike Catcher Diode |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Seems like you could test for a diode with a 9V battery and a volt meter..
Apply voltage to the coil in one direction, and something close to the
full voltage of the battery should be present.. Swap the terminals on the
battery, and the voltage on the coil should be limited to a diode drop -
maybe about 0.8V depending on what kind of diode they use.
I don't think this method would put any of the components involved at risk.
Matt-
> At 01:37 PM 7/13/2009, you wrote:
>>As long as this subject has bubbled up, I'd like to know how to test
>>my contactors to see if they have internal SCD's. It's been nagging
>>at me for awhile and I'm nearing installing them.
>
> The only contactors that I've sold with built in
> diodes said so on the bottom of the mounting
> bracket. If you have a 'scope it's easy to tell
> in a simple bench test setup (or just keep your
> fingers across the coil contacts while you break
> the circuit . . . if you don't "jump" then
> there's a diode installed.
>
> Given that they are easy to get and inexpensive,
> put them on unless you already KNOW that they're
> present inside. Very few contactors come with them
> built in . . . I had to search for the one I
> sold.
>
>
> 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: Spike Catcher Diode |
At 08:03 PM 7/13/2009, you wrote:
>
>Seems like you could test for a diode with a 9V battery and a volt meter..
> Apply voltage to the coil in one direction, and something close to the
>full voltage of the battery should be present.. Swap the terminals on the
>battery, and the voltage on the coil should be limited to a diode drop -
>maybe about 0.8V depending on what kind of diode they use.
MUCH better idea! Actually, if the 9V battery is fresh,
the contactor will pull in for BOTH directions of battery
connection if NO diode is present . . . and FAIL to pull
in for ONE direction if diode IS present.
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: Automotive blade fuses? |
>
>The type of wire over current protection to use should be considered
>independently from the flap failure on go around case.
Absolutely! Over the years I've received many e-mails
where the builder was concerned about being able to
"reset" a tripped current protection while citing some
personal experience or perhaps a dark-n-stormy-night
story where resetting breakers was part of the script.
I'll refer new readers to the following discussions
from years past . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/fuseorcb.html
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/fusvbkr2.html
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/failtoll.pdf
The short answer to the fuses vs. breakers question
asks the builder to consider that there are far
more events that cause a system to stop working
that DO NOT trip the circuit protection than events
that DO trip the circuit protection.
Over-current trips are for protection of the
airframe from smoke and fire caused by faulted wires.
The properly sized circuit protection will never
nuisance trip. I.e., when it DOES trip, that
system is telling you that it's out of the
ball game. It's time to call in the relief
pitcher. Inclusion of pilot resetable circuit
protection with any notions of increasing
system reliability is wishful thinking.
In the OBAM aviation world we can FIX a nuisance
tripping system by up-sizing the protection and
wire size before the next flight. In the TC
aircraft world, you need to get permission
and then spend a lot of money to do it.
Isn't that one of several reasons we're all
here talking about it on the List?
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
| From: | "heisan" <justin(at)expertron.co.za> |
Thanks everybody.
When I asked around here, everybody uses glass fuses or breakers. Two A&Ps I chatted
to said blade fuses were a bad idea (basically because it is difficult
to make the pretty!
Nice to know that they will work, and are safe to use.
Does anybody know of an on-line shop that sells decent blade fuse holders? Options
here are few and far between.
Thanks,
Justin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252936#252936
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-19 Future Plans for use with Eggenfellner Engine |
At 04:56 PM 7/13/2009, you wrote:
Considering that AEC 9005-101 is no more and that AEC 9011-100-1
The 9005 product included a power transistor suited to the
direct control of the aux battery contactor . . .
which encouraged the use of a 2-10 style switch
for aux battery master. In the interest of simplicity
I went to simple annunciation of low aux battery voltage
-AND- a simpler switch to control it.
If you want an automatic management feature, you can
use the ABMM product from
http://www.periheliondesign.com/
or built from scratch as described on my website.
I really like the capability of what the 9011
will do for not only control and enunciation of
OV but also the monitoring of LV for
2 electrical busses. (A side note the REV B
02-04-06 drawing for the 9011 device shows a redundant #6 connection).
Yeah, there's a couple of things that need fixing.
Note too that the 9011 has a LOT of features just because
we can put them in for little if any extra cost.
On can use all or any combination of the features
depending on design goals. For example, it's not
a great "waste" to use a 9011 as a simple, single
channel LV warning. The basic 9011 package, warning
lights, and OV relay will be separately offered
products.
If the internally regulated alternator used with
this system is like the Plane Power and the
Enable/Field connection carries the field current
(as indicated in Lectric Bobs correspondence
with plane power), I assume the following:
AEC9004 is not needed with the AEC 9011.
Correct. The AEC9004 allows builders to install
ANY internally regulated alternator and exercise
any time, any conditions ON/OFF control while
achieving the legacy design goals for independent
monitoring and control for OV conditions. It's
use is dictated by the internally regulated alternator.
The 9011 would still be used for LV annunciation
in all cases where that feature is not offered in
other accessories.
The Special Disconnect Relay will break the field
connection, which would be powered to the relay
from the 5A.CB and back to the ALT On Switch.
Yes. Note that the relay was re-incorporated
so that the 9011 can be used with EITHER alternators
or generators.
The N.O. terminal on the Disconnect Relay, could
be connected to ground. This would open the
5A.CB when the relay was activated. This is
redundant, I am sure. But can it hurt? Does
tripping of the 5A.CB at the time of every
pre-flight test/reset series cause a problem?
No need to do this. The microprocessor in the 9011
latches the relay to keep the alternator/generator
off line. The OV trip light (if installed) will
illuminate. The LV warning lights (if installed)
will begin to complain shortly thereafter.
If the internally regulated alternator is not as
above and the field current cannot be broken; I
assume that this is where AEC 9004 is
needed. How is this integrated into the above?
Yes, the AEC9004 is used on internally regulated alternators
only.
Two other related questions:
I understand that Jan Eggenfellner recommends
that both main batteries should be used in
parallel during an engine start. Is there any
reason that a Brown-Out addition should not be
considered as was done in converting Z-13/8 to
Z-10/8? It only adds cost/weight of one more
small battery and one more small relay. A side
benefit is that this would add somewhat to the alternator out flight duration.
Depends on your installed equipment and design
goals. If you have electro-whizzies that you intend
to power up before starting that do not tolerate
brown-outs, then keeping one battery out of the
cranking loop is required. If you start up such
devices only after the engine is started, then
using both batteries to crank is fine . . . but
either battery should be capable of starting
an engine.
In looking at Eggenfellners most current
recommendation for the electrical power system to
be used with his engines, I would like to
consider the following: Instead of one 4PDT
switch to the engine, it makes sense to me to
have 2 4PST switches through a double power diode
to each of the 4 essential engine items (the 4th
for me would be the propeller). Eliminate the
Ignition Switch. This to me reduces parts
count and eliminates a single point of failure
(double throw switch). Comments?
Single point failure elimination is a design goal
for all well considered Failure Modes Effects
Analysis. Anything you can do to reduce if not
eliminate all "sharing" of components between
primary and backup systems is a good thing to do.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Automotive blade fuses? |
At 04:59 PM 7/13/2009, you wrote:
>
>That is really what you should be using (is ATO blade type fuses) over the
>glass fuses. From our experience, using glass fuses has many negatives and
>they aren't something we'd really recommend for airplanes anymore.
Absolutely! These have fragile internal connections at
the ends of the fusible links . . . they also used large
area, low pressure connections in their holders. Not
gas-tight.
>One big benefit to the blade fuses is now you can get them with tiny LED's in
>them that illuminate when the fuse "blows", basicacally you can see at a
>glance if the fuse blow because it'll be lighted.
. . . assuming that circuit is "turned on". Fuse
popping in a properly sized protection scheme is
exceedingly rare. How many times have any of us
replaced fuses in our cars over the past 20 years?
I've had two such experiences. Both involved fuses
that were blown for cause . . . i.e. something
wrong in the protected system. My wife's cars
have yet to present such opportunities. If you
deduce that ANY system in your airplane is necessary
for comfortable termination of flight, then one
is well advised to have a plan-b for any and
all such systems. I.e., being able to replace
fuses or re-set breakers is NOT a plan.
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: Whip antenna |
>My plan is to clamp a bracket to the tubing to mount the antenna and
>run the shielding to a nearby ground. Am I thinking correct on
>this? I know its not the best installation but its for a hand held radio.
That will work.
>Also, the antenna is a 45 degree unit but I need to bend it beyond
>45 to get ground clearance, any problems doing this?
No problem.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Wickert <jimw_btg(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
Justin
There are several but I have my best luck with Waytek, Inc. very good quality and price, also they have the blade fuses with "SMART FUSE" indicator. Happy building. www.wyatekwire.com Take Care.
Jim Wickert
Vision #159 CL 4.5
"Vision" some will have some will not.
-----Original Message-----
>From: heisan <justin(at)expertron.co.za>
>Sent: Jul 14, 2009 8:06 AM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Automotive blade fuses?
>
>
>Thanks everybody.
>
>When I asked around here, everybody uses glass fuses or breakers. Two A&Ps I
chatted to said blade fuses were a bad idea (basically because it is difficult
to make the pretty!
>
>Nice to know that they will work, and are safe to use.
>
>Does anybody know of an on-line shop that sells decent blade fuse holders? Options
here are few and far between.
>
>Thanks,
>Justin
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252936#252936
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Borger <rlborger(at)mac.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
Justin,
B&C has several fuse holders and fuse sets available:
http://www.bandc.biz/index.aspx
As does SteinAir:
http://www.steinair.com/
And probably other good dealers as well.
Bob Borger
On Tuesday, July 14, 2009, at 08:06AM, "heisan" wrote:
>
>Thanks everybody.
