AeroElectric-List Archive Browser

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-mx
October 19, 2015 - December 08, 2015

Date: Oct 19, 2015
Bob, et.al., One of my students bought an AA-1 Yankee which has an 'interesting' issue. The ammeter needle bounces constantly - has done so since he bought it. Yesterday when flying I noticed that the backlighting on the LCD radio disp lay, and the instrument post lights flicker in time with the bouncing needl e (had to look close to see the flicker in the post lights). No other symp toms that I have noticed. I figured it was a VR issue. He recently had a new VR installed, due to a battery charging issue, and the bouncing is still there. The A&P did volta ge testing (don't know exactly what) and reported everything works as expec ted (except for the bouncing needle). So my questions are: What can cause that? What can we look at for further diagnosis? Thanks, Dennis Glaeser Nothing in this message is intended to constitute an electronic signature u nless a specific statement to the contrary is included in this message. Confidentiality Note: This message is intended only for the person or entit y to which it is addressed. It may contain confidential and/or privileged m aterial. Any review, transmission, dissemination or other use, or taking of any action in reliance upon this message by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete it from your co mputer. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ARGOLDMAN(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 19, 2015
Subject: Re: Bouncing ammeter question
Just guessing, however I seem to remember my Yankee years ago (AA-1 clipper) had an incandescen t pulsating beacon on the tip of the rudder. Could it be that this is creating a pulsating drain which you are seeing as a periodic fluctuation in bus voltage? Electrically, the aircraft is quite basic. Originally it was supplied with a Narco MK 12 with the tube/power supply unit located in, if I remember correctly, way aft in the tail cone. The clipper had a gyro inst rument panel. I actually got my instrument rating in it in 1969. check the draw of the beacon. Rich In a message dated 10/19/2015 1:23:14 P.M. Central Daylight Time, dennis.glaeser(at)gm.com writes: Bob, et.al., One of my students bought an AA-1 Yankee which has an =98interestin g=99 issue. The ammeter needle bounces constantly =93 has done so since he boug ht it. Yesterday when flying I noticed that the backlighting on the LCD radio display, and the instrument post lights flicker in time with the bouncing needle (had to look close to see the flicker in the post lights). No oth er symptoms that I have noticed. I figured it was a VR issue. He recently had a new VR installed, due to a battery charging issue, and the bouncing is still there. The A&P did voltage testing (don=99t know exactly what) and reported everything works as expected (except for the bouncing needle). So my questions are: What can cause that? What can we look at for further diagnosis? Thanks, Dennis Glaeser Nothing in this message is intended to constitute an electronic signature unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in this message. Confidentiality Note: This message is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. It may contain confidential and/or privi leged material. Any review, transmission, dissemination or other use, or taking of any action in reliance upon this message by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you rec eived this message in error, please contact the sender and delete it from your computer. ======================== ============ ======================== ============ ======================== ============ ======================== ============ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Bouncing ammeter question
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Oct 19, 2015
There could be an intermittent bad connection in the alternator field circuit. The alternator field switch is a common problem as is the alternator connector. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=448100#448100 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 19, 2015
From: Jim Baker <jimbaker(at)npacc.net>
Subject: Re: Bouncing ammeter question
R28gdG8gdGhlIFplZnRyb25pY3Mgc2l0ZSAoIGFsdGVybmF0b3IgY29udHJvbGxlciApLiBUaGUg cHJvYmxlbSBpcyBwcm9iYWJseSBoaWdoIHJlc2lzdGFuY2UgaW4gdGhlIGZpZWxkIGNpcmN1aXQu IFRoZXkgaGF2ZSBhIHdob2xlIGFydGljbGUgb24gdGhlIHdpZy13YWcgaXNzdWUuCgpKaW0gQmFr ZXIKNDA1IDQyNiA1Mzc3CgotLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQpGcm9tOiBEZW5uaXMg QSBHbGFlc2VyIDxkZW5uaXMuZ2xhZXNlckBnbS5jb20+ClRvOiAiQWVyb0VsZWN0cmljLUxpc3RA bWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbSIgPEFlcm9FbGVjdHJpYy1MaXN0QG1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20+ClNlbnQ6IE1v biwgMTkgT2N0IDIwMTUgMTQ6MjAKU3ViamVjdDogQWVyb0VsZWN0cmljLUxpc3Q6IEJvdW5jaW5n IGFtbWV0ZXIgcXVlc3Rpb24KCi0tXzAwMF9jN2ExMDFhZWZkNjc0ZGI3YjE1YTE5NGI1ZmM2MDhm YkRDTUlQUEVYQ0gwMDJuYW1jb3JwZ21jXwpDb250ZW50LVR5cGU6IHRleHQvcGxhaW47IGNoYXJz ZXQ9InVzLWFzY2lpIgpDb250ZW50LVRyYW5zZmVyLUVuY29kaW5nOiBxdW90ZWQtcHJpbnRhYmxl CgpCb2IsIGV0LmFsLiwKCk9uZSBvZiBteSBzdHVkZW50cyBib3VnaHQgYW4gQUEtMSBZYW5rZWUg