AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-lu

June 20, 2013 - July 07, 2013



      
      Read this topic online here:
      
      http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403026#403026
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 20, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Best practices for multi-destination connections
At 05:00 PM 6/19/2013, you wrote: Machined pins by themselves, without a DB housing, make handy, very small, removable butt connectors. A piece of tight heat shrink will hold the whole thing together. Good or bad, the entire connection disappears in a wire bundle, it's so slim. Yes! I've illustrated the technique at: http://tinyurl.com/c5v2xvm Also, I recently did an install that needed power to 5 or 6 engine sensors. The sensors are all very low current and fed from a single wire out of the engine monitor, so I used Bob's DB ground block philosophy in reverse: I soldered the wire from the engine monitor to the back terminals of the DB sockets, then distributed that power to the various sensors through the other half of the DB connector. I used the plastic body of the connector to insulate the whole thing. The d-sub can be pretty versatile. The technique Dave is talking about here is illustrated at: http://tinyurl.com/kpy5acn http://tinyurl.com/jwwta9t Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 20, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Now writing for Kitplanes
The next issue of Kitplanes will contain an article by yours truly on DIY bond studs. After some conversation with Paul Dye, I've agreed to offer a continuous flow of material for the magazine's pages. Some of you may remember Paul from his offering of this technique for crafting an annunciator panel http://tinyurl.com/mrockg7 I have written a dozen or so articles for S.A. and did some critical review for articles proposed by others . . . But after they published these two bombs http://tinyurl.com/ke3bq9d http://tinyurl.com/5hug5 and then failed to remit promised payment for an article cranked out at a dead-run to fill a gap generated by another author, I decided to part ways with S.A. I'm looking forward to a much more pleasant and productive association with Kitplanes. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 20, 2013
From: Jeff Luckey <jluckey(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Now writing for Kitplanes
That's great Bob - looking forward to it. Can't think of a better man for t he job!=0A=0A-Jeff=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" =0ATo: aeroelectri c-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 5:05 PM=0ASubject: Ae roElectric-List: Now writing for Kitplanes=0A =0A=0A--> AeroElectric-List m essage posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" =0A=0AThe next issue of Kitplanes will contain an article=0Aby yours truly on DIY bond studs. After some conversation=0Awith Paul Dye, I've agreed to offer a continuous flow of=0Amaterial for the magazine's pages. Some of you may remember=0APaul from his offering of this technique for crafting=0Aan annunciator panel=0A=0Ahttp://tinyurl.com/mrockg7=0A=0AI have written a doz en or so articles for S.A. and did=0Asome critical review for articles prop osed by others . . .=0A=0ABut after they published these two bombs=0A=0Ahtt p://tinyurl.com/ke3bq9d=0A=0Ahttp://tinyurl.com/5hug5=0A=0Aand then failed to remit promised payment for an=0Aarticle cranked out at a dead-run to fil l a gap=0Agenerated by another author, I decided to part ways=0Awith S.A. =0A=0AI'm looking forward to a much more pleasant and=0Aproductive associat =========== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ralph Finch <ralphmariafinch(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jun 21, 2013
Subject: Re: Now writing for Kitplanes
Excellent. In the past I've written a couple of emails to Kitplanes suggesting this very thing. Looks like the new editor is more responsive and alert than the previous one. On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Jeff Luckey wrote: > That's great Bob - looking forward to it. Can't think of a better man for > the job! > > -Jeff > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > *To:* aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > *Sent:* Thursday, June 20, 2013 5:05 PM > *Subject:* AeroElectric-List: Now writing for Kitplanes > > nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> > > The next issue of Kitplanes will contain an article > by yours truly on DIY bond studs. After some conversation > with Paul Dye, I've agreed to offer a continuous flow of > material for the magazine's pages. Some of you may remember > Paul from his offering of this technique for crafting > an annunciator panel > > http://tinyurl.com/mrockg7 > > I have written a dozen or so articles for S.A. and did > some critical review for articles proposed by others . . . > > But after they published these two bombs > > http://tinyurl.com/ke3bq9d > > http://tinyurl.com/5hug5 > > and then failed to remit promised payment for an > article cranked out at a dead-run to fill a gap > generated by another author, I decided to part ways > with S.A. > > I'm looking forward to a much more pleasant and > productive association with Kitplanes. > > > Bob . . . ** > > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rob Henderson" <robnrobinh(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Best practices for multi-destination connections
Date: Jun 21, 2013
Bob What do you recommend for removable connections for larger single wires, say 16 or 14 gauge? Would a "B" crimp male and female with heat shrink be ok? -Rob -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 4:52 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Best practices for multi-destination connections --> At 05:00 PM 6/19/2013, you wrote: Machined pins by themselves, without a DB housing, make handy, very small, removable butt connectors. A piece of tight heat shrink will hold the whole thing together. Good or bad, the entire connection disappears in a wire bundle, it's so slim. Yes! I've illustrated the technique at: http://tinyurl.com/c5v2xvm Also, I recently did an install that needed power to 5 or 6 engine sensors. The sensors are all very low current and fed from a single wire out of the engine monitor, so I used Bob's DB ground block philosophy in reverse: I soldered the wire from the engine monitor to the back terminals of the DB sockets, then distributed that power to the various sensors through the other half of the DB connector. I used the plastic body of the connector to insulate the whole thing. The d-sub can be pretty versatile. The technique Dave is talking about here is illustrated at: http://tinyurl.com/kpy5acn http://tinyurl.com/jwwta9t Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 21, 2013
Subject: Re: Now writing for Kitplanes
From: Bill <wtrooper(at)gmail.com>
Congratulations Sensei - I'm real pleased to hear this. For years your offerings have been shared extensively by word-of-mouth in the OBAM community. This praiseworthy development is long overdue. Kitplanes is the most respected publication IMO, for the quality of information you present. Bill SF bay area On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com**> > > The next issue of Kitplanes will contain an article > by yours truly on DIY bond studs. After some conversation > with Paul Dye, I've agreed to offer a continuous flow of > material for the magazine's pages. Some of you may remember > Paul from his offering of this technique for crafting > an annunciator panel > > http://tinyurl.com/mrockg7 > > I have written a dozen or so articles for S.A. and did > some critical review for articles proposed by others . . . > > But after they published these two bombs > > http://tinyurl.com/ke3bq9d > > http://tinyurl.com/5hug5 > > and then failed to remit promised payment for an > article cranked out at a dead-run to fill a gap > generated by another author, I decided to part ways > with S.A. > > I'm looking forward to a much more pleasant and > productive association with Kitplanes. > > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 21, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Best practices for multi-destination connections
At 09:13 AM 6/21/2013, you wrote: > > >Bob >What do you recommend for removable connections for larger single wires, say >16 or 14 gauge? >Would a "B" crimp male and female with heat shrink be ok? If it were my airplane, I'd go with the PIDG knife splice http://tinyurl.com/kp6ptl2 Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Now writing for Kitplanes
From: "eschlanser" <eschlanser(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Jun 21, 2013
Bob, That's good news for us Kitplanes subscribers! Here's some inspiration for writing technical articles for the average OBAM reader. http://tinyurl.com/nb628a4 Good luck on your new job. Eric Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403101#403101 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 21, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Now writing for Kitplanes
At 11:03 AM 6/21/2013, you wrote: > >Bob, > >That's good news for us Kitplanes subscribers! > >Here's some inspiration for writing technical articles for the >average OBAM reader. http://tinyurl.com/nb628a4 Interesting article. Vocabulary and meaning are critical to the useful sharing of ideas. Many years ago in my own career, I remember being presented with a list of words that had identical, similar or easily mis-understood meaning. We were encouraged to tailor our writing to favor use the top word on each list, I.e. probably the one with the most common usage. In later years, we've see the rise of Technical Standard English' as a communications tool for maximizing the sharing of understanding. I think there was a mil-spec of common technical terms too. To be sure, our own culture is becoming less dependent upon comprehending the written word as the cost of producing visual/aural documents goes down. Concise use of words becomes more important not only for many of our fellow citizens but for the spread of ideas amongst our brothers for whom English is not a first language. I've toyed with an idea for another book that would compile and distill some 20 years of Q&A work with the OBAM community into a kind FAQ. This book would be an ideal vehicle for defining terms as well. Dr. Dee is helping me get the present state of the 'Connection into a single application for a completely fresh look at the editing with a goal of doing our first issue totally generated in a desk-top publisher. I'll then be able to screen the document cover to cover for certain words and phrases with the idea of bringing them into greater common alignment. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 21, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Best practices for multi-destination connections
At 10:09 AM 6/21/2013, you wrote: > > >At 09:13 AM 6/21/2013, you wrote: >> >> >>Bob >>What do you recommend for removable connections for larger single wires, say >>16 or 14 gauge? >>Would a "B" crimp male and female with heat shrink be ok? > > If it were my airplane, I'd go with the PIDG knife splice > > http://tinyurl.com/kp6ptl2 There's a less expensive version at: http://tinyurl.com/mgfrn8h Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ralph Finch <ralphmariafinch(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jun 21, 2013
Subject: Re: Now writing for Kitplanes
Your Paul Harvey-like "Rest of the Story" analyses are wonderful. Hope you can keep doing them. Ralph Finch On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com**> > > > http://tinyurl.com/ke3bq9d > > http://tinyurl.com/5hug5 > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 21, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Now writing for Kitplanes
At 01:37 PM 6/21/2013, you wrote: >Your Paul Harvey-like "Rest of the Story" analyses are wonderful. >Hope you can keep doing them. Thank you. After a career centered on selling new products and fixing old products that didn't, it's hard not to hold an extra appreciation for the value of what I've called simple-ideas. Fundamental, unchanging truths that become ingredients that go into recipes for success. Individuals with the most rudimentary reading and measuring skills can follow a recipe for about any work product. It's been institutionalized as the ISO9000 way. Certainly Ford and McDondald's demonstrated the utility of the work-instruction for a century. But the first time the outcome is not-as-expected or the machine breaks, the short path to resurrection and perhaps the prophylactic against future failure will be guided by an understanding of those simple- ideas . . . and what caused them not to 'fit'. I've adopted the philosophy for my readers that is no different than for customers or supervisors of years past. Laying out the whole story down to the list of simple-ideas builds confidence and reduces risk. It makes us better customers, better suppliers, and more competent users of systems which are a mystery to the vast majority of the inhabitants of this planet. I don't get to fly nearly as often as I would like but you folks are my alter-egos. If I can help you exploit your enjoyment of the sport with as much pleasure and confidence as I have experienced, then not having a machine with wings on it parked at my airport is not a serious void in my life. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 21, 2013
Subject: Re: Now writing for Kitplanes
From: DeWitt Whittington <dee.whittington(at)gmail.com>
Johan, thanks so much for the suggestion. Could you tell me from whom you are going to buy this muffler? I did a quick look on the web and see a number of sources. One we've dealt with before is Summit Racing, but the three versions I see there don't match the one you are speaking of. Is there a particular reason you are going with 2.50" diameter pipes? Also, are you going to run the left and right pipes together and have a single muffler, or two pipes. The header pipe we have from Jan is 1 3/4" diameter. I do see Magnaflow muffler of a straight through design (inlet offset to outlet) in 1 3/4" diameter. but with the case of the muffler 14" long, 20" inches long overall. Dee On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com**> > > At 01:37 PM 6/21/2013, you wrote: > >> Your Paul Harvey-like "Rest of the Story" analyses are wonderful. Hope >> you can keep doing them. >> > > > Thank you. > > After a career centered on selling new products > and fixing old products that didn't, it's hard > not to hold an extra appreciation for the value > of what I've called simple-ideas. Fundamental, > unchanging truths that become ingredients that > go into recipes for success. > > Individuals with the most rudimentary reading > and measuring skills can follow a recipe for > about any work product. It's been institutionalized > as the ISO9000 way. Certainly Ford and McDondald's > demonstrated the utility of the work-instruction > for a century. > > But the first time the outcome is not-as-expected > or the machine breaks, the short path to resurrection > and perhaps the prophylactic against future failure > will be guided by an understanding of those simple- > ideas . . . and what caused them not to 'fit'. > > I've adopted the philosophy for my readers that > is no different than for customers or supervisors > of years past. Laying out the whole story down to > the list of simple-ideas builds confidence and > reduces risk. It makes us better customers, better > suppliers, and more competent users of systems > which are a mystery to the vast majority of > the inhabitants of this planet. > > I don't get to fly nearly as often as I would like > but you folks are my alter-egos. If I can help > you exploit your enjoyment of the sport with as > much pleasure and confidence as I have experienced, > then not having a machine with wings on it parked at > my airport is not a serious void in my life. > > > Bob . . . > > -- DeWitt (Dee) Whittington 804-677-4849 iPhone 804-358-4333 Home www.VirginiaFlyIn.org Building Glasair Sportsman with 3 partners ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 21, 2013
Subject: Re: Now writing for Kitplanes
From: DeWitt Whittington <dee.whittington(at)gmail.com>
Ooops, sorry, Bob. Obviously my recent post was in error. Dee On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com**> > > At 01:37 PM 6/21/2013, you wrote: > >> Your Paul Harvey-like "Rest of the Story" analyses are wonderful. Hope >> you can keep doing them. >> > > > Thank you. > > After a career centered on selling new products > and fixing old products that didn't, it's hard > not to hold an extra appreciation for the value > of what I've called simple-ideas. Fundamental, > unchanging truths that become ingredients that > go into recipes for success. > > Individuals with the most rudimentary reading > and measuring skills can follow a recipe for > about any work product. It's been institutionalized > as the ISO9000 way. Certainly Ford and McDondald's > demonstrated the utility of the work-instruction > for a century. > > But the first time the outcome is not-as-expected > or the machine breaks, the short path to resurrection > and perhaps the prophylactic against future failure > will be guided by an understanding of those simple- > ideas . . . and what caused them not to 'fit'. > > I've adopted the philosophy for my readers that > is no different than for customers or supervisors > of years past. Laying out the whole story down to > the list of simple-ideas builds confidence and > reduces risk. It makes us better customers, better > suppliers, and more competent users of systems > which are a mystery to the vast majority of > the inhabitants of this planet. > > I don't get to fly nearly as often as I would like > but you folks are my alter-egos. If I can help > you exploit your enjoyment of the sport with as > much pleasure and confidence as I have experienced, > then not having a machine with wings on it parked at > my airport is not a serious void in my life. > > > Bob . . . > > -- DeWitt (Dee) Whittington 804-677-4849 iPhone 804-358-4333 Home www.VirginiaFlyIn.org Building Glasair Sportsman with 3 partners ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 22, 2013
From: Linda Walker <l.p(at)talk21.com>
Subject: Alternate Z-32 Heavy duty E-bus feed
=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ASubject: Alternate Z-32 Heavy duty E-bus feed=0A =0A=0ABob. =0AI wonder if you could comment on the following please:=0A=0AI have notic ed a 0.7 volt drop across the E-bus normal feedpath diode in a Z-13 (11/01) architecture.=0AIs this normal and correct?=0A=0AOn reviewing the Z-32 Hea vy Duty E-Bus Feed diagram, Rev-K-04/20/05, is it in order to alter it to d o away with the E-bus normal feedpath diode?=0ATo accomplish this, the NC c ontact of the relay would connect to the Main Bus.=0AThe COM contact would connect to the E-Bus.=0AThe NO contact would connect to the Main Battery Bu s and the negative side of the 1N4001 relay diode.=0A=0AIn the relay non-po wered state, the E-Bus is supplied by the Main Bus.=0A=0AWith the battery c ontactor open, closing the E-Bus alternate feed switch feeds the E-Bus from the Main Battery Bus.=0ADo you see any isssues with this arrangement?=0ACo uld you elaborate on the reasoning behind the E-Bus normal Feedpath diode i nclusion in Z-32?=0A=0AThank you for your time looking at this.Patrick Elli ott, G-LGEZ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 22, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Alternate Z-32 Heavy duty E-bus feed
At 03:10 AM 6/22/2013, you wrote: >Subject: Alternate Z-32 Heavy duty E-bus feed > >Bob. >I wonder if you could comment on the following please: > >I have noticed a 0.7 volt drop across the E-bus normal feedpath >diode in a Z-13 (11/01) architecture. >Is this normal and correct? Yes. You can reduced this value slightly by substituting a Schottky diode . . . but yes, the drop you observe is normal . . . and insignificant. >On reviewing the Z-32 Heavy Duty E-Bus Feed diagram, Rev-K-04/20/05, >is it in order to alter it to do away with the E-bus normal feedpath diode? >To accomplish this, the NC contact of the relay would connect to the Main Bus. >The COM contact would connect to the E-Bus. >The NO contact would connect to the Main Battery Bus and the >negative side of the 1N4001 relay diode. This puts BOTH power pathways for the e-but through a single device. A design goal for the architecture as published was to craft independent pathways. In the relay non-powered state, the E-Bus is supplied by the Main Bus. >With the battery contactor open, closing the E-Bus alternate feed >switch feeds the E-Bus from the Main Battery Bus. >Do you see any isssues with this arrangement? >Could you elaborate on the reasoning behind the E-Bus normal >Feedpath diode inclusion in Z-32? A driver for this goal was gleaned from experiences with the legacy 'avionics master switch' wherein all power for the radios comes through one electro- mechanical device with contacts and moving parts. This condition has prompted some owners of certified iron to install a second, back up switch in parallel with the first. The as-published architecture eliminates risk for single failure induced loss of the e-bus. The voltage drop noted is not significant to operation of the aircraft. Keep in mind that should you find yourself without an alternator, the battery becomes a secondary source of power. Batteries deliver energy at 12.5 volts and LOWER. When the alternator is up, the main bus runs at 14.2 to 14.6. The 0.7 volt drop in the normal feedpath diode supplies the e-bus at 13.5 to 13.9 volts. If you expect to get full utility from your e-bus appliances under battery only conditions at 11.0 to 12.5 volts then I suggest that the voltage drop cited for alternator supported operations is not significant. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Battery fail question
Date: Jun 23, 2013
A couple of weeks ago the battery suddenly failed in my '09 Toyota. The starter had never given any indication that the battery was getting weak. I drove up to a business just before 5:00 pm, shut off the car, got out and tried the door on the business.locked! They closed a few minutes early. Got back in the car and everything was dead. The panel would not light up. The starter would not click. The door locks would not work! (good thing I had not locked them when I went to the door!) I called my neighbor and he tried to jump the car with jumper cables. The starter would not turn it past the compression stroke while on the jumper cables. (My neighbor had heard that it was dangerous to have his car running while jumping off another car, so we were on his battery only. I have never heard of this problem, but that is another question.) I removed the battery, exchanged it for a new one, and the car started and ran fine. No apparent charging problems after several thousand miles. Does anyone know what might have happened to my old battery to cause this sudden failure? Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mark Banus <mbanus(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: #2 Welding Cable
Date: Jun 23, 2013
Bob, Do to W&B considerations I am moving my 2 Panasonic 1220 batteries 8' aft. I had originally used #4 as the runs were all short, 18" or less(all forward of the firewall). The batteries were initially mounted on the forward firewall. As the cable runs are now 9' I intend to use #2 welding cable. Yesterday another builder stopped by to "review many progress" and said welding cable might not be a good choice aft of the firewall as welding cable gives of poisonous fumes if it burns. Comments? Mark Banus Glasair SIIS FT N600 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
Subject: Re: Battery fail question
From: bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com>
my wild guess is that a part of the battery broke loose and shorted out a cell on the inside. about the same thing on my second car right now.battery was 12 yrs old though so no complaints. bob noffs On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Bill Bradburry w rote: > ** ** > > A couple of weeks ago the battery suddenly failed in my =9209 ****Toyota* ***. > **** > > The starter had never given any indication that the battery was getting > weak. I drove up to a business just before 5:00 pm, shut off the car, go t > out and tried the door on the business=85locked! They closed a few minu tes > early. Got back in the car and everything was dead. The panel would not > light up. The starter would not click. The door locks would not work! > (good thing I had not locked them when I went to the door!)**** > > I called my neighbor and he tried to jump the car with jumper cables. Th e > starter would not turn it past the compression stroke while on the jumper > cables. (My neighbor had heard that it was dangerous to have his car > running while jumping off another car, so we were on his battery only. I > have never heard of this problem, but that is another question.)**** > > ** ** > > I removed the battery, exchanged it for a new one, and the car started an d > ran fine. No apparent charging problems after several thousand miles.*** * > > ** ** > > Does anyone know what might have happened to my old battery to cause this > sudden failure?**** > > ** ** > > Bill**** > > * > =========== =========== =========== =========== > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
Bob, Do to W&B considerations I am moving my 2 Panasonic 1220 batteries 8' aft. I had originally used #4 as the runs were all short, 18" or less(all forward of the firewall). The batteries were initially mounted on the forward firewall. As the cable runs are now 9' I intend to use #2 welding cable. Yesterday another builder stopped by to "review many progress" and said welding cable might not be a good choice aft of the firewall as welding cable gives of poisonous fumes if it burns. Comments? When ANY insulation burns, the products of combustion are exceedingly unfriendly to children and other living things. There are folks who make it their life's work to 'reduce risk' . . . even to the point of codifying their profundities and threatening you with retribution for regulatory transgression. In THIS case: What conditions would cause the insulation on these cables to burn? Electrical overload is one . . . externally applied fire is the other. The risks for electrically induced overload are so tiny that certified iron of all sizes does not add overload protection to these wires. In FAR23.1357 we find these words: Sec. 23.1357 Circuit protective devices. (a) Protective devices, such as fuses or circuit breakers, must be installed in all electrical circuits other than-- (1) Main circuits of starter motors used during starting only; and (2) Circuits in which no hazard is presented by their omission. If you've got active fire in the aircraft that threatens to ignite your wire's insulation, then I suggest your risk issues go far beyond any concerns for the quality of the smoke. Bottom line is that while those-who-know-more- about-airplanes-than-we-do will prohibit certain insulations in new design, they still permit an older airplane to be repaired with the SAME insulations that were on the original type certificate. For example, a 1946 C-140 wired with cotton over rubber wire or a 1968 C-172 wired with nylon over PVC can be repaired with the same wire. If the admonitions for controlling cockpit pollution were imperatives, then one would think that any airplane brought in for repairs should be completely re-wired. The short answer is that risks to your future well being due to poor selection of insulation are vanishingly small compared to risks for bird strike, wind shear . . . or running out of fuel. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Battery fail question
Date: Jun 23, 2013
Bill; Most likely a broken inter-cell connection causing an open circuit within the battery. (vibration induced) For at least the latter part of that last trip you were probably operating alternator only and when you shut down you had "nothing". Not turning past compression stroke situation is a poor (high resistance) connection or poor quality small AWG booster cables. (same high resistance problem) The typical booster cables sold today are too small to be of much use. If you look at the cables carried by tow trucks they are usually at least #2 if not even #1 or #0. Parts store cables are often as small as #8 or even #10. Bob McC _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Bradburry Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 8:47 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery fail question A couple of weeks ago the battery suddenly failed in my '09 Toyota. The starter had never given any indication that the battery was getting weak. I drove up to a business just before 5:00 pm, shut off the car, got out and tried the door on the business.locked! They closed a few minutes early. Got back in the car and everything was dead. The panel would not light up. The starter would not click. The door locks would not work! (good thing I had not locked them when I went to the door!) I called my neighbor and he tried to jump the car with jumper cables. The starter would not turn it past the compression stroke while on the jumper cables. (My neighbor had heard that it was dangerous to have his car running while jumping off another car, so we were on his battery only. I have never heard of this problem, but that is another question.) I removed the battery, exchanged it for a new one, and the car started and ran fine. No apparent charging problems after several thousand miles. Does anyone know what might have happened to my old battery to cause this sudden failure? Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Battery fail question
Date: Jun 23, 2013
I left out the fact that the battery tested to have 8 volts when I took it to the store to get a new battery. That would go along with your theory of a broken internal connection I would suppose? What about the idea of not jumping starting a car with your own engine running? I have done this all my life and have never heard of this being a problem?? What could happen?? Bill _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob McCallum Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 10:26 AM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Battery fail question Bill; Most likely a broken inter-cell connection causing an open circuit within the battery. (vibration induced) For at least the latter part of that last trip you were probably operating alternator only and when you shut down you had "nothing". Not turning past compression stroke situation is a poor (high resistance) connection or poor quality small AWG booster cables. (same high resistance problem) The typical booster cables sold today are too small to be of much use. If you look at the cables carried by tow trucks they are usually at least #2 if not even #1 or #0. Parts store cables are often as small as #8 or even #10. Bob McC _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Bradburry Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 8:47 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery fail question A couple of weeks ago the battery suddenly failed in my '09 Toyota. The starter had never given any indication that the battery was getting weak. I drove up to a business just before 5:00 pm, shut off the car, got out and tried the door on the business.locked! They closed a few minutes early. Got back in the car and everything was dead. The panel would not light up. The starter would not click. The door locks would not work! (good thing I had not locked them when I went to the door!) I called my neighbor and he tried to jump the car with jumper cables. The starter would not turn it past the compression stroke while on the jumper cables. (My neighbor had heard that it was dangerous to have his car running while jumping off another car, so we were on his battery only. I have never heard of this problem, but that is another question.) I removed the battery, exchanged it for a new one, and the car started and ran fine. No apparent charging problems after several thousand miles. Does anyone know what might have happened to my old battery to cause this sudden failure? Bill http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Battery fail question
At 10:16 AM 6/23/2013, you wrote: >I left out the fact that the battery tested to have 8 volts when I >took it to the store to get a new battery. Aha . . . perhaps it was a 4-cell battery . . . i've seen single-cell shorts take a tired battery down to 10 . . . but two cells at the same time. > That would go along with your theory of a broken internal > connection I would suppose? A broken connection would get you a zero-volts battery . . . >What about the idea of not jumping starting a car with your own >engine running? > I have done this all my life and have never heard of this being a problem?? > What could happen?? Not much. If I'm jumpering to a dead battery that is otherwise a good battery, I'll leave the car running and let the jump-car alternator charge the dead battery for a few minutes. This greatly improves cranking with the jump. I don't know where that 'concern' came from. It may have roots in the world of spikes and other electronics-killing phenomenon. How old was this battery? Had it ever suffered long term discharge? I had a 4-year old battery take me home from Walmart one day with no indication of weakness. Got home and remembered something I still needed. Got back into car and the battery was unable to crank the engine. Now, if it had just failed before I drove out of the Walmart parking lot instead of after I got home! Your 8-volt observation could be tire cells, and/or one or more shorted cells. Only a bench examination would reveal the whole story. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Battery fail question
Bill,=0A=0ACan you tell us if the 8V was open circuit or under a battery te ster load?=0A=0AThe problem with starting jump starting a car with the alte rnator running is that you never really know what the load is going to be. For example, if the dead battery is in an "almost shorted" condition, the s tarting battery might survive but what about the alternator?=C2- They're only rated for so many Amperes.=0A=C2-=0AHenador Titzoff=0A=0A=0A________ ________________________=0A From: Bill Bradburry <bbradburry(at)bellsouth.net> =0ATo: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 11:16 AM=0ASubject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Battery fail question=0A =0A=0A=0A =0AI left out the fact that the battery=0Atested to have 8 volts when I too k it to the store to get a new battery.=C2- That=0Awould go along with yo ur theory of a broken internal connection I would suppose?=0AWhat about the idea of not jumping starting=0Aa car with your own engine running?=C2- I have done this all my life and have=0Anever heard of this being a problem? ?=C2- What could happen??=0A=C2-=0ABill=0A=C2-=0A=0A_________________ _______________=0A =0AFrom:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com=0A[ mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob McCal lum=0ASent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 10:26=0AAM=0ATo: aeroelectric-list@matron ics.com=0ASubject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Battery fail question=0A=C2-=0A Bill;=0A=C2-=0AMost=0Alikely a broken inter-cell connection causing an op en circuit within the=0Abattery. (vibration induced) For at least the latte r part of that last trip you=0Awere probably operating alternator only and when you shut down you had=0A=9Cnothing=9D. Not turning past co mpression stroke situation is a poor=0A(high resistance) connection or poor quality small AWG booster cables. (same=0Ahigh resistance problem) The typ ical booster cables sold today are too small to=0Abe of much use. If you lo ok at the cables carried by tow trucks they are=0Ausually at least #2 if no t even #1 or #0. Parts store cables are often as small=0Aas #8 or even #10. =0A=C2-=0ABob McC=0A=C2-=0A=0A________________________________=0A =0AFr om:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com=0A[mailto:owner-aeroelectri c-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Bradburry=0ASent: Sunday, Ju ne 23, 2013 8:47=0AAM=0ATo: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com=0ASubject: Aero Electric-List: Battery fail question=0A=C2-=0AA couple of weeks ago the b attery suddenly=0Afailed in my =9909 Toyota .=C2- =0AThe starter ha d never given any indication=0Athat the battery was getting weak.=C2- I d rove up to a business just before=0A5:00 pm, shut off the car, got out and tried the door on the=0Abusinesslocked! =C2-=C2-They closed a few minutes early.=C2- Got=0Aback in the car and everything was dead.=C2 - The panel would not light=0Aup.=C2- The starter would not click.=C2 - The door locks would not=0Awork!=C2- (good thing I had not locked the m when I went to the door!)=0AI called my neighbor and he tried to jump=0At he car with jumper cables.=C2- The starter would not turn it past the=0Ac ompression stroke while on the jumper cables. (My neighbor had heard that i t=0Awas dangerous to have his car running while jumping off another car, so we were=0Aon his battery only.=C2- I have never heard of this problem, b ut that is=0Aanother question.)=0A=C2-=0AI removed the battery, exchanged it for a=0Anew one, and the car started and ran fine.=C2- No apparent ch arging problems=0Aafter several thousand miles.=0A=C2-=0ADoes anyone know what might have happened=0Ato my old battery to cause this sudden failure? =0A=C2-=0ABill=0A=C2-=0A=C2-=0Ahttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Aer oElectric-List=0A=C2-=0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com=0A=C2-=0Ahttp://www = ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Battery fail question
At 11:49 AM 6/23/2013, you wrote: >Bill, > >Can you tell us if the 8V was open circuit or under a battery tester load? > >The problem with starting jump starting a car with the alternator >running is that you never really know what the load is going to be. >For example, if the dead battery is in an "almost shorted" >condition, the starting battery might survive but what about the >alternator? They're only rated for so many Amperes. Generally speaking, you cannot damage an alternator from electrical overload. They are internally limited as to how much current they will deliver. The thing that kills alternators under heavy load is lack of cooling . . . not delivery of current much above the nameplate rating. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: rayj <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: Battery fail question
Greetings, I had an experience in the early 90's where the damage to the alternator on the car being jumped was attributed to the jumping car having it's engine running. It was a late 80's Ford. The Ford dealer's mechanic gave the reason, obviously without much discussion of the physics behind the event :>). I vaguely recall something about regulator frequencies on the 2 vehicles being in conflict. It was a long time ago, so take the story for what it's worth. 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 06/23/2013 11:35 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: SNIP > >> What about the idea of not jumping starting a car with your own >> engine running? >> I have done this all my life and have never heard of this being a >> problem?? >> What could happen?? > > Not much. If I'm jumpering to a dead battery > that is otherwise a good battery, I'll leave > the car running and let the jump-car alternator > charge the dead battery for a few minutes. This > greatly improves cranking with the jump. > > I don't know where that 'concern' came from. It > may have roots in the world of spikes and other > electronics-killing phenomenon. SNIP ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Lloyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Battery fail question
Date: Jun 23, 2013
Bill, I have had the same thing happen a time or two.... One time it was the battery post "clamp" had fractured. It was still on the post and looked normal but, the fracture opened the post to clamp and large current could not pass. A new battery cable solved that problem. However, you proved that was not the problem via the new battery working normally. Other failures....if the battery is heavily sulphated (sludge buildup on the cell bottom) it can short out a cell or more. Internally, it is no longer an electron generator but, just a poor quality connection inside the battery. Cells can open too. I am not sure how this happens. Where the actual "break" occurs. About jump cables....too my knowledge it is still best to have the "source" auto (idle) running when jumping the "load" car (the dead one). It is also best, if time allows to let the jump charging to continue for some minutes (15 min. ) before trying to start the dead car. This gives some relief for all the components in the charging loop. The other new problem is that a lot of charging cables/clamps are much too wimpy. Always use a heavy duty (old fashion type) set for jumping. If you are forced to use a wimpy set, be sure to allow a long charge, at idle rpm, before hitting the start switch on the dead car. And, as we all should know be very careful of the jump cable attachment steps. Thru an error in connection, etc. I have viewed a dead battery literally blow in half and "that is not a good thing" ( as Rod M. would say...) if someone is leaning over it making the connections....D ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Bradburry To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 5:46 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery fail question A couple of weeks ago the battery suddenly failed in my '09 Toyota. The starter had never given any indication that the battery was getting weak. I drove up to a business just before 5:00 pm, shut off the car, got out and tried the door on the business.locked! They closed a few minutes early. Got back in the car and everything was dead. The panel would not light up. The starter would not click. The door locks would not work! (good thing I had not locked them when I went to the door!) I called my neighbor and he tried to jump the car with jumper cables. The starter would not turn it past the compression stroke while on the jumper cables. (My neighbor had heard that it was dangerous to have his car running while jumping off another car, so we were on his battery only. I have never heard of this problem, but that is another question.) I removed the battery, exchanged it for a new one, and the car started and ran fine. No apparent charging problems after several thousand miles. Does anyone know what might have happened to my old battery to cause this sudden failure? Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Battery fail question
Bob,=0A=0AI know of semiconductors that were damaged from too much current, and it was heat that killed them.- In fact, I know of semiconductors tha t were damaged by too much heat, only to fail later.=0A=0AIsn't this the sa me story here?- You crank and crank and crank, and the alternator tempera ture goes up and damages the rectifier circuit.- As an outside power sour ce provider for someone who can't start their engine, I would be concerned about damage to any part of my electrical system.- You never know what th e other person is going to do, so I would start with just a battery only. - If that didn't work, I would try what you said earlier: run the engine and alternator to charge up both batteries for a few minutes, then turn off the engine and let the other person try to start his engine.- If that di dn't work, I would consider allowing the other person to start his car with my engine running, but she would have to be really good looking! :)=0A=0AL ast thing I need is a dead car because of someone else's problem.=0A=0A- =0AHenador Titzoff=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: "Rober t L. Nuckolls, III" =0ATo: aeroelectric-list @matronics.com =0ASent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 12:56 PM=0ASubject: Re: AeroE lectric-List: Battery fail question=0A =0A=0A=0AAt 11:49 AM 6/23/2013, you wrote:=0A=0ABill,=0A>=0A>Can you tell us if the 8V was open circuit or unde r a battery tester=0Aload?=0A>=0A>The problem with starting jump starting a car with the alternator running=0Ais that you never really know what the l oad is going to be. For example,=0Aif the dead battery is in an "almost sho rted" condition, the=0Astarting battery might survive but what about the al ternator?-=0AThey're only rated for so many Amperes.=0A- Generally spea king, you cannot damage an alternator=0A- from electrical overload. They are internally limited=0A- as to how much current they will deliver. The thing=0A- that kills alternators under heavy load is lack of=0A- coolin g . . . not delivery of current much above=0A- the nameplate rating.=0A ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Any thing you can think of to use this product for?