>
>When I asked around here, everybody uses glass fuses or breakers. Two A&Ps I
chatted to said blade fuses were a bad idea (basically because it is difficult
to make the pretty!
>
>Nice to know that they will work, and are safe to use.
>
>Does anybody know of an on-line shop that sells decent blade fuse holders? Options
here are few and far between.
>
>Thanks,
>Justin
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252936#252936
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Mauledriver Watson <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
I got mine from B&C. Their inventory is limited to exactly what you
need. I'm sure with some effort, everything can be found elsewhere and
found cheaper perhaps.
http://www.bandcspecialty.com/
heisan wrote:
>
> Thanks everybody.
>
> When I asked around here, everybody uses glass fuses or breakers. Two A&Ps I
chatted to said blade fuses were a bad idea (basically because it is difficult
to make the pretty!
>
> Nice to know that they will work, and are safe to use.
>
> Does anybody know of an on-line shop that sells decent blade fuse holders? Options
here are few and far between.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252936#252936
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
heisan wrote:
> Does anybody know of an on-line shop that sells decent blade fuse holders? Options
here are few and far between.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/10-Way-Blade-Fuse-Box-Holder-lucar-terminals_W0QQitemZ120430551339QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM?hash=item1c0a38612b&_trksid=p3286.m63.l1177&_trkparms=|293%3A1|294%3A50
Generally, search eBay for "ATC fuse holder".
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "plaurence" <peterlaurence6(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
Try http://www.mihdirect.biz/
Peter
I got mine from B&C. Their inventory is limited to exactly what you
need. I'm sure with some effort, everything can be found elsewhere and
found cheaper perhaps.
http://www.bandcspecialty.com/
.
>
> When I asked around here, everybody uses glass fuses or breakers. Two
A&Ps I chatted to said blade fuses were a bad idea (basically because it is
difficult to make the pretty!
>
> Nice to know that they will work, and are safe to use.
>
> Does anybody know of an on-line shop that sells decent blade fuse holders?
Options here are few and far between.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252936#252936
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Mauledriver Watson <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
I've adopted the fuse approach in my RV10 project with 2 fuse holders in
the passenger's foot well.
I did put a resettable breaker in for the flaps. My thinking at the
timee was that the flap motor could be overpowered by actuation at
excessive speeds. Of course, if the plane is flown properly, the whole
issue is avoided. And failure in such a circumstance would probably
result in the flaps failing in a very flyable condition. So I assume
it's probably unnecessary. It was just the only scenario I could come
up with for a resettable breaker (I have 3 others - AP as an emergency
disconnect, and 2 for the LR3Cs)
2 days ago, I think I got a lesson in what is meant by "The properly
sized circuit protection will never nuisance trip". During some
testing in the shop, I left my panel powered on an hour or so. When I
returned, one display was dark. I check the fuse and found it had
blown. A few minutes later, the other 2 displays re-booted and
eventually shut themselves down. What happened?
Turns out that 1 of my batteries (Odyssesy 680s) had lost a cell. I
hadn't expected that but in retrospect, the battery had been abused.
It's 2 years old and it's been left for long periods of time at less
than full charge. I think the last straw may be hooking up the
'always-on' circuits for the 3 display unit clocks (GRT HX) and
continuing an irregular charging schedule.
While the GRT displays will run at less than 14 or 12 volts, the current
goes up as the voltage drops. It appears that with a failed cell, the
voltage was down to 10.5 volts or less and the current increased to a
point that blew the 3 amp blade fuse. Cautiously, I put a 2 amp fuse in
the holder and that blew immediately.
Later, I used my crossfeed switch on my Z14 configuration and the panel
operated normally. It was arguably a nuisance trip.
What I take away from this is that even though the GRT manuals indicate
that at least a 2 amp fuse is required with a 5 amp max fuse for the
circuit, the best solution would be to size the fuse to protect the wire
(5 for awg20, 10 for awg 18). The GRT manuals also state that the units
are internally protected against internal faults which suggests that the
external fuse is only in place to protect the circuit.
What I also take away is that if I had a battery cell failure in the
air, I would be very busy with a display failed by an unnecessarily
blown fuse. Even with a Z14 with dual busses and batteries. Robust
sizing for wire protection would limit failures to internal unit faults
which takes the whole fuse box out of the equation.
My plan is to strictly size the fuses for wire protection so I can take
full advantage of the Z14's redundancy.
List, what do you think?
Thanks Bob,
Bill Watson
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>> The type of wire over current protection to use should be considered
>> independently from the flap failure on go around case.
>
> Absolutely! Over the years I've received many e-mails
> where the builder was concerned about being able to
> "reset" a tripped current protection while citing some
> personal experience or perhaps a dark-n-stormy-night
> story where resetting breakers was part of the script.
>
> I'll refer new readers to the following discussions
> from years past . . .
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/fuseorcb.html
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/fusvbkr2.html
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/failtoll.pdf
>
> The short answer to the fuses vs. breakers question
> asks the builder to consider that there are far
> more events that cause a system to stop working
> that DO NOT trip the circuit protection than events
> that DO trip the circuit protection.
>
> Over-current trips are for protection of the
> airframe from smoke and fire caused by faulted wires.
> The properly sized circuit protection will never
> nuisance trip. I.e., when it DOES trip, that
> system is telling you that it's out of the
> ball game. It's time to call in the relief
> pitcher. Inclusion of pilot resetable circuit
> protection with any notions of increasing
> system reliability is wishful thinking.
>
> In the OBAM aviation world we can FIX a nuisance
> tripping system by up-sizing the protection and
> wire size before the next flight. In the TC
> aircraft world, you need to get permission
> and then spend a lot of money to do it.
> Isn't that one of several reasons we're all
> here talking about it on the List?
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ---------------------------------------
> ( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
> ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
> ( appearance of being right . . . )
> ( )
> ( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
Yup..Stein air and there are many automotive outlets that have them..Try summit
racing or Jc whitney etc.,,I even found my local autozone have them.
There are some wonderful A&P's around but you have to remember that they are taught
that everything that is FAA mandated is good and anything designed after
1940 is BAAAAD..thats why we still have vacuum pumps on cessna's which give about
the same odds for survival in IMC as playing Russian roulette...Ok slight
exageration maybe..:)
Frank RV7a electrically dependant, no mechanical fuel pump, no mags and flys in
IMC!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of heisan
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 6:07 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Automotive blade fuses?
-->
Thanks everybody.
When I asked around here, everybody uses glass fuses or breakers. Two A&Ps I chatted
to said blade fuses were a bad idea (basically because it is difficult
to make the pretty!
Nice to know that they will work, and are safe to use.
Does anybody know of an on-line shop that sells decent blade fuse holders? Options
here are few and far between.
Thanks,
Justin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252936#252936
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "plaurence" <peterlaurence6(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Automotive blade fuses? |
Is there such a thing as a slo blow ATO fuse?
Peter
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
Justin,
Pegasus offers the same item as B & C at a competitive cost. As much of
the OBAM stuff is derived from auto racing they also sell a lot of other
things you'll need to make that bird fly. They're stock is high quality
and they normally ship the same day.
http://www.pegasusautoracing.com/productselection.asp?Product=4402
Glenn
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Ernest Christley
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:54 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Automotive blade fuses?
heisan wrote:
> Does anybody know of an on-line shop that sells decent blade fuse
holders? Options here are few and far between.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/10-Way-Blade-Fuse-Box-Holder-lucar-terminals_W0QQite
mZ120430551339QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM?hash
item1c0a38612b&_trksid=p3286.m63.l1177&_trkparms=|293%3A1|294%3A50
Generally, search eBay for "ATC fuse holder".
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
| From: | Byron Janzen <thorps18(at)gmail.com> |
A couple good sources for electrical supplies:
http://www.bandc.biz/electricalsupplies.aspx
http://www.steinair.com/store.htm
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 6:06 AM, heisan wrote:
>
> Thanks everybody.
>
> When I asked around here, everybody uses glass fuses or breakers. Two A&Ps
> I chatted to said blade fuses were a bad idea (basically because it is
> difficult to make the pretty!
>
> Nice to know that they will work, and are safe to use.
>
> Does anybody know of an on-line shop that sells decent blade fuse holders?
> Options here are few and far between.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252936#252936
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Stone <rv8iator(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
My personal favorite...
http://tinyurl.com/nnmgg5
This is the Bussman 20 circuit/ two buss panel mount ATC/ATO fuse block.
Stienair and BandC have the surface mount styles for the same fuses.
Chris Stone
RV-8
-----Original Message-----
>From: heisan <justin(at)expertron.co.za>
>Sent: Jul 14, 2009 9:06 AM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Automotive blade fuses?
>
>
>Thanks everybody.
>
>When I asked around here, everybody uses glass fuses or breakers. Two A&Ps I
chatted to said blade fuses were a bad idea (basically because it is difficult
to make the pretty!
>
>Nice to know that they will work, and are safe to use.
>
>Does anybody know of an on-line shop that sells decent blade fuse holders? Options
here are few and far between.
>
>Thanks,
>Justin
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252936#252936
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Automotive blade fuses? |
At 10:44 AM 7/14/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>Is there such a thing as a slo blow ATO fuse?
No. When you need slow-blow characteristics
it's usually associated with hi-inrush and
or wildly variable current demands. Pitot
heaters, hydraulic pumps, etc come to mind.
For this we recommend MANL style current
limiters like . . .
Emacs!
These have very long time constants.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LARRY SHARRATT <sandlar1(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Altitude Encoder Readout |
Thanks - I appreciate the replies to my question.
Just after posting the question, I inadvertently unsubscribed from the list so
just read a couple of the replies today, thus the delay in acknowledging your
responses.
Thanks again.