d2hpY2ggaGFzIGFuICdpbnRlcmVzdGluZycgaXNzdWUuClRoZSBhbW1ldGVyIG5lZWRsZSBib3Vu Y2VzIGNvbnN0YW50bHkgLSBoYXMgZG9uZSBzbyBzaW5jZSBoZSBib3VnaHQgaXQuClllc3RlcmRh eSB3aGVuIGZseWluZyBJIG5vdGljZWQgdGhhdCB0aGUgYmFja2xpZ2h0aW5nIG9uIHRoZSBMQ0Qg cmFkaW8gZGlzcD0KbGF5LCBhbmQgdGhlIGluc3RydW1lbnQgcG9zdCBsaWdodHMgZmxpY2tlciBp biB0aW1lIHdpdGggdGhlIGJvdW5jaW5nIG5lZWRsPQplIChoYWQgdG8gbG9vayBjbG9zZSB0byBz ZWUgdGhlIGZsaWNrZXIgaW4gdGhlIHBvc3QgbGlnaHRzKS4gIE5vIG90aGVyIHN5bXA9CnRvbXMg dGhhdCBJIGhhdmUgbm90aWNlZC4KSSBmaWd1cmVkIGl0IHdhcyBhIFZSIGlzc3VlLiAgSGUgcmVj ZW50bHkgaGFkIGEgbmV3IFZSIGluc3RhbGxlZCwgZHVlIHRvIGEgPQpiYXR0ZXJ5IGNoYXJnaW5n IGlzc3VlLCBhbmQgdGhlIGJvdW5jaW5nIGlzIHN0aWxsIHRoZXJlLiAgVGhlIEEmUCBkaWQgdm9s dGE9CmdlIHRlc3RpbmcgKGRvbid0IGtub3cgZXhhY3RseSB3aGF0KSBhbmQgcmVwb3J0ZWQgZXZl cnl0aGluZyB3b3JrcyBhcyBleHBlYz0KdGVkIChleGNlcHQgZm9yIHRoZSBib3VuY2luZyBuZWVk bGUpLgpTbyBteSBxdWVzdGlvbnMgYXJlOgpXaGF0IGNhbiBjYXVzZSB0aGF0PwpXaGF0IGNhbiB3 ZSBsb29rIGF0IGZvciBmdXJ0aGVyIGRpYWdub3Npcz8KClRoYW5rcywKCkRlbm5pcyBHbGFlc2Vy CgoKTm90aGluZyBpbiB0aGlzIG1lc3NhZ2UgaXMgaW50ZW5kZWQgdG8gY29uc3RpdHV0ZSBhbiBl bGVjdHJvbmljIHNpZ25hdHVyZSB1PQpubGVzcyBhIHNwZWNpZmljIHN0YXRlbWVudCB0byB0aGUg Y29udHJhcnkgaXMgaW5jbHVkZWQgaW4gdGhpcyBtZXNzYWdlLgoKQ29uZmlkZW50aWFsaXR5IE5v dGU6IFRoaXMgbWVzc2FnZSBpcyBpbnRlbmRlZCBvbmx5IGZvciB0aGUgcGVyc29uIG9yIGVudGl0 PQp5IHRvIHdoaWNoIGl0IGlzIGFkZHJlc3NlZC4gSXQgbWF5IGNvbnRhaW4gY29uZmlkZW50aWFs IGFuZC9vciBwcml2aWxlZ2VkIG09CmF0ZXJpYWwuIEFueSByZXZpZXcsIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiwg ZGlzc2VtaW5hdGlvbiBvciBvdGhlciB1c2UsIG9yIHRha2luZyBvZj0KIGFueSBhY3Rpb24gaW4g cmVsaWFuY2UgdXBvbiB0aGlzIG1lc3NhZ2UgYnkgcGVyc29ucyBvciBlbnRpdGllcyBvdGhlciB0 aGFuPQogdGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHJlY2lwaWVudCBpcyBwcm9oaWJpdGVkIGFuZCBtYXkgYmUgdW5s YXdmdWwuIElmIHlvdSByZWNlaXZlZCA9CnRoaXMgbWVzc2FnZSBpbiBlcnJvciwgcGxlYXNlIGNv bnRhY3QgdGhlIHNlbmRlciBhbmQgZGVsZXRlIGl0IGZyb20geW91ciBjbz0KbXB1dGVyLgoKLS1f MDAwX2M3YTEwMWFlZmQ2NzRkYjdiMTVhMTk0YjVmYzYwOGZiRENNSVBQRVhDSDAwMm5hbWNvcnBn bWNfCkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZTogdGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PSJ1cy1hc2NpaSIKQ29udGVudC1U cmFuc2Zlci1FbmNvZGluZzogcXVvdGVkLXByaW50YWJsZQoKPGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6dj0zRCJ1cm46 c2NoZW1hcy1taWNyb3NvZnQtY29tOnZtbCIgeG1sbnM6bz0zRCJ1cm46c2NoZW1hcy1taWNyPQpv c29mdC1jb206b2ZmaWNlOm9mZmljZSIgeG1sbnM6dz0zRCJ1cm46c2NoZW1hcy1taWNyb3NvZnQt Y29tOm9mZmljZTp3b3JkIiA9CnhtbG5zOm09M0QiaHR0cDovL3NjaGVtYXMubWljcm9zb2Z0LmNv bS9vZmZpY2UvMjAwNC8xMi9vbW1sIiB4bWxucz0zRCJodHRwOj0KLy93d3cudzMub3JnL1RSL1JF Qy1odG1sNDAiPgo8aGVhZD4KPG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj0zRCJDb250ZW50LVR5cGUiIGNvbnRl bnQ9M0QidGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PTNEdXMtYXNjaWkiPQo+CjxtZXRhIG5hbWU9M0QiR2Vu ZXJhdG9yIiBjb250ZW50PTNEIk1pY3Jvc29mdCBXb3JkIDE1IChmaWx0ZXJlZCBtZWRpdW0pIj4K PHN0eWxlPjwhLS0KLyogRm9udCBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLwpAZm9udC1mYWNlCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1p bHk6IkNhbWJyaWEgTWF0aCI7CglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDQgNSAzIDUgNCA2IDMgMiA0O30KQGZvbnQt ZmFjZQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGlicmk7CglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDE1IDUgMiAyIDIgNCAzIDIg NDt9Ci8qIFN0eWxlIERlZmluaXRpb25zICovCnAuTXNvTm9ybWFsLCBsaS5Nc29Ob3JtYWwsIGRp di5Nc29Ob3JtYWwKCXttYXJnaW46MGluOwoJbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTouMDAwMXB0OwoJZm9udC1z aXplOjExLjBwdDsKCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIixzYW5zLXNlcmlmO30KYTpsaW5rLCBz cGFuLk1zb0h5cGVybGluawoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5OTsKCWNvbG9yOiMwNTYzQzE7 Cgl0ZXh0LWRlY29yYXRpb246dW5kZXJsaW5lO30KYTp2aXNpdGVkLCBzcGFuLk1zb0h5cGVybGlu a0ZvbGxvd2VkCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXByaW9yaXR5Ojk5OwoJY29sb3I6Izk1NEY3MjsKCXRleHQt ZGVjb3JhdGlvbjp1bmRlcmxpbmU7fQpzcGFuLkVtYWlsU3R5bGUxNwoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10eXBl OnBlcnNvbmFsLWNvbXBvc2U7Cglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FsaWJyaSIsc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsKCWNv bG9yOndpbmRvd3RleHQ7fQouTXNvQ2hwRGVmYXVsdAoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10eXBlOmV4cG9ydC1v bmx5OwoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7fQpAcGFnZSBXb3JkU2VjdGlv bjEKCXtzaXplOjguNWluIDExLjBpbjsKCW1hcmdpbjoxLjBpbiAxLjBpbiAxLjBpbiAxLjBpbjt9 CmRpdi5Xb3JkU2VjdGlvbjEKCXtwYWdlOldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMTt9Ci0tPjwvc3R5bGU+PCEtLVtp ZiBndGUgbXNvIDldPjx4bWw+CjxvOnNoYXBlZGVmYXVsdHMgdjpleHQ9M0QiZWRpdCIgc3BpZG1h eD0zRCIxMDI2IiAvPgo8L3htbD48IVtlbmRpZl0tLT48IS0tW2lmIGd0ZSBtc28gOV0+PHhtbD4K PG86c2hhcGVsYXlvdXQgdjpleHQ9M0QiZWRpdCI+CjxvOmlkbWFwIHY6ZXh0PTNEImVkaXQiIGRh dGE9M0QiMSIgLz4KPC9vOnNoYXBlbGF5b3V0PjwveG1sPjwhW2VuZGlmXS0tPgo8L2hlYWQ+Cjxi b2R5IGxhbmc9M0QiRU4tVVMiIGxpbms9M0QiIzA1NjNDMSIgdmxpbms9M0QiIzk1NEY3MiI+Cjxk aXYgY2xhc3M9M0QiV29yZFNlY3Rpb24xIj4KPHAgY2xhc3M9M0QiTXNvTm9ybWFsIj5Cb2IsIGV0 LmFsLiw8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4KPHAgY2xhc3M9M0QiTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwv bzpwPjwvcD4KPHAgY2xhc3M9M0QiTXNvTm9ybWFsIj5PbmUgb2YgbXkgc3R1ZGVudHMgYm91Z2h0 