AeroElectric-List Archive Browser

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-kt
November 22, 2011 - December 28, 2011

-------- Dan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358785#358785 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/rst_intercom_mic_out_ptt_wiring_313.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jerald Folkerts" <jfolkerts1(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Wire Size for Wing Lighting
Date: Nov 22, 2011
I'm getting ready to close the right wing on my Murphy Super Rebel build and need to run the wires for my lights. I have two Whelan PLED 1L landing lights in a Grimes fixture, each pulls 1.2 Amps. I'm using LED position light replacement bulbs from PSA Enterprises, LED7STPL-12V in a standard Grimes position light fixture, each pulls less than .2 amps. Based on my reading/understanding of wire selection in the Aero-Electric Connection, I should be able to use 22 awg for each light - correct? That said, is there a reason to use heavier wire, i.e. 18 or 20 awg in case something changes in the future? Thanks, Jerry Folkerts SR #093 www.mykitlog.com/jfolkerts/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: cdnch701 <cdnch701(at)mts.net>
Date: Nov 22, 2011
Subject: 1 Wire vs. 3Wwire alternators
I need some help here with alternators! What is the difference between a 1 wire and a 3 wire system? Can a 1 wire setup be shut down with a switch as per over voltage protection... or does it have to be a 3 wire? Thanks Ron ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 22, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Wire Size for Wing Lighting
At 11:00 AM 11/22/2011, you wrote: >Im getting ready to close the right wing on my >Murphy Super Rebel build and need to run the >wires for my lights. I have two Whelan PLED 1L >landing lights in a Grimes fixture, each pulls >1.2 Amps. Im using LED position light >replacement bulbs from PSA Enterprises, >LED7STPL-12V in a standard Grimes position light >fixture, each pulls less than .2 amps. Based on >my reading/understanding of wire selection in >the Aero-Electric Connection, I should be able >to use 22 awg for each light correct? Yes >That said, is there a reason to use heavier >wire, i.e. 18 or 20 awg in case something changes in the future? Your option . . . but going back seems to be about as likely a move as putting inner tube tires on your car. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 22, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: 1 Wire vs. 3Wwire alternators
At 11:43 AM 11/22/2011, you wrote: > >I need some help here with alternators! What is the difference >between a 1 wire and a 3 wire >system? I'm not sure there's a uniform convention for 1 versus 2 versus 3 wire alternators. The 1-wire alternators I see for boats, RVs and utility vehicles have regulators built in. They have ONE b-lead that connects to the system and they automatically shut down internally when the alterantor is not turning. >Can a 1 wire setup be shut down with a switch as per over voltage protection No >... or does it have >to be a 3 wire? It certainly needs to have more than one wire, the second of which offers absolute control over field excitation. Check out B&C or Plane Power. They've provided for satisfaction of the legacy philosophy for putting alternators on airplanes. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 23, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Contributions Down By 20%...
Dear Listers, As of today, Contributions to the Matronics List Fund Raiser are lagging behind last year at this time by roughly 20%. I have a Fund Raiser each year simply to cover my operating costs for the Lists. I *do not* accept any advertising income to support the Lists and rely solely on the Contributions of members to keep the expenses paid. I run all of my own servers and they are housed here locally, and the Internet connection is a commercial-grade, T1 connection with public address space. I also maintain a full backup system that does nightly backups of all List-related data so that in the event of a server crash, all of the Lists and the many years of List archive data could be restored onto a new server in a matter of hours. All of this costs a fair amount of money, not to mention a significant amount of my personal time. I have a Fund Raiser each year to cover these costs and I ask that members that feel they receive a benefit from my investments make a modest Contribution each year to support the continued operation and upgrade of these services. If you enjoy the Lists, please make a Contribution today. I also offer some incentive gifts for larger Contribution levels. At the Contribution Web Site, you can use a credit card, Paypal, or personal check to show your support for the continuation of these services: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, drop a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 Thank you for your support! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 23, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Contributions Down By 20%...
At 02:20 AM 11/23/2011, you wrote: > > >Dear Listers, > >As of today, Contributions to the Matronics List Fund Raiser are lagging be >hind last year at this time by roughly 20%. Hey folks. It doesn't take much if everyone chips in . . . last time I looked, there were over 1800 subscribers to this list. For the price of a #2 at McD, 1800 folks could make a BIG difference in Matt's enthusiasm for keeping all the hardware running and the lights turned on. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "messydeer" <messydeer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2011
I read this in the RST 442 documentation this morning: Some push-to-transmit switches are designed only for use with headsets and radios and leave the microphone audio line (this is the "ring" portion of the microphone plug) connected to the radio even when the radio is not transmitting. Since some radios ground (disable) the microphone audio in receive mode, this type of PTT switch is unsuitable for use with an intercom system. If you already have PTT switches in the aircraft you may wish to try them with your intercom. If, however, you find that you lose intercom function (microphones are weak, distorted, or dead) when you plug the "PILOT ICS" and "COPILOT ICS" plugs into the COM radio via these PTT switches you will need to either 1) change to a model switch which opens the audio line when not transmitting or 2) consult your local radio shop and have a relay installed to achieve the same effect. I found out my Dynon DX15 handheld radio sends power to the mic only when transmitting, so my last schematic wouldn't work. They suggested using DPDT switches for the PTT's. Unfortunately, the gatekeeper to the engineer I was corresponding with has cut me off, so I can't get any more answers from them. I drew what I hope will work for me. I would use 4 pieces of single conductor shielded wire with the braided shield carrying ground current. The intercom has extra ground wires coming out of it, so that's already set. An additional unshielded ground wire would go from the intercom to the shell of the plug to the handheld radio. How does this look? BTW, is it common for radios to operate this way? -------- Dan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359044#359044 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/rst_intercom_dpdt_ptt_with_shields_981.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
Date: Nov 23, 2011
Not quite following you here. You've stated you're using DPDT switches for the PTT but you've depicted DPST in your sketch??? Bob McC > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list- > server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of messydeer > Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 4:08 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom > > > I read this in the RST 442 documentation this morning: > > Some push-to-transmit switches are designed only for use with headsets and radios > and leave the > microphone audio line (this is the "ring" portion of the microphone plug) connected to > the radio even > when the radio is not transmitting. Since some radios ground (disable) the > microphone audio in receive > mode, this type of PTT switch is unsuitable for use with an intercom system. If you > already have PTT > switches in the aircraft you may wish to try them with your intercom. If, however, you > find that you > lose intercom function (microphones are weak, distorted, or dead) when you plug the > "PILOT ICS" and > "COPILOT ICS" plugs into the COM radio via these PTT switches you will need to > either 1) change to a > model switch which opens the audio line when not transmitting or 2) consult your > local radio shop and > have a relay installed to achieve the same effect. > > I found out my Dynon DX15 handheld radio sends power to the mic only when > transmitting, so my last schematic wouldn't work. They suggested using DPDT > switches for the PTT's. Unfortunately, the gatekeeper to the engineer I was > corresponding with has cut me off, so I can't get any more answers from them. > > I drew what I hope will work for me. I would use 4 pieces of single conductor shielded > wire with the braided shield carrying ground current. The intercom has extra ground > wires coming out of it, so that's already set. An additional unshielded ground wire > would go from the intercom to the shell of the plug to the handheld radio. > > How does this look? > > BTW, is it common for radios to operate this way? > > -------- > Dan > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359044#359044 > > > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/rst_intercom_dpdt_ptt_with_shields_981.jp g > > > > > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "messydeer" <messydeer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2011
Hmm...I didn't think if they were or weren't single or double throws. Here's Dynon's quote: "I took a look at your schematic and I don't think this configuration will work with the DX15..." He's referring to the earlier 'RST intercom mic out ptt wiring.jpg' diagram. ".. DX15 only sends power to the microphone while it is transmitting. Even if you were to use a DPDT, I'm not sure what effect having two microphones in parallel will have. It may cause the audio to become distorted if the DX15 cannot provide enough power for both microphones. The headset adapter we sell only has connections for one headset, so we have never tried that configuration. If you were to use two DPDT switches to make sure only one headset mic is connected to the DX15 at a time, I think that will give you the best results." Below is the drawing in the RST manual that helped me understand what Dynon was saying, so I copied the switch diagram the same. I've reviewed the difference between a DPDT and SPDT. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought a DPDT functions the same as a DPST when the correct 2 of the 6 contacts are left open. Semantics aside, would my drawing work? -------- Dan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359090#359090 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/rst_dptdt_or_dpst_switch_for_ptt_178.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 24, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
At 11:35 PM 11/23/2011, you wrote: > >Hmm...I didn't think if they were or weren't single or double >throws. Here's Dynon's quote: > >"I took a look at your schematic and I don't think this >configuration will work with the DX15..." > >He's referring to the earlier 'RST intercom mic out ptt wiring.jpg' diagram. Unless he sits down to study the RST intercom internal wiring, he's shooting in the dark. Do you want both pilot and copilot headsets to access the DX15 transmit function? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "messydeer" <messydeer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2011
Dynon said "the DX15 only sends power to the mic when it is transmitting". I assume this means it's somehow disabled when receiving. Or is there a concern that the radio can't get power to the headsets? I thought they got power from the intercom. Weir said "some radios ground (disable) the microphone audio in receive mode, this type of PTT switch is unsuitable for use with an intercom system." I assumed then that the DX15 would have the mic grounded when receiving as the mechanism to cutoff power to it. I've never read how exactly the RST or any other intercom treats the mic out signal. I thought the VOX switch in the intercom transmitted the mic signal from the pilot's and copilot's mics to both the headsets whenever a certain threshold was reached. From what Weir has written, it sounds like there is no switch or gatekeeper between the intercom and mic out to the radio. Whenever one of the mics overcomes the VOX threshold, the signal goes through the mic out line to the radio. I also thought the intercom would function fine without being connected to the radio at all. There's power supplied to the intercom and the headphones and mics from the headsets are plugged into it. But Dynon said their radio might not have enough power to supply two headsets in parallel, sounding like the intercom does not supply enough power to the headsets. I don't know what needs to happen for a radio to transmit the mic signal. I thought engaging the PTT, shorted the tip to the shell, which caused the radio to transmit. Both the PTT button on the side of the handheld and the one in the stick acted the same way. I thought that once this was done, the radio would transmit whatever signal was coming in from the mic. If the intercom's VOX threshold has been exceeded while the PTT is pushed, the mic signal is sent to the radio and gets transmitted. I don't understand what Dynon means when he says the DX15 sends power to the mic. I know he says it does it only when transmitting, but I don't know what it means. It sounds like power from the radio to the radio's mic jack is needed as well as the signal from the mic out line from the intercom to the radios's mic jack. I'm sure the workings of a radio mic, its power, grounding and transmitting functions are fairly simple to understand, but I don't have that knowledge. I'd be terribly grateful if you could explain this to me, or where I could get this information. The thing that bothers me about wiring the PTT with a SPST switch, leaving the mic out line connected to the radio, is that both the designer of the intercom and that of the radio say this is not a good idea and suggested the DPDT solution. How could I test my radio, headsets, and intercom with my current SPST PTT switches? Would I just hook everything up, set the radio to some locally unused frequency and try it out? > Do you want both pilot and copilot headsets to access > the DX15 transmit function? > While I'm taking flight lessons, I can imagine it would be nice to have that capability for both me and the CFI. Afterwards, it seems unlikely I'd ever need it, except when there'd be another occasion for someone to be taught communication skills. -------- Dan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359121#359121 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Just A Few More Days To Make Your List Contribution...
There is less than a week left in this year's List Fund Raiser and only a few short days to grab one of the great Contribution Gifts available this year. Support is still significantly lagging behind last year at this point but hopefully it will pick up here towards the end. Please remember that it is solely the Contributions of List members that keeps the Lists up and running as there is no commercialism or advertising on the Matronics Lists and Forums. The List Contribution web site is secure, fast, and easy and you can use a credit card, Paypal: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, drop a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 I want to thank everyone that has already made a generous contribution to support the Lists! Thank you! Matt Dralle Matronics EMail List and Forum Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Zimmer" <stickandrudder1(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Schematic Drawings
Date: Nov 25, 2011
Bob, drawing Z-12 shows the conductor from the battery contactor to the battery bus as being a 12 AWG conductor of 6 inches length or less (rev. K =93 04/20/05). I understand the reason for the short conductor is for crash safety for the always on buss. However, I=99m using panel mounted circuit breakers for my three power busses (main, essential, battery) and so adhering to the 6 inch specification isn=99t possible. What are your thoughts of the addition of a properly rated circuit breaker or fusible link on the engine side of the firewall to protect the remaining conductor the length of which I estimate will be 36 to 48 inches depending on location of the electrical conductor firewall penetration? By the way, my Ebus will have one PMAG (one PMAG, and one conventional mag installation), clock, cabin lights, fuel boost, and switched Ebus alternate feed on the battery buss. Thanks ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Wire bundle Q
From: "chris Sinfield" <chris_sinfield(at)yahoo.com.au>
Date: Nov 25, 2011
Hi all I am running my wires and coax for my radio and intercom. I also have a Dynon Ext compass wires to run as well. If i run the compass and VHF coax together in the one bundle, will I get a heading change every time I TX? what about if I run the Intercom wires with the Compass wires will the same thing happen when I TX? I just have limited holes available to put wire bundles. Chris Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359253#359253 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Nov 25, 2011
Dan, Your schematic, "RST intercom DPDT PTT with shields.JPG" looks OK to me. The goal is to connect only one mic audio at a time to the handheld radio. Your schematic accomplishes that. However, I suggest that you use relays as shown on RST dwg 422-3060. Then the mic audio wires can be kept short instead of running them to the control sticks. Short wires are less likely to pick up interference. By using relays, there will be only half as many wires going to the control stick. Double pole relays will allow the hand-held x-mit key to be connected directly to ground instead of through a series diode. Who knows if the handheld transmitter will be keyed with voltage dropped across a diode? The relays will not carry much current. So miniature ones with gold plated contacts are best. RST drawing 442-4072 was confusing to me at first until I realized that the headsets plug into the intercom and the other plugs and jacks interface the intercom with the radio. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359259#359259 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "messydeer" <messydeer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Nov 25, 2011
Thanks, Joe :-) What you say makes sense about using a relay. I drew a couple diagrams, one with a single relay and another with a double relay, but I must be missing something, cuz it looks like both of them have the transmit key connected directly to ground. I also included another RST drawing. I put a diode in the same place in my drawings, but don't know why it's needed. I'm familiar with using a reversing diode normally put between the two coil leads, which hasn't been included. Why one and not the other? Another nice thing about using relays in my particular case is that I've already got the spst stick switches made and fitted, just waiting for wires. If I figure this relay thing out, looks like I'll still be able to use them :-) -------- Dan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359272#359272 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/ptt_single_pole_relay_168.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/ptt_double_pole_relay_931.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/apnote_03_rst_ptt_relay_136.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Wire bundle Q
At 04:32 PM 11/25/2011, you wrote: > > >Hi all >I am running my wires and coax for my radio and intercom. I also >have a Dynon Ext compass wires to run as well. > >If i run the compass and VHF coax together in the one bundle, will I >get a heading change every time I TX? what about if I run the >Intercom wires with the Compass wires will the same thing happen when I TX? >I just have limited holes available to put wire bundles. Run them all together. Folks who build devices for airplanes are or at least should be aware of potential hazards to proper functioning of their system. DO-160 and other certification protocols were crafted for the purpose of raising awareness of potential risks and proving that the system designer adequately compensates for those risks. In short, if any manufacturer specifically states that you should maintain "certain separation" from the wires of other systems, there is good reason to question their due diligence in designing the product. It is not difficult to craft products 99.99% immune from all expected risks. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Schematic Drawings
At 10:11 AM 11/25/2011, you wrote: >Bob, drawing Z-12 shows the conductor from the >battery contactor to the battery bus as being a >12 AWG conductor of 6 inches length or less >(rev. K 04/20/05). I understand the reason >for the short conductor is for crash safety for >the always on buss. However, Im using panel >mounted circuit breakers for my three power >busses (main, essential, battery) and so >adhering to the 6 inch specification isnt >possible. What are your thoughts of the >addition of a properly rated circuit breaker or >fusible link on the engine side of the firewall >to protect the remaining conductor the length of >which I estimate will be 36 to 48 inches >depending on location of the electrical >conductor firewall penetration? By the way, my >Ebus will have one PMAG (one PMAG, and one >conventional mag installation), clock, cabin >lights, fuel boost, and switched Ebus alternate feed on the battery buss. If your "battery" bus is on the panel, then it's not a battery bus but yet another bus tasked with different loads. Its long feeder would be fitted with another battery contactor. A battery bus is always hot, drives wires that are always hot but protected with fast devices rated below the legacy crash safety design rules . . . and located AT the battery. Once you depart from this convention, it's some other kind of bus that gets treated like other fat-wire fed busses in the airplane. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: KX170/175 Installation Manual
A coule years ago, somebody here on the List offered me a .pdf copy of the King KX170 installation manual. In the Matronics archives, there's a note where I posted availability of that document in the installation data feature of my website. Now, for some reason unbeknownst to me, I don't it it either on my website or on my hard-drive. If somebody has access to this document (or any other vintage installation manuals) in .pdf, I'd be pleased to have copies for sharing. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2011
From: rayj <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: KX170/175 Installation Manual
Bob, I have a kx 145 manual, but it's in paper and would take a while to scan. If you're interested, let me know and I'll try to get it scanned over the winter. Raymond Julian Kettle River, MN "And you know that I could have me a million more friends, and all I'd have to lose is my point of view." - John Prine On 11/25/2011 10:31 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > A coule years ago, somebody here on the List offered > me a .pdf copy of the King KX170 installation manual. > > In the Matronics archives, there's a note where I posted > availability of that document in the installation data > feature of my website. > > Now, for some reason unbeknownst to me, I don't it it > either on my website or on my hard-drive. > > If somebody has access to this document (or any > other vintage installation manuals) in .pdf, I'd > be pleased to have copies for sharing. > > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Nov 25, 2011
Dan, How about a circuit like this dwg attached? Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359284#359284 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/ptt_relays_239.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2011
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: KX170/175 Installation Manual
I have the pinout diagram, but not the install manual. On 11/25/2011 9:52 PM, rayj wrote: > > Bob, > > I have a kx 145 manual, but it's in paper and would take a while to > scan. If you're interested, let me know and I'll try to get it > scanned over the winter. > > Raymond Julian > >> >> >> A coule years ago, somebody here on the List offered >> me a .pdf copy of the King KX170 installation manual. >> >> In the Matronics archives, there's a note where I posted >> availability of that document in the installation data >> feature of my website. >> >> Now, for some reason unbeknownst to me, I don't it it >> either on my website or on my hard-drive. >> >> If somebody has access to this document (or any >> other vintage installation manuals) in .pdf, I'd >> be pleased to have copies for sharing. >> >> >> Bob . . . >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: KX170/175 Installation Manual
At 10:52 PM 11/25/2011, you wrote: > >Bob, > >I have a kx 145 manual, but it's in paper and would take a while to >scan. If you're interested, let me know and I'll try to get it >scanned over the winter. Yeah, that's a big job. I used to have access to an automatic scanner that would take a stack of paper and make a big .pdf of two sided paper copies. Sure was handy. If you'd like to see the work added to the body of data offered, it would be appreciated but don't let it get in the way of anything important. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "messydeer" <messydeer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Nov 25, 2011
Nice :-) Hadn't thought about this before, but I think the PTT relay grounds would go to a/c ground, and the other 4 would go to the radio jack sleeve, right? I also looked around Digikey.com for the relays. It was hard to match the relays with sockets that are sold separately. I'm browsing through Ebay, which may have something. -------- Dan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359290#359290 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Nov 26, 2011
About those diodes in the RST 442-3060 schematic. They block 12 volts from the relay coils from getting into the radio PTT circuit. > Hadn't thought about this before, but I think the PTT relay grounds would go to a/c ground, and the other 4 would go to the radio jack sleeve, right? Sounds OK to me. Another option besides socket mount relays are PC board mount. Digikey has many of those rated at less than 2 amps. PC type can be mounted on perf board. Radio Shack sells it. I have even seen relays taped to a wire bundle with no mounting hardware, not that I recommend doing that. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359308#359308 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 26, 2011
Subject: Re: Schematic Drawings
From: Paul Zimmer <paul.zimmer00(at)gmail.com>
I've changed my Email address that I subscribed to Matronics with, so this may screw up the continuity of the thread. Please see below. On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 9:38 AM, Paul Zimmer wrote : > > OK. So my always on battery bus isn't really a battery bus, rather an > always on non-battery-bus bus (a lame attempt at humor). So what to > do? Perhaps if you would briefly discuss the reasons behind the design > point for not bringing a non-switched fat-wire into the cabin would > facilitate understanding. > > From a neophyte's perspective (me), given the stated reason for not doing > so being crash safety, it seems the concern is one of the fat-wire being > compromised in a crash, possibly resulting in a short circuit, in a wire > capable of conducting a large number of electrons simultaneously. Not a > good thing when considering all of the bad things that could happen as a > result. Is this is a fair assessment of the concern or is there more to it > (you used the phrase "protected with fast devices", the meaning of which > escapes me)? > > If this *is* the primary design consideration, wouldn't the addition of a > circuit breaker (or other device) near the battery accomplish the same > thing, as long as the device was sized less than the current > carrying capacty of the fat-wire? The idea of additing another contactor > or relay makes no sense if the bus is to be always on, and if it's not > going to be always on, then the devices may as well be moved to either th e > main or essential bus as most appropriate. > > Thanks once again for your time and insight. > > Paul > On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < > nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > >> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com**> >> >> >> At 10:11 AM 11/25/2011, you wrote: >> >>> Bob, drawing Z-12 shows the conductor from the battery contactor to the >>> battery bus as being a 12 AWG conductor of 6 inches length or less (rev . K >>> ' 04/20/05). I understand the reason for the short conductor is for crash >>> safety for the always on buss. However, I=92m using panel mounted circ uit >>> breakers for my three power busses (main, essential, battery) and so >>> adhering to the 6 inch specification isn=92t possible. What are your >>> thoughts of the addition of a properly rated circuit breaker or fusible >>> link on the engine side of the firewall to protect the remaining conduc tor >>> the length of which I estimate will be 36 to 48 inches depending on >>> location of the electrical conductor firewall penetration? By the way , my >>> Ebus will have one PMAG (one PMAG, and one conventional mag installatio n), >>> clock, cabin lights, fuel boost, and switched Ebus alternate feed on th e >>> battery buss. >>> >> >> If your "battery" bus is on the panel, then it's not a battery >> bus but yet another bus tasked with different loads. Its >> long feeder would be fitted with another battery contactor. >> >> A battery bus is always hot, drives wires that are always >> hot but protected with fast devices rated below the legacy >> crash safety design rules . . . and located AT the battery. >> Once you depart from this convention, it's some other kind of bus >> that gets treated like other fat-wire fed busses in the >> airplane. >> >> >> Bob . . . >> >> =====**=================== ===========**= .com/contribution> =====**=================== ===========**= //www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List> =====**=================== ===========**= =====**=================== ===========**= .com/contribution> =====**=================== ===========**= >> >> >> >> > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "messydeer" <messydeer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Nov 26, 2011
K. Perf board? Is that the same as breadboard? I looked at that and saw the word 'temporary' and went no further. I looked up 'perforated board' at RS, which might be different. http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103804 I could insert the relay terminals through the holes and solder wires to them from the backside and use a couple spacer posts to keep the exposed solder off the metal panel? I also wonder about the relay terminal wiring diagram. The attached is typical. If taken literally, if power is applied to the coil, it would move only one of the switches and not the other. No power would mean 4 contacts 6 and 13 contacts 11. With power, either 4 would go to 8, or 13 would go to 9, but not both?? -------- Dan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359312#359312 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/dpdt_relay_terminal_wiring_164.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/perf_board_relay_mount_198.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Schematic Drawings
From: "tomcostanza" <Tom(at)CostanzaAndAssociates.com>
Date: Nov 26, 2011
> Once you depart from this convention, it's some other kind of bus > that gets treated like other fat-wire fed busses in the > airplane. Ditto Paul's question. And does this mean it should be protected? I didn't want to run 4 branch circuit wires through the firewall, so I put a small fuse panel inside the cabin, fed by a wire connected directly to the battery. I assume this should be protected. But Z-11 has a 6AWG wire from the battery contactor to the Main bus and shows no protection. (I'm soo confused!) Perhaps a review of "fat wire" protection would be in order. Or just point us to the relevant section in The Connection. Thanks. -------- Clear Skies, Tom Costanza Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359314#359314 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Thomas Barter" <kesleyelectric(at)iowatelecom.net>
Subject: SD-8 installation
Date: Nov 26, 2011
As I prepare to begin the installation of Z-13/8 on my airplane, a few questions arise. Figure Z-25, the SD-8 with self excitation, shows a 12 AWG and a 14 AWG lead connected to a single male Fast-On terminal on the bridge rectifier. Is this done with a single terminal, or is there a suitable "piggyback" terminal available that would facilitate this? I have seen such terminals around, but they are not high quality AMP style terminals. Is there another way to terminate the leads onto a single tab and still be able to separate them if either the SD-8 or regulator should need to be removed? Figure Z-25 shows the dynamo leads as a twisted pair, where as the other figures do not. Not at all difficult to do, but is it necessary? If a connector is needed for the four leads from the SD-8 voltage regulator, is a Molex type connector suitable for use with the regulator on the engine side of the firewall? Finally, the preliminary version R of Z-13/8 calls out an ATC style inline fuse instead of a fuselink at the battery contactor. Any further insight on this matter? Regards, Tom Barter Kesley, IA Avid Magnum O-320 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Nov 26, 2011
Different manufacturers could have various names for their products. To me, a breadboard has spring loaded sockets to plug parts into. A perforated board is what I had in mind, similar to the Radio Shack one that you referenced. Although soldered wires on the bottom of the perf board do not look good compared to a printed circuit board, it is a quick and easy way to make a circuit. But nobody is going to see it anyway. The important thing is that the project is mechanically and electrically sound. There are also ready-made generic printed circuit boards that may or may not have traces suitable for mounting relays. Digikey sells perforated board, i.e, 3396K-ND, and V2018-ND. See http://media.digikey.com/pdf/Data%20Sheets/Vector%20PDFs/Vectorbord%20Circbord.pdf It appears that V2018-ND has strips of copper on the back side for soldering parts and wires that are located on the top side. Perhaps someone who has experience with these boards will comment. If suitable, this type of board will make a nice looking project. The wiring diagram that you attached looks like one that might be printed on the side of a relay. It is a schematic to show how to connect wires. A schematic does not necessarily show the actual physical layout. I would be very surprised if both sets of contacts did not operate simultaneously. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359324#359324 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "messydeer" <messydeer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Nov 26, 2011
Yes, I just saw those boards at digikey. Of the two you mentioned, one is insulated, no plated holes. The other says 'continuous bus', which may not be what I need. At least I don't understand it. There's also another on the circbord.pdf link, #8029, which has plated holes. If I used the insulated non-plated one, soldering the terminals from the backside would hold the relay to the board in tension. With the plated one, I'd also have the terminals soldered directly to the plated board. Would the non-plated board connection be strong enough? -------- Dan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359332#359332 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 26, 2011
From: Jeff Page <jpx(at)qenesis.com>
Subject: Re: KX170/175 Installation Manual
Bob, I just sent the KX170/175 Installation Manual to your email address. Jeff Page Dream Aircraft Tundra #10 > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: KX170/175 Installation Manual > A couple years ago, somebody here on the List offered > me a .pdf copy of the King KX170 installation manual. > > In the Matronics archives, there's a note where I posted > availability of that document in the installation data > feature of my website. > > Now, for some reason unbeknownst to me, I don't it it > either on my website or on my hard-drive. > > If somebody has access to this document (or any > other vintage installation manuals) in .pdf, I'd > be pleased to have copies for sharing. > > > Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 26, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
At 11:21 AM 11/26/2011, you wrote: > >Different manufacturers could have various names for their >products. To me, a breadboard has spring loaded sockets to plug >parts into. A perforated board is what I had in mind, similar to >the Radio Shack one that you referenced. Although soldered wires on >the bottom of the perf board do not look good compared to a printed >circuit board, it is a quick and easy way to make a circuit. But >nobody is going to see it anyway. The important thing is that the >project is mechanically and electrically sound. I've dug out the internal schematics for the RST intercom and discovered that this is an INTERCOM with no integration-friendly features for tying it to one or more radios. As an intercom, I'm mystified as to the installation instructions that recommend opening the mic audio leads to each mic along with the PTT signal. I.e. a spring loaded, 2-pole, normally open push-button DPST OFF-(ON). If one adheres to this configuration, then it seems that the value of an adjustable silencing system (VOX, squelch, etc) is negated . . . the existence of these switches in the mic audio leads makes it a Push-to-Talk Intercom . . . not a VOX intercom. A study of the microphone input circuits to the intercom shows that power to run the microphone's electronics is provided internally to the intercom via the 2.2K resistors tied to the mic leads from the 8v supply. http://www.aeroelectric.com/Installation_Data/RST/RST-442.pdf Emacs! However, there are PILOT MIC OUT and COPILOT MIC OUT pins offered that "loop through" the intercom to service any other audio need . . . ostensibly a comm radio. This presents a bit of a quandry for the system integrator. To allow both mics of a two-pilot system to access the radio, one needs to tie the two signals together. Which puts 2 mic power sources in the intercom arm wrestling with each other and the third power source in the radio. Of course, breaking the mic audio lines with the PTT switch breaks one of those pathways while the system is in use via the other pathway. My suggestion: No relays, no DPST, OFF-(ON) buttons. Find connectors that mate with the pendant cables coming out of the intercom (Molex or Mate-m-Lock?) and set all that octopus of headset cables aside. Wire microphones as always-hot signal leads to their respective inputs on the intercom. Use the VOX system to control background noise when not speaking. Take the mic audio out leads from the intercom to a SPDT, ON-ON switch so that audio TO the DX-15 mic can be either pilot, co-pilot but not both. Wire as many single pole, SPST OFF-(ON) push buttons as desired to the DX-15 PTT line. I'll convert this description to a sketch as soon as I get some other chores taken care of. This is why the Dynon folks seemed to get stand-offish when asked for advice. Without having both access to internal working details of the intercom -AND- time to offer what amounts to gratis, customized system integration services, the guy didn't have a clue as to what MIGHT work. Even my suggestion has some risk that will have to shake out on the bench: While talking on the radio, the 2.2K mic-power bias resistors will be in parallel with what ever power comes from the DX-15. I'm surprised that those resistors are so large . . . their deleterious effects on the DX-15 audio may well be minimal. At the same time, it's possible that audio heard over the intercom will take a jump in perceived volume when transmitting. If that happens, we'll need to go to plan-B. In any case, I think a y-adapter only adds to the snarl of snakes generally associated with loose-in-the-cockpit intercom systems. It seems prudent to simplify this wiring to the greatest extent possible. It would be helpful to know the style of connector depicted in the RST drawing as "P101". A close-up photo would be useful. I think Jim was fond of the Molex mini nylon connectors back then but I need to confirm this. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 26, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: SD-8 installation
At 10:22 AM 11/26/2011, you wrote: >As I prepare to begin the installation of Z-13/8 on my airplane, a >few questions arise. > > Figure Z-25, the SD-8 with self excitation, shows a 12 AWG and > a 14 AWG lead connected to a single male Fast-On terminal on the > bridge rectifier. Is this done with a single terminal, or is there > a suitable "piggyback" terminal available that would > facilitate this? I have seen such terminals around, but they are > not high quality AMP style terminals. Is there another way to > terminate the leads onto a single tab and still be able to separate > them if either the SD-8 or regulator should need to be removed? A yellow-PDGE terminal will accept both wires in a single crimp. http://search.digikey.com/us/en/products/696371-1/696371-1-ND/2258865 > > Figure Z-25 shows the dynamo leads as a twisted pair, where as > the other figures do not. Not at all difficult to do, but is it necessary? no, but keep them together. > > If a connector is needed for the four leads from the SD-8 > voltage regulator, is a Molex type connector suitable for use with > the regulator on the engine side of the firewall? I'd rather see knife splices and heat shrink in those leads than any sort of connector. http://search.digikey.com/us/en/products/320566/A27474-ND/292649 > > Finally, the preliminary version R of Z-13/8 calls out an ATC > style inline fuse instead of a fuselink at the battery > contactor. Any further insight on this matter? ATC30 in-line is fine and will be recommened in the future. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "messydeer" <messydeer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Nov 26, 2011
> As an intercom, I'm mystified as to the installation > instructions that recommend opening the mic audio > leads to each mic along with the PTT signal. I.e. > a spring loaded, 2-pole, normally open push-button > DPST OFF-(ON). > > If one adheres to this configuration, then it seems > that the value of an adjustable silencing > system (VOX, squelch, etc) is negated . . . the > existence of these switches in the mic audio leads > makes it a Push-to-Talk Intercom . . . not a VOX > intercom. I thought this and all intercoms could function independently from the radio. Thought it would work even if there wasn't a radio connected. The vox and/or squelch of the intercom would work in a closed system between the two headsets. I also thought placing these switches for the PTT's and mic's would not effect the intercom, since they are added between the intercom and the radio, not between the intercom and the headsets. > I'll > convert this description to a sketch as soon > as I get some other chores taken care of. This would be very helpful. I tore apart the intercom box a few days ago and plan to mount just the squelch, volume and pilot/all controls permanently to the panel. I'll cut off all the wires to the Molex connections to be able to put everything behind the panel. The only cables coming out into view would be those connecting directly with the handheld radio mounted at the corner of the instrument panel and side panel. This would be the power, mic/ptt, and headphone, along with the antenna cable. -------- Dan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359345#359345 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/rst_442_intercom_connections_458.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Nov 26, 2011
> As an intercom, I'm mystified as to the installation instructions that recommend opening the mic audio leads to each mic along with the PTT signal. I.e. a spring loaded, 2-pole, normally open push-button DPST OFF-(ON). > > If one adheres to this configuration, then it seems that the value of an adjustable silencing system (VOX, squelch, etc) is negated . . . the existence of these switches in the mic audio leads makes it a Push-to-Talk Intercom . . . not a VOX intercom. Bob, The RST documentation makes it hard to understand whether it is referring to MIC audio input to the intercom or the audio output from the intercom. It took me awhile to realize that the questions that Dan was asking was about the output interface between the intercom and the hand-held radio. The headsets and MICs are plugged directly into the intercom. So as far as the intercom is concerned, the MICs are always connected. The relay circuit that I suggested is an interface between the intercom and the hand-held radio. The relays do not open the headset MIC circuit to the intercom. The MICs are always hot. The relays choose which intercom audio output to connect to the hand-held radio. > . . .set all that octopus of headset cables aside . . . . It seems prudent to simplify this wiring to the greatest extent possible. I agree with you. It reminds me of the rat's nest of wires behind my computer. :D Perhaps Dan will figure out a way to install it so that all wires are behind the panel except for the cable that plugs into the radio. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359347#359347 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Nov 26, 2011
Dan, I just noticed that Digikey has a wiring diagram of the V2018-ND board. http://www.vectorelect.com/Product/Circbord/Layout/8022%20Layout.pdf The pins on a relay like Z768-ND will match the holes of the board. Scratch a vertical line through the copper traces. Mount the relay so that it straddles the scratched line. Insert wires from the same side as the relay. Solder the relays and wires to copper side of the board. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359349#359349 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 26, 2011
Subject: Re: Schematic Drawings
From: Paul Zimmer <paul.zimmer00(at)gmail.com>
Tom, I'm not sure what you mean when you ask if it should br protected. I'm suggesting a breaker on the forward side of the firewall, protecting a fat wire that would enter the cabin, powering an always on "Battery Bus". On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 11:08 AM, tomcostanza wrote: > > > > > Once you depart from this convention, it's some other kind of bus > > that gets treated like other fat-wire fed busses in the > > airplane. > > > Ditto Paul's question. And does this mean it should be protected? I > didn't want to run 4 branch circuit wires through the firewall, so I put a > small fuse panel inside the cabin, fed by a wire connected directly to the > battery. I assume this should be protected. But Z-11 has a 6AWG wire from > the battery contactor to the Main bus and shows no protection. (I'm soo > confused!) > > Perhaps a review of "fat wire" protection would be in order. Or just > point us to the relevant section in The Connection. > > Thanks. > > -------- > Clear Skies, > Tom Costanza > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359314#359314 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 26, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: KX170/175 Installation Manual
At 12:01 PM 11/26/2011, you wrote: > >Bob, > >I just sent the KX170/175 Installation Manual to your email address. Thanks! NOTICE TO ALL READERS . . . THE MISSING FILE IS RETRIEVED. CONSIDER THE REQUEST FOR REPLACEMENT SATISFIED. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 27, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Please Make A Contribution Today...