Larry Sharratt
----- Original Message -----
From: "LARRY SHARRATT" <sandlar1(at)embarqmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 8, 2009 10:46:09 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Altitude Encoder Readout
Don't know if this is the proper forum for this, but here goes:
Some years ago, maybe 15 or so, there was an article in Sport Aviation regarding
a kit for a panel-mounted device which would give a constant display of what
the encoder was sending. Since then, I haven't heard of any such instrument,
except what's incorporated in the newer transponders. Does anyone on this forum
know of any such self-contained instrument that could be used with the older
transponders/encoders?
Thanks
Larry Sharratt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "plaurence" <peterlaurence6(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Automotive blade fuses? |
Bob,
The reason I asked this question was that a friend just installed an EFIS
made by MGL. They recommend a slow blow fuse .
I thought this was odd. Any ideas. My next inquiry will be with MGL.
Thanks
Peter Laurence
_____
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, July 14, 2009 12:37 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Automotive blade fuses?
At 10:44 AM 7/14/2009, you wrote:
Is there such a thing as a slo blow ATO fuse?
No. When you need slow-blow characteristics
it's usually associated with hi-inrush and
or wildly variable current demands. Pitot
heaters, hydraulic pumps, etc come to mind.
For this we recommend MANL style current
limiters like . . .
Emacs!
These have very long time constants.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
| Subject: | Automotive blade fuses? |
I don't know of anyone who put in anything other than the standard ATO blad
e fuse in with an EFIS..My guess is MGL was speaking generically. I would s
uggest going the next size up on th cable and installed the rated fuse, you
can always increase the fuse rating after if necessary..But I really doubt
and EFIS would have a hi enough in-rush current to blow a standard fuse at
the correct steady state rating.
Frank
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectr
ic-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of plaurence
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 10:29 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Automotive blade fuses?
Bob,
The reason I asked this question was that a friend just installed an EFIS m
ade by MGL. They recommend a slow blow fuse .
I thought this was odd. Any ideas. My next inquiry will be with MGL.
Thanks
Peter Laurence
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectr
ic-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:37 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Automotive blade fuses?
At 10:44 AM 7/14/2009, you wrote:
com>
Is there such a thing as a slo blow ATO fuse?
No. When you need slow-blow characteristics
it's usually associated with hi-inrush and
or wildly variable current demands. Pitot
heaters, hydraulic pumps, etc come to mind.
For this we recommend MANL style current
limiters like . . .
[cid:814044917@14072009-1E25]
These have very long time constants.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Mitchell" <rmitch1(at)hughes.net> |
| Subject: | Automotive blade fuses? |
Take a look at the RV-12, esp. the E-LSA version. It is all fuses (no
substitution allowed under E-LSA protocol, but, they use a type that lights
up when blown. How does that work?
Bob Mitchell
Lancair 320
_____
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, July 14, 2009 09:37
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Automotive blade fuses?
At 10:44 AM 7/14/2009, you wrote:
Is there such a thing as a slo blow ATO fuse?
No. When you need slow-blow characteristics
it's usually associated with hi-inrush and
or wildly variable current demands. Pitot
heaters, hydraulic pumps, etc come to mind.
For this we recommend MANL style current
limiters like . . .
Emacs!
These have very long time constants.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
| Subject: | Automotive blade fuses? |
Led strapped across the terminals...When it is NOT blown the LED is bypasse
d by the fuse..When it blows current flows thru the led to the fault..Its a
micro-amps so not enough current to heat the wire but enough to light the
led..Which essentially acts like a big resistor.
Frank
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectr
ic-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert Mitchell
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 1:10 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Automotive blade fuses?
Take a look at the RV-12, esp. the E-LSA version. It is all fuses (no subs
titution allowed under E-LSA protocol, but, they use a type that lights up
when blown. How does that work?
Bob Mitchell
Lancair 320
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectr
ic-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 09:37
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Automotive blade fuses?
At 10:44 AM 7/14/2009, you wrote:
com>
Is there such a thing as a slo blow ATO fuse?
No. When you need slow-blow characteristics
it's usually associated with hi-inrush and
or wildly variable current demands. Pitot
heaters, hydraulic pumps, etc come to mind.
For this we recommend MANL style current
limiters like . . .
[cid:080413120@14072009-1E2C]
These have very long time constants.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank Stringham <fstringham(at)hotmail.com> |
I am just about to put my RV7A in the air but....I have one minor problem t
o solve. The Dynon EMS D-120 is not indicating TRUE voltage output both wit
h the engine in operation or when running on the battery.
My electrical architecture is Z13/8 modified to have the B&C 40 amp alterna
tor regulated by LR3C-14. The amp/current pick off shunt is in location A
position as found in the Dynon EMS D-120 install manual page 3.12. When the
Master Battery/Main Alternator switch is actuated the Dynon shows 10.8 vol
t. When the Essential bus is actuated the voltage climbs to 12.8 with or wi
thout the Master on.
Every possible connection point has had a continuity check/voltage check co
mpleted. We have also followed the B & C LR3C-14 trouble shooting guide whi
ch had no neitive results so the LR3C would SEEM to be OK . All grounds hav
e been checked for problems...one found.
But all (except using B&C trouble shooting guide)roads seem to lead to a ba
d LR3C-14.....but Bill at B&C thinks there has to be another problem.......
.............In short every connection up to the regulator are 12.8 volts w
ith the master on but once past the LR3C it read 10.8 at the power pin loca
tion #1 on the D-Sub. This indicated two things the problem is at the LR3C
and the Dynon D120 is isolated showing it isn't the problem................
....
We know the altenators ..... both main and aux SD8 are doing there thing be
cause when we have ground run the engine the battery charge has been mainta
ined
So where do I check next??????????????????????????????
Frank @ 1L8 ...RV7A... ready to fly?????maybe
_________________________________________________________________
Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail=AE.
http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tut
orial_QuickAdd_062009
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
For debugging, have you been using a separate meter from the voltage
information provided by the Dynon? It's not clear to me from your
description of the process..
Asked differently, how do you know what the TRUE voltage is?
As an aside, what I get from the Dynon manual is that the voltage
displayed is that which is found on Pin 1 of the 37 pin harness. From
that, I gather that where you have the shunts wired is of no consequence
when considering what voltage is displayed by the Dynon. It's possible I
missed your point however.
Closing the e-bus feed shorts past the e-bus diode so that you get full
battery voltage to the Dynon (which I gather is connected to the e-bus).
Is 12.8V what is read with the engine running?
Is the LR3C installed in place of the Ford regulator?
Sounds interesting..
Matt-
>
>
> I am just about to put my RV7A in the air but....I have one minor problem
> to solve. The Dynon EMS D-120 is not indicating TRUE voltage output both
> with the engine in operation or when running on the battery.
>
>
> My electrical architecture is Z13/8 modified to have the B&C 40 amp
> alternator regulated by LR3C-14. The amp/current pick off shunt is in
> location A position as found in the Dynon EMS D-120 install manual page
> 3.12. When the Master Battery/Main Alternator switch is actuated the Dynon
> shows 10.8 volt. When the Essential bus is actuated the voltage climbs to
> 12.8 with or without the Master on.
>
> Every possible connection point has had a continuity check/voltage check
> completed. We have also followed the B & C LR3C-14 trouble shooting guide
> which had no neitive results so the LR3C would SEEM to be OK . All grounds
> have been checked for problems...one found.
>
>
> But all (except using B&C trouble shooting guide)roads seem to lead to a
> bad LR3C-14.....but Bill at B&C thinks there has to be another
> problem....................In short every connection up to the regulator
> are 12.8 volts with the master on but once past the LR3C it read 10.8 at
> the power pin location #1 on the D-Sub. This indicated two things the
> problem is at the LR3C and the Dynon D120 is isolated showing it isn't the
> problem....................
>
>
> We know the altenators ..... both main and aux SD8 are doing there thing
> because when we have ground run the engine the battery charge has been
> maintained
>
>
> So where do I check next??????????????????????????????
>
>
> Frank @ 1L8 ...RV7A... ready to fly?????maybe
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail.
> http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_QuickAdd_062009
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank Stringham <fstringham(at)hotmail.com> |
Hi Matt
Thanks for the ? and info. I have answered yoou in the body of your query.
> Date: Tue=2C 14 Jul 2009 17:56:59 -0600
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Voltage problem
> From: mprather(at)spro.net
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
t>
>
> For debugging=2C have you been using a separate meter from the voltage
> information provided by the Dynon? It's not clear to me from your
> description of the process..
> YES a DVM
> Asked differently=2C how do you know what the TRUE voltage is?
> SEE Above....
> As an aside=2C what I get from the Dynon manual is that the voltage
> displayed is that which is found on Pin 1 of the 37 pin harness. From
> that=2C I gather that where you have the shunts wired is of no consequenc
e
> when considering what voltage is displayed by the Dynon. It's possible I
> missed your point however. ....Your point is true as to where the voltage
is obtained by the Dynon. The shunt shows and + 0r negative amps.
>
> Closing the e-bus feed shorts past the e-bus diode so that you get full
> battery voltage to the Dynon (which I gather is connected to the e-bus).
Yes=2C and this has not been checked ...... will be doing that straight awa
y.
>
>
> Is 12.8V what is read with the engine running?
Only if the essential bus is closed and the master is opened.....Both while
the engine is running and just on battery!!!
>
>
> Is the LR3C installed in place of the Ford regulator? Yes.
>
>
>
> Sounds interesting..
>
> Matt-
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I am just about to put my RV7A in the air but....I have one minor probl
em
> > to solve. The Dynon EMS D-120 is not indicating TRUE voltage output bot
h
> > with the engine in operation or when running on the battery.