IGFuIEFBLTEgWWFua2VlIHdoaWNoIGhhcyBhPQpuICYjODIxNjtpbnRlcmVzdGluZyYjODIxNzsg aXNzdWUuJm5ic3A7CjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPgo8cCBjbGFzcz0zRCJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPlRoZSBh bW1ldGVyIG5lZWRsZSBib3VuY2VzIGNvbnN0YW50bHkgJiM4MjExOyBoYXMgZG89Cm5lIHNvIHNp bmNlIGhlIGJvdWdodCBpdC4mbmJzcDsKPG86cD48L286cD48L3A+CjxwIGNsYXNzPTNEIk1zb05v cm1hbCI+WWVzdGVyZGF5IHdoZW4gZmx5aW5nIEkgbm90aWNlZCB0aGF0IHRoZSBiYWNrbGlnaHRp bj0KZyBvbiB0aGUgTENEIHJhZGlvIGRpc3BsYXksIGFuZCB0aGUgaW5zdHJ1bWVudCBwb3N0IGxp Z2h0cyBmbGlja2VyIGluIHRpbWUgPQp3aXRoIHRoZSBib3VuY2luZyBuZWVkbGUgKGhhZCB0byBs b29rIGNsb3NlIHRvIHNlZSB0aGUgZmxpY2tlciBpbiB0aGUgcG9zdCA9CmxpZ2h0cykuJm5ic3A7 IE5vIG90aGVyIHN5bXB0b21zIHRoYXQgSQogaGF2ZSBub3RpY2VkLiZuYnNwOyA8bzpwPjwvbzpw PjwvcD4KPHAgY2xhc3M9M0QiTXNvTm9ybWFsIj5JIGZpZ3VyZWQgaXQgd2FzIGEgVlIgaXNzdWUu Jm5ic3A7IEhlIHJlY2VudGx5IGhhZCBhPQogbmV3IFZSIGluc3RhbGxlZCwgZHVlIHRvIGEgYmF0 dGVyeSBjaGFyZ2luZyBpc3N1ZSwgYW5kIHRoZSBib3VuY2luZyBpcyBzdGk9CmxsIHRoZXJlLiAm bmJzcDtUaGUgQSZhbXA7UCBkaWQgdm9sdGFnZSB0ZXN0aW5nIChkb24mIzgyMTc7dCBrbm93IGV4 YWN0bHkgdz0KaGF0KSBhbmQgcmVwb3J0ZWQgZXZlcnl0aGluZyB3b3JrcyBhcyBleHBlY3RlZCAo ZXhjZXB0CiBmb3IgdGhlIGJvdW5jaW5nIG5lZWRsZSkuPG86cD48L286cD48L3A+CjxwIGNsYXNz PTNEIk1zb05vcm1hbCI+U28gbXkgcXVlc3Rpb25zIGFyZTogPG86cD48L286cD48L3A+CjxwIGNs YXNzPTNEIk1zb05vcm1hbCI+V2hhdCBjYW4gY2F1c2UgdGhhdD8mbmJzcDsgPG86cD48L286cD48 L3A+CjxwIGNsYXNzPTNEIk1zb05vcm1hbCI+V2hhdCBjYW4gd2UgbG9vayBhdCBmb3IgZnVydGhl ciBkaWFnbm9zaXM/PG86cD48L286cD0KPjwvcD4KPHAgY2xhc3M9M0QiTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48bzpw PiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4KPHAgY2xhc3M9M0QiTXNvTm9ybWFsIj5UaGFua3MsPG86cD48L286 cD48L3A+CjxwIGNsYXNzPTNEIk1zb05vcm1hbCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3A+CjxwIGNs YXNzPTNEIk1zb05vcm1hbCI+RGVubmlzIEdsYWVzZXI8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4KPC9kaXY+Cjxi cj4KPGJyPgpOb3RoaW5nIGluIHRoaXMgbWVzc2FnZSBpcyBpbnRlbmRlZCB0byBjb25zdGl0dXRl IGFuIGVsZWN0cm9uaWMgc2lnbmF0dXJlIHU9Cm5sZXNzIGEgc3BlY2lmaWMgc3RhdGVtZW50IHRv IHRoZSBjb250cmFyeSBpcyBpbmNsdWRlZCBpbiB0aGlzIG1lc3NhZ2UuCjxicj4KPGJyPgpDb25m aWRlbnRpYWxpdHkgTm90ZTogVGhpcyBtZXNzYWdlIGlzIGludGVuZGVkIG9ubHkgZm9yIHRoZSBw ZXJzb24gb3IgZW50aXQ9CnkgdG8gd2hpY2ggaXQgaXMgYWRkcmVzc2VkLiBJdCBtYXkgY29udGFp biBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwgYW5kL29yIHByaXZpbGVnZWQgbT0KYXRlcmlhbC4gQW55IHJldmlldywg dHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uLCBkaXNzZW1pbmF0aW9uIG9yIG90aGVyIHVzZSwgb3IgdGFraW5nIG9mPQog YW55IGFjdGlvbiBpbiByZWxpYW5jZSB1cG9uIHRoaXMKIG1lc3NhZ2UgYnkgcGVyc29ucyBvciBl bnRpdGllcyBvdGhlciB0aGFuIHRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnQgaXMgcHJvaGliPQppdGVk IGFuZCBtYXkgYmUgdW5sYXdmdWwuIElmIHlvdSByZWNlaXZlZCB0aGlzIG1lc3NhZ2UgaW4gZXJy b3IsIHBsZWFzZSBjb249CnRhY3QgdGhlIHNlbmRlciBhbmQgZGVsZXRlIGl0IGZyb20geW91ciBj b21wdXRlci4KCgoKPHByZT48Yj48Zm9udCBzaXplPTNEMiBjb2xvcj0iIzAwMDAwMCIgZmFjZT0z RCJjb3VyaWVyIG5ldyxjb3VyaWVyIj4KCl8tPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNE PTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNE PTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNE PTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNECl8tPTNEICAgICAgICAgIC0gVGhl IEFlcm9FbGVjdHJpYy1MaXN0IEVtYWlsIEZvcnVtIC0KXy09M0QgVXNlIHRoZSBNYXRyb25pY3Mg TGlzdCBGZWF0dXJlcyBOYXZpZ2F0b3IgdG8gYnJvd3NlCl8tPTNEIHRoZSBtYW55IExpc3QgdXRp bGl0aWVzIHN1Y2ggYXMgTGlzdCBVbi9TdWJzY3JpcHRpb24sCl8tPTNEIEFyY2hpdmUgU2VhcmNo ICYgRG93bmxvYWQsIDctRGF5IEJyb3dzZSwgQ2hhdCwgRkFRLApfLT0zRCBQaG90b3NoYXJlLCBh bmQgbXVjaCBtdWNoIG1vcmU6Cl8tPTNECl8tPTNEICAgLS0+IDxhIGhyZWY9M0QiaHR0cDovL3d3 dy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tL05hdmlnYXRvcj9BZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMtTGlzdCI+aHR0cDovL3d3dy5t YXRyb25pY3MuY29tL05hdmlnYXRvcj9BZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMtTGlzdDwvYT4KXy09M0QKXy09M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0QKXy09M0QgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAtIE1BVFJPTklDUyBXRUIgRk9SVU1TIC0KXy09M0Qg U2FtZSBncmVhdCBjb250ZW50IGFsc28gYXZhaWxhYmxlIHZpYSB0aGUgV2ViIEZvcnVtcyEKXy09 M0QKXy09M0QgICAtLT4gPGEgaHJlZj0zRCJodHRwOi8vZm9ydW1zLm1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20iPmh0 dHA6Ly9mb3J1bXMubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbTwvYT4KXy09M0QKXy09M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0QKXy09M0QgICAg ICAgICAgICAgLSBMaXN0IENvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbiBXZWIgU2l0ZSAtCl8tPTNEICBUaGFuayB5b3Ug Zm9yIHlvdXIgZ2VuZXJvdXMgc3VwcG9ydCEKXy09M0QgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAtTWF0dCBEcmFsbGUsIExpc3QgQWRtaW4uCl8tPTNEICAgLS0+IDxhIGhyZWY9M0QiaHR0 cDovL3d3dy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tL2NvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbiI+aHR0cDovL3d3dy5tYXRyb25pY3Mu Y29tL2NvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbjwvYT4KXy09M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0QKCjwvYj48L2ZvbnQ+PC9wcmU+PC9ib2R5 PjwvaHRtbD4KLS1fMDAwX2M3YTEwMWFlZmQ2NzRkYjdiMTVhMTk0YjVmYzYwOGZiRENNSVBQRVhD SDAwMm5hbWNvcnBnbWNfLS0KCgoKCg= ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ron Burnett <ronburnett(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Radio battery voltage?