Dear Listers, A quick reminder that November is the annual List Fund Raiser and the List of Contributors is quickly approching. The Matronics Lists are 100% member supported and all of the operational costs are provided for by your Contributions during this time of the year. Your personal Contribution makes a big difference and keeps all of the Matronics Email Lists and Forums completely ad-free. Please make your Contribution today to keep these services up and running! http://www.matronics.com/contribution or by dropping a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 Thank you in advance! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List and Forum Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Maintenance manual for King KT76A?
From: "Brantel" <bchesteen(at)hughes.net>
Date: Nov 27, 2011
Anyone got the Maintenance manual for King KT76A in PDF? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359456#359456 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 27, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
At 11:28 PM 11/25/2011, you wrote: > >Nice :-) > >Hadn't thought about this before, but I think the PTT relay grounds >would go to a/c ground, and the other 4 would go to the radio jack >sleeve, right? > >I also looked around Digikey.com for the relays. It was hard to >match the relays with sockets that are sold separately. I'm browsing >through Ebay, which may have something. This relay . . . http://search.digikey.com/us/en/products/G5V-2-DC12/Z768-ND/87821 is suited to the task and fits in this socket http://search.digikey.com/us/en/products/4-1571552-2/4-1571552-2-ND/2258924 Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "messydeer" <messydeer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Nov 27, 2011
Thanks, Bob :-) I understand these relays can be soldered to a perfboard. Joe had mentioned this, and I sorta forgot about the socket. Is there an advantage in using a socket, or could the relay be just as easily soldered directly onto a perfboard? I'd only be getting two of them and they're real cheap, so cost isn't an issue. -------- Dan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359477#359477 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Nov 27, 2011
Attached is a schematic that I drew of a single relay interface between RST-442 & Com radio. Only one MIC can be connected to the radio at a time. I do not know if having the co-pilot MIC always connected to the radio hurts anything. What do you think? Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359478#359478 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/rst_442_173.gif ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Nov 27, 2011
> Is there an advantage in using a socket, or could the relay be just as easily soldered directly onto a perfboard? I think it is a matter of personal preference. A socket will make it easy to replace a defective relay. The relay can not be damaged by heat from soldering if it is plugged into a socket. Sometimes troubleshooting is made easier by unplugging a component from a socket. But I prefer to solder parts directly to a PC board without using a socket, especially if subject to harsh environmental conditions. Then I do not have to worry about a bad connection between the part and the socket. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359481#359481 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Nov 27, 2011
See attached picture that shows how a perf board with copper strips can be used to make a project without having to acid etch a copper clad PC board. While not suitable for complex circuits, simple circuits can be crafted by adding jumpers to the component side of the board. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359486#359486 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/vectorbord_100.gif ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 27, 2011
From: Paul McAllister <l_luv2_fly(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Source for Wire wrap PCB stakes
Hi All,=0A=0AWay back a while, wire wrapping was all the rage and I used to be able to buy a PCB wire wrap pin.- I am looking for these again and th e nearest thing I can find is ED5002-ND from Digikey.- Apart from the fac t that these are .33cents each, they at not what I am looking for.- The E D5002-ND appears to be a wire wrap socket.- All I am looking for is a sim ple stake that is soldered to the board as a wire wrap post.=0A=0AIf anyone could direct me to a source I'd appreciate it.=0A=0AThanks,- Paul=0A ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 27, 2011
From: "MikeRV6-A" <mikerv6a@ao-cs.com>
Subject: Re: Source for Wire wrap PCB stakes
You can find several sizes of wire wrap pins from Keystone Electronics in part numbers 5070 through 5083. Another option is purchase of wire wrap DIP IC sockets, then cut pins off the sockets to obtain single pins. Mike > Hi All, > > Way back a while, wire wrapping was all the rage and I used to be able to > buy a PCB wire wrap pin. I am looking for these again and the nearest > thing I can find is ED5002-ND from Digikey. Apart from the fact that > these are .33cents each, they at not what I am looking for. The ED5002-ND > appears to be a wire wrap socket. All I am looking for is a simple stake > that is soldered to the board as a wire wrap post. > > If anyone could direct me to a source I'd appreciate it. > > Thanks, Paul > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "The Kuffels" <kuffel(at)cyberport.net>
Subject: Re: Source for Wire wrap PCB stakes
Date: Nov 28, 2011
Paul, << PCB wire wrap pin. I am looking for these again and the nearest thing I can find is ED5002-ND from Digikey. Apart from the fact that these are .33cents each >> Mouser sells the Vector wire wrap pins. 574-T68/C is 100 bifurcated posts for $10.71 or 574-T46-4-9/C straight posts for $10.45. Tom Kuffel ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 28, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
At 03:16 PM 11/27/2011, you wrote: > >See attached picture that shows how a perf board with copper strips >can be used to make a project without having to acid etch a copper >clad PC board. While not suitable for complex circuits, simple >circuits can be crafted by adding jumpers to the component side of the board. Another options to consider . . . Emacs! You could lay out a board like that shown above (actually, the layout is already done) and order them from Express PCB. Minimum order yields 18 boards in 3 days for about $69. This board would accept a solder-cup D-sub along one edge and mate to 9-pin de-sub of your choice. The board is supported at one end on the mating connector. The other end with a screw and spacer. Alternatively, one could downsize the d-sub connectors like I did here http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/macservo/macservo.html . . . and finish off the installation with a simple, over-all cover of heat shrink where the relay assembly is simply tied to a wire bundle. In this instance, I think I'd solder the relay to the board as opposed to setting it in a socket. This process would yield a very compact relay assembly with robust construction, very low assembly time and stone simple (d-sub) interface to your radio. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Schematic Drawings
From: "nuckollsr" <bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Date: Nov 28, 2011
See paragraph 1357 and 1361 in http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/FAA/Part23_electrical_A.pdf These conventions in the certified world are generally promoted in the z-figures by suggesting that battery busses be located at the battery. Protection for always hot feeders not exceed 5A in breaker or 7A in fuse or be fitted with the functional equivalent of a pilot controlled disconnect as illustrated in . . . http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z32K.pdf My recommendations are based on what I know I could get certified on an T/C aircraft. Just how far afield one chooses to go in the experimental aircraft world is up to the builder. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359626#359626 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 29, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Just Two Days Left - Still Way Behind...
Dear Listers, There are just two more days left in this years List Fund Raiser. Over the last few weeks I have received some really nice comments from members on what the Lists have meant to them. I have included some of them below. Please read over the comments and ponder on your own feelings about the Lists and the support and camaraderie you have found here. We are still way behind last year in terms of the number of contributions. I really want to keep providing these services to the homebuilt community, but it take resources. Since there's no advertising budget or deep pockets to keep the operation a float, its solely your generosity during the Fund Raiser that keeps things going. Please make a Contribution today. If you've been putting off showing your support for the Lists, now is the time to do it! Make a contribution with a Credit Card or though PayPal at that Matronics Contribution web site: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, drop a check in the mail: Matronics / Matt Dralle 581 Jeannie Way Livermore, CA 94550 Thank you in advance for your support! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ==================== A Few List Member Comments ===================== I get a lot of useful information and satisfaction from belonging to your groups. Somehow you foster a great sense of community without the baggage that accompanies other lists. Dave S. We do appreciate you running the lists spam and advertising free. Jeff P. I am celebrating my first flight day and you and the lists deserve a thanks since without it my build would have taken twice as long. Chris L. I enjoy the list. Have my morning coffee with it! Buddy M. Your lists are the best investment of my time and money, bar none, when it comes to interfacing with my fellow amateur builders. Owen B. Keep it going!! Thanks for taking over. Wallace J. I enjoy the Pietenpol List a lot. Malcolm Z. Thanks for your great site! As a new CJ-6 owner, your web site is an invaluable resource. Ken B. Great informational source. Fred S. Thanks for doing this! Lance G. Thank you for the service i do enjoy the many hours I use on line with the banter/ serious technical items. Noel G. Thanks for the years of builder support. Roy H. Great forum! Roger C. Thank you VERY MUCH, Matt, for carrying on with this great service. The "Europa" community really appreciates it. All the best, Svein - now celebrating 10 years as a subscriber, I think! Svein J. Matt, I'm building a much nicer and safer airplane because of your efforts. Robert D. 21 years for you 9 years for me on the Zenith lists. Could not imagine building and flying without Matronics. Brian U. Thanks for ALL the hard work and time you put into maintaining these forums. As an EAA Tech counselor I recommend them often. Paul M. This Pietenpol list is a huge part of the motivation that keeps me working on my project. This has been a great place for meeting like minded folks and getting help for the difficult parts. Thomas S. Thanks for the excellent service Matt. Frank S. Matt, I'm a Sonex building, but I have to say that the Piet group is without a doubt the most interesting. Ken M. I can't tell you how much I appreciate the Piet List. This is one of my sanity lifelines! Daniel H. Your site has provided us over the years with excellent connections to others for advice. Good job! Bob M. Kolb List is my #1 source! Henry V. Matt, you do a great job with this site. I've been with it since the beginning! John M. I am very grateful for all of your excellent work on the List. Arthur L. Thank you for the service you provide us all! Nicholas C. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 12 outputs on a 24v system
From: "donjohnston" <don(at)numa.aero>
Date: Nov 29, 2011
I'm going to need some 12v outputs on my 24v electrical system and I ran across these. http://cdn.vicorpower.com/documents/datasheets/ds_megamod.pdf Does anyone have any first hand experience with these? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359704#359704 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>
Subject: 12 outputs on a 24v system
Date: Nov 29, 2011
Why not consider using two 12V batteries in series and take 12v off one? Jay -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of donjohnston Sent: 29 November 2011 03:26 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: 12 outputs on a 24v system I'm going to need some 12v outputs on my 24v electrical system and I ran across these. http://cdn.vicorpower.com/documents/datasheets/ds_megamod.pdf Does anyone have any first hand experience with these? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359704#359704 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PTT Y adapter for RST intercom
From: "messydeer" <messydeer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Nov 29, 2011
Thanks, Bob and Joe :-) I've ordered the relay and continuous bus perfboard. I'll post some pics when I get it assembled. I also was wondering about the power supply. I'll wire the a/c 12v supply to the wire connected to the BI terminal on the intercom circuit board. There is also an option to add a 9v battery for backup, connected to the BO terminal. I have a 1.2 Ah 12v battery that is used for my EFIS backup supply and wonder if I could wire this to the BO terminal in place of the 9v. Would I need a resistor between my 12v backup battery and the BO terminal, to drop it down to 9v? If so, how do I figure the size? How would I know the intercom is drawing current from the main 12v supply (BI) and not the backup (BO)? Even though the small 12v backup battery gets recharged by the main a/c 12v supply, seems I'd want the a/c 12v supply to provide power for the intercom. -------- Dan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359725#359725 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/rst_power_supply_schematic_186.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 29, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: 12 outputs on a 24v system
At 10:30 AM 11/29/2011, you wrote: > >Why not consider using two 12V batteries in series and take 12v off one? This has been tried . . . and never works. The batteries become 'unbalanced' with the top one being over-charged and the bottom under-charged. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 29, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: 12 outputs on a 24v system
At 07:25 AM 11/29/2011, you wrote: > >I'm going to need some 12v outputs on my 24v electrical system and I >ran across these. > >http://cdn.vicorpower.com/documents/datasheets/ds_megamod.pdf > >Does anyone have any first hand experience with these? How much total power do you need . . . and for what systems? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 30, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: [Please Read] - Last Official Day of List Fund Raiser!
Dear Listers, Its November 30th and that means a couple of things. Its my birthday again, 48 of them, in fact! But it also means that its that last official day of the Matronics Email List Fund Raiser! If you been jones'n over one of those really nice incentive gifts now is the time to jump on one!! If you've been meaning to make a Contribution this month but have been putting it off for some reason, NOW is the time! I will be posting the List of Contributors in a few days, so you'll probably want to be known as a person that supported the Lists! I want to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution this year in support of our Lists. It is your generosity that keeps this operation running and I don't ever forget it. Hopefully everyone feels the same. Below are a few more of the nice comments from Listers I've received this year. Please read them over and see if you don't agree. The List Contribution Web Site is fast and easy. Please support our habit by making your Contribution right now: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, by dropping a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 Thank you to all in advance! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ==================== A Few More List Member Comments ===================== I never would have ended up with the great flying airplane I have without the help of people on the Pietenpol list. Thanks for giving us the medium to communicate our questions, tips and suggestions. Matt P. Thanks for the hard work and maintaining the site commercial free. Good luck for the future and this site has been a source of great friendship. Peter B. It is a great resource. Jim G. Thanks so much for your continuing support of the homebuilt community. Gerald A. You are doing an outstanding job running the list's. Keep it going. Bill V. Thanks for keeping this valuable information source going. Best of all the forums. George A. Another Great year on the RV-List! Thomas E. Still the best source of information (& opinion) for builders on a wide range of issues. Martin H. Matt, thanks for hosting and maintaining the lists! Rumen D. It is a great resource. Bryan R. Thanks for your continuing interest in Van's RV8 kitplanes. Peter C. I'm no longer building or flying but like to keep in touch with the current generation of builders. Best wishes to a great list system. Gerry C. A great list that is most useful for builders. Graham H. Thanks for this wonderful tool! Ralph C. Thanks for a great service to the experimental aviation community. Douglas D. Great topics and loads of useful info keep the subject matter relevant. George H. Thanks for keeping this going. Richard R. Great facility and well managed. Victor F. Thanks for a great service. John D. Thank you for you time and efforts they have made Aviation a better place for everyone. Jim W. I still enjoy getting the list in the morning. Don M. You provide a great resource. David M. You have probably saved a few necks over the years. Robert F. Thank you for being there. Benjamin B. You perform a great service. Bruce M. Thank you for providing this invaluable resource. William D. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 30, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Last Official Day of List Fund Raiser!
At 02:17 AM 11/30/2011, you wrote: > >I want to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution >this year in support of our Lists. It is your generosity that keeps >this operation running and I don't ever forget it. Hopefully >everyone feels the same. May I suggest that the vast majority of what is exchanged here on the Lists is truly "news you can use" . . . words and ideas that advance your understanding and the quality of your labors. I encourage everyone to compare the value for the exchange of words and ideas here on the Lists with the value of words and ideas exchanged on television and what purports to be responsible journalism. Consider the search engine that provides nearly instant access to refinement of ideas that go back many years. Recall that the #1 commodity of exchange is $time$. Our time as individuals will command a wide range of offers in the free market exchange of value. But everybody's time shares a common limitation . . . FACILITY. The world's most talented neurosurgeon's time isn't worth a plugged nickle without a facility in which to practice that talent. Without a facility for sharing, all of the ideas and new discoveries within our community are limited to the benefit of a small, local populace. The same idea has to be discovered and re-discovered by countless others because the first discovery is not disseminated nor is it recorded for posterity. The words entered here are shared with a world wide community in mere seconds and at no particular expense to the writer. In the grand scheme of things, our collective $time$ as participants on the Lists is worth thousands of times more than the cost of the hardware used to disseminate those ideas . . . but for lack of perhaps a single light bulb, a whole library of books becomes instantly inaccessible. For the price of a few morning rags from the machine in front of the coffee shop, you can ease the out-of-pocket burden for those who keep the lights on. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Splicing ARINC and serial shielded wires...
From: "jayb" <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Nov 30, 2011
I have a vendor built radio/efis harness that is composed almost entirely of shielded wire. Since receiving the harness I decided to add a new component that requires both ARINC and RS232 Serial signals. Since there's no audio in the mix... Is it acceptable to splice into shielded ARINC and/or RS232 Serial wires using standard aircraft quality wire? That means there would be no shield between splice to new widget. Or should I try to match the shielded wire with the same; carrying through the shield, etc? A related question... Would it be a poor choice to intermix ARINC and Serial in the same shielded wire bundle? I don't know how sensitive either protocol is to noise. Thanks, Jay Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359949#359949 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 30, 2011
Subject: Re: [Please Read] - Last Official Day of List Fund
Raiser!