> >
> >
> >
> > My electrical architecture is Z13/8 modified to have the B&C 40 amp
> > alternator regulated by LR3C-14. The amp/current pick off shunt is in
> > location A position as found in the Dynon EMS D-120 install manual page
> > 3.12. When the Master Battery/Main Alternator switch is actuated the Dy
non
> > shows 10.8 volt. When the Essential bus is actuated the voltage climbs
to
> > 12.8 with or without the Master on.
> >
> > Every possible connection point has had a continuity check/voltage chec
k
> > completed. We have also followed the B & C LR3C-14 trouble shooting gui
de
> > which had no neitive results so the LR3C would SEEM to be OK . All grou
nds
> > have been checked for problems...one found.
> >
> >
> >
> > But all (except using B&C trouble shooting guide)roads seem to lead to
a
> > bad LR3C-14.....but Bill at B&C thinks there has to be another
> > problem....................In short every connection up to the regulato
r
> > are 12.8 volts with the master on but once past the LR3C it read 10.8 a
t
> > the power pin location #1 on the D-Sub. This indicated two things the
> > problem is at the LR3C and the Dynon D120 is isolated showing it isn't
the
> > problem....................
> >
> >
> >
> > We know the altenators ..... both main and aux SD8 are doing there thin
g
> > because when we have ground run the engine the battery charge has been
> > maintained
> >
> >
> >
> > So where do I check next??????????????????????????????
> >
> >
> >
> > Frank @ 1L8 ...RV7A... ready to fly?????maybe
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail=AE.
> > http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM
_Tutorial_QuickAdd_062009
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live=99: Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_BR_life_in_synch_062009
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Automotive blade fuses? |
At 12:29 PM 7/14/2009, you wrote:
>Bob,
>
>The reason I asked this question was that a friend just installed an
>EFIS made by MGL. They recommend a slow blow fuse .
>
>I thought this was odd. Any ideas. My next inquiry will be with MGL.
Hmmmm . . . can't imagine why they would ask for
one. Haven't had occasion to call one out in a new
design for about 30 years. These are pretty much
dim memories of another time. In glass 1/4 x 1-1/4
fuses these are the MDL series. I've got a drawer
full of various sizes that I'm NOT moving to the
new shop in M.L.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Frank,
It sounds rather like neither alternator is functioning. Or at least it
sounds like neither of them are getting connected to the bus. It is odd
that you measure 12.8 volts on the bus with the e-bus switch closed - I
would have guessed that would sag down a bit after a bit of starting and
running the engine..
What does the ammeter read with the engine off? On?
What ignition source are you using? Mags, Pmags?
The dynamo wiring is probably the easiest to check. Does your system have
the dynamo disconnect relay? Can you hear that relay close when you flip
the control switch? With the engine off, closing the relay should put 12v
on the red lead to the regulator. Is that happening?
On the main alternator, I'd be snooping around to see if voltage is going
through the field - this can be checked with the engine off. With the DC
master turned on, the regulator should get power through the A terminal,
and should put power on the F terminal - energizing the field. If that's
happening, the alternator should put out power - if it's good.
Is the 5A field breaker good?
Regards,
Matt-
>
> Hi Matt
>
>
> Thanks for the ? and info. I have answered yoou in the body of your query.
>
>
>> Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 17:56:59 -0600
>> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Voltage problem
>> From: mprather(at)spro.net
>> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>>
>>
>>
>> For debugging, have you been using a separate meter from the voltage
>> information provided by the Dynon? It's not clear to me from your
>> description of the process..
>> YES a DVM
>> Asked differently, how do you know what the TRUE voltage is?
>> SEE Above....
>> As an aside, what I get from the Dynon manual is that the voltage
>> displayed is that which is found on Pin 1 of the 37 pin harness. From
>> that, I gather that where you have the shunts wired is of no consequence
>> when considering what voltage is displayed by the Dynon. It's possible I
>> missed your point however. ....Your point is true as to where the
>> voltage is obtained by the Dynon. The shunt shows and + 0r negative
>> amps.
>>
>> Closing the e-bus feed shorts past the e-bus diode so that you get full
>> battery voltage to the Dynon (which I gather is connected to the e-bus).
>
>
> Yes, and this has not been checked ...... will be doing that straight
> away.
>>
>>
>> Is 12.8V what is read with the engine running?
>
>
> Only if the essential bus is closed and the master is opened.....Both
> while the engine is running and just on battery!!!
>>
>>
>> Is the LR3C installed in place of the Ford regulator? Yes.
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sounds interesting..
>>
>> Matt-
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > I am just about to put my RV7A in the air but....I have one minor
>> problem
>> > to solve. The Dynon EMS D-120 is not indicating TRUE voltage output
>> both
>> > with the engine in operation or when running on the battery.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > My electrical architecture is Z13/8 modified to have the B&C 40 amp
>> > alternator regulated by LR3C-14. The amp/current pick off shunt is in
>> > location A position as found in the Dynon EMS D-120 install manual
>> page
>> > 3.12. When the Master Battery/Main Alternator switch is actuated the
>> Dynon
>> > shows 10.8 volt. When the Essential bus is actuated the voltage climbs
>> to
>> > 12.8 with or without the Master on.
>> >
>> > Every possible connection point has had a continuity check/voltage
>> check
>> > completed. We have also followed the B & C LR3C-14 trouble shooting
>> guide
>> > which had no neitive results so the LR3C would SEEM to be OK . All
>> grounds
>> > have been checked for problems...one found.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > But all (except using B&C trouble shooting guide)roads seem to lead to
>> a
>> > bad LR3C-14.....but Bill at B&C thinks there has to be another
>> > problem....................In short every connection up to the
>> regulator
>> > are 12.8 volts with the master on but once past the LR3C it read 10.8
>> at
>> > the power pin location #1 on the D-Sub. This indicated two things the
>> > problem is at the LR3C and the Dynon D120 is isolated showing it isn't
>> the
>> > problem....................
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > We know the altenators ..... both main and aux SD8 are doing there
>> thing
>> > because when we have ground run the engine the battery charge has been
>> > maintained
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > So where do I check next??????????????????????????????
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Frank @ 1L8 ...RV7A... ready to fly?????maybe
>> >
>> > _________________________________________________________________
>> > Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail.
>> > http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_QuickAdd_062009
>>
>>
>>
> ===========
> ===========
> ===========
> ===========
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Windows Live: Keep your life in sync.
> http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_BR_life_in_synch_062009
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
| From: | Etienne Phillips <etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com> |
Hi Justin
They are available locally (as in Port Elizabeth) from Autozone... Not sure
where abouts you are, but autozone is a chain store of sorts, so you may
find them all over the country!
Etienne
2009/7/14 heisan
>
> Thanks everybody.
>
> When I asked around here, everybody uses glass fuses or breakers. Two A&Ps
> I chatted to said blade fuses were a bad idea (basically because it is
> difficult to make the pretty!
>
> Nice to know that they will work, and are safe to use.
>
> Does anybody know of an on-line shop that sells decent blade fuse holders?
> Options here are few and far between.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252936#252936
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vincent Himsl <vshimsl(at)live.com> |
| Subject: | D.A.R question about fuse access |
In planning the layout of your electrical system=2C I would suggest you pla
ce your fuse blocks where you can answer 'yes' to the following question fr
om a D.A.R:
"Are you able to change fuses for critical instruments in flight?" (or som
ething similar)
Fortunately one of my fuse blocks=2C the one with my critical instruments
=2C was within reach (under the panel) while in flight. Changing them in fl
ight would be painful but possible.
Before y'all blast off=2C realize the D.A.R is inspecting your airplane to
see if it complies with Federal Regulations. If he asks you a question it i
s because he believes he is required to.
And regardless our collective thoughts and feelings about the question=2C i
t is being asked.
I have been on this list for years so I guess I should have anticipated thi
s=2C but I have to admit the question caught me by surprise. I relay this s
o you are not.
Regards=2C
Vince_Himsl
RV8 N8432 Flying (10hours)
_________________________________________________________________
Lauren found her dream laptop. Find the PC that=92s right for you.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/choosepc/?ocid=ftp_val_wl_290
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Barrow <bobbarrow10(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Suitable diode replacement |
I have blown all 3 diodes on my S701-2 Cross Feed Contactor (through stupid
ity!!) on my 12 volt Z14 architecture. They are all of the type 1N5400 (3 a
mp 50 volt). I am having trouble getting replacements locally (Australia) f
or these specific diodes and I was wondering if I could replace them with t
he type 1N5404 (3 amp 400 volt) which is readily available.
One of 1N5400 diodes on the Cross Feed Contactor is obviously specifically
for voltage spike suppression across the contactor. I'm not sure whether th
e voltage rating (breakdown voltage for reverse current) on this diode in p
articular is actually an important factor for spike suppression or not.
I'd appreciate feedback from any guru out there.
_________________________________________________________________
View photos of singles in your area Click Here
http://dating.ninemsn.com.au/search/search.aspx?exec=go&tp=q&gc=2&tr
=1&lage=18&uage=55&cl=14&sl=0&dist=50&po=1&do=2&trackingid
=1046138&r2s=1&_t=773166090&_r=WLM_EndText
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
I've also seen these at Pep Boys if you're on the east coast.
Glenn
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Etienne Phillips
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 6:10 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Automotive blade fuses?
Hi Justin
They are available locally (as in Port Elizabeth) from Autozone... Not
sure where abouts you are, but autozone is a chain store of sorts, so
you may find them all over the country!
Etienne
2009/7/14 heisan
Thanks everybody.
When I asked around here, everybody uses glass fuses or breakers. Two
A&Ps I chatted to said blade fuses were a bad idea (basically because it
is difficult to make the pretty!
Nice to know that they will work, and are safe to use.
Does anybody know of an on-line shop that sells decent blade fuse
holders? Options here are few and far between.