Date: Oct 19, 2015
Thanks to all for explaining my battery challenge. I have followed the suggestion of keeping the backup battery in the glove box. Ron Burnett Sent from my iPad May you have the blessings of the Lord today. > On Sep 14, 2015, at 9:05 PM, Charlie England wrote: > > >> On 9/14/2015 7:53 PM, Ron Burnett wrote: >> >> I have a Luscombe and use an ICOM radio/VOR on a Quantum rechargeable battery. On the radio I also use a 10 cell AA attached battery which measures 16 volts with new cells in it. >> >> My question is does this high battery voltage "trump" my 12.6 rechargeable? It seems to as my batteries keep needing to be replaced and I rarely need to charge the rechargeable. >> >> Inquiring minds want to know. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Ron Burnett N1131B Luscombe 8A >> N524RB RV-6A > > Are you saying that you're using an Icom portable, with a 10 cell internal battery pack, and you're supplying 12V to the same portable through its external power jack? > > If so, then 'it depends'. Some portables will charge the internal pack from the external power jack; some won't. But 12V won't charge a 16V battery pack, in any case. Some portables actually disconnect the internal battery pack when powered off the external power jack. > > Why not simply remove the battery pack & run off the 12V battery. If you lose the battery, reinstall the internal pack. > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Deems Herring <dsleepy47(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Bouncing ammeter question
Date: Oct 19, 2015
Is it a 1969 AA-1 Yankee or is it 1A=2C 1B or 1C? The wiring diagrams are s lightly different depending on the year.Does the needle behavior change whe n the beacon is turned on or off? The power supply is actually for a top an d bottom beacon. It normally has a resistor on the unused side. Deems Herring owner AA-1B N1491R From: dennis.glaeser(at)gm.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: Bouncing ammeter question Date: Mon=2C 19 Oct 2015 18:20:27 +0000 =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A Bob=2C et.al.=2C=0A =0A One of my students bought an AA-1 Yankee which has an =91interesting=92 iss ue. =0A =0A The ammeter needle bounces constantly ' has done so since he bought it. =0A =0A Yesterday when flying I noticed that the backlighting on the LCD radio disp lay=2C and the instrument post lights flicker in time with the bouncing nee dle (had to look close to see the flicker in the post lights). No other sy mptoms that I=0A have noticed. =0A I figured it was a VR issue. He recently had a new VR installed=2C due to a battery charging issue=2C and the bouncing is still there. The A&P did v oltage testing (don=92t know exactly what) and reported everything works as expected (except=0A for the bouncing needle).=0A So my questions are: =0A What can cause that? =0A What can we look at for further diagnosis?=0A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: A R Goldman <argoldman(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Bouncing ammeter question
Date: Oct 19, 2015
69 should be the straight AA1. That was the year that I had also. Unless the N number was changed you can tell the sequence in which it was made. They s tarted with "56" and then the sequence number. Followed by a letter mine was "L" and was the 48 th one made. They went to the "a etched designation with a change in the wing to make it tamer. It was great just the way it was imn sho Rich Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 19, 2015, at 6:21 PM, Deems Herring wrote: > > Is it a 1969 AA-1 Yankee or is it 1A, 1B or 1C? The wiring diagrams are sl ightly different depending on the year. > Does the needle behavior change when the beacon is turned on or off? The p ower supply is actually for a top and bottom beacon. It normally has a resis tor on the unused side. > > > Deems Herring owner AA-1B N1491R > > From: dennis.glaeser(at)gm.com > To: AeroElectric-List(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Bouncing ammeter question > Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 18:20:27 +0000 > > Bob, et.al., > > > > One of my students bought an AA-1 Yankee which has an =98interesting =99 issue. > > The ammeter needle bounces constantly =93 has done so since he bough t it. > > Yesterday when flying I noticed that the backlighting on the LCD radio dis play, and the instrument post lights flicker in time with the bouncing needl e (had to look close to see the flicker in the post lights). No other sympt oms that I have noticed. > > I figured it was a VR issue. He recently had a new VR installed, due to a battery charging issue, and the bouncing is still there. The A&P did volta ge testing (don=99t know exactly what) and reported everything works a s expected (except for the bouncing needle). > > So my questions are: > > What can cause that? > > What can we look at for further diagnosis? > > > > > 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 19, 2015
From: Jim Baker <jimbaker(at)npacc.net>
Subject: Wig-wag alternator
Go to the Zeftronics site ( alternator controller ). The problem is probably high resistance in the field circuit. They have a whole article on the wig-wag issue. Jim Baker 405 426 5377 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Bouncing ammeter question
From: rayj <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net>
Date: Oct 20, 2015
I don't recall the details, but there's something about old Cessnas and bouncing meters that Bob has written about on this list. Something about cumulative resistance from all the junctions in the circuits, if I recall correctly. I'm sure Bob will comment soon. Raymond Julian Kettle River, MN The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the produce of the second. -John Steinbeck, novelist, Nobel laureate (1902-1968) On 10/19/2015 01:20 PM, Dennis A Glaeser wrote: > Bob, et.al., > > One of my students bought an AA-1 Yankee which has an interesting issue. > > The ammeter needle bounces constantly has done so since he bought it. > > Yesterday when flying I noticed that the backlighting on the LCD radio > display, and the instrument post lights flicker in time with the > bouncing needle (had to look close to see the flicker in the post > lights). No other symptoms that I have noticed. > > I figured it was a VR issue. He recently had a new VR installed, due to > a battery charging issue, and the bouncing is still there. The A&P did > voltage testing (dont know exactly what) and reported everything works > as expected (except for the bouncing needle). > > So my questions are: > > What can cause that? > > What can we look at for further diagnosis? > > Thanks, > > Dennis Glaeser > > > Nothing in this message is intended to constitute an electronic > signature unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in > this message. > > Confidentiality Note: This message is intended only for the person or > entity to which it is addressed. It may contain confidential and/or > privileged material. Any review, transmission, dissemination or other > use, or taking of any action in reliance upon this message by persons or > entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may be > unlawful. If you received this message in error, please contact the > sender and delete it from your computer. > > http://www.matronics.com/contribution > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 20, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Bouncing ammeter question
At 04:13 AM 10/20/2015, you wrote: > >I don't recall the details, but there's something about old Cessnas >and bouncing meters that Bob has written about on this >list. Something about cumulative resistance from all the junctions >in the circuits, if I recall correctly. I'm sure Bob will comment soon. > >Raymond Julian >Kettle River, MN Your system architecture and symptoms are typical of literally millions of examples of similar problems throughout the spectrum of vehicular DC power systems of which airplanes are a small portion. A COMMON THREAD that runs through these systems occurs when the regulator voltage sense line shares a path with alternator field current. This is typical of ALL three-wire regulators of which the 'ford' legacy devices are but one example. This condition is well known in architectures of this type and is often called the 'galloping ammeter'. In the older Cessnas, I recommend refurbishing everything from the bus bar to the regulator which would include breaker, alternator switch and wires. Doing any ONE thing might 'cure' the problem but it's the sum-total of environmentally driven resistance creep that finally stacks up to cause the instability. You may cure it with one replacement but only by replacing ALL will you get back to as-new condition. See http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Alternators/Know_Your_Charging_System.pdf Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Newbie with PM alternator feed question
From: "blues750" <den_beaulieu(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Oct 21, 2015
Bob, Working on the details with ULPower (the engine manufacturer). Not so much a concern for my endurance scenarios, but if I want to use everything I'm going to have on the aircraft, (continuous loads), I am in excess of 30 amps. I have my notes which I will edit a bit and post. I would very much like some outside review of my "plans" to see if I am on the right track with things...just need a few days to get back into my notes. Thanks for the interest and patience! Dave Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=448171#448171 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 22, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Newbie with PM alternator feed question
At 09:14 PM 10/21/2015, you wrote: > >Bob, > >Working on the details with ULPower (the engine manufacturer). Not >so much a concern for my endurance scenarios, but if I want to use >everything I'm going to have on the aircraft, (continuous loads), I >am in excess of 30 amps. I have my notes which I will edit a bit >and post. I would very much like some outside review of my "plans" >to see if I am on the right track with things...just need a few days >to get back into my notes. Thanks for the interest and patience! > >Dave Take a look at the documents on the website at: http://tinyurl.com/9rt6ymn You'll find the load-analsysi work product of several List members in Excel spread sheets. There is also a blank planning form that I use as the FIRST step of planning a new electrical system. Fill out one page for each bus . . . battery, main, e-bus, engine, etc. List the load and it's demands under each of the flight conditions. I've run load analysis studies on a lot of airplanes, one that even included pitot heat STILL came to less than 27A for a max continuous running load. It's really easy to get bogged down in the notion that an alternator be sized to run everything all the time . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: FS: Alternator for C-172, C-182, C-210
From: "Barry" <blmarzaa(at)gmail.com>
Date: Oct 24, 2015
Yellow tagged p/n DOFF10300J for C-172, C-182, C210 and others with 14V systems. $390.00 which includes shipping in the ConUS, and PayPal fees. Barry Marz blmarzaa(at)gmail.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=448242#448242 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Newbie with PM alternator feed question
From: "blues750" <den_beaulieu(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Oct 24, 2015