From: "rparigoris" <rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us>
Date: Jun 23, 2013
Hi Group Any thing you can think of to use this product for, not including coating the spouses bath towel and per-coating your buddies composite bird just before paint: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZrjXSsfxMQ&feature=player_embedded Ron Parigoris Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403217#403217 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Battery fail question
>Not turning past compression stroke situation is a poor (high >resistance) connection or poor quality small AWG booster cables. >(same high resistance problem) The typical booster cables sold today >are too small to be of much use. If you look at the cables carried >by tow trucks they are usually at least #2 if not even #1 or #0. >Parts store cables are often as small as #8 or even #10. > >Bob McC Excellent point. The lighter gage jumpers are battery booster cables intended to charge a dead battery while connected to a vehicle with the engine running. This is just a heavy duty version of your 1.5 amp battery maintainer that will charge the battery over a 10 hour period. The #10 jumpers will let you put enough charge into a dead battery ro probably start a car after 10-20 minutes. Of course, #2 or #4 jumpers will let you handily crank engines. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Battery fail question
At 12:28 PM 6/23/2013, you wrote: >Greetings, > >I had an experience in the early 90's where the damage to the >alternator on the car being jumped was attributed to the jumping car >having it's engine running. It was a late 80's Ford. The Ford >dealer's mechanic gave the reason, obviously without much discussion >of the physics behind the event :>). I vaguely recall something >about regulator frequencies on the 2 vehicles being in conflict. I'd be willing to bet that the greatest risk to the vehicle with the dead battery is reversed polarity. The dead battery will offer no significant resistance to the reversed polarity. A reversal of about three volts will drive the alternator's diodes into very hard conduction at what ever current level the rescue vehicle's battery will deliver . . . certainly many hundreds if not over 1000 amps. This risk would exist whether or not the rescue vehicle's alternator were running. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: rayj <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: Any thing you can think of to use this product
for? Just a few quick thoughts:Tent fly; Sail boat sails; Kitchen and bath surfaces; To keepwindows clear of rain or fogging(like rain-x); Might decrease drag on boat hulls; possible corrosion protection on electronics, etc. How does it affect porosity? How durable is it? 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 06/23/2013 01:27 PM, rparigoris wrote: > > Hi Group > > Any thing you can think of to use this product for, not including coating the spouses bath towel and per-coating your buddies composite bird just before paint: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZrjXSsfxMQ&feature=player_embedded > > Ron Parigoris > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403217#403217 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Battery fail question
From: Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery fail question Bob, I know of semiconductors that were damaged from too much current, and it was heat that killed them. In fact, I know of semiconductors that were damaged by too much heat, only to fail later. Inadequately cooled for the task at hand? Isn't this the same story here? You crank and crank and crank, and the alternator temperature goes up and damages the rectifier circuit. Alternators are inherently current limited. Unlike generators, the alternator's magnetics keeps it from delivering more than 10-20% over nameplate at any load. Alternators are rated for worst case (hot) conditions. As discussed some years ago, the 60A breaker on tens of thousands of Cessna alternator b-leads is DESIGNED to nuisance trip. A cold 60A alternator will put out 70A or more until it warms up. Turn a 60A alternator into a discharged battery on a cold morning an your risk of popping the 60A b-lead breaker is higher . . . but you can't get much more than 70A which falls off as the alternator warms up. If the system integrators INTEND that an as-installed alternator be capable of full rated output at max operating temperature, then those same integrators will also have provided cooling . . . to make sure that perfectly ordinary temperature rise does not prevent the alternator from working as advertised. As an outside power source provider for someone who can't start their engine, I would be concerned about damage to any part of my electrical system. You never know what the other person is going to do, so I would start with just a battery only. If that didn't work, I would try what you said earlier: run the engine and alternator to charge up both batteries for a few minutes, then turn off the engine and let the other person try to start his engine. If that didn't work, I would consider allowing the other person to start his car with my engine running, but she would have to be really good looking! :) Last thing I need is a dead car because of someone else's problem. Okay, let's reverse engineer the feared failure. Exactly what components are vulnerable and what sources and magnitude of abuse puts them at risk? Finally how does that source come into existence because we've jumpered two systems together? My point is that we WORRY based on lots of hangar tales and things we don't understand. As I have suggested over a long history of reading, analyzing and harvesting good data from the classic 'dark-n- stormy-night stories, most cause-and-effect analysis by the authors is flawed. If you gave me an airplane (or automobile) and challenged me to 'make it vulnerable' to a battery jumping procedure, I wouldn't know where to start . . . I'm aware of no such components. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
From: Bill Allen <billallensworld(at)gmail.com>
I found that #2 wire is also very heavy, and used the "fatwire" from perehelion designs; see http://www.periheliondesign.com/fatwires.htm Bill Allen Cozy4 EGBJ UK On 23 June 2013 13:50, Mark Banus wrote: > ** ** > > Bob,**** > > ** ** > > Do to W&B considerations I am moving my 2 Panasonic 1220 batteries 8' aft. > I had originally used #4 as the runs were all short, 18" or less(all > forward of the firewall). The batteries were initially mounted on the > forward firewall.**** > > ** ** > > As the cable runs are now 9' I intend to use #2 welding cable. Yesterday > another builder stopped by to "review many progress" and said welding cable > might not be a good choice aft of the firewall as welding cable gives of > poisonous fumes if it burns.**** > > ** ** > > Comments?**** > > ** ** > > Mark Banus**** > > Glasair SIIS FT **** > > N600**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: <rd2(at)dejazzd.com>
Subject: Re: Any thing you can think of to use this product
for? Leading edge anti-ice coating? Rumen ---- rparigoris wrote: ============ Hi Group Any thing you can think of to use this product for, not including coating the spouses bath towel and per-coating your buddies composite bird just before paint: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZrjXSsfxMQ&feature=player_embedded Ron Parigoris Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403217#403217 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Battery fail question
Good points, Bob.- You've done the homework to determine that there are n o extreme currents causing thermal problems in vehicle and aircraft alterna tors.- I'll accept that!=0A=0A-=0AHenador Titzoff=0A=0A=0A_____________ ___________________=0A From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroel ectric.com>=0ATo: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 3:15 PM=0ASubject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery fail question=0A uckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>=0A=0AFrom: Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff@y ahoo.com>=0ASubject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery fail question=0ATo: "ae roelectric-list(at)matronics.com" =0A=0A=0ABo b,=0A=0AI know of semiconductors that were damaged from too much current, a nd =0Ait was heat that killed them.- In fact, I know of semiconductors th at =0Awere damaged by too much heat, only to fail later.=0A=0A- - - I nadequately cooled for the task=0A- - - at hand?=0A=0AIsn't this the same story here?- You crank and crank and crank, and =0Athe alternator te mperature goes up and damages the rectifier circuit.=0A=0A=0A- - - Al ternators are inherently current limited.=0A- - - Unlike generators, the alternator's magnetics=0A- - - keeps it from delivering more than 10-20% over=0A- - - nameplate at any load. Alternators are rated=0A - - - for worst case (hot) conditions. As discussed=0A- - - som e years ago, the 60A breaker on tens of thousands=0A- - - of Cessna a lternator b-leads is DESIGNED to nuisance=0A- - - trip.- A cold 60A alternator will put out 70A or=0A- - - more until it warms up.=0A=0A - - - Turn a 60A alternator into a discharged battery=0A- - - o n a cold morning an your risk of popping the 60A=0A- - - b-lead break er is higher . . . but you can't=0A- - - get much more than 70A which falls off as the=0A- - - alternator warms up.=0A=0A- - - If th e system integrators INTEND that an as-installed=0A- - - alternator b e capable of full rated output at max=0A- - - operating temperature, then those same integrators=0A- - - will also have provided cooling . . . to make sure=0A- - - that perfectly ordinary temperature rise do es not=0A- - - prevent the alternator from working as advertised.=0A =0A- As an outside power source provider for someone who can't start =0A their engine, I would be concerned about damage to any part of my =0Aelectr ical system.- You never know what the other person is going to =0Ado, so I would start with just a battery only.- If that didn't work, =0AI would try what you said earlier: run the engine and alternator to =0Acharge up bo th batteries for a few minutes, then turn off the engine =0Aand let the oth er person try to start his engine.- If that didn't =0Awork, I would consi der allowing the other person to start his car =0Awith my engine running, b ut she would have to be really good looking! :)=0A=0ALast thing I need is a dead car because of someone else's problem.=0A=0A- - - Okay, let's r everse engineer the feared failure.=0A- - - Exactly what components a re vulnerable and what=0A- - - sources and magnitude of abuse puts th em at risk?=0A- - - Finally how does that source come into existence =0A- - - because we've jumpered two systems together?=0A=0A- - - My point is that we WORRY based on lots of hangar=0A- - - tales a nd things we don't understand. As I have=0A- - - suggested over a lon g history of reading, analyzing=0A- - - and harvesting good data from the classic 'dark-n-=0A- - - stormy-night stories, most cause-and-ef fect analysis=0A- - - by the authors is flawed.=0A=0A- - - If y ou gave me an airplane (or automobile) and=0A- - - challenged me to ' make it vulnerable' to a=0A- - - battery jumping procedure, I wouldn' t know where=0A- - - to start . . . I'm aware of no such components. - - - - - - - - - - - - -Matt Dralle, List Admin. ==== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ralph Finch <ralphmariafinch(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jun 23, 2013
Subject: Re: Any thing you can think of to use this product
for? It's available at Home Depot <http://www.homedepot.com/p/Rust-Oleum-Stops-Rust-18-oz-NeverWet-Multi-Purpose-Spray-Kit-274232/204216476> BTW. However, this version dries cloudy/translucent, so not suitable for canopies :(, and dries a little fuzzy or rough apparently so not good for leading edges either. Still, this is only the beginning. Perhaps in a few years similar products better suited for our aircraft will be available. On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 1:01 PM, wrote: > > Leading edge anti-ice coating? > Rumen > > ---- rparigoris wrote: > > ============ > rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us> > > Hi Group > > Any thing you can think of to use this product for, not including coating > the spouses bath towel and per-coating your buddies composite bird just > before paint: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZrjXSsfxMQ&feature=player_embedded > > Ron Parigoris > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403217#403217 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: fedico94(at)mchsi.com
Subject: Re: Any thing you can think of to use this product
for? similar material tried by local engineer. Coated inside of his 2 stage snow blower chute and no ice stuck to it ----- Original Message ----- From: Ralph Finch <ralphmariafinch(at)gmail.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Any thing you can think of to use this product for? It's available at Home Depot <http://www.homedepot.com/p/Rust-Oleum-Stops-Rust-18-oz-NeverWet-Multi-Purpose-Spray-Kit-274232/204216476> BTW. However, this version dries cloudy/translucent, so not suitable for canopies :(, and dries a little fuzzy or rough apparently so not good for leading edges either. Still, this is only the beginning. Perhaps in a few years similar products better suited for our aircraft will be available. On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 1:01 PM, wrote: > > Leading edge anti-ice coating? > Rumen > > ---- rparigoris wrote: > > ============ > rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us> > > Hi Group > > Any thing you can think of to use this product for, not including coating > the spouses bath towel and per-coating your buddies composite bird just > before paint: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZrjXSsfxMQ&feature=player_embedded > > Ron Parigoris > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403217#403217 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Battery fail question
From: "racerjerry" <gki(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us>
Date: Jun 23, 2013
Minor corrosion at a battery terminal can cause the identical symptoms. In a car, one of the first troubleshooting steps is to turn on the headlights. Often they will light up, but turning the key to start makes the headlights go out and stay out even after the key is released; they will not light up again until you jiggle a cable. In this case, suspect corrosion and/or a very weak battery connection. When commercial jumpers are clamped over the battery terminals, they provide a boost, but the long length of the smaller cables often are not enough to crank a high compression engine by themselves when the cars battery is completely dead or electrically disconnected. If the cars battery is very weak but connections are OK, sometimes just sitting for ten minutes with the jumpers connected will transfer enough juice from the donor battery to get you going. And yes, things work a lot better/faster with the donor cars engine running. -------- Jerry King Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403244#403244 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Yoder" <ftyoder(at)yoderbuilt.com>
Subject: Any thing you can think of to use this product
for?
Date: Jun 23, 2013
anti icing.... _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of rayj Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 12:10 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Any thing you can think of to use this product for? Just a few quick thoughts: Tent fly; Sail boat sails; Kitchen and bath surfaces; To keep windows clear of rain or fogging(like rain-x); Might decrease drag on boat hulls; possible corrosion protection on electronics, etc. How does it affect porosity? How durable is it? 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 06/23/2013 01:27 PM, rparigoris wrote: Hi Group Any thing you can think of to use this product for, not including coating the spouses bath towel and per-coating your buddies composite bird just before paint: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZrjXSsfxMQ <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZrjXSsfxMQ&feature=player_embedded> &feature=player_embedded Ron Parigoris Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403217#403217 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2013
From: robert wiebe <ramjetwiebe(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
Please, can I say something?=0A=0AMy first comment may be, "What doesn't pr oduce noxious fumes when it burns?"-=0A=0AWell, a goodly amount of weldin g cable, it seems. It just doesn't burn.-=0A=0ASome does.-One insulatio n for welding wire is treated neoprene rubber. I remember some time ago (wh en I was a chemical rep) there was a big discussion on the use of ETU (Ethy lene Thiouria sp?) as it was used in the vulcanization process. (There may be other methods in use now.) And neoprene rubber burns.-=0A=0AEPDM does not.=0A=0ABTW, both come in red and I can't tell you why so few use this co lour on their + battery runs.-=0A=0A=0AWhat is not supposed to burn is EP DM. -Ethylene propylene diene monomer is, I think, the most common store bought welding cable insulation. The price for a brand name is roughly the same as for neoprene. However, I (that would be me but you have your own ch oices to make) would not use EPDM in this application as it has-significa ntly lower resistance to grease and oil than neoprene. Apart from that, EPD M and neoprene are pretty much equal in strength, abrasion resistance and s o on so FFW I would have no temptation to use EPDM --except that EPDM is not supposed to be flammable.-Much of the surplus welding cable I have en countered seems to be neoprene, but I wouldn't count on it. (They both come in different colours and finishes.) So, with EPDM, no poisonous fumes. It doesn't burn. Put that in your pipe and try and smoke it!-=0A=0AThe neopr ene cable I am most familiar with is the Carol Brand made stuff (now Genera l Cable.) General Cable makes even more rugged wire, but I have never seen it in use - only on sample boards. In the spec sheets, GC calls US made Car olprene flame resistant. The big welding stores sell this stuff by the ligh t year.=0A=0AI do know that Carolprene finds its way inside mines, factorie s, etc. where there are going to be major concerns in the case of fire. I h ave been around this or similar products most of my life and have never see n it burn. Granted, I have never intentionally taken a torch to the stuff b ut I can tell you it exists in seriously harsh environments. (It pulls back if you solder it with a torch so I learned to make good crimps. That's one expensive(!) crimper [so borrow] but I was always able to find good termin als surplus. DKW.)=0A=0ANext time I see a wire rep, I'll ask if he can give me the burn temperature for the insulation. A brief hunt-http://msds.dup ont.com/msds/pdfs/EN/PEN_09004a35803d9eb8.pdf-reveals that plain ol' neop rene "burns" (flashpoint, open cup) at above F500 (C260) degrees. For refer ence, wood burns at about C300 degrees.-The fumes from neoprene ARE toxic and noxious. They can cause permanent lung damage.=0A=0AEven though EPDM i s NOT flammable it's maximum listed service temp is C150 degrees.-So if y ou want, run as much as you like inside your aircraft and dare your buddies to burn it.-Under the hood, EPDM does find it's way into ignition wires, but to my mind this is an item you replace every annual. If you build nose heavy and put your battery(s) in the tail, then this might be just the pla ce to run EPDM!-=0A=0AMore importantly, I think, than insulation is wire strand size. I have seen a LOT of very heavy strand stuff called welding ca ble even though it would never be tolerated. Acceptable stranding should be no larger than 0.010. All the good stuff is.=0A=0AIn addition to Bob's com ments about fusing: I guess you could always put in a fusible link if you R EALLY felt the need. This just seems like an additional and unnecessary fai lure point (more connections) to me. I wouldn't do it. ( Aside: As a teen, I had a '74 Mazda Rotary with a failed fuse link that took me days to find. They also ran all the current through the ammeter; something I learned not to do thanks to that experience.)-=0A=0AIn the one aircraft I have built and the two projects I am working on, I installed a cable or rod operated mechanical battery switch and no solenoid. (A switch needs no current to st ay on.)-Either way, I don't know if I would remember to turn off an ignit ion switch or flip a battery switch (and turn off the fuel and turn off the fuel pump and so on) if I was in a hurry to get out of the way. Maybe that requires practice on my part. I remember reading a tale of a WW2 pilot who bailed out and felt cheated at just that moment as in all his training the y never even gave him a minutes instruction - let alone practice - on how t o deplane ("Not now, Tatoo. I'm busy admiring the Corinthian Leather seats in my Volare."*) when he wasn't on the ground.=0A=0AAll this conversation a bout safety... How many of us wear a parachute?=0A=0A*"De plane, Boss! De p lane!" If this makes no sense to you, I feel very old.=0A=0A=0ANeoprene doe s not appear to be a trademark, hence I -avoided capitalization as it is a -generic term.-=0A=0A=0A-Robert=0A-=0A=0A=0A_______________________ _________=0A From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com >=0ATo: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 6:55 :03 AM=0ASubject: Re: AeroElectric-List: #2 Welding Cable=0A =0A=0A=0ABob, =0A=0ADo to W&B considerations I am moving my 2 Panasonic 1220 batteries 8' =0Aaft. I had originally used #4 as the runs were all short, 18" or=0Aless( all forward of the firewall). The batteries were initially mounted=0Aon the forward firewall.=0A=0AAs the cable runs are now 9' I intend to use #2 wel ding cable. Yesterday=0Aanother builder stopped by to "review many progress " and said=0Awelding cable might not be a good choice aft of the firewall a s welding=0Acable gives of poisonous fumes if it burns.=0A=0AComments?=0A =0A-- When ANY insulation burns, the products of=0A-- combustion ar e exceedingly unfriendly=0A-- to children and other living things.=0A =0A-- There are folks who make it their life's=0A-- work to 'reduce risk' . . . even to the point=0A-- of codifying their profundities and threatening=0A-- you with retribution for regulatory=0A-- transgre ssion.=0A=0A-- In THIS case: What conditions would cause the=0A-- i nsulation on these cables to burn? Electrical=0A-- overload is one . . . externally applied fire=0A-- is the other.=0A=0A-- The risks for electrically induced overload are=0A-- so tiny that certified iron of a ll sizes does=0A-- not add overload protection to these wires.=0A-- =0A-- In FAR23.1357 we find these words:=0A=0ASec. 23.1357-- Circu it protective devices.=0A=0A(a) Protective devices, such as fuses or circui t breakers, must=0Abe=0Ainstalled in all electrical circuits other than-- =0A(1) Main circuits of starter motors used during starting only; and=0A(2) Circuits in which no hazard is presented by their omission.=0A=0A--- If you've got active fire in the aircraft=0A--- that threatens to ig nite your wire's insulation,=0A--- then I suggest your risk issues go far beyond=0A--- any concerns for the quality of the smoke.=0A=0A- -- Bottom line is that while those-who-know-more-=0A--- about-air planes-than-we-do will prohibit certain=0A--- insulations in new desi gn, they still permit=0A--- an older airplane to be repaired with the SAME=0A--- insulations that were on the original type=0A--- ce rtificate.=0A=0A--- For example, a 1946 C-140 wired with cotton over =0A--- rubber wire or a 1968 C-172 wired with nylon over=0A--- PVC can be repaired with the same wire. If the=0A--- admonitions for controlling cockpit pollution=0A--- were imperatives, then one would think that any=0A--- airplane brought in for repairs should be=0A- -- completely re-wired.=0A=0A--- The short answer is that risks t o your future=0A--- well being due to poor selection of insulation=0A --- are vanishingly small compared to risks=0A--- for bird stri ke, wind shear . . . or running=0A--- out of fuel.=0A=0A=0A- Bob . ================== ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 24, 2013
From: Chuck Birdsall <cbirdsall6(at)cox.net>
Subject: ELT antenna location
I'm putting a 406MHz ELT (ACK E-04) in my Piper Cherokee in place of dead OE Narco. One of the statements in the installation manual - and in other references such as AC43.13-2 and antenna manufacturers - says that the ELT antenna should be at least 36 inches from a Com antenna. Key word: Should. The original mount for the factory-installed Narco ELT antenna is 18 inches away from the Com 2 antenna. A quick cruise around the airport found that most of the Pipers with dual coms have a similar setup. I don't want to move the Com 2 antenna because that will start a vortex I'd rather avoid for the time being. Venerable but still functioning avionics package supported by an antenna farm limits my options. I realize there are coupling factors with antennas placed within a half-wavelength of each other. I called the manufacturer and asked - and was told they strongly recommend maintaining 3 feet distance, but they also shoved lots of RF at the antenna/ELT combo during testing and saw no ill effects. So the questions are: Am I going to have to move the Com 2 antenna? What are the risk factors if I leave the antenna locations as they are? Thanks, Chuck ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ben" <n801bh(at)NetZero.com>
Date: Jun 24, 2013
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
Personally I agree with Bob...... If you have a fire burning to the exte nt of worrying about fumes coming off the insulation jacket, you have yo ur priorities wrong....... Ben Haas N801BH www.haaspowerair.com ---------- Original Message ---------- From: robert wiebe <ramjetwiebe(at)yahoo.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: #2 Welding Cable Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 21:24:04 -0700 (PDT) Please, can I say something? My first comment may be, "What doesn't produce noxious fumes when it bur ns?" Well, a goodly amount of welding cable, it seems. It just doesn't burn. Some does. One insulation for welding wire is treated neoprene rubber. I remember some time ago (when I was a chemical rep) there was a big disc ussion on the use of ETU (Ethylene Thiouria sp?) as it was used in the v ulcanization process. (There may be other methods in use now.) And neopr ene rubber burns. EPDM does not. BTW, both come in red and I can't tell you why so few use this colour on their + battery runs. What is not supposed to burn is EPDM. Ethylene propylene diene monomer is, I think, the most common store bought welding cable insulation. The price for a brand name is roughly the same as for neoprene. However, I ( that would be me but you have your own choices to make) would not use EP DM in this application as it has significantly lower resistance to greas e and oil than neoprene. Apart from that, EPDM and neoprene are pretty m uch equal in strength, abrasion resistance and so on so FFW I would have no temptation to use EPDM - except that EPDM is not supposed to be flam mable. Much of the surplus welding cable I have encountered seems to be neoprene, but I wouldn't count on it. (They both come in different colou rs and finishes.) So, with EPDM, no poisonous fumes. It doesn't burn. Pu t that in your pipe and try and smoke it! The neoprene cable I am most familiar with is the Carol Brand made stuff (now General Cable.) General Cable makes even more rugged wire, but I h ave never seen it in use - only on sample boards. In the spec sheets, GC calls US made Carolprene flame resistant. The big welding stores sell t his stuff by the light year. I do know that Carolprene finds its way inside mines, factories, etc. wh ere there are going to be major concerns in the case of fire. I have bee n around this or similar products most of my life and have never seen it burn. Granted, I have never intentionally taken a torch to the stuff bu t I can tell you it exists in seriously harsh environments. (It pulls ba ck if you solder it with a torch so I learned to make good crimps. That' s one expensive(!) crimper [so borrow] but I was always able to find goo d terminals surplus. DKW.) Next time I see a wire rep, I'll ask if he can give me the burn temperat ure for the insulation. A brief hunt http://msds.dupont.com/msds/pdfs/EN /PEN_09004a35803d9eb8.pdf reveals that plain ol' neoprene "burns" (flash point, open cup) at above F500 (C260) degrees. For reference, wood burns at about C300 degrees. The fumes from neoprene ARE toxic and noxious. T hey can cause permanent lung damage. Even though EPDM is NOT flammable it's maximum listed service temp is C1 50 degrees. So if you want, run as much as you like inside your aircraft and dare your buddies to burn it. Under the hood, EPDM does find it's w ay into ignition wires, but to my mind this is an item you replace every annual. If you build nose heavy and put your battery(s) in the tail, th en this might be just the place to run EPDM! More importantly, I think, than insulation is wire strand size. I have s een a LOT of very heavy strand stuff called welding cable even though it would never be tolerated. Acceptable stranding should be no larger than 0.010. All the good stuff is. In addition to Bob's comments about fusing: I guess you could always put in a fusible link if you REALLY felt the need. This just seems like an additional and unnecessary failure point (more connections) to me. I wou ldn't do it. ( Aside: As a teen, I had a '74 Mazda Rotary with a failed fuse link that took me days to find. They also ran all the current throu gh the ammeter; something I learned not to do thanks to that experience. ) In the one aircraft I have built and the two projects I am working on, I installed a cable or rod operated mechanical battery switch and no sole noid. (A switch needs no current to stay on.) Either way, I don't know i f I would remember to turn off an ignition switch or flip a battery swit ch (and turn off the fuel and turn off the fuel pump and so on) if I was in a hurry to get out of the way. Maybe that requires practice on my pa rt. I remember reading a tale of a WW2 pilot who bailed out and felt che ated at just that moment as in all his training they never even gave him a minutes instruction - let alone practice - on how to deplane ("Not no w, Tatoo. I'm busy admiring the Corinthian Leather seats in my Volare."* ) when he wasn't on the ground. All this conversation about safety... How many of us wear a parachute? *"De plane, Boss! De plane!" If this makes no sense to you, I feel very old. Neoprene does not appear to be a trademark, hence I avoided capitalizat ion as it is a generic term. -Robert From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 6:55:03 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: #2 Welding Cable Bob, Do to W&B considerations I am moving my 2 Panasonic 1220 batteries 8' af t. I had originally used #4 as the runs were all short, 18" or less(all forward of the firewall). The batteries were initially mounted on the fo rward firewall. As the cable runs are now 9' I intend to use #2 welding cable. Yesterday another builder stopped by to "review many progress" and said welding c able might not be a good choice aft of the firewall as welding cable giv es of poisonous fumes if it burns. Comments? When ANY insulation burns, the products of combustion are exceedingly unfriendly to children and other living things. There are folks who make it their life's work to 'reduce risk' . . . even to the point of codifying their profundities and threatening you with retribution for regulatory transgression. In THIS case: What conditions would cause the insulation on these cables to burn? Electrical overload is one . . . externally applied fire is the other. The risks for electrically induced overload are so tiny that certified iron of all sizes does not add overload protection to these wires. In FAR23.1357 we find these words: Sec. 23.1357 Circuit protective devices. (a) Protective devices, such as fuses or circuit breakers, must be installed in all electrical circuits other than-- (1) Main circuits of starter motors used during starting only; and (2) Circuits in which no hazard is presented by their omission. If you've got active fire in the aircraft that threatens to ignite your wire's insulation, then I suggest your risk issues go far beyond any concerns for the quality of the smoke. Bottom line is that while those-who-know-more- about-airplanes-than-we-do will prohibit certain insulations in new design, they still permit an older airplane to be repaired with the SAME insulations that were on the original type certificate. For example, a 1946 C-140 wired with cotton over rubber wire or a 1968 C-172 wired with nylon over PVC can be repaired with the same wire. If the admonitions for controlling cockpit pollution were imperatives, then one would think that any airplane brought in for repairs should be completely re-wired. The short answer is that risks to your future well being due to poor selection of insulation are vanishingly small compared to risks for bird strike, wind shear . . . or running out of fuel. Bob . . . lank" href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectri c-List">http://t; http://www.matronics.com/contrib======== ====== ======================== ======================== ======================== ======================== ======================== ============ ____________________________________________________________ NetZero now offers 4G mobile broadband. Sign up now. http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=NZINTISP0512T4GOUT1 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 24, 2013
From: Bill Putney <billp(at)wwpc.com>
Subject: Re: ELT antenna location
You're going to have to replace the factory ELT antenna anyway. The 406 ELTs come with antennas that work on both 121.5 and 406. The old antenna will only be effective on 121.5. Are you saying that you have to move the Com 2 antenna because there's no place on the upper fuselage that's 3' away? Or are you saying you don't want to move the ELT antenna position? In any case, the biggest problem of having the 2 antennas in such close proximity is going to be that they will influence each others radiation patterns and you'll find nulls in the coverage in certain directions. I'm a little surprised that the antennas got positioned that close to begin with but it's hard to find enough good places on small airplanes. Bill On 6/24/13 12:38 AM, Chuck Birdsall wrote: > > > I'm putting a 406MHz ELT (ACK E-04) in my Piper Cherokee in place of > dead OE Narco. > > One of the statements in the installation manual - and in other > references such as AC43.13-2 and antenna manufacturers - says that the > ELT antenna should be at least 36 inches from a Com antenna. Key > word: Should. > > The original mount for the factory-installed Narco ELT antenna is 18 > inches away from the Com 2 antenna. A quick cruise around the airport > found that most of the Pipers with dual coms have a similar setup. I > don't want to move the Com 2 antenna because that will start a vortex > I'd rather avoid for the time being. Venerable but still functioning > avionics package supported by an antenna farm limits my options. > > I realize there are coupling factors with antennas placed within a > half-wavelength of each other. I called the manufacturer and asked - > and was told they strongly recommend maintaining 3 feet distance, but > they also shoved lots of RF at the antenna/ELT combo during testing > and saw no ill effects. > > So the questions are: > Am I going to have to move the Com 2 antenna? > What are the risk factors if I leave the antenna locations as they are? > > > Thanks, > > Chuck > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>
Subject: Z14N incorrect switch designation?