From: Paul Zimmer <paul.zimmer00(at)gmail.com>
Matt. You, Mark Twain and I have something in common, although Mark and I have a few years on you (he a few more than me). Happy birthday!! Keep up the good work. On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Matt Dralle wrote: > > > > Dear Listers, > > Its November 30th and that means a couple of things. Its my birthday > again, 48 of them, in fact! But it also means that its that last official > day of the Matronics Email List Fund Raiser! If you been jones'n over one > of those really nice incentive gifts now is the time to jump on one!! > > If you've been meaning to make a Contribution this month but have been > putting it off for some reason, NOW is the time! > > I will be posting the List of Contributors in a few days, so you'll > probably want to be known as a person that supported the Lists! > > I want to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution this > year in support of our Lists. It is your generosity that keeps this > operation running and I don't ever forget it. Hopefully everyone feels the > same. > > Below are a few more of the nice comments from Listers I've received this > year. Please read them over and see if you don't agree. > > The List Contribution Web Site is fast and easy. Please support our habit > by making your Contribution right now: > > http://www.matronics.com/contribution > > Or, by dropping a personal check in the mail to: > > Matt Dralle / Matronics > 581 Jeannie Way > Livermore CA 94550 > > Thank you to all in advance! > > Matt Dralle > Matronics Email List Administrator > > > ==================== A Few More List Member Comments ===================== > > I never would have ended up with the great flying airplane I have without > the help of people on the Pietenpol list. Thanks for giving us the medium > to communicate our questions, tips and suggestions. > > Matt P. > > Thanks for the hard work and maintaining the site commercial free. Good > luck for the future and this site has been a source of great friendship. > > Peter B. > It is a great resource. > > Jim G. > > Thanks so much for your continuing support of the homebuilt community. > > Gerald A. > > You are doing an outstanding job running the list's. Keep it going. > > Bill V. > > Thanks for keeping this valuable information source going. Best of all > the forums. > > George A. > > Another Great year on the RV-List! > > Thomas E. > > Still the best source of information (& opinion) for builders on a wide > range of issues. > > Martin H. > > Matt, thanks for hosting and maintaining the lists! > > Rumen D. > > It is a great resource. > > Bryan R. > > Thanks for your continuing interest in Van's RV8 kitplanes. > > Peter C. > > I'm no longer building or flying but like to keep in touch with the current > generation of builders. Best wishes to a great list system. > > Gerry C. > > A great list that is most useful for builders. > > Graham H. > > Thanks for this wonderful tool! > > Ralph C. > > Thanks for a great service to the experimental aviation community. > > Douglas D. > > Great topics and loads of useful info keep the subject matter relevant. > > George H. > > Thanks for keeping this going. > > Richard R. > > Great facility and well managed. > > Victor F. > > Thanks for a great service. > > John D. > > Thank you for you time and efforts they have made Aviation a better > place for everyone. > > Jim W. > > I still enjoy getting the list in the morning. > > Don M. > > You provide a great resource. > > David M. > > You have probably saved a few necks over the years. > > Robert F. > > Thank you for being there. > > Benjamin B. > > You perform a great service. > > Bruce M. > > Thank you for providing this invaluable resource. > > William D. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Zimmer" <stickandrudder1(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Typo
Date: Nov 30, 2011
Bob, note that the section describing figure Z-10/8 on page Z-3 of revision 12A refers to the schematic as Z-13/8. A minor correction for the next revision. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 01, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Typo
At 09:38 PM 11/30/2011, you wrote: >Bob, note that the section describing figure Z-10/8 on page Z-3 of >revision 12A refers to the schematic as Z-13/8. A minor correction >for the next revision. Fixed it in the Rev13 work document. Thanks! Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: EFIS brownout capacitor
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Dec 01, 2011
Bob and all, Is it feasible to provide brownout protection for an EFIS during engine cranking with a large electrolytic capacitor? A capacitor would not have to be replaced periodically and it might not weigh as much as a backup battery. Each brand of EFIS might have a different supply voltage requirement. But for this discussion, let's assume that 9 volts are required to prevent the EFIS from rebooting. How long is the battery voltage below 9 volts when starting the engine? The starter will draw the most current when it is first energized. Once the starter is rotating, back EMF will reduce the current draw. So for the first several milliseconds, the battery voltage will be at the lowest. If a large capacitor could support the EFIS voltage for one second, would that be long enough? If an EFIS draws 1 amp, what size capacitor would be required? Some EFISs have dedicated terminals for a backup battery. I assume that those EFISs have an internal diode to prevent discharge of the backup battery into the aircraft electrical system. Otherwise an external diode is needed. Could a capacitor provide brownout protection? Or would it have to be so large as to make it impractical? Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=359987#359987 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 01, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: EFIS brownout capacitor
At 02:44 AM 12/1/2011, you wrote: Bob and all, Is it feasible to provide brownout protection for an EFIS during engine cranking with a large electrolytic capacitor? A capacitor would not have to be replaced periodically and it might not weigh as much as a backup battery. Each brand of EFIS might have a different supply voltage requirement. But for this discussion, let's assume that 9 volts are required to prevent the EFIS from rebooting. How long is the battery voltage below 9 volts when starting the engine? The starter will draw the most current when it is first energized. Once the starter is rotating, back EMF will reduce the current draw. So for the first several milliseconds, the battery voltage will be at the lowest. If a large capacitor could support the EFIS voltage for one second, would that be long enough? Probably. It might even be as short as 250 milliseconds. See: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/99_Saturn_SL1_2.gif http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/99_Saturn_SL1.jpg http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/95_GMC_Safari_3.gif http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/95_GMC_Safari_1.gif The traces above were taken from the two vehicles we were driving at the time. The Saturn has a PM starter motor, the Safari has a wound field. The larger depression of battery voltage in the Saturn trace can be partially attributed to the the greater inrush current for the PM motor. If an EFIS draws 1 amp, what size capacitor would be required? Some EFISs have dedicated terminals for a backup battery. I assume that those EFISs have an internal diode to prevent discharge of the backup battery into the aircraft electrical system. Otherwise an external diode is needed. Could a capacitor provide brownout protection? Or would it have to be so large as to make it impractical? It's been done. Consider that the rate of change across a capacitor is defined by V/S = A/F 1 Amp of charge (or discharge) on a 1 Farad capacitor produces a voltage change rate of 1 Volt per Second. Of course, few devices draw a constant current as the voltage varies so this relationship has a practical limitation that falls apart for more than short durations. Of course, that's what we're talking about. Of the top of our head, we could estimate that a capacitor charged to .7 volts below battery voltage (12.5 - .7) = 11.8 volts. The goal is to limit voltage drop to 2.8 volts over a .25 second interval So, V/S = A/F (V/S)F = A F = AS/V = .25/2.8 = .09 Farads There's an RC vs. V calculator at http://www.bowdenshobbycircuits.info/rc.htm which can be used to do the same math. In this case, plug in some essentially constant current combination, say 100 volts and 0.1K ohms (1A). Then plug in time of 250mS and voltage change of 2.8 volts. The tool calculates 88029.7978 microFarads or 0.088F. Unfortunately, fat-caps don't come in the range of incremental sizes as their smaller cousins. Also, 16V ratings is in the realm of high voltage for a super-cap. Here's a device that would fit our hypothetical: http://search.digikey.com/us/en/products/BZ12GA124ZAB/478-6281-ND/2506257 It's a 120 milliFarad device described in this data sheet: http://www.avx.com/docs/Catalogs/bestcap.pdf This exercise suggests to the practicality of using more 'active' forms of bus voltage regulation. If I were writing specs for a modern EFIS system where design goals called for improved immunity to starter brownout, I'd call for the switchmode power supply output to be stable down to 7 or 8 volts. Of course, input currents to the supply would double during the brownout interval but it's a short duration. Bottom line is that its a lower cost of ownership to design brown out protection into a device than to paste it on outside. I proposed a scheme to a customer some years back where we explored the addition of a 3 volt, DC to DC converter to be switched in as a bus voltage booster during cranking times. The customer tried it in the lab with positive results . . . don't know if it ever went into production. A 3v, 1A supply is an ittty-bitty critter compared to a super-cap. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: EFIS brownout capacitor
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Dec 01, 2011
Bob, Thank you very much for taking the time to reply. Digikey has some other large capacitors that are not as expensive: $16 http://search.digikey.com/scripts/dksearch/dksus.dll?vendor=0&keywords=ECE-T1EP104FA $12 http://search.digikey.com/scripts/dksearch/dksus.dll?vendor=0&keywords=ECE-T1CP104FA One of these capacitors might be a viable alternative to replacing an expensive internal backup battery for someone who only needs brownout protection and not a longer backup time. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360010#360010 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 01, 2011
Subject: Knobs and Dials
From: Etienne Phillips <etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com>
Hi All Not strictly aero-electric, but vaguely related... I'm desperately looking for 2 knob assemblies for a 4mm shaft >From this catalogue http://docs-europe.electrocomponents.com/webdocs/002a/0900766b8002a402.pdfthe parts numbers for the assembly are S210 004 - Black knob C210 Black 5 cap D211 or D218 figure dial I've tried RS Components, Mouser, Digikey, Mantech, Selco (who make them, have a $50 minimum charge, but don't have the figure dials), and a horde of others without success. If I had one already, I'd consider making a mould and casting a new one! Thanks, in desperation... Etienne ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: EFIS brownout capacitor
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Dec 01, 2011
When the master switch is turned on, would the inrush current to a 0.1F capacitor be a problem? Thanks, Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360011#360011 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Knobs and Dials
Date: Dec 01, 2011
Just off the top of my head - Could you get a more standard/easier-to-find knob for a 1/8 inch shaft (isn't that about 3 mm?) and drill it out? _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Etienne Phillips Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 09:40 Subject: AeroElectric-List: Knobs and Dials Hi All Not strictly aero-electric, but vaguely related... I'm desperately looking for 2 knob assemblies for a 4mm shaft >From this catalogue http://docs-europe.electrocomponents.com/webdocs/002a/0900766b8002a402.pdf the parts numbers for the assembly are S210 004 - Black knob C210 Black 5 cap D211 or D218 figure dial I've tried RS Components, Mouser, Digikey, Mantech, Selco (who make them, have a $50 minimum charge, but don't have the figure dials), and a horde of others without success. If I had one already, I'd consider making a mould and casting a new one! Thanks, in desperation... Etienne ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 01, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: EFIS brownout capacitor
At 11:41 AM 12/1/2011, you wrote: > >When the master switch is turned on, would the inrush current to a >0.1F capacitor be a problem? >Thanks, Joe Good question. If the cap is fed with say, 4' of 22AWG (16 mOhm/ft) then there is potential for a 150+ Amp inrush. You might want to consider some ballasting resistance or perhaps an inrush limiter sized to your operating loads. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: cdnch701builder <cdnch701(at)mts.net>
Date: Dec 01, 2011
Subject: Re: 1 Wire vs. 3Wwire alternators
Thanks bob... I have a 3 wire internally regulated alternator... that I would like to convert to external regulator! Is there any info online somewhere that provides instructions to do the conversion? I have been searching and I cannot find! Ron :--)> :--)> :--)> At 11:43 AM 11/22/2011, you wrote: :--)>:--)> :--)>:--)> I need some help here with alternators! What is the difference :--)>:--)> between a 1 wire and a 3 wire :--)>:--)> system? :--)>:--)> :--)> I'm not sure there's a uniform convention for :--)> 1 versus 2 versus 3 wire alternators. The :--)> 1-wire alternators I see for boats, RVs and :--)> utility vehicles have regulators built in. They :--)> have ONE b-lead that connects to the system and :--)> they automatically shut down internally when :--)> the alterantor is not turning. :--)> :--)>:--)> Can a 1 wire setup be shut down with a switch as per over voltage protection :--)>:--)> :--)> No :--)> :--)>:--)> ... or does it have :--)>:--)> to be a 3 wire? :--)>:--)> :--)> :--)> It certainly needs to have more than one wire, the :--)> second of which offers absolute control over field :--)> excitation. Check out B&C or Plane Power. They've :--)> provided for satisfaction of the legacy philosophy for :--)> putting alternators on airplanes. :--)> :--)> :--)> Bob . . . :--)> :--)> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 01, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: EFIS brownout capacitor
At 01:35 PM 12/1/2011, you wrote: > After some sifting through the gray matter archives, I retrieved the core principals behind an active 'bus booster' that I crafted some years back. Making this technology work for brown-out protection would look something like this: http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/Royer_Oscillator_Bus-Booster.pdf I've used this style power oscillator in dozens of products. It's designed around a saturable core transformer that operates in the 1000-4000 Hz range. These are usually tape-wound toroidal cores. This particular implementation uses 'upside down PNP' power transistors with grounded collectors. The assembly staff really liked that . . . no insulating washers and grease! This would be a DC-DC power supply that produces say 3.5 volts for a 12 volt input. The instant the starter contactor is energized, battery voltage applied to the protected device is boosted to about 16.0 volts. When the starter inrush hits, battery voltage drops to say 9 volts with a proportional drop in boost level to about 2.4 volts which is added to the 9 volts for a 'protected' output of 11.4 or so. When the starter is de-energized, the oscillator is unpowered, boosting is replaced by normal bus power through the upper, diode-isolated input. To handle a 1A load, output power would be under 5 watts. This is a really small oscillator. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 01, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: 1 Wire vs. 3Wwire alternators
At 03:13 PM 12/1/2011, you wrote: > >Thanks bob... > >I have a 3 wire internally regulated alternator... that I would like >to convert to external >regulator! > >Is there any info online somewhere that provides instructions to do >the conversion? I have >been searching and I cannot find! It varies from one brand and model to the next. An alternator repair shop could open it up and easily identify the means by which the internal regulator could be by-passed. I've seen some articles but don't recall now where . . . Sorry. Perhaps somebody here on the List will recall some exemplar articles. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Etienne Phillips <etienne.phillips(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Knobs and Dials
Date: Dec 02, 2011
On 01 Dec 2011, at 7:58 PM, Jeff Luckey wrote: > Just off the top of my head ' > > Could you get a more standard/easier-to-find knob for a 1/8 inch shaft (isn=92t that about 3 mm?) and drill it out? > > > Hi Jeff That is definitely an option, along with using a spacer sleeve to get the shaft size to 6mm. However, the 21mm knob diameter and the figure dials seem to be what makes this combination particularly hard to find. Thanks for the input though :) Etienne ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: EFIS brownout capacitor
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Dec 02, 2011
Bob, Thanks for the Bus-Booster circuit. I was thinking that an inductor in series with an EFIS would limit the inrush current to a large capacitor. And when the main battery voltage dropped during cranking, that an inductor will try to maintain current flow to the EFIS while the capacitor tries to maintain the voltage. I do not know what size inductor is required. Inductors are heavy compared to capacitors. It is starting to look like a small backup battery is the easiest solution to brownout protection. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360065#360065 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 1 Wire vs. 3Wwire alternators
From: "jonlaury" <jonlaury(at)impulse.net>
Date: Dec 02, 2011
Ron, Try this http://home.earthlink.net/~timrv6a/alternator.htm Good Luck, John Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360068#360068 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: cdnch701builder <cdnch701(at)mts.net>
Date: Dec 02, 2011
Subject: Re: 1 Wire vs. 3Wwire alternators
Thanks John... my alternator is a 40A Denzo 3 wire. It's pretty hard to make out from the photos! Ron :--)> :--)> Ron, :--)> Try this :--)> :--)> http://home.earthlink.net/~timrv6a/alternator.htm :--)> :--)> Good Luck, :--)> John :--)> :--)> :--)> Read this topic online here: :--)> :--)> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360068#360068 :--)> :--)> :--)> AeroElectric-List Email Forum - :--)> MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - :--)> http://www.matronics.com/contribution ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 1 Wire vs. 3Wwire alternators
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Dec 02, 2011
Here is another link to modifying an alternator: http://www.eaa.org/experimenter/articles/2009-09_howto_alternator.asp Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360075#360075 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "ROGER & JEAN CURTIS" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net>
Subject: 1 Wire vs. 3Wwire alternators
Date: Dec 02, 2011
>I have a 3 wire internally regulated alternator... that I would like >to convert to external >regulator! > Here is one from the EAA Website http://www.eaa.org/experimenter/articles/2009-09_howto_alternator.asp Roger ________________________________________________________________________________
From: cdnch701builder <cdnch701(at)mts.net>
Date: Dec 02, 2011
Subject: Re: 1 Wire vs. 3Wwire alternators
Thanks Roger... Ron :--)>:--)> I have a 3 wire internally regulated alternator... that I would like to :--)>:--)> convert to external regulator! :--)>:--)> :--)> Here is one from the EAA Website :--)> :--)> :--)> http://www.eaa.org/experimenter/articles/2009-09_howto_alternator.asp :--)> :--)> Roger ________________________________________________________________________________
From: cdnch701builder <cdnch701(at)mts.net>
Date: Dec 02, 2011
Subject: Re: 1 Wire vs. 3Wwire alternators
Thanks Joe... That is for a 1 wire, I have a 3 wire... is there much difference? Ron :--)> :--)> Here is another link to modifying an alternator: :--)> http://www.eaa.org/experimenter/articles/2009-09_howto_alternator.asp Joe :--)> :--)> -------- :--)> Joe Gores :--)> :--)> :--)> Read this topic online here: :--)> :--)> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360075#360075 :--)> :--)> :--)> AeroElectric-List Email Forum - :--)> MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - :--)> http://www.matronics.com/contribution ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 02, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: EFIS brownout capacitor
At 08:57 AM 12/2/2011, you wrote: > >Bob, >Thanks for the Bus-Booster circuit. >I was thinking that an inductor in series with an EFIS would limit >the inrush current to a large capacitor. And when the main battery >voltage dropped during cranking, that an inductor will try to >maintain current flow to the EFIS while the capacitor tries to >maintain the voltage. I do not know what size inductor is >required. Inductors are heavy compared to capacitors. It is >starting to look like a small backup battery is the easiest solution >to brownout protection. An inductor would have that effect . . . but on a scale of weight and volume that would be exceedingly unattractive. Yes, batteries are effective energy storage devices when their weight and volume are compared with other technologies. The cost-of-ownership driver for standby batteries is maintenance. What would be really cool is to craft a cell technology that might offer a fraction of the energy storage capability for popular cells but high longevity numbers. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 02, 2011
From: Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net>
Subject: Re: EFIS brownout capacitor
> The cost-of-ownership driver for standby batteries > is maintenance. What would be really cool is to > craft a cell technology that might offer a > fraction of the energy storage capability > for popular cells but high longevity numbers. > > > Bob . . . > pretty hard to beat a couple of D cell flashlight batteries (and a mini relay) for a couple of seconds of 1 amp 3 volt boost if that is still the situation being discussed. One could even leave the batteries in the flashlight so that it can be used as a --- flashlight. Ken ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fred Stucklen" <wstucklen1(at)cox.net>
Subject: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
Date: Dec 03, 2011
Hi All, After several hot day "Low Fuel Pressure" warnings while taxing out to the runway, I've been thinking about implementing a circuit that would allow the Aux fuel pump to be automatically turned ON for a short period of time, whenever the low fuel pressure warning existed. We already have this ability in most modern fuel injected cars, why not our Aircraft? Having this might allow more use of Autogas as it is more susceptible to vapor lock conditions the result in the Low Fuel Pressure Warnings... Implementation would probably have a fuel pressure sensor input (0-5VDC directly from the existing sensor), and a timer to keep the pump running for some duration. Some sort of small Processor IC with an A/D input would probably be the least expensive design approach. The logic would be something like, IF Pressure low turn on pump, start timer; If timer not timed out, keep pump ON; If pressure low and timer not timed out, reset timer If timer timed out and pressure OK, shut off pump From a pilots perspective, the AUX Fuel Pump switch on the panel would be a three position switch: OFF, AUTO, ON. I've had engine "Stumblings" several times while taxing, due to vapor lock and low the resultant "Low Fuel Pressure" warnings. Even had one on an approach while using a 50/50 mix of autogas and 100LL. The Aux pump always took care of the issue (as the aux pump is located near the cooler fuel source). So why not automate the process and make it safer. Any comments? Fred Stucklen RV-7A N924RV IO-360 Fixed Pitch ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 03, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
I=92ve had engine =93Stumblings=94 several times while taxing, due to vapor lock and low the resultant =93Low Fuel Pressure=94 warnings. Even had one on an approach while using a 50/50 mix of autogas and 100LL. The Aux pump always took care of the issue (as the aux pump is located near the cooler fuel source). So why not automate the process and make it safer=85 Doing what you suggest is not difficult technologically. The elegant solution will be the simplest, most robust and lowest cost of ownership solution. The "KISS Principal" has been defined by various individuals for centuries but one of my favorites was offered by Antoine de Saint Exup=E9ry's who opined, "It seems that perfection is reached not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." You already have an Aux Fuel Pump and a switch for controlling it. Indeed, you've cited instances where operating this switch improved on system functionality during conditions most likely to produce poor fuel flow. Does the engine ever object to having the pump ON? In other words, if the pump is NOT needed to offset a poor flow condition, does having it ON during otherwise normal operations pose any potential for problems? I've flown several aircraft where the Aux Pump was switched ON for ground ops and approach to landing as a checklist item. If there is no downside to having the pump on, would it not be simpler to turn it on for all operations where vapor issues are anticipated? The idea of building an electro-whizzy to automate that function will get the juices flowing in any ol' electron herder. At the same time, I am reminded too of the frustration displayed by some guys who worked for me when I asked, "That works really slick. Now, what can you do to reduce parts count?" If in your estimation the automatic control feature goes to your elegant solution, we can certainly discuss the bits and pieces necessary to make it so. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 03, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: EFIS brownout capacitor
pretty hard to beat a couple of D cell flashlight batteries (and a mini relay) for a couple of seconds of 1 amp 3 volt boost if that is still the situation being discussed. One could even leave the batteries in the flashlight so that it can be used as a --- flashlight. Absolutely! I can recall the use of alkaline or ni-cad cells being suggested while mulling over design options. I think zero-maintenance circuitry consistently won out over the use of components with a shelf or service life. Of course, that was the T/C market which is driven by different design goals. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 1 Wire vs. 3Wwire alternators
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Dec 03, 2011
cdnch701builder Ron, Are you using a Viking engine? I am no alternator expert. But if your alternator has 3 wires, One of them could be used for enabling the alternator. The over-voltage protection should be in series with that wire. There could be an internal regulator failure mode that does not respond to removing power from that wire. The safest way is to remove the internal regulator and use an external one. Many builders are reluctant to modify a perfectly good working alternator in order to achieve over-voltage protection. An over-voltage condition is unlikely but could be very expensive if it happens. Some modern avionics are able to operate with supply voltages in the range of 10 to30. They are less likely to be damaged. In case of an over-voltage condition, an alternator with an ampacity that matches the expected aircraft load will not generate as high of a voltage as an over-sized alternator will. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360099#360099 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fred Stucklen" <wstucklen1(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
Date: Dec 03, 2011
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III ( nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com) Date: Sat Dec 03 - 5:10 AM I've had engine =93Stumblings=94 several times while taxing, due to vapor lock and low the resultant =93Low Fuel Pressure=94 warnings. Even had one on an approach while using a 50/50 mix of autogas and 100LL. The Aux pump always took care of the issue (as the aux pump is located near the cooler fuel source). So why not automate the process and make it safer. Doing what you suggest is not difficult technologically. The elegant solution will be the simplest, most robust and lowest cost of ownership solution. The "KISS Principal" has been defined by various individuals for centuries but one of my favorites was offered by Antoine de Saint Exup=E9ry's who opined, "It seems that perfection is reached not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." You already have an Aux Fuel Pump and a switch for controlling it. Indeed, you've cited instances where operating this switch improved on system functionality during conditions most likely to produce poor fuel flow. Agree this is the simplest approach, but.. Does the engine ever object to having the pump ON? In other words, if the pump is NOT needed to offset a poor flow condition, does having it ON during otherwise normal operations pose any potential for problems? The engine doesn't care that the Aux pump is ON, but there could be other Vapor lock issues if the pump is left ON with the fuel just circulating within the pump (causing the fuel to heat up and vaporize). The pump Motor doesn't stop once normal pressure has been obtained. The fuel is just circulated. The AUX pump is in the cockpit, but, in excessively hot weather on the ramp while idling with the pump ON, can vapor lock, causing the engine to stall, and a VERY difficult restart. I have also seen situations while using Autogas on hot days where the Same issue exist in the air. The pilot is usually "Notified" of the problem when the engine stumbles because of the low fuel pressure. (I have the ES Airflow Fuel Pump kit on the IO-360 RV-7A. Because of its ability to cause vapor lock, I use it very judiciously.) I've flown several aircraft where the Aux Pump was switched ON for ground ops and approach to landing as a checklist item. If there is no downside to having the pump on, would it not be simpler to turn it on for all operations where vapor issues are anticipated? Yes, but what happens if it's forgotten and left ON? Why not have it automatically shut ON/OFF on proper pressure (with an acceptable fuel pressure ON time delay)? The idea of building an electro-whizzy to automate that function will get the juices flowing in any ol' electron herder. At the same time, I am reminded too of the frustration displayed by some guys who worked for me when I asked, "That works really slick. Now, what can you do to reduce parts count?" True, but then again, if we always "Do it the same way because it's always Been done that way", GA would still be in the 1930's Model "T" mode of operation instead of where our Auto industry is at today (with advanced controls). That's what separates us from the "Certified" world.. If in your estimation the automatic control feature goes to your elegant solution, we can certainly discuss the bits and pieces necessary to make it so. Bob . . . My background is Electrical Engineer/Controller Programmer (retired). I'd probably use a PIC chip and a relay or MOSFET. Only a handful of components. Total parts cost shouldn't be more than $10. (assuming I've already paid for the PIC development tools.). This is probably a good workaround for the pump that's already Installed. The OFF/AUTO/ON switch implementation would enable normal or AUTO operation. Fred RV-7A N924RV ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: MGL Enigma audio alert to RST 442 intercom
From: "messydeer" <messydeer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Dec 03, 2011
Bob and crew: I'm plugging away at my project of converting my RST 442 portable intercom to a panel mount that would interface with my DX15 handheld radio. My MGL Enigma EFIS has an audio alert feature that could be wired into the intercom system, but I'm not sure where the best place would be and what components to include. I'd thought of simply wiring it into the 'tape in' terminal, but this would get muted with any incoming audio. How would you go about this? Would a 10f capacitor in series with the EFIS audio and terminal 1 of S102, the Pilot - All switch work? There are also two different output terminals on the back of the Enigma for this: audio output high level This output contains high level, low impedance audio (voice prompts and alerts). This output can drive a small 4-8 ohm speaker directly at up to 1W power. This output can also be connected to intercom panels that accept high level inputs. Audio output low level This output contains low level high impedance audio intended for intercom panels that provide low level inputs. I've also attached a page of the manual that gives a little more info. -------- Dan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360110#360110 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/mgl_enigma_odyssey_installation_21_208.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 04, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Hardware Failure - Matronics Web Servers Currently
Offline failure and is currently not available. Replacement hardware has been ordered and should arrive on Tuesday 12/6/2011. All services should be restored shortly there after. During the outage, the Matronics Forums, Wiki, and other web-based List services will NOT be available. However, during the outage, all normal EMAIL based sevices WILL be available so you may continue to post messages to the various lists without an issue. I am so sorry for any inconvenience this web server outage has caused... Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 04, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Server crash
Folks, The Matronics hardware suite suffered some major problems Saturday . . . Matt has some patches running to keep things running (mirror to another server). If you didn't make a contribution to the service during the 'normal' fundraising activity, please consider making one now. The electro-whizzies that make all this work for us don't come off the local thrift store's appliance shelves . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 04, 2011
Subject: Re: Server crash
From: William Greenley <wgreenley(at)gmail.com>
Good idea, but it looks like donations will have to wait until after the servers are back online. Bill On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > Folks, > > The Matronics hardware suite suffered some major > problems Saturday . . . Matt has some patches running > to keep things running (mirror to another server). > > If you didn't make a contribution to the service > during the 'normal' fundraising activity, please > consider making one now. The electro-whizzies that > make all this work for us don't come off > the local thrift store's appliance shelves . . . > > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ralph Finch <ralphmariafinch(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 04, 2011
Subject: Re: Server crash
It would be cheaper and more reliable to simply run the lists from a commercial server. Ralph Finch On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com**> > > Folks, > > The Matronics hardware suite suffered some major > problems Saturday . . . Matt has some patches running > to keep things running (mirror to another server). > > If you didn't make a contribution to the service > during the 'normal' fundraising activity, please > consider making one now. The electro-whizzies that > make all this work for us don't come off > the local thrift store's appliance shelves . . . > > > Bob . . . > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 04, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Server crash