[quote="nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect"]At 09:14 PM 10/21/2015, you wrote: > > Bob, > > Working on the details with ULPower (the engine manufacturer). Not so much a concern for my endurance scenarios, but if I want to use everything I'm going to have on the aircraft, (continuous loads), I am in excess of 30 amps. I have my notes which I will edit a bit and post. I would very much like some outside review of my "plans" to see if I am on the right track with things...just need a few days to get back into my notes. Thanks for the interest and patience! > > Dave Take a look at the documents on the website at: http://tinyurl.com/9rt6ymn (http://tinyurl.com/9rt6ymn) You'll find the load-analsysi work product of several List members in Excel spread sheets. There is also a blank planning form that I use as the FIRST step of planning a new electrical system. Fill out one page for each bus . . . battery, main, e-bus, engine, etc. List the load and it's demands under each of the flight conditions. I've run load analysis studies on a lot of airplanes, one that even included pitot heat STILL came to less than 27A for a max continuous running load. Thanks Bob... > It's really easy to get bogged down in the notion > that an alternator be sized to run everything all > the time . . . I have read that for planning purposes, one should reduce the alternator rating by 20% - with that thought my 30A alternator would nominally be used as a 24A power source for continuous duty. Yes/no? ...I will do more homework and hopefully present some better, more complete info. Looking forward to feedback from you and the group! Dave Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=448247#448247 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 26, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Newbie with PM alternator feed question
> > >I have read that for planning purposes, one should reduce the >alternator rating by 20% - with that thought my 30A alternator would >nominally be used as a 24A power source for continuous duty. Yes/no? > > Sortof . . . There's a fundamental notion in aircraft electrical system design that you should have enough alternator capacity to recharge a largely depleted battery in 60 minutes of flight. So if you've managed to get an engine started after dragging the battery down to 20% of capacity -AND- it's a 17 a.h. battery, then there should be approx 9A of 'excess' alternator capacity available to recharge a battery. If you've only got 30A total, then your full up running load needs to be 21A or less. For decades, Cessna and contemporaries were content to bolt the same 60A alternator to all their single engine models . . . which generally provided LOTS of excess snort. Further, if the battery is maintained/managed well -AND- you never launch into IFR -AND- your engine always starts in a few blades then the rule of thumb for 20% reserve becomes somewhat useless. THIS is why airplanes with smaller alternators benefit from an accurate load analysis along with some judiciously crafted standard operating procedures. If you're going to launch IFR then KNOWING that your battery capacity is sufficient to your battery only endurance goals is pretty important you your wife and kids. > >...I will do more homework and hopefully present some better, more >complete info. Looking forward to feedback from you and the group! If you don't have a copy of the 'Connection, you can download a .pdf from the website . . . or purchase a paper copy there too . . . but given the limited capability of your alternator combined with the electrically dependent engine, I recommend you educate yourself in the finer details of energy management for CONFIDANT/COMFORTABLE flight. Then sift the pebbles and twigs out with folks here on the List . . . I looked at the engine website briefly but didn't see any mention of a 50A option alternator. Can you point me to the information you were offered? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 27, 2015
From: Jan de Jong <jan_de_jong(at)casema.nl>
Subject: Earthx LiFePO4 for aircraft
Just in case I am not the only one to have missed this... Earthx appears to have responded to complaints from aircraftbuilders: http://earthxmotorsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/ETX_Manual_111017_K.pdf see "Hundred Series" - the battery holds up when the alternator is shut off. Jan de Jong ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Earthx LiFePO4 for aircraft
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Oct 27, 2015
On 10/27/2015 10:02 AM, Jan de Jong wrote: > > > Just in case I am not the only one to have missed this... > > Earthx appears to have responded to complaints from aircraftbuilders: > > http://earthxmotorsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/ETX_Manual_111017_K.pdf > > see "Hundred Series" - the battery holds up when the alternator is > shut off. > > Jan de Jong While it's likely a viable option for a/c use, their PR people and now, their tech writers, really give me pause. quote from your link: In a lead-acid battery the cells are package in the same case with an acid solution that supports the transfer of charge from higher voltage cells to ones with a lower voltage. unquote. Say What? I've never seen a lead acid battery that shared acid between cells. I also think that they are highly deceptive in claiming that a 6 AH lead acid battery is really only 2 AH. If it were, it would be rated at 2 AH. That 30% number they keep citing is the discharge level for maximum life of the battery; not how much energy can be extracted from it. In a normal environment, the battery would never be discharged below ~90%, and that would be due to a really extended engine start event. In a straight discharge (dead alternator) situation, 6 AH is 6 AH, and 2 AH is 2 AH. Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 27, 2015
From: Jan de Jong <jan_de_jong(at)casema.nl>
Subject: Re: Earthx LiFePO4 for aircraft
I believe it was Shorai who introduced the "PbEq" Ah rating and the factor of 3. So there is some defensive and also some wrong PR in the introductory part of the text. At least in their specifications they quote the actual Ah number in addition to the "PbEq". And they show discharge curves for currents and temperatures. Now they also have, in principle, a correct aircraft battery. I strongly suspect they have a very capable electronics engineer there. But experience will tell. Jan de Jong On 10/27/2015 7:00 PM, Charlie England wrote: > > > On 10/27/2015 10:02 AM, Jan de Jong wrote: >> >> >> Just in case I am not the only one to have missed this... >> >> Earthx appears to have responded to complaints from aircraftbuilders: >> >> http://earthxmotorsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/ETX_Manual_111017_K.pdf >> >> see "Hundred Series" - the battery holds up when the alternator is >> shut off. >> >> Jan de Jong > While it's likely a viable option for a/c use, their PR people and > now, their tech writers, really give me pause. > quote from your link: > In a lead-acid battery the cells are package in the same case with an > acid solution that supports the transfer of charge from higher voltage > cells to ones with a lower voltage. > unquote. > > Say What? > > I've never seen a lead acid battery that shared acid between cells. > > I also think that they are highly deceptive in claiming that a 6 AH > lead acid battery is really only 2 AH. If it were, it would be rated > at 2 AH. That 30% number they keep citing is the discharge level for > maximum life of the battery; not how much energy can be extracted from > it. In a normal environment, the battery would never be discharged > below ~90%, and that would be due to a really extended engine start > event. In a straight discharge (dead alternator) situation, 6 AH is 6 > AH, and 2 AH is 2 AH. > > Charlie > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 27, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Earthx LiFePO4 for aircraft
> > >Say What? > >I've never seen a lead acid battery that shared acid between cells. > >I also think that they are highly deceptive in claiming that a 6 AH >lead acid battery is really only 2 AH. If it were, it would be rated >at 2 AH. That 30% number they keep citing is the discharge level for >maximum life of the battery; not how much energy can be extracted >from it. In a normal environment, the battery would never be >discharged below ~90%, and that would be due to a really extended >engine start event. In a straight discharge (dead alternator) >situation, 6 AH is 6 AH, and 2 AH is 2 AH. > >Charlie I've had a couple of 'semantics wrestling' matches with EarthX. This whole 'lead-acid equivalency' thing is smoke and mirrors . . . at least as far as aircraft are concerned . . . where STARTING an engine is NOT the defining factor for battery sizing. They asked me to participate in the development of an EarthX 'application' document wherein the company would suggest one of their products as suited for popular models of aircraft. I attempt to explain that such a document was not only fraught with potential for error, it opened them up for a lawsuit should some hapless pilot run out of battery snort after having replaced the stock SVLA battery based on EarthX lead-acid equivalency claims. I have an EarthX battery sample that I intend to test on my minivan. But I need a data acquisition system that Paul and I have under development. It will gather fine resolution data for battery performance for long periods of time. I'll get a month of data on the as-installed, soggy battery. Then on the EarthX battery, then on a new battery of the size recommended for the car. I'll do cap-checks on all three test articles as well. But in any case, be aware of the need for knowing USEABLE CAPACITY of any battery you install irrespective of brand or chemistry. Understand further that many of the folks out there hawking light weight super-batteries to the OBAM aviation DO NOT appear to understand the unique requirements for integrating a battery onto an airplane. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 28, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Fire Sale = Phase V
I have several hundred solder-sleeves with pigtails for terminating shielded wires. Not sure what the part number is but as you can see here, it shrinks down well onto a 22AWG twisted trio. Emacs! Thought I'd give the List members first crack at them . . . Bag of 20 pieces postage paid to US addresses is $10. Email me directly please . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Fire Sale Phase V - SOLD OUT
Thank you gentlemen . . . the recently uncovered 'stash' of solder sleeves is sold out. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Fire Sale Phase V - SOLD OUT
At 12:10 PM 10/29/2015, you wrote: > >There aren't any women on the list? :>) None who ordered parts . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rene" <rene(at)felker.com>
Subject: Fire Sale Phase V - SOLD OUT
Date: Oct 29, 2015
That is hard to tell sometimes.. J Rene' 801-721-6080 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, October 29, 2015 1:44 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fire Sale Phase V - SOLD OUT At 12:10 PM 10/29/2015, you wrote: There aren't any women on the list? :>) None who ordered parts . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 2015
From: Sam Marlow <sam.marlow(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: Re: Fire Sale Phase V - SOLD OUT