Date: Jun 24, 2013
Hello Bob, I am modifying the Z14 architecture for Rotax type generators/ dynamo's; it seems to me that the STARTER/ CROSS FEED switch should be a 2-5 (ON)-OFF-ON, rather than a 2-7 (ON)-OFF-(ON)? Jay ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 24, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Z14N incorrect switch designation?
At 11:08 AM 6/24/2013, you wrote: >Hello Bob, > >I am modifying the Z14 architecture for Rotax type generators/ >dynamo's; it seems to me that the STARTER/ CROSS FEED switch should >be a 2-5 (ON)-OFF-ON, rather than a 2-7 (ON)-OFF-(ON)? > >Jay > > You are correct. The schematic symbol is correct but the p/n callout wrong. I'll fix. Thanks! Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 25, 2013
From: D L Josephson <dlj04(at)josephson.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 5 Msgs - 06/24/13
> From: Chuck Birdsall<cbirdsall6(at)cox.net> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: ELT antenna location > > > I'm putting a 406MHz ELT (ACK E-04) in my Piper Cherokee in place of > dead OE Narco. > > One of the statements in the installation manual - and in other > references such as AC43.13-2 and antenna manufacturers - says that the > ELT antenna should be at least 36 inches from a Com antenna. Key word: > Should. (snip) > > So the questions are: > Am I going to have to move the Com 2 antenna? > What are the risk factors if I leave the antenna locations as they are? My suggestion is that it will be just fine, assuming that you use the antenna supplied with the E-04. The comm will be affected just as it was with the other ELT antenna there, or maybe a little less. The ELT radiation pattern will be affected, but I would think only slightly, and not at all on 406 MHz. The only risk factor I can think of is that there might be a little more potential for intermodulation if you are transmitting on Com 2 while the ELT is transmitting, but that's a highly unlikely scenario. -- David Josephson ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Date: Jun 25, 2013
I've been selling Copper-clad-aluminum Fatwire in several sizes for years. Many many happy users on the Aeroelectric LIst. Top fuel dragsters love it too. Sizes Super-2-CCA and Super-4-CCA both use a VW-1 flame retardant high tech polyester insulation which is as benevolent as an insulation can be. Super-8 uses a TFE "Tefzel" copy (I sell the Super-8 to the military and others). All of these are designed for aircraft use but find uses in balloons, racecars, helicopters, drones, etc., where weight is important. I will gladly send a free sample to interested builders. See attached. -------- Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge, MA 01550 (508) 764-2072 emjones(at)charter.net Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403388#403388 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/copper_cables_aluminum_cables_727.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 25, 2013
From: "wynaire(at)citlink.net" <wynaire(at)citlink.net>
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
Hello Eric,=0AThis may be a "loose canon" question..=0AIn a glass/plastic a ircraft, do both polarity cables need to be the same size [dia.]?- Seems in reality, that there are less electrons "coming back to the battery" than going out..., hence the-allowance-for a smaller pipe! =0AThanks in adv ance,=0AMike W=0ALNC2 360 builder forever ;)=0APS: Your heavy cabling is on my list of must have items. =0A************=0A=0A=0A>_____________________ ___________=0A> From: Eric M. Jones <emjones(at)charter.net>=0A>To: aeroelectr ic-list(at)matronics.com =0A>Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 6:28 AM=0A>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable=0A> =0A>=0A>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" =0A>=0A>I've been s elling Copper-clad-aluminum Fatwire in several sizes for years. Many many h appy users on the Aeroelectric LIst. Top fuel dragsters love it too.=0A>=0A >Sizes Super-2-CCA and Super-4-CCA both use a VW-1 flame retardant high tec h polyester insulation which is as benevolent as an insulation can be. Supe r-8 uses a TFE "Tefzel" copy (I sell the Super-8 to the military and others ).=0A>=0A>All of these are designed for aircraft use but find uses in ballo ons, racecars, helicopters, drones, etc., where weight is important.=0A>=0A >I will gladly send a free sample to interested builders. See attached.=0A> =0A>--------=0A>Eric M. Jones=0A>www.PerihelionDesign.com=0A>113 Brentwood Drive=0A>Southbridge, MA 01550=0A>(508) 764-2072=0A>emjones(at)charter.net =0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>Read this topic online here:=0A>=0A>http://forums.matro nics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403388#403388=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>Attachments: =0A>=0A>http://forums.matronics.com//files/copper_cables_aluminum_cables_72 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Matt Dralle, L ==========0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A> ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Date: Jun 25, 2013
> ...This may be a "loose cannon" question...In a glass/plastic aircraft, do both polarity cables need to be the same size [dia.]? Seems in reality, that there are less electrons "coming back to the battery" than going out..., hence the allowance for a smaller pipe! ...Mike W What a wonderful question! In fact, there are exactly and precisely as many electrons returning as got sent out. Electrons don't go back to "battery rehab" for another trip. The true picture is far more complicated, and if you decided you wanted to know, you'd never finish your airplane. In a metal airplane, letting the metal body carry the ground current is possible but not to be undertaken without some serious engineering work, and might change over time. Letting the metal tube frame carry the ground current likewise is problematic. See attached. -------- Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge, MA 01550 (508) 764-2072 emjones(at)charter.net Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403408#403408 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/dabbling_with_electricity_385.pdf http://forums.matronics.com//files/dabbling_with_electricity_360.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 25, 2013
From: Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
Mike,=0A=0AAccording to Krucshev's current and voltage law, what you say be low is not true.=0A-=0A=0AHenador Titzoff=0A=0A=0A_______________________ _________=0A From: "wynaire(at)citlink.net" <wynaire(at)citlink.net>=0ATo: "aeroe lectric-list(at)matronics.com" =0ASent: Tues day, June 25, 2013 1:07 PM=0ASubject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable=0A =0A=0A=0AHello Eric,=0AThis may be a "loose canon" question..=0AI n a glass/plastic aircraft, do both polarity cables need to be the same siz e [dia.]?- Seems in reality, that there are less electrons "coming back t o the battery" than going out..., hence the-allowance-for a smaller pip e! =0AThanks in advance,=0AMike W=0ALNC2 360 builder forever ;)=0APS: Your heavy cabling is on my list of must have items. =0A************=0A=0A=0AFro m: Eric M. Jones =0A>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.c om =0A>Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 6:28 AM=0A>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Eric M. Jones" =0A>=0A>I've been selling=0A Copper-cla d-aluminum Fatwire in several sizes for years. Many many happy users on the Aeroelectric LIst. Top fuel dragsters love it too.=0A>=0A>Sizes Super-2-CC A and Super-4-CCA both use a VW-1 flame retardant high tech polyester insul ation which is as benevolent as an insulation can be. Super-8 uses a TFE "T efzel" copy (I sell the Super-8 to the military and others).=0A>=0A>All of these are designed for aircraft use but find uses in balloons, racecars, he licopters, drones, etc., where weight is important.=0A>=0A>I will gladly se nd a free sample to interested builders. See attached.=0A>=0A>--------=0A>E ric M. Jones=0A>www.PerihelionDesign.com=0A>113 Brentwood Drive=0A>Southbri dge, MA 01550=0A>(508) 764-2072=0A>emjones(at)charter.net=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A> =0A>Read this topic online here:=0A>=0A>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtop ic.php?p=403388#403388=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>Attachments: =0A>=0A>http://for ums.matronics.com//files/copper_cables_aluminum_cables_727.pdf http://www.m atronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectbsp; - - - -=0Aums.matronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com/=0A>_; - - - - - - - - - -Matt Dralcontribution" target="_blank">http://www.matron ======= ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
Date: Jun 25, 2013
Correct; whilst the relative voltage changes in a series circuit, the current stays the same throughout the circuit. We size cables by considering the current through them, and the voltage drop incurred across the line until it gets to the load; the current being the primary factor. Since the current is the same throughout the circuit the return line must be the same size as the supply line. Johannesburg Jay PS I think that it was Kirchoff's law and not Krucshev's J From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Henador Titzoff Sent: 25 June 2013 07:51 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable Mike, According to Krucshev's current and voltage law, what you say below is not true. Henador Titzoff _____ From: "wynaire(at)citlink.net" <wynaire(at)citlink.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 1:07 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable Hello Eric, This may be a "loose canon" question.. In a glass/plastic aircraft, do both polarity cables need to be the same size [dia.]? Seems in reality, that there are less electrons "coming back to the battery" than going out..., hence the allowance for a smaller pipe! Thanks in advance, Mike W LNC2 360 builder forever ;) PS: Your heavy cabling is on my list of must have items. ************ From: Eric M. Jones <emjones(at)charter.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 6:28 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable I've been selling Copper-clad-aluminum Fatwire in several sizes for years. Many many happy users on the Aeroelectric LIst. Top fuel dragsters love it too. Sizes Super-2-CCA and Super-4-CCA both use a VW-1 flame retardant high tech polyester insulation which is as benevolent as an insulation can be. Super-8 uses a TFE "Tefzel" copy (I sell the Super-8 to the military and others). All of these are designed for aircraft use but find uses in balloons, racecars, helicopters, drones, etc., where weight is important. I will gladly send a free sample to interested builders. See attached. -------- Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge, MA 01550 (508) 764-2072 emjones(at)charter.net Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403388#403388 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/copper_cables_aluminum_cables_727.pdf http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectbsp; <http://forums.matronics.com/files/copper_cables_aluminum_cables_727.pdf> ums.matronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com/ _; -Matt Dralcontribution" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution ank" href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://wt; http://www.matronics.com/contrib============== <http://forums.matronics.co=> <http://forums.matronics.co=> <http://forums.matronics.co=> <http://forums.matronics.co=> <http://forums.matronics.co=> <http://forums.matronics.co=> Forum - to browse Un/Subscription, Chat, FAQ, http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rob Housman" <rob@hyperion-ef.com>
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
Date: Jun 25, 2013
It was Kirchhoff's Law way back when I was an undergraduate in engineering. Best regards, Rob Housman Irvine, California Europa XS Rotax 914 S/N A070 Airframe complete Avionics soon From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Henador Titzoff Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 10:51 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable Mike, According to Krucshev's current and voltage law, what you say below is not true. Henador Titzoff _____ From: "wynaire(at)citlink.net" <wynaire(at)citlink.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 1:07 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable Hello Eric, This may be a "loose canon" question.. In a glass/plastic aircraft, do both polarity cables need to be the same size [dia.]? Seems in reality, that there are less electrons "coming back to the battery" than going out..., hence the allowance for a smaller pipe! Thanks in advance, Mike W LNC2 360 builder forever ;) PS: Your heavy cabling is on my list of must have items. ************ From: Eric M. Jones <emjones(at)charter.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 6:28 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable I've been selling Copper-clad-aluminum Fatwire in several sizes for years. Many many happy users on the Aeroelectric LIst. Top fuel dragsters love it too. Sizes Super-2-CCA and Super-4-CCA both use a VW-1 flame retardant high tech polyester insulation which is as benevolent as an insulation can be. Super-8 uses a TFE "Tefzel" copy (I sell the Super-8 to the military and others). All of these are designed for aircraft use but find uses in balloons, racecars, helicopters, drones, etc., where weight is important. I will gladly send a free sample to interested builders. See attached. -------- Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge, MA 01550 (508) 764-2072 emjones(at)charter.net Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403388#403388 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/copper_cables_aluminum_cables_727.pdf http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectbsp; <http://forums.matronics.com/files/copper_cables_aluminum_cables_727.pdf> ums.matronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com/ _; -Matt Dralcontribution" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution ank" href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://wt; http://www.matronics.com/contrib============== <http://forums.matronics.co=> <http://forums.matronics.co=> <http://forums.matronics.co=> <http://forums.matronics.co=> <http://forums.matronics.co=> <http://forums.matronics.co=> Forum - to browse Un/Subscription, Chat, FAQ, http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 25, 2013
From: "wynaire(at)citlink.net" <wynaire(at)citlink.net>
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
Thanks for your clear reply to my [humor intended] question. Ironic that yo u mention the ex-USSR president, as he remains a hero to some friends [USSR ], primarily for trying to get corn started in the countryside. Better it h ad been "popcorn." I still enjoy watching kids eyes when popping in a bag o f micro-waveable corn for them, on visits [Belarus].=C2-=C2- Mank=0A=0A =0A>________________________________=0A> From: Jay Hyde <jay(at)horriblehyde.c om>=0A>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0A>Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 12:48 PM=0A>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable=0A> =0A> =0A>=0A>Correct; whilst the relative voltage changes in a series circuit, t he current stays the same throughout the circuit.=C2- We size cables by c onsidering the current through them, and the voltage drop incurred across t he line until it gets to the load; the current being the primary factor.=C2 - Since the current is the same throughout the circuit the return line mu st be the same size as the supply line.=0A>=C2-=0A>Johannesburg Jay=0A>PS I think that it was Kirchoff=99s law and not Krucshev=99s=C2 - J=0A>=C2-=0A>=C2-=0A>From:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics. com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hena dor Titzoff=0A>Sent: 25 June 2013 07:51 PM=0A>To: aeroelectric-list@matroni cs.com=0A>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable=0A>=C2-=0A >Mike,=0A>=0A>According to Krucshev's current and voltage law, what you say below is not true.=0A>=C2-=0A>Henador Titzoff=0A>=0A>___________________ _____________=0A>=0A>From:"wynaire(at)citlink.net" =0A>To : "aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com" =0A>S ent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 1:07 PM=0A>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable=0A>=C2-=0A>Hello Eric,=0A>This may be a "loose canon" qu estion..=0A>In a glass/plastic aircraft, do both polarity cables need to be the same size [dia.]?=C2- Seems in reality, that there are less electron s "coming back to the battery" than going out..., hence the=C2-allowance =C2-for a smaller pipe! =0A>Thanks in advance,=0A>Mike W=0A>LNC2 360 buil der forever ;)=0A>PS: Your heavy cabling is on my list of must have items. =0A>************=0A>=C2-=0A>>From:Eric M. Jones =0A> >To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0A>>Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 6:28 AM=0A>>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable=0A>>=0A>>--> AeroE lectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" =0A>> =0A>>I've been selling Copper-clad-aluminum Fatwire in several sizes for ye ars. Many many happy users on the Aeroelectric LIst. Top fuel dragsters lov e it too.=0A>>=0A>>Sizes Super-2-CCA and Super-4-CCA both use a VW-1 flame retardant high tech polyester insulation which is as benevolent as an insul ation can be. Super-8 uses a TFE "Tefzel" copy (I sell the Super-8 to the m ilitary and others).=0A>>=0A>>All of these are designed for aircraft use bu t find uses in balloons, racecars, helicopters, drones, etc., where weight is important.=0A>>=0A>>I will gladly send a free sample to interested build ers. See attached.=0A>>=0A>>--------=0A>>Eric M. Jones=0A>>http://www.perih eliondesign.com/=0A>>113 Brentwood Drive=0A>>Southbridge, MA 01550=0A>>(508 ) 764-2072=0A>>emjones(at)charter.net=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>Read this top ic online here:=0A>>=0A>>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=4033 88#403388=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>Attachments: =0A>>=0A>>http://forums.matr onics.com/files/copper_cables_aluminum_cables_727.pdf=0A>>_; =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralcontribution" ta rget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>> =0A>>=0A>=C2-=0A>=C2-=0A>ank" href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigato r?AeroElectric-List">http://wt/; http://forums.matronics.co=/=0A>=C2- =0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=C2-=0A>=C2-=0A>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator? AeroElectric-List=0A>http://forums.matronics.com=0A>http://www.matronics.co =0A>=0A> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: =?utf-8?B?am9obi5tYWNjYWxsdW1AYmlncG9uZC5jb20=?= <john.maccallum(at)bigpond.com>
Subject: =?utf-8?B?UmU6IEFlcm9FbGVjdHJpYy1MaXN0OiBSZTogIzIgV2VsZGluZyBDYWJsZQ==?
Date: Jun 26, 2013
S2lyY2hvZmZzIGxhdyBJIHRoaW5rIHlvdSBtZWFuLiBUaGUgc3VtIG9mIHRoZSBjdXJyZW50IGZs b3dpbmcgaW50byBhIG5vZGUgaXMgZXF1YWwgdG8gdGhlIHN1bSBvZiB0aGUgY3VycmVudCBmbG93 aW5nIG91dCBvZiBhIG5vZGUuIE9yIGluIG90aGVyIHdvcmRzIHlvdSBuZWVkIHRoZSBzYW1lIHNp emUgY2FibGVzLgpDaGVlcnMgCkpvaG4gTWFjQ2FsbHVtCgpTZW50IGZyb20gbXkgSFRDIE9uZSBY TCBvbiB0aGUgVGVsc3RyYSA0RyBuZXR3b3JrCgotLS0tLSBSZXBseSBtZXNzYWdlIC0tLS0tCkZy b206ICJIZW5hZG9yIFRpdHpvZmYiIDxoZW5hZG9yX3RpdHpvZmZAeWFob28uY29tPgpUbzogImFl cm9lbGVjdHJpYy1saXN0QG1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20iIDxhZXJvZWxlY3RyaWMtbGlzdEBtYXRyb25p Y3MuY29tPgpTdWJqZWN0OiBBZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMtTGlzdDogUmU6ICMyIFdlbGRpbmcgQ2FibGUK RGF0ZTogV2VkLCBKdW4gMjYsIDIwMTMgMDE6NTEKCgpNaWtlLAoKQWNjb3JkaW5nIHRvIEtydWNz aGV2J3MgY3VycmVudCBhbmQgdm9sdGFnZSBsYXcsIHdoYXQgeW91IHNheSBiZWxvdyBpcyBub3Qg dHJ1ZS4KwqAKCkhlbmFkb3IgVGl0em9mZgoKCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fCiBGcm9tOiAid3luYWlyZUBjaXRsaW5rLm5ldCIgPHd5bmFpcmVAY2l0bGluay5uZXQ+ClRv OiAiYWVyb2VsZWN0cmljLWxpc3RAbWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbSIgPGFlcm9lbGVjdHJpYy1saXN0QG1h dHJvbmljcy5jb20+IApTZW50OiBUdWVzZGF5LCBKdW5lIDI1LCAyMDEzIDE6MDcgUE0KU3ViamVj dDogUmU6IEFlcm9FbGVjdHJpYy1MaXN0OiBSZTogIzIgV2VsZGluZyBDYWJsZQogCgoKSGVsbG8g RXJpYywKVGhpcyBtYXkgYmUgYSAibG9vc2UgY2Fub24iIHF1ZXN0aW9uLi4KSW4gYSBnbGFzcy9w bGFzdGljIGFpcmNyYWZ0LCBkbyBib3RoIHBvbGFyaXR5IGNhYmxlcyBuZWVkIHRvIGJlIHRoZSBz YW1lIHNpemUgW2RpYS5dP8KgIFNlZW1zIGluIHJlYWxpdHksIHRoYXQgdGhlcmUgYXJlIGxlc3Mg ZWxlY3Ryb25zICJjb21pbmcgYmFjayB0byB0aGUgYmF0dGVyeSIgdGhhbiBnb2luZyBvdXQuLi4s IGhlbmNlIHRoZcKgYWxsb3dhbmNlwqBmb3IgYSBzbWFsbGVyIHBpcGUhIApUaGFua3MgaW4gYWR2 YW5jZSwKTWlrZSBXCkxOQzIgMzYwIGJ1aWxkZXIgZm9yZXZlciA7KQpQUzogWW91ciBoZWF2eSBj YWJsaW5nIGlzIG9uIG15IGxpc3Qgb2YgbXVzdCBoYXZlIGl0ZW1zLiAKKioqKioqKioqKioqCgoK RnJvbTogRXJpYyBNLiBKb25lcyA8ZW1qb25lc0BjaGFydGVyLm5ldD4KPlRvOiBhZXJvZWxlY3Ry aWMtbGlzdEBtYXRyb25pY3MuY29tIAo+U2VudDogVHVlc2RheSwgSnVuZSAyNSwgMjAxMyA2OjI4 IEFNCj5TdWJqZWN0OiBBZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMtTGlzdDogUmU6ICMyIFdlbGRpbmcgQ2FibGUKPiAK Pgo+LS0+IEFlcm9FbGVjdHJpYy1MaXN0IG1lc3NhZ2UgcG9zdGVkIGJ5OiAiRXJpYyBNLiBKb25l cyIgPGVtam9uZXNAY2hhcnRlci5uZXQ+Cj4KPkkndmUgYmVlbiBzZWxsaW5nCiBDb3BwZXItY2xh ZC1hbHVtaW51bSBGYXR3aXJlIGluIHNldmVyYWwgc2l6ZXMgZm9yIHllYXJzLiBNYW55IG1hbnkg aGFwcHkgdXNlcnMgb24gdGhlIEFlcm9lbGVjdHJpYyBMSXN0LiBUb3AgZnVlbCBkcmFnc3RlcnMg bG92ZSBpdCB0b28uCj4KPlNpemVzIFN1cGVyLTItQ0NBIGFuZCBTdXBlci00LUNDQSBib3RoIHVz ZSBhIFZXLTEgZmxhbWUgcmV0YXJkYW50IGhpZ2ggdGVjaCBwb2x5ZXN0ZXIgaW5zdWxhdGlvbiB3 aGljaCBpcyBhcyBiZW5ldm9sZW50IGFzIGFuIGluc3VsYXRpb24gY2FuIGJlLiBTdXBlci04IHVz ZXMgYSBURkUgIlRlZnplbCIgY29weSAoSSBzZWxsIHRoZSBTdXBlci04IHRvIHRoZSBtaWxpdGFy eSBhbmQgb3RoZXJzKS4KPgo+QWxsIG9mIHRoZXNlIGFyZSBkZXNpZ25lZCBmb3IgYWlyY3JhZnQg dXNlIGJ1dCBmaW5kIHVzZXMgaW4gYmFsbG9vbnMsIHJhY2VjYXJzLCBoZWxpY29wdGVycywgZHJv bmVzLCBldGMuLCB3aGVyZSB3ZWlnaHQgaXMgaW1wb3J0YW50Lgo+Cj5JIHdpbGwgZ2xhZGx5IHNl bmQgYSBmcmVlIHNhbXBsZSB0byBpbnRlcmVzdGVkIGJ1aWxkZXJzLiBTZWUgYXR0YWNoZWQuCj4K Pi0tLS0tLS0tCj5FcmljIE0uIEpvbmVzCj53d3cuUGVyaWhlbGlvbkRlc2lnbi5jb20KPjExMyBC cmVudHdvb2QgRHJpdmUKPlNvdXRoYnJpZGdlLCBNQSAwMTU1MAo+KDUwOCkgNzY0LTIwNzIKPmVt am9uZXMoYXQpY2hhcnRlci5uZXQKPgo+Cj4KPgo+UmVhZCB0aGlzIHRvcGljIG9ubGluZSBoZXJl Ogo+Cj5odHRwOi8vZm9ydW1zLm1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20vdmlld3RvcGljLnBocD9wPTQwMzM4OCM0 MDMzODgKPgo+Cj4KPgo+QXR0YWNobWVudHM6IAo+Cj5odHRwOi8vZm9ydW1zLm1hdHJvbmljcy5j b20vL2ZpbGVzL2NvcHBlcl9jYWJsZXNfYWx1bWludW1fY2FibGVzXzcyNy5wZGYgaHR0cDovL3d3 dy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tL05hdmlnYXRvcj9BZXJvRWxlY3Ric3A7IMKgIMKgIMKgIMKgCnVtcy5t YXRyb25pY3MuY29tLyIgdGFyZ2V0PSJfYmxhbmsiPmh0dHA6Ly9mb3J1bXMubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNv bS8KPl87IMKgIMKgIMKgIMKgIMKgIMKgIMKgIMKgIMKgIC1NYXR0IERyYWxjb250cmlidXRpb24i IHRhcmdldD0iX2JsYW5rIj5odHRwOi8vd3d3Lm1hdHJvbj09PT09PT0K ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 25, 2013
From: Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: =?utf-8?B?UmU6IEFlcm9FbGVjdHJpYy1MaXN0OiDvu79SZTogQWVyb0VsZWN0cmljLUxp?=
=?utf-8?B?c3Q6IFJlOiAjMiBXZWxkaW5nIENhYmxl? John, actually it's Kirchoff's voltage and current laws.=C2- He formulate d them in 1845, which is way back before we had EE decrees.=0A=0AWhen I arr ived on the crypto scene in 1969, the old timers had been calling them Khru shchev's voltage and current laws as a JOKE.=C2- Do you guys get it?=C2 - Both names start with a K and kinda sound alike unless you're German or Russian.=C2- Then they don't.=0A=C2-=0A=0AHenador Titzoff=0A=0A=0A____ ____________________________=0A From: "john.maccallum(at)bigpond.com" <john.ma ccallum(at)bigpond.com>=0ATo: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Tuesday , June 25, 2013 6:30 PM=0ASubject: AeroElectric-List: =EF=BBRe: AeroElec tric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable=0A =0A=0A=0AKirchoffs law I think you mean. The sum of the current flowing into a node is equal to the sum of the curr ent flowing out of a node. Or in other words you need the same size cables. =0ACheers =0AJohn MacCallum=0A=0ASent from my HTC One XL on the Telstra 4G network=0A=0A=0A----- Reply message -----=0AFrom: "Henador Titzoff" <henado r_titzoff(at)yahoo.com>=0ATo: "aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com" =0ASubject: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable=0ADa te: Wed, Jun 26, 2013 01:51=0A=0A=0AMike,=0A=0AAccording to Krucshev's curr ent and voltage law, what you say below is not true.=0A=C2-=0A=0AHenador Titzoff=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: "wynaire(at)citlink.n et" =0ATo: "aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com" =0ASent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 1:07 PM=0ASubject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable=0A=0A=0A=0AHello Eric,=0AThis may be a "loose canon" question..=0AIn a glass/plastic aircraft, do both po larity cables need to be the same size [dia.]?=C2- Seems in reality, that there are less electrons "coming back to the battery" than going out..., h ence the=C2-allowance=C2-for a smaller pipe! =0AThanks in advance,=0AMi ke W=0ALNC2 360 builder forever ;)=0APS: Your heavy cabling is on my list o f must have items. =0A************=0A=0A=0AFrom: Eric M. Jones <emjones@cha rter.net>=0A>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0A>Sent: Tuesday, June 25 , 2013 6:28 AM=0A>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable=0A> =0A> er.net>=0A>=0A>I've been selling=0ACopper-clad-aluminum Fatwire in several sizes for years. Many many happy users on the Aeroelectric LIst. Top fuel d ragsters love it too.=0A>=0A>Sizes Super-2-CCA and Super-4-CCA both use a V W-1 flame retardant high tech polyester insulation which is as benevolent a s an insulation can be. Super-8 uses a TFE "Tefzel" copy (I sell the Super- 8 to the military and others).=0A>=0A>All of these are designed for aircraf t use but find uses in balloons, racecars, helicopters, drones, etc., where weight is important.=0A>=0A>I will gladly send a free sample to interested builders. See attached.=0A>=0A>--------=0A>Eric M. Jones=0A>www.Perihelion Design.com=0A>113 Brentwood Drive=0A>Southbridge, MA 01550=0A>(508) 764-207 2=0A>emjones(at)charter.net=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>Read this topic online here: =0A>=0A>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403388#403388=0A>=0A> =0A>=0A>=0A>Attachments: =0A>=0A>http://forums.matronics.com//files/copper_ cables_aluminum_cables_727.pdf http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElect bsp; =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2-=0Aums.matronics.com/" target="_blank">ht tp://forums.matronics.com/=0A>_; =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralcontribution" target="_blank">http://www.m atron====== ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 25, 2013
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List:
Re: #2 Welding Cable
From: Bill <wtrooper(at)gmail.com>
Hey Henador - Good joke - too much damage control but I get it now (I am also prepared to accept "EE decrees" as another joke . . ?). All is well - Bill SF bay area On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Henador Titzoff wrote: > John, actually it's Kirchoff's voltage and current laws. He formulated > them in 1845, which is way back before we had EE decrees. > > When I arrived on the crypto scene in 1969, the old timers had been > calling them Khrushchev's voltage and current laws as a JOKE. Do you guy s > get it? Both names start with a K and kinda sound alike unless you're > German or Russian. Then they don't. > > Henador Titzoff > ------------------------------ > *From:* "john.maccallum(at)bigpond.com" > *To:* aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 25, 2013 6:30 PM > *Subject:* AeroElectric-List: =EF=BBRe: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Weld ing Cable > > Kirchoffs law I think you mean. The sum of the current flowing into a nod e > is equal to the sum of the current flowing out of a node. Or in other wor ds > you need the same size cables. > Cheers > John MacCallum > > Sent from my HTC One XL on the Telstra 4G network > > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Henador Titzoff" <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com> > To: "aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com" > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable > Date: Wed, Jun 26, 2013 01:51 > > > Mike, > > According to Krucshev's current and voltage law, what you say below is no t > true. > > > Henador Titzoff > > > ________________________________ > From: "wynaire(at)citlink.net" <wynaire(at)citlink.net> > To: "aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com" > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 1:07 PM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable > > > Hello Eric, > This may be a "loose canon" question.. > In a glass/plastic aircraft, do both polarity cables need to be the same > size [dia.]? Seems in reality, that there are less electrons "coming bac k > to the battery" than going out..., hence the allowance for a smaller pipe ! > Thanks in advance, > Mike W > LNC2 360 builder forever ;) > PS: Your heavy cabling is on my list of must have items. > ************ > > > From: Eric M. Jones <emjones(at)charter.net> > >To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > >Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 6:28 AM > >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable > > > > > emjones(at)charter.net> > > > >I've been selling > Copper-clad-aluminum Fatwire in several sizes for years. Many many happy > users on the Aeroelectric LIst. Top fuel dragsters love it too. > > > >Sizes Super-2-CCA and Super-4-CCA both use a VW-1 flame retardant high > tech polyester insulation which is as benevolent as an insulation can be. > Super-8 uses a TFE "Tefzel" copy (I sell the Super-8 to the military and > others). > > > >All of these are designed for aircraft use but find uses in balloons, > racecars, helicopters, drones, etc., where weight is important. > > > >I will gladly send a free sample to interested builders. See attached. > > > >-------- > >Eric M. Jones > >www.PerihelionDesign.com > >113 Brentwood Drive > >Southbridge, MA 01550 > >(508) 764-2072 > >emjones(at)charter.net > > > > > > > > > >Read this topic online here: > > > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403388#403388 > > > > > > > > > >Attachments: > > > >http://forums.matronics.com//files/copper_cables_aluminum_cables_727.pdf > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectbsp; > ums.matronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com/ > >_; -Matt Dralcontribution" target="_blank"> > http://www.matron====== > > > * > =========== =========== =========== =========== > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
From: Neal George <neal.george(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jun 25, 2013
Wasn't Krucshev the guy with the shoe...? Neal George Sent from my iPhone On Jun 25, 2013, at 1:57 PM, "Rob Housman" <rob@hyperion-ef.com> wrote: > It was Kirchhoff's Law way back when I was an undergraduate in engineering . > > > Best regards, > > Rob Housman > > Irvine, California > Europa XS > Rotax 914 > S/N A070 > Airframe complete > Avionics soon > > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelect ric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Henador Titzoff > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 10:51 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable > > Mike, > > According to Krucshev's current and voltage law, what you say below is not true. > > Henador Titzoff > From: "wynaire(at)citlink.net" <wynaire(at)citlink.net> > To: "aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com" > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 1:07 PM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable > > Hello Eric, > This may be a "loose canon" question.. > In a glass/plastic aircraft, do both polarity cables need to be the same s ize [dia.]? Seems in reality, that there are less electrons "coming back to the battery" than going out..., hence the allowance for a smaller pipe! > Thanks in advance, > Mike W > LNC2 360 builder forever ;) > PS: Your heavy cabling is on my list of must have items. > ************ > > From: Eric M. Jones <emjones(at)charter.net> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 6:28 AM > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable > net> > > I've been selling Copper-clad-aluminum Fatwire in several sizes for years. Many many happy users on the Aeroelectric LIst. Top fuel dragsters love it t oo. > > Sizes Super-2-CCA and Super-4-CCA both use a VW-1 flame retardant high tec h polyester insulation which is as benevolent as an insulation can be. Super -8 uses a TFE "Tefzel" copy (I sell the Super-8 to the military and others). > > All of these are designed for aircraft use but find uses in balloons, race cars, helicopters, drones, etc., where weight is important. > > I will gladly send a free sample to interested builders. See attached. > > -------- > Eric M. Jones > www.PerihelionDesign.com > 113 Brentwood Drive > Southbridge, MA 01550 > (508) 764-2072 > emjones(at)charter.net > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403388#403388 > > > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/copper_cables_aluminum_cables_727.pdf h ttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectbsp; ums.matronics.com/" t arget="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com/ > _; -Matt Dralcontribution" target="_blank">http://www. matronics.com/contribution > > > > > > > > ank" href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http:// wt; http://www.matronics.com/contrib============== > > > > > > > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List > http://forums.matronics.com > http://www.matronics.com/contribution > > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 25, 2013
From: Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
Yes, Neal, everybody thought Krushchev was a heel, but he had a lot of sole .=0A=0A-=0AHenador Titzoff=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A Fr om: Neal George =0ATo: "aeroelectric-list(at)matronics. com" =0ASent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 9:37 PM=0ASubject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable=0A =0A=0A=0AWasn 't Krucshev the guy with the shoe...?=0A=0ANeal George=0ASent from my iPhon e=0A=0AOn Jun 25, 2013, at 1:57 PM, "Rob Housman" <rob@hyperion-ef.com> wro te:=0A=0A=0AIt was Kirchhoff's Law way back when I was an undergraduate in engineering.=0A>-=0A>-=0A>Best regards,=0A>-=0A>Rob Housman=0A>-=0A >Irvine, California=0A>Europa XS=0A>Rotax 914=0A>S/N A070=0A>Airframe compl ete=0A>Avionics soon=0A>-=0A>From:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronic s.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of He nador Titzoff=0A>Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 10:51 AM=0A>To: aeroelectric- list(at)matronics.com=0A>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable =0A>-=0A>Mike,=0A>=0A>According to Krucshev's current and voltage law, wh at you say below is not true.=0A>-=0A>Henador Titzoff=0A>=0A>____________ ____________________=0A>=0A>From:"wynaire(at)citlink.net" =0A>To: "aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com" =0A>Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 1:07 PM=0A>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-Lis t: Re: #2 Welding Cable=0A>-=0A>Hello Eric,=0A>This may be a "loose canon " question..=0A>In a glass/plastic aircraft, do both polarity cables need t o be the same size [dia.]?- Seems in reality, that there are less electro ns "coming back to the battery" than going out..., hence the-allowance- for a smaller pipe! =0A>Thanks in advance,=0A>Mike W=0A>LNC2 360 builder fo rever ;)=0A>PS: Your heavy cabling is on my list of must have items. =0A>** **********=0A>-=0A>>From:Eric M. Jones =0A>>To: aero electric-list(at)matronics.com =0A>>Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 6:28 AM=0A>>S ubject: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Welding Cable=0A>>=0A>>--> AeroElectric-L ist message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" =0A>>=0A>>I've been selling Copper-clad-aluminum Fatwire in several sizes for years. Many many happy users on the Aeroelectric LIst. Top fuel dragsters love it too. =0A>>=0A>>Sizes Super-2-CCA and Super-4-CCA both use a VW-1 flame retardant high tech polyester insulation which is as benevolent as an insulation can be. Super-8 uses a TFE "Tefzel" copy (I sell the Super-8 to the military a nd others).=0A>>=0A>>All of these are designed for aircraft use but find us es in balloons, racecars, helicopters, drones, etc., where weight is import ant.=0A>>=0A>>I will gladly send a free sample to interested builders. See attached.=0A>>=0A>>--------=0A>>Eric M. Jones=0A>>www.PerihelionDesign.com =0A>>113 Brentwood Drive=0A>>Southbridge, MA 01550=0A>>(508) 764-2072=0A>>e mjones(at)charter.net=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>Read this topic online here: =0A>>=0A>>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403388#403388=0A>> =0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>Attachments: =0A>>=0A>>http://forums.matronics.com//fil es/copper_cables_aluminum_cables_727.pdf http://www.matronics.com/Navigator ?AeroElectbsp; - - - - ums.matronics.com/" target="_blank">http:/ /forums.matronics.com/=0A>>_; - - - - - - - - - -Matt Dra lcontribution" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A>> =0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>-=0A>-=0A>ank" href="http://www.matronics.com /Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://wt; http://www.matronics.com/contrib ================0A>-=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>- =0A>-=0A>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List=0A>http://f orums.matronics.com=0A>http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A>-== =========0Ast">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElect ric-List=0A===================== ===============0Acs.com=0A======= ====0Amatronics.com/contribution=0A=========== ======================== ================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 26, 2013