Thanks,
Justin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252936#252936
h as List Un/Subscription,
www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
Matt Dralle, List Admin.
====
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: D.A.R question about fuse access |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Why did you design the airplane with any critical instruments? Good panel
design dictates that there aren't any.
It's a trick question.. Most certified single engine airplanes don't have
a backup vacuum source. Nor a backup electrical system.
An EFIS, a separate turn indicator, plus a (at least one of these having
internal/backup/battery power) GPS provide as much (more) useful,
overlapping information so that if any one item fails, you can still
maintain control of the airplane.
Changing fuses while in flight instead of maintaining positive control of
the airplane sounds dangerous.
Matt-
>
> In planning the layout of your electrical system, I would suggest you
> place your fuse blocks where you can answer 'yes' to the following
> question from a D.A.R:
>
> "Are you able to change fuses for critical instruments in flight?" (or
> something similar)
>
> Fortunately one of my fuse blocks, the one with my critical instruments,
> was within reach (under the panel) while in flight. Changing them in
> flight would be painful but possible.
>
> Before y'all blast off, realize the D.A.R is inspecting your airplane to
> see if it complies with Federal Regulations. If he asks you a question it
> is because he believes he is required to.
>
> And regardless our collective thoughts and feelings about the question, it
> is being asked.
>
> I have been on this list for years so I guess I should have anticipated
> this, but I have to admit the question caught me by surprise. I relay this
> so you are not.
>
> Regards,
> Vince_Himsl
> RV8 N8432 Flying (10hours)
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Lauren found her dream laptop. Find the PC thats right for you.
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/choosepc/?ocid=ftp_val_wl_290
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Suitable diode replacement |
Hi Bob,
The 1N5404 will work fine.
Bob W.
Bob Barrow wrote:
>
> I have blown all 3 diodes on my S701-2 Cross Feed Contactor (through stupidity!!)
on my 12 volt Z14 architecture. They are all of the type 1N5400 (3 amp 50
volt). I am having trouble getting replacements locally (Australia) for these
specific diodes and I was wondering if I could replace them with the type 1N5404
(3 amp 400 volt) which is readily available.
>
>
>
> One of 1N5400 diodes on the Cross Feed Contactor is obviously specifically for
voltage spike suppression across the contactor. I'm not sure whether the voltage
rating (breakdown voltage for reverse current) on this diode in particular
is actually an important factor for spike suppression or not.
>
>
>
> I'd appreciate feedback from any guru out there.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> View photos of singles in your area Click Here
> http://dating.ninemsn.com.au/search/search.aspx?exec=go&tp=q&gc=2&tr=1&lage=18&uage=55&cl=14&sl=0&dist=50&po=1&do=2&trackingid=1046138&r2s=1&_t=773166090&_r=WLM_EndText
--
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: | Re: D.A.R question about fuse access |
At 07:25 AM 7/15/2009, you wrote:
>In planning the layout of your electrical system, I would suggest
>you place your fuse blocks where you can answer 'yes' to the
>following question from a D.A.R:
>
>"Are you able to change fuses for critical instruments in
>flight?" (or something similar)
This is a recurring concern that is lifted from
the FARS. In 99% of the cases where "critical"
is used in Part 23/25 it's referring to exploring
the limits of some performance characteristics
like load limits, single-engine handling qualities
in a twin engine airplane, c.g. limits, etc. etc.
In terms of criticality of electro-whizzies, the
FARS are not enlightening. I suggest this is because
while things like wing spars, engines and unstable
aerodynamics can get you killed, the manner in which
electrics affect the outcome of flight varies widely
based on mission, weather and pilot skills. The DAY
VFR J-3 has no critical electrics . . . in fact no
electrics at all. The LAIV-P that routinely bores
holes in crummy weather, at night and over mountains
is entirely another matter.
To begin, YOU need to assess criticality
of any particular piece of hardware based on how
YOU are going to use the airplane. Second, be
aware that there are many ways that piece of
equipment can quit working that DO NOT pop fuses
or breakers. The simple logic behind this assertion
suggests that spending any time locating fuses
for easy replacement adds no value to the finished
product. Finally, launching into the blue with
a willingness to become a systems failure diagnostician
and repair technician during a time when you really
NEED some particular piece of stuff to be working
comes with a high order of risk.
The obvious solution is to design the system for
FAILURE TOLERANCE . . . i.e. no matter what
circumstances for which you plan to use the airplane,
no single piece of necessary equipment is not
backed up, i.e. your airplane has no critical
systems.
>Fortunately one of my fuse blocks, the one with my critical
>instruments, was within reach (under the panel) while in flight.
>Changing them in flight would be painful but possible.
The best fix for this is move it where you
CAN'T reach it. The tendency to think in terms
of in-flight fuse replacement goes away and
thinking about failure tolerance replaces it.
. . . A good thing.
>Before y'all blast off, realize the D.A.R is inspecting your
>airplane to see if it complies with Federal Regulations. If he asks
>you a question it is because he believes he is required to.
If your talking about an owner built and maintained
airplane, there are no regulations that affect
configuration of the project. The only regulations
that apply to OBAM aircraft are OPERATIONAL concerns
rightfully levied because you must play
in the same sandbox with the big guys. While
operating in that environment, it should be
transparent to everyone else that you're in an
OBAM aircraft. You're behaviors and capabilities
need to be the same as everyone else while
seamlessly sharing the airspace.
>And regardless our collective thoughts and feelings about the
>question, it is being asked.
>
>I have been on this list for years so I guess I should have
>anticipated this, but I have to admit the question caught me by
>surprise. I relay this so you are not.
The answer for anyone who might exercise a
regulatory authority over your project is to
explain why none of the equipment items in your
airplane are ever "critical" to continued
flight or comfortable termination of flight.
This might be because for every situation in which
you use the airplane, it matters not if ANY electrical
item on the panel is working. Better yet, it
might be the case because you have a plan-b in
the hip pocket to deal with any failure of necessary
equipment.
Think of it like this: I've never owned an
airplane with an electrical system in it (Our
J-3 at 1K1 was not so blessed). Every time
I go fly, it's in a rented airplane. As I walk
up to that airplane, should I be ruminating on
service history for the alternator? Should I
check the logs for service difficulties? Do
I want to check the warranty date sticker on
the battery? With a rented airplane, there are
MANY issues that are out of my direct supervision
and control. THIS is why I have to rely on the
integrity and skill of the airplane's owner
to keep things up to snuff under the FARS. At
the same time, I always fly with this stuff
in my flight bag:
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/Vacination_for_Dark_Panel_Syndrom.pdf
So my personal assessment of criticality combined
with the manner in which I use airplanes allows
me to launch without concern for ANYTHING working
on the panel. It's my plan-B, plan-C, etc to
comfortably terminate the flight at airport of
intended destination irrespective of
whether or not the master switch is even turned
on. I don't care if it's a C150 or an A36. I'm
comfortable with NOT knowing if the electrical
systems is 100% to my satisfaction.
The mind set you need to adopt when dealing with
the "learned elite" of aviation is NOT to argue
with the applicability of any particular directives
handed down from on high. Smile and explain that
you've carefully thought through your system
configuration. It's designed with your skill
set and mission requirements in mind such that
no single piece of equipment is "critical". All
installed electro-whizzies are either (1) not necessary
for comfortable termination of any anticipated flight
or (2) backed up with totally independent capabilities.
If YOU understand what you've achieved based on your
planning and workmanship, then explaining it to
a skeptical/un-informed inquisitor is easier.
It's your confidence built upon understanding and
planning that drives risk down for YOUR use of THAT
airplane . . . NOT mindless adherence to vague, broad
brush directives from a policy and procedures manual
that doesn't apply to you anyhow.
See chapter 17 of the 'Connection and any number of
fuse/breaker/failure-tolerance discussions on the
List archives and on http://aeroelectric.com.
Understanding starts there. Confidence will follow.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | D.A.R question about fuse access |
Matt,
Ok, I have 3 EFIS displays, two alternators, two batteries & two
internal batteries within the EFIS's, a drop down panel to access all
fuses (within easy reach of the pilot) and a compliment of spare LED
fuses. I'm thinking of adding a PEZ like dispenser for fuses below my
seat with lighted push buttons with numbers so I can pop them on demand
like a soda machine.
So how should I respond to the DAR?
I totally agree, with one caveat - if you need to change fuses in
flight, be sure you have the autopilot turned on with the traffic alerts
turned on. If you're flying IFR you already have someone watching your
back for the 1 minute it takes. If you can't find the problem in 1
minute and it's not critical, fix it on the ground. Better yet, fly with
a buddy and make him/her perform the swap.
Glenn
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Prather
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 9:35 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: D.A.R question about fuse access
Why did you design the airplane with any critical instruments? Good
panel
design dictates that there aren't any.
It's a trick question.. Most certified single engine airplanes don't
have
a backup vacuum source. Nor a backup electrical system.
An EFIS, a separate turn indicator, plus a (at least one of these having
internal/backup/battery power) GPS provide as much (more) useful,
overlapping information so that if any one item fails, you can still
maintain control of the airplane.
Changing fuses while in flight instead of maintaining positive control
of
the airplane sounds dangerous.
Matt-
>
> In planning the layout of your electrical system, I would suggest you
> place your fuse blocks where you can answer 'yes' to the following
> question from a D.A.R:
>
> "Are you able to change fuses for critical instruments in flight?"
(or
> something similar)
>
> Fortunately one of my fuse blocks, the one with my critical
instruments,
> was within reach (under the panel) while in flight. Changing them in
> flight would be painful but possible.
>
> Before y'all blast off, realize the D.A.R is inspecting your airplane
to
> see if it complies with Federal Regulations. If he asks you a question
it
> is because he believes he is required to.
>
> And regardless our collective thoughts and feelings about the
question, it
> is being asked.