Can someone help me identify what kind of connectors are used on this switch? I want to use it on the flaps for an RV7A. Part # 13AT437-T2 7711 or M8805/26-010, not sure which one is the part number. Thanks! Sam Marlow Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > Thank you gentlemen . . . the recently uncovered > 'stash' of solder sleeves is sold out. > > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 2015
From: Sam Marlow <sam.marlow(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: Switch ID
Can someone help me identify what kind of connectors are used on this switch? I want to use it on the flaps for an RV7A. Part # 13AT437-T2 7711 or M8805/26-010, not sure which one is the part number. Thanks! Sam Marlow ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Switch ID
From: Eric Page <edpav8r(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Oct 29, 2015
Those are called solder turrets: There is no mating connector. They're meant to have bare wires wrapped arou nd them then soldered, like this: I'll leave it to others here to discuss their suitability for use in aircraf t. Eric > On Oct 29, 2015, at 3:32 PM, Sam Marlow wrote: > Can someone help me identify what kind of connectors are used on this swit ch? I want to use it on the flaps for an RV7A. Part # 13AT437-T2 7711 or M88 05/26-010, not sure which one is the part number. > Thanks! > > Sam Marlow

________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 2015
From: Sam Marlow <sam.marlow(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: Re: Switch ID
Thanks for the reply! Eric Page wrote: > Those are called solder turrets: > > > There is no mating connector. They're meant to have bare wires wrapped around them then soldered, like this: > > > I'll leave it to others here to discuss their suitability for use in aircraft. > > Eric > > >> On Oct 29, 2015, at 3:32 PM, Sam Marlow wrote: >> Can someone help me identify what kind of connectors are used on this switch? I want to use it on the flaps for an RV7A. Part # 13AT437-T2 7711 or M8805/26-010, not sure which one is the part number. >> Thanks! >> >> Sam Marlow >
> > >
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: A new 'star' on the lithium horizon
October 26, 2015 by Charles Morris & filed under Newswire, The Tech. Sakti3 Dyson, the manufacturer of high-tech vacuum cleaners and restroom hand dryers, has acquired Michigan startup Sakti3 for $90 million in cash, as reported by <http://qz.com/525623/vacuum-cleaner-maker-dyson-is-buying-experimental-batt ery-startup-sakti3/>Quartz. Founder and CEO Ann Marie Sastry will oversee development of her company=92s solid-state battery technology as an executive for Dyson. UK-based Dyson, which invested $15 million in Sakti3 last March, also plans to build a new battery production plant, with an investment of up to $1 billion. The EV community has followed Sakti3 closely ' in August 2014, CEO Ann Marie Sastry told Scientific American that the company=92s prototype solid-state battery cells had achieved energy density of 1,143 Watt-hours per liter ' more than double that of today=92s best lithium-ion batteries. GM Ventures invested a chunk of change in the company in September 2010, and some speculated that Sakti3 was a contender to provide ba tteries for GM=92s upcoming 200-mile EV. Solid-state tech was in the news again recently, as auto parts giant Bosch bought Seeo, another solid-state battery startup. Is all of Sakti3=92s pioneering work really going to end up as a way to improve battery life in cordless vacuums? Neither Sastry nor Dyson CEO James Dyson would comment on speculation about future plans to provide batteries for EVs, but Dyson did say that he=92s not ruling out the possibility that Sakti3=92s technology could be licensed to other companies. =93We are very fortunate indeed to join and become a contributor to not only Dyson, but hopefully help get solid-state battery technology out into commercial products much, much more quickly and efficiently,=94 said Sastry. =93Where this will take us isn=92t yet something we can comment on, but it is sure to be exciting. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: A new 'star' on the lithium horizon
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Oct 30, 2015
On 10/30/2015 10:52 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > October 26, 2015 by Charles Morris > /&/ filed under > Newswire , The Tech > . > > > Dyson, the manufacturer of high-tech vacuum cleaners and restroom hand > dryers, has acquired Michigan startup Sakti3 for $90 million in cash, > as reported by Quartz > <http://qz.com/525623/vacuum-cleaner-maker-dyson-is-buying-experimental-battery-startup-sakti3/>. > Founder and CEO Ann Marie Sastry will oversee development of her > companys solid-state battery technology as an executive for Dyson. > > UK-based Dyson, which invested $15 million in Sakti3 last March > , > also plans to build a new battery production plant, with an investment > of up to $1 billion. > > The EV community has followed Sakti3 closely in August 2014, CEO Ann > Marie Sastry told Scientific American that the companys prototype > solid-state battery cells had achieved *energy density of 1,143 > Watt-hours per liter* > ** > more than double that of todays best lithium-ion batteries. GM > Ventures invested a chunk of change in the company in September 2010, > and some speculated that Sakti3 was a contender to provide batteries > for GMs upcoming 200-mile EV > . > > Solid-state tech was in the news again recently, as auto parts giant > Bosch bought Seeo, another solid-state battery startup. > > Is all of Sakti3s pioneering work really going to end up as a way to > improve battery life in cordless vacuums? Neither Sastry nor Dyson CEO > James Dyson would comment on speculation about future plans to provide > batteries for EVs, but Dyson did say that hes not ruling out the > possibility that Sakti3s technology could be licensed to other companies. > > We are very fortunate indeed to join and become a contributor to not > only Dyson, but hopefully help get solid-state battery technology out > into commercial products much, much more quickly and efficiently, > said Sastry. Where this will take us isnt yet something we can > comment on, but it is sure to be exciting. > > Bob . . . > The cool thing about the article is that it mentions several competing companies/approaches. Maybe it will push Elon to even better approaches..... Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 2015
Subject: A new 'star' on the lithium horizon
From: "Art Zemon" <art(at)zemon.name>
=0AAs the owner of a plug-in hybrid car, this is great news. I just had to sell my pure electric car because it did not have sufficient range for my n eeds.=0A =0A -- Art Z.=0A =0A--[ http://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/ ]( http: //CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/ )"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel=0A ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: A new 'star' on the lithium horizon
At 12:52 PM 10/30/2015, you wrote: >As the owner of a plug-in hybrid car, this is great news. I just had >to sell my pure electric car because it did not have sufficient >range for my needs. My personal wish is that the technology thrives and is licensed to multiple manufacturers. Anyone who sets out to market an aviation- unique product is at risk for making a small fortune by starting out with a large one . . . it's hard enough for cars . . . what are Tesla's prospects for ever producing positive returns for all its investors? On the other hand, the first airplanes to get electrical systems exploited a tiny 'scoop' into the technology flow for millions of automobiles. Hence, a quantum jump in any automotive technology bodes well for the minuscule aviation market. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: PLEASE READ - Matronics Email List Fund Raiser During
November! Dear Listers, Each November I hold a PBS-like fund raiser to support the continued operation and upgrade of the Email List and Fourm Services at Matronics. It's solely through the Contributions of List members (you) that these Matronics Lists are possible. You have probably noticed that there are no banner ads or pop-up windows on any of the Matronics Lists or related web sites such as the Forums site http://forums.matronics.com , Wiki site http://wiki.matronics.com , or other related pages such as the List Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search , List Browse http://www.matronics.com/listbrowse , etc. This is because I believe in a List experience that is completely about the sport we all enjoy - namely Airplanes and not about annoying advertisements. During the month of November I will be sending out List messages every couple of days reminding everyone that the Fund Raiser is underway. I ask for your patience and understanding during the Fund Raiser and throughout these regular messages. The Fund Raiser is only financial support mechanism I have to pay all of the bills associated with running these lists. YOUR personal Contribution counts! This year we have a really HUGE and TERRIFIC line up of free gifts to go along with the various Contribution levels. In fact, there are over 30 different gifts to choose from - more than we've ever had before! There's something for everyone, to be sure. Most all of these gifts have been provided by some of the vary members and vendors that you'll find on the Matronics Lists and they have been either donated or provided at substantially discounted rates. This year, these generous members include: Andy Gold of the Builder's Bookstore http://www.buildersbooks.com These are very generous guys and I encourage you to visit their respective web sites. Each one offers a unique and excellent aviation-related product line. I would like publicly to thank Andy, Bob, Corbin, George, and Jon their generous support of the Lists again this year!! Please make your List Contribution using any one of three secure methods including using a credit card, PayPal, or by personal check. All three methods afford you the opportunity to select one of this year's free gifts with a qualifying Contribution amount!! To make your Contribution, please visit the secure web site: http://www.matronics.com/contribution I would like to thank everyone in advance for their generous financial AND moral support over the years! Thank you! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator RV-4/RV-6/RV-8 Builder/Rebuilder/Pilot ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Where are fuses required?
From: "donjohnston" <don@velocity-xl.com>
Date: Nov 01, 2015
I'm putting in a small battery to keep the EFIS & AHRS up prior to and during engine starts. It will also be able to power the EFIS & AHRS in the unlikely event that that primary electrical system should have some type catastrophic failure. But my question is about fuses. Since the backup battery has a switch that would remove the fuses in the fuse block from the circuit, I'm thinking that another fuse would be required between the battery and the switch (see attached). Is this a common (or best) practice? Thanks, Don Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=448517#448517 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/electrical_system__2015_10_22_702.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 2015
From: Jan de Jong <jan_de_jong(at)casema.nl>
Subject: LiFePO4 endurance battery?