From: "wynaire(at)citlink.net" <wynaire(at)citlink.net>
Subject: Re: #2 Welding Cable
Thanks for taking the time to reply. Yours [and the others'] answers did se ttle a long-nagging point [kinda' like a turn-to-downwind and stall... ]. I t is great the way others chime-in. Humbling actually, especially if [every once in a while] when you begin to think you know it all, you find out the opposite, and keep on learning. =0ACpaciebo. [Thx in Russian].=0AMike=0A** ********=0A-=0A=0A=0A>________________________________=0A> From: Eric M. Jones =0A>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com =0A>Sent : Tuesday, June 25, 2013 11:33 AM=0A>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: #2 Wel ones" =0A>=0A>=0A>> ...This may be a "loose cannon" qu estion...In a glass/plastic aircraft, do both polarity cables need to be th e same size [dia.]? Seems in reality, that there are less electrons "coming back to the battery" than going out..., hence the allowance for a smaller pipe! ...Mike W =0A>=0A>=0A>What a wonderful question! In fact, there are e xactly and precisely as many electrons returning as got sent out. Electrons don't go back to "battery rehab" for another trip. The true picture is far more complicated, and if you decided you wanted to know, you'd never finis h your airplane.=0A>=0A>In a metal airplane, letting the metal body carry t he ground current is possible but not to be undertaken without some serious engineering work, and might change over time. Letting the metal tube frame carry the ground current likewise is problematic. =0A>=0A>See attached.=0A >=0A>--------=0A>Eric M. Jones=0A>www.PerihelionDesign.com=0A>113 Brentwood Drive=0A>Southbridge, MA 01550=0A>(508) 764-2072=0A>emjones(at)charter.net =0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>Read this topic online here:=0A>=0A>http://forums.matro nics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403408#403408=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>Attachments: =0A>=0A>http://forums.matronics.com//files/dabbling_with_electricity_385.pd f=0A>http://forums.matronics.com//files/dabbling_with_electricity_360.pdf - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Matt Dralle, List Adm ========0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 26, 2013
Subject: forest of earths
From: Bill Allen <billallensworld(at)gmail.com>
Hi All - I read on someones website of a "forest of earths" made up from a DB connector and pins - can anyone steer me to it? Bill llen ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "R. curtis" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: forest of earths
Date: Jun 26, 2013
Hi All - I read on someones website of a =22forest of earths=22 made up from a DB connector and pins - can anyone steer me to it=3F Bill, Here is one on Bob's website. http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/minibus/minibus.html Roger -- Do you have a slow PC=3F Try a Free scan http://www.spamfighter.com/SLOW-PCfi ghter=3Fcid=sigen ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 26, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: forest of earths
At 03:33 PM 6/26/2013, you wrote: >Hi All - I read on someones website of a "forest of earths" made up >from a DB connector and pins - can anyone steer me to it? > >Bill, > >Here is one on Bob's website. > ><http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/minibus/minibus.html>http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/minibus/minibus.html > Here's some additional details on available configurations http://tinyurl.com/7hvmat6 manufactured versions can be secured at: http://tinyurl.com/cgr42l5 Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Vern Little" <sprocket@vx-aviation.com>
Subject: Re: forest of earths
Date: Jun 26, 2013
Slightly more sophisticated: http://store.makerplane.org/axis-gbx-25-avionics-wiring-hub/ From: Bill Allen Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 12:55 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: forest of earths Hi All - I read on someones website of a "forest of earths" made up from a DB connector and pins - can anyone steer me to it? Bill llen No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 06/26/13 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 27, 2013
Subject: Re: forest of earths
From: Bill Allen <billallensworld(at)gmail.com>
Thanks Bob. On 26 June 2013 23:59, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > At 03:33 PM 6/26/2013, you wrote: > > Hi All - I read on someones website of a "forest of earths" made up from > a DB connector and pins - can anyone steer me to it? > > Bill, > > Here is one on Bob's website. > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/minibus/minibus.html > > > Here's some additional details on available > configurations > > http://tinyurl.com/7hvmat6 > > manufactured versions can be secured at: > > http://tinyurl.com/cgr42l5 > > > ** > > ** Bob . . . > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 27, 2013
Subject: Re: forest of earths
From: Bill Allen <billallensworld(at)gmail.com>
Thanks Roger. On 26 June 2013 23:33, R. curtis wrote: > ** > > Hi All - I read on someones website of a "forest of earths" made up from a > DB connector and pins - can anyone steer me to it? > > Bill, > > Here is one on Bob's website. > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/minibus/minibus.html > > > Roger > > > ------------------------------ > . > > Do you have a slow PC?<http://www.spamfighter.com/SLOW-PCfighter?cid=sigen>Try a free scan! > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 27, 2013
Subject: Re: forest of earths
From: Bill Allen <billallensworld(at)gmail.com>
Thanks Vern. On 27 June 2013 00:12, Vern Little <sprocket@vx-aviation.com> wrote: > Slightly more sophisticated: > http://store.makerplane.org/axis-gbx-25-avionics-wiring-hub/ > > *From:* Bill Allen > *Sent:* Wednesday, June 26, 2013 12:55 PM > *To:* aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* AeroElectric-List: forest of earths > > Hi All - I read on someones website of a "forest of earths" made up from > a DB connector and pins - can anyone steer me to it? > > Bill llen > > * > > 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* > > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Good deal on handy bench supply
From: "nuckollsr" <bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Date: Jun 26, 2013
I've owned several variants on this product. Still have one. It services about 95% of my power supply needs. http://tinyurl.com/pp9o5k4 Bob . . . Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403493#403493 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 27, 2013
Subject: Landing Light Aim
From: Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com>
This might be slightly off of the usual topic, but does anyone have any tips for where to aim a landing light on a tailwheel airplane? I have the tools to align it with a vertical tilt of choice, but I don't know what the best choice would be. I can also include some measures for adjustment, but I wonder how many degrees of adjustment I should include. Thanks in advance! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 27, 2013
Subject: Re: Landing Light Aim
Good Morning Jared, I would aim it so the light beam parallels the ground with the tail wheel on the ground. Then go try it and adjust as needed! Happy Skies, Old Bob In a message dated 6/27/2013 11:30:23 A.M. Central Daylight Time, email(at)jaredyates.com writes: --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jared Yates This might be slightly off of the usual topic, but does anyone have any tips for where to aim a landing light on a tailwheel airplane? I have the tools to align it with a vertical tilt of choice, but I don't know what the best choice would be. I can also include some measures for adjustment, but I wonder how many degrees of adjustment I should include. Thanks in advance! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 27, 2013
Subject: Re: forest of earths
From: Bill Allen <billallensworld(at)gmail.com>
Hi Bob, I've got your book, but I haven't got it with me at the moment - where would I find your advice on 1. On what devices to use shielded wire 2. Whether to earth one end of the shield or both 3. How to avoid ground-loops in a system. I spent a couple of hours last night trawling through back articles but couldn't find anything on the above. I learned lots of other things though :^) many thanks, Bill Allen LongEzDiesel G-LEZE CozyMk4 G-BYLZ On 26 June 2013 23:59, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > At 03:33 PM 6/26/2013, you wrote: > > Hi All - I read on someones website of a "forest of earths" made up from > a DB connector and pins - can anyone steer me to it? > > Bill, > > Here is one on Bob's website. > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/minibus/minibus.html > > > Here's some additional details on available > configurations > > http://tinyurl.com/7hvmat6 > > manufactured versions can be secured at: > > http://tinyurl.com/cgr42l5 > > > ** > > ** Bob . . . > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 27, 2013
Subject: Re: Landing Light Aim
From: Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com>
Thanks Old Bob! On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:34 PM, wrote: > Good Morning Jared, > > I would aim it so the light beam parallels the ground with the tail wheel on > the ground. Then go try it and adjust as needed! > > Happy Skies, > > Old Bob > > In a message dated 6/27/2013 11:30:23 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > email(at)jaredyates.com writes: > > > This might be slightly off of the usual topic, but does anyone have > any tips for where to aim a landing light on a tailwheel airplane? I > have the tools to align it with a vertical tilt of choice, but I don't > know what the best choice would be. I can also include some measures > for adjustment, but I wonder how many degrees of adjustment I should > include. Thanks in advance! > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Landing Light Aim
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Date: Jun 28, 2013
You would think that DC3's or B17's must have had a way to do this. A brief search turned up nothing, but I am sure a more thorough search would find something applicable. Sensing the angle of the airplane and adjusting the light automatically would seem tricky, but sensing the speed from the pitot and making an automatic adjustment, or putting a switch on the tail wheel might yield a system that is worth implementing. But Keep It Simple. Remember that the main long-throw lights are used when the tail and airspeed is high. By the time the tail is on the ground, you might not need much. -------- Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge, MA 01550 (508) 764-2072 emjones(at)charter.net Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403564#403564 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: mapratherid <mapratherid(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Landing Light Aim
Date: Jun 28, 2013
So, maybe the light could be aimed by tracking the pitch trim. Simpler and maybe even lighter to put two lights on the airplane? One for taxi and one for landing. You get a bit of redundancy too. Old recipe for success. Moving parts = yuck. Finally, I would have guessed aiming for landing attitude might be better, as once you're in three point attitude you're not covering ground nearly as fast so maybe don't need to see as far/well. I do understand that your desire for visual acuity increases while close to the ground.. Cheers, Matt- On Jun 28, 2013, at 7:59 AM, "Eric M. Jones" wrote: > > You would think that DC3's or B17's must have had a way to do this. A brief search turned up nothing, but I am sure a more thorough search would find something applicable. > > Sensing the angle of the airplane and adjusting the light automatically would seem tricky, but sensing the speed from the pitot and making an automatic adjustment, or putting a switch on the tail wheel might yield a system that is worth implementing. > > But Keep It Simple. Remember that the main long-throw lights are used when the tail and airspeed is high. By the time the tail is on the ground, you might not need much. > > -------- > Eric M. Jones > www.PerihelionDesign.com > 113 Brentwood Drive > Southbridge, MA 01550 > (508) 764-2072 > emjones(at)charter.net > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403564#403564 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "R. curtis" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Landing Light Aim
Date: Jun 28, 2013
I must say that I agree with "Old Bob" that the light should be adjusted for straight ahead with the tail on the ground. If you adjust for straight ahead with the tail high you will be lighting the tree tops during taxi, which greatly decreases the utility of the light. If the light is adjusted somewhat low, you will still be able to see the ground for both approach to landing and taxi. This is not optimal for all phases of flight and taxi, but IMHO it's the best compromise for one solidly mounted light. Roger -- Do you have a slow PC? Try a Free scan http://www.spamfighter.com/SLOW-PCfighter?cid=sigen ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 28, 2013
Subject: Re: Landing Light Aim
Good Morning Eric, Actually there were retractable landing lights which did provide the pilot with the capability of adjusting the beam up or down, but the majority only had one position where the light was on. In my past, the only two airplanes I flew with the adjustable lights were the Bamboo Bomber (Cessna Bob Cat) and the Douglas DC-6/7 series Both of those series' aircraft had one switch that extended or retracted the light and it had a center position by which the light could be stopped. They also had a separate on/off switch for the bulb itself. Unfortunately. If you retracted the light and failed to turn it off it was not noticeable from the cockpit unless you flew into a cloud where the blast of light would make it obvious. The vast majority of retractable lights I have used just went up or down. No stopping in between and the light came on shortly after it vacated the housing and went off shortly after the retraction process was initiated. I suppose that a bit of rewiring could make any of them work like our old DC-6/7 lights did. The DC-3s that I flew had very nice fixed landing lights mounted in the leading edge of the wings. Since I just flew for one company, I have no idea whether other airlines had their airplanes differently equipped. One thing for sure, we tried to use the landing lights as little as possible on the ground because they got too hot and would burn out the bulbs prematurely. The fixed ones would also warp the plastic leading edge cover if used on the ground. Landing lights were normally off for all taxiing. If the need arose, just a short blast was used. Happy Skies Old Bob In a message dated 6/28/2013 9:02:18 A.M. Central Daylight Time, emjones(at)charter.net writes: --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" You would think that DC3's or B17's must have had a way to do this. A brief search turned up nothing, but I am sure a more thorough search would find something applicable. Sensing the angle of the airplane and adjusting the light automatically would seem tricky, but sensing the speed from the pitot and making an automatic adjustment, or putting a switch on the tail wheel might yield a system that is worth implementing. But Keep It Simple. Remember that the main long-throw lights are used when the tail and airspeed is high. By the time the tail is on the ground, you might not need much. -------- Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge, MA 01550 (508) 764-2072 emjones(at)charter.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Help finding Fork Terminals "URGENT"
From: "jhausch" <jimhausch(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jun 28, 2013
This is a bit of a long shot, but here goes... I'm an AeroElectric lurker. I work in the factory automation business. One of my customers called me a few minutes ago looking for 3000 Panduit P14-6FN-M. That is a fork terminal with a non-insulated barrel for #16-14 wire. He needs these tomorrow, or, at latest, Monday. I don't normally sell stuff like this and his regular source is out. We've checked Newark, Mouser, Grainger, and Allied..... Any ideas? Datasheet link http://hqwww.panduit.com/panduit/groups/MPM-NL/documents/PartDrawing/093579.pdf Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403588#403588 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Help finding Fork Terminals "URGENT"
From: Jon <jrg3689(at)aol.com>
Date: Jun 28, 2013
Check McMaster Carr Sent from my iPhone On Jun 28, 2013, at 19:25, "jhausch" wrote: > > This is a bit of a long shot, but here goes... > > I'm an AeroElectric lurker. I work in the factory automation business. > > One of my customers called me a few minutes ago looking for 3000 Panduit P14-6FN-M. That is a fork terminal with a non-insulated barrel for #16-14 wire. > > He needs these tomorrow, or, at latest, Monday. I don't normally sell stuff like this and his regular source is out. We've checked Newark, Mouser, Grainger, and Allied..... > > Any ideas? > > Datasheet link > http://hqwww.panduit.com/panduit/groups/MPM-NL/documents/PartDrawing/093579.pdf > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403588#403588 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 28, 2013
From: Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com>
Subject: Re: Help finding Fork Terminals "URGENT"
I see them offered at Mouser, Digikey, Grainger, etc...but they're either out of stock or in one case, only 77 left! But I did find this one at Sacramento Electric Supply, no indication of how many are in stock, but it might be worth a look-see: http://store.sacelec.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=7699 Harley ----------------------------------------------------------------- On 6/28/2013 7:25 PM, jhausch wrote: > > This is a bit of a long shot, but here goes... > > I'm an AeroElectric lurker. I work in the factory automation business. > > One of my customers called me a few minutes ago looking for 3000 Panduit P14-6FN-M. That is a fork terminal with a non-insulated barrel for #16-14 wire. > > He needs these tomorrow, or, at latest, Monday. I don't normally sell stuff like this and his regular source is out. We've checked Newark, Mouser, Grainger, and Allied..... > > Any ideas? > > Datasheet link > http://hqwww.panduit.com/panduit/groups/MPM-NL/documents/PartDrawing/093579.pdf > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 28, 2013
Subject: Re: Help finding Fork Terminals "URGENT"
From: thomas sargent <sarg314(at)gmail.com>
I got a hit on this part number at digikey.com, although it does say "non-stock", so they probably don't have them on the shelf. On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Jon wrote: > > Check McMaster Carr > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jun 28, 2013, at 19:25, "jhausch" wrote: > > > > > This is a bit of a long shot, but here goes... > > > > I'm an AeroElectric lurker. I work in the factory automation business. > > > > One of my customers called me a few minutes ago looking for 3000 Panduit > P14-6FN-M. That is a fork terminal with a non-insulated barrel for #16-14 > wire. > > > > He needs these tomorrow, or, at latest, Monday. I don't normally sell > stuff like this and his regular source is out. We've checked Newark, > Mouser, Grainger, and Allied..... > > > > Any ideas? > > > > Datasheet link > > > http://hqwww.panduit.com/panduit/groups/MPM-NL/documents/PartDrawing/093579.pdf > > > > > > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403588#403588 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Tom Sargent ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 28, 2013
Subject: Re: Landing Light Aim
From: Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com>
Thanks for the additional input everyone! This particular application won't have any provisions for in-flight adjustment, but the variation in replies here has helped establish the range of ground adjustment that I will provide for. On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:25 PM, wrote: > Good Morning Eric, > > Actually there were retractable landing lights which did provide the pilot > with the capability of adjusting the beam up or down, but the majority only > had one position where the light was on. > > In my past, the only two airplanes I flew with the adjustable lights were > the Bamboo Bomber (Cessna Bob Cat) and the Douglas DC-6/7 series > > > Both of those series' aircraft had one switch that extended or retracted the > light and it had a center position by which the light could be stopped. They > also had a separate on/off switch for the bulb itself. > > Unfortunately. If you retracted the light and failed to turn it off it was > not noticeable from the cockpit unless you flew into a cloud where the blast > of light would make it obvious. The vast majority of retractable lights I > have used just went up or down. No stopping in between and the light came on > shortly after it vacated the housing and went off shortly after the > retraction process was initiated. I suppose that a bit of rewiring could > make any of them work like our old DC-6/7 lights did. > > The DC-3s that I flew had very nice fixed landing lights mounted in the > leading edge of the wings. Since I just flew for one company, I have no idea > whether other airlines had their airplanes differently equipped. > > One thing for sure, we tried to use the landing lights as little as possible > on the ground because they got too hot and would burn out the bulbs > prematurely. The fixed ones would also warp the plastic leading edge cover > if used on the ground. > > Landing lights were normally off for all taxiing. If the need arose, just a > short blast was used. > > Happy Skies > > Old Bob > > In a message dated 6/28/2013 9:02:18 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > emjones(at)charter.net writes: > > > > You would think that DC3's or B17's must have had a way to do this. A brief > search turned up nothing, but I am sure a more thorough search would find > something applicable. > > Sensing the angle of the airplane and adjusting the light automatically > would seem tricky, but sensing the speed from the pitot and making an > automatic adjustment, or putting a switch on the tail wheel might yield a > system that is worth implementing. > > But Keep It Simple. Remember that the main long-throw lights are used when > the tail and airspeed is high. By the time the tail is on the ground, you > might not need much. > > -------- > Eric M. Jones > www.PerihelionDesign.com > 113 Brentwood Drive > Southbridge, MA 01550 > (508) 764-2072 > emjones(at)charter.net > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Henry Hallam <henry(at)pericynthion.org>
Date: Jun 28, 2013
Subject: Re: Help finding Fork Terminals "URGENT"
Does it have to be that exact part number? These look like they would match: http://www.elecdirect.com/product/79c0d8db-bf28-44a1-a7de-b5a482e01f42.aspx They say 3-5 day shipping, but maybe they can do something special for you if you call them? On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:50 PM, thomas sargent wrote: > I got a hit on this part number at digikey.com, although it does say > "non-stock", so they probably don't have them on the shelf. > > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Jon wrote: >> >> >> Check McMaster Carr >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Jun 28, 2013, at 19:25, "jhausch" wrote: >> >> > >> > This is a bit of a long shot, but here goes... >> > >> > I'm an AeroElectric lurker. I work in the factory automation business. >> > >> > One of my customers called me a few minutes ago looking for 3000 Panduit >> > P14-6FN-M. That is a fork terminal with a non-insulated barrel for #16-14 >> > wire. >> > >> > He needs these tomorrow, or, at latest, Monday. I don't normally sell >> > stuff like this and his regular source is out. We've checked Newark, >> > Mouser, Grainger, and Allied..... >> > >> > Any ideas? >> > >> > Datasheet link >> > >> > http://hqwww.panduit.com/panduit/groups/MPM-NL/documents/PartDrawing/093579.pdf >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Read this topic online here: >> > >> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403588#403588 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> ========== >> - >> ric-List" >> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List >> ========== >> MS - >> k">http://forums.matronics.com >> ========== >> e - >> -Matt Dralle, List Admin. >> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> ========== >> >> >> > > > -- > Tom Sargent > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 28, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Landing Light Aim
At 08:06 PM 6/28/2013, you wrote: > >Thanks for the additional input everyone! This particular application >won't have any provisions for in-flight adjustment, but the variation >in replies here has helped establish the range of ground adjustment >that I will provide for. Given the low cost, small size and low energy requirements, have you considered separate landing and taxi lights. Even the trikes often have separate lamps. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Help finding Fork Terminals "URGENT"
From: "jhausch" <jimhausch(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jun 28, 2013
Hey guys, Thanks! We'll give those a try. Yes - the usual suspects are all out of stock. We knew about the 77. He needs to use a 16 AWG wire with it. I suggested looking for other fork terminals or perhaps different AWG ranges... Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403596#403596 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 28, 2013
Subject: Re: Landing Light Aim
From: Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com>
I'm a little to far into the integration to use two on this project. I'm not planning to fly at night very often, so the benefit side of the cost/benefit is fairly low starting out. On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > At 08:06 PM 6/28/2013, you wrote: >> >> >> >> Thanks for the additional input everyone! This particular application >> won't have any provisions for in-flight adjustment, but the variation >> in replies here has helped establish the range of ground adjustment >> that I will provide for. > > > Given the low cost, small size and low energy requirements, > have you considered separate landing and taxi lights. Even > the trikes often have separate lamps. > > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 28, 2013
From: robert wiebe <ramjetwiebe(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Help finding Fork Terminals "URGENT"
Not sure where you are located.=0A=0Adid you try Westburne in Southern Onta rio? They showed stock when I logged in and tried to order 10 000.-=0A=0A They used to be open Sat AMs but Monday is a Holiday hear.=0A=0Ahttps://ont ario.westburne.ca/p14-6fn-m-term-fork-non-ins-narrow-to-/PANP146FNM/Product Information.raction=0A=0A=0AR.=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A___________________________ _____=0A From: jhausch <jimhausch(at)gmail.com>=0ATo: aeroelectric-list@matron ics.com =0ASent: Friday, June 28, 2013 4:25:09 PM=0ASubject: AeroElectric-L ist: Help finding Fork Terminals "URGENT"=0A =0A=0A--> AeroElectric-List me ssage posted by: "jhausch" =0A=0AThis is a bit of a lo ng shot, but here goes...=0A=0AI'm an AeroElectric lurker. I work in the fa ctory automation business.=0A=0AOne of my customers called me a few minutes ago looking for 3000 Panduit P14-6FN-M.- That is a fork terminal with a non-insulated barrel for #16-14 wire.=0A=0AHe needs these tomorrow, or, at latest, Monday.- I don't normally sell stuff like this and his regular so urce is out.- We've checked Newark, Mouser, Grainger, and Allied.....=0A =0AAny ideas?=0A=0ADatasheet link=0Ahttp://hqwww.panduit.com/panduit/groups /MPM-NL/documents/PartDrawing/093579.pdf=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ARead this topic onli ne here:=0A=0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403588#403588 = ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Help finding Fork Terminals "URGENT"
From: "jhausch" <jimhausch(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jun 28, 2013
Thanks! We'll try that one, too. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403601#403601 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Help finding Fork Terminals "URGENT"
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Date: Jun 29, 2013
Better choice: Thomas and Betts Sta-kon B14-6F or similar (there are several similar types) See the T&B catalog online. I actually have a box of these but nowhere near 3000. -------- Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge, MA 01550 (508) 764-2072 emjones(at)charter.net Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403617#403617 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 29, 2013
Subject: Re: Landing Light Aim
From: GLEN MATEJCEK <fly4grins(at)gmail.com>
The old: Hi Eric et al- On the (tailwheel) PV-2, the Grimes retractable landing lights are very versatile. The basic unit and it's components can be wired a variety of ways, but in this example a three position switch controls lamp movement at will through it's entire range of ops. Limit switches stop the motor at either end of the travel, with 'up' being fully retracted and 'down' being in a perfect position for use as a landing light. On the ground, the lamp can be motored to any position desired for taxi. Another switch in the assembly turns the lamp on or off as it passes the retracted plus 15 degrees position. A separate switch in the cockpit can be used to extinguish the lamps if req'd. Footnote: the bomb bay lights were wired through the squat switch... one can only imagine how that came about! Also, I believe that basic landing light ass'y was used right up through the DC-9. The new: Hi Matt et al- Although not yet flying (someday...), I have a light in each wing, one to be aimed for taxi the other aimed for landing, and both for redundancy and collision avoidance, including one of Eric's wig-wags. With any luck, there will be some overlap and each will suffice for the other should the need arise. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
From: "dgaldrich" <dgaldrich(at)embarqmail.com>
Date: Jun 30, 2013
Hi Robert et al. Two issues to discuss Under what circumstances could you recommend/condone the use of a simple mechanical master switch (as in Z-17) rather than a traditional battery contactor? I am building an aircraft with very similar loads to Z-17 but will have an 18 amp dynamo/PMG and an Odyssey 680 battery so I guess the real question is, do those two items change the ability to use a switch versus the additional complexity and "hold" current usage of a contactor? Second issue is wiring the starter. Mine has two separate terminals. One for the serious current and one for the solenoid. I'm planning to wire the battery directly to the starter with #2AWG cable and use #16AWG from the solenoid to the start switch and back through a 5 or 10 amp CB. All of the Z- diagrams show a start contactor so I'm wondering if my planning passes the "idiot" test. Thanks. Dave Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403652#403652 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 30, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
At 11:07 AM 6/30/2013, you wrote: > > >Hi Robert et al. > >Two issues to discuss > >Under what circumstances could you recommend/condone the use of a >simple mechanical master switch (as in Z-17) rather than a >traditional battery contactor? It needs to serve the same purpose as any other form of battery master . . . offer the pilot direct control of the battery by means located as close as possible to\ the battery . . . generally less than 1 foot. EVERY OBAM aircraft could use a manual master switch as long as it was in convenient reach of the pilot. >I am building an aircraft with very similar loads to Z-17 but will >have an 18 amp dynamo/PMG and an Odyssey 680 battery so I guess the >real question is, do those two items change the ability to use a >switch versus the additional complexity and "hold" current usage of >a contactor? You CAN purchase a low-hold current contactor . . . but have you done a load analysis? What are your full up running loads? >Second issue is wiring the starter. Mine has two separate >terminals. One for the serious current and one for the >solenoid. I'm planning to wire the battery directly to the starter >with #2AWG cable and use #16AWG from the solenoid to the start >switch and back through a 5 or 10 amp CB. All of the Z- diagrams >show a start contactor so I'm wondering if my planning passes the "idiot" test. It's not generally done that way . . . opening the battery master is supposed to take the system max-cold. This would include fat wires to the starter. What kind of airplane/engine combination are we discussing? Do you have night lighting? What drove your decision for the 680 as opposed to a smaller battery? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 30, 2013
From: Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
Dave, Here's a couple of ideas for you to consider, 1. If a switch is used as the 'master switch' as you suggest, some distance from the battery, consider installing a 20 or 25A (or similar) c/b close to the battery, and in reach of the pilot, so if need be breaker can be pulled and the system will be cold from there on. 2. Fit a starter relay close to the battery - that way you do not have hot thick wires running to the engine all the time. The issue then is the starter relay welding itself shut, where releasing the starter button will not stop the starter. Some modern starters with an on board solenoid allow for the path energising the solenoid to be broken - such as SkyTec NL series. If a switch is added in the cockpit in this path then the starter can be turned off with a welded starter relay. Regards, Peter On 30/06/2013 17:07, dgaldrich wrote: > > Hi Robert et al. > > Two issues to discuss > > Under what circumstances could you recommend/condone the use of a simple mechanical master switch (as in Z-17) rather than a traditional battery contactor? > > I am building an aircraft with very similar loads to Z-17 but will have an 18 amp dynamo/PMG and an Odyssey 680 battery so I guess the real question is, do those two items change the ability to use a switch versus the additional complexity and "hold" current usage of a contactor? > > Second issue is wiring the starter. Mine has two separate terminals. One for the serious current and one for the solenoid. I'm planning to wire the battery directly to the starter with #2AWG cable and use #16AWG from the solenoid to the start switch and back through a 5 or 10 amp CB. All of the Z- diagrams show a start contactor so I'm wondering if my planning passes the "idiot" test. > > Thanks. > > Dave > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403652#403652 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Date: Jun 30, 2013