Maybe cheaper, but probably not. And certainly not as secure and flexible. I do IT architecture and design for a living and the system that supports the Matronics Lists is built to those same standards. For example, dedicated environmental control, battery backups, redundancy where practical, daily data backups, and commercial-grade connectivity. For a relatively small operation, the Matronics systems are a lot more "commercial" than most small to medium business installations I've seen. That being said, its not always economically feasible to have a "spare" of everything and sometimes the unforeseen and unfortunate happens. In the 20+ years I've been managing these List services this way, there have only been a couple of substantial outages and from what I've seen in the industry, that's a pretty good track record. Rest assured, I'm am doing everything possible to restore service as quickly as possible. Best regards, Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator At 08:16 AM 12/4/2011 Sunday, you wrote: >It would be cheaper and more reliable to simply run the lists from a commercial server. > >Ralph Finch > >On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > >Folks, > >The Matronics hardware suite suffered some major >problems Saturday . . . Matt has some patches running >to keep things running (mirror to another server). > >If you didn't make a contribution to the service >during the 'normal' fundraising activity, please >consider making one now. The electro-whizzies that >make all this work for us don't come off >the local thrift store's appliance shelves . . . > > > Bob . . . > > Matt G Dralle | Matronics | 581 Jeannie Way | Livermore | CA | 94550 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 04, 2011
Subject: Re: Server crash
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
On 12/4/2011 11:16 AM, Ralph Finch wrote: > It would be cheaper and more reliable to simply run the lists from a > commercial server. Over the long haul it is typically not cheaper to rent commercial servers. Over the past 12+ years or so that I've been on the lists, I can only remember one other time that there were issues, so I'd say they are pretty reliable. Given that the email interface is still up and running tells me that Matt has a pretty robust configuration. I also maintain a personal server for mailing lists/Wikis/web forums for New England pilots and I can attest that at times it is a thankless job. Like Matt, I do it because of my interest in aviation. Unlike Matt, I don't ask for, and do not accept donations. I cover all costs and do it simply as my way of giving back to the aviation community. Given that Matt doesn't *require* payment to participate, I'd say he has setup an excellent system that works for everyone. If you want to help out by donating, you can, but if you don't want to, you don't have to and no one is going to give you a hard time about it. IMHO he is doing an excellent job. -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ralph Finch <ralphmariafinch(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 04, 2011
Subject: Re: Server crash
For a handful of low-volume, non-critical email lists such as the Matronics Lists, a generic commercial hosting system would be cheaper and easier...*if the alternative was to set up a complete hardware/software system from scratch*. But clearly Matt already has a system in place for other purposes so it makes sense to put the Matronics Lists on that system. As for the outage itself, I'm not complaining. I didn't even notice it. I appreciate the Lists but like another commenter run a website/email lists for a local airport group and don't get always get compensation, financial or otherwise. It's a volunteer activity and I'm glad to do it, most of the time. I use a commercial web host (hostmonster.com) and it works great. RF On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Matt Dralle wrote: > > > > Maybe cheaper, but probably not. And certainly not as secure and > flexible. I do IT architecture and design for a living and the system that > supports the Matronics Lists is built to those same standards. For > example, dedicated environmental control, battery backups, redundancy where > practical, daily data backups, and commercial-grade connectivity. For a > relatively small operation, the Matronics systems are a lot more > "commercial" than most small to medium business installations I've seen. > That being said, its not always economically feasible to have a "spare" of > everything and sometimes the unforeseen and unfortunate happens. In the > 20+ years I've been managing these List services this way, there have only > been a couple of substantial outages and from what I've seen in the > industry, that's a pretty good track record. > > Rest assured, I'm am doing everything possible to restore service as > quickly as possible. > > Best regards, > > Matt Dralle > Matronics Email List Administrator > > > At 08:16 AM 12/4/2011 Sunday, you wrote: > >It would be cheaper and more reliable to simply run the lists from a > commercial server. > > > >Ralph Finch > > > >On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> > > > >Folks, > > > >The Matronics hardware suite suffered some major > >problems Saturday . . . Matt has some patches running > >to keep things running (mirror to another server). > > > >If you didn't make a contribution to the service > >during the 'normal' fundraising activity, please > >consider making one now. The electro-whizzies that > >make all this work for us don't come off > >the local thrift store's appliance shelves . . . > > > > > > Bob . . . > > > > > > > Matt G Dralle | Matronics | 581 Jeannie Way | Livermore | CA | 94550 > 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email > http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Sherburn" <dsherburn(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Server crash
Date: Dec 04, 2011
I can't imagine the time, money and effort that goes into this kind of an effort. Speaking from the standpoint of a casual user, I appreciate the list and the ability to take advantge of the advice and consulting that goes with being able to access a service like this. Thanks for the effort, Matt (and all)! Dan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Dralle" <dralle(at)matronics.com> Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 12:28 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Server crash > > > Maybe cheaper, but probably not. And certainly not as secure and > flexible. I do IT architecture and design for a living and the system > that supports the Matronics Lists is built to those same standards. For > example, dedicated environmental control, battery backups, redundancy > where practical, daily data backups, and commercial-grade connectivity. > For a relatively small operation, the Matronics systems are a lot more > "commercial" than most small to medium business installations I've seen. > That being said, its not always economically feasible to have a "spare" of > everything and sometimes the unforeseen and unfortunate happens. In the > 20+ years I've been managing these List services this way, there have only > been a couple of substantial outages and from what I've seen in the > industry, that's a pretty good track record. > > Rest assured, I'm am doing everything possible to restore service as > quickly as possible. > > Best regards, > > Matt Dralle > Matronics Email List Administrator > > > At 08:16 AM 12/4/2011 Sunday, you wrote: >>It would be cheaper and more reliable to simply run the lists from a >>commercial server. >> >>Ralph Finch >> >>On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III >><nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> >>wrote: >><nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> >> >>Folks, >> >>The Matronics hardware suite suffered some major >>problems Saturday . . . Matt has some patches running >>to keep things running (mirror to another server). >> >>If you didn't make a contribution to the service >>during the 'normal' fundraising activity, please >>consider making one now. The electro-whizzies that >>make all this work for us don't come off >>the local thrift store's appliance shelves . . . >> >> >> Bob . . . >> >> > > > Matt G Dralle | Matronics | 581 Jeannie Way | Livermore | CA | 94550 > 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email > http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Aux pump Circuit
Date: Dec 04, 2011
Excuse me for jumping in here Fred but...given your comments I've summarized below...ARE YOU KIDDING ME? YOU HAVE THESE KNOWN ISSUES AND YOU CONTINUE TO USE AUTOGAS??!! Is it because 100LL is not available where you are or you just want to save money? I like to save money too but I wouldn't bet my life on it! How about forgetting about the auto boost pump circuit and running 100LL, especially in the SUMMER? If you absolutely HAVE to have some autogas in the tank, how about running a mix of 100LL and autogas? I'm no expert so don't do this without consulting a chemist who knows about petroleum formulations. Maybe there is a moderating effect of mixing autogas with 100LL that will increase the vapor pressure sufficiently to avoid the vapor lock and still allow a percentage of autogas that makes the cost per hour a bit less of a bite on the wallet. Again, I'm not the expert so experiment with this at your own risk. Better yet, just get the 100LL, I'd hate to see our fellow RVers have to do a missing man formation for you. Dean RV-6A N197DM Flying, 3+ years -------------Original message ---------- From: "Fred Stucklen" <wstucklen1(at)cox.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea .... other Vapor lock issues if the pump is left ON with the fuel just circulating within the pump (causing the fuel to heat up and vaporize). ...in excessively hot weather on the ramp while idling with the pump ON, can vapor lock, causing the engine to stall, and a VERY difficult restart. I have also seen situations while using Autogas on hot days where the same issue exists in the air. ....engine stumbles because of the low fuel pressure (I have the ES Airflow Fuel Pump kit on the IO-360 RV-7A. Because of its ability to cause vapor lock, I use it very judiciously.) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 04, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
>The engine doesn=92t care that the Aux pump is ON, but there could be other >Vapor lock issues if the pump is left ON with the fuel just circulating >within the pump (causing the fuel to heat up and vaporize). The pump >Motor doesn=92t stop once normal pressure has been obtained. The fuel is >just circulated. Yeah, sounds like a vane pump (constant volume) that cracks a bypass relief valve when the flow potential exceeds demand. That's one of the nice things about FACET put-put pumps. They're constant pressure and simply relax when the flow is restricted. > The AUX pump is in the cockpit, but, in excessively hot >weather on the ramp while idling with the pump ON, can vapor lock, causing >the engine to stall, and a VERY difficult restart. Some of the fuel injected fuel systems have a pressure relief valve that returns fuel to a tank as opposed to thrashing it in a tight loop. This has the effect of keeping a contiguous flow of cooling liquid in the delivery system. >I have also seen situations while using Autogas on hot days where the >Same issue exist in the air. The pilot is usually =93Notified=94 of the >problem when the engine stumbles because of the low fuel pressure. >(I have the ES Airflow Fuel Pump kit on the IO-360 RV-7A. Because of >its ability to cause vapor lock, I use it very judiciously.) Sounds like an opportunity to design some deficiencies out of the fuel system. Autogas is a very successful aviation fuel but vapor-locking experiences beg to be solved with core design changes as opposed to work-arounds. Okay, it's a vane pump working into an incompressible space so full time operation cracks a pressure-relief valve causing a lot of Joules to be stirred into a small volume of fuel. It would be difficult to come up with a set of fixed time intervals for cycling the pump triggered on some pressure value. How about a duty cycle controller that servos the pump to produce a selected pressure . . . some value below cracking pressure on the bypass. Here, leaving the pump on all the time means that under low flow demands, the pump runs slowly but ramps up to maintain pressure at higher demands. I proposed a system like that for a client some years back but we never made it to a prototype stage . . . the idea seems sound. A transducer like this might provide pressure data http://tinyurl.com/79ax3g3 >Yes, but what happens if it=92s forgotten and left ON? Why not have it >automatically shut ON/OFF on proper pressure (with an acceptable fuel >pressure ON time delay)? If in the constant pressure mode, leaving it on wouldn't be a big deal . . . and again, it's not an unreasonable check-list item . . . backed up perhaps with a panel annunciator. If the low pressure event triggers a fixed time delay for full speed operation of the pump, then you've still got a situation that works the pump hard while stirring up the fuel. >True, but then again, if we always =93Do it the same way because it=92s always >Been done that way=94, GA would still be in the 1930=92s Model =93T=94 mode >of operation instead of where our Auto industry is at today (with advanced >controls). That=92s what separates us from the =93Certified=94 world=85. You miss the point. You set design goals first and then figure out the simplest means for achieving those goals. In no way do I suggest that automation should be avoided for simplicity's sake . . . If your design goal is for a minimalist approach to mitigating an engine stumbling event, then the elegant solution might not include transducers, processors and software. But if you WANT it automated, the ingredients that go into that recipe for success will be different . . . and more of them. Has nothing to do with legacy > >My background is Electrical Engineer/Controller Programmer (retired). I=92d >probably use a PIC chip and a relay or MOSFET. Only a handful of components. >Total parts cost shouldn=92t be more than $10. (assuming I=92ve already paid for >the PIC development tools=85). This is probably a good workaround for the pump >that=92s already Installed. The OFF/AUTO/ON switch implementation would enable >normal or AUTO operation. A pressure transducer, 8-pin pic and a power-fet would comprise major components of a constant pressure controller. I've got a "do-lots" board already laid out and an enclosure to contain it. You'd have to jeep a power fet onto the board to handle the pump current. A schematic for the board and photos are on the website. I'll get you links when the server is back up. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fred Stucklen" <wstucklen1(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
Date: Dec 05, 2011
>How about a duty cycle controller that servos the pump >to produce a selected pressure . . . some value below >cracking pressure on the bypass. Here, leaving the pump >on all the time means that under low flow demands, the >pump runs slowly but ramps up to maintain pressure at >higher demands. Bob, Not a bad idea. This would emulate the faucet pump operation. That should be easy to implement.. The Auto industry is essentially doing the same thing with their 'in-the-tank' fuel pumps where they are cooled by the surrounding fuel, and where they always have a liquid to pump. This results in the whole fuel delivery system being kept at a higher pressure, making it less susceptible to a vapor lock condition. Our problem with our current fuel delivery system design in aircraft is that some portions of that system are at low pressure, and in a heated environment. When the engine mounted pump starts sucking fuel (creating even lower pressure) from these heated lines, we get a vapor lock situation. We've done a 'patch job' by placing the Aux pump 'near' the cool fuel source, and use it when a vapor problem occurs (or to prevent one from occurring). Having a constant pressure Aux fuel pump might solve this, but is still a "Patch" as it doesn't have redundancy. Moving the fuel pump operation into each tank, with a constant pressure controller, could open up the usage of Autogas to more planes. Two tanks, each with a pump, gives redundancy too. Something to think about... And to those whom have made (or thought about making) comments about the use of Autogas in our planes, I'll ask you a few questions: If Autogas is a problem, why do you use it in your car? Is it the gas that's the issue, or the system that utilizes the gas? If it's the system, what can we do to change it to be an acceptable, safe replacement for the current 100LL aviation systems in our aircraft? Most of the issues of Autogas usage have been solved in the auto industry already. If we keep open minds and study these solutions, apply them to the aviation industry with the required redundancy for safety, we can overcome .. We have the ability to make changes in this industry IF we choose too... Fred Stucklen RV-7A N924RV 650 Hrs ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 05, 2011
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
From: Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com>
Excuse me for jumping in here, but I think you guys are working the wrong end of this problem. Vapor lock has all but disappeared in automobiles, even though ethanol has been added and the vapor pressure of the fuel has gone down. Why? Because, for the most part, engine driven fuel pumps located in hot engine compartments have gone the way of the dinosaur. Modern cars don't draw the fuel, they push it with in-tank fuel pumps. Pushing fuel pressurizes it all the way from the tank, instead of drawing it from the engine which reduces the pressure and brings vapor pressure into play. Fix the problem permanently by putting a block off plate where that engine driven pump is mounted and either put the fuel pump(s) in the tank(s) or so close that head pressure drives the fuel to the pump(s). Now all you need to do is fashion an essential buss / emergency power source architecture to make sure that the pump is never in danger of losing power. Just a thought. Rick Girard On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Fred Stucklen wrote: > >How about a duty cycle controller that servos the pump**** > > >to produce a selected pressure . . . some value below**** > > >cracking pressure on the bypass. Here, leaving the pump**** > > >on all the time means that under low flow demands, the**** > > >pump runs slowly but ramps up to maintain pressure at**** > > >higher demands.**** > > ** ** > > Bob,**** > > ** ** > > Not a bad idea. This would emulate the faucet pump operation. That > should be easy to implement=85.**** > > The Auto industry is essentially doing the same thing with their > =91in-the-tank=92 fuel pumps where they are cooled by the surrounding fue l, and > where they always have a liquid to pump. This results in the whole fuel > delivery system being kept at a higher pressure, making it less susceptib le > to a vapor lock condition.**** > > Our problem with our current fuel delivery system design in aircraft is > that some portions of that system are at low pressure, and in a heated > environment. When the engine mounted pump starts sucking fuel (creating > even lower pressure) from these heated lines, we get a vapor lock > situation. We=92ve done a =91patch job=92 by placing the Aux pump =91near =92 the cool > fuel source, and use it when a vapor problem occurs (or to prevent one fr om > occurring). Having a constant pressure Aux fuel pump might solve this, bu t > is still a =93Patch=94 as it doesn=92t have redundancy.**** > > Moving the fuel pump operation into each tank, with a constant pressure > controller, could open up the usage of Autogas to more planes. Two tanks, > each with a pump, gives redundancy too=85**** > > Something to think about=85..**** > > ** ** > > And to those whom have made (or thought about making) comments about th e > use of Autogas in our planes, I=92ll ask you a few questions: If Autogas is a > problem, why do you use it in your car? Is it the gas that=92s the issue, or > the system that utilizes the gas? If it=92s the system, what can we do to > change it to be an acceptable, safe replacement for the current 100LL > aviation systems in our aircraft?**** > > Most of the issues of Autogas usage have been solved in the auto > industry already. If we keep open minds and study these solutions, apply > them to the aviation industry with the required redundancy for safety, we > can overcome =85.**** > > ** ** > > We have the ability to make changes in this industry IF we choose too =85=85. > **** > > ** ** > > Fred Stucklen**** > > RV-7A N924RV 650 Hrs**** > > * > =========== =========== =========== =========== =========== > * > > -- Zulu Delta Mk IIIC Thanks, Homer GBYM It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy. - Groucho Marx ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 05, 2011
From: ronburnett(at)charter.net
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
Gentlemen and Ladies, I have an H-4 Subaru modified from the original Eggenfellner package. I purchased an electrical manager from Protek.com called the Protek Bus Manager that auto restores a backup fuel pump for auto operations. My twin pumps are located on the floor of my RV-6A. We do have a bypass purge line that Jan Eggenfellner developed because some builders ignored his advice and mounted the pumps over the muffler firewall forward without cooling air or protective cover. I have 77 hours of satisfactory service with this arrangement. My project can be found on kitlog.com under builders and Ron Burnett. Ron Burnett N524RB H-4 Subaru On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Richard Girard wrote: Excuse me for jumping in here, but I think you guys are working the wrong end of this problem. Vapor lock has all but disappeared in automobiles, even though ethanol has been added and the vapor pressure of the fuel has gone down. Why? Because, for the most part, engine driven fuel pumps located in hot engine compartments have gone the way of the dinosaur. Modern cars don't draw the fuel, they push it with in-tank fuel pumps. Pushing fuel pressurizes it all the way from the tank, instead of drawing it from the engine which reduces the pressure and brings vapor pressure into play. Fix the problem permanently by putting a block off plate where that engine driven pump is mounted and either put the fuel pump(s) in the tank(s) or so close that head pressure drives the fuel to the pump(s). Now all you need to do is fashion an essential buss / emergency power source architecture to make sure that the pump is never in danger of losing power. Just a thought. -= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 05, 2011
From: Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
On 12/05/2011 08:20 AM, Fred Stucklen wrote: > > >How about a duty cycle controller that servos the pump > > >to produce a selected pressure . . . some value below > > >cracking pressure on the bypass. Here, leaving the pump > > >on all the time means that under low flow demands, the > > >pump runs slowly but ramps up to maintain pressure at > > >higher demands. > > Bob, > > Not a bad idea. This would emulate the faucet pump operation. That > should be easy to implement.... > > The Auto industry is essentially doing the same thing with their > 'in-the-tank' fuel pumps where they are cooled by the surrounding > fuel, and where they always have a liquid to pump. This results in the > whole fuel delivery system being kept at a higher pressure, making it > less susceptible to a vapor lock condition. > > Our problem with our current fuel delivery system design in aircraft > is that some portions of that system are at low pressure, and in a > heated environment. When the engine mounted pump starts sucking fuel > (creating even lower pressure) from these heated lines, we get a vapor > lock situation. We've done a 'patch job' by placing the Aux pump > 'near' the cool fuel source, and use it when a vapor problem occurs > (or to prevent one from occurring). Having a constant pressure Aux > fuel pump might solve this, but is still a "Patch" as it doesn't have > redundancy. > > Moving the fuel pump operation into each tank, with a constant > pressure controller, could open up the usage of Autogas to more > planes. Two tanks, each with a pump, gives redundancy too... > > Something to think about..... > > And to those whom have made (or thought about making) comments about > the use of Autogas in our planes, I'll ask you a few questions: If > Autogas is a problem, why do you use it in your car? Is it the gas > that's the issue, or the system that utilizes the gas? If it's the > system, what can we do to change it to be an acceptable, safe > replacement for the current 100LL aviation systems in our aircraft? > > Most of the issues of Autogas usage have been solved in the auto > industry already. If we keep open minds and study these solutions, > apply them to the aviation industry with the required redundancy for > safety, we can overcome .... > > We have the ability to make changes in this industry IF we choose > too....... > > Fred Stucklen > > RV-7A N924RV 650 Hrs > Congrats on being a lot more diplomatic in your response to that autofuelkills rant than I would have been. You & Rick Girard are right; a decent late-20th century fuel system would almost certainly solve the problem. There's a guy on the VAF forum that's run 2 pairs of in-series Facet pumps for years with no problem. (Series operation is to get pressure high enough to work with the otherwise stock Bendix style injection.) Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 05, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
At 12:58 PM 12/5/2011, Gill wrote: Excuse me for jumping in here, but I think you guys are working the wrong end of this problem. Modern cars don't draw the fuel, they push it with in-tank fuel pumps. Which goes to a suggestion I posited earlier that it's more attractive to design vapor-lock bottle-necks out of the system as opposed to pasting a 'fix' on top of a demonstrably deficient design. Fred: The Auto industry is essentially doing the same thing with their in-the-tank fuel pumps where they are cooled by the surrounding fuel, and where they always have a liquid to pump. This results in the whole fuel delivery system being kept at a higher pressure, making it less susceptible to a vapor lock condition. Our problem with our current fuel delivery system design in aircraft is that some portions of that system are at low pressure, and in a heated environment. When the engine mounted pump starts sucking fuel (creating even lower pressure) from these heated lines, we get a vapor lock situation. Weve done a patch job by placing the Aux pump near the cool fuel source, and use it when a vapor problem occurs (or to prevent one from occurring). Having a constant pressure Aux fuel pump might solve this, but is still a Patch as it doesnt have redundancy. Moving the fuel pump operation into each tank, with a constant pressure controller, could open up the usage of Autogas to more planes. Two tanks, each with a pump, gives redundancy too Something to think about.. Bob :The Facet pumps are really compact . . . could they not be located so close to the fuel outlet that vapor lock in that short span is unlikely to impossible? Fred: And to those whom have made (or thought about making) comments about the use of Autogas in our planes, If we keep open minds and study these solutions, apply them to the aviation industry with the required redundancy for safety, we can overcome . Sure, the issue isn't about the fuel, it's about the system in which the fuel is to be used. I had a neighbor about 15 years ago that had already been burning autogas in his 170 for years. He did extensive testing and found that the gravity flow system installed on his airplane needed only a short run of plumbing to be insulated to eliminate the hazard on his particular machine. The vapor lock phenomenon is well understood as well as design techniques for eliminating it. I REALLY like the system that recirculates part of the pump's flow back to one tank. Keeping the system flushed with cool fuel seems a pretty solid technique. It's hard for an air/radiation conducted heat source to compete with a liquid cooling source. We have the ability to make changes in this industry IF we choose too Absolutely! Whether things discussed in this thread have any influence on Fred's endeavors isn't the point. The fact that we've laid a lot of simple- ideas on the table as proposed recipes for success using those ideas is being archived for future readers. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 05, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
At 02:33 PM 12/5/2011, you wrote: >Gentlemen and Ladies, > >I have an H-4 Subaru modified from the original Eggenfellner >package. I purchased an electrical manager from Protek.com called >the Protek Bus Manager that auto restores a backup fuel pump for >auto operations. My twin pumps are located on the floor of my >RV-6A. We do have a bypass purge line that Jan Eggenfellner >developed because some builders ignored his advice and mounted the >pumps over the muffler firewall forward without cooling air or >protective cover. I have 77 hours of satisfactory service with this >arrangement. > >My project can be found on kitlog.com under builders and Ron Burnett. Thanks for the data points Ron. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 05, 2011
From: ronburnett(at)charter.net
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
Bob, Thanks for all you do. Took your course twice and learned and enjoyed it both times. It gave me the confidence to actually start wiring. You are a most noble soul and asset to all us builders. Ron Burnett N524RB M71 Greensfield, MO On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: At 02:33 PM 12/5/2011, you wrote: Gentlemen and Ladies, I have an H-4 Subaru modified from the original Eggenfellner package. I purchased an electrical manager from Protek.com called the Protek Bus Manager that auto restores a backup fuel pump for auto operations. My twin pumps are located on the floor of my RV-6A. We do have a bypass purge line that Jan Eggenfellner developed because some builders ignored his advice and mounted the pumps over the muffler firewall forward without cooling air or protective cover. I have 77 hours of satisfactory service with this arrangement. My project can be found on kitlog.com under builders and Ron Burnett. Thanks for the data points Ron. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 05, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
At 06:55 PM 12/5/2011, you wrote: >Bob, > >Thanks for all you do. Took your course twice and learned and >enjoyed it both times. It gave me the confidence to actually start >wiring. You are a most noble soul and asset to all us builders. Thank you for the kind endorsement sir. I will endeavor to remain worthy. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 06, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: New Connector added to Catalog of Cables
We can now offer a low profile, right angle BNC cable male connector on the pre-fabricated coax assemblies. Emacs! Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 07, 2011
From: Glen Matejcek <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
Hi All- I may have missed something in the exchanges here, but I think a couple data points might have been overlooked. First, one of the differences in the aircraft and automotive fuel systems is that the automotive system works at ground level. The aircraft system needs to work at lower ambient atmoshpheric pressures, and is therefore inherently more vapor lock prone than an automotive system with the same fuel at the same temperature. Another data point is that when the automotive, tank mounted pump fails, you coast over to the side of the road. It's a little more complicated when the pump in a pump dependent aircraft fuel system quits. A a reminder, the common philosophy behind aircraft boost pumps is to provide fuel pressure when the engine driven pump can't, I.E. for priming or when the EDP has failed. If an aircraft fuel system has turned out to need the boost pump in order to operate safely under nominal circumstances, I would suggest that there is another problem that needs to be addressed and that using the boost pump is a band aid, not a solution. The last thing is that the plans for my fuel injected RV called for quite a bit of seemingly unnecessary tubing in the return line back to the selector valve. Turns out that the whole point there is to provide a radiator. If one were to get creative and shorten that line, the system would end up more vapor lock prone. FWIW, YMMV, ETC Glen Matejcek ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 07, 2011
From: Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net>
Subject: Re: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
> The last thing is that the plans for my fuel injected RV called for > quite a bit of seemingly unnecessary tubing in the return line back > to the selector valve. Turns out that the whole point there is to > provide a radiator. If one were to get creative and shorten that > line, the system would end up more vapor lock prone. > Actually after watching attempts to cool and reintroduce bypassed fuel into the pump end in bent airplanes, most folks agree that the issue is venting the vapour bubbles back to a tank or header. Merely cooling doesn 't cut it for automotive EFI installations. Maybe it works better with 100LL. When the pressure drops at the regulator there is excellent conditions to create vapour bubbles, some of which are air and not all of which will readily re-condense. Ken ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 07, 2011
From: Kenneth Johnson <kjohnsondds(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
Hi All,=0AI seldom write because I am far from an expert in this area.- I n addition I have not finished building my plane.- However, I will offer this suggestion as it has been recommended for my engine.- I am using a M azda rotary engine.- This automotive engine has a fuel rail with a return fuel line to my main fuel tank.- With the engine, a MSD Ignition high pr essure electric fuel pump (Part # 2225) was included.- Because this is a very important part for engine function, a second pump has been plumbed in parallel with check valves for each.- There are separate switches for eac h, which allows one to use either one.- I am uncertain about using them b oth together, as I am not that far, or if would even be necessary.- These fuel pumps have been placed on the pilots side of the firewall and the fue l is pumped about 2 feet to the fuel rail. - I have looked up information regarding this fuel pump and it appears to be reliable and that is why I h ave written.- If others have experience with this fuel pump, it would be ope n for discussion.- =0A=0AKen Johnson=0A=0A=0A=0A_________________________ _______=0A From: Glen Matejcek <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net>=0ATo: aeroelectric -list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Wednesday, December 7, 2011 7:45 AM=0ASubject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea=0A =0A--> AeroE lectric-List message posted by: Glen Matejcek =0A =0AHi All-=0A=0AI may have missed something in the exchanges here, but I th ink a couple data points might have been overlooked.- First, one of the d ifferences in the aircraft and automotive fuel systems is that the automoti ve system works at ground level.- The aircraft system needs to work at lo wer ambient atmoshpheric pressures, and is therefore inherently more vapor lock prone than an automotive system with the same fuel at the same tempera ture.=0A=0AAnother data point is that when the automotive, tank mounted pum p fails, you coast over to the side of the road.- It's a little more comp licated when the pump in a pump dependent aircraft fuel system quits.=0A=0A A a reminder, the common philosophy behind aircraft boost pumps is to provi de fuel pressure when the engine driven pump can't, I.E. for priming or whe n the EDP has failed.- If an aircraft fuel system has turned out to need the boost pump in order to operate safely under nominal circumstances, I wo uld suggest that there is another problem that needs to be addressed and th at using the boost pump is a band aid, not a solution.=0A=0AThe last thing is that the plans for my fuel injected RV called for quite a bit of seeming ly unnecessary tubing in the return line back to the selector valve.- Tur ns out that the whole point there is to provide a radiator.- If one were to get creative and shorten that line, the system would end up more vapor l =========================0A =================== ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 07, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Matronics Web Services Restored!