LiFePO4 starting batteries contain relatively little energy. It may be useful to look at the possibilty of an AUX battery for endurance (and plan C backup, and possibly voltage hold-up during cranking). Main task: sit until needed - possibly never. Searching "standby" and "backup" with safety as the main interest I found: http://www.pbq.nl/media/datasheet/pbq-lithium-lifepo4-batteries-product-overview.pdf The text is not quite native English. Made in China (Enerise?). Examples: http://www.pbqbatteries.com/media/datasheet/pbq-life-5-12.pdf http://www.pbqbatteries.com/media/datasheet/pbq-life-15-12.pdf Note: thermal runaway protection additive in the electrolyte Note: low maximum charging current Note: unknown self-discharge rate (depends on BMS); probably reasonable (a 3Ah size exists) Note: not for free: http://www.advitek.nl/merken/pbq/pbq-life-5---12-lithium-lifepo4-12v-5ah-lithium-ac.html http://www.advitek.nl/merken/pbq/pbq-lf-15---12-lithium-lifepo4-12v-15ah-lithium-ac.html Note: supposedly long life Note: I did not easily find a USA equivalent Jan de Jong ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Where are fuses required?
From: C&K <yellowduckduo(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 01, 2015
In the event of a short in the wiring or the device under power you want to prevent the battery from burning something. If the battery is large enough that a short will flow enough current to burn the wiring then yes a fuse would be appropriate. If it was a battery that might itself overheat with a shorted wire (lithium?) then a fuse would also be appropriate. Ken On 01/11/2015 8:00 AM, donjohnston wrote: > > I'm putting in a small battery to keep the EFIS & AHRS up prior to and during engine starts. It will also be able to power the EFIS & AHRS in the unlikely event that that primary electrical system should have some type catastrophic failure. > > But my question is about fuses. Since the backup battery has a switch that would remove the fuses in the fuse block from the circuit, I'm thinking that another fuse would be required between the battery and the switch (see attached). > > Is this a common (or best) practice? > > Thanks, > Don > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=448517#448517 > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/electrical_system__2015_10_22_702.jpg > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: LiFePO4 endurance battery?
From: "plevyakh" <hplevyak(at)mac.com>
Date: Nov 01, 2015
Jan, I installed an EarthX ETX680 in my GlaStar about two months ago. I have roughly 40 flight hours on the battery. I'm very pleased with my installation so far. Engine starting is much improved over my Odyssey PC680. Engine start improvements are a result of 1) moving the battery forward from an AFT tail cone location to on the Firewall (gained 4.5V of starter voltage), and 2) the increased cranking amps of the ETX680. I'm using Bob's Z13-8 architecture as my base but with some differences (e.g., Dual Lightspeed Ignition system). I have a Main Bus, Endurance Bus, and Battery Bus. After the installation I did a Endurance Bus "load test"...by simulating failed primary alternator (B&C Specialty 60 amp), and failed backup alternator (B&C SD-8 (8amp)) and running on only the ETX680 battery. I had a voltmeter on the battery bus with battery bus voltage at 13.2V at beginning of test, and 12.87V at the end of test...End of Test established when my Instrument Panel "Blue LED Battery Warning light" came on my panel. My endurance bus load was 7.4amps. Outside Air Temp was 75deg F. The ETX680 battery ran for 63 minutes until the LED Battery light came on. The LED battery warning light is run by the EarthX Battery Management System (BMS). One function of the BMS is that a flashing LED light indicates that one or more of the cells are discharged greater than 80%. More on the BMS can be found in the EarthX manual. Since I have the SD-8 backup alternator...I won't need to push the ETX680 battery this hard...but it's good to know I have roughly an hour of flight time before my warning light comes on (Battery Ops Alone). I plan to re-run this test at each Annual inspection to maintain awareness of it's capacity as I use up life cycles. I did reset my B&C Specialty Voltage regulator trip point for recharge to 14.5V as recommended by Bob K. in a previous thread of Lithium batteries. I'm also running cooling hoses to the battery to keep it cool since it's installed FWF in the engine compartment. I highly recommend Bob Knuckoll's battery series in KitPlanes magazine...these articles are worth the price of annual subscription alone! Howard (GlaStar N19HL approaching 100 hrs flight time). -------- Howard Plevyak GlaStar / Cincinnati, Ohio Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=448522#448522 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Technique for DSub Pin / data breakout for RPM
issue
From: "plevyakh" <hplevyak(at)mac.com>
Date: Nov 01, 2015
Folks, Just wanted to say THANKS! for all the great ideas on how to accomplish this data breakout. I was able to craft my test rig, and determine my RPM issue. Much appreciated! I love the AeroElectrics Forum!!! What a great resource for us experimental folks. Sincerely, Howard -------- Howard Plevyak GlaStar / Cincinnati, Ohio Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=448523#448523 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Where are fuses required?
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 01, 2015
That switch does not remove the fuses from the circuit. The fuses will protect downstream wires and loads from excessive current no matter if the switch is open or closed. As for needing additional short circuit protection near the battery, it all depends on how long the wires are between the battery and existing fuses and what danger those wires are in from potential damage. Usually it is not a good idea to have fuses in series because it is unpredictable which fuse will blow first, even if they are different sizes. If you think that the current path between the battery and fuse needs protection, then a fusible link should be considered. For a circuit with 20awg wire, a fusible link made of 24awg wire will work. If you really want to use another fuse at the battery, then use a much larger fuse. It will protect against short circuits between the battery and 2 amp fuse. The 2 amp fuse will protect against downstream shorts and overloads. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=448524#448524 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Where are fuses required?
From: "donjohnston" <don@velocity-xl.com>
Date: Nov 01, 2015
user9253 wrote: > That switch does not remove the fuses from the circuit. The fuses will protect downstream wires and loads from excessive current no matter if the switch is open or closed. "It will protect downstream wires." But not upstream wires. I am asking about the wire from the battery to the switch. With the switch open, there would be no circuit protection between the battery and the switch. Is that something to be concerned about? The distance from the battery to the switch is about 6'. From the switch to the fuse block is another 3'. Obviously, there are many places were there is no circuit protection (the link from the battery to the master contactor, master contactor to the starter contactor, master contactor to the main bus bar, etc.) I'm trying to understand what the criteria is for when fuses (or CB's) are called for. Thanks, Don Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=448526#448526 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: LiFePO4 endurance battery?
> >Since I have the SD-8 backup alternator...I won't need to push the >ETX680 battery this hard...but it's good to know I have roughly an >hour of flight time before my warning light comes on (Battery Ops >Alone). I plan to re-run this test at each Annual inspection to >maintain awareness of it's capacity as I use up life cycles. > >I did reset my B&C Specialty Voltage regulator trip point for >recharge to 14.5V as recommended by Bob K. in a previous thread of >Lithium batteries. I'm also running cooling hoses to the battery to >keep it cool since it's installed FWF in the engine compartment. > >I highly recommend Bob Knuckoll's battery series in KitPlanes >magazine...these articles are worth the price of annual subscription alone! Good work sir . . . thanks for sharing. I trust you'll write down the results of your findings. I've taken a hiatus on the KP articles . . . got a couple in process on the hard drive, one of which is a wrap-up piece on COMPARATIVE performance of a stock lead-acid, an EarthX LiPO and I'm thinking of running an 18 a.h. SLVA to round out the data package. It's going to be a while . . . in the mean time, cogent studies such as yours will assisting in expanding the body of knowledge. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: LiFePO4 endurance battery?