The FAA doesn't require a battery contactor and you car doesn't have one. The contactor per FAA "must disconnect the battery with one hand in the event of an emergency" e.g. crash. Nascar has the same issues, but the cars' enormous vibration has pretty much forced racecar builders to use battery switches instead. I recommend Flaming River remote battery switches, but there are others. The entire experimental aircraft can be built without contactors, and I think it's a good approach. -------- Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge, MA 01550 (508) 764-2072 emjones(at)charter.net Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403664#403664 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 30, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
> > >The entire experimental aircraft can be built without contactors, >and I think it's a good approach. I took dual instruction in a TriPacer back in '61 that mounted the battery under the pax seat. The battery master was a switch that you could reach under the seats between pilot and co-pilot. The starter was a manual push button in a similar position between the pilot's knees. A contactor is not required . . . just a battery master disconnect. If you can acquire manual switches suited to the task and they can be mounted for convenient access the choice is yours. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 01, 2013
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Landing Light Aim
I've been operating off a rather dimly lit grass strip for 15 years or so. First with a tailwheel Maule (hundreds of landings) then an RV10 (1 dozen night ops). Some observations: * The Maule's incandescent wing mounted landing light was aimed roughly so that the landing area was lit when on a 'normal' short final. I never adjusted it. * During landing, the runway lights provide most of the visual information. * The Maule's lights provided confirmation that there was a ground surface in the black hole and a quick view of any major obstructions just before rounding out. * I never saw the deer. * The Maule's light was on the left wing. * An additional light on the right wing I'm guessing would be somewhat useful on short final (see deer strike by right wheel) but of little use during taxi. * During taxi, the light mainly lit up the trees. If I didn't live here, I wouldn't be able to taxi safely here. * A nose mounted light aimed for taxi might be very useful on a dark, rough strip. * The pair of wing mounted HID landing lights on the '10 is what I should have had on the Maule. I would have aimed the left one for taxi and the right for the trees. Or just swapped out the incandescent unit for an HID unit. Bill "lit grass with 100LL and JetA seems like heaven" Watson On 6/28/2013 12:00 PM, mapratherid wrote: > > So, maybe the light could be aimed by tracking the pitch trim. > > Simpler and maybe even lighter to put two lights on the airplane? One for taxi and one for landing. You get a bit of redundancy too. Old recipe for success. Moving parts = yuck. > > Finally, I would have guessed aiming for landing attitude might be better, as once you're in three point attitude you're not covering ground nearly as fast so maybe don't need to see as far/well. I do understand that your desire for visual acuity increases while close to the ground.. > > > Cheers, > > Matt- > > On Jun 28, 2013, at 7:59 AM, "Eric M. Jones" wrote: > >> >> You would think that DC3's or B17's must have had a way to do this. A brief search turned up nothing, but I am sure a more thorough search would find something applicable. >> >> Sensing the angle of the airplane and adjusting the light automatically would seem tricky, but sensing the speed from the pitot and making an automatic adjustment, or putting a switch on the tail wheel might yield a system that is worth implementing. >> >> But Keep It Simple. Remember that the main long-throw lights are used when the tail and airspeed is high. By the time the tail is on the ground, you might not need much. >> >> -------- >> Eric M. Jones >> www.PerihelionDesign.com >> 113 Brentwood Drive >> Southbridge, MA 01550 >> (508) 764-2072 >> emjones(at)charter.net >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403564#403564 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: BlackBerry Z10 ----- $350
From: "aneale" <janeale632(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Jul 01, 2013
It's happening again at V2B COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED . We are offering a Special Bonanza to all our current and new customers who are willing to purchase genuine and original Smart-phones for personal use or retail purposes. OUR SERVICE IN LIFE IS NOT TO GET AHEAD OF OTHERS, BUT TO GET AHEAD OF OURSELVES TO BREAK OUR OWN RECORDS, TO OUTSTRIP OUR YESTERDAY BY OUR TODAY (Enquires available 24 hours a day) CONTACT PERSON: Jenifer Douglas (marketing manager) CONTACT EMAILS & SALES INQUIRY: v2bcomltd(at)gmail.com V2bcommunicationslimited(at)hotmail.co.uk We take this opportunity to introduce ourselves as one of the leading Approved dealers, specialized in the distributors of Mobile phones,Laptops,Games,Mobile accessories,computer e.t.c. Our objective is to develop long-term relationships with our customers. SHIPPING METHOD: FedEx,UPS & URBAN SPEED SERVICE. DELIVERY/ANALYSIS: 48Hrs Via FedEx Express Delivery, (OVERNIGHT DELIVERY ALSO AVAILABLE @Affordable charges). PAYMENT METHOD: PAYPAL,BANK TRANSFER,WESTERN UNION,MONEY GRAMM, PERFECT MONEY Our BONANZA are: Buy 2 units and get 1 unit FREE including shipping Buy 4 units and get 2 unit FREE including shipping Buy 5 units and get 3 unit FREE including shipping Buy 2 units Apple iPhone 5 64GB --@ $350 Each = $700 USD and get 1 unit FREE Buy 4 units Apple iPhone 5 64GB --@ $350 Each = $1,400 USD and get 2 units FREE Buy 5 units Apple iPhone 5 64GB --@ $300 Each = $1,750 USD and get 3 units FREE Why buy from us ? * Your privacy is guaranteed * Our prices are second to none * Insurance Secured Transactions * We ship Monday through Saturday. * Free shipping on qualified orders * We offer a reasonable discount bulk purchase * We ship the same day after confirmation of payment. * We offer a 30 days return policy and a 100% money back guarantee. If you are interested, forward your questions and inquires to us via email your order and shipping details. we give 1 year warranty for every product sold out to our costumers, our product are company class 1 tested and approved by global standard organization of wireless industries. Below is our current mobile phones price list: NO TAX on all products! DON'T CONTACT US FOR FAKE OR REFURBISH PHONES. WE SELL ORIGINAL PHONES ONLY. Price listed Also applies for Oversea Shipment Apple iPad 4 Retina 128GB Wi-fi UNLOCKED --- $400 Apple iPad 4 64GB with Wi-Fi ---$350 USD Apple iPad mini ----------------$290 USD Apple iPad 3 Wi-Fi + 4G 64GB..........................$300 USD Apple iPad 3 Wi-Fi 64GB...............................$280 USD Apple iPad 2 (Wi-Fi + 3G)-----$250 Apple iPad 2 (Wi-Fi)----$240 Apple iPad 2 (CDMA)---$230 Apple Tablet iPad 64GB (Wi-Fi + 3G)---$220usd Apple Tablet iPad 32GB (Wi-Fi + 3G)---$200usd Apple Tablet iPad 16GB (Wi-Fi + 3G)---$190usd Apple iPhone: Apple iPhone 5 16GB---- $300 Apple iPhone 5 32GB---- $330 Apple iPhone 5 64GB---- $350 Apple iPhone 4S 64GB ..............$300 Apple iPhone 4S 32GB ..............$280 Apple iPhone 4S 16GB ..............$270 Apple iPhone 4 CDMA---$260 Apple iphone 4g 32gb----$250 Apple iPhone 3GS 32GB- $180 Apple iPhone 3GS 16GB- $180 Apple iPhone 4GB $90 Apple iPhone 8GB $110 Apple iPhone 16GB $115 Apple iPhone 3G 8GB $125 Apple iPhone 3G 16GB $135 BlackBerry: BlackBerry Z10 ...... $350 BlackBerry Q10 ---$280 Blackberry TK Victory......$350 Blackberry porsche 9981--$500 BlackBerry Porsche P9531-$500 BlackBerry Curve 9380---$265 BlackBerry Bold 9790---$260 BlackBerry Curve 9370---$250 BlackBerry Playbook WiMax......$250 BlackBerry 4G Playbook LTE.....$250 BlackBerry Torch 9850---$270 BlackBerry Torch 9860---$265 BlackBerry Torch 9810----$260 BlackBerry Curve 9350--$250 BlackBerry Bold Touch 9900--$255 BlackBerry Bold Touch 9930--$250 BlackBerry 4G PlayBook HSPA+--$245 BlackBerry PlayBook WiMax--$240 BlackBerry PlayBook---$230 BlackBerry bold 9780------$270 BlackBerry Curve 3G 9300--$250 BlackBerry Torch 9800-----$260 BlackBerry Pearl 3G 9100---$240 BlackBerry Pearl 3G 9105---$230 BlackBerry Bold 9650---$220 Windows Phone: Windows Phone 7 -----$250 HTC HTC Butterfly-----$380 HTC EVO 3D PG86100--$240 HTC One SU--------$380 HTC One SC--------$350 HTC DROID DNA-----$350 HTC One SV--------$350 HTC Desire X------$350 HTC Desire VT-----$330 HTC Desire SV-----$350 HTC One VX.....$350 HTC One X+.....$330 HTC One X......$300 HTC Titan II --- $300 HTC Vivid ----- $ 300.00 HTC Rezound----$260 HTC One XL----$250 HTC Rhyme---$250 HTC Sensation XL---$250 HTC Panache---$240 Htc Advantage X7510----$240 HTC Sensation XE--$260 HTC Titan--$260 HTC Jetstream--$255 HTC Trophy--$250 HTC DROID Incredible 2--$245 HTC Sensation 4G--$240 HTC Inspire 4G--$235 HTC Freestyle---$230 HTC Aria--------$225 HTC Evo 4G--$220 HTC Wildfire---$210 HTC Desire $200 HTC HD mini $200 HTC Legend - $200 HTC Google Nexus One $200 Nokia: Nokia Lumia 920 ---------$300 nokia-lumia-820 ---------$300 Nokia 808 PureView-----$280 Nokia Lumia 900----$280 Nokia Lumia 610---------$270 Nokia N9.......$270 Nokia N950......$265 Nokia 500.......$265 Nokia X7-00.....$265 Nokia E6.......$260 Nokia Astound------$250 Nokia Oro-----$230 Nokia N950......$270 Nokia T7---$260 Nokia X2-01--$250 Nokia C5-03--$245 Nokia X5-01 - $240 Nokia N8----$240 Nokia X6 8GB--$230 Sony Ericsson: Sony Xperia Z----$300 Sony Ericsson Xperia mini pro --- $ 270.00 Sony Ericsson XPERIA Play ------ $ 250.00 Sony Ericsson Xperia arc S--$260 Sony Ericsson Xperia neo V---$250 Sony Ericsson XPERIA Arc---$230 Sony Ericsson BRAVIA S004...$220 Sony Ericsson Spiro..$230 Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 mini pro $220 Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 mini $210 Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 - $200 Sony Ericsson Xperia X2 $190 Sony Ericsson XPERIA X1 - $150 Sony Ericsson Aspen $230 Sony Ericsson Vivaz Pro $210 Sony Ericsson Vivaz $200 Samsung: Samsung I9500 Galaxy S4----$350 Samsung I9505 Galaxy S4 --- $350 Samsung I9190 Galaxy S4 mini ---$300 Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 N5100 ---$300 Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 N8000 -----$320 Samsung I9300 Galaxy S III-----$300 Samsung Galaxy Young GT-S6310 --$250 Samsung Galaxy Tab 8.9 4G P7320T---$300 Samsung Galaxy Nexus Telus--$270 Samsung Galaxy Prevail ---------- $ 260 Samsung I9001 Galaxy S Plus ---- $ 260 Samsung Galaxy Note--250 Samsung Galaxy Pocket S5300--$250 Samsung Galaxy S II T-Mobile---$250 Samsung Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch--$250 Samsung Conquer 4G--$245 Samsung I9100 Galaxy S II--$240 Samsung i997 Infuse 4G---$240 Samsung Google Nexus S--$230 Samsung Galaxy Tab ---$230 Samsung Vibrant----$220 Samsung W960 AMOLED 3D---$240 Samsung Galaxy A---$210 Samsung I9000 Galaxy S---$210 Samsung I6500U Galaxy---$210 Motorola phones Motorola MT917 ----------- $ 350.00 Motorola XT928 ----------- $ 350.00 Motorola Milestone XT883--$260 Motorola DROID XYBOARD 8.2 MZ609 --$250 Motorola DROID XYBOARD 10.1 MZ617---$250 Motorola XOOM 2 Media Edition---$250 Motorola MOTO XT316--$250 Motorola XPRT----$250 Motorola XOOM MZ604--$250 Motorola XOOM MZ601--$240 Motorola XOOM MZ600--$230 Motorola ATRIX 4G--$230 Motorola QUENCH $220 Motorola XT720 MOTOROI $210 Motorola BACKFLIP $215 Motorola XT800 $205 LG Phones LG Spectrum---$255 LG Optimus Big LU6800--$250 LG Phoenix--$250 LG Thrive---$245 LG Thrill 4G---$235 LG T315-----$230 LG Optimus 3D P920--$220 LG KH5200 Andro-$220 LG GS290 Cookie Fresh-$210 LG GW820 eXpo - $200 LG GT540 $200 LG GD510 Pop $200 Video Games Console: Playstation: APPLE LAPTOPS Apple Macbook Air.$400usd Apple Macbook Pro MC240LL/A ..$385usd Apple Macbook Pro MB990LL/A $400usd Apple MacBook (MA700LL/A) Mac Notebook$410usd Apple MacBook Pro (MA611LL/A) Notebook$390usd Apple MacBook (MA254LL/A) Mac Notebook$300usd Apple iBook G3 (M7698LL/A) Mac Notebook..$395usd Apple MacBook Pro (MA609LL/A) Notebook$420usd Apple MacBook Pro (MA600LLA) Notebook$410usd Apple MacBook Pro (MA610LL/A) Notebook$420usd Apple Macbook Pro (885909119400) Notebook..$415usd Other: Canon EOS 5D Mark II --- $1000 Others :: Canon EOS 5D Mark II .... $1000 HP ENVY 14 Beats edition series...... $999.99 Bose Lifestyle 235 Home Entertainment System ........... $1,599 Bose Lifestyle V25 Home Entertainment System ........... $1,610 Bose Lifestyle V35 Home Entertainment System ........... $2,200 Playstation 3 Slim 320GB ........................ $299 Pioneer CDJ-1000MK3/DJM-800 Package with Coffin Case ...... $1,548 Samsung 55" (138cm) Series 9 3D Full HD LED TV - UA55C9000 ... $2,000 Sony NEX FS10 ................................................$4199 Sony HXR-NX5U - PAL - NXCAM Digital HD Video Camcorder ..... $1699 Apple MacBook Air - Core 2 Duo 2.13 GHz - 13.3 ------ 400.00 Kindly Contact us for more product that are not listed above. Note : Bulk purchase (3units above) Prices are negotiable. ETC CONTACT EMAILS & SALES INQUIRY: v2bcomltd(at)gmail.com V2bcommunicationslimited(at)hotmail.co.uk SIGNED Mgt 2013 V2B COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED All Rights Reserved. Products carry 1 year international warranty . Powered by V2B COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED Copyright 2013, V2B COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403718#403718 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
From: "dgaldrich" <dgaldrich(at)embarqmail.com>
Date: Jul 01, 2013
Based on everyone's inputs and logic, I will use a normal aircraft style contactor for the battery. The aircraft is a Pietenpol with a Corvair engine and my arms are not long enough to reach the battery in the engine compartment from the rear cockpit. I would be interested in a low current one if it could handle the starter current when closed. The aircraft will have LED lights/strobes, Microair radio and transponder, individual electric instruments, and conventional ignition. No landing light or heated pitot. I'm figuring a maximum of 10 amps so the dynamo has enough output to "hold" a contactor in addition to the normal load. The 680 battery was chosen for no better reason than it works in motorcycles and ATVs. Would love to use something lighter if it will turn over the engine reliably. I am not primarily concerned with a long endurance capability. Any kind of electrical issue, or mechanical for that matter, is a land at the nearest suitable field signal and I fly on the east coast where 30 minutes of battery power will generally get you on the ground, even at Pietenpol airspeeds. The Corvair uses a Subaru starter which has an almost zero weld closed failure rate so I'm still thinking of running a large wire from the battery contactor to the big lug on the starter and using the starter solenoid as an independent way to turn the engine over. Two less junctions in the high current path. Thanks Bob and others for the information and advice. Dave Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403742#403742 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 02, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
At 04:30 PM 7/1/2013, you wrote: > > >Based on everyone's inputs and logic, I will use a normal aircraft >style contactor for the battery. The aircraft is a Pietenpol with a >Corvair engine and my arms are not long enough to reach the battery >in the engine compartment from the rear cockpit. I would be >interested in a low current one if it could handle the starter >current when closed. It's easy to craft a contactor-coil-current-manager. See: http://tinyurl.com/bolkoyc Contactors like the EV series from Tyco will do something similar . . . although probably in a micro-cotroller. >The aircraft will have LED lights/strobes, Microair radio and >transponder, individual electric instruments, and conventional >ignition. No landing light or heated pitot. I'm figuring a maximum >of 10 amps so the dynamo has enough output to "hold" a contactor in >addition to the normal load. Okay, you're not 'hurting' for energy under normal conditions. A e-bus alternate feed path that bypasses the contactor could be crafted for your panel bus. > The 680 battery was chosen for no better reason than it works in > motorcycles and ATVs. Would love to use something lighter if it > will turn over the engine reliably. The 680 will crank an IO720 . . . there are many batteries will crank the Corvair engine. > I am not primarily concerned with a long endurance > capability. Any kind of electrical issue, or mechanical for that > matter, is a land at the nearest suitable field signal and I fly on > the east coast where 30 minutes of battery power will generally get > you on the ground, even at Pietenpol airspeeds. Do you plan to carry a hand-held? >The Corvair uses a Subaru starter which has an almost zero weld >closed failure rate so I'm still thinking of running a large wire >from the battery contactor to the big lug on the starter and using >the starter solenoid as an independent way to turn the engine >over. Two less junctions in the high current path. Your cranking path stresses are no worse and probably much less than those for tens of thousands of single engine airplanes. Modifications to the legacy battery/battery-contactor/starter-contactor/starter configuration has no calculable return on investement. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Boeing switches
From: "woxofswa" <woxof(at)aol.com>
Date: Jul 02, 2013
Greetings. I am trying to infuse a couple of little touches of my day job into my RV-10 project. To that end, I have purchased the yoke of a B737 and cut off the uprights to use as the stick grips of my -10. I would obviously like to the Boeing pitch trim, PTT, and A/P disconnect switches if possible. The latter two should be easy, but the Pitch trim might be a problem. Boeing uses a two part switch mechanism and there are four leads that come from the module. (http://s125.photobucket.com/user/myronnelson/media/photo_zpsfd9c6ca8.jpg.html) What I am trying to do is interface these four leads into a Safety Trim three lead connection. Keeping the split switch capability would be okay, but not necessary. Any comments or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. -------- Myron Nelson Mesa, AZ Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. Finishing kit and FWF kit in progress. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403817#403817 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 02, 2013
From: Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com>
Subject: Re: Boeing switches
Myron, Without the logic backing up how this is connected its difficult to suggest how to use both switches. I would connect common ground (pin 7 I think) to WHT/Vxx (connected to A1 & A3) and the trim up/down inputs to B3 (WHT/GRN I think) and to B1 (WHT/BLU/ORN?), leaving the WHT/RED not connected. You would be using the top switch only, but I don't think that's a problem in service. Regards, Peter On 02/07/2013 18:50, woxofswa wrote: > > Greetings. I am trying to infuse a couple of little touches of my day job into my RV-10 project. To that end, I have purchased the yoke of a B737 and cut off the uprights to use as the stick grips of my -10. > > I would obviously like to the Boeing pitch trim, PTT, and A/P disconnect switches if possible. > > The latter two should be easy, but the Pitch trim might be a problem. Boeing uses a two part switch mechanism and there are four leads that come from the module. > > (http://s125.photobucket.com/user/myronnelson/media/photo_zpsfd9c6ca8.jpg.html) > > What I am trying to do is interface these four leads into a Safety Trim three lead connection. Keeping the split switch capability would be okay, but not necessary. > > Any comments or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. > > -------- > Myron Nelson > Mesa, AZ > Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. Finishing kit and FWF kit in progress. > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403817#403817 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Good deal on handy bench supply
From: "nuckollsr" <bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Date: Jul 02, 2013
Given the generally upstanding nature of eBay merchants and buyers, it's unlikely that the power supply you bought is faulty. Here's Mastech's page on that model http://tinyurl.com/lqh7hea At the bottom you'll find an e-mail link. Drop them a line, tell them what model of power supply you have and that you want a copy of the user's manual. I think they'll tell you were to download it . . . or attach it directly to their reply. Bob . . . Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403837#403837 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Boeing switches
From: Eric Page <edpav8r(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Jul 02, 2013
Myron, What is the pinout of the Safety Trim 3-lead connection (i.e. what inputs does it require from the switch)? I presume there's a common ground and one pin each for trim nose up and trim nose down. Can you confirm? Can we get a clearer photo of the switch module legend? It may be possible to accomplish what you want with relays, or some 4000-series logic ICs, or a simple micro-controller. I presume your preferred outcome is to retain the "both switches must be closed" logic for the trim switches, as in the Boeing. Eric On Jul 2, 2013, at 12:50 PM, "woxofswa" wrote: > Greetings. I am trying to infuse a couple of little touches of my day job into my RV-10 project. To that end, I have purchased the yoke of a B737 and cut off the uprights to use as the stick grips of my -10. > > I would obviously like to the Boeing pitch trim, PTT, and A/P disconnect switches if possible. > > The latter two should be easy, but the Pitch trim might be a problem. Boeing uses a two part switch mechanism and there are four leads that come from the module. > > (http://s125.photobucket.com/user/myronnelson/media/photo_zpsfd9c6ca8.jpg.html) > > What I am trying to do is interface these four leads into a Safety Trim three lead connection. Keeping the split switch capability would be okay, but not necessary. > > Any comments or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. > > -------- > Myron Nelson > Mesa, AZ > Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. Finishing kit and FWF kit in progress. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Boeing switches
From: Eric Page <edpav8r(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Jul 02, 2013
Myron, After looking at this a little more, I have to agree with Peter. I was definitely over-thinking it! The "both switches must be closed" logic is internal to the module. They simply have the two thumb switches wired in series. Peter's advice below should work. Eric On Jul 2, 2013, at 2:35 PM, Peter Pengilly wrote: > > Myron, > > Without the logic backing up how this is connected its difficult to suggest how to use both switches. I would connect common ground (pin 7 I think) to WHT/Vxx (connected to A1 & A3) and the trim up/down inputs to B3 (WHT/GRN I think) and to B1 (WHT/BLU/ORN?), leaving the WHT/RED not connected. You would be using the top switch only, but I don't think that's a problem in service. > > Regards, Peter ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 02, 2013
From: Jeff Page <jpx(at)qenesis.com>
Subject: Wire strippers
I bought a pair of cheap wire strippers to see how good/bad they were. They appear to be a far east clone of the Ideal Stripmaster, and the mounting is such that the Ideal blades would fit. They turned out to be as cheap as they could be made, but still work. I had to take them apart to bend a spring to make them open in the correct sequence so the wire doesn't get caught after stripping. I would not recommend them for someone doing a lot of wiring - say an airplane ;-) but they are better than the kind that has a single flat blade that just rips the insulation. The die handles 8, 10, 12, 14, 18 gauge wire, so it is missing sizes commonly used for aircraft. I bought them from Princess Auto (Canadian equivalent of Harbor Freight) for $4.99. They are not a regularly stocked item, so when they are gone, they are gone. My local store had 17 pairs in stock after being advertised starting on June 25th. The product number is 8276172. http://www.princessauto.com Jeff Page Dream Aircraft Tundra #10 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 03, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Boeing switches
At 10:11 PM 7/2/2013, you wrote: > >Myron, > >After looking at this a little more, I have to agree with Peter. I >was definitely over-thinking it! > >The "both switches must be closed" logic is internal to the >module. They simply have the two thumb switches wired in series. > >Peter's advice below should work. > >Eric > The split trim switch and the recommended wiring is a prophylactic against trim runaway caused by failure of a single switch - i.e. both switches CAN be operated as a single switch for normal operations but BOTH switches have to fail to produce a runaway condition. This technique has been used on a host of electric trim systems. Further the switches can be operated independently of each other for pre-flight check of integrity for the opposite switch. Wiring as recommended honors the legacy failure mode effects analysis which I've discussed in detail here. http://tinyurl.com/lpvth8d Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Boeing switches
From: "woxofswa" <woxof(at)aol.com>
Date: Jul 03, 2013
Thanks for the input. I'll try the suggested method. The Safety Trim gives runaway protection so I'm not so concerned about maintaining that from the switch itself. I haven't delved into the PTT or A/P disco yet, but hopefully those should interface easily. -------- Myron Nelson Mesa, AZ Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. FWF complete. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403873#403873 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 03, 2013
From: Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
That is what I did. Not zero risk but not something I worry about. We always check for normal charging voltage after start and before takeoff which should catch a failed on starter solenoid. I think it is likely that turning off the battery contactor would stop a stuck on on starter at least one time but I've never tested that. I've seen a lot of grief when conversions try to "improve" something over the tried and true method used in thousands of automobiles. The subaru starter was not designed to run with an external starter contactor. If you add the additonal starter contactor, how often would you test it for having failed closed anyway. I like simple and I like most modern automotive technology - well up to a couple of years ago anyway... Ken >> The Corvair uses a Subaru starter which has an almost zero weld closed >> failure rate so I'm still thinking of running a large wire from the >> battery contactor to the big lug on the starter and using the starter >> solenoid as an independent way to turn the engine over. Two less >> junctions in the high current path. > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
From: "dgaldrich" <dgaldrich(at)embarqmail.com>
Date: Jul 03, 2013
I agree. It seems pointless to have 2 solenoids operating at the same time. The other issue is that I believe the Subaru solenoid moves the gear before the contactor part puts juice to the motor brushes. An aircraft type contactor would do both at the same time rather than sequentially. Have not dismantled one so I may be in error. Dave Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403903#403903 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Boeing switches
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Date: Jul 04, 2013
My two cents: Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems boneheaded, and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree review. Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem from occurring. Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good engineering. -------- Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge, MA 01550 (508) 764-2072 emjones(at)charter.net Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403912#403912 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 04, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
At 07:13 PM 7/3/2013, you wrote: > > >I agree. It seems pointless to have 2 solenoids operating at the >same time. The other issue is that I believe the Subaru solenoid >moves the gear before the contactor part puts juice to the motor >brushes. An aircraft type contactor would do both at the same time >rather than sequentially. Have not dismantled one so I may be in error. None of applications of an external contactor proposed for modern starters "bypasses" functionality of the built in solenoid/contactor. The starter's built in solenoids do engage the pinion gear before closing electrical connection for the starter motor. Variants to select from when using these modern starters causes the builder to decide whether the built in contactor is energized by the panel mounted, START switch -OR- energized through a more robust device. There is a problem to be solved when the panel mounted starter control is used to energize the starter's built in contactor. Unlike legacy 'starter solenoids' controlling starters with Bendix drives, the modern pinion engagement solenoids have a very high coil current demand during the first few milliseconds of being energized. See: http://tinyurl.com/op5cs2g Failure to recognize this difference in solenoid/contator performance caused a kerfuffle over burned start switch contacts on the ACS-510 key swicch (clone of legacy Bendix/Gerdes). ACS now sells a diode with two terminals applied. Emacs! A critical need to install this diode across the starter contactor engagement coil arose from the alarming rate at which start contacts in the key switch were destroyed by overstress when the legacy starter/external contactor combo was replaced with a light weight version with combination solenoid/ contactors. Many cars suffered similar failure modes in their key-start switches. SB92-01 from ACS originally place thier diode across the switch contacts . . . wrong place. It was corrected in a subsequent revision. See http://tinyurl.com/nva2xdy B&C adopted the philosophy of jumpering the starter solenoid coil right to the fat-wire terminal on the starter . . . and controlling power to the starter though a modern, starter contactor WITH built in coil suppression diode. The external contactor's inrush demands on the start switch are a small fraction of that for direct control. This philosophy posed a new problem when PM motor starters began to show up on the airplane. PM motors have a pronounced counter-emf during spin-down after the power is removed. This would delay disengagement of the pinion gear and was commonly called "starter run on" . . . in fact it was better called "delayed disengagement". Starters with wound fields (B&C and some others) do not suffer this indignity and function well with the engagement solenoid jumpered directly to the starter's fat-wire terminal. In ANY case, the builder's design goals should include providing a source of solenoid engagement power that (1) is supplied through a low impedance source (short and fatter than usual wires) and (2) avoid running this power through the panel mounted start switch. If the starter is a PM version, the builder can take advantage of the "I" terminal on many modern starter cotactors and use it to SUPPLY current to the engagement solenoid. This provides for instant removal of coil power when the starter switch is opened and prevents 'delayed disengagement'. In this case, the builder would do well to have diode coil suppression on BOTH the external contactor coil AND the solenoid/contactor coil on the starter. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 04, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Boeing switches
At 07:29 AM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > >My two cents: > >Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems >boneheaded, and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree >review. Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem from occurring. Whether or not a problem was demonstrably prevented is irrelevant to the reliability study. Good FMEA mitigation assumes that the part WILL fail. Working out a logical means by which single failures might go undetected for no more than a single tank full of fuel has been a time-honored legacy design goal. >Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good engineering. they are not used in PARALLEL. In the Boeing case, they are in series with one side controlling direction, the other side in SERIES controlling power. Each side can be explored for functionality in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Beech (and many others) uses the two spdt switches to handle one half of a PM motor UP-OFF- DN switching duty. Again, both sides easily evaluated in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Lear (and many others) uses the 'coolie hat' to drive relays that DID offer a possibility for runaway-by- sticking. But their systems architecture included a wheel-master-disconnect that removed power from all trim systems along with the autopilot. I AM aware of trim runaways in aircraft fitted with wheel master disconnects that would not have happened if the airplane had been fitted with the split trim switch where the WMD switch provided the mitigation. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <berkut13(at)berkut13.com>
Subject: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector
Date: Jul 04, 2013
Can someone point me to the part number/source for a replacement 90-degree, bulkhead, slide-on, coax connector used on the Narco AT-150 transponder tray? Any of the usual suspects (Mouser, Digi-Key, Allied, etc) carry them? Thanks, James ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com>
Subject: Re: Boeing switches
Date: Jul 04, 2013
Good argument Bob.... I use a switch on the panel to power the trim, but that may be a bit far away for a quick reaction, before the trim lurks all the way to the end. Jay -----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: 04 July 2013 04:29 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches --> At 07:29 AM 7/4/2013, you wrote: >--> > >My two cents: > >Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems boneheaded, >and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree review. >Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem from occurring. Whether or not a problem was demonstrably prevented is irrelevant to the reliability study. Good FMEA mitigation assumes that the part WILL fail. Working out a logical means by which single failures might go undetected for no more than a single tank full of fuel has been a time-honored legacy design goal. >Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good engineering. they are not used in PARALLEL. In the Boeing case, they are in series with one side controlling direction, the other side in SERIES controlling power. Each side can be explored for functionality in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Beech (and many others) uses the two spdt switches to handle one half of a PM motor UP-OFF- DN switching duty. Again, both sides easily evaluated in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Lear (and many others) uses the 'coolie hat' to drive relays that DID offer a possibility for runaway-by- sticking. But their systems architecture included a wheel-master-disconnect that removed power from all trim systems along with the autopilot. I AM aware of trim runaways in aircraft fitted with wheel master disconnects that would not have happened if the airplane had been fitted with the split trim switch where the WMD switch provided the mitigation. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michael Burbidge <mburbidg(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. Master/Battery and Alt
Field...