Dear Listers, web services have been fully restored including the Web Forums, List Browse, Archive Search, Wiki, and AeroElectric web sites. It was quite an ordeal getting the replacement boards for the server, but things went back together tonight and are up and running nicely. The first company I ordered the boards from originally called me a day later to say that, whoops, they really didn't have them in stock after all... Fortunately, I was able to locate some through a different source and had then over-nighted and they arrived today. Thank you for your patience and consideration though the whole thing! The List Contribution web site is also back on line for those wishing to make a donation to the effort: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Best regards, Matt Dralle Matronics List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
From: "jonlaury" <jonlaury(at)impulse.net>
Date: Dec 08, 2011
FWIW, I am running a Simple Digital Systems EFI on my Franklin powered Glasair. I modified the Glasair fuel system to provide gravity pressure to two electric fuel pumps (with integral check valves) under all positive G conditions. A sump tank (1 qt) was squeezed between the belly pan and the wing bottom. The header tank and wing tanks feed the sump tank. Check valves are installed between the wing tanks and sump. The pumps are at the aft end of the sump tank and push fuel through a FW mounted filter then to the fuel rail, to the pressure regulator and back to the header tank. Within the header is a dam to within 3/4" of ceiling of the header, creating a 1 gal. capacity dry space.On the dry side of the dam, outside vent air (2) is supplied and wing tank vents and sump tank purge vent are near the top of the dam. At the bottom of the dry side, drain lines back to the mains are installed so that any fuel over the dam from recirculated fuel and a topped off header returns to the wing tanks. Normal ops is to leave the header open to feed the sump tank, then select a wing tank R, L, or both. With header open and wing tanks on both, the system accesses total tankage. As angle of attack is increased, the header tank rises relative to the sump tank increasing gravity pressure at the pump intake. If desired for CG reasons, the header only or wing only may be selected. The system pressure is 40 psi. The pumps draw 3.5-4 amps each and deliver 20 gph each. Both on delivers 28 gph. One pump is on the main bus, one on the battery bus. The system has not been flown, but operates as expected in all conceivable +/- AOA. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360456#360456 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
From: "jonlaury" <jonlaury(at)impulse.net>
Date: Dec 08, 2011
aerobubba(at)earthlink.ne wrote: > Hi All- > > > > Another data point is that when the automotive, tank mounted pump fails, you coast over to the side of the road. It's a little more complicated when the pump in a pump dependent aircraft fuel system quits. > Glen Matejcek My queries and investigations into automotive hi pressure fuel pump failures revealed that a fuel pump rarely has an abrupt total failure. The gearotor and vane type premature failure of the pump mechanism itself is from dirty fuel. Motor failure is age/time related the same as any certified, mechanical/electric AC fuel pump. The symptoms of impending failure of automotive fuel pumps are the same...falling pressure/increase amperage draw. But people being the fallible monitoring system that they are, is the reason for redundant essential systems. Anecdotally, I have never experienced an automotive fuel pump failure inspite of two Toyota trucks, a Ford Taurus, a Ford truck and a MBZ sedan being driven over 1,000,000 miles. John Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360462#360462 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
From: "Bill & Sue" <Billandsue(at)billbell.co.uk>
Date: Dec 08, 2011
Here in the UK Nigel Charles published what I thought was an elegant (and LAA approved) modification for the Europa with its main and reserve feeds to a Rotax engine running on Mogas. The essence of the mod was to remove the mechanical fuel pump and use two electrical pumps, one fed from the main tank and one from the reserve. By sensing the fuel pressure, when the fuel pressure dropped (i.e. when the tank ran empty or was blocked) the reserve pump was switched on automatically and illuminating a light on the panel. I've seen it, it works, and by all accounts seamlessly, changing over without so much as a cough. Using this system, and insulating the fuel lines in the engine bay, Nigel was also able to avoid vapor lock with sufficient confidence to eliminate the need for a return fuel line to the tank. Bill Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360474#360474 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 09, 2011
From: Glen Matejcek <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
HI John- I once had a Rabbit that developed a rather annoying habit of sputtering and quitting at random and inconvenient times and locations on hot days, and it seemed like vapor lock was the culprit. The dealer could find nothing wrong with the car and insisted I was buying crap gas. So, I took it to a sharp independant mechanic (a pilot, as it happens) who determined that when my tank mounted fuel pump got hot, it failed. When cooled sufficiently, it would function and test normally. However good and predictable modern pumps may be, my fundamental premise remains that if normal operations can require the use of both pumps to keep the engine running, there is in fact no redundancy. Finding myself at the side of the road amongst the cornfields in the Rabbit was a nuisance, in the RV it would be a bit more problematic. Just one guy's perspective- >My queries and investigations into automotive hi pressure fuel pump failures revealed >that a fuel pump rarely has an abrupt total failure. The gearotor and vane >type premature failure of the pump mechanism itself is from dirty fuel. Motor >failure is age/time related the same as any certified, mechanical/electric >AC fuel pump. The symptoms of impending failure of automotive fuel pumps are >the same...falling pressure/increase amperage draw. But people being the fallible >monitoring system that they are, is the reason for redundant essential systems. > >Anecdotally, I have never experienced an automotive fuel pump failure inspite of >two Toyota trucks, a Ford Taurus, a Ford truck and a MBZ sedan being driven >over 1,000,000 miles. > >John > Glen Matejcek ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 09, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
At 08:25 AM 12/9/2011, you wrote: > > So, I took it to a sharp independant mechanic (a pilot, as it > happens) who determined that when my tank mounted fuel pump got > hot, it failed. When cooled sufficiently, it would function and test normally. > >However good and predictable modern pumps may be, my fundamental >premise remains that if normal operations can require the use of >both pumps to keep the engine running, there is in fact no redundancy. > >Anecdotally, I have never experienced an automotive fuel pump > failure inspite of > >two Toyota trucks, a Ford Taurus, a Ford truck and a MBZ sedan being driven > >over 1,000,000 miles. I've experienced two pump failures . . . on the same vehicle. It was a generic design common to millions of other vehicles. "Reliability studies" that speak to 1 failure per bazillion flight hours are statistically correct but often interpreted poorly. The explanation is pretty lengthy and easily accesses elsewhere. This is why your's truly has always encouraged builders to assume that EVERY component is going to fail at some point in your lifetime experience with the airplane. Then run the failure mode effects analysis to determine how that failure can be accommodated . . . as opposed to anointing it with the holy-oil of prevention. See chapter 17 of "the Connection". With respect to fuel pumps, any time you can integrate a modern FACET pump into your design, you've got a big step up in service life. One moving part, two simple valves, totally sold state management of the energy used to compress the pumping spring. We discussed these pumps at length some years ago here on the lists. I researched the patents that spoke to the evolution of this technology dating back to the 20's. You can tiptoe through the patents on this style of pump at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Pumps/ The neat thing about modern incarnations of this style is elimination of the breaker contacts found in the earliest versions. Another nice feature is their ability to simply shut down when fluid flow is restricted of stopped of hard. Fuel pressure is a function of a compressed spring force and not stalled rotor current. One would be hard pressed to find a pump more friendly to the failure modes effects analysis for moving fuel around the airplane. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
From: "jonlaury" <jonlaury(at)impulse.net>
Date: Dec 09, 2011
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: > At 08:25 AM 12/9/2011, you wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, I took it to a sharp independant mechanic (a pilot, as it > > happens) who determined that when my tank mounted fuel pump got > > hot, it failed. When cooled sufficiently, it would function and test normally. > > > > However good and predictable modern pumps may be, my fundamental > > premise remains that if normal operations can require the use of > > both pumps to keep the engine running, there is in fact no redundancy. > > > > > > > > > > > > One would be hard pressed to find a pump more > friendly to the failure modes effects analysis > for moving fuel around the airplane. > > > > Bob . . . Glen and Bob, No argument with either of you. I appreciate both of your observations. The Facet solid state pumps are hard to beat and I have one as a transfer pump. But they don't make the high pressure required by EFI. And Glen, of course, if you need two pumps for a system, there is no redundancy if only two are installed. My system needs one operable pump. Two are installed in the hopes that I will be able to choose a runway over a freeway as a place to land if the primary pump dies. I was glad when this subject came up as it gave me the opportunity to put my fuel system on the table for the analytical minds that hang out here. John Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360561#360561 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: King KT-76A tray connector housing
From: "Louie928" <louieo(at)gorge.net>
Date: Dec 10, 2011
I need the connector housing for a King KT-76A transponder tray. There must be a Molex or similar housing that could be used rather than the costly replacement shown here. http://www.lane-pilot.com/servlet/Detail?no=99 -------- Louis W. Ott 601XL Quick Build Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360657#360657 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Kenworth Exhaust
From: "magi111" <venugopalmaran(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 12, 2011
Hey my very first comment on your site. ,I have been reading your post for a while and thought I would completely pop in and drop a friendly note. . It is great stuff indeed. Kenworth Exhaust (http://www.glenroyexhaust.com.au/truck.php) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360804#360804 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 13, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Kenworth Exhaust
At 10:20 PM 12/12/2011, you wrote: > >Hey my very first comment on your site. ,I have been reading your >post for a while and thought I would completely pop in and drop a >friendly note. . It is great stuff indeed. Welcome aboard sir. Are you building an airplane? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>
Subject: Generator Regulators
Date: Dec 13, 2011
Does anyone know of another company, besides Zeftronics, that manufactures or supplies generator regulators? Whilst Zeftronics seems to have the lead in supplying many different regulators their service is really bad, taking more than three days to respond to emails, and then not responding properly. Its taken me almost two weeks now just to get the correct information from them and I fear that it will take the same amount of time to place an order, by which time delivery will take as long because of the time of year.. Jay South Africa ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 13, 2011
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Generator Regulators
Well, their generator regulator is top notch. You do not need to purchase from Zeftronics directly. In fact you will get a better price from Chief Aircraft or Sacramento Skyranch. The regulator came with full documentation, items that needed checking prior to installation so that you don't "smoke" the regulator with a defect in electrical system. I've had mine installed for over 10 years and 700 hours flight time with no issues. I believe B&C Electrics also offers a good solid state regulator. I would never go back to a mechanical regulator. On 12/13/2011 2:52 AM, Jay Hyde wrote: > > Does anyone know of another company, besides Zeftronics, that > manufactures or supplies generator regulators? Whilst Zeftronics seems > to have the lead in supplying many different regulators their service > is really bad, taking more than three days to respond to emails, and > then not responding properly. > > Its taken me almost two weeks now just to get the correct information > from them and I fear that it will take the same amount of time to > place an order, by which time delivery will take as long because of > the time of year. > > Jay > > South Africa > > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 13, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Kenworth Exhaust
At 04:04 AM 12/13/2011, you wrote: > > >Bob N, > > I believe he is a spammer. The subject line of "Kenworth > Exhaust" and his link to view automotive exhausts >have zero to do with airplane electrics. At least, this is how I >interpret his post. Yeah, but it seemed prudent to give him the benefit of the doubt. He's not presently subscribed to any Matronics forums. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 13, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Generator Regulators
At 08:19 AM 12/13/2011, you wrote: > >Well, their generator regulator is top notch. You do not need to >purchase from Zeftronics directly. In fact you will get a better >price from Chief Aircraft or Sacramento Skyranch. The regulator came >with full documentation, items that needed checking prior to >installation so that you don't "smoke" the regulator with a defect >in electrical system. I've had mine installed for over 10 years and >700 hours flight time with no issues. I believe B&C Electrics also >offers a good solid state regulator. I would never go back to a >mechanical regulator. The regulators offered by B&C are not suited to service with generators. Alternators are inherently current limited and do not require reverse current cutouts. Generators are nothing more than parallel wound motors that deliver energy into the system if you spin them fast enough that 'counter-emf' exceeds system voltage. Their regulation dynamics is different too. Modern micro-electronics would make it much easier to build a generator controller . . . it would simply be a scaled down version of those devices found on Beechjets and Hawkers. But the market is pretty limited. Right now, Zeftronics is the only game in town that I'm aware of. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Generator Regulators
From: DeWitt Whittington <dee.whittington(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 13, 2011
I too can vouch for the quality of Zeftronics products. When I was the maintenance manager for a four Cessna flying club I switched all of them to Zeftronics units. And, yes, a number of the aircraft parts houses stock their products. Also I would not hesitate calling Femi Ibitayo, the owner of the company at 800-362-8985. Back in the day I met him at Oshkosh and spoke to him several times after that but not recently. Dee Sent from my iPad On Dec 13, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > Well, their generator regulator is top notch. You do not need to purchase from Zeftronics directly. In fact you will get a better price from Chief Aircraft or Sacramento Skyranch. The regulator came with full documentation, items that needed checking prior to installation so that you don't "smoke" the regulator with a defect in electrical system. I've had mine installed for over 10 years and 700 hours flight time with no issues. I believe B&C Electrics also offers a good solid state regulator. I would never go back to a mechanical regulator. > > On 12/13/2011 2:52 AM, Jay Hyde wrote: >> >> Does anyone know of another company, besides Zeftronics, that manufactures or supplies generator regulators? Whilst Zeftronics seems to have the lead in supplying many different regulators their service is really bad, taking more than three days to respond to emails, and then not responding properly. >> >> Its taken me almost two weeks now just to get the correct information from them and I fear that it will take the same amount of time to place an order, by which time delivery will take as long because of the time of year. >> >> Jay >> >> South Africa >> >> * >> >> >> * > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 13, 2011
Subject: starter switch wiring
From: Dennis Ramsey <doramsey(at)gmail.com>
I wired my starter switch and magnetos like Z-26 with the magneto wire shields both connected to the ground terminal on the switch and the other end of the shields connected to motor ground. Before installing the switch I confirmed continuity was correct in all switch positions. Why would one have continuity to ground from the magneto post even when the switch is in the "both" position. In fact there is strangely continuity from magneto post to magneto post. If it matters, the magnetos are Bendix and both have impulse couplings (no jumper required on the switch). I assumed that the magneto post is isolated from ground unless its wired to ground. Is that incorrect? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 13, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject:
At 10:55 AM 12/13/2011, you wrote: >I wired my starter switch and magnetos like Z-26 with the magneto >wire shields both connected to the ground terminal on the switch and >the other end of the shields connected to motor ground. Before >installing the switch I confirmed continuity was correct in all >switch positions. Why would one have continuity to ground from the >magneto post even when the switch is in the "both" position. In >fact there is strangely continuity from magneto post to magneto >post. If it matters, the magnetos are Bendix and both have impulse >couplings (no jumper required on the switch). I assumed that the >magneto post is isolated from ground unless its wired to ground. Is >that incorrect? No it is quite correct. What your ohmmeter perceives as "grounded" is really a measurement of the VERY LOW resistance of a magneto's primary coil (less than 1 ohm as I recall). The difference in measured resistance for a magneto's p-terminal to ground with points open verus points closed is very hard to detect with a garden variety ohmmeter. This is why one needs a "buzz box" to time a magneto. The "buzz box" is responsive to changes in AC impedance as opposed to DC resistance of the magneto p-lead circuit. Here's a compendium of documents that speak to magneto timing tools http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Magneto_Timing/ and even a couple of DIY buzz-boxes . . . one by the inestimable Jim Wier. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 13, 2011
Subject: Re: ectric-List:
From: Dennis Ramsey <doramsey(at)gmail.com>
Thanks Bob. That makes sense and educated me as to why we use timing devices instead of simple conductivity tests. I had confirmed that the issue I was seeing was indeed at the magneto but I was lost once I saw a perceived ground at the post. On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > At 10:55 AM 12/13/2011, you wrote: > > I wired my starter switch and magnetos like Z-26 with the magneto wire > shields both connected to the ground terminal on the switch and the other > end of the shields connected to motor ground. Before installing the > switch I confirmed continuity was correct in all switch positions. Why > would one have continuity to ground from the magneto post even when the > switch is in the "both" position. In fact there is strangely continuity > from magneto post to magneto post. If it matters, the magnetos are Bendix > and both have impulse couplings (no jumper required on the switch). I > assumed that the magneto post is isolated from ground unless its wired to > ground. Is that incorrect? > ** > > > No it is quite correct. What your ohmmeter perceives > as "grounded" is really a measurement of the VERY LOW > resistance of a magneto's primary coil (less than 1 > ohm as I recall). > > The difference in measured resistance for a magneto's > p-terminal to ground with points open verus points closed > is very hard to detect with a garden variety ohmmeter. > > This is why one needs a "buzz box" to time a magneto. > The "buzz box" is responsive to changes in AC impedance > as opposed to DC resistance of the magneto p-lead circuit. > > Here's a compendium of documents that speak to magneto > timing tools > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Magneto_Timing/ > > and even a couple of DIY buzz-boxes . . . one by > the inestimable Jim Wier. > > > ** > > ** Bob . . . > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Lloyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Generator Regulators
Date: Dec 13, 2011
Jay, Is it a generator or an alternator regulator you need...? I don't know about the older generators but, if you have an alternator, it is a Ford product. Last time I needed one, I went to a Ford truck or marine business and bought the Ford heavy duty regulator. It was less than $30 US. Same or better than the so called approved units.... Could be the same for the older generators too... D ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- ----- Original Message ----- From: Jay Hyde To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 1:52 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Generator Regulators Does anyone know of another company, besides Zeftronics, that manufactures or supplies generator regulators? Whilst Zeftronics seems to have the lead in supplying many different regulators their service is really bad, taking more than three days to respond to emails, and then not responding properly. Its taken me almost two weeks now just to get the correct information from them and I fear that it will take the same amount of time to place an order, by which time delivery will take as long because of the time of year.. Jay South Africa ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Lloyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Generator Regulators
Date: Dec 13, 2011
Jay, I stumbled on this answer. For some reason, I thought you were discussing a Cessna based question. Best to delete my answer due to my brain fart..... D ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- ----- Original Message ----- From: David Lloyd To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 2:07 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Generator Regulators Jay, Is it a generator or an alternator regulator you need...? I don't know about the older generators but, if you have an alternator, it is a Ford product. Last time I needed one, I went to a Ford truck or marine business and bought the Ford heavy duty regulator. It was less than $30 US. Same or better than the so called approved units.... Could be the same for the older generators too... D ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- ----- Original Message ----- From: Jay Hyde To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 1:52 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Generator Regulators Does anyone know of another company, besides Zeftronics, that manufactures or supplies generator regulators? Whilst Zeftronics seems to have the lead in supplying many different regulators their service is really bad, taking more than three days to respond to emails, and then not responding properly. Its taken me almost two weeks now just to get the correct information from them and I fear that it will take the same amount of time to place an order, by which time delivery will take as long because of the time of year.. Jay South Africa href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c 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: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>
Subject: Generator Regulators
Date: Dec 14, 2011
Thanks anyway David and all who answered. I have had replies from Zeftronics, but they take 2-3 days to reply and then it goes to 3-4 days because of the time difference between here and the US so its most frustrating. But I do have an answer now although it has now taken 2 weeks to get to this point! Jay From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Lloyd Sent: 14 December 2011 02:25 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Generator Regulators Jay, I stumbled on this answer. For some reason, I thought you were discussing a Cessna based question. Best to delete my answer due to my brain fart..... D _____ ----- Original Message ----- From: David Lloyd <mailto:skywagon(at)charter.net> Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 2:07 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Generator Regulators Jay, Is it a generator or an alternator regulator you need...? I don't know about the older generators but, if you have an alternator, it is a Ford product. Last time I needed one, I went to a Ford truck or marine business and bought the Ford heavy duty regulator. It was less than $30 US. Same or better than the so called approved units.... Could be the same for the older generators too... D _____ ----- Original Message ----- From: Jay Hyde <mailto:jay(at)horriblehyde.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 1:52 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Generator Regulators Does anyone know of another company, besides Zeftronics, that manufactures or supplies generator regulators? Whilst Zeftronics seems to have the lead in supplying many different regulators their service is really bad, taking more than three days to respond to emails, and then not responding properly. Its taken me almost two weeks now just to get the correct information from them and I fear that it will take the same amount of time to place an order, by which time delivery will take as long because of the time of year.. Jay South Africa href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref "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 href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref "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 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 14, 2011
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Generator Regulators
I find email to many companies to be a notoriously poor way to communicate. Some have on-line chat that works while they don't answer their email, etc. etc. I think email as a medium to business has been seriously compromised by the avalanche of spam. I find all too often I have to either use instant chat (which I'm not very fond of) or call them on the phone...don't know issue with Zeftronics, but have found that with other companies. On 12/14/2011 12:14 AM, Jay Hyde wrote: > > Thanks anyway David and all who answered. I have had replies from > Zeftronics, but they take 2-3 days to reply and then it goes to 3-4 > days because of the time difference between here and the US so its > most frustrating... > > But I do have an answer now although it has now taken 2 weeks to get > to this point! > > Jay > > *From:*owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of > *David Lloyd > *Sent:* 14 December 2011 02:25 AM > *To:* aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* Re: AeroElectric-List: Generator Regulators > > Jay, > > I stumbled on this answer. For some reason, I thought you were > discussing a Cessna based question. Best to delete my answer due to > my brain fart..... > > D > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ----- Original Message ----- > > *From:*David Lloyd > > *To:*aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > > > *Sent:*Tuesday, December 13, 2011 2:07 PM > > *Subject:*Re: AeroElectric-List: Generator Regulators > > Jay, > > Is it a generator or an alternator regulator you need...? I don't > know about the older generators but, if you have an alternator, it > is a Ford product. Last time I needed one, I went to a Ford truck > or marine business and bought the Ford heavy duty regulator. It > was less than $30 US. Same or better than the so called approved > units.... Could be the same for the older generators too... > > D > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ----- Original Message ----- > > *From:*Jay Hyde > > *To:*aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > > > *Sent:*Tuesday, December 13, 2011 1:52 AM > > *Subject:*AeroElectric-List: Generator Regulators > > Does anyone know of another company, besides Zeftronics, that > manufactures or supplies generator regulators? Whilst > Zeftronics seems to have the lead in supplying many different > regulators their service is really bad, taking more than three > days to respond to emails, and then not responding properly. > > Its taken me almost two weeks now just to get the correct > information from them and I fear that it will take the same > amount of time to place an order, by which time delivery will > take as long because of the time of year.... > > Jay > > South Africa > > * * > > * * > > *href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com* > > *href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com* > > *href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com* > > *href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="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* > > * * > > * * > > *href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com* > > *href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com* > > *href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com* > > *href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="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* > > * * > * * > ** > ** > ** > ** > ** > ** > ** > ** > *www.aeroelectric.com* > *www.buildersbooks.com* > *www.homebuilthelp.com* > ** > *http://www.matronics.com/contribution* > ** > ** > ** > ** > ** > ** > ** > *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List* > ** > ** > *http://forums.matronics.com* > ** > ** > ** > ** > *http://www.matronics.com/contribution* > ** > * * > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 14, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
Fred, During the review of design goals on your idea you mentioned the possibility of using a PIC micro-controller to accomplish the task. I mentioned a "do lots" board and enclosure that could be useful to your efforts. The schematic for the board is . . . http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/Do-Much_Board_Schematic.pdf If you want to massage it in a cad program . . . http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/Do-Much_Board.dwg Obviously, if you put ALL the parts on the board, there would be some conflicts of functionality. However, depending on what parts are put on, what are left off, values of parts and nature of software installed in the 8DIP PIC, you can "Do Lots" . . . Emacs! The board is being re-configured to accept surface mount power FETs as opposed to the 4DIP parts shown. The whole thing fits into this enclosure http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9011/A15_Package.jpg I think there's room under the board to let you jeep a TO247 power FET into the enclosure . . . depending on a refinement of design goals and preliminary design review, this combination of parts might save you a lot of time and offer a good finished product. Use as it suits your needs. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: starter switch wiring
From: "racerjerry" <gki(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us>
Date: Dec 15, 2011
Most likely you are just reading the magneto internal coil resistance. Disconnect the P leads and re-measure. You will still see continuity between the magnetos P lead terminal and ground with P leads disconnected. The magnetos coils primary winding consists of a small number of turns of wire wrapped around an iron core. One end of the primary winding is internally grounded and the other end is connected to the P terminal/stud. The resistance of the primary winding is very low (not much more than the meter lead resistance) and difficult to measure using a standard ohmmeter. Slick specifies primary coil resistance to be between 0.5 and 1.2 ohms (points open / disconnected). With your ohmmeter, verify that each bare P lead (aircraft wiring) has continuity between each lead and ground when magneto switch is in the OFF position and OPEN (no continuity) when in the BOTH position. If that works, reconnect everything, fire up the engine and do a normal magneto RPM drop check to verify all is well. -------- Jerry King Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360955#360955 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: James Kinninger <jimk(at)hdiss.net>
Subject: Re Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
Date: Dec 15, 2011
The original topic seems to have gravitated to the area of vapor locks and pump placement. That is fine with me and actually makes my below information applicable. Here is my question to Don Rivera of Airflow Performance (the maker of my Aux pump & kit) and his answer: My question was: " I have return lines to each wing tank. These lines go through an Andair Value that when turned, changes both the out going line from the tank as well as the return line. So, can I hook up your boost pump to take advantage of the plumbing I have in place or should I abandon it and the expensive Andair Valve?" Don's response, Nov 19, 2011: "It would not be advisable to run separate return lines to each tank when using this boost pump package. Simply tee the return line into the supply line feeding the boost pump. You can put a tee fitting on the outlet of the selector valve then on the run of the tee, connect that to the inlet of the boost pump. Connect the return line from the pump to the tee part of the fitting on the selector valve. You can use your trick Andair selector valve for the purge return (that=92s the valve on top of the engine). Due to vapor issues it is not advisable to install the boost pump on the engine side of the firewall (a gascolator is also not advisable to be installed on the firewall). This is far more a flight safety issue than installing the boost pump with =93high pressure fuel=94 (30 PSI is not high pressure) in the cockpit. If the plumbing is installed correctly and aircraft fuel system practices are followed for plumbing (reference AC4313-2B) there should be no problem." Don Rivera Airflow Performance 111 Airflow Drive Spartanburg, SC 29306 Phone: 864-576-4512 Fax: 864-576-0201 E-Mail: don(at)airflowperformance.com website: airflowperformance.com Jim Kinninger jimk(at)hdiss.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 15, 2011
From: Paul Millner <millner(at)me.com>
Subject: Use of non-aviation Ford-style regulators
Note that it can be dangerous to use non-aviation Ford-type regulators in our airplanes.When the alternator half of the master switch is turned off, the regulator will allow the alternator to go into a voltage runaway mode, and that overvoltage will not be controlled by your overvoltage relay (since the field current is flowing via a separate path, directly from the alternator).The overvoltage condition can cook your avionics and battery. Even if you don't turn off the alternator half of the master switch, if your separate overvoltage relay trip for any reason with such a regulator installed, that, ironically, will trigger the voltage runaway scenario. Paul ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 15, 2011
From: David <ainut(at)knology.net>
Subject: Re: Use of non-aviation Ford-style regulators
Uh oh. What's the protection for this? I'm using not a Ford, but a smaller, denser, lighter Japanese alternator with same output. David Merchant Paul Millner wrote: > > Note that it can be dangerous to use non-aviation Ford-type regulators > in our airplanes. When the alternator half of the master switch is > turned off, the regulator will allow the alternator to go into a > voltage runaway mode, and that overvoltage will not be controlled by > your overvoltage relay (since the field current is flowing via a > separate path, directly from the alternator). The overvoltage > condition can cook your avionics and battery. > > > Even if you don't turn off the alternator half of the master switch, > if your separate overvoltage relay trip for any reason with such a > regulator installed, that, ironically, will trigger the voltage > runaway scenario. > > > Paul > -- Tell the truth. Be honest. Be responsible to and for yourself. I liked America when it was free and it's people were responsible and had morals. Every gram of cocaine you buy from elsewhere contributes to an innocent being murdered in Central and South America. Grow your own or Stop taking it. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
From: "Fred Stucklen" <fred.stucklen(at)utcfuelcells.com>
Date: Dec 15, 2011
I've given some more thought and testing on the Auto Aux Fuel Pump idea that I originally posted. I've attached a schematic of a circuit I've bread boarded and tested. Seems to to work. The idea/implementation is to automatically turn the pump ON for as long as the fuel pressure is below a set limit, and don't turn it off until the pressure has been above that limit for at least 10 seconds. If the pressure go low again, the process is repeated. I'm planning on making up a hardwired proto board and actually testing in my RV-7A, but probably not until after the new year..... Fred Stucklen RV-7A N924RV 650 Hrs Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361007#361007 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/auto_aux_fuel_pump_704.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Victor Menkal <vmenkal(at)mac.com>
Subject: Purpose of Diodes on Relays
Date: Dec 15, 2011
I noted that the manufacturer of my ignition switch requests a diode across the between the excitation (low current start switch) input and ground. Also noted that Bob calls out diodes on fig Z-16 wiring diagram for the Rotax 912. Can anyone provide a simple explanation of reason for these? As well Bob did not call out the diode on Z-16 but assume its the same as the other drawings which calls for a 1N5400 diode. I really like Bob's crow bar over voltage module and alternator disconnect relay which is not included in the standard Rotax wiring schematic. Low cost and easy to install (following Bob's schematic of course) and covers off one problem area which a number of Rotax owners have identified with the standard wiring system and rectifier. Best part is that my ALT switch on the panel is now gainfully employed (not used following standard Rotax diagram). Over voltage protection option is also highly recommended by the Rotax guru's at Rotec Research Canada. Thanx Vic CH750 Rotax 912ULS-2 Whitehorse Yukon ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Lloyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Purpose of Diodes on Relays
Date: Dec 15, 2011
Not sure if this is what your are looking for.... The diode on some ignition switches provides a small current to the alternator field to insure that the field gets excited upon start up. Some alternators do not self start and need a little current to begin the generation process... Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- ----- Original Message ----- From: Victor Menkal To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 9:26 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Purpose of Diodes on Relays I noted that the manufacturer of my ignition switch requests a diode across the between the excitation (low current start switch) input and ground. Also noted that Bob calls out diodes on fig Z-16 wiring diagram for the Rotax 912. Can anyone provide a simple explanation of reason for these? As well Bob did not call out the diode on Z-16 but assume its the same as the other drawings which calls for a 1N5400 diode. I really like Bob's crow bar over voltage module and alternator disconnect relay which is not included in the standard Rotax wiring schematic. Low cost and easy to install (following Bob's schematic of course) and covers off one problem area which a number of Rotax owners have identified with the standard wiring system and rectifier. Best part is that my ALT switch on the panel is now gainfully employed (not used following standard Rotax diagram). Over voltage protection option is also highly recommended by the Rotax guru's at Rotec Research Canada. Thanx Vic CH750 Rotax 912ULS-2 Whitehorse Yukon ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 16, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Purpose of Diodes on Relays
At 11:26 PM 12/15/2011, you wrote: I noted that the manufacturer of my ignition switch requests a diode across the between the excitation (low current start switch) input and ground. Also noted that Bob calls out diodes on fig Z-16 wiring diagram for the Rotax 912. Can anyone provide a simple explanation of reason for these? As well Bob did not call out the diode on Z-16 but assume its the same as the other drawings which calls for a 1N5400 diode. Capacitors and inductors are both capable of 'storing energy'. Capacitors store charge as a voltage which manifests when electrons pile up in the insulating space between two conductors. Discharging a capacitor offers potential for a very high current event. Inductors store a charge in their magnetic fields. While current is flowing from external sources, a field is generated within the core of the inductor. When that external source is removed, the magnetic field collapses rapidly. Voltage generated in the windings of the inductor is proportional to the number of turns, strength of the field and RATE OF CHANGE for the collapse of that field. The diodes shown wired in parallel with the coils of relays and solenoids to effect an orderly management of that stored energy. See . . . http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/spikecatcher.pdf We've had some past discussions here on the List about the 'optimal' choice of components for managing this energy. The confusion has been compounded by erroneous notions published over the signatures of people who should have known better. Suffice it to say that for OUR purposes in the crafting systems with exceedingly low service cycles . . . the plain vanilla diode approach illustrated in my drawings suffices nicely. Here's a capture of one such discussion thread where I attempted to apply some simple-ideas in physics with practical recipes for success in the art of 'spike management' . . . http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/spike.pdf Know also that good management of this energy does NOT go to the PROTECTION of solid state devices in the ship's systems. It's for protection of service life on the controlling device. I.e., diode on the battery contactor improves on the service life of the battery master switch. Suppression of this transient also goes to minimizing the probability of interference with other systems . . . which is a transient performance event, not a destructive event. ANY diode is capable of doing the job electrically. I recommend the 1N5400 series devices for their robust MECHANICAL qualities. But the actual part number is electrically non-critical. I really like Bob's crow bar over voltage module and alternator disconnect relay which is not included in the standard Rotax wiring schematic. Low cost and easy to install (following Bob's schematic of course) and covers off one problem area which a number of Rotax owners have identified with the standard wiring system and rectifier. Best part is that my ALT switch on the panel is now gainfully employed (not used following standard Rotax diagram). Over voltage protection option is also highly recommended by the Rotax guru's at Rotec Research Canada. I have not been made aware of any runaway alternator situations with the PM alternators. A rectifier/regulator is: (1) an electrical device that HAS runaway failure modes and(2) is highly stressed - runs hotter than !@#$@#. OV protection seems a prudent addition to the stock drawings supplied by engine manufacturers which never seem to include OV protection recommendations. We theorized here on the List that the public relations types for the various engine suppliers would be embarrassed to admit that their product offering could fail in a very unhappy manner. Hence, "let us not admit it by recommending ov protection." Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 16, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Use of non-aviation Ford-style regulators
Paul Millner wrote: Note that it can be dangerous to use non-aviation Ford-type regulators in our airplanes. When the alternator half of the master switch is turned off, the regulator will allow the alternator to go into a voltage runaway mode, and that overvoltage will not be controlled by your overvoltage relay (since the field current is flowing via a separate path, directly from the alternator). The overvoltage condition can cook your avionics and battery. Even if you don't turn off the alternator half of the master switch, if your separate overvoltage relay trip for any reason with such a regulator installed, that, ironically, will trigger the voltage runaway scenario. Paul At 07:02 PM 12/15/2011, you wrote: Uh oh. What's the protection for this? I'm using not a Ford, but a smaller, denser, lighter Japanese alternator with same output. David Merchant Man! I've not had occasion to lift the lid on this pot of stew since I owned the Benton Airpark (1K1) 22 years ago. Paul's admonition arises from the fact that SOME solid state replacements for the original Ford electromechanical regulators do not conform to the form, fit and function of those regulators. As installed first on automobiles the Ford style regulator was configured thusly: Emacs! The regulator contained two "relay" like devices wherein one relay was the voltage regulator and the second was used as an ON-OFF control of field excitation. The field relay sensed a DC voltage on the alternator's "N" terminal (y-wound stator center tap) and would automatically excite an alternator as soon as the engine was started and the alternator was demonstrated to be in motion. This all happened through a tiny excitation current that would flow through the alternator warning light bulb into the regulator's "I" or indicator terminal. Failure of this light bulb led to a lot of regulators and alternators being swapped out as mechanics who did not understand the system tried to get their customer's car back on the road. Later systems added a resistor across the lamp to make sure that the alternator would still come on line even if the bulb were burned out. This is the root-system from which Cessna's alternators evolved. Cessna chose to run their field supply voltage right into the "A" terminal and control the field supply relay directly with alternator field switch controlling the "S" terminal. In later years, the OV protection module (first proposed by yours truly) was inserted between the alternator field switch and the "S" terminal. Emacs! So much for the history. In later years, solid state replacements with the same A, S, I and F terminal markings were crafted where the S-terminal was no longer used for field control but for BUS VOLTAGE SENSING. When one drops one of these regulators into an automobile, the system still performs in a useful manner. When dropped into a Cessna, opening the field control side of the split master switch deprived the regulator of control information causing the alternator to full-field . . . i.e. OV runaway. I'm not sure that ALL solid state drop-ins for a Ford regulator behave in this manner . . . but some do. Been there, done that on one of my rental fleet airplanes. But if "Ford-style" regulators are wired per recommendations in the Z-figures (A and S terminals tied together) there is no risk for experiencing the design induced runaway condition. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Victor Menkal <vmenkal(at)mac.com>
Subject: Relay protection diodes.