>
> I have been on this list for years so I guess I should have
anticipated
> this, but I have to admit the question caught me by surprise. I relay
this
> so you are not.
>
> Regards,
> Vince_Himsl
> RV8 N8432 Flying (10hours)
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Lauren found her dream laptop. Find the PC that's right for you.
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/choosepc/?ocid=ftp_val_wl_290
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Brame <chasb(at)satx.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Fluctuating Amps |
Bob, et. al.,
According to my MicroVision engine monitor, the amps on my RV-6 vary
almost constantly from "0" to around "17." A normal load should be
about "7." The voltage holds very steady at 13.8 monitored from my
essential bus, and all my avionics and other electrical equipment
seems to work as advertised. I have a B&C 60 amp alternator and a
generic Ford voltage regulator. The amperage is measured via a Hall
sensor on the main alternator feed line and I have not been able to
locate any loose wires or bad connections.
Any ideas of what the problem is? Is there an alternator or voltage
regulator failure in the offing?
Charlie Brame
RV-6A N11CB
San Antonio
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | D.A.R question about fuse access |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Depending on how the circuits are designed, it sounds like you're set for
most ops..
I like the AP idea. Arguably, an AP should be on any airplane used for
IFR. They are relatively cheap nowadays. What's the procedure if you
suspect the fuse for the AP blew?
What happens if you accidentally pull the wrong fuse? Do you lose another
piece of 'critical equipment'?
Matt-
>
> Matt,
>
> Ok, I have 3 EFIS displays, two alternators, two batteries & two
> internal batteries within the EFIS's, a drop down panel to access all
> fuses (within easy reach of the pilot) and a compliment of spare LED
> fuses. I'm thinking of adding a PEZ like dispenser for fuses below my
> seat with lighted push buttons with numbers so I can pop them on demand
> like a soda machine.
>
> So how should I respond to the DAR?
>
> I totally agree, with one caveat - if you need to change fuses in
> flight, be sure you have the autopilot turned on with the traffic alerts
> turned on. If you're flying IFR you already have someone watching your
> back for the 1 minute it takes. If you can't find the problem in 1
> minute and it's not critical, fix it on the ground. Better yet, fly with
> a buddy and make him/her perform the swap.
>
> Glenn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt
> Prather
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 9:35 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: D.A.R question about fuse access
>
>
>
> Why did you design the airplane with any critical instruments? Good
> panel
> design dictates that there aren't any.
>
> It's a trick question.. Most certified single engine airplanes don't
> have
> a backup vacuum source. Nor a backup electrical system.
>
> An EFIS, a separate turn indicator, plus a (at least one of these having
> internal/backup/battery power) GPS provide as much (more) useful,
> overlapping information so that if any one item fails, you can still
> maintain control of the airplane.
>
> Changing fuses while in flight instead of maintaining positive control
> of
> the airplane sounds dangerous.
>
>
> Matt-
>
>>
>> In planning the layout of your electrical system, I would suggest you
>> place your fuse blocks where you can answer 'yes' to the following
>> question from a D.A.R:
>>
>> "Are you able to change fuses for critical instruments in flight?"
> (or
>> something similar)
>>
>> Fortunately one of my fuse blocks, the one with my critical
> instruments,
>> was within reach (under the panel) while in flight. Changing them in
>> flight would be painful but possible.
>>
>> Before y'all blast off, realize the D.A.R is inspecting your airplane
> to
>> see if it complies with Federal Regulations. If he asks you a question
> it
>> is because he believes he is required to.
>>
>> And regardless our collective thoughts and feelings about the
> question, it
>> is being asked.
>>
>> I have been on this list for years so I guess I should have
> anticipated
>> this, but I have to admit the question caught me by surprise. I relay
> this
>> so you are not.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Vince_Himsl
>> RV8 N8432 Flying (10hours)
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Lauren found her dream laptop. Find the PC that's right for you.
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/choosepc/?ocid=ftp_val_wl_290
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Suitable diode replacement |
>One of 1N5400 diodes on the Cross Feed Contactor is obviously
>specifically for voltage spike suppression across the contactor.
Actually, only ONE of the three is for coil spike
suppression. The other two are for power steering.
The idea is that one should be able to close the
contactor using power from either side of the system.
I.e. the powered side gets a contactor closed to
support the non-powered side.
As long as the diodes are rated at 50v or more,
ANY diode will work in these applications for
contactors. Higher current ratings are called
for with devices like the normal feed path for
the e-bus . . . which is not needed on Z-14
systems.
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: Fluctuating Amps |
At 10:20 AM 7/15/2009, you wrote:
>
>Bob, et. al.,
>
>According to my MicroVision engine monitor, the amps on my RV-6 vary
>almost constantly from "0" to around "17." A normal load should be
>about "7." The voltage holds very steady at 13.8 monitored from my
>essential bus, and all my avionics and other electrical equipment
>seems to work as advertised. I have a B&C 60 amp alternator and a
>generic Ford voltage regulator. The amperage is measured via a Hall
>sensor on the main alternator feed line and I have not been able to
>locate any loose wires or bad connections.
>
>Any ideas of what the problem is? Is there an alternator or voltage
>regulator failure in the offing?
The first thing to do is confirm the variability
of the display. If the voltage readings are steady
then the regulator is fine. I'd do a temporary
installation of another ammeter in the b-lead
to confirm the micro-vision system performance.
Alternatively, you could simply remove the current
sensor all together and quit worrying about it.
Ammeters are more useful as a diagnostic tool and
then only if they're know to be trustworthy. If
your voltage is stable under all system load
conditions, probability is that the ammeter
is flakey. Try taking the b-lead wire out of the
sensor and see if it's still bouncing around
with "zero" excitation.
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: | Fun flying after the medical is gone? |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDbQ5xvsrIU
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | D.A.R question about fuse access |
I wonder how a DAR would look upon Vertical Power. No fuses. You have a
control box in the panel that you can reset a "failed" circuit, but that's
it. There's no ability to "change fuses in flight".
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: D.A.R question about fuse access
At 07:25 AM 7/15/2009, you wrote:
In planning the layout of your electrical system, I would suggest you place
your fuse blocks where you can answer 'yes' to the following question from a
D.A.R:
"Are you able to change fuses for critical instruments in flight?" (or
something similar)
This is a recurring concern that is lifted from
the FARS. In 99% of the cases where "critical"
is used in Part 23/25 it's referring to exploring
the limits of some performance characteristics
like load limits, single-engine handling qualities
in a twin engine airplane, c.g. limits, etc. etc.
In terms of criticality of electro-whizzies, the
FARS are not enlightening. I suggest this is because
while things like wing spars, engines and unstable
aerodynamics can get you killed, the manner in which
electrics affect the outcome of flight varies widely
based on mission, weather and pilot skills. The DAY
VFR J-3 has no critical electrics . . . in fact no
electrics at all. The LAIV-P that routinely bores
holes in crummy weather, at night and over mountains
is entirely another matter.
To begin, YOU need to assess criticality
of any particular piece of hardware based on how
YOU are going to use the airplane. Second, be
aware that there are many ways that piece of
equipment can quit working that DO NOT pop fuses
or breakers. The simple logic behind this assertion
suggests that spending any time locating fuses
for easy replacement adds no value to the finished
product. Finally, launching into the blue with
a willingness to become a systems failure diagnostician
and repair technician during a time when you really
NEED some particular piece of stuff to be working
comes with a high order of risk.
The obvious solution is to design the system for
FAILURE TOLERANCE . . . i.e. no matter what
circumstances for which you plan to use the airplane,
no single piece of necessary equipment is not
backed up, i.e. your airplane has no critical
systems.
Fortunately one of my fuse blocks, the one with my critical instruments, was
within reach (under the panel) while in flight. Changing them in flight
would be painful but possible.
The best fix for this is move it where you
CAN'T reach it. The tendency to think in terms
of in-flight fuse replacement goes away and
thinking about failure tolerance replaces it.
. . . A good thing.
Before y'all blast off, realize the D.A.R is inspecting your airplane to see
if it complies with Federal Regulations. If he asks you a question it is
because he believes he is required to.
If your talking about an owner built and maintained
airplane, there are no regulations that affect
configuration of the project. The only regulations
that apply to OBAM aircraft are OPERATIONAL concerns
rightfully levied because you must play
in the same sandbox with the big guys. While
operating in that environment, it should be
transparent to everyone else that you're in an
OBAM aircraft. You're behaviors and capabilities
need to be the same as everyone else while
seamlessly sharing the airspace.
And regardless our collective thoughts and feelings about the question, it
is being asked.
I have been on this list for years so I guess I should have anticipated
this, but I have to admit the question caught me by surprise. I relay this
so you are not.
The answer for anyone who might exercise a
regulatory authority over your project is to
explain why none of the equipment items in your
airplane are ever "critical" to continued
flight or comfortable termination of flight.
This might be because for every situation in which
you use the airplane, it matters not if ANY electrical
item on the panel is working. Better yet, it
might be the case because you have a plan-b in
the hip pocket to deal with any failure of necessary
equipment.
Think of it like this: I've never owned an
airplane with an electrical system in it (Our
J-3 at 1K1 was not so blessed). Every time
I go fly, it's in a rented airplane. As I walk
up to that airplane, should I be ruminating on
service history for the alternator? Should I
check the logs for service difficulties? Do
I want to check the warranty date sticker on
the battery? With a rented airplane, there are
MANY issues that are out of my direct supervision
and control. THIS is why I have to rely on the
integrity and skill of the airplane's owner
to keep things up to snuff under the FARS. At
the same time, I always fly with this stuff
in my flight bag:
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/Vacination_for_Dark_Panel_Syndrom.pdf
So my personal assessment of criticality combined
with the manner in which I use airplanes allows
me to launch without concern for ANYTHING working
on the panel. It's my plan-B, plan-C, etc to
comfortably terminate the flight at airport of
intended destination irrespective of
whether or not the master switch is even turned
on. I don't care if it's a C150 or an A36. I'm
comfortable with NOT knowing if the electrical
systems is 100% to my satisfaction.