Date: Jul 04, 2013
I'm sure I read a discussion of this question somewhere but can't find it. I'm building an RV-9A, basic day/night VFR. I'm using the Basic Day/Night VFR system diagram available from B&C website. It is almost identical to the Z-11 diagram in Bob's book. One difference is that the Z-11 uses a 2 poll 3-throw switch (2-10) for the master, so that the alternator can be switched on after start. The Basic VFR diagram from B&C uses a 2 poll 2 throw switch (2-3) so that the alternator field is on during start. What are the advantages of isolating the alternator field during startup? My airplane has a B&C 40 amp alternator. Which approach would you recommend? Thanks, Michael- ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Low voltage indicator with dual alternators
From: "donjohnston" <don(at)numa.aero>
Date: Jul 04, 2013
I'm going to have a 60a primary and a 20a secondary alternator with B&C LR3C and LS1A voltage regulators respectively. If in the event of a primary alternator failure, and I switch to the secondary, will the primary low voltage warning light (off of LR3C, pin 5) remain illuminated? Or will switching off that alternator open the low voltage circuit? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403960#403960 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 04, 2013
From: Bill Putney <billp(at)wwpc.com>
Subject: Re: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector
It's TED 9-30-10 connector. These are solder on connectors and have the lowest profile (depth-wise). http://hangar-10.com/products/Tray-Mount-Rf-Antenna-Connect.html You should check with them to make sure a snap ring is included or you may have to buy it separately. There's also a DBA-600 that is a connector like you want with a female BNC so you don't have a cable attached to your tray. You put a BNC on the cable and connect it to this adapter. About the same price as the 9-30-10 but of course you have to do the BNC too. http://hangar-10.com/products/Bnc-Tray-Adapter-W%7B47%7DSnap-Ring.html Bill On 7/4/13 10:59 AM, berkut13(at)berkut13.com wrote: > Can someone point me to the part number/source for a replacement > 90-degree, > bulkhead, slide-on, coax connector used on the Narco AT-150 transponder > tray? Any of the usual suspects (Mouser, Digi-Key, Allied, etc) carry > them? > > Thanks, > James > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 04, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Boeing switches
At 01:05 PM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > >Good argument Bob.... I use a switch on the panel to power the trim, but >that may be a bit far away for a quick reaction, before the trim lurks all >the way to the end. You would do well to deduce the severity of a trim runaway. Is the airplane controllable with full trim either up or down? How fast does the trim run with respect to pilot reaction times needed to deal with a runaway? Are there stops or limits to trim excursion necessary for the full range of CG envelopes or will the system produce more pitch authority than would ever be necessary for normal operations? In a Lear, at Mach cruise, the system is manually failed and the pilot is obligated to keep hands in the lap for 3 seconds. Only then can he move to deal with the situation. After achieving a stable, safe condition, recorded data is analyzed for busting limits on attitude, altitude and airspeed excursions. The exercise is repeated and trim speeds then adjusted until a sweat-free, runaway recovery is assured. The trim systems I've seen in some TC aircraft are so slow that unexpected trims under worst case conditions are no big deal. But what's the story for YOUR airplane? Yes, if trim speeds are brisk, trim authority high and you have good reason for not reducing them, then some form of inarguable override is indicated. Instructing the pilot to pull a breaker for taming a trim runaway is generally not acceptable . . . even panel mounted switche situated amongst other switches will get you frowns from the human factors guys. At the same time, find out just how much risk is associated with an uncontrolled trim event and see if that can be engineered out as opposed to stacking emergency ops hardware on top of the design. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <berkut13(at)berkut13.com>
Subject: Re: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector
Date: Jul 04, 2013
Excellent! Exactly what I needed. Thanks. From: Bill Putney Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2013 4:57 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector It's TED 9-30-10 connector. These are solder on connectors and have the lowest profile (depth-wise). http://hangar-10.com/products/Tray-Mount-Rf-Antenna-Connect.html You should check with them to make sure a snap ring is included or you may have to buy it separately. There's also a DBA-600 that is a connector like you want with a female BNC so you don't have a cable attached to your tray. You put a BNC on the cable and connect it to this adapter. About the same price as the 9-30-10 but of course you have to do the BNC too. http://hangar-10.com/products/Bnc-Tray-Adapter-W%7B47%7DSnap-Ring.html Bill On 7/4/13 10:59 AM, berkut13(at)berkut13.com wrote: Can someone point me to the part number/source for a replacement 90-degree, bulkhead, slide-on, coax connector used on the Narco AT-150 transponder tray? Any of the usual suspects (Mouser, Digi-Key, Allied, etc) carry them? Thanks, James ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Low voltage indicator with dual alternators
At 04:47 PM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > >I'm going to have a 60a primary and a 20a secondary alternator with >B&C LR3C and LS1A voltage regulators respectively. > >If in the event of a primary alternator failure, and I switch to the >secondary, will the primary low voltage warning light (off of LR3C, >pin 5) remain illuminated? Or will switching off that alternator >open the low voltage circuit? No, the OV and LV sense lines along with power to run those systems is independent of the regulator circuits. The LV warning systems will function whether or not the alternator is powered. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. Master/Battery and
Alt Field... At 02:16 PM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > >I'm sure I read a discussion of this question somewhere but can't find it. > >I'm building an RV-9A, basic day/night VFR. I'm using the Basic >Day/Night VFR system diagram available from B&C website. It is >almost identical to the Z-11 diagram in Bob's book. One difference >is that the Z-11 uses a 2 poll 3-throw switch (2-10) for the master, >so that the alternator can be switched on after start. The Basic VFR >diagram from B&C uses a 2 poll 2 throw switch (2-3) so that the >alternator field is on during start. > >What are the advantages of isolating the alternator field during >startup? My airplane has a B&C 40 amp alternator. Which approach >would you recommend? None. The choice of switches depends on how you plan to disable the alternator during battery only operations. If you have a field supply breaker that can be pulled, then the simple 2 pole, 2 throw switch is fine. If you've gone the crowbar ov protection route then the breaker should be present. Alternatively, the 3-position switch duplicates the legacy control philosophy that allows a battery to be turned on without the alternator . . . like the split rocker switch. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: cardinalnsb <cardinalnsb(at)aol.com>
Subject: solenoid wiring question
Re figure 5 of Bob's diagram of adding a starter contactor upstream of the original starter solenoid: Is there any reason not to wire the fat wire to the starter side of the old original starter solenoid, with a jumper from the fat wire terminal back to the old starter solenoid energizer terminal. The point would be to eliminate the high current having to flow through the old starter solenoid disc, since the high current is being controlled by the new upstream starter contactor. Thanks, Skip Simpson In a message dated 07/05/13 03:12:33 Eastern Daylight Time, aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com writes: * ================================================== Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive ================================================== Today's complete AeroElectric-List Digest can also be found in either of the two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version of the AeroElectric-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor such as Notepad or with a web browser. HTML Version: http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 13-07-04&Archive=AeroElectric Text Version: http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 13-07-04&Archive=AeroElectric ================================================ EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive ================================================ ---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 07/04/13: 10 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 05:32 AM - Re: Boeing switches (Eric M. Jones) 2. 06:20 AM - Re: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 3. 07:29 AM - Re: Re: Boeing switches (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 4. 11:00 AM - Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector () 5. 11:05 AM - Re: Re: Boeing switches (Jay Hyde) 6. 12:17 PM - Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. Master/Battery and Alt Field... (Michael Burbidge) 7. 02:48 PM - Low voltage indicator with dual alternators (donjohnston) 8. 02:57 PM - Re: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector (Bill Putney) 9. 03:22 PM - Re: Re: Boeing switches (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 10. 03:42 PM - Re: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector () ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> My two cents: Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems boneheaded, and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree review. Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem from occurring. Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good engineering. -------- Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge, MA 01550 (508) 764-2072 emjones(at)charter.net Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403912#403912 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions At 07:13 PM 7/3/2013, you wrote: > > >I agree. It seems pointless to have 2 solenoids operating at the >same time. The other issue is that I believe the Subaru solenoid >moves the gear before the contactor part puts juice to the motor >brushes. An aircraft type contactor would do both at the same time >rather than sequentially. Have not dismantled one so I may be in error. None of applications of an external contactor proposed for modern starters "bypasses" functionality of the built in solenoid/contactor. The starter's built in solenoids do engage the pinion gear before closing electrical connection for the starter motor. Variants to select from when using these modern starters causes the builder to decide whether the built in contactor is energized by the panel mounted, START switch -OR- energized through a more robust device. There is a problem to be solved when the panel mounted starter control is used to energize the starter's built in contactor. Unlike legacy 'starter solenoids' controlling starters with Bendix drives, the modern pinion engagement solenoids have a very high coil current demand during the first few milliseconds of being energized. See: http://tinyurl.com/op5cs2g Failure to recognize this difference in solenoid/contator performance caused a kerfuffle over burned start switch contacts on the ACS-510 key swicch (clone of legacy Bendix/Gerdes). ACS now sells a diode with two terminals applied. Emacs! A critical need to install this diode across the starter contactor engagement coil arose from the alarming rate at which start contacts in the key switch were destroyed by overstress when the legacy starter/external contactor combo was replaced with a light weight version with combination solenoid/ contactors. Many cars suffered similar failure modes in their key-start switches. SB92-01 from ACS originally place thier diode across the switch contacts . . . wrong place. It was corrected in a subsequent revision. See http://tinyurl.com/nva2xdy B&C adopted the philosophy of jumpering the starter solenoid coil right to the fat-wire terminal on the starter . . . and controlling power to the starter though a modern, starter contactor WITH built in coil suppression diode. The external contactor's inrush demands on the start switch are a small fraction of that for direct control. This philosophy posed a new problem when PM motor starters began to show up on the airplane. PM motors have a pronounced counter-emf during spin-down after the power is removed. This would delay disengagement of the pinion gear and was commonly called "starter run on" . . . in fact it was better called "delayed disengagement". Starters with wound fields (B&C and some others) do not suffer this indignity and function well with the engagement solenoid jumpered directly to the starter's fat-wire terminal. In ANY case, the builder's design goals should include providing a source of solenoid engagement power that (1) is supplied through a low impedance source (short and fatter than usual wires) and (2) avoid running this power through the panel mounted start switch. If the starter is a PM version, the builder can take advantage of the "I" terminal on many modern starter cotactors and use it to SUPPLY current to the engagement solenoid. This provides for instant removal of coil power when the starter switch is opened and prevents 'delayed disengagement'. In this case, the builder would do well to have diode coil suppression on BOTH the external contactor coil AND the solenoid/contactor coil on the starter. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches At 07:29 AM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > >My two cents: > >Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems >boneheaded, and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree >review. Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem from occurring. Whether or not a problem was demonstrably prevented is irrelevant to the reliability study. Good FMEA mitigation assumes that the part WILL fail. Working out a logical means by which single failures might go undetected for no more than a single tank full of fuel has been a time-honored legacy design goal. >Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good engineering. they are not used in PARALLEL. In the Boeing case, they are in series with one side controlling direction, the other side in SERIES controlling power. Each side can be explored for functionality in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Beech (and many others) uses the two spdt switches to handle one half of a PM motor UP-OFF- DN switching duty. Again, both sides easily evaluated in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Lear (and many others) uses the 'coolie hat' to drive relays that DID offer a possibility for runaway-by- sticking. But their systems architecture included a wheel-master-disconnect that removed power from all trim systems along with the autopilot. I AM aware of trim runaways in aircraft fitted with wheel master disconnects that would not have happened if the airplane had been fitted with the split trim switch where the WMD switch provided the mitigation. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ From: <berkut13(at)berkut13.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector Can someone point me to the part number/source for a replacement 90-degree, bulkhead, slide-on, coax connector used on the Narco AT-150 transponder tray? Any of the usual suspects (Mouser, Digi-Key, Allied, etc) carry them? Thanks, James ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ From: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches Good argument Bob.... I use a switch on the panel to power the trim, but that may be a bit far away for a quick reaction, before the trim lurks all the way to the end. Jay -----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: 04 July 2013 04:29 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches --> At 07:29 AM 7/4/2013, you wrote: >--> > >My two cents: > >Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems boneheaded, >and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree review. >Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem from occurring. Whether or not a problem was demonstrably prevented is irrelevant to the reliability study. Good FMEA mitigation assumes that the part WILL fail. Working out a logical means by which single failures might go undetected for no more than a single tank full of fuel has been a time-honored legacy design goal. >Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good engineering. they are not used in PARALLEL. In the Boeing case, they are in series with one side controlling direction, the other side in SERIES controlling power. Each side can be explored for functionality in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Beech (and many others) uses the two spdt switches to handle one half of a PM motor UP-OFF- DN switching duty. Again, both sides easily evaluated in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Lear (and many others) uses the 'coolie hat' to drive relays that DID offer a possibility for runaway-by- sticking. But their systems architecture included a wheel-master-disconnect that removed power from all trim systems along with the autopilot. I AM aware of trim runaways in aircraft fitted with wheel master disconnects that would not have happened if the airplane had been fitted with the split trim switch where the WMD switch provided the mitigation. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ From: Michael Burbidge <mburbidg(at)gmail.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. Master/Battery and Alt Field... I'm sure I read a discussion of this question somewhere but can't find it. I'm building an RV-9A, basic day/night VFR. I'm using the Basic Day/Night VFR system diagram available from B&C website. It is almost identical to the Z-11 diagram in Bob's book. One difference is that the Z-11 uses a 2 poll 3-throw switch (2-10) for the master, so that the alternator can be switched on after start. The Basic VFR diagram from B&C uses a 2 poll 2 throw switch (2-3) so that the alternator field is on during start. What are the advantages of isolating the alternator field during startup? My airplane has a B&C 40 amp alternator. Which approach would you recommend? Thanks, Michael- ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Subject: AeroElectric-List: Low voltage indicator with dual alternators From: "donjohnston" <don(at)numa.aero> I'm going to have a 60a primary and a 20a secondary alternator with B&C LR3C and LS1A voltage regulators respectively. If in the event of a primary alternator failure, and I switch to the secondary, will the primary low voltage warning light (off of LR3C, pin 5) remain illuminated? Or will switching off that alternator open the low voltage circuit? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403960#403960 ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ From: Bill Putney <billp(at)wwpc.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector It's TED 9-30-10 connector. These are solder on connectors and have the lowest profile (depth-wise). http://hangar-10.com/products/Tray-Mount-Rf-Antenna-Connect.html You should check with them to make sure a snap ring is included or you may have to buy it separately. There's also a DBA-600 that is a connector like you want with a female BNC so you don't have a cable attached to your tray. You put a BNC on the cable and connect it to this adapter. About the same price as the 9-30-10 but of course you have to do the BNC too. http://hangar-10.com/products/Bnc-Tray-Adapter-W%7B47%7DSnap-Ring.html Bill On 7/4/13 10:59 AM, berkut13(at)berkut13.com wrote: > Can someone point me to the part number/source for a replacement > 90-degree, > bulkhead, slide-on, coax connector used on the Narco AT-150 transponder > tray? Any of the usual suspects (Mouser, Digi-Key, Allied, etc) carry > them? > > Thanks, > James > * > > > * ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches At 01:05 PM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > >Good argument Bob.... I use a switch on the panel to power the trim, but >that may be a bit far away for a quick reaction, before the trim lurks all >the way to the end. You would do well to deduce the severity of a trim runaway. Is the airplane controllable with full trim either up or down? How fast does the trim run with respect to pilot reaction times needed to deal with a runaway? Are there stops or limits to trim excursion necessary for the full range of CG envelopes or will the system produce more pitch authority than would ever be necessary for normal operations? In a Lear, at Mach cruise, the system is manually failed and the pilot is obligated to keep hands in the lap for 3 seconds. Only then can he move to deal with the situation. After achieving a stable, safe condition, recorded data is analyzed for busting limits on attitude, altitude and airspeed excursions. The exercise is repeated and trim speeds then adjusted until a sweat-free, runaway recovery is assured. The trim systems I've seen in some TC aircraft are so slow that unexpected trims under worst case conditions are no big deal. But what's the story for YOUR airplane? Yes, if trim speeds are brisk, trim authority high and you have good reason for not reducing them, then some form of inarguable override is indicated. Instructing the pilot to pull a breaker for taming a trim runaway is generally not acceptable . . . even panel mounted switche situated amongst other switches will get you frowns from the human factors guys. At the same time, find out just how much risk is associated with an uncontrolled trim event and see if that can be engineered out as opposed to stacking emergency ops hardware on top of the design. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ From: <berkut13(at)berkut13.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector Excellent! Exactly what I needed. Thanks. From: Bill Putney Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2013 4:57 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector It's TED 9-30-10 connector. These are solder on connectors and have the lowest profile (depth-wise). http://hangar-10.com/products/Tray-Mount-Rf-Antenna-Connect.html You should check with them to make sure a snap ring is included or you may have to buy it separately. There's also a DBA-600 that is a connector like you want with a female BNC so you don't have a cable attached to your tray. You put a BNC on the cable and connect it to this adapter. About the same price as the 9-30-10 but of course you have to do the BNC too. http://hangar-10.com/products/Bnc-Tray-Adapter-W%7B47%7DSnap-Ring.html Bill On 7/4/13 10:59 AM, berkut13(at)berkut13.com wrote: Can someone point me to the part number/source for a replacement 90-degree, bulkhead, slide-on, coax connector used on the Narco AT-150 transponder tray? Any of the usual suspects (Mouser, Digi-Key, Allied, etc) carry them? Thanks, James ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. Master/Battery and
Alt Field...
From: Michael Burbidge <mburbidg(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jul 05, 2013
I'm using the LR3C-14 external regulator and fuse blocks from B&C. My field supply includes a fuse in my fuse block but I cannot pull the fuse during flight. It sounds like I should either move the field supply to a breaker on the panel that I can pull, or use the 3-position switch. Another question. All of my 250 hours of flight are in a 1959 C172, which has a generator. There is a master switch with two positions. My question is under what conditions would one operate "battery only"? Thanks for the help, Michael- On Jul 5, 2013, at 6:08 AM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote: > > At 02:16 PM 7/4/2013, you wrote: >> >> I'm sure I read a discussion of this question somewhere but can't find it. >> >> I'm building an RV-9A, basic day/night VFR. I'm using the Basic Day/Night VFR system diagram available from B&C website. It is almost identical to the Z-11 diagram in Bob's book. One difference is that the Z-11 uses a 2 poll 3-throw switch (2-10) for the master, so that the alternator can be switched on after start. The Basic VFR diagram from B&C uses a 2 poll 2 throw switch (2-3) so that the alternator field is on during start. >> >> What are the advantages of isolating the alternator field during startup? My airplane has a B&C 40 amp alternator. Which approach would you recommend? > > None. The choice of switches depends on > how you plan to disable the alternator during > battery only operations. If you have a field > supply breaker that can be pulled, then the > simple 2 pole, 2 throw switch is fine. If > you've gone the crowbar ov protection route > then the breaker should be present. > > Alternatively, the 3-position switch duplicates > the legacy control philosophy that allows a > battery to be turned on without the alternator . . . > like the split rocker switch. > > > > Bob . . . > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: solenoid wiring question
Date: Jul 05, 2013
That would engage the starter motor before the solenoid engages the flywheel with the starter drive gear. It could cause a mess! B2 _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of cardinalnsb Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 12:28 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: solenoid wiring question Re figure 5 of Bob's diagram of adding a starter contactor upstream of the original starter solenoid: Is there any reason not to wire the fat wire to the starter side of the old original starter solenoid, with a jumper from the fat wire terminal back to the old starter solenoid energizer terminal. The point would be to eliminate the high current having to flow through the old starter solenoid disc, since the high current is being controlled by the new upstream starter contactor. Thanks, Skip Simpson In a message dated 07/05/13 03:12:33 Eastern Daylight Time, aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com writes: * ================================================== Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive ================================================== Today's complete AeroElectric-List Digest can also be found in either of the two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version of the AeroElectric-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor such as Notepad or with a web browser. HTML Version: http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 13-07-04&Archive=AeroElectric Text Version: http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 2013-07-04&Archive=AeroElectric ============================ ==================== EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive ================================================ ---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 07/04/13: 10 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 05:32 AM - Re: Boeing switches (Eric M. Jones) 2. 06:20 AM - Re: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) ; 3. 07:29 AM - Re: Re: Boeing switches (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 4. 11:00 AM - Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector () 5. 11:05 AM - Re: Re: Boeing switches (Jay Hyde) 6. 12:17 PM - Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. Master/Battery and Alt Field... (Michael Burbidge) 7. 02:48 PM - Low voltage indicator with dual alternators (donjohnston) 8. 02:57 PM - Re: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector (Bill Putney) 9. 03:22 PM - Re: Re: Boeing switches (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 10. 03:42 PM - Re: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector () ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> My two cents: Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems boneheaded, and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree review. Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem from occurring. Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good engineering. -------- Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge, MA 01550 (508) 764-2072 emjones(at)charter.net Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403912#403912 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions At 07:13 PM 7/3/2013, you wrote: > > >I agree. It se ems pointless to have 2 solenoids operating at the >same time. The other issue is that I believe the Subaru solenoid >moves the gear before the contactor part puts juice to the motor >brushes. An aircraft type contactor would do both at the same time >rather than sequentially. Have not dismantled one so I may be in error. None of applications of an external contactor proposed for modern starters "bypasses" functionality of the built in solenoid/contactor. The starter's built in solenoids do engage the pinion gear before closing electrical connection for the starter motor. Variants to select from when using these modern starters causes the builder to decide whether the built in contactor is energized by the panel mounted, START switch -OR- energized through a more robust device. There is a problem to be solved when the panel mounted starter control is used to energize the starter's built in contactor. Unlike legacy 'starter solenoids' controlling starters with Bendix drives, the modern pinion engagement solenoids have a very high coil current demand during the first few milliseconds of being energized. See: http://tinyurl.com/op5cs2g Failure to recognize this difference in solenoid/contator performance caused a kerfuffle over burned start switch contacts on the ACS-510 key swicch (clone of legacy Bendix/Gerdes). ACS now sells a diode with two terminals applied. Emacs! A critical need to install this diode across the starter contactor engagement coil arose from the alarming rate at which start contacts in the key switch were destroyed by overstress when the legacy starter/external contactor combo was replaced with a light weight version with combination solenoid/ contactors. Many cars suffered similar failure modes in their key-start switches. SB92-01 from ACS originally place thier diode across the switch contacts . . . wrong place. It was corrected in a subsequent revision. See http://tinyurl.com/nva2xdy B&C adopted the philosophy of jumpering the starter solenoid coil right to the fat-wire terminal on the starter . . . and controlling power to the starter though a modern, starter contactor WITH built in coil suppression diode. The external contactor's inrush demands on the start switch are a small fraction of that for direct control. This philosophy posed a new problem when PM motor starters began to show up on the airplane. PM motors have a pronounced counter-emf during spin-down after the power is removed. This would delay disengagement of the pinion gear and was commonly called "starter run on" . . . in fact it was better called "delayed disengagement". Starters with wound fields (B&C and some others) do not suffer this indignity and function well with the engagement solenoid jumpered directly to the starter's fat-wire terminal. In ANY case, the builder's design goals should include providing a source of solenoid engagement power that (1) is supplied through a low impedance source (short and fatter than usual wires) and (2) avoid running this power through the panel mounted start switch. If the starter is a PM version, the builder can take advantage of the "I" terminal on many modern starter cotactors and use it to SUPPLY current to the engagement solenoid. This provides for instant removal of coil power when the starter switch is opened and prevents 'delayed disengagement'. In this case, the builder would do well to have diode coil suppression on BOTH the external contactor coil AND the solenoid/contactor coil on the starter. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches At 07:29 AM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > >My two cents: > >Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems >boneheaded, and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree >review. Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem from occurring. Whether or not a problem was demonstrably prevented is irrelevant to the reliability study. Good FMEA mitigation assumes that the part WILL fail. Working out a logical means by which single failures might go undetected for no more than a single tank full of fuel has been a time-honored legacy design goal. >Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good engineering. they are not used in PARALLEL. In the Boeing case, they are in series with one side controlling direction, the other side in SERIES controlling power. Each side can be explored for functionality in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Beech (and many others) uses the two spdt switches to handle one half of a PM motor UP-OFF- DN switchin g duty. Again, both sides easily evaluated in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Lear (and many others) uses the 'coolie hat' to drive relays that DID offer a possibility for runaway-by- sticking. But their systems architecture included a wheel-master-disconnect that removed power from all trim systems along with the autopilot. I AM aware of trim runaways in aircraft fitted with wheel master disconnects that would not have happened if the airplane had been fitted with the split trim switch where the WMD switch provided the mitigation. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ From: <berkut13(at)berkut13.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Con nector Can someone point me to the part number/source for a replacement 90-degree, bulkhead, slide-on, coax connector used on the Narco AT-150 transponder tray? Any of the usual suspects (Mouser, Digi-Key, Allied, etc) carry them? Thanks, James ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ From: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches Good argument Bob.... I use a switch on the panel to power the trim, but that may be a bit far away for a quick reaction, before the trim lurks all the way to the end. Jay -----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: 04 July 2013 04:29 PM Subject: Re: AeroElect ric-List: Re: Boeing switches --> At 07:29 AM 7/4/2013, you wrote: >--> > >My two cents: > >Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems boneheaded, >and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree review. >Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem from occurring. Whether or not a problem was demonstrably prevented is irrelevant to the reliability study. Good FMEA mitigation assumes that the part WILL fail. Working out a logical means by which single failures might go undetected for no more than a single tank full of fuel has been a time-honored legacy design goal. >Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good engineering. they are not used in PARALLEL. In the Boeing case, the y are in series with one side controlling direction, the other side in SERIES controlling power. Each side can be explored for functionality in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Beech (and many others) uses the two spdt switches to handle one half of a PM motor UP-OFF- DN switching duty. Again, both sides easily evaluated in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Lear (and many others) uses the 'coolie hat' to drive relays that DID offer a possibility for runaway-by- sticking. But their systems architecture included a wheel-master-disconnect that removed power from all trim systems along with the autopilot. I AM aware of trim runaways in aircraft fitted with wheel master disconnects that would not have happened if the airplane had been fitted with the split trim switch where the WMD switch provided the mitigation. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ From: Michael Burbidge <mburbidg(at)gmail.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. Master/Battery and Alt Field... I'm sure I read a discussion of this question somewhere but can't find it. I'm building an RV-9A, basic day/night VFR. I'm using the Basic Day/Night VFR system diagram available from B&C website. It is almost identical to the Z-11 diagram in Bob's book. One difference is that the Z-11 uses a 2 poll 3-throw switch (2-10) for the master, so that the alternator can be switched on after start. The Basic VFR diagram from B&C uses a 2 poll 2 throw switch (2-3) so that the alternator field is on duri ng start. What are the advantages of isolating the alternator field during startup? My airplane has a B&C 40 amp alternator. Which approach would you recommend? Thanks, Michael- ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Subject: AeroElectric-List: Low voltage indicator with dual alternators From: "donjohnston" <don(at)numa.aero> I'm going to have a 60a primary and a 20a secondary alternator with B&C LR3C and LS1A voltage regulators respectively. If in the event of a primary alternator failure, and I switch to the secondary, will the primary low voltage warning light (off of LR3C, pin 5) remain illuminated? Or will switching off that alternator open the low voltage circuit? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403960#403960 _____________ ___________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ From: Bill Putney <billp(at)wwpc.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector It's TED 9-30-10 connector. These are solder on connectors and have the lowest profile (depth-wise). http://hangar-10.com/products/Tray-Mount-Rf-Antenna-Connect.html You should check with them to make sure a snap ring is included or you may have to buy it separately. There's also a DBA-600 that is a connector like you want with a female BNC so you don't have a cable attached to your tray. You put a BNC on the cable and connect it to this adapter. About the same price as the 9-30-10 but of course you have to do the BNC too. http://hangar-10.com/products/Bnc-Tray-Adapter-W%7B47%7DSnap-Ring.html Bill On 7/4/13 10:59 AM, berkut13(at)berkut13.com wrote: > Can someone po int me to the part number/source for a replacement > 90-degree, > bulkhead, slide-on, coax connector used on the Narco AT-150 transponder > tray? Any of the usual suspects (Mouser, Digi-Key, Allied, etc) carry > them? > > Thanks, > James > * > > > * ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches At 01:05 PM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > >Good argument Bob.... I use a switch on the panel to power the trim, but >that may be a bit far away for a quick reaction, before the trim lurks all >the way to the end. You would do well to deduce the severity of a trim runaway. Is the airplane controllable with full trim either up or down? How fast does the trim run with respect to pilot reaction times needed to deal with a runaway? Are there stops or limits to trim excursion necessary for the full range of CG envelopes or will the system produce more pitch authority than would ever be necessary for normal operations? In a Lear, at Mach cruise, the system is manually failed and the pilot is obligated to keep hands in the lap for 3 seconds. Only then can he move to deal with the situation. After achieving a stable, safe condition, recorded data is analyzed for busting limits on attitude, altitude and airspeed excursions. The exercise is repeated and trim speeds then adjusted until a sweat-free, runaway recovery is assured. The trim systems I've seen in some TC aircraft a re so slow that unexpected trims under worst case conditions are no big deal. But what's the story for YOUR airplane? Yes, if trim speeds are brisk, trim authority high and you have good reason for not reducing them, then some form of inarguable override is indicated. Instructing the pilot to pull a breaker for taming a trim runaway is generally not acceptable . . . even panel mounted switche situated amongst other switches will get you frowns from the human factors guys. At the same time, find out just how much risk is associated with an uncontrolled trim event and see if that can be engineered out as opposed to stacking emergency ops hardware on top of the design. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ From: <berkut13(at)berkut13.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector Excellent! Exactly what I needed. Thanks. From: Bill Putney Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2013 4:57 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector It's TED 9-30-10 connector. These are solder on connectors and have the lowest profile (depth-wise). http://hangar-10.com/products/Tray-Mount-Rf-Antenna-Connect.html You should check with them to make sure a snap ring is included or you may have to buy it separately. There's also a DBA-600 that is a connector like you want with a female BNC so you don't have a cable attached to your tray. You put a BNC on the cable and connect it to this adapter. About the same price as the 9-30-10 but of course you have to do the BNC too. http://hangar-10.com/products/Bnc-Tray-Adapter-W%7B47%7DSna ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: solenoid wiring question
At 11:28 AM 7/5/2013, you wrote: >Re figure 5 of Bob's diagram of adding a starter contactor upstream >of the original starter solenoid: Just so I'm clear, what "figure 5" are you referring to? Wired like this? Emacs! > >Is there any reason not to wire the fat wire to the starter side of >the old original starter solenoid, with a jumper from the fat wire >terminal back to the old starter solenoid energizer terminal. It would be helpful if you would sketch your proposed change, scan and attach to your email. > >The point would be to eliminate the high current having to flow >through the old starter solenoid disc, since the high current is >being controlled by the new upstream starter contactor. By 'original' I presume you're talking about the one built onto the starter. I'm not sure of "the point". Keep in mind that the solenoid/contactor combo on the starter has two jobs . . . extend pinion gear then apply power to motor. On the release side, power is first removed from the motor before the pinion gear is retracted. The reason for the upstream contactor is to buffer the current draw on the starter engage switch. An alternative method calls for a relay wired thusly. Emacs! Which ever way you decide to do it, the singular design goal is to reduce stresses on the starter engage switch on the panel. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. Master/Battery
and Alt Field... At 11:34 AM 7/5/2013, you wrote: > >I'm using the LR3C-14 external regulator and fuse blocks from B&C. >My field supply includes a fuse in my fuse block but I cannot pull >the fuse during flight. then you have not followed instructions for the LR3C-14 for supplying field power through a breaker. This is to accommodate the regulator's built in crowbar OV shutdown system. >It sounds like I should either move the field supply to a breaker on >the panel that I can pull, or use the 3-position switch. You need the breaker anyhow. After that, a 2 or 3 position switch as you wish. >Another question. All of my 250 hours of flight are in a 1959 C172, >which has a generator. There is a master switch with two positions. >My question is under what conditions would one operate "battery only"? Ground maintenance operations. Getting the ATIS and Clearance delivery before starting the engine. Shutting the generator/alternator off for some kind of mis-behavior - voltage jumping around but not so vigorously as to trip the OV system. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: Ed <decaclops(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
So....on the SkyTec permanent magnet starter, the diode goes from the little terminal to where - ground on the starter case? By the way, I only measure approximately .3 ohms from the small terminal to the starter case. I thought the coil would have more resistance than that. The starter comes from SkyTec with a jumper from small terminal to the fat wire terminal. Ed Holyoke On 7/4/2013 6:18 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > If the starter is a PM version, the builder can > take advantage of the "I" terminal on many modern > starter cotactors and use it to SUPPLY current > to the engagement solenoid. This provides for > instant removal of coil power when the starter > switch is opened and prevents 'delayed disengagement'. > > In this case, the builder would do well to have > diode coil suppression on BOTH the external contactor > coil AND the solenoid/contactor coil on the > starter. > > Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. Master/Battery
and Alt Field...