Date: Dec 16, 2011
Thanx David. I think I found the reason for the diodes is to protect electronics from the brief high voltage spike created in the relay coils when the relay is switched off. Appreciate advice if a 1N5400 diode (3A 100V) is ok for the master relay. Thanx Vic Vic Menkal CH750 Rotax 912ULS Whitehorse Yukon ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 16, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
At 09:59 PM 12/15/2011, you wrote: > > >I've given some more thought and testing on the Auto Aux Fuel Pump >idea that I originally posted. I've attached a schematic of a >circuit I've bread boarded and tested. Seems to to work. > The idea/implementation is to automatically turn the pump ON for > as long as the fuel pressure is below a set limit, and don't turn > it off until the pressure has been above that limit for at least 10 > seconds. If the pressure go low again, the process is repeated. > I'm planning on making up a hardwired proto board and actually > testing in my RV-7A, but probably not until after the new year..... The circuit yields well to critical review but it took me a bit of feather-sorting to understand application of the power FET as drawn. You your schematic has the bulk connection tied to the drain terminal and the thing that jumped off the page at me was an N-channel FET. But after sorting out the S-G-D labels and application in the circuit, the real P-channel device emerged. Another approach worth considering is use of an N-Channel device as a pull-down switch. You'd need to do some re-wiring to make the pump's manual ops be pull-to-ground too. The N-channel offers potentially 1/10th the on-resistance of a P-channel. Heat sinking of the device becomes much easier and performance goes up with the reduced voltage drop. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 16, 2011
From: rayj <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: Purpose of Diodes on Relays
On 12/16/2011 08:23 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > Capacitors and inductors are both capable of 'storing > energy'. Capacitors store charge as a voltage which > manifests when electrons pile up in the insulating > space between two conductors. Discharging a capacitor > offers potential for a very high current event. Greetings, It's my understanding that the electrons accumulate in the conductor on one side of the insulating space while "holes" accumulate in the conductor on the other side of the insulating space. Clarification? Raymond Julian Kettle River, MN "And you know that I could have me a million more friends, and all I'd have to lose is my point of view." - John Prine > > Inductors store a charge in their magnetic fields. > While current is flowing from external sources, a > field is generated within the core of the inductor. > When that external source is removed, the magnetic > field collapses rapidly. Voltage generated in the > windings of the inductor is proportional to the number > of turns, strength of the field and RATE OF CHANGE > for the collapse of that field. > > The diodes shown wired in parallel with the coils > of relays and solenoids to effect an orderly management > of that stored energy. See . . . > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/spikecatcher.pdf > > We've had some past discussions here on the List > about the 'optimal' choice of components for managing > this energy. The confusion has been compounded by > erroneous notions published over the signatures of > people who should have known better. Suffice it to > say that for OUR purposes in the crafting systems > with exceedingly low service cycles . . . the plain > vanilla diode approach illustrated in my drawings > suffices nicely. > > Here's a capture of one such discussion thread where > I attempted to apply some simple-ideas in physics > with practical recipes for success in the art > of 'spike management' . . . > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/spike.pdf > > Know also that good management of this energy does > NOT go to the PROTECTION of solid state devices in > the ship's systems. It's for protection of service > life on the controlling device. I.e., diode on the > battery contactor improves on the service life of > the battery master switch. Suppression of this transient > also goes to minimizing the probability of interference > with other systems . . . which is a transient > performance event, not a destructive event. > > ANY diode is capable of doing the job electrically. > I recommend the 1N5400 series devices for their > robust MECHANICAL qualities. But the actual > part number is electrically non-critical. > > I really like Bob's crow bar over voltage module and alternator > disconnect relay which is not included in the standard Rotax wiring > schematic. Low cost and easy to install (following Bob's schematic of > course) and covers off one problem area which a number of Rotax owners > have identified with the standard wiring system and rectifier. Best part > is that my ALT switch on the panel is now gainfully employed (not used > following standard Rotax diagram). Over voltage protection option is > also highly recommended by the Rotax guru's at Rotec Research Canada. > > I have not been made aware of any runaway alternator > situations with the PM alternators. A rectifier/regulator > is: (1) an electrical device that HAS runaway failure > modes and(2) is highly stressed - runs hotter than !@#$@#. > OV protection seems a prudent addition to the stock > drawings supplied by engine manufacturers which never > seem to include OV protection recommendations. > > We theorized here on the List that the public relations > types for the various engine suppliers would be > embarrassed to admit that their product offering could > fail in a very unhappy manner. Hence, "let us not > admit it by recommending ov protection." > > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter Mather" <peter(at)mather.com>
Subject: Vans 35A alternator - Nippondenso 14184
Date: Dec 16, 2011
Can anyone tell me the purpose of the third wire on the connector of this alternator? The cable supplied by Vans has Black - ground; green - field; white - not connected. I'm looking at using a regulator that has a stator connection which it uses to drive an ignition light - is the white connection to the stator? Thanks in advance Peter ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca>
Subject: Purpose of Diodes on Relays
Date: Dec 16, 2011
A starting motor is essentially a coil. When you activate the starter (read coil) draws down on the current of the battery. The more load on the starter the greater the current drawn by the starter. When you release the starter button, key or whatever, all the energy stored up in the coil (or starter motor) is immediately dumped into the circuit, with extremely high voltage in reverse polarity. The diode allows this reverse potential to be drained off safely without frying all your expen$ive avionics and other digital equipment on the buss. Clear as mud? Noel From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Victor Menkal Sent: December 16, 2011 1:56 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Purpose of Diodes on Relays I noted that the manufacturer of my ignition switch requests a diode across the between the excitation (low current start switch) input and ground. Also noted that Bob calls out diodes on fig Z-16 wiring diagram for the Rotax 912. Can anyone provide a simple explanation of reason for these? As well Bob did not call out the diode on Z-16 but assume its the same as the other drawings which calls for a 1N5400 diode. I really like Bob's crow bar over voltage module and alternator disconnect relay which is not included in the standard Rotax wiring schematic. Low cost and easy to install (following Bob's schematic of course) and covers off one problem area which a number of Rotax owners have identified with the standard wiring system and rectifier. Best part is that my ALT switch on the panel is now gainfully employed (not used following standard Rotax diagram). Over voltage protection option is also highly recommended by the Rotax guru's at Rotec Research Canada. Thanx Vic CH750 Rotax 912ULS-2 Whitehorse Yukon ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 16, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Purpose of Diodes on Relays
> >Greetings, > >It's my understanding that the electrons accumulate in the conductor >on one side of the insulating space while "holes" accumulate in the >conductor on the other side of the insulating space. > >Clarification? That's a good a analogy. Here are some explanations with a lot of mathematical description but one can clean the simple-ideas of the physics . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric http://www.physics.sjsu.edu/becker/physics51/capacitors.htm Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Auto Aux Fuel Pump Circuit Idea
From: "Fred Stucklen" <fred.stucklen(at)utcfuelcells.com>
Date: Dec 16, 2011
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: > At 09:59 PM 12/15/2011, you wrote: > > Bob, > > Yep, I guess I drew the MOSFET incorrectly. It is a "P" channel device. Power dissipation on this .02 ohm ON device should be minimal. So far testing has show that it can draw 10 amps with no heatsink.... I will heatsink it in the prototype. > I'd rather test the concept in a way that involves little change to the existing wiring in the plane. I currently have the circuit wired to switch the positive side, so the "P" Channel device works better for me. Very easy to change it to a pull down circuit if some one else wanted that method. > I think the next step is to prototype it, bench check it using an actual pump (instead of the halogen bulb I'm currently using for a load)and then begin actual flight testing of the timed concept. If this works out OK, it might be lower cost to implement the design using the PIC processor. > By the way, thanks for the proto board idea. I might use that in the future... > > Fred Stucklen > RV-7A N924RV 650 Hrs > > > The circuit yields well to critical review but it took me a bit of feather-sorting to understand application of the power FET as drawn. You your schematic has the bulk connection tied to the drain terminal and the thing that jumped off the page at me was an N-channel FET. But after sorting out the S-G-D labels and application in the circuit, the real P-channel device emerged. Another approach worth considering is use of an N-Channel device as a pull-down switch. You'd need to do some re-wiring to make the pump's manual ops be pull-to-ground too. The N-channel offers potentially 1/10th the on-resistance of a P-channel. Heat sinking of the device becomes much easier and performance goes up with the reduced voltage drop. Bob . . .[/quote] Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361068#361068 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 16, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Vans 35A alternator - Nippondenso 14184
At 01:17 PM 12/16/2011, you wrote: > >Can anyone tell me the purpose of the third wire on the connector of this >alternator? > >The cable supplied by Vans has Black - ground; green - field; white - not >connected. > >I'm looking at using a regulator that has a stator connection which it uses >to drive an ignition light - is the white connection to the stator? Does Van's alternator REQUIRE an external regulator? Last time I looked, their offerings were internally regulated. Can you post an excerpt of the schematic . . . or point us to a link where your applicable schematic is visible? Trying to give useful advise based on numbers of pins and colors of wires is risky. The SCHEMATICS associated with the products being explored are necessary for offering well considered advice. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 16, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Purpose of Diodes on Relays
At 01:28 PM 12/16/2011, you wrote: >A starting motor is essentially a coil. When you activate the >starter (read coil) draws down on the current of the battery. The >more load on the starter the greater the current drawn by the >starter. When you release the starter button, key or whatever, all >the energy stored up in the coil (or starter motor) is immediately >dumped into the circuit, with extremely high voltage in reverse >polarity. The diode allows this reverse potential to be drained off >safely without frying all your expen$ive avionics and other digital >equipment on the buss. A few years back (about 11) when we were exploring the behavior of energy stored on inductive devices, we discovered (and demonstrated on the bench) that un-suppressed spikes from inductive devices are almost totally dissipated across the spreading contacts of the switching device. For example, here's one of many plots we gathered while stirring the Contactor-Spike- Stew pot: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/CH_Bus_Noise_w_0p1_Cap.gif There are two traces. The top one shows voltage developed across the contacts of the controlling switch . . . the lower trace shows voltage that made it out to the bus . . . barely perceptible. Know that electronic devices designed to run directly from the bus of any vehicular DC system is (1) easily designed to stand off the (2) minuscule packet of energy that makes it across the opening switch. In short, there is no risk of "frying" anything. The major risk is shortened service life of the switch that controls the contactor. The same conditions apply to energy dumped from a starter motor . . . it's the starter contactor that takes the hit, not electro whizzies running off the bus. One might think that an inductor charged to hundreds of amps represents the grand dragon of spike generators. Motors have a unique feature called counter-emf. A 12v motor really runs on the DIFFERENCE voltage between applied voltage (battery) and counter-emf due to rotation. The real free inductance model of a motor is rather small in comparison with contactor coils having hundreds of turns of wire. This is why you never see spike suppressors on a motor . . . they're just not a potential threat. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter Mather" <peter(at)mather.com>
Subject: Vans 35A alternator - Nippondenso 14184
Date: Dec 16, 2011
Bob The alternator is one Vans were selling back in 04. It is externally regulated and Vans then recommended a VR-1751 or MS-150A regulator but always said to leave the white lead "unconnected" I can't see what else the third wire could be except a stator connection but any suggestions or test ideas would be appreciated. Best Regards Peter -----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: 16 December 2011 21:42 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Vans 35A alternator - Nippondenso 14184 --> At 01:17 PM 12/16/2011, you wrote: >--> > >Can anyone tell me the purpose of the third wire on the connector of >this alternator? > >The cable supplied by Vans has Black - ground; green - field; white - >not connected. > >I'm looking at using a regulator that has a stator connection which it >uses to drive an ignition light - is the white connection to the stator? Does Van's alternator REQUIRE an external regulator? Last time I looked, their offerings were internally regulated. Can you post an excerpt of the schematic . . . or point us to a link where your applicable schematic is visible? Trying to give useful advise based on numbers of pins and colors of wires is risky. The SCHEMATICS associated with the products being explored are necessary for offering well considered advice. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 17, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Vans 35A alternator - Nippondenso 14184
At 04:48 PM 12/16/2011, you wrote: > >Bob > >The alternator is one Vans were selling back in 04. It is externally >regulated and Vans then recommended a VR-1751 or MS-150A regulator but >always said to leave the white lead "unconnected" > >I can't see what else the third wire could be except a stator connection but >any suggestions or test ideas would be appreciated. > >Best Regards > >Peter Okay. If there's no regulator built in, then the third wire cannot be for the legacy "alternator inop light" provided by most built in regulators. This leaves the possibility that it is a stator tap for a y-wound alternator. Do an ohmmeter test between this connection and the alternator case. Check the indicated resistance for both polarities of the meter leads. One should be some 'low' value while the other will be very high if not infinite. This the expected display for looking at the resistance of the lower trio of diodes. Then do the same test between the 'third lead' and the b-terminal. You should see similar if not identical readings for the upper trio of diodes. Finally, in MIGHT be that Van was selling a modified automotive alternator wherein an internal regulator was removed. In this case, connections of the third lead are left up to the modifier . . . but is likely to be open circuit to any other portion of the alternator's internals. It's a game of non-invasive Clue . . . except that nobody died at the hands of Col. Mustard in the parlor by hanging. Whoops! Speaking of clues . . . I missed the one you provided in the subject line. Fooey . . . I've not finished my first cup of coffee . . . if that's a valid excuse. Okay, go to the Motorcar Parts of America website at http://www.onlinetechhelp.com/picturesPlus1.php and enter your 14184 in the part number search. Don't know why this takes you to a page featuring TWO part numbers, but select 14184. There you will find a drawing that gives dimensions, a picture of the device and a connector pin-out diagram. In this case, the mystery "third lead" is indeed a stator tap connection. The MPA website belongs to the company that offered me detailed insight into the alternator remanufacturing business several years ago. I gave a brief accounting of a tour of their Tijuana, MX facility in Revision 12, Chapter 3 of the 'Connection. Newcomers to the List might wish to avail themselves of that description. It's an eye-opener. I suggest that everyone bookmark this website in their browser. It's a huge repository of useful information. I was tempted to delete the opening soliloquy to gloss over my lack of due diligence in sorting the data you offered. But it's still a valid technique for making useful deductions on parts not so well identified as yours. So here it is . . . warts and all. I'm going for another cup of coffee. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter Mather" <peter(at)mather.com>
Subject: Vans 35A alternator - Nippondenso 14184
Date: Dec 17, 2011
Bob Thanks for that - I should have worked that one out for myself. Anyway, I've just tested as suggested using the diode setting on my DMM and it is definitely stator. Have you had a look at the STMicroelectronics alternator regulator chips? Single chip does everything, easy to package. The top of the ranhge version seems to be http://www.st.com/internet/automotive/product/89833.jsp Best regards Peter -----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: 17 December 2011 15:27 Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Vans 35A alternator - Nippondenso 14184 --> At 04:48 PM 12/16/2011, you wrote: >--> > >Bob > >The alternator is one Vans were selling back in 04. It is externally >regulated and Vans then recommended a VR-1751 or MS-150A regulator but >always said to leave the white lead "unconnected" > >I can't see what else the third wire could be except a stator >connection but any suggestions or test ideas would be appreciated. > >Best Regards > >Peter Okay. If there's no regulator built in, then the third wire cannot be for the legacy "alternator inop light" provided by most built in regulators. This leaves the possibility that it is a stator tap for a y-wound alternator. Do an ohmmeter test between this connection and the alternator case. Check the indicated resistance for both polarities of the meter leads. One should be some 'low' value while the other will be very high if not infinite. This the expected display for looking at the resistance of the lower trio of diodes. Then do the same test between the 'third lead' and the b-terminal. You should see similar if not identical readings for the upper trio of diodes. Finally, in MIGHT be that Van was selling a modified automotive alternator wherein an internal regulator was removed. In this case, connections of the third lead are left up to the modifier . . . but is likely to be open circuit to any other portion of the alternator's internals. It's a game of non-invasive Clue . . . except that nobody died at the hands of Col. Mustard in the parlor by hanging. Whoops! Speaking of clues . . . I missed the one you provided in the subject line. Fooey . . . I've not finished my first cup of coffee . . . if that's a valid excuse. Okay, go to the Motorcar Parts of America website at http://www.onlinetechhelp.com/picturesPlus1.php and enter your 14184 in the part number search. Don't know why this takes you to a page featuring TWO part numbers, but select 14184. There you will find a drawing that gives dimensions, a picture of the device and a connector pin-out diagram. In this case, the mystery "third lead" is indeed a stator tap connection. The MPA website belongs to the company that offered me detailed insight into the alternator remanufacturing business several years ago. I gave a brief accounting of a tour of their Tijuana, MX facility in Revision 12, Chapter 3 of the 'Connection. Newcomers to the List might wish to avail themselves of that description. It's an eye-opener. I suggest that everyone bookmark this website in their browser. It's a huge repository of useful information. I was tempted to delete the opening soliloquy to gloss over my lack of due diligence in sorting the data you offered. But it's still a valid technique for making useful deductions on parts not so well identified as yours. So here it is . . . warts and all. I'm going for another cup of coffee. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 17, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Vans 35A alternator - Nippondenso 14184
>Have you had a look at the STMicroelectronics alternator regulator chips? >Single chip does everything, easy to package. I've not seen those devices before. Nice. They have a built in power fet for controlling the field. The problem with most regulator products is that they're designed to integrate with modern engine controllers and even the older chips (20+ years) have a phase sense pin that shuts the field current off until the alternator is sensed to be rotating. Not sure how this particular chip works but the device I first evaluated http://aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Misc/Freescale/MC33092A_Simplified.pdf also has this 'phase input signal' on pin 10 that had to be 'fooled' believing that the alternator was turning. Otherwise, I needed to bring a phase sample out of the alternator (yet another airframe wire) to accommodate the chip's design goals. I've considered a number of new design projects for regulators friendly to the legacy, external regulator philosophy . . . but there's just too many perfectly acceptable regulators out there already. If I do one in the future, it will be processor based and feature some diagnostic outputs . . . THAT's a feature that the contemporary COTS products don't have. The L9911 chip you cited does have diagnostics tailored to the automotive engine controller world . . . I'd probably go more for a human readable output of some kind. That's WAaaayyyy back on the stove's burners . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Victor Menkal <vmenkal(at)mac.com>
Subject: Diodes on Relays
Date: Dec 17, 2011
Thanx Bob and everyone for the great info on this. Superb! Victor Menkal CH750 Rotax 912 ULS-2 Aeroelectric OV protected Whitehorse Yukon ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Starter contactors
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Dec 17, 2011
My aircraft has a Rotax 912ULS engine with an 18 amp alternator. I am considering adding lighting and additional avionics that would load the alternator to near maximum. In an effort to conserve electricity, I am thinking about eliminating the main battery contactor similar to Z-17 or Z-20. I am not familiar with the internal workings of the starter motor, but do not believe there is an internal solenoid that could be used to open the circuit. My options are: 1. Leave the circuit as is with a battery contactor. 2. Remove the battery contactor and add a second starter contactor in series with the existing one. The starter contactors would be energized by two side by side momentary push button switches. 3. Remove the battery contactor and connect the starter contactor directly to the battery. Option 3 is the simplest and lightest weight and least expensive. But I am concerned about the starter contacts welding themselves shut with no way to shut off the power. Is the likelihood of the starter contactor failing closed, great enough to warrant the use of two contactors in series with the starter motor? Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361107#361107 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 17, 2011
From: Jan de Jong <jan_de_jong(at)casema.nl>
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
Joe, There may be an option 4. You might investigate using Tyco BDS-A as the battery contactor (attached). Buy at Allied. Plug and contacts at http://www.newunitedracetech.com Somewhat expensive. Search "AMP 184046". Altogether say $60. Regards, Jan de Jong ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Dec 17, 2011
Jan de Jong, Thanks for that information. A latching relay has another failure mode to consider: failure to unlatch. However a latching relay may be suitable for use in some situations. I will keep it in mind. Thanks for the link. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361112#361112 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 17, 2011
From: Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net>
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
There is also the option of a manual battery switch. Could be used as a battery contactor substitute or just in series with the starter. Saw one the other day that only weighed a couple of oz. It was under $10. and rated for 200 amps. Ken On 17/12/2011 5:01 PM, Jan de Jong wrote: > Joe, > > There may be an option 4. > You might investigate using Tyco BDS-A as the battery contactor (attached). > > Buy at Allied. > Plug and contacts at http://www.newunitedracetech.com > Somewhat expensive. > Search "AMP 184046". > Altogether say $60. > > Regards, > Jan de Jong > > *Truncated!* ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 17, 2011
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
From: Bill <wtrooper(at)GMAIL.COM>
I've considered the "Little Switch" on this page: http://www.flamingriver.com/batterydisconnect Bill SF bay area Thinking Onex On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 12:47 PM, user9253 wrote: > > > > My aircraft has a Rotax 912ULS engine with an 18 amp alternator. I am > considering adding lighting and additional avionics that would load the > alternator to near maximum. In an effort to conserve electricity, I am > thinking about eliminating the main battery contactor similar to Z-17 or > Z-20. I am not familiar with the internal workings of the starter motor, > but do not believe there is an internal solenoid that could be used to open > the circuit. My options are: > 1. Leave the circuit as is with a battery contactor. > 2. Remove the battery contactor and add a second starter contactor in > series with the existing one. The starter contactors would be energized > by two side by side momentary push button switches. > 3. Remove the battery contactor and connect the starter contactor > directly to the battery. > > Option 3 is the simplest and lightest weight and least expensive. But I > am concerned about the starter contacts welding themselves shut with no way > to shut off the power. > Is the likelihood of the starter contactor failing closed, great enough > to warrant the use of two contactors in series with the starter motor? > Joe > > -------- > Joe Gores > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361107#361107 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 18, 2011
From: Jan de Jong <jan_de_jong(at)casema.nl>
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
A solid state loadswitch as starter contactor could also be an option (attached). I would be inclined to make my own though by parallelling some BTS555. Jan de Jong ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 18, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
At 09:05 PM 12/17/2011, you wrote: >I've considered the "Little Switch" on this page: ><http://www.flamingriver.com/batterydisconnect>http://www.flamingriver.com/batterydisconnect This appears to be the same switch offered by Harbor Feight at a fraction of the cost . . . http://www.harborfreight.com/heavy-duty-battery-cutoff-switch-66789.html Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 18, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
At 02:47 PM 12/17/2011, you wrote: > >My aircraft has a Rotax 912ULS engine with an 18 amp alternator. I >am considering adding lighting and additional avionics that would >load the alternator to near maximum. Can you share your load analysis with us? >Option 3 is the simplest and lightest weight and least >expensive. But I am concerned about the starter contacts welding >themselves shut with no way to shut off the power. > Is the likelihood of the starter contactor failing closed, great > enough to warrant the use of two contactors in series with the starter motor? Not if you can climb out quickly and disconnect the battery without undue hazard. But the incidences of sticking starter contactors of the S704 variety are exceedingly rare. How about a battery switch and S704-1 style starter contactor. When you say your alternator is loaded to "near max" . . . under what conditions and for how long? Keep in mind that legacy design goals for engine driven power sources is to keep 20-25% of alternator capacity in reserve for battery replenishment. A load analysis of ENERGY requirements for various phases of flight might yield some less stressing facts about your night flight capabilities . . . ESPECIALLY with LED nav lights. Landing lights are a toss up . . . their current demand is high but the duty cycle can be exceedingly low. You don't really NEED light until you're in the flare. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca>
Subject: Purpose of Diodes on Relays
Date: Dec 18, 2011
One thing that really surprises me on your lower trace is the fact there is no variance in the lower trace as the engine cranks. I know in my plane the lights in the panel dim as the engine is cranked just because of the current drawn by the starter motor really loads down the battery. This could be because of the speed of the trace which I make out to be around 1.500 sec left to right. The only place I've actually seen a diode on a switch is on turbine engines where the starter motor is also the generator (old 206). The MM specifies the diode be in good working order to protect from reverse EMF. I was told that from time to time I would see the diodes again but haven't Noel From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: December 16, 2011 6:27 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Purpose of Diodes on Relays At 01:28 PM 12/16/2011, you wrote: A starting motor is essentially a coil. When you activate the starter (read coil) draws down on the current of the battery. The more load on the starter the greater the current drawn by the starter. When you release the starter button, key or whatever, all the energy stored up in the coil (or starter motor) is immediately dumped into the circuit, with extremely high voltage in reverse polarity. The diode allows this reverse potential to be drained off safely without frying all your expen$ive avionics and other digital equipment on the buss. A few years back (about 11) when we were exploring the behavior of energy stored on inductive devices, we discovered (and demonstrated on the bench) that un-suppressed spikes from inductive devices are almost totally dissipated across the spreading contacts of the switching device. For example, here's one of many plots we gathered while stirring the Contactor-Spike- Stew pot: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/CH_Bus_Noise_w_0p1_Cap.gif There are two traces. The top one shows voltage developed across the contacts of the controlling switch . . . the lower trace shows voltage that made it out to the bus . . . barely perceptible. Know that electronic devices designed to run directly from the bus of any vehicular DC system is (1) easily designed to stand off the (2) minuscule packet of energy that makes it across the opening switch. In short, there is no risk of "frying" anything. The major risk is shortened service life of the switch that controls the contactor. The same conditions apply to energy dumped from a starter motor . . . it's the starter contactor that takes the hit, not electro whizzies running off the bus. One might think that an inductor charged to hundreds of amps represents the grand dragon of spike generators. Motors have a unique feature called counter-emf. A 12v motor really runs on the DIFFERENCE voltage between applied voltage (battery) and counter-emf due to rotation. The real free inductance model of a motor is rather small in comparison with contactor coils having hundreds of turns of wire. This is why you never see spike suppressors on a motor . . . they're just not a potential threat. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Dec 18, 2011
> Can you share your load analysis with us? Aircraft load at present time 0.3A SL 40 com 1.6A GTX 327 X-PNDR 0.2A 496 GPS 1.5A Dynon D-180 EFIS 2.6A Autopilot w/ 2 servos 0.1A Intercom 0.5A Misc 0.7A Battery Contactor 1.5A Fuel Pump (continuous) ---------------------------------------- 9A Total 3.5A Proposed Dynon SkyView (additional 1.5A during backup battery charging) 3.2A Proposed 35W HID Landing light (continuous for collision avoidance) ----------------------------------------------------- 15.7A New Total The voltage regulator requires dedicated cooling at higher loads. The Rotax 912ULS starts so quickly that main battery charging load is negligible. The autopilot will not be turned on until after climbing to cruise altitude. The battery will be charged by then. I never fly at night, thus no position lights. The electric fuel pump runs continuously per Van's RV-12 design. > How about a battery switch and S704-1 style starter contactor. I assume that you meant to type S702-1 starter contactor. I am reluctant to use a manual battery disconnect switch. It would add another failure point to the electrical system. In the event of a failed closed contactor, it would take me a minute or more to exit the plane and operate the battery switch. The cost to buy a second starter contactor is not much more than a quality manual battery switch. > But the incidences of sticking starter contactors . . . are exceedingly rare. That answers my question. If it is not a safety of flight issue, I am inclined to keep the electrical system simple with one starter contactor connected directly to the battery and add an indicator light showing starter energized. Thanks Bob, for the reply. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361150#361150 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 19, 2011
From: Jan de Jong <jan_de_jong(at)casema.nl>
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
Just a point of information. According to Rotax 914 installation manual: starter relay, 75 A, 300 A for 1 s, weighs 145 g (that is 5 ounces) and requires a fuse of 2 A. Having 2, if required, would not be so bad. Jan de Jong ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 19, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
I assume that you meant to type S702-1 starter contactor. Yes I am reluctant to use a manual battery disconnect switch. It would add another failure point to the electrical system. That's one of the risks mitigated by the dual feed endurance bus. I assume that you meant to type S702-1 starter contactor. Yes I am reluctant to use a manual battery disconnect switch. It would add another failure point to the electrical system. That's one of the risks mitigated by the dual feed endurance bus. Having a manually operated battery switch adds no new risks beyond those offere by the legacy battery master contactor. In the event of a failed closed contactor, it would take me a minute or more to exit the plane and operate the battery switch. The cost to buy a second starter contactor is not much more than a quality manual battery switch. Where is your battery located with respect to pilot access to a battery switch. What are your thoughts about battery disconnect before unplanned arrival with the earth? Here's another thought. If all of your electro-whizzies could be operated through a 7.5A or less fuse, then you could consider dispensing with the main bus entirely in favor of a 'super battery bus'. This would require that every device have it's own ON/OFF switch . . . with appropriate attention to shut-down-by-checklist to make sure the battery is available the next time you go flying. The starter contactor could be located next to the battery also. Bob . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 19, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Purpose of Diodes on Relays
At 12:00 PM 12/18/2011, you wrote: One thing that really surprises me on your lower trace is the fact there is no variance in the lower trace as the engine cranks. I know in my plane the lights in the panel dim as the engine is cranked just because of the current drawn by the starter motor really loads down the battery. This could be because of the speed of the trace which I make out to be around 1.500 sec left to right. This is a bench test wired per the schematic in the upper right corner and labeled to show where channels 1 and 2 of the 'scope were connected. The picture's width is 10 x 250 uS or 2.5 mS. The only place I've actually seen a diode on a switch is on turbine engines where the starter motor is also the generator (old 206). The MM specifies the diode be in good working order to protect from reverse EMF. I was told that from time to time I would see the diodes again but haven't. The energy management diode for a contactor should be installed on the contactor itself . . . or very near by. For a short time, diodes WERE installed directly on starter switches. This MIGHT be an artifact of an AD that folks-who-know-more-about-airplanes-that-we-do published in response to some start-contact failures in the legacy off-l-r-both-start keyswitches offered no by Aircraft Spruce and perhaps others. The AD erroneously placed the needed diode across the switch where it had no beneficial effects. This is discussed here: http://aeroelectric.com/articles/spikecatcher.pdf Any diodes across switch contacts should be replaced by diodes across the coils. This is not so significant for a turbine powered aircraft . . . the 'starter contactor' is likely to double as a reverse current cutout relay for the generator. Eaton-C/H 6041 series contactors are common . . . their effects on the controlling switch are not so profound as that of the automotive two-stage starter solenoids http://aeroelectric.com/articles/strtctr.pdf or even the intermittent duty starter contactors common to the automotive world. Indeed, the contactor we used to offer as the S702-1 was supplied to us with the diode already installed. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Dec 19, 2011
The battery is located on the engine side of the firewall. It can be reached through the oil-check door. I plan to use an automotive 20 or 30 amp relay in place of the master battery contactor. However, starting current would not go through the relay. The starter contactor is located close to the battery. My only concern is a failed closed starter contactor. But that seems to be a remote possibility. And if it ever happened, it would occur while on the ground. Thanks for all of the ideas and suggestions. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361229#361229 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Creek" <mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Wig-Wag Trouble Shooting
Date: Dec 19, 2011
I've operated a SSF-1 flasher for about 20 hours with the single-switch configuration. Only the right side lamp comes on in wig-wag and full-on positions. I've changed the left side bulb to make sure that it is good. I'm guessing either the flasher or the diode is bad. Any suggestions for trouble shooting? I suppose I could just order both and change both of them, but I'm hoping there is a way to tell if either the flasher or diode is bad. Thanks, Mike ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Dec 19, 2011