The mind set you need to adopt when dealing with
the "learned elite" of aviation is NOT to argue
with the applicability of any particular directives
handed down from on high. Smile and explain that
you've carefully thought through your system
configuration. It's designed with your skill
set and mission requirements in mind such that
no single piece of equipment is "critical". All
installed electro-whizzies are either (1) not necessary
for comfortable termination of any anticipated flight
or (2) backed up with totally independent capabilities.
If YOU understand what you've achieved based on your
planning and workmanship, then explaining it to
a skeptical/un-informed inquisitor is easier.
It's your confidence built upon understanding and
planning that drives risk down for YOUR use of THAT
airplane . . . NOT mindless adherence to vague, broad
brush directives from a policy and procedures manual
that doesn't apply to you anyhow.
See chapter 17 of the 'Connection and any number of
fuse/breaker/failure-tolerance discussions on the
List archives and on http://aeroelectric.com .
Understanding starts there. Confidence will follow.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | D.A.R question about fuse access |
Matt,
However silly it may appear I like the led approach to avoid choosing an
un-blown/wrong fuse. On my fuse buses, each fuse is additionally labeled
to assist in locating the right fuse. To me pulling the wrong fuse is no
worse than pulling a breaker accidentally. Turn off the affected device,
plug the fuse back in and re-start the device - don't do that again. I
have dual ignition with one side slaved to the second battery. The
engine will keep running no matter what breaker is pulled.
Since my AP is internal to the Dynon and runs on the Dynon network, it
will fly on battery for about an hour, thus giving me enough warning to
get down. If one has lots of blown fuses and has trouble picking the
right one, you either have a bigger issue or you're just really ignorant
about maintenance. Assuming only one is blown, let's fix it and maybe
avoid lots of headaches.
The nice thing about having internal batteries within the EFIS is that
nothing changes while you scurry to either change the fuse or land and
repair - even for the AP. If I couldn't isolate the problem by replacing
the fuse - I'd just land. Kind-o-like the ole' circuit breaker theory -
if it blows once you reset it. If it blows twice, you leave it.
Glenn
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Prather
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 11:50 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: D.A.R question about fuse access
Depending on how the circuits are designed, it sounds like you're set
for
most ops..
I like the AP idea. Arguably, an AP should be on any airplane used for
IFR. They are relatively cheap nowadays. What's the procedure if you
suspect the fuse for the AP blew?
What happens if you accidentally pull the wrong fuse? Do you lose
another
piece of 'critical equipment'?
Matt-
>
> Matt,
>
> Ok, I have 3 EFIS displays, two alternators, two batteries & two
> internal batteries within the EFIS's, a drop down panel to access all
> fuses (within easy reach of the pilot) and a compliment of spare LED
> fuses. I'm thinking of adding a PEZ like dispenser for fuses below my
> seat with lighted push buttons with numbers so I can pop them on
demand
> like a soda machine.
>
> So how should I respond to the DAR?
>
> I totally agree, with one caveat - if you need to change fuses in
> flight, be sure you have the autopilot turned on with the traffic
alerts
> turned on. If you're flying IFR you already have someone watching your
> back for the 1 minute it takes. If you can't find the problem in 1
> minute and it's not critical, fix it on the ground. Better yet, fly
with
> a buddy and make him/her perform the swap.
>
> Glenn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Matt
> Prather
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 9:35 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: D.A.R question about fuse access
>
>
>
> Why did you design the airplane with any critical instruments? Good
> panel
> design dictates that there aren't any.
>
> It's a trick question.. Most certified single engine airplanes don't
> have
> a backup vacuum source. Nor a backup electrical system.
>
> An EFIS, a separate turn indicator, plus a (at least one of these
having
> internal/backup/battery power) GPS provide as much (more) useful,
> overlapping information so that if any one item fails, you can still
> maintain control of the airplane.
>
> Changing fuses while in flight instead of maintaining positive control
> of
> the airplane sounds dangerous.
>
>
> Matt-
>
>>
>> In planning the layout of your electrical system, I would suggest you
>> place your fuse blocks where you can answer 'yes' to the following
>> question from a D.A.R:
>>
>> "Are you able to change fuses for critical instruments in flight?"
> (or
>> something similar)
>>
>> Fortunately one of my fuse blocks, the one with my critical
> instruments,
>> was within reach (under the panel) while in flight. Changing them in
>> flight would be painful but possible.
>>
>> Before y'all blast off, realize the D.A.R is inspecting your airplane
> to
>> see if it complies with Federal Regulations. If he asks you a
question
> it
>> is because he believes he is required to.
>>
>> And regardless our collective thoughts and feelings about the
> question, it
>> is being asked.
>>
>> I have been on this list for years so I guess I should have
> anticipated
>> this, but I have to admit the question caught me by surprise. I relay
> this
>> so you are not.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Vince_Himsl
>> RV8 N8432 Flying (10hours)
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Lauren found her dream laptop. Find the PC that's right for you.
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/choosepc/?ocid=ftp_val_wl_290
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | D.A.R question about fuse access |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Certainly there are situations where I might mess around with diagnostics
while in flight. Many a flight there's nothing better to do besides drone
on. Especially if it's severe-clear for the length of the mission. If
it's dark and/or stormy, I'd be much more reluctant to do anything besides
hunker down and continue the flight with what's left. In my limited
experience on the needles, distraction is something I don't need..
Out of curiosity, is the AP servo powered by the instrument or does it
have a separate power source?
Matt-
>
> Matt,
>
> However silly it may appear I like the led approach to avoid choosing an
> un-blown/wrong fuse. On my fuse buses, each fuse is additionally labeled
> to assist in locating the right fuse. To me pulling the wrong fuse is no
> worse than pulling a breaker accidentally. Turn off the affected device,
> plug the fuse back in and re-start the device - don't do that again. I
> have dual ignition with one side slaved to the second battery. The
> engine will keep running no matter what breaker is pulled.
>
> Since my AP is internal to the Dynon and runs on the Dynon network, it
> will fly on battery for about an hour, thus giving me enough warning to
> get down. If one has lots of blown fuses and has trouble picking the
> right one, you either have a bigger issue or you're just really ignorant
> about maintenance. Assuming only one is blown, let's fix it and maybe
> avoid lots of headaches.
>
> The nice thing about having internal batteries within the EFIS is that
> nothing changes while you scurry to either change the fuse or land and
> repair - even for the AP. If I couldn't isolate the problem by replacing
> the fuse - I'd just land. Kind-o-like the ole' circuit breaker theory -
> if it blows once you reset it. If it blows twice, you leave it.
>
> Glenn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt
> Prather
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 11:50 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: D.A.R question about fuse access
>
>
>
> Depending on how the circuits are designed, it sounds like you're set
> for
> most ops..
>
> I like the AP idea. Arguably, an AP should be on any airplane used for
> IFR. They are relatively cheap nowadays. What's the procedure if you
> suspect the fuse for the AP blew?
>
> What happens if you accidentally pull the wrong fuse? Do you lose
> another
> piece of 'critical equipment'?
>
>
> Matt-
>
>>
>> Matt,
>>
>> Ok, I have 3 EFIS displays, two alternators, two batteries & two
>> internal batteries within the EFIS's, a drop down panel to access all
>> fuses (within easy reach of the pilot) and a compliment of spare LED
>> fuses. I'm thinking of adding a PEZ like dispenser for fuses below my
>> seat with lighted push buttons with numbers so I can pop them on
> demand
>> like a soda machine.
>>
>> So how should I respond to the DAR?
>>
>> I totally agree, with one caveat - if you need to change fuses in
>> flight, be sure you have the autopilot turned on with the traffic
> alerts
>> turned on. If you're flying IFR you already have someone watching your
>> back for the 1 minute it takes. If you can't find the problem in 1
>> minute and it's not critical, fix it on the ground. Better yet, fly
> with
>> a buddy and make him/her perform the swap.
>>
>> Glenn
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Matt
>> Prather
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 9:35 AM
>> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: D.A.R question about fuse access
>>
>>
>>
>> Why did you design the airplane with any critical instruments? Good
>> panel
>> design dictates that there aren't any.
>>
>> It's a trick question.. Most certified single engine airplanes don't
>> have
>> a backup vacuum source. Nor a backup electrical system.
>>
>> An EFIS, a separate turn indicator, plus a (at least one of these
> having
>> internal/backup/battery power) GPS provide as much (more) useful,
>> overlapping information so that if any one item fails, you can still
>> maintain control of the airplane.
>>
>> Changing fuses while in flight instead of maintaining positive control
>> of
>> the airplane sounds dangerous.
>>
>>
>> Matt-
>>
>>>
>>> In planning the layout of your electrical system, I would suggest you
>>> place your fuse blocks where you can answer 'yes' to the following
>>> question from a D.A.R:
>>>
>>> "Are you able to change fuses for critical instruments in flight?"
>> (or
>>> something similar)
>>>
>>> Fortunately one of my fuse blocks, the one with my critical
>> instruments,
>>> was within reach (under the panel) while in flight. Changing them in
>>> flight would be painful but possible.
>>>
>>> Before y'all blast off, realize the D.A.R is inspecting your airplane
>> to
>>> see if it complies with Federal Regulations. If he asks you a
> question
>> it
>>> is because he believes he is required to.
>>>
>>> And regardless our collective thoughts and feelings about the
>> question, it
>>> is being asked.