From: Michael Burbidge <mburbidg(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jul 05, 2013
Bob, Thanks. Glad I asked. I see the note about the breaker in bold. I had read the instructions at one point, and had ordered the 5 Amp breaker. So I have it. But I had not revisited the instructions when I started the wiring. It seems like a lot of non-TSO'ed equipment comes with almost no instructions and you get used to figuring it out on your own with help from forums and mailing lists. The B&C instructions are quite complete. A good reminder for me to use the instructions when they are supplied! Thanks, Michael- On Jul 5, 2013, at 10:53 AM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote: > > At 11:34 AM 7/5/2013, you wrote: >> >> I'm using the LR3C-14 external regulator and fuse blocks from B&C. My field supply includes a fuse in my fuse block but I cannot pull the fuse during flight. > > then you have not followed instructions for the LR3C-14 > for supplying field power through a breaker. This is to > accommodate the regulator's built in crowbar OV shutdown > system. > >> It sounds like I should either move the field supply to a breaker on the panel that I can pull, or use the 3-position switch. > > You need the breaker anyhow. After that, a 2 or 3 position > switch as you wish. > >> Another question. All of my 250 hours of flight are in a 1959 C172, which has a generator. There is a master switch with two positions. My question is under what conditions would one operate "battery only"? > > Ground maintenance operations. Getting the > ATIS and Clearance delivery before starting > the engine. Shutting the generator/alternator > off for some kind of mis-behavior - voltage jumping > around but not so vigorously as to trip the OV > system. > > > Bob . . . > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Low voltage indicator with dual alternators
From: "donjohnston" <don(at)numa.aero>
Date: Jul 05, 2013
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: > At 04:47 PM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > > > > > > > I'm going to have a 60a primary and a 20a secondary alternator with > > B&C LR3C and LS1A voltage regulators respectively. > > > > If in the event of a primary alternator failure, and I switch to the > > secondary, will the primary low voltage warning light (off of LR3C, > > pin 5) remain illuminated? Or will switching off that alternator > > open the low voltage circuit? > > > > > > No, the OV and LV sense lines along with power to > run those systems is independent of the regulator > circuits. The LV warning systems will function whether > or not the alternator is powered. > > Bob . . . Sorry if I'm belaboring the point, I just want to make sure I got this right. If I switch to the secondary alternator (and switch off the primary alternator), the LV light on the primary's VR will not be illuminated? -Don Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403999#403999 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: Bill Putney <billp(at)wwpc.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
Ed, Do you get the same resistance reading in both directions? What if you swap your meter leads? If there's an internal snubbing diode there, you'll get a really low resistance reading in the direction the diode conducts in and you'll read the coil resistance with the meter leads swapped the other way around. .3 ohms at 14V would pull about 47 amps. Probably more than your starter switch can handle. I'm thinking it should be like 30 ohms or more. Bill On 7/5/13 11:28 AM, Ed wrote: > > So....on the SkyTec permanent magnet starter, the diode goes from the > little terminal to where - ground on the starter case? By the way, I > only measure approximately .3 ohms from the small terminal to the > starter case. I thought the coil would have more resistance than that. > The starter comes from SkyTec with a jumper from small terminal to the > fat wire terminal. > > Ed Holyoke > > > On 7/4/2013 6:18 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: >> If the starter is a PM version, the builder can >> take advantage of the "I" terminal on many modern >> starter cotactors and use it to SUPPLY current >> to the engagement solenoid. This provides for >> instant removal of coil power when the starter >> switch is opened and prevents 'delayed disengagement'. >> >> In this case, the builder would do well to have >> diode coil suppression on BOTH the external contactor >> coil AND the solenoid/contactor coil on the >> starter. >> >> Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
At 01:28 PM 7/5/2013, you wrote: > >So....on the SkyTec permanent magnet starter, the diode goes from >the little terminal to where - ground on the starter case? Same for ALL starters with the built in solenoid/contactor. Emacs! .... or like this Emacs! > By the way, I only measure approximately .3 ohms from the small > terminal to the starter case. I thought the coil would have more > resistance than that. The starter comes from SkyTec with a jumper > from small terminal to the fat wire terminal. Yup, that resistance to ground is LOW . . . it gets higher after the pinion gear extends but the initial current draw is significant. That's why you use external contactors or a buffer relay as shown above . . . I've added diodes to Z22 . . . something I should have done years ago. Thanks for reminding me. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Low voltage indicator with dual alternators
At 01:33 PM 7/5/2013, you wrote: > > >nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: > > At 04:47 PM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I'm going to have a 60a primary and a 20a secondary alternator with > > > B&C LR3C and LS1A voltage regulators respectively. > > > > > > If in the event of a primary alternator failure, and I switch to the > > > secondary, will the primary low voltage warning light (off of LR3C, > > > pin 5) remain illuminated? Or will switching off that alternator > > > open the low voltage circuit? > > > > > > > > > > No, the OV and LV sense lines along with power to > > run those systems is independent of the regulator > > circuits. The LV warning systems will function whether > > or not the alternator is powered. > > > > Bob . . . > > >Sorry if I'm belaboring the point, I just want to make sure I got this right. > >If I switch to the secondary alternator (and switch off the primary >alternator), the LV light on the primary's VR will not be illuminated? > >-Don I presume you're talking about Z-12. Any time you have a low voltage condition, both regulators will flash their low voltage lights (if installed). Since lv warning is redundant, you COULD install only one light on either one of the regulators. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
At 01:58 PM 7/5/2013, you wrote: > >Ed, > >Do you get the same resistance reading in both directions? What if >you swap your meter leads? If there's an internal snubbing diode >there, you'll get a really low resistance reading in the direction >the diode conducts in and you'll read the coil resistance with the >meter leads swapped the other way around. > >.3 ohms at 14V would pull about 47 amps. Probably more than your >starter switch can handle. I'm thinking it should be like 30 ohms or more. > >Bill 40 amps . . . yeah that's about right. See: http://tinyurl.com/op5cs2g Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Low voltage indicator with dual alternators
On 7/5/2013 9:05 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > At 04:47 PM 7/4/2013, you wrote: >> >> I'm going to have a 60a primary and a 20a secondary alternator with >> B&C LR3C and LS1A voltage regulators respectively. >> >> If in the event of a primary alternator failure, and I switch to the >> secondary, will the primary low voltage warning light (off of LR3C, >> pin 5) remain illuminated? Or will switching off that alternator open >> the low voltage circuit? > > No, the OV and LV sense lines along with power to > run those systems is independent of the regulator > circuits. The LV warning systems will function whether > or not the alternator is powered. I have the same setup and that's how it works. That is, the low voltage light simply monitors the voltage on the buss independent of alternator operation. Given that, I've wondered how a failed alternator would manifest itself. - If failure was due to an overvoltage situation, the breaker would pop. Since I normally fly with the 2 busses interconnected, I would expect the low voltage lights to remain off perhaps for the remainder of the flight. If one did come on because buss voltage dropped below the threshold, I would expect both to come on more or less simultaneously as long as the busses were interconnected. The only explicit indication of Alt failure would be the popped OV breaker. - Are there other modes of Alternator failure where there would be no explicit indication of failure? I'm thinking that a snapped belt would be an example. If loads and battery condition were such that the interconnected buss voltage stayed above the low volt threshold, there would be no explicit indication. Is that right? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: cardinalnsb <cardinalnsb(at)aol.com>
Subject: solenoid wiring question
My previous question referenced figure 5 of Bob's diagram, it should have referenced figure 6. Corrected below. Re figure 6 of Bob's diagram of adding a starter contactor upstream of the original starter solenoid: Is there any reason not to wire the fat wire to the starter side of the old original starter solenoid, with a jumper from the fat wire terminal back to the old starter solenoid energizer terminal. The point would be to eliminate the high current having to flow through the old starter solenoid disc, since the high current is being controlled by the new upstream starter contactor. Thanks, Skip Simpson In a message dated 07/05/13 03:12:33 Eastern Daylight Time, aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com writes: * ================================================== Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive ================================================== Today's complete AeroElectric-List Digest can also be found in either of the two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version of the AeroElectric-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor such as Notepad or with a web browser. HTML Version: http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 13-07-04&Archive=AeroElectric Text Version: http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 13-07-04&Archive=AeroElectric ================================================ EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive ================================================ ---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 07/04/13: 10 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 05:32 AM - Re: Boeing switches (Eric M. Jones) 2. 06:20 AM - Re: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 3. 07:29 AM - Re: Re: Boeing switches (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 4. 11:00 AM - Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector () 5. 11:05 AM - Re: Re: Boeing switches (Jay Hyde) 6. 12:17 PM - Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. Master/Battery and Alt Field... (Michael Burbidge) 7. 02:48 PM - Low voltage indicator with dual alternators (donjohnston) 8. 02:57 PM - Re: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector (Bill Putney) 9. 03:22 PM - Re: Re: Boeing switches (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 10. 03:42 PM - Re: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector () ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> My two cents: Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems boneheaded, and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree review. Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem from occurring. Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good engineering. -------- Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge, MA 01550 (508) 764-2072 emjones(at)charter.net Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403912#403912 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions At 07:13 PM 7/3/2013, you wrote: > > >I agree. It seems pointless to have 2 solenoids operating at the >same time. The other issue is that I believe the Subaru solenoid >moves the gear before the contactor part puts juice to the motor >brushes. An aircraft type contactor would do both at the same time >rather than sequentially. Have not dismantled one so I may be in error. None of applications of an external contactor proposed for modern starters "bypasses" functionality of the built in solenoid/contactor. The starter's built in solenoids do engage the pinion gear before closing electrical connection for the starter motor. Variants to select from when using these modern starters causes the builder to decide whether the built in contactor is energized by the panel mounted, START switch -OR- energized through a more robust device. There is a problem to be solved when the panel mounted starter control is used to energize the starter's built in contactor. Unlike legacy 'starter solenoids' controlling starters with Bendix drives, the modern pinion engagement solenoids have a very high coil current demand during the first few milliseconds of being energized. See: http://tinyurl.com/op5cs2g Failure to recognize this difference in solenoid/contator performance caused a kerfuffle over burned start switch contacts on the ACS-510 key swicch (clone of legacy Bendix/Gerdes). ACS now sells a diode with two terminals applied. Emacs! A critical need to install this diode across the starter contactor engagement coil arose from the alarming rate at which start contacts in the key switch were destroyed by overstress when the legacy starter/external contactor combo was replaced with a light weight version with combination solenoid/ contactors. Many cars suffered similar failure modes in their key-start switches. SB92-01 from ACS originally place thier diode across the switch contacts . . . wrong place. It was corrected in a subsequent revision. See http://tinyurl.com/nva2xdy B&C adopted the philosophy of jumpering the starter solenoid coil right to the fat-wire terminal on the starter . . . and controlling power to the starter though a modern, starter contactor WITH built in coil suppression diode. The external contactor's inrush demands on the start switch are a small fraction of that for direct control. This philosophy posed a new problem when PM motor starters began to show up on the airplane. PM motors have a pronounced counter-emf during spin-down after the power is removed. This would delay disengagement of the pinion gear and was commonly called "starter run on" . . . in fact it was better called "delayed disengagement". Starters with wound fields (B&C and some others) do not suffer this indignity and function well with the engagement solenoid jumpered directly to the starter's fat-wire terminal. In ANY case, the builder's design goals should include providing a source of solenoid engagement power that (1) is supplied through a low impedance source (short and fatter than usual wires) and (2) avoid running this power through the panel mounted start switch. If the starter is a PM version, the builder can take advantage of the "I" terminal on many modern starter cotactors and use it to SUPPLY current to the engagement solenoid. This provides for instant removal of coil power when the starter switch is opened and prevents 'delayed disengagement'. In this case, the builder would do well to have diode coil suppression on BOTH the external contactor coil AND the solenoid/contactor coil on the starter. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches At 07:29 AM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > >My two cents: > >Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems >boneheaded, and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree >review. Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem from occurring. Whether or not a problem was demonstrably prevented is irrelevant to the reliability study. Good FMEA mitigation assumes that the part WILL fail. Working out a logical means by which single failures might go undetected for no more than a single tank full of fuel has been a time-honored legacy design goal. >Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good engineering. they are not used in PARALLEL. In the Boeing case, they are in series with one side controlling direction, the other side in SERIES controlling power. Each side can be explored for functionality in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Beech (and many others) uses the two spdt switches to handle one half of a PM motor UP-OFF- DN switching duty. Again, both sides easily evaluated in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Lear (and many others) uses the 'coolie hat' to drive relays that DID offer a possibility for runaway-by- sticking. But their systems architecture included a wheel-master-disconnect that removed power from all trim systems along with the autopilot. I AM aware of trim runaways in aircraft fitted with wheel master disconnects that would not have happened if the airplane had been fitted with the split trim switch where the WMD switch provided the mitigation. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ From: <berkut13(at)berkut13.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector Can someone point me to the part number/source for a replacement 90-degree, bulkhead, slide-on, coax connector used on the Narco AT-150 transponder tray? Any of the usual suspects (Mouser, Digi-Key, Allied, etc) carry them? Thanks, James ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ From: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches Good argument Bob.... I use a switch on the panel to power the trim, but that may be a bit far away for a quick reaction, before the trim lurks all the way to the end. Jay -----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: 04 July 2013 04:29 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches --> At 07:29 AM 7/4/2013, you wrote: >--> > >My two cents: > >Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems boneheaded, >and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree review. >Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem from occurring. Whether or not a problem was demonstrably prevented is irrelevant to the reliability study. Good FMEA mitigation assumes that the part WILL fail. Working out a logical means by which single failures might go undetected for no more than a single tank full of fuel has been a time-honored legacy design goal. >Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good engineering. they are not used in PARALLEL. In the Boeing case, they are in series with one side controlling direction, the other side in SERIES controlling power. Each side can be explored for functionality in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Beech (and many others) uses the two spdt switches to handle one half of a PM motor UP-OFF- DN switching duty. Again, both sides easily evaluated in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing a runaway-by-sticking. Lear (and many others) uses the 'coolie hat' to drive relays that DID offer a possibility for runaway-by- sticking. But their systems architecture included a wheel-master-disconnect that removed power from all trim systems along with the autopilot. I AM aware of trim runaways in aircraft fitted with wheel master disconnects that would not have happened if the airplane had been fitted with the split trim switch where the WMD switch provided the mitigation. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ From: Michael Burbidge <mburbidg(at)gmail.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. Master/Battery and Alt Field... I'm sure I read a discussion of this question somewhere but can't find it. I'm building an RV-9A, basic day/night VFR. I'm using the Basic Day/Night VFR system diagram available from B&C website. It is almost identical to the Z-11 diagram in Bob's book. One difference is that the Z-11 uses a 2 poll 3-throw switch (2-10) for the master, so that the alternator can be switched on after start. The Basic VFR diagram from B&C uses a 2 poll 2 throw switch (2-3) so that the alternator field is on during start. What are the advantages of isolating the alternator field during startup? My airplane has a B&C 40 amp alternator. Which approach would you recommend? Thanks, Michael- ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Subject: AeroElectric-List: Low voltage indicator with dual alternators From: "donjohnston" <don(at)numa.aero> I'm going to have a 60a primary and a 20a secondary alternator with B&C LR3C and LS1A voltage regulators respectively. If in the event of a primary alternator failure, and I switch to the secondary, will the primary low voltage warning light (off of LR3C, pin 5) remain illuminated? Or will switching off that alternator open the low voltage circuit? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403960#403960 ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ From: Bill Putney <billp(at)wwpc.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector It's TED 9-30-10 connector. These are solder on connectors and have the lowest profile (depth-wise). http://hangar-10.com/products/Tray-Mount-Rf-Antenna-Connect.html You should check with them to make sure a snap ring is included or you may have to buy it separately. There's also a DBA-600 that is a connector like you want with a female BNC so you don't have a cable attached to your tray. You put a BNC on the cable and connect it to this adapter. About the same price as the 9-30-10 but of course you have to do the BNC too. http://hangar-10.com/products/Bnc-Tray-Adapter-W%7B47%7DSnap-Ring.html Bill On 7/4/13 10:59 AM, berkut13(at)berkut13.com wrote: > Can someone point me to the part number/source for a replacement > 90-degree, > bulkhead, slide-on, coax connector used on the Narco AT-150 transponder > tray? Any of the usual suspects (Mouser, Digi-Key, Allied, etc) carry > them? > > Thanks, > James > * > > > * ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches At 01:05 PM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > >Good argument Bob.... I use a switch on the panel to power the trim, but >that may be a bit far away for a quick reaction, before the trim lurks all >the way to the end. You would do well to deduce the severity of a trim runaway. Is the airplane controllable with full trim either up or down? How fast does the trim run with respect to pilot reaction times needed to deal with a runaway? Are there stops or limits to trim excursion necessary for the full range of CG envelopes or will the system produce more pitch authority than would ever be necessary for normal operations? In a Lear, at Mach cruise, the system is manually failed and the pilot is obligated to keep hands in the lap for 3 seconds. Only then can he move to deal with the situation. After achieving a stable, safe condition, recorded data is analyzed for busting limits on attitude, altitude and airspeed excursions. The exercise is repeated and trim speeds then adjusted until a sweat-free, runaway recovery is assured. The trim systems I've seen in some TC aircraft are so slow that unexpected trims under worst case conditions are no big deal. But what's the story for YOUR airplane? Yes, if trim speeds are brisk, trim authority high and you have good reason for not reducing them, then some form of inarguable override is indicated. Instructing the pilot to pull a breaker for taming a trim runaway is generally not acceptable . . . even panel mounted switche situated amongst other switches will get you frowns from the human factors guys. At the same time, find out just how much risk is associated with an uncontrolled trim event and see if that can be engineered out as opposed to stacking emergency ops hardware on top of the design. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ From: <berkut13(at)berkut13.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector Excellent! Exactly what I needed. Thanks. From: Bill Putney Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2013 4:57 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector It's TED 9-30-10 connector. These are solder on connectors and have the lowest profile (depth-wise). http://hangar-10.com/products/Tray-Mount-Rf-Antenna-Connect.html You should check with them to make sure a snap ring is included or you may have to buy it separately. There's also a DBA-600 that is a connector like you want with a female BNC so you don't have a cable attached to your tray. You put a BNC on the cable and connect it to this adapter. About the same price as the 9-30-10 but of course you have to do the BNC too. http://hangar-10.com/products/Bnc-Tray-Adapter-W%7B47%7DSnap-Ring.html Bill On 7/4/13 10:59 AM, berkut13(at)berkut13.com wrote: Can someone point me to the part number/source for a replacement 90-degree, bulkhead, slide-on, coax connector used on the Narco AT-150 transponder tray? Any of the usual suspects (Mouser, Digi-Key, Allied, etc) carry them? Thanks, James ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. Master/Battery and
Alt Field...