I had a great idea. Wire two starter contactors in series. They will be energized by two momentary push button switches, one labeled and in plain sight on the panel, the other switch hidden. When the barefoot bandit attempts to steal my plane, he will turn on the master and push the start button. He will hear one contactor pull in and assume there is an electrical problem because the engine does not crank. So he will go find another plane that someone left the key in. I will not need a key or an expensive key switch because only I will know how to start the engine (along with everyone else on Aeroelectric). And I will not have to worry about losing the key or forgetting it. Has anyone ever driven all of the way to the airport, only to realize the aircraft key was still at home? Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361244#361244 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Wig-Wag Trouble Shooting
From: Daniel Hooper <enginerdy(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 19, 2011
So you can't get the left side to light under any circumstances? Have you tried directly energizing it with it disconnected from the wig-wag module? It could be a wiring issue. Do you have a multimeter that you can use to check for the presence of voltages at various points? --Daniel On Dec 19, 2011, at 7:40 PM, Mike Creek wrote: > > I've operated a SSF-1 flasher for about 20 hours with the single-switch > configuration. Only the right side lamp comes on in wig-wag and full-on > positions. I've changed the left side bulb to make sure that it is good. > I'm guessing either the flasher or the diode is bad. Any suggestions for > trouble shooting? I suppose I could just order both and change both of > them, but I'm hoping there is a way to tell if either the flasher or diode > is bad. > > Thanks, > Mike > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 19, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: 2011 List of Contributors
Dear Listers, The 2011 Matronics Email List and Forum Fund Raiser officially ended a couple of weeks ago and its time that I publish this year's List of Contributors. Its the people on this list that directly make the Email Lists and Forums possible. Their generous contributions keep the servers and Internet connection up and running! You can still show your support this year and pick up a great gift at the same time. The Contribution Web Site is fast, easy, and secure: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, by dropping a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 I also want to thank Bob, Jon, and Andy for their generous support through the supply of great gifts this year!! These guys have some great products and I encourage you to visit their respective web sites: Bob Nucklolls - AeroElectric - http://www.aeroelectric.com Jon Croke - HomebuiltHELP - http://www.homebuilthelp.com Andy Gold - The Builder's Bookstore - http://www.buildersbooks.com And finally, I'm proud to present The 2011 Fund Raiser List of Contributors: http://www.matronics.com/loc/2011.html Thanks again to everyone that made a Contribution this year!! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List and Forum Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Creek" <mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Wig-Wag Trouble Shooting
Date: Dec 19, 2011
Hmm..., yes it could be a wiring issue, however (although my previous post isn't very clear) it worked fine for about 20 hours, but only the right side comes on now. I've checked the wiring and connectors visually and by moving the connectors to ensure they have good contact at the switch, flasher, and diode. I'm reasonably sure the wiring is fine. Your idea about energizing the left side is a good one, I'll switch wires for left and right to see if the left side lights up. I considered using a volt meter; however, it is in a difficult spot and both the wig-wag flasher and diode are energized from the same switch (unless one pole is bad) so I doubt a volt meter would reveal much given the configuration; but it is certainly worth a try. Thanks, Mike -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Hooper Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 6:49 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wig-Wag Trouble Shooting --> So you can't get the left side to light under any circumstances? Have you tried directly energizing it with it disconnected from the wig-wag module? It could be a wiring issue. Do you have a multimeter that you can use to check for the presence of voltages at various points? --Daniel On Dec 19, 2011, at 7:40 PM, Mike Creek wrote: > --> > > I've operated a SSF-1 flasher for about 20 hours with the > single-switch configuration. Only the right side lamp comes on in > wig-wag and full-on positions. I've changed the left side bulb to make sure that it is good. > I'm guessing either the flasher or the diode is bad. Any suggestions > for trouble shooting? I suppose I could just order both and change > both of them, but I'm hoping there is a way to tell if either the > flasher or diode is bad. > > Thanks, > Mike > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 20, 2011
From: Jan de Jong <jan_de_jong(at)casema.nl>
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
Hi Joe, > I had a great idea. Wire two starter contactors in series. They will be energized by two momentary push button switches, one labeled and in plain sight on the panel, the other switch hidden. When the barefoot bandit attempts to steal my plane, he will turn on the master and push the start button. He will hear one contactor pull in and assume there is an electrical problem because the engine does not crank. So he will go find another plane that someone left the key in. > I will not need a key or an expensive key switch because only I will know how to start the engine (along with everyone else on Aeroelectric). And I will not have to worry about losing the key or forgetting it. Has anyone ever driven all of the way to the airport, only to realize the aircraft key was still at home? > Joe > Interesting. 1. You may need three pushbuttons (or more hands): two switches that individually should not work (test) and a third that operates both relays. 2. Light weight Rotax relays (if procured from Rotax) may not be cheap. Regards, Jan de Jong ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca>
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
Date: Dec 20, 2011
Many aircraft do not have any keys. Even aircraft down to the size of the venerable DHC beaver. Of course if you steal one of those you better know what you are doing. Noel -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jan de Jong Sent: December 20, 2011 6:30 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Starter contactors Hi Joe, > I had a great idea. Wire two starter contactors in series. They will be energized by two momentary push button switches, one labeled and in plain sight on the panel, the other switch hidden. When the barefoot bandit attempts to steal my plane, he will turn on the master and push the start button. He will hear one contactor pull in and assume there is an electrical problem because the engine does not crank. So he will go find another plane that someone left the key in. > I will not need a key or an expensive key switch because only I will know how to start the engine (along with everyone else on Aeroelectric). And I will not have to worry about losing the key or forgetting it. Has anyone ever driven all of the way to the airport, only to realize the aircraft key was still at home? > Joe > Interesting. 1. You may need three pushbuttons (or more hands): two switches that individually should not work (test) and a third that operates both relays. 2. Light weight Rotax relays (if procured from Rotax) may not be cheap. Regards, Jan de Jong ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeff Luckey" <JLuckey(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Starter contactors
Date: Dec 20, 2011
Save your money for the second solenoid - Just wire your 2 pushbuttons in series for the solenoid coil. -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Noel Loveys Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 17:30 Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Starter contactors Many aircraft do not have any keys. Even aircraft down to the size of the venerable DHC beaver. Of course if you steal one of those you better know what you are doing. Noel -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jan de Jong Sent: December 20, 2011 6:30 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Starter contactors Hi Joe, > I had a great idea. Wire two starter contactors in series. They will be energized by two momentary push button switches, one labeled and in plain sight on the panel, the other switch hidden. When the barefoot bandit attempts to steal my plane, he will turn on the master and push the start button. He will hear one contactor pull in and assume there is an electrical problem because the engine does not crank. So he will go find another plane that someone left the key in. > I will not need a key or an expensive key switch because only I will know how to start the engine (along with everyone else on Aeroelectric). And I will not have to worry about losing the key or forgetting it. Has anyone ever driven all of the way to the airport, only to realize the aircraft key was still at home? > Joe > Interesting. 1. You may need three pushbuttons (or more hands): two switches that individually should not work (test) and a third that operates both relays. 2. Light weight Rotax relays (if procured from Rotax) may not be cheap. Regards, Jan de Jong ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <berkut13(at)berkut13.com>
Subject: Altimeter Lighting Pinout
Date: Dec 21, 2011
Does anyone have the pinout for a Piper (Aerosonic) 2" Altimeter? Model#: PS50189-3 (I can get the Piper number if needed) Like this one: http://www.mcico.com/16450-1147-CN637BA7DC6648.html?MN=!MN! It has a 5-pin connector on the back for internal lighting - I need to know what the voltage requirement is and what pins are used. Thanks, James ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>
Subject: Headphone squeal
Date: Dec 22, 2011
I'm busy trying to solve a problem of a load squeal in the headphones. The installation was done by somebody else and I'm picking up the pieces J The system uses a Flightcom 403 intercom and has pilot, copilot and 2 pax places. I see that both the headphone and microphone wires are run in the same shielded cable (a 3 core cable). Whenever you plug a headset into any of the pax places you get an almost immediate squeal in all the 'phones. Sometimes it does not start immediately, but as soon as you tap or try to speak into the microphone the squeal starts. Best practice suggests that the microphone and headphones wire should be separate and shielded so I suspect that this may be where the problem lies. Anybody else had similar problems? Jay ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 22, 2011
From: Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Headphone squeal
On 12/22/2011 04:07 AM, Jay Hyde wrote: > > I'm busy trying to solve a problem of a load squeal in the > headphones. The installation was done by somebody else and I'm > picking up the pieces J > > The system uses a Flightcom 403 intercom and has pilot, copilot and 2 > pax places. I see that both the headphone and microphone wires are > run in the same shielded cable (a 3 core cable). Whenever you plug a > headset into any of the pax places you get an almost immediate squeal > in all the 'phones. Sometimes it does not start immediately, but as > soon as you tap or try to speak into the microphone the squeal > starts. Best practice suggests that the microphone and headphones > wire should be separate and shielded so I suspect that this may be > where the problem lies. > > Anybody else had similar problems? > > Jay > To eliminate the easy stuff first: Are the all headphones on or off the heads of the users? If any headset is plugged in but *not* properly installed on a head, you can get a positive-feedback squeal as soon as you excite the system by speaking into or tapping on a mic. I wouldn't claim that it's impossible for the wire to cause the problem, but look at the cable attached to the headphones. :-) Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 22, 2011
From: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Headphone squeal
My copilot station pops and breaks squelch when there isn't a head between the mic and earpieces. The noise from the vent or heater kicks it off so I unplug the mic jack when I'm flying solo..... Someone else mentioned something similar to this - so I'm chiming in too..... -----Original Message----- >From: Jay Hyde <jay(at)horriblehyde.com> >Sent: Dec 22, 2011 5:07 AM >To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Headphone squeal > >I'm busy trying to solve a problem of a load squeal in the headphones. The >installation was done by somebody else and I'm picking up the pieces J > > > >The system uses a Flightcom 403 intercom and has pilot, copilot and 2 pax >places. I see that both the headphone and microphone wires are run in the >same shielded cable (a 3 core cable). Whenever you plug a headset into any >of the pax places you get an almost immediate squeal in all the 'phones. >Sometimes it does not start immediately, but as soon as you tap or try to >speak into the microphone the squeal starts. Best practice suggests that >the microphone and headphones wire should be separate and shielded so I >suspect that this may be where the problem lies. > > > >Anybody else had similar problems? > > > >Jay > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <berkut13(at)berkut13.com>
Subject: Re: Headphone squeal
Date: Dec 22, 2011
One 3-conductor shielded cable for both mic and phone? How are the grounds (collar) for each plug isolated from each other as well as from airframe ground? I think you are barking up the right tree. If the system is not wired as the intercom manufacturer suggests, that=99s the first place to start. -James From: Charlie England Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 8:43 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Headphone squeal On 12/22/2011 04:07 AM, Jay Hyde wrote: I=99m busy trying to solve a problem of a load squeal in the headphones. The installation was done by somebody else and I=99m picking up the pieces J The system uses a Flightcom 403 intercom and has pilot, copilot and 2 pax places. I see that both the headphone and microphone wires are run in the same shielded cable (a 3 core cable). Whenever you plug a headset into any of the pax places you get an almost immediate squeal in all the =98phones. Sometimes it does not start immediately, but as soon as you tap or try to speak into the microphone the squeal starts. Best practice suggests that the microphone and headphones wire should be separate and shielded so I suspect that this may be where the problem lies. Anybody else had similar problems? Jay ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 22, 2011
From: Tim Andres <tim2542(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Headphone squeal
On 12/22/2011 2:07 AM, Jay Hyde wrote: > > I'm busy trying to solve a problem of a load squeal in the > headphones. The installation was done by somebody else and I'm > picking up the pieces J > > The system uses a Flightcom 403 intercom and has pilot, copilot and 2 > pax places. I see that both the headphone and microphone wires are > run in the same shielded cable (a 3 core cable). Whenever you plug a > headset into any of the pax places you get an almost immediate squeal > in all the 'phones. Sometimes it does not start immediately, but as > soon as you tap or try to speak into the microphone the squeal > starts. Best practice suggests that the microphone and headphones > wire should be separate and shielded so I suspect that this may be > where the problem lies. > > Anybody else had similar problems? > > Jay > > * > * Jay; from what I have read about this, putting mic & phone audio inside the same shielded cable will almost guarantee what you are seeing. If you go to PSE's site, ( http://www.ps-engineering.com/support.shtml ) they have a Power Point file on how to wire an audio panel. Lots of other tips & tricks on the ppt also. Tim > * > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>
Subject: Headphone squeal
Date: Dec 22, 2011
I received a response from Flightcom, "If a mono headset is plugged into the intercom or a stereo headset that is set to mono, this will cause the squeal. Or if the wiring is not shielded cable, and the mic and headphone wires are in the same cable" So it seems that I am barking up the right tree (at least in terms of the wires- not sure that I get the mono/ stereo thing, especially since their system is mono.) , which is what I thought; but thanks for the inputs. I am going to re-wire the system and will give you feedback when done. Jay From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Andres Sent: 22 December 2011 05:33 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Headphone squeal On 12/22/2011 2:07 AM, Jay Hyde wrote: I'm busy trying to solve a problem of a load squeal in the headphones. The installation was done by somebody else and I'm picking up the pieces J The system uses a Flightcom 403 intercom and has pilot, copilot and 2 pax places. I see that both the headphone and microphone wires are run in the same shielded cable (a 3 core cable). Whenever you plug a headset into any of the pax places you get an almost immediate squeal in all the 'phones. Sometimes it does not start immediately, but as soon as you tap or try to speak into the microphone the squeal starts. Best practice suggests that the microphone and headphones wire should be separate and shielded so I suspect that this may be where the problem lies. Anybody else had similar problems? Jay Jay; from what I have read about this, putting mic & phone audio inside the same shielded cable will almost guarantee what you are seeing. If you go to PSE's site, ( http://www.ps-engineering.com/support.shtml ) they have a Power Point file on how to wire an audio panel. Lots of other tips & tricks on the ppt also. Tim ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill S" <docyukon(at)ptcnet.net>
Subject: parelling two rp3 indicators
Date: Dec 22, 2011
I am wanting to parllel two Ray Allen RP3 led position indicators useing only one POS5 position sensor. RAC said that thay wont work just parelling them and that I need to add another position sensor or a switch which I would rather not do. Can anyone sudjest an electrical ckt. that would work for this? Thanks Bill S. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 22, 2011
Subject: Re: Headphone squeal
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
On 12/22/2011 11:16 AM, Jay Hyde wrote: > Or if the wiring is not shielded cable, and the mic and > headphone wires are in the same cable I'm a bit confused by this. Aren't the mic and headphone wires in the same cable on the headphone itself (ie, the cable that goes between the headphone and the plugs)? -Dj ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Headphone squeal
From: Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com>
Date: Dec 22, 2011
I would suggest barking up the mono/stereo tree. I have installed this inter com and I added a stereo/mono switch at each station, per the directions. I c an send you a pdf of the install manual if you need it. I can produce a sque al in my system by operating that switch incorrectly. On Dec 22, 2011, at 11:16, "Jay Hyde" wrote: > I received a response from Flightcom, =9CIf a mono headset is plugge d into the intercom or a stereo headset that is set to mono, this will cause the squeal. Or if the wiring is not shielded cable, and the mic and headpho ne wires are in the same cable=9D > > So it seems that I am barking up the right tree (at least in terms of the w ires- not sure that I get the mono/ stereo thing, especially since their sys tem is mono) , which is what I thought; but thanks for the inputs. I am going to re-wire the system and will give you feedback when done. > > Jay > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelect ric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Andres > Sent: 22 December 2011 05:33 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Headphone squeal > > On 12/22/2011 2:07 AM, Jay Hyde wrote: > I=99m busy trying to solve a problem of a load squeal in the headpho nes. The installation was done by somebody else and I=99m picking up t he pieces J > > The system uses a Flightcom 403 intercom and has pilot, copilot and 2 pax p laces. I see that both the headphone and microphone wires are run in the sa me shielded cable (a 3 core cable). Whenever you plug a headset into any of the pax places you get an almost immediate squeal in all the =98phone s. Sometimes it does not start immediately, but as soon as you tap or try t o speak into the microphone the squeal starts. Best practice suggests that t he microphone and headphones wire should be separate and shielded so I suspe ct that this may be where the problem lies. > > Anybody else had similar problems? > > Jay > > > Jay; from what I have read about this, putting mic & phone audio inside th e same shielded cable will almost guarantee what you are seeing. If you go t o PSE's site, ( http://www.ps-engineering.com/support.shtml ) > they have a Power Point file on how to wire an audio panel. Lots of other t ips & tricks on the ppt also. > Tim > > > > -- Please Support Your Lists This Month nbsp; (And Get Some AWE SOME FREE November is the Annual List Fund Raiser. Click below to find o ut more Free Incentive Gifts AeroElectric www.aeroelectric.comhttp://www.matronics.com/c= -Matt Dralle, List - The AeroElectric-List Email List ut ilities such as List Photoshare, and much much --> http://www.matronics.c om/Navigator?AeroElectric-List > http://forums.matronics.com - List Contribution Web generous nbsp; --> http://www.matronics.com/c > > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 22, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: parelling two rp3 indicators
At 10:59 AM 12/22/2011, you wrote: >I am wanting to parllel two Ray Allen RP3 led position indicators >useing only one POS5 position sensor. RAC said that thay wont work >just parelling them and that I need to add another position sensor >or a switch which I would rather not do. Can anyone sudjest an >electrical ckt. that would work for this? Thanks Bill S. > You need a 'buffer-amplifier' between the position feedback potentiometer and ONE of the two indicators. The problem with paralleling the two indicators arises from the fact that they're not a 'high impedance' voltmeter. The system is calibrated for one pot driving one indicator. Adding a second indicator doubles the load on the position signal from the potentiometer. The 'fix' is to convert one of the indicators into a high-impedance voltmeter. You need an operational amplifier with rail-to-rail inputs and outputs. A device like the LM7321 would probably work. http://search.digikey.com/us/en/products/LM7321MF%2FNOPB/LM7321MFCT-ND/1878646 Adding this device to the second indicator prevents it from loading the potentiometer. You need to fabricate something like this . . . http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/Ray-Allen_Dual_Indicators.pdf It could be fabricated on an etched circuit board that would fit inside a d-sub connector back shell. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 22, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Gooseneck map light assy available . . .
I was sorting out the contents of some moving boxes and ran across this map light that used to be on our website catalog. http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Lighting/Map_LightA.JPG http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Lighting/Map_LightB.JPG Since I'm not building an airplane, I thought I would offer this to any interested builder. You can get a mating connection from Radio Shack http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103444 I also have a miniature Cessna style dimming rheostat to go with it. Emacs! This is the same switch/dimmer used in the single-lamp, overhead flood in single engine Cessnas. Interested builders email me direct. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Headphone squeal
From: Michael Phillips <michael.phil(at)ca.rr.com>
Date: Dec 23, 2011
Check for insulation washer on mic jack Sent from my iPad On Dec 22, 2011, at 2:07 AM, "Jay Hyde" wrote: > I=99m busy trying to solve a problem of a load squeal in the headpho nes. The installation was done by somebody else and I=99m picking up t he pieces J > > The system uses a Flightcom 403 intercom and has pilot, copilot and 2 pax p laces. I see that both the headphone and microphone wires are run in the sa me shielded cable (a 3 core cable). Whenever you plug a headset into any of the pax places you get an almost immediate squeal in all the =98phone s. Sometimes it does not start immediately, but as soon as you tap or try t o speak into the microphone the squeal starts. Best practice suggests that t he microphone and headphones wire should be separate and shielded so I suspe ct that this may be where the problem lies. > > Anybody else had similar problems? > > Jay > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Aerobatics vs Gyros
From: "tomcostanza" <Tom(at)CostanzaAndAssociates.com>
Date: Dec 23, 2011
I read a Mid-Continent manual that advised turning off the gyro 5 minutes before doing aerobatics. I assume the 5 minutes is to let the gyro spin down. I have 3 gyros. I don't want to use 3 switches, but I'm willing to use one 3 pole switch. Any suggestions? Has anyone done this? I realize a single switch is a single point of failure, but this is one mother of a switch. And what are the odds of all 3 poles failing at the same time? P.S. Posted this on VAF too. -------- Clear Skies, Tom Costanza Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361536#361536 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Honeywell Switch Ratings
From: "tomcostanza" <Tom(at)CostanzaAndAssociates.com>
Date: Dec 23, 2011
This catalog http://www.f16pit.com/docs/honywell_tl.pdf shows electrical ratings on the 1st page. Am I correct that this is the capacity per pole? Or is it the total capacity of the switch? -------- Clear Skies, Tom Costanza Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361537#361537 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 23, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Aerobatics vs Gyros
At 07:31 AM 12/23/2011, you wrote: > > >I read a Mid-Continent manual that advised turning off the gyro 5 >minutes before doing aerobatics. I assume the 5 minutes is to let >the gyro spin down. I have 3 gyros. I don't want to use 3 switches, >but I'm willing to use one 3 pole switch. Any suggestions? Has >anyone done this? > >I realize a single switch is a single point of failure, but this is >one mother of a switch. And what are the odds of all 3 poles >failing at the same time? Very small . . . . . . and the "ratings" are per pole . . . ANY of the Microswitch products is suited to your task. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Gooseneck map light assy available . . .
From: "nuckollsr" <bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Date: Dec 23, 2011
The parts have been sold. Thanks for looking. Bob . . . Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361571#361571 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 24, 2011
Subject: Thanks to all
From: James Kilford <james(at)etravel.org>
To everyone on the Aeroelectric List, and especially to Bob, Many thanks indeed for all your kind advice and guidance over the past year. I really appreciate it very much. I hope you all have a very happy and restful Christmas. James Kilford Bristol, UK ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Relays
From: Bill Nelson <bnelson79(at)charter.net>
Date: Dec 25, 2011
What is the difference between a battery relay and a starter relay? I have a Rans S12S and the circuit diagram for the Rotax 912ULS engine shows both. But I just got the plane and it only has what I think is a starter relay with the rotary starter switch and a simple SPST master switch. Do I need to add the battery relay? Bill Sent from my iPad ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Relays
From: Bob Meyers <bobmeyers(at)meyersfamily.org>
Date: Dec 25, 2011
Among other things, a battery contactor is designed for continuous duty and typically draws about 3/4 of an amp when energized. A starter contactor is designed for intermittent duty and draws about 5 amps when energized. Bob Meyers Flying my Sonex N982SX - Building log at http://n982sx.com Sent from my iPad On Dec 25, 2011, at 10:13 PM, Bill Nelson wrote: > > What is the difference between a battery relay and a starter relay? I have a Rans S12S and the circuit diagram for the Rotax 912ULS engine shows both. But I just got the plane and it only has what I think is a starter relay with the rotary starter switch and a simple SPST master switch. Do I need to add the battery relay? > Bill > > Sent from my iPad > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Relays
From: "user9253" <fran4sew(at)banyanol.com>
Date: Dec 26, 2011
> Do I need to add the battery relay? I asked a similar question here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=87274&sid=3724253c38f733fb3dfb539a40ee396b And the answer is, "It depends." The majority of aircraft have both a master battery contactor and a starter contactor connected in series. If the starter contactor ever fails in the closed position, the circuit can still be opened with the battery contactor. The likelihood of that failure mode occurring is, in Bob's words, "exceedingly rare". Weight and electrical energy can be saved by not installing a battery contactor. A 30-amp automotive relay can be used as a mini-master to remotely control all electrical power leaving the battery (except for starting current). That is a nice feature to have in case of a forced landing. Since the Rotax dynamo is rated at only 18 amps, a 20 amp toggle switch can be used as a mini-master with the disadvantage of not being able to remotely shut off power at the battery. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361671#361671 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Garmin 696 Data Out
From: "tomcostanza" <Tom(at)CostanzaAndAssociates.com>
Date: Dec 26, 2011
Happy holidays all. I'm using a Garmin 696 and want to use the "data out" to drive a TruTrak autopilot, and an ACK ELT. Does anyone know if I can just parallel all these data lines together, or do I need a buffer? Thanks. -------- Clear Skies, Tom Costanza Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361677#361677 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Garmin 696 Data Out
From: Kenneth Melvin <melvinke(at)coho.net>
Date: Dec 26, 2011
I can confirm that the 496 will drive at least 3 units, including a TruTrak autopilot. Kenneth Melvin On Dec 26, 2011, at 10:59 AM, tomcostanza wrote: > > Happy holidays all. > > I'm using a Garmin 696 and want to use the "data out" to drive a TruTrak autopilot, and an ACK ELT. Does anyone know if I can just parallel all these data lines together, or do I need a buffer? > > Thanks. > > -------- > Clear Skies, > Tom Costanza > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361677#361677 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 26, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration...
Dear Listers, I've been flying the new 10" Dynon Skyview in the RV-6 for a few weeks now and it seems like the airspeed is reading maybe 10mph fast. The GS always reads 10mph or more slower than the True airspeed, no matter which way I fly with respect to the current wind. Looking through the configuration options on the Skyview, I'm not seeing parameters to calibrate the airspeed. If the airspeed were *slow* compared to the GS, I could envision making adjustments to the Pitot tube to get it in better alignment with slipstream. But *fast* is a head scratcher. If there's no electronic configuration parameters to adjust, what do you do? Are there Pitot line "attenuators" like for RF in coax? ;-) Matt - Matt "Red Dawg" Dralle RV-8 #82880 N998RV "Ruby Vixen" http://www.mattsrv8.com - Matt's Complete RV-8 Construction Log http://www.mattsrv8.com/Mishap - Landing Mishap Rebuild Log http://www.youtube.com/MattsRV8 - Matt's RV-8 HDTV YouTube Channel Status: 170+ Hours TTSN - Rebuilding Fuselage After Landing Mishap... RV-6 #20916 N360EM "The Flyer" http://www.mattsrv6.com - Matt's RV-6 Revitalization Log Status: 42+ Hours Since Purchase - Upgrades Complete; Now In Full Flyer Mode ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration...
From: Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com>
Date: Dec 26, 2011
Perhaps it is an issue with the way it is calculating tas. Do you have an ias indication? If so perhaps you could use a flight computer to verify. Have the Dynon folks had any input? On Dec 26, 2011, at 22:39, Matt Dralle wrote: > > Dear Listers, > > I've been flying the new 10" Dynon Skyview in the RV-6 for a few weeks now and it seems like the airspeed is reading maybe 10mph fast. The GS always reads 10mph or more slower than the True airspeed, no matter which way I fly with respect to the current wind. Looking through the configuration options on the Skyview, I'm not seeing parameters to calibrate the airspeed. If the airspeed were *slow* compared to the GS, I could envision making adjustments to the Pitot tube to get it in better alignment with slipstream. But *fast* is a head scratcher. If there's no electronic configuration parameters to adjust, what do you do? Are there Pitot line "attenuators" like for RF in coax? ;-) > > Matt > > - > Matt "Red Dawg" Dralle > > RV-8 #82880 N998RV "Ruby Vixen" > http://www.mattsrv8.com - Matt's Complete RV-8 Construction Log > http://www.mattsrv8.com/Mishap - Landing Mishap Rebuild Log > http://www.youtube.com/MattsRV8 - Matt's RV-8 HDTV YouTube Channel > Status: 170+ Hours TTSN - Rebuilding Fuselage After Landing Mishap... > > RV-6 #20916 N360EM "The Flyer" > http://www.mattsrv6.com - Matt's RV-6 Revitalization Log > Status: 42+ Hours Since Purchase - Upgrades Complete; Now In Full Flyer Mode > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration...
Date: Dec 27, 2011
The problem is with your static port. Check out this link. http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8/rvlinks/ssec.html Bill B -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt Dralle Sent: Monday, December 26, 2011 10:39 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration... Dear Listers, I've been flying the new 10" Dynon Skyview in the RV-6 for a few weeks now and it seems like the airspeed is reading maybe 10mph fast. The GS always reads 10mph or more slower than the True airspeed, no matter which way I fly with respect to the current wind. Looking through the configuration options on the Skyview, I'm not seeing parameters to calibrate the airspeed. If the airspeed were *slow* compared to the GS, I could envision making adjustments to the Pitot tube to get it in better alignment with slipstream. But *fast* is a head scratcher. If there's no electronic configuration parameters to adjust, what do you do? Are there Pitot line "attenuators" like for RF in coax? ;-) Matt - Matt "Red Dawg" Dralle RV-8 #82880 N998RV "Ruby Vixen" http://www.mattsrv8.com - Matt's Complete RV-8 Construction Log http://www.mattsrv8.com/Mishap - Landing Mishap Rebuild Log http://www.youtube.com/MattsRV8 - Matt's RV-8 HDTV YouTube Channel Status: 170+ Hours TTSN - Rebuilding Fuselage After Landing Mishap... RV-6 #20916 N360EM "The Flyer" http://www.mattsrv6.com - Matt's RV-6 Revitalization Log Status: 42+ Hours Since Purchase - Upgrades Complete; Now In Full Flyer Mode ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 27, 2011
From: Dan Billingsley <dan(at)azshowersolutions.com>
Subject: First Engine Start Problem
Bob,=0AI have had the Kitfox wiring completed for about 8 months now and I used the new Z-16 schematic. I have most of my avionics on the E-Bus and th ey have been working well since day one when I first flipped the switch. A week ago the day came to do my first engine start. As it goes with the Rota x 912uls, we purged the oil system then began turning the prop looking for oil pressure. After turning it through several times by hand we decided to then let the starter do the work. The starter turned the engine over well, however, I was dismayed when my whole panel of avionics went dead. I of cou rse quit cranking and began troubleshooting. It didn't take long to find th at the fuseable link off the Batt Contactor (heading to the E-Bus) burned t hrough. I went ahead and bypassed the link with 16 AWG and was able to comp lete a successful first engine start. The guys that were working with me as ked me why that link was there...I did not have a good answer for them. I do have the diode in place, yet I assume a "spike" occurred when I turned the engine over. So...I am now reluctant to put another fuseable link in pl ace but have a concern if there is still a problem that burned my link in t he first place.-=0AI am open to comments and suggestions.-=0AThanks,=0A Dan Billingsley=0AMesa, AZ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 26, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Relays
At 10:13 PM 12/25/2011, you wrote: > >What is the difference between a battery relay and a starter relay? >I have a Rans S12S and the circuit diagram for the Rotax 912ULS >engine shows both. But I just got the plane and it only has what I >think is a starter relay with the rotary starter switch and a simple >SPST master switch. Do I need to add the battery relay? Probably not. You've got a day-vfr-fair weather machine with few incentives for adding lots of 'conveniences'. The Piper Tri-Pacer in which I took early flying lessons had a battery switch and a starter push-button. No relays at all. The FUNCTIONALITY for the two devices is very different. The battery switch/contactor is designed to use a minimum of power and is expected to SWITCH rather light loads while being able to CARRY the occasional starter current. The starter contactor needs to SWITCH large inrush loads without welding contacts. Power drain is not an issue because its operating duty cycle is very low . . . seconds per flight cycle. Hence, the starter switch/contactor is designed for the more demanding service as a control device. If what you have has been vetted by folks who have been-there-done-that . . . there's no compelling rationale for changing anything. If they become troublesome, get with us here on the List and we'll help you craft a more robust alternative. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 27, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: First Engine Start Problem
At 03:37 AM 12/27/2011, you wrote: >Bob, >I have had the Kitfox wiring completed for about 8 months now and I >used the new Z-16 schematic. I have most of my avionics on the E-Bus >and they have been working well since day one when I first flipped the switch. What is the total list of goodies on the e-bus? > A week ago the day came to do my first engine start. As it goes > with the Rotax 912uls, we purged the oil system then began turning > the prop looking for oil pressure. After turning it through several > times by hand we decided to then let the starter do the work. The > starter turned the engine over well, however, I was dismayed when > my whole panel of avionics went dead. I of course quit cranking and > began troubleshooting. It didn't take long to find that the > fuseable link off the Batt Contactor (heading to the E-Bus) burned > through. I went ahead and bypassed the link with 16 AWG and was > able to complete a successful first engine start. The guys that > were working with me asked me why that link was there...I did not > have a good answer for them. I do have the diode in place, yet I > assume a "spike" occurred when I turned the engine over. So...I am > now reluctant to put another fuseable link in place but have a > concern if there is still a problem that burned my link in the first place. >I am open to comments and suggestions. Any and all sorts of fault protection (links, fuses, breakers, etc) are there to protect wires. The idea of an e-bus is to power up electro-whizzies most useful for ALTERNATOR OUT EN ROUTE ENDURANCE while operating battery only. This alternate feed path goes around the battery contactor thus offering an opportunity to (1) eliminate battery contactor loads on the battery or (2) get a minimum list of useful goodies powered if the contactor or its control circuit fails. You didn't have a 'spike' . . . you had some level of LOAD that was greater than what the 22AWG link would carry. Having a list of goodies powered from the e-bus will give us the first clues as to why such a load existed. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <bakerocb(at)cox.net>
Subject: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration...