>>>
>>> I have been on this list for years so I guess I should have
>> anticipated
>>> this, but I have to admit the question caught me by surprise. I relay
>> this
>>> so you are not.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Vince_Himsl
>>> RV8 N8432 Flying (10hours)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Lauren found her dream laptop. Find the PC that's right for you.
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/choosepc/?ocid=ftp_val_wl_290
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
| From: | "heisan" <justin(at)expertron.co.za> |
Thanks for all the info.
I will try AutoZone locally on Friday. If that doesn't work, I will order from
one of the on-line shops.
You guys in the USA really have it all!
Thanks,
Justin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253201#253201
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: D.A.R question about fuse access |
| From: | thomas sargent <sarg314(at)gmail.com> |
I'm confused by this thread. Are you telling me that the D.A.R. is going to
REQUIRE that my fuse block be accessible in flight? (Mine isn't.) Or are you
just telling me I need to have a rap prepared to respond to the question.
--
Tom Sargent
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
| Subject: | D.A.R question about fuse access |
DAR's sometimes have an "its my way or the highway" approach..But this is v
ery rare.
You just need to tell him there is no one fuse that will take out your abil
ity to fly or navigate..And you have no intention of changing fuses in flig
ht.
None of my 3 fuse boxes are accesible and the idea of changing a fuse while
being bounced around in IMC is ludicrous in my mind.
Frank RV7a IFR, elctric fuel pumps only, totally electrically dependant.
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectr
ic-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of thomas sargent
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: D.A.R question about fuse access
I'm confused by this thread. Are you telling me that the D.A.R. is going t
o REQUIRE that my fuse block be accessible in flight? (Mine isn't.) Or are
you just telling me I need to have a rap prepared to respond to the questio
n.
--
Tom Sargent
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
| From: | thomas sargent <sarg314(at)gmail.com> |
Autozone has them, but only in values used commonly in cars. For your plane
you will need a lot of small values - 1 or 2 or 3 amps. I doubt you'll find
those at autozone or checker. B&C Specialty has them.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:17 PM, heisan wrote:
>
> Thanks for all the info.
>
> I will try AutoZone locally on Friday. If that doesn't work, I will order
> from one of the on-line shops.
>
> You guys in the USA really have it all!
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
--
Tom Sargent
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Contacter, or not? |
| From: | "heisan" <justin(at)expertron.co.za> |
After all the great info and advice I got on the fuses, I thought I would try asking
about contacters too [Wink] .
The aircraft manufacturer, and the engine manual both give a wiring diagram that
does NOT include a master contacter. The battery positive goes directly to a
master switch, and then to the main bus.
This is the first time I have seen a configuration like this (without the contacter).
What are the advantages, and disadvantages of doing it this way? My maximum
current draw is around 10A, so well within the continuous current range
of a small toggle switch.
Thanks!
Justin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253209#253209
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
| Subject: | Contacter, or not? |
Where does the starter current go?..Usually it goes through the master contactor..You
won't be sending that kind of current through a normal toggle switch..well
more than once anyway...:)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of heisan
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:42 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Contacter, or not?
-->
After all the great info and advice I got on the fuses, I thought I would try asking
about contacters too [Wink] .
The aircraft manufacturer, and the engine manual both give a wiring diagram that
does NOT include a master contacter. The battery positive goes directly to a
master switch, and then to the main bus.
This is the first time I have seen a configuration like this (without the contacter).
What are the advantages, and disadvantages of doing it this way? My maximum
current draw is around 10A, so well within the continuous current range
of a small toggle switch.
Thanks!
Justin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253209#253209
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Contacter, or not? |
| From: | "heisan" <justin(at)expertron.co.za> |
frank.hinde(at)hp.com wrote:
> Where does the starter current go?..Usually it goes through the master contactor..You
won't be sending that kind of current through a normal toggle switch..well
more than once anyway...:)
>
> --
Ah - forgot to mention - the starter has a built in solenoid.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253216#253216
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | D.A.R question about fuse access |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
I like this answer. I suspect that many DAR's will be happy that you have
a rational answer to such a question - indicating that you have considered
and understand the issues involved.
Regards,
Matt-
> DAR's sometimes have an "its my way or the highway" approach..But this is
> very rare.
>
> You just need to tell him there is no one fuse that will take out your
> ability to fly or navigate..And you have no intention of changing fuses in
> flight.
>
> None of my 3 fuse boxes are accesible and the idea of changing a fuse
> while being bounced around in IMC is ludicrous in my mind.
>
>
> Frank RV7a IFR, elctric fuel pumps only, totally electrically dependant.
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of thomas
> sargent
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:19 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: D.A.R question about fuse access
>
>
> I'm confused by this thread. Are you telling me that the D.A.R. is going
> to REQUIRE that my fuse block be accessible in flight? (Mine isn't.) Or
> are you just telling me I need to have a rap prepared to respond to the
> question.
>
>
> --
> Tom Sargent
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Etienne Phillips <etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Automotive blade fuses? |
Hi all
When I suggested Autozone, I was referring to Autozone South Africa,
not AutoZone USA. As Justin is a fellow Dark-Continent (Africa for
those who are not familiar with the expression) dweller, I can
appreciate the lack of local availability of certain seemingly easily
obtainable aviation bits and pieces, unless you're happy spending
8-10 times the items value in shipping.
I'm pretty sure the smaller values are available, and certainly any
cable fault will be able to pop a 5A fuse... If you want it to blow
at a lower value than that, then you'll probably find those fuses to
be a bit harder to find. But there's no reason you have to import the
fuse holder from the opposite side of the planet just because that's
where the fuses will eventually need to come from.
Etienne
:-)
On 15 Jul 2009, at 9:38 PM, thomas sargent wrote:
> Autozone has them, but only in values used commonly in cars. For
> your plane you will need a lot of small values - 1 or 2 or 3 amps.
> I doubt you'll find those at autozone or checker. B&C Specialty
> has them.
>
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:17 PM, heisan
> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for all the info.
>
> I will try AutoZone locally on Friday. If that doesn't work, I
> will order from one of the on-line shops.
>
> You guys in the USA really have it all!
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> --
> Tom Sargent
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Contacter, or not? |
So there is a separate cable that comes directly from the battery and goes to the
starter solenoid..I.e bypasses the switch?
The reason I ask is cus useually the starter cable goes through the master contactor,
then through the starter contactor then to the starter.
I.e the starter cable usually goes through the master...At least on "Proper" airplanes..:)
Sounds like you have an automotive setup?..You could also have a starter solenoid
with this setup if you are uncomfortable with the starter cable being permanently
hot.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of heisan
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 1:03 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Contacter, or not?
-->
frank.hinde(at)hp.com wrote:
> Where does the starter current go?..Usually it goes through the master
> contactor..You won't be sending that kind of current through a normal
> toggle switch..well more than once anyway...:)
>
> --
Ah - forgot to mention - the starter has a built in solenoid.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253216#253216
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Contacter, or not? |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
With a peak current demand of 10A, I think you have a few options..
- Use a small(er) relay mounted close (6") to the battery. Mount your
distribution bus anywhere you wish. This is basically a scaled-down
version of existing architectures and provides all of the normal Z
functionality. This is how my hand-started Varieze is setup.
- If your battery is located close to the pilot's seat, you may be able
to replace the battery relay with a manually operated battery switch.
Cable operated switches have been discussed here in the past.
- Use a battery bus mounted close to the battery. This is fine if you
don't care about being able to make the whole system "cold" with one
switch.
- Use an appropriately sized inline fuse to feed the battery to a bus
which is located elsewhere in the plane. This is probably OK if none of
the electrical equipment is "critical to continued flight".. Faulting
the fat feeder would cause it's protection to open up, causing all your
electrical stuff to go dark.
Using a relay of any type (esp a fat contactor) causes an extra load on
the electrical system. If your sole source of power is a small PM dynamo,
every watt starts to add up. Small relays only draw on the order of 100mA
- less than 1% of the B&C dynamo on my O-200 - an acceptable load..
Regards,
Matt-
>
> After all the great info and advice I got on the fuses, I thought I
would
> try asking about contacters too [Wink] .
>
> The aircraft manufacturer, and the engine manual both give a wiring
diagram that does NOT include a master contacter. The battery positive
goes directly to a master switch, and then to the main bus.
>
> This is the first time I have seen a configuration like this (without
the
> contacter). What are the advantages, and disadvantages of doing it this
way? My maximum current draw is around 10A, so well within the
continuous
> current range of a small toggle switch.
>
> Thanks!
> Justin
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253209#253209
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Contacter, or not? |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
If your battery is located any significant distance from your starter, you
need a heavy relay or heavy switch.. It's bad practice to have a long
unprotected cable in the airplane which can't otherwise be made cold (via
a switch or contactor).
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> frank.hinde(at)hp.com wrote:
>> Where does the starter current go?..Usually it goes through the master
>> contactor..You won't be sending that kind of current through a normal
>> toggle switch..well more than once anyway...:)
>>
>> --
>
>
> Ah - forgot to mention - the starter has a built in solenoid.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=253216#253216
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Birkelbach <phil(at)petrasoft.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Contacter, or not? |
For only 10 Amps go with the switch. It takes almost an amp of
current to hold the master contactor closed so you'd be using ~10% of
your power just to keep the power on.
One advantage to a master contactor is that the big fat wire that
doesn't have a fuse on it can be very short. You can replicate this
for 10A with an automotive relay near the battery and a small wire
coming back to the switch, but that is one more thing that can fail.
If it were me, I'd probably just put a fusible link near the battery,
then run the wire from that to the switch and then to the main buss.
Simple is good!
Phil Birkelbach
Houston RV7 - 727WB
phil(at)petrasoft.net
http://www.myrv7.com/
On Jul 15, 2009, at 2:42 PM, heisan wrote:
> >
>
July 02, 2009 - July 15, 2009
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-iv