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jul 05, 2013
> One difference is that the Z-11 uses a 2 poll 3-throw switch (2-10) for the master, so that the alternator can be switched on after start. Wired per Z-11, the alternator could be switched off during start, but I do not think that is the intent or common usage. I would start the engine with the alternator field turned on. There are some situations when it is desirable to shut the alternator field off. One situation is parked on the ground with the engine off and battery contactor on. Another situation is when the charging system malfunctions in the air. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=404021#404021 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: Ed <decaclops(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: Ed <decaclops(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
I knew on some level that low ohms means high current. That's why I questioned it, but I didn't do the math. 35 amps is a bunch! I'm not planning to throw away my starter contactor anytime soon. I did measure the coil both directions and it is the same. Ed Holyoke On 7/5/2013 12:29 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > At 01:58 PM 7/5/2013, you wrote: >> >> Ed, >> >> Do you get the same resistance reading in both directions? What if >> you swap your meter leads? If there's an internal snubbing diode >> there, you'll get a really low resistance reading in the direction >> the diode conducts in and you'll read the coil resistance with the >> meter leads swapped the other way around. >> >> .3 ohms at 14V would pull about 47 amps. Probably more than your >> starter switch can handle. I'm thinking it should be like 30 ohms or >> more. >> >> Bill > > 40 amps . . . yeah that's about right. > See: > > http://tinyurl.com/op5cs2g > > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 05, 2013
From: Ed <decaclops(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: solenoid wiring question
Skip, If I read you right, you are talking about bypassing the solenoid on the starter and wiring straight to the starter motor terminal. What then pulls the pinion gear forward to engage with the ring gear? The solenoid normally does that before the starter motor starts to spin. As the gear shaft bottoms, the contacts in the solenoid power up the motor. Even if the solenoid coil is backfed from the motor terminal and pulls the pinion gear up, the motor will already be spinning full bore. I'm guessing that chipped teeth on the ring gear are in your future. I'd wire it as Bob drew it. Ed Holyoke On 7/5/2013 2:26 PM, cardinalnsb wrote: > My previous question referenced figure 5 of Bob's diagram, it should > have referenced figure 6. Corrected below. > Re figure 6 of Bob's diagram of adding a starter contactor upstream of > the original starter solenoid: > Is there any reason not to wire the fat wire to the starter side of > the old original starter solenoid, with a jumper from the fat wire > terminal back to the old starter solenoid energizer terminal. > The point would be to eliminate the high current having to flow > through the old starter solenoid disc, since the high current is being > controlled by the new upstream starter contactor. > Thanks, Skip Simpson > In a message dated 07/05/13 03:12:33 Eastern Daylight Time, > aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com writes: > > * > > ================================================= > Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive > ================================================= > > Today's complete AeroElectric-List Digest can also be found in > either of the > two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest > formatted > in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked > Indexes > and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII > version > of the AeroElectric-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic > text editor > such as Notepad or with a web browser. > > HTML Version: > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 13-07-04&Archive=AeroElectric > > > Text Version: > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 13-07-04&Archive=AeroElectric > > > ============================ =================== > EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive > =============================================== > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > AeroElectric-List Digest Archive > --- > Total Messages Posted Thu 07/04/13: 10 > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Today's Message Index: > ---------------------- > > 1. 05:32 AM - Re: Boeing switches (Eric M. Jones) > 2. 06:20 AM - Re: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter > Questions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) > ; 3. 07:29 AM - Re: Re: Boeing switches (Robert L. Nuckolls, > III) > 4. 11:00 AM - Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector () > 5. 11:05 AM - Re: Re: Boeing switches (Jay Hyde) > 6. 12:17 PM - Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. Master/Battery and > Alt Field... (Michael Burbidge) > 7. 02:48 PM - Low voltage indicator with dual alternators > (donjohnston) > 8. 02:57 PM - Re: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector (Bill > Putney) > 9. 03:22 PM - Re: Re: Boeing switches (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) > 10. 03:42 PM - Re: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector () > > > ________________________________ Message 1 > _____________________________________ > > > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches > From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> > > > My two cents: > > Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems > boneheaded, and wouldn't > stand a thorough engineering fault-tree review. Furthermore I'd > bet that it > never prevented ANY problem from occurring. > > Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good > engineering. > > -------- > Eric M. Jones > www.PerihelionDesign.com > 113 Brentwood Drive > Southbridge, MA 01550 > (508) 764-2072 > emjones(at)charter.net > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403912#403912 > > > ________________________________ Message 2 > _____________________________________ > > > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and > Starter Questions > > At 07:13 PM 7/3/2013, you wrote: > > > > > >I agree. It se ems pointless to have 2 solenoids operating at the > >same time. The other issue is that I believe the Subaru solenoid > >moves the gear before the contactor part puts juice to the motor > >brushes. An aircraft type contactor would do both at the same time > >rather than sequentially. Have not dismantled one so I may be in > error. > > None of applications of an external contactor > proposed for modern starters "bypasses" functionality > of the built in solenoid/contactor. The > starter's built in solenoids do engage the pinion > gear before closing electrical connection for > the starter motor. > > Variants to select from when using these modern > starters causes the builder to decide whether > the built in contactor is energized by the panel > mounted, START switch -OR- energized through a more > robust device. > > There is a problem to be solved when the panel > mounted starter control is used to energize the > starter's built in contactor. Unlike legacy > 'starter solenoids' controlling starters with > Bendix drives, the modern pinion engagement > solenoids have a very high coil current demand > during the first few milliseconds of being > energized. See: http://tinyurl.com/op5cs2g > > Failure to recognize this difference in > solenoid/contator performance caused a > kerfuffle over burned start switch contacts > on the ACS-510 key swicch (clone of legacy > Bendix/Gerdes). ACS now sells a diode with two > terminals applied. > > Emacs! > > > A critical need to install this diode across the > starter contactor engagement coil arose from the > alarming rate at which start contacts in the key > switch were destroyed by overstress when the legacy > starter/external contactor combo was replaced with > a light weight version with combination solenoid/ > contactors. Many cars suffered similar failure modes > in their key-start switches. > > SB92-01 from ACS originally place thier diode across > the switch contacts . . . wrong place. It was corrected > in a subsequent revision. See http://tinyurl.com/nva2xdy > > B&C adopted the philosophy of jumpering the starter > solenoid coil right to the fat-wire terminal on > the starter . . . and controlling power to the > starter though a modern, starter contactor WITH > built in coil suppression diode. The external contactor's > inrush demands on the start switch are a small fraction > of that for direct control. > > This philosophy posed a new problem when PM motor > starters began to show up on the airplane. PM motors > have a pronounced counter-emf during spin-down after > the power is removed. This would delay disengagement > of the pinion gear and was commonly called "starter > run on" . . . in fact it was better called "delayed > disengagement". > > Starters with wound fields (B&C and some others) > do not suffer this indignity and function well with > the engagement solenoid jumpered directly to the > starter's fat-wire terminal. > > In ANY case, the builder's design goals should > include providing a source of solenoid engagement > power that (1) is supplied through a low impedance > source (short and fatter than usual wires) and > (2) avoid running this power through the panel > mounted start switch. > > If the starter is a PM version, the builder can > take advantage of the "I" terminal on many modern > starter cotactors and use it to SUPPLY current > to the engagement solenoid. This provides for > instant removal of coil power when the starter > switch is opened and prevents 'delayed disengagement'. > > In this case, the builder would do well to have > diode coil suppression on BOTH the external contactor > coil AND the solenoid/contactor coil on the > starter. > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________ Message 3 > _____________________________________ > > > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches > > > At 07:29 AM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > > > >My two cents: > > > >Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems > >boneheaded, and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree > >review. Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem > from occurring. > > Whether or not a problem was demonstrably > prevented is irrelevant to the reliability > study. Good FMEA mitigation assumes that the > part WILL fail. Working out a logical means > by which single failures might go undetected > for no more than a single tank full of fuel > has been a time-honored legacy design goal. > > >Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good > engineering. > > they are not used in PARALLEL. In the Boeing > case, they are in series with one side controlling > direction, the other side in SERIES controlling power. > Each side can be explored for functionality > in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing > a runaway-by-sticking. > > Beech (and many others) uses the two spdt > switches to handle one half of a PM motor UP-OFF- > DN switchin g duty. Again, both sides easily > evaluated in pre-flight, neither side capable > of causing a runaway-by-sticking. > > Lear (and many others) uses the 'coolie hat' to > drive relays that DID offer a possibility for runaway-by- > sticking. But their systems architecture included > a wheel-master-disconnect that removed power from > all trim systems along with the autopilot. I AM > aware of trim runaways in aircraft fitted with > wheel master disconnects that would not have happened > if the airplane had been fitted with the split > trim switch where the WMD switch provided the > mitigation. > > > Bob . . . > > > ________________________________ Message 4 > _____________________________________ > > > From: <berkut13(at)berkut13.com> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Con nector > > Can someone point me to the part number/source for a replacement > 90-degree, > bulkhead, slide-on, coax connector used on the Narco AT-150 > transponder > tray? Any of the usual suspects (Mouser, Digi-Key, Allied, etc) > carry > them? > > Thanks, > James > > ________________________________ Message 5 > _____________________________________ > > > From: "Jay Hyde" <jay(at)horriblehyde.com> > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches > > > Good argument Bob.... I use a switch on the panel to power the > trim, but > that may be a bit far away for a quick reaction, before the trim > lurks all > the way to the end. > > Jay > > > -----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: 04 July 2013 04:29 PM > Subject: Re: AeroElect ric-List: Re: Boeing switches > > --> > > At 07:29 AM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > >--> > > > >My two cents: > > > >Using two parallel switches to prevent trim runaway seems > boneheaded, > >and wouldn't stand a thorough engineering fault-tree review. > >Furthermore I'd bet that it never prevented ANY problem from > occurring. > > Whether or not a problem was demonstrably > prevented is irrelevant to the reliability > study. Good FMEA mitigation assumes that the > part WILL fail. Working out a logical means > by which single failures might go undetected > for no more than a single tank full of fuel > has been a time-honored legacy design goal. > > >Sure, I understand the intention, but I don't think it's good > engineering. > > they are not used in PARALLEL. In the Boeing > case, the y are in series with one side controlling > direction, the other side in SERIES controlling power. > Each side can be explored for functionality > in pre-flight, neither side capable of causing > a runaway-by-sticking. > > Beech (and many others) uses the two spdt > switches to handle one half of a PM motor UP-OFF- > DN switching duty. Again, both sides easily > evaluated in pre-flight, neither side capable > of causing a runaway-by-sticking. > > Lear (and many others) uses the 'coolie hat' to > drive relays that DID offer a possibility for runaway-by- > sticking. But their systems architecture included > a wheel-master-disconnect that removed power from > all trim systems along with the autopilot. I AM > aware of trim runaways in aircraft fitted with > wheel master disconnects that would not have happened > if the airplane had been fitted with the split > trim switch where the WMD switch provided the > mitigation. > > > Bob . . . > > > ________________________________ Message 6 > _____________________________________ > > > From: Michael Burbidge <mburbidg(at)gmail.com> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Master/Battery/Alt Field vs. > Master/Battery and Alt > Field... > > > I'm sure I read a discussion of this question somewhere but can't > find it. > > I'm building an RV-9A, basic day/night VFR. I'm using the Basic > Day/Night VFR system > diagram available from B&C website. It is almost identical to the > Z-11 diagram > in Bob's book. One difference is that the Z-11 uses a 2 poll > 3-throw switch > (2-10) for the master, so that the alternator can be switched on > after start. > The Basic VFR diagram from B&C uses a 2 poll 2 throw switch (2-3) > so that > the alternator field is on duri ng start. > > What are the advantages of isolating the alternator field during > startup? My airplane > has a B&C 40 amp alternator. Which approach would you recommend? > > Thanks, > Michael- > > > ________________________________ Message 7 > _____________________________________ > > > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Low voltage indicator with dual > alternators > From: "donjohnston" <don(at)numa.aero> > > > I'm going to have a 60a primary and a 20a secondary alternator > with B&C LR3C and > LS1A voltage regulators respectively. > > If in the event of a primary alternator failure, and I switch to > the secondary, > will the primary low voltage warning light (off of LR3C, pin 5) > remain illuminated? > Or will switching off that alternator open the low voltage circuit? > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403960#403960 > > > _____________ ___________________ Message 8 > _____________________________________ > > > From: Bill Putney <billp(at)wwpc.com> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector > > It's TED 9-30-10 connector. These are solder on connectors and > have the > lowest profile (depth-wise). > > http://hangar-10.com/products/Tray-Mount-Rf-Antenna-Connect.html > > You should check with them to make sure a snap ring is included or > you > may have to buy it separately. > > There's also a DBA-600 that is a connector like you want with a > female > BNC so you don't have a cable attached to your tray. You put a BNC on > the cable and connect it to this adapter. About the same price as the > 9-30-10 but of course you have to do the BNC too. > > http://hangar-10.com/products/Bnc-Tray-Adapter-W%7B47%7DSnap-Ring.html > > > Bill > > On 7/4/13 10:59 AM, berkut13(at)berkut13.com wrote: > > Can someone po int me to the part number/source for a replacement > > 90-degree, > > bulkhead, slide-on, coax connector used on the Narco AT-150 > transponder > > tray? Any of the usual suspects (Mouser, Digi-Key, Allied, > etc) carry > > them? > > > > Thanks, > > James > > * > > > > > > * > > > ________________________________ Message 9 > _____________________________________ > > > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Boeing switches > > > At 01:05 PM 7/4/2013, you wrote: > > > >Good argument Bob.... I use a switch on the panel to power the > trim, but > >that may be a bit far away for a quick reaction, before the trim > lurks all > >the way to the end. > > You would do well to deduce the severity of a > trim runaway. Is the airplane controllable with > full trim either up or down? How fast does the > trim run with respect to pilot reaction times > needed to deal with a runaway? Are there stops > or limits to trim excursion necessary for the full > range of CG envelopes or will the system produce > more pitch authority than would ever be necessary > for normal operations? > > In a Lear, at Mach cruise, the system is manually > failed and the pilot is obligated to keep hands in > the lap for 3 seconds. Only then can he move to > deal with the situation. After achieving a stable, > safe condition, recorded data is analyzed for > busting limits on attitude, altitude and airspeed > excursions. > > The exercise is repeated and trim speeds then > adjusted until a sweat-free, runaway recovery > is assured. > > The trim systems I've seen in some TC aircraft > a re so slow that unexpected trims under worst > case conditions are no big deal. But what's the > story for YOUR airplane? > > Yes, if trim speeds are brisk, trim authority high > and you have good reason for not reducing them, then some > form of inarguable override is indicated. Instructing > the pilot to pull a breaker for taming a trim runaway > is generally not acceptable . . . even panel mounted > switche situated amongst other switches will get > you frowns from the human factors guys. > > At the same time, find out just how much risk is > associated with an uncontrolled trim event and > see if that can be engineered out as opposed to > stacking emergency ops hardware on top of the > design. > > > Bob . . . > > > ________________________________ Message 10 > ____________________________________ > > > From: <berkut13(at)berkut13.com> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector > > Excellent! Exactly what I needed. Thanks. > > > From: Bill Putney > Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2013 4:57 PM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Narco Transponder Tray Coax Connector > > It's TED 9-30-10 connector. These are solder on connectors and > have the > lowest profile (depth-wise). > > http://hangar-10.com/products/Tray-Mount-Rf-Antenna-Connect.html > > You should check with them to make sure a snap ring is included or > you > may have to buy it separately. > > There's also a DBA-600 that is a connector like you want with a > female > BNC so you don't have a cable attached to your tray. You put a BNC on > the cable and connect it to this adapter. About the same price as the > 9-30-10 but of course you have to do the BNC too. > > http://hangar-10.com/products/Bnc-Tray-Adapter-W%7B47%7DSna > > * > > > * > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
At 11:54 PM 7/5/2013, you wrote: > >I knew on some level that low ohms means high current. That's why I >questioned it, but I didn't do the math. 35 amps is a bunch! I'm not >planning to throw away my starter contactor anytime soon. I did >measure the coil both directions and it is the same. Which starter contactor are we talking about? One built onto a starter or an external contactor? When you mentioned 0.3 ohms, the first image in my head was for a contactor built onto a starter. These DO present a very low terminal resistance in the de-energized mode. There's mechanism inside that demands a ~30A closure current and a more moderate, ~10A holding current. . . Run of the mill external contactors http://tinyurl.com/kqphmh . . . have no such shift in demand and will require ~5A to close and hold the contacts. Further, the models sold previously by us and now by B&C have built in coil suppression diodes. Be wary of low resistance measurements with the garden variety multimeter. They're not designed to 'wash out' the effects of lead length and their excitation current to a device under test is too low to offer useful resolution of low resistance measurements. This limitation is what prompted the design of a 4-wire low resistance measurements adapter. This was published in a Beech shop notes bulletin some years back. We had a rash of unnecessary replacement of landing gear down-lock indicator switches on fielded aircraft. This was traced to the quality of contact resistance measurements using the garden variety multi-meter. The task demanded instrumentation better suited to the task. http://tinyurl.com/4l3tuj6 A few years later I crafted this product based on the earlier article . . . http://tinyurl.com/6g9e7vm The value of this technique for low resistance measurement is described in the Grounding chapter of the 'Connection. The same technique is useful for getting meaningful data on coil and contact resistance of the more robust components in the ship's electrical system. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
Date: Jul 06, 2013
> I knew on some level that low ohms means high current. That's why I > questioned it, but I didn't do the math. 35 amps is a bunch! I'm not > planning to throw away my starter contactor anytime soon. I did measure > the coil both directions and it is the same. > > Ed Holyoke And that's why you don't re-invent the wheel, but rather follow the conventional wisdom of using a "standard" starter contactor ahead of the solenoid built into the starter OR use a buffer relay to energize the solenoid just as all modern cars do and as Bob has explained in a previous post. (your starter won't operate without the built in solenoid as that is what engages the pinion with the ring gear) Bob McC ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Low voltage indicator with dual alternators
>I have the same setup and that's how it works. That is, the low >voltage light simply monitors the voltage on the buss independent of >alternator operation. Given that, I've wondered how a failed >alternator would manifest itself. What architecture are we talking about? Z-12 or Z-14? With independent busses for each alternator, the two systems are normally operated with the cross-feed OPEN. Each LV montior will tell the condition of it's respective bus. With Z-12 where the aux alternator is paired with a Standby Regulator, the aux alternator is operated with the switch ON but with the lower set-point for the SB regulator voltage, the aux alternator normally 'runs' in a relaxed state. If the main alternator is shut down for any reason, bus voltage sags and the SB regulator wakes up the aux alternator. If system loads are equal to or less than aux alternator capability, then the lv light will not come on but the AUX ALT LOADED indicator light will come on. If system loads are too great for the aux alternator, the AUX ALT LOADED light flashes to prompt reduction in load. If Z-12 with LR3C regulators, you would normally run with the aux alternator OFF and turn it on only when prompted by a LV warning . . . from either regulator having a warning light installed. >- If failure was due to an overvoltage situation, the breaker would >pop. Since I normally fly with the 2 busses interconnected Not recommended. > I would expect the low voltage lights to remain off perhaps for > the remainder of the flight. If one did come on because buss > voltage dropped below the threshold, I would expect both to come on > more or less simultaneously as long as the busses were > interconnected. The only explicit indication of Alt failure would > be the popped OV breaker. The design goals for Z-14 were two-fold. (1) being able to parallel batteries for engine cranking and (2) being able to share power between systems in the event of an alternator failure. As you have deduced, running them in parallel during normal operations has the potential for obscuring failure of one of the alternators. >- Are there other modes of Alternator failure where there would be >no explicit indication of failure? I'm thinking that a snapped belt >would be an example. If loads and battery condition were such that >the interconnected buss voltage stayed above the low volt threshold, >there would be no explicit indication. Is that right? Yes. Another reason for running them independently of each other for normal flight ops. With the crossfeed closed, you have a Z-12 with dual batteries. Unless one alternator is configured for stand-by operation by incorporation of the appropriate regulator, then you have two alternators in a paralleled mode of operation controlled by regulators not designed for paralleling (current management) of the two alternators. If you want to do this, then set the aux alternator regulator down by about 1 volt so that it stays 'relaxed' for normal ops. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Trouble transmitting...
From: Tom Chapman <tomrv4(at)me.com>
Date: Jul 06, 2013
I have an RV4 with an Icom A200 radio installed. The antenna is a bent whip installed on the bottom of the fuselage between the gear legs. The plane has been flying for 6+ years with this setup, and working fine. The only problem I've ever had with ATC hearing my calls is on the ground, when (I assume) a gear leg is blocking transmission. I can turn the plane slightly and they hear me fine. In the air, I've never had a problem with reception or transmission, even at fairly long distances. Yesterday I flew a cross country and called for flight following soon after my departure from my uncontrolled airport. They heard me fine, and gave me a squawk code. They acknowledged my position, and no further comm with me until he was ready to hand me off. I was hearing all his other exchanges with other planes. He called to hand off, and I acknowledged. (Transmit light on the A200 came on). Before I could switch, he called back with the same transmission. He hadn't heard my reply. I tried several times to respond and no luck. I switched freq's and I couldn't raise the next controller either. I waited 10 min or so and finally got him. I'm assuming my transmissions were weak, and only got thru when I was close to their antenna. I just cancelled with him, and continued on. ...reception is perfect ...transmit light on A200 illuminating ...my radio is being heard by ATC intermittently Where should I start troubleshooting? Thanks! Tom ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: PLEASE! A Reminder...
From: "jonlaury" <jonlaury(at)impulse.net>
Date: Jul 06, 2013
In the interest of clarity in the daily digest, and unclogging the archives, PLEASE REVIEW Matt Dralle's Useage Guidelines. To wit: "- If you want to respond to a post, DO keep the "Subject:" line of your response the same as that of the original post. This makes it easy to find threads in the archive. - When responding, NEVER quote the *entire* original post in your response. DO use lines from the original post to help "tune in" the reader to the topic at hand, but be selective. The impact that quoting the entire original post has on the size of the archive can not be overstated! " Cheers, John Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=404061#404061 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jul 06, 2013
Subject: Re: Trouble transmitting...
Easiest thing first: I've seen what you're describing when the power wire broke *almost* completely--only one or two strands remained. I assume the radio couldn't draw enough power to put out a decent transmission, as it takes much more power to transmit than to do any of the other things it normally does. Same would go for the ground as well, and either one might only show intermittently. Dave Saylor 831-750-0284 CL ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Trouble transmitting...
At 11:03 AM 7/6/2013, you wrote: I have an RV4 with an Icom A200 radio installed. The antenna is a bent whip installed on the bottom of the fuselage between the gear legs. The plane has been flying for 6+ years with this setup, and working fine. The only problem I've ever had with ATC hearing my calls is on the ground, when (I assume) a gear leg is blocking transmission. I can turn the plane slightly and they hear me fine. In the air, I've never had a problem with reception or transmission, even at fairly long distances. Yesterday I flew a cross country and called for flight following soon after my departure from my uncontrolled airport. They heard me fine, and gave me a squawk code. They acknowledged my position, and no further comm with me until he was ready to hand me off. I was hearing all his other exchanges with other planes. He called to hand off, and I acknowledged. (Transmit light on the A200 came on). Before I could switch, he called back with the same transmission. He hadn't heard my reply. I tried several times to respond and no luck. I switched freq's and I couldn't raise the next controller either. I waited 10 min or so and finally got him. I'm assuming my transmissions were weak, and only got thru when I was close to their antenna. I just cancelled with him, and continued on. ...reception is perfect ...transmit light on A200 illuminating ...my radio is being heard by ATC intermittently Where should I start troubleshooting? Given the long history of un-eventful and satisfactory performance, the first rocks to peek under are things most likely to have CHANGED. The first thing I would do is get an SWR/PWR meter and check both transmitter power output -AND- antenna SWR. Two things that might have changed is condition of the transmitter's power output stages or condition of the antenna and its feed line. Here's a good example of a tool for this task. http://tinyurl.com/k4t2pn9 We reviewed this product here on the List a couple of years ago. It's a great performer at a very reasonable price. Every EAA chapter ought to have one to lend to members. Problems like these yield only to quantifiable measurement. If you acquire one of these, you will want to acquire N-male to F-BNC adapters. http://tinyurl.com/ksmdxch and a short piece of good coax (about 2' long) with a BNC-Male on each end. http://tinyurl.com/cgr42l5 (scroll down to RB-142 Cable Assemblies) Lord Kelvin expressed it thusly: "When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts advanced to the stage of science." Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
Subject: Quads - Remarkable UAVs
From: rparigor(at)suffolk.lib.ny.us
Hi Group A little off topic, but very interesting TED presentation I want to share: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2itwFJCgFQ&feature=youtu.be Ron Parigoris ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Looking for (off topic)
I'd like to tap the collective experience of the list in search of a gizmo that I don't even know what to call it . . . I've seen cousins to the 'Chinese finger trap' that could be slipped over a hose or large wire bundle. One end of the 'trap' is fitted with a loop of small cable . . . the same cable that makes up the cylinder of the device. When placed over the hose/bundle and tensioned, it grabs the outside surface over a large area (essential damage free, low pressure) while getting a grip on it. The work piece may then be secured to some suspension point. I've seen them used to hold up drop cords suspended from the ceiling. I've 'wandered' through the Grainger and McMaster catalogs. I'd bet they have 'em if I just knew the name of the beasts! Any ideas? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Looking for (off topic)
I'd bet they have 'em if I just knew the name of the beasts! Any ideas? Duhhh . . . how about 'pulling grips'? It's amazing how simple gaps in language can cause one to waste so much time! Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Looking for (off topic)
Date: Jul 06, 2013
Bob; They're called "Kellums grips". Actually that is one brand name, but should provide sources for you. They are made by Hubbell. Bob McC > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list- > server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III > Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2013 4:30 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Looking for (off topic) > > > > I'd like to tap the collective experience of > the list in search of a gizmo that I don't even > know what to call it . . . > > I've seen cousins to the 'Chinese finger trap' that > could be slipped over a hose or large wire bundle. > One end of the 'trap' is fitted with a loop of small > cable . . . the same cable that makes up the > cylinder of the device. > > When placed over the hose/bundle and tensioned, > it grabs the outside surface over a large area > (essential damage free, low pressure) while > getting a grip on it. The work piece may then > be secured to some suspension point. > > I've seen them used to hold up drop cords suspended > from the ceiling. I've 'wandered' through the > Grainger and McMaster catalogs. I'd bet they have > 'em if I just knew the name of the beasts! > > Any ideas? > > > Bob . . . > > > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Looking for (off topic)
Date: Jul 06, 2013
Sorry, spelling error "Kellems" not "Kellums" Bob McC > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob McCallum [mailto:robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca] > Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2013 4:52 PM > To: 'aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com' > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Looking for (off topic) > > Bob; > > They're called "Kellums grips". Actually that is one brand name, but should provide > sources for you. They are made by Hubbell. > > Bob McC > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric- > list- > > server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III > > Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2013 4:30 PM > > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Looking for (off topic) > > > > > > > > I'd like to tap the collective experience of > > the list in search of a gizmo that I don't even > > know what to call it . . . > > > > I've seen cousins to the 'Chinese finger trap' that > > could be slipped over a hose or large wire bundle. > > One end of the 'trap' is fitted with a loop of small > > cable . . . the same cable that makes up the > > cylinder of the device. > > > > When placed over the hose/bundle and tensioned, > > it grabs the outside surface over a large area > > (essential damage free, low pressure) while > > getting a grip on it. The work piece may then > > be secured to some suspension point. > > > > I've seen them used to hold up drop cords suspended > > from the ceiling. I've 'wandered' through the > > Grainger and McMaster catalogs. I'd bet they have > > 'em if I just knew the name of the beasts! > > > > Any ideas? > > > > > > Bob . . . > > > > > > _- > > > ==================================================== > > ====== > > _- > > > ==================================================== > > ====== > > _- > > > ==================================================== > > ====== > > _- > > > ==================================================== > > ====== > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Looking for (off topic)
Date: Jul 06, 2013
Try this catalogue http://tinyurl.com/khffnbb Bob McC > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list- > server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III > Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2013 4:38 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Looking for (off topic) > > > > I'd bet they have > 'em if I just knew the name of the beasts! > > Any ideas? > > Duhhh . . . how about 'pulling grips'? > It's amazing how simple gaps in language > can cause one to waste so much time! > > > Bob . . . > > > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > _- > ==================================================== > ====== > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
From: Bill Putney <billp(at)wwpc.com>
Subject: Re: Looking for (off topic)
They're called "grips". They are also used to hoist coaxial cables up towers. You can find them in broadcast and two way radio vendors lists. Bill On 7/6/13 1:29 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > I'd like to tap the collective experience of > the list in search of a gizmo that I don't even > know what to call it . . . > > I've seen cousins to the 'Chinese finger trap' that > could be slipped over a hose or large wire bundle. > One end of the 'trap' is fitted with a loop of small > cable . . . the same cable that makes up the > cylinder of the device. > > When placed over the hose/bundle and tensioned, > it grabs the outside surface over a large area > (essential damage free, low pressure) while > getting a grip on it. The work piece may then > be secured to some suspension point. > > I've seen them used to hold up drop cords suspended > from the ceiling. I've 'wandered' through the > Grainger and McMaster catalogs. I'd bet they have > 'em if I just knew the name of the beasts! > > Any ideas? > > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Looking for (off topic)
At 04:25 PM 7/6/2013, you wrote: > >They're called "grips". They are also used to hoist coaxial cables >up towers. You can find them in broadcast and two way radio vendors lists. > >Bill Yeah, I've used them many times back in my tower climbing days. Just had a hard block on the right term. I want to use some to tether garden hoses to a stake next to the hydrant. Our hose bibs have timers on them . . . made of plastic. One good tug with the hose would break them. These basket-woven grips seem like just the ticket for grabbing the hose and maintaining a bend relief between the stake and hose bib. Thanks guys! Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
From: Jeff Luckey <jluckey(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Looking for (off topic)
Bob,=0A=0AI think the name you are looking for is "kellum".- =0A=0AI used to get them from Hubbell, see:=0Ahttp://ecatalog.hubbell-wiring.com/Produc tInformation/ViewCatalog.aspx?Dest=hubbell-wiring.com/press/catalog/t.pdf &Page=59=0A=0Ahere is another reference from google:=0Ahttp://www.plccent er.com/Shop/KELLEMS/074093514/FNFP?source=GoogleShopping&gclid=COGg3aj_ m7gCFUQ6QgodSA4AGg=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A Fro m: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" =0ATo: aeroelec tric-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Saturday, July 6, 2013 1:29 PM=0ASubject: AeroElectric-List: Looking for (off topic)=0A =0A=0A--> AeroElectric-List m essage posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" =0A=0AI'd like to tap the collective experience of=0Athe list in search of a gizmo that I don't even=0Aknow what to call it . . .=0A=0AI've seen cousi ns to the 'Chinese finger trap' that=0Acould be slipped over a hose or larg e wire bundle.=0AOne end of the 'trap' is fitted with a loop of small=0Acab le . . . the same cable that makes up the=0Acylinder of the device.=0A=0AWh en placed over the hose/bundle and tensioned,=0Ait grabs the outside surfac e over a large area=0A(essential damage free, low pressure) while=0Agetting a grip on it. The work piece may then=0Abe secured to some suspension poin t.=0A=0AI've seen them used to hold up drop cords suspended=0Afrom the ceil ing. I've 'wandered' through the=0AGrainger and McMaster catalogs. I'd bet they have=0A'em if I just knew the name of the beasts!=0A=0AAny ideas?=0A = ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Looking for (off topic)
At 06:35 PM 7/6/2013, you wrote: >Bob, > >Might suggest a less expensive solution. Use some cotton line and >tie some half hitches, or a taut line hitch or two, or a prussic >knot or two around the hose. Perhaps anchor the initial bite with a >cinch knot. While they may need renewing every few years, the >overall cost of ownership I expect will be lower over your and your >children's lifetimes. Funny you should mention that. Off the shelf versions are pretty pricey given that they are made from 20-cents worth of wire rope. Saw a youtube presentation on DIY finger traps. I deduced that about 15 minutes and four, 3-foot pieces of rope woven over the appropriate dowel would produce a clone of such devices. Thought about just using synthetic cordage but I got a really good deal on some 1/16" stainless cable off eBay. This will make a good 'shop project' . . . not perhaps for the children but certainly for the grand kids. Thanks! Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: CardinalNSB(at)aol.com
Date: Jul 06, 2013
Subject: starter solenoid
So, I understand that the solenoid needs to make its mechanical travel so the teeth are engaged, before the high current is sent to the starter. That is why the high current to the starter doesn't connect until the plunger is extended. Thanks Skip ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: starter solenoid
At 07:01 PM 7/6/2013, you wrote: >So, I understand that the solenoid needs to make its mechanical >travel so the teeth are engaged, before the high current is sent to >the starter. Yes . . . current available from the FAT wire . . . > That is why the high current to the starter doesn't connect until > the plunger is extended. Thanks Skip The "high current" we have been discussing is that which flows into the SMALL terminal on the solenoid/ contactor assembly. Current that normally comes though the START switch on the panel. This current starts out high . . . ~30A to effect rapid and positive engagement of the pinion gear. Only when the contacts close and energize the starter motor does the contactor coil terminal current FALL to the LOWER holding value on the order of 10A. All this fussing over external contactors or boost relays is for purpose of reducing abuse of the START switch. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
From: Ed <decaclops(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
Howdy Bob, When I said contactor, I meant the firewall variety, a B&C unit. That's the one I'm not throwing away, ;-) I did not measure the coil resistance on that one. I replaced the starter solenoid because it was demanding 20 - 30 starter button pushes before it would crank. The starter contactor on the firewall clunks reliably. The new solenoid coil measured .3 ohm. I don't figure that to be very accurate, but it is repeatable. The VOM leads measured about .5 and then .8 for the coil so I called it .3 ohm. I was just a bit surprised that it was that low, even if I were off a little. Now that I read your piece about contactors and soleniods, I understand why the low resistance. My comment about keeping the contactor was that I'd just as soon not do that to my starter switch. By the way, the Borg Warner (BWD) part number for the starter solenoid I just put on my PM SkyTec is: S5613 I got mine at O'Rielly's auto parts for ~$25. That's much better than $200 flat rate repair at SkyTec + shipping and wait for it. Speaking of diodes, is this overkill? http://www.amazon.com/Amico-Molded-Plastic-Rectifier-Diodes/dp/B009IN1KB8/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1373088088&sr=8-6&keywords=diodes I can get these, but the shipping is more than the diodes: http://www.digikey.com/scripts/DKSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&itemSeq=133108363&uq=635086673453750862 Pax, Ed On 7/6/2013 6:12 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > At 11:54 PM 7/5/2013, you wrote: >> >> I knew on some level that low ohms means high current. That's why I >> questioned it, but I didn't do the math. 35 amps is a bunch! I'm not >> planning to throw away my starter contactor anytime soon. I did >> measure the coil both directions and it is the same. > > Which starter contactor are we talking about? > One *built onto a starter* or an *external* contactor? > > When you mentioned 0.3 ohms, the first image in > my head was for a contactor built onto a starter. > These DO present a very low terminal resistance in the > de-energized mode. There's mechanism inside that > demands a ~30A closure current and a more moderate, > ~10A holding current. . . > > Run of the mill external contactors > > http://tinyurl.com/kqphmh > > <http://tinyurl.com/kqphmh> . . . have no such shift in demand and > will require > ~5A to close and hold the contacts. Further, the models > sold previously by us and now by B&C have built > in coil suppression diodes. > > Be wary of low resistance measurements with the > garden variety multimeter. They're not designed > to 'wash out' the effects of lead length and their > excitation current to a device under test is > too low to offer useful resolution of low resistance > measurements. > > This limitation is what prompted the design of a > 4-wire low resistance measurements adapter. This > was published in a Beech shop notes bulletin some > years back. We had a rash of unnecessary replacement > of landing gear down-lock indicator switches on > fielded aircraft. This was traced to the quality > of contact resistance measurements using the > garden variety multi-meter. The task demanded > instrumentation better suited to the task. > > http://tinyurl.com/4l3tuj6 > > <http://tinyurl.com/4l3tuj6> A few years later I crafted this product > based > on the earlier article . . . > > http://tinyurl.com/6g9e7vm > > The value of this technique for low resistance > measurement is described in the Grounding > chapter of the 'Connection. The same technique > is useful for getting meaningful data on coil > and contact resistance of the more robust components > in the ship's electrical system. > > > Bob . . . > > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
From: Ed <decaclops(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
I'm with you there, Bob. Ed On 7/6/2013 6:19 AM, Bob McCallum wrote: > > >> I knew on some level that low ohms means high current. That's why I >> questioned it, but I didn't do the math. 35 amps is a bunch! I'm not >> planning to throw away my starter contactor anytime soon. I did measure >> the coil both directions and it is the same. >> >> Ed Holyoke > And that's why you don't re-invent the wheel, but rather follow the > conventional wisdom of using a "standard" starter contactor ahead of the > solenoid built into the starter OR use a buffer relay to energize the > solenoid just as all modern cars do and as Bob has explained in a previous > post. (your starter won't operate without the built in solenoid as that is > what engages the pinion with the ring gear) > > Bob McC > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 06, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch/Contactor and Starter Questions
> > >Speaking of diodes, is this overkill? ><http://www.amazon.com/Amico-Molded-Plastic-Rectifier-Diodes/dp/B009IN1KB8/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1373088088&sr=8-6&keywords=diodes>http://www.amazon.com/Amico-Molded-Plastic-Rectifier-Diodes/dp/B009IN1KB8/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1373088088&sr=8-6&keywords=diodes > >I can get these, but the shipping is more than the diodes: ><http://www.digikey.com/scripts/DKSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&itemSeq=133108363&uq=635086673453750862>http://www.digikey.com/scripts/DKSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&itemSeq=133108363&uq=635086673453750862 I like the 1N5400 series devices which are stocked by Radio Shack http://tinyurl.com/pfwlz2v and Jameco http://tinyurl.com/qjefqzq if you don't mind paying for 0.08 each in packs of 30. They use first class parcel for small orders . . . these would come to your door for under $2. The 1N5400 has reasonably robust leads and package. Smaller diodes work too but these are mechanically user friendly, easy to get and the price is right. Any P/N in the 1N540x series is okay from 0 to 9 Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carlos Trigo" <trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt>
Subject: Choosing the switches for an RV-10
Date: Jul 07, 2013
Guys It's time to choose the switches for the RV-10 panel, and I wonder which ones are more popular between the RV-10 builders: For the Master and ALT field, have you used the Cessna split rocker or just 2 separate toggle switches? For the magnetos and starter, did everybody use the ACS combined keyed switch, or is it better to use 2 toggles and one push-button momentary starter switch? And for the lights and other electrical equipment, which has been the choice: the classic rocker switches or the color coded toggle switches? Thanks for your opinions, both in the technical and the functional aspects Carlos ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Trouble transmitting...
From: Tom Chapman <tomrv4(at)me.com>
Date: Jul 07, 2013
Thanks Bob and Dave! I have a starting point now and will get going on it tomorrow... Tom > > ...reception is perfect > ...transmit light on A200 illuminating > ...my radio is being heard by ATC intermittently > > Where should I start troubleshooting? > > Given the long history of un-eventful and > satisfactory performance, the first rocks > to peek under are things most likely to > have CHANGED. > > The first thing I would do is get an SWR/PWR > meter and check both transmitter power output > -AND- antenna SWR. Two things that might have > changed is condition of the transmitter's power > output stages or condition of the antenna > and its feed line. > > Here's a good example of a tool for this task. > > http://tinyurl.com/k4t2pn9 > > We reviewed this product here on the List a > couple of years ago. It's a great performer > at a very reasonable price. Every EAA chapter > ought to have one to lend to members. Problems > like these yield only to quantifiable measurement. > > If you acquire one of these, you will want to > acquire N-male to F-BNC adapters. > > http://tinyurl.com/ksmdxch > > and a short piece of good coax (about 2' long) > with a BNC-Male on each end. > > http://tinyurl.com/cgr42l5 (scroll down to RB-142 Cable Assemblies) > > Lord Kelvin expressed it thusly: > =9CWhen you can measure what you are speaking about, > and express it in numbers, you know something about it, > when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge > is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the > beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in > your thoughts advanced to the stage of science.=9D > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 07, 2013
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Choosing the switches for an RV-10
At 04:37 AM 7/7/2013, you wrote: Guys It's time to choose the switches for the RV-10 panel, and I wonder which ones are more popular between the RV-10 builders: For the Master and ALT field, have you used the Cessna split rocker or just 2 separate toggle switches? The split rocker switch functionality can be duplicated by a progressive transfer switch of any other style. There's nothing 'magic' or extraordinary convenience for having purchase the split rocker switch. http://tinyurl.com/kdqwahq For the magnetos and starter, did everybody use the ACS combined keyed switch, or is it better to use 2 toggles and one push-button momentary starter switch? Similarly, there is nothing 'magic' about functionality of the legacy key-switch . . . which is expensive and takes up a lot of room


June 20, 2013 - July 07, 2013

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-lu