Date: Dec 27, 2011
12/27/2011 Hello Matt, You wrote: 1) "Are there Pitot line "attenuators" like for RF in coax?" Not pitot tube line attenuators, but both attenuators and augmentors in the form of wedges before or after the static port portion of the pitot - static system that can be used to tweak airspeed (and altitude) indications. 2) "But *fast* is a head scratcher. If there's no electronic configuration parameters to adjust, what do you do?" See this posting to the aeroelectric list for a more complete explanation of the use of wedges to adjust airspeed indications: http://www.matronics.com/searching/getmsg_script.cgi?INDEX=88398860?KEYS=static_port?LISTNAME=AeroElectric?HITNUMBER=9?SERIAL=0431117943?SHOWBUTTONS=YES A bit of search around in your Matronic's archive system on pitot static systems and airspeed, particularly any posting on this arena by Kevin Horton, will reveal a host of material for thought and action. 'OC' Baker Says: "The best investment we can make is the time and effort to gather and understand knowledge." ======================================================= From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration... Dear Listers, I've been flying the new 10" Dynon Skyview in the RV-6 for a few weeks now and it seems like the airspeed is reading maybe 10mph fast. The GS always reads 10mph or more slower than the True airspeed, no matter which way I fly with respect to the current wind. Looking through the configuration options on the Skyview, I'm not seeing parameters to calibrate the airspeed. If the airspeed were *slow* compared to the GS, I could envision making adjustments to the Pitot tube to get it in better alignment with slipstream. But *fast* is a head scratcher. If there's no electronic configuration parameters to adjust, what do you do? Are there Pitot line "attenuators" like for RF in coax? ;-) Matt - Matt "Red Dawg" Dralle ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "ROGER & JEAN CURTIS" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net>
Subject: First Engine Start Problem
Date: Dec 27, 2011
You didn't have a 'spike' . . . you had some level of LOAD that was greater than what the 22AWG link would carry. Having a list of goodies powered from the e-bus will give us the first clues as to why such a load existed. Bob . . . Since this is a new wiring installation, you may want to check your wiring again. Especially look to make sure that you do not somehow have starter current through your fusible link. Roger ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 27, 2011
From: Dan Billingsley <dan(at)azshowersolutions.com>
Subject: Re: First Engine Start Problem
Thanks for the quick reply. I will be going to the airport today and take i nventory of the e-bus goodies. I understand and accept that this could be a n over-Load problem so I may need to transfer a couple things to the main b us. What troubles me is I have had this E-bus circuit working many times wi th everything turned on sometimes for 5 to 10 minutes without a hitch. Will start with a current tally and get back.=0ADan=0A=0A=0A=0A>_______________ _________________=0A> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroele ctric.com>=0A>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0A>Sent: Tuesday, Decemb er 27, 2011 5:14 AM=0A>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: First Engine Start P , III" =0A>=0A>At 03:37 AM 12/27/2011, you w rote:=0A>> Bob,=0A>> I have had the Kitfox wiring completed for about 8 mon ths now and I used the new Z-16 schematic. I have most of my avionics on th e E-Bus and they have been working well since day one when I first flipped the switch.=0A>=0A>- What is the total list of goodies on the e-bus?=0A> =0A>=0A>>- A week ago the day came to do my first engine start. As it goe s with the Rotax 912uls, we purged the oil system then began turning the pr op looking for oil pressure. After turning it through several times by hand we decided to then let the starter do the work. The starter turned the eng ine over well, however, I was dismayed when my whole panel of avionics went dead. I of course quit cranking and began troubleshooting. It didn't take long to find that the fuseable link off the Batt Contactor (heading to the E-Bus) burned through. I went ahead and bypassed the link with 16 AWG and w as able to complete a successful first engine start. The guys that were wor king with me asked me why that link was there...I did not have a good answe r for them. I do have the diode in place, yet I assume a "spike" occurred w hen I turned the engine over. So...I am now reluctant to put another fuseab le link in place but have a concern if there is still a problem that burned my link in the first place.=0A>> I am open to comments and suggestions.=0A >=0A>- Any and all sorts of fault protection (links,=0A>- fuses, brea kers, etc) are there to protect wires.=0A>- The idea of an e-bus is to p ower up electro-whizzies=0A>- most useful for ALTERNATOR OUT EN ROUTE EN DURANCE=0A>- while operating battery only. This alternate feed=0A>- p ath goes around the battery contactor thus offering=0A>- an opportunity to (1) eliminate battery contactor loads=0A>- on the battery or (2) get a minimum list of useful goodies=0A>- powered if the contactor or its co ntrol circuit fails.=0A>=0A>- You didn't have a 'spike' . . . you had so me level=0A>- of LOAD that was greater than what the 22AWG link=0A>- would carry. Having a list of goodies powered from the=0A>- e-bus will g ive us the first clues as to why such=0A>- a load existed.=0A>=0A>=0A> =======================0A>=0A> =0A>=0A>=0A>=0A> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Valovich, Paul" <pvalovich(at)dcscorp.com>
Date: Dec 27, 2011
Subject: Re: Garmin 696 Data Out
It's been a while but I think you have to use the serial port, not the data port. I think I ended up splitting the serial port output to my AFS 4500 and ADI II autopilot. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration...
From: "racerjerry" <gki(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us>
Date: Dec 27, 2011
If the airspeed is reading too HIGH, a quick & dirty solution is to install a controlled leak in the pitot system. Install a T in the pitot line and use the third port as a drilled jet to vent to cabin air. Begin with a #80 drill bit and open up. For calibration, extend the new line (plastic tubing) into the cockpit so your co-pilot can make adjustments in flight. -------- Jerry King Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361733#361733 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 27, 2011
From: paul wilson <pwmac(at)sisna.com>
Subject: Re: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration...
Pitot is not an issue since it is pretty insensitive to angle of attack. A quick check in just about any gas dynamics text will tell you error vs angle of attack. My memory is bad, but its pretty hard to get much of an error due to angle. Static location can be an issue. The text book pitot static probe had many static ports and one dynamic port. Paul =========== At 08:39 PM 12/26/2011, you wrote: > >Dear Listers, > >I've been flying the new 10" Dynon Skyview in the RV-6 for a few >weeks now and it seems like the airspeed is reading maybe 10mph >fast. The GS always reads 10mph or more slower than the True >airspeed, no matter which way I fly with respect to the current >wind. Looking through the configuration options on the Skyview, I'm >not seeing parameters to calibrate the airspeed. If the airspeed >were *slow* compared to the GS, I could envision making adjustments >to the Pitot tube to get it in better alignment with >slipstream. But *fast* is a head scratcher. If there's no >electronic configuration parameters to adjust, what do you do? Are >there Pitot line "attenuators" like for RF in coax? ;-) > >Matt > >- >Matt "Red Dawg" Dralle > >RV-8 #82880 N998RV "Ruby Vixen" >http://www.mattsrv8.com - Matt's Complete RV-8 Construction Log >http://www.mattsrv8.com/Mishap - Landing Mishap Rebuild Log >http://www.youtube.com/MattsRV8 - Matt's RV-8 HDTV YouTube Channel >Status: 170+ Hours TTSN - Rebuilding Fuselage After Landing Mishap... > >RV-6 #20916 N360EM "The Flyer" >http://www.mattsrv6.com - Matt's RV-6 Revitalization Log >Status: 42+ Hours Since Purchase - Upgrades Complete; Now In Full Flyer Mode > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Tim Perry <tperry(at)lvtofly.com>
Subject: Re: First Engine Start Problem
Date: Dec 27, 2011
Sound like you have a loose connection. When you cranked the engine somethin g that was not touching now was. There is often a lot of movement with the e ngine start you don't get with it just sitting there. And during your troub leshooting you might have moved the offending conbection where it no longer i s making contact. I have had this type of problem before and it really suck s when it happens during flight, but best to have a good breaker or fuse blo w than a fire.... Tim Sent from my iPhone On Dec 27, 2011, at 9:46 AM, Dan Billingsley wro te: > Thanks for the quick reply. I will be going to the airport today and take i nventory of the e-bus goodies. I understand and accept that this could be an over-Load problem so I may need to transfer a couple things to the main bus . What troubles me is I have had this E-bus circuit working many times with e verything turned on sometimes for 5 to 10 minutes without a hitch. Will star t with a current tally and get back. > Dan > > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 5:14 AM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: First Engine Start Problem > ls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> > > At 03:37 AM 12/27/2011, you wrote: > > Bob, > > I have had the Kitfox wiring completed for about 8 months now and I used the new Z-16 schematic. I have most of my avionics on the E-Bus and they ha ve been working well since day one when I first flipped the switch. > > What is the total list of goodies on the e-bus? > > > > A week ago the day came to do my first engine start. As it goes with th e Rotax 912uls, we purged the oil system then began turning the prop looking for oil pressure. After turning it through several times by hand we decided to then let the starter do the work. The starter turned the engine over wel l, however, I was dismayed when my whole panel of avionics went dead. I of c ourse quit cranking and began troubleshooting. It didn't take long to find t hat the fuseable link off the Batt Contactor (heading to the E-Bus) burned t hrough. I went ahead and bypassed the link with 16 AWG and was able to compl ete a successful first engine start. The guys that were working with me aske d me why that link was there...I did not have a good answer for them. I do h ave the diode in place, yet I assume a "spike" occurred when I turned the en gine over. So...I am now reluctant to put another fuseable link in place but have a concern if there is still a problem that burned my link in the first place. > > I am open to comments and suggestions. > > Any and all sorts of fault protection (links, > fuses, breakers, etc) are there to protect wires. > The idea of an e-bus is to power up electro-whizzies > most useful for ALTERNATOR OUT EN ROUTE ENDURANCE > while operating battery only. This alternate feed > path goes around the battery contactor thus offering > an opportunity to (1) eliminate battery contactor loads > on the battery or (2) get a minimum list of useful goodies > powered if the contactor or its control circuit fails. > > You didn't have a 'spike' . . . you had some level > of LOAD that was greater than what the 22AWG link > would carry. Having a list of goodies powered from the > e-bus will give us the first clues as to why such > a load existe==================== ====www.builders -Matt - The AeroElectri c-List Email Forum -http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Aersp; - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - > sp; --> http://ww=================== === > > > > > > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: First Engine Start Problem
From: "zodiac601" <timtreat(at)sbcglobal.net>
Date: Dec 27, 2011
My guess is an overloaded e bus. When you cranked, the voltage dropped and the amps of everything went up. watts = volts x amps. If the battery voltage dropped 20% during cranking, then the amperage of everything went up 20% as well. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361739#361739 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "The Kuffels" <kuffel(at)cyberport.net>
Subject: Re: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration...
Date: Dec 27, 2011
Matt, Agree with others the symptoms indicate a static problem, specifically the location is producing a vacuum when moving. While introducing a "controlled leak" in the pitot side might fix the airspeed error, probably at only one airspeed, it wouldn't fix the altitude error also produced by static error. Two very simple things you can do to confirm the problem and start toward a solution. First on takeoff set the altimeter to an exact division. Note as you speed up and rotate if the altitude changes, even a little. Higher altitude implies dynamic vacuum at the static port(s) which will produce the effect you describe, lower altitude means dynamic pressure. As a test, tape a wedge, or even a block such as a short piece or two of tongue depressor, behind the port(s). If your error decreases you are on the right track and set for a little cut and try with wedge size and placement. Before starting be sure to have accurate error measurements. Use the spreadsheet mentioned by others to get wind independent actual true airspeeds. Or you are welcome to the spreadsheet I developed from the same formula with 4 leg input. The 4th leg provides redundant information to indicate the quality of the input data. Tom Kuffel, CFI EAA Flight Advisor ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration...
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Date: Dec 27, 2011
On 2011-12-27, at 11:12 , racerjerry wrote: > > If the airspeed is reading too HIGH, a quick & dirty solution is to install a controlled leak in the pitot system. Install a T in the pitot line and use the third port as a drilled jet to vent to cabin air. Begin with a #80 drill bit and open up. For calibration, extend the new line (plastic tubing) into the cockpit so your co-pilot can make adjustments in flight. If the airspeed is reading too, it is quite likely a problem with the static system. This could be a static system leak, or a poorly designed or located static port. Errors in the static system will affect both airspeed and altitude, so it is much better to find and fix the static source problem than it is to create a pitot leak too. If you were to fiddle with the pitot system to fix the ASI indication (or provide ASI adjustments, as some EFIS systems allow), you would still have errors in the altimeter, and these can be safety of flight issues. The TCAS systems on larger aircraft provide guidance to avoid collision with you based on whatever altitude is reported by your transponder. If you have static system errors, the TCAS system may be giving commands that increase the risk of collision. Static system leaks on RVs often produce ASIs that read about 10 kt too high, so the first thing to do is a static system leak check. Another common problem is flush mounted static ports on RVs, but this typically leads to ASIs reading too low. -- Kevin Horton RV-8 Ottawa, Canada http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 27, 2011
From: bnelson79(at)charter.net
Subject: Re: Relays
Bob, In the original 1998 Rotax Installation Manual the schematic didn't show anything fancy. But the newest incarnation (May 2009) has both a starter relay and a battery relay. I've talked to at least 2 Rotax techs, the Rans tech, my own mechanic, as well as others and everyone seems to say something different. I think I've decided to go with the latest schematic which has a 5 A and a 50 A fuse/C.B. in the external alternator circuit as well as a DPST master switch that connects the 5 A line from the IG connection on the alternator to the battery relay. There is also a 25 A fuse/C.B. in the R, B+, C lines from the regulator/rectifier in the internal alternator circuit. Both alternators run at the same time then, all the time, although the 5 A C.B. will be switched so I can shut down the external alternator if I want to. I assume there is one line coming out of the external alt. circuit and another from the internal circuit that both connect to the consumers bus. Is this correct with both running at the same time? Any comments on any of these issues will be appreciated. Bill On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 7:01 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > At 10:13 PM 12/25/2011, you wrote: >> >> >> What is the difference between a battery relay and a starter relay? I >> have a Rans S12S and the circuit diagram for the Rotax 912ULS engine >> shows both. But I just got the plane and it only has what I think is >> a starter relay with the rotary starter switch and a simple SPST >> master switch. Do I need to add the battery relay? > > Probably not. You've got a day-vfr-fair weather > machine with few incentives for adding lots of > 'conveniences'. The Piper Tri-Pacer in which I took early > flying lessons had a battery switch and a starter > push-button. No relays at all. > > The FUNCTIONALITY for the two devices is very > different. The battery switch/contactor is designed > to use a minimum of power and is expected to SWITCH > rather light loads while being able to CARRY the > occasional starter current. > > The starter contactor needs to SWITCH large inrush > loads without welding contacts. Power drain is not > an issue because its operating duty cycle is very > low . . . seconds per flight cycle. Hence, the starter > switch/contactor is designed for the more demanding > service as a control device. > > If what you have has been vetted by folks who > have been-there-done-that . . . there's no compelling > rationale for changing anything. If they become > troublesome, get with us here on the List and we'll > help you craft a more robust alternative. > > > Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gerry van Dyk" <gerry.vandyk(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration...
Date: Dec 27, 2011
Matt, I've got a couple of thoughts: The pitot / static system depends on the static port being true ambient pressure, which is actually pretty difficult to achieve in airflow. If you've got the port(s) in a spot that generates a slight positive pressure on the static side you will de-calibrate the airspeed to the low side, if there's negative pressure at the port airspeed will read high. On the C172SP I rent there's a 1/8" high lip on the fitting right beside the static hole. As the lip is at an angle to airflow, I presume they dial in the static system by rotating the fitting so the angle gives the correct pressure at the port for a specific speed range. I've read somewhere (perhaps the Bingelis books) about making adjustments to the static port by laying strips of tape in front of or behind the port. As an example, the area in front of the windshield on a stock car is a high pressure area where they take the induction to the engine, I would suggest laying down a few thicknesses of tape behind the port to start. Then again if your port is in an area of laminar flow, tripping the flow in front of the port may have the same effect. I believe once you have a modification that works you can make a permanent 'fix' that would be more efficient than a bleed port in the line. Hope this helps. Gerry -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt Dralle Sent: December 26, 2011 8:39 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration... Dear Listers, I've been flying the new 10" Dynon Skyview in the RV-6 for a few weeks now and it seems like the airspeed is reading maybe 10mph fast. The GS always reads 10mph or more slower than the True airspeed, no matter which way I fly with respect to the current wind. Looking through the configuration options on the Skyview, I'm not seeing parameters to calibrate the airspeed. If the airspeed were *slow* compared to the GS, I could envision making adjustments to the Pitot tube to get it in better alignment with slipstream. But *fast* is a head scratcher. If there's no electronic configuration parameters to adjust, what do you do? Are there Pitot line "attenuators" like for RF in coax? ;-) Matt - Matt "Red Dawg" Dralle RV-8 #82880 N998RV "Ruby Vixen" http://www.mattsrv8.com - Matt's Complete RV-8 Construction Log http://www.mattsrv8.com/Mishap - Landing Mishap Rebuild Log http://www.youtube.com/MattsRV8 - Matt's RV-8 HDTV YouTube Channel Status: 170+ Hours TTSN - Rebuilding Fuselage After Landing Mishap... RV-6 #20916 N360EM "The Flyer" http://www.mattsrv6.com - Matt's RV-6 Revitalization Log Status: 42+ Hours Since Purchase - Upgrades Complete; Now In Full Flyer Mode ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 27, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: First Engine Start Problem
At 09:35 AM 12/27/2011, you wrote: > >My guess is an overloaded e bus. When you cranked, the voltage >dropped and the amps of everything went up. watts = volts x amps. > >If the battery voltage dropped 20% during cranking, then the >amperage of everything went up 20% as well. For the vast majority of electro-whizzies, current draw does not go up and input voltage goes down. Modern avionics with switchmode power supplies are 'constant power' systems but even then, the increase is not THAT profound for the duration of a cranking cycle. It takes a LOT more current to fuse a 22AWG wire than you might suppose. See: http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Wire/22AWG_20A.pdf Current ratings for wire is bounded by INSULATION performance, not COPPER performance. If he fused a 22AWG link, something rather profound occurred. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 27, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Relays
At 10:56 AM 12/27/2011, you wrote: > >Bob, >In the original 1998 Rotax Installation Manual the schematic didn't >show anything fancy. But the newest incarnation (May 2009) has both >a starter relay and a battery relay. I've talked to at least 2 >Rotax techs, the Rans tech, my own mechanic, as well as others and >everyone seems to say something different. I think I've decided to >go with the latest schematic which has a 5 A and a 50 A fuse/C.B. in >the external alternator circuit as well as a DPST master switch that >connects the 5 A line from the IG connection on the alternator to >the battery relay. There is also a 25 A fuse/C.B. in the R, B+, C >lines from the regulator/rectifier in the internal alternator >circuit. Both alternators run at the same time then, all the time, >although the 5 A C.B. will be switched so I can shut down the >external alternator if I want to. I assume there is one line coming >out of the external alt. circuit and another from the internal >circuit that both connect to the consumers bus. Is this correct >with both running at the same time? >Any comments on any of these issues will be appreciated. Forgive me but a schematic is many times more lucid than a verbal description. Can you send/post/link a copy of the diagram that strikes your fancy? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 27, 2011
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: First Engine Start Problem
At 08:46 AM 12/27/2011, you wrote: >Thanks for the quick reply. I will be going to the airport today and >take inventory of the e-bus goodies. I understand and accept that >this could be an over-Load problem so I may need to transfer a >couple things to the main bus. What troubles me is I have had this >E-bus circuit working many times with everything turned on sometimes >for 5 to 10 minutes without a hitch. Will start with a current tally >and get back. In particular, do you have any loads that are not generally described in the suggested list of endurance goodies I've written about? Is your starter system dependent upon e-bus supply of energy in any way? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration...
Date: Dec 27, 2011
If you build in a leak in the system, I doubt that you will ever pass your biannual transponder check. Just something to consider... Bill B -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Horton Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 11:46 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration... On 2011-12-27, at 11:12 , racerjerry wrote: > > If the airspeed is reading too HIGH, a quick & dirty solution is to install a controlled leak in the pitot system. Install a "T" in the pitot line and use the third port as a drilled jet to vent to cabin air. Begin with a #80 drill bit and open up. For calibration, extend the new line (plastic tubing) into the cockpit so your co-pilot can make adjustments in flight. If the airspeed is reading too, it is quite likely a problem with the static system. This could be a static system leak, or a poorly designed or located static port. Errors in the static system will affect both airspeed and altitude, so it is much better to find and fix the static source problem than it is to create a pitot leak too. If you were to fiddle with the pitot system to fix the ASI indication (or provide ASI adjustments, as some EFIS systems allow), you would still have errors in the altimeter, and these can be safety of flight issues. The TCAS systems on larger aircraft provide guidance to avoid collision with you based on whatever altitude is reported by your transponder. If you have static system errors, the TCAS system may be giving commands that increase the risk of collision. Static system leaks on RVs often produce ASIs that read about 10 kt too high, so the first thing to do is a static system leak check. Another common problem is flush mounted static ports on RVs, but this typically leads to ASIs reading too low. -- Kevin Horton RV-8 Ottawa, Canada http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 27, 2011
From: Dan Billingsley <dan(at)azshowersolutions.com>
Subject: Re: First Engine Start Problem
________________________________ From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Sent: Tue, December 27, 2011 11:27:05 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: First Engine Start Problem At 08:46 AM 12/27/2011, you wrote: Thanks for the quick reply. I will be going to the airport today and take inventory of the e-bus goodies. I understand and accept that this could be an over-Load problem so I may need to transfer a couple things to the main bus. What troubles me is I have had this E-bus circuit working many times with everything turned on sometimes for 5 to 10 minutes without a hitch. Will start with a current tally and get back. In particular, do you have any loads that are not generally described in the suggested list of endurance goodies I've written about? Is your starter system dependent upon e-bus supply of energy in any way? No, the starter system is drawn off the main buss. I was not able to take a tally on the goodies today but it is in the cards for tomorrow. I will get back the info to the list as soon as I round it up. I will say that there are quite a few things on the E-Bus as compared to the Main. Doing a tally on the amps drawn when all is on at the E-Bus is something I neglected to do, so I am quite interested in figuring it out. Thanks all for the comments and suggestions. Dan Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Nelson" <bnelson79(at)charter.net>
Subject: Relays
Date: Dec 27, 2011
Picture #1 is the old system that approximates mine, though there are some additional C.B. switches and fuses in some lines. #2 is what I would like to go with. The DPST Master Switch would be replaced with a SPST 5 Amp C.B. switch and 16 would be a simple Master Switch connected to the battery relay. Any thoughts, suggestions, or warnings would be appreciated. Bill -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 10:25 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Relays --> At 10:56 AM 12/27/2011, you wrote: > >Bob, >In the original 1998 Rotax Installation Manual the schematic didn't >show anything fancy. But the newest incarnation (May 2009) has both a >starter relay and a battery relay. I've talked to at least 2 Rotax >techs, the Rans tech, my own mechanic, as well as others and everyone >seems to say something different. I think I've decided to go with the >latest schematic which has a 5 A and a 50 A fuse/C.B. in the external >alternator circuit as well as a DPST master switch that connects the 5 >A line from the IG connection on the alternator to the battery relay. >There is also a 25 A fuse/C.B. in the R, B+, C lines from the >regulator/rectifier in the internal alternator circuit. Both >alternators run at the same time then, all the time, although the 5 A >C.B. will be switched so I can shut down the external alternator if I >want to. I assume there is one line coming out of the external alt. >circuit and another from the internal circuit that both connect to the >consumers bus. Is this correct with both running at the same time? >Any comments on any of these issues will be appreciated. Forgive me but a schematic is many times more lucid than a verbal description. Can you send/post/link a copy of the diagram that strikes your fancy? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 27, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Dynon Skyview Airspeed Calibration...
At 07:39 PM 12/26/2011 Monday, Matt Dralle wrote: >Dear Listers, > >I've been flying the new 10" Dynon Skyview in the RV-6 for a few weeks now and it seems like the airspeed is reading maybe 10mph fast. The GS always reads 10mph or more slower than the True airspeed, no matter which way I fly with respect to the current wind. Looking through the configuration options on the Skyview, I'm not seeing parameters to calibrate the airspeed. If the airspeed were *slow* compared to the GS, I could envision making adjustments to the Pitot tube to get it in better alignment with slipstream. But *fast* is a head scratcher. If there's no electronic configuration parameters to adjust, what do you do? Are there Pitot line "attenuators" like for RF in coax? ;-) > >Matt Listers, Thank you for all the great suggestions on resolving this airspeed issue! I took a look at the static ports on the RV-6 today and found that they are done using a flush head screw with a hole drilled in the center on either side of the fuselage. They do *not* protrude from the side of the plane at all. They are totally flush (see attached picture). Just for fun, I whipped up a couple of quick test deals using a 3/16" washer and some electrical tape. I poked a 1/16" hole in the center of the tape and then put the washer centered over the static ports on both sides of the fuselage (see attached pictures). Then, I went flying on this beautiful December 27 day in California! I didn't have time to do any real scientific multi-leg testing, but I was amazed that the True Airspeed is now falling in a much more believable range compared to the GPS-derived ground speed. On one cross-country leg, I had an exactly 90 degree crosswind component and the True Airspeed and GPS Ground Speed were tracking exactly the same. Yahoo! Obviously I need to do some additional, more scientific measurements and probably come up with a slightly more "permanent" washer arrangement, but the early returns are very promising! :-) Thanks again for all the great feedback! Matt - Matt "Red Dawg" Dralle RV-8 #82880 N998RV "Ruby Vixen" http://www.mattsrv8.com - Matt's Complete RV-8 Construction Log http://www.mattsrv8.com/Mishap - Landing Mishap Rebuild Log http://www.youtube.com/MattsRV8 - Matt's RV-8 HDTV YouTube Channel Status: 170+ Hours TTSN - Rebuilding Fuselage After Landing Mishap... RV-6 #20916 N360EM "The Flyer" http://www.mattsrv6.com - Matt's RV-6 Revitalization Log Status: 42+ Hours Since Purchase - Upgrades Complete; Now In Full Flyer Mode ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 27, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Dynon Skyview vs. GRT HX EFIS...
>At 09:47 PM 12/27/2011 Tuesday, you wrote: >I have looked at the Dynon stuff up at Arlington Air Show the past two years >and really like the looks of them. They added autopilot and said last year >that they were about to announce communications added to their system. A >single 10" screen to do everything would be pretty easy to install learn to >operate. Mostly Dynon looks best in the magazines. I guess you get used to >any of them or they would not all still be in business. >Pete I have a Dynon 10" Skyview in the RV-6: http://www.mattsrv6.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV6&project 43&category=0&log=138164&row=45 http://www.mattsrv6.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV6&project 43&category=0&log=138163&row=46 and a triple GRT HX setup in the RV-8: http://www.mattsrv8.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV8&project=638&category=2973&log'376&row=134 http://www.mattsrv8.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV8&project=638&category=2973&log'375&row=135 I've flown the GRT HX setup about 170 hours and the Dynon Skyview system about 45 hours now. Which do I prefer? That's a tough call. There are parts about each system that I like a lot... The installation and configuration of the Dynon is easier. Instructions are also better. The network cable interconnect system that Dynon uses (I think it is just RS485, but it works well) is also a no-brainer to install. Their display (PFD/Engine/Map) are definitely very pretty and demo well. The GRT is a little harder to get installed, the manual is a little sketchy in places and there are a LOT of configuration options that can seem daunting at

November 22, 2011 - December 28, 2011

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-kt