From: Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com>
Date: Nov 01, 2015
The way these batteries are going there is the potential for a different battery bus architecture. An aircraft battery is usually performing 2 different requirements, firstly stored energy to start the engine and secondly as a back-up power supply should the engine driven system fail, or to fill in for short term loads. Starting requires a large current for a few seconds (if everything works properly), back-up power requires more modest currents for much longer. The two requirements are quite different and require different batteries. For many years we have used lead-acid batteries for both tasks as the minimum battery required for reliable starting was adequate for the back-up task, but those typically available;e are relatively heavy - say 17lb for a PC680 common in Lycoming engined aircraft. There is a strong argument, advocated by Bob and others, to use two cheaper batteries of the same type - one for starting and one for back-up - and to replace one each year (there is more to this argument - read The Connection). With the progress in Lithium battery technology this may no longer be the optimum strategy - as long as the promises of Li battery makers are true... Lithium batteries are significantly lighter than lead-acids for the same task (not always the same stored energy). Also batteries optimised for starting probably don't store sufficient energy to meet the back-up requirement. Also a Lithium battery capable of providing starting currents and storing sufficient energy for the back-up case can be 5x more expensive than a pure back-up battery. As any Li battery suitable for aviation use will have an on-board battery management system, and can cope with being depleted to a point where the BMS shuts off without a life penalty, it is likely that Lithium batteries will last much longer than lead-acids. Li batteries are also attractive are they don't lose much charge over time. An Li battery designed to crank a Lycoming can be relatively small and light. With a companion back-up battery the combined weight will be less than one 15Ah lead-acid. The cost will be 2 or 3 times that of a PC680, but the lithiums should last a lot longer. Clearly there is little data available beyond battery manufacturers' claims as these batteries are only just becoming available in any significant numbers and the technology is still maturing. I have been talking to a Lithium battery company in the UK about a sailplane application. To provide some numbers, a 20Ah battery, which will provide a maximum of 20A, weighs 2.8kg (6.2lb) and has a life of 3000 cycles (probably 10x an equivalent lead acid) and would retail at (around) $200. A Li battery to start a Lycoming (nominally a 5Ah battery) weighs around 2.5lb, has a similar 3000 cycle life expectancy, but might cost around $300. Overall this pair would weigh around half a PC680, but would be at least 3x more expensive and will require a more complex electrical system. Once these batteries have proven their reliability any aircraft that doesn't require any significant back-up capability may be able to realise a 12lb+ weight saving at a relatively modest $/lb rate. Who knows where this will go in the next year or two, and which particular Li technology will become favoured. Peter On 01/11/2015 13:13, Jan de Jong wrote: > > > LiFePO4 starting batteries contain relatively little energy. > It may be useful to look at the possibilty of an AUX battery for > endurance (and plan C backup, and possibly voltage hold-up during > cranking). > Main task: sit until needed - possibly never. > > Searching "standby" and "backup" with safety as the main interest I > found: > http://www.pbq.nl/media/datasheet/pbq-lithium-lifepo4-batteries-product-overview.pdf > > The text is not quite native English. > Made in China (Enerise?). > Examples: > http://www.pbqbatteries.com/media/datasheet/pbq-life-5-12.pdf > http://www.pbqbatteries.com/media/datasheet/pbq-life-15-12.pdf > > Note: thermal runaway protection additive in the electrolyte > Note: low maximum charging current > Note: unknown self-discharge rate (depends on BMS); probably > reasonable (a 3Ah size exists) > Note: not for free: > http://www.advitek.nl/merken/pbq/pbq-life-5---12-lithium-lifepo4-12v-5ah-lithium-ac.html > > http://www.advitek.nl/merken/pbq/pbq-lf-15---12-lithium-lifepo4-12v-15ah-lithium-ac.html > > Note: supposedly long life > Note: I did not easily find a USA equivalent > > Jan de Jong > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Where are fuses required?
From: Bill Putney <billp(at)wwpc.com>
Date: Nov 01, 2015
The criteria is; wherever you would not like an electrical fire. The battery to the master contactor should be a few inches. That's your cut off if everything goes sideways. Of course once you open the master, you have no power for anything. The wire from the main contactor to the starter contactor and on to the starter is really big wire and it's not likely to get hot enough fast enough to cause a fire. The unlucky exception is when some part of the airframe cuts through the starter wire's insulation. In that case you'll get a pretty good flash while the electric arc is eating airframe and the wire at the point of contact. If it happens to be in a spot where there is something flammable there's a fire. If not, the arc will eat airframe and wire until the gap gets so wide the arc can't be sustained. I think the usual thing to do is to put the fuse block(s)/circuit breakers really close to the main power bus and protect the main power bus really well. Then switches that control loads come after the protective devices. Switches are mechanical assemblies and I've seen a fair number of switches that have disassembled themselves. Then you have a power source flopping around with the switch actuator still firmly mounted to the panel. If you have a 6' piece of #18 wire from the battery to the switch and then another 3' to the fuse, that is a potential 9' long hot knife or igniter. You really need to physically protect every one of those as if it was a main bus wire. That means, don't run it in bundles with other wires (or plumbing), make sure it's well protected and stood off from any grounded conductive surface. For most designers, the pain of having to treat a bunch of wires as is they were main bus wires is such a pain in the neck that they just protect things as close to a single main bus as possible. Bill On 11/1/15 07:43, donjohnston wrote: > > > user9253 wrote: >> That switch does not remove the fuses from the circuit. The fuses will protect downstream wires and loads from excessive current no matter if the switch is open or closed. > > "It will protect downstream wires." But not upstream wires. > > I am asking about the wire from the battery to the switch. With the switch open, there would be no circuit protection between the battery and the switch. Is that something to be concerned about? > > The distance from the battery to the switch is about 6'. From the switch to the fuse block is another 3'. > > Obviously, there are many places were there is no circuit protection (the link from the battery to the master contactor, master contactor to the starter contactor, master contactor to the main bus bar, etc.) > > I'm trying to understand what the criteria is for when fuses (or CB's) are called for. > > Thanks, > Don > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=448526#448526 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob Verwey <bob.verwey(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 01, 2015
Subject: help with simple 12v motor reversing circuit
G'day, Can someone please "roll"me a simple circuit for reversing a 12v dc motor. I have robust limit switches capable of easily handling the 6 amps that the motor draws on this linear actuator "non aviation application" . The limit switches each have 2 contacts, n.c. So I have one n.o./n.c. "push to make" pushbutton and another n.o., for the up and down functions. Obviously if both are pushed simultaneously, nothing should happen. Thanks! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob Verwey <bob.verwey(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 01, 2015
Subject: help with simple 12v motor reversing circuit
G'day, Can someone please "roll"me a simple circuit for reversing a 12v dc motor. I have robust limit switches capable of easily handling the 6 amps that the motor draws on this linear actuator "non aviation application" . The limit switches each have 2 contacts, n.c. So I have one n.o./n.c. "push to make" pushbutton and another n.o., for the up and down functions. Obviously if both are pushed simultaneously, nothing should happen. Thanks! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: help with simple 12v motor reversing circuit
At 11:18 AM 11/1/2015, you wrote: >G'day, >Can someone please "roll"me a simple circuit for reversing a 12v dc motor. =C2 >I have robust limit switches capable of easily >handling the 6 amps that the motor draws on this >linear actuator "non aviation application" . The limit switches eac > > See http://tinyurl.com/nhftedq Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Where are fuses required?
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 01, 2015
> With the switch open, there would be no circuit protection between the battery and the switch. There is no circuit protection between the battery and the switch regardless of whether the switch is open or closed. If that wire shorts to ground, it doesn't matter if the switch is open or closed. The 2 amp fuse will not blow because it will not be conducting the ground fault current. It is difficult to give advice without seeing the physical location of components. How about replacing the wire from the battery to the 2 amp fuse with 18 AWG wire and putting a fusible link or large value fuse (15 Amp ?) right at the battery? I assume that a fuse located at the battery would not be accessible during flight. So it should be sized so that the 2 amp fuse would always blow first if the load shorts out. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=448549#448549 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Where are fuses required?
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 01, 2015
Of course it is not a good idea to replace a blown fuse in flight. It is safer to wait until on the ground before troubleshooting. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=448550#448550 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 2015
From: Jim Baker <jimbaker(at)npacc.net>
Subject: Re: Corrupted messages
VGVzdC4KCkppbSBCYWtlcgo0MDUgNDI2IDUzNzcKCi0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0t CkZyb206IERqIE1lcnJpbGwgPGRlZWpAZGVlai5uZXQ+ClRvOiAiYWVyb2VsZWN0cmljLWxpc3RA bWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbSIgPGFlcm9lbGVjdHJpYy1saXN0QG1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20+ClNlbnQ6IFN1 biwgMDEgTm92IDIwMTUgMTU6MzkKU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IEFlcm9FbGVjdHJpYy1MaXN0OiBDb3Jy dXB0ZWQgbWVzc2FnZXMKCi0tPiBBZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMtTGlzdCBtZXNzYWdlIHBvc3RlZCBieTog RGogTWVycmlsbCA8ZGVlakBkZWVqLm5ldD4KCgo+IAo+PiBPbiAxIE5vdiAyMDE1LCBhdCAwNzoy MCBwbSwgSmFuIGRlIEpvbmcgPGphbl9kZV9qb25nQGNhc2VtYS5ubD4gd3JvdGU6Cj4+IAo+PiBk byBub3QgYXJjaGl2ZQo+PiBJcyB0aGlzIGEgZ2VuZXJhbCBjb21wbGFpbnQ/Cj4+IFNpbmNlIHll c3RlcmRheSBJIHJlY2VpdmVkIHNldmVyYWwgbWVzc2FnZXMgY29udGFpbmluZyBvbmx5IHRoaXM6 Cj4gCgpTZWVpbmcgbG90cyBvZiB0aGVzZSBhcyB3ZWxsLiAgTG9va3MgbGlrZSBiYWRseSBmb3Jt YXR0ZWQgSFRNTCBjb2RlLgoKLURqCgoKCl8tPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09Cl8tPQpfLT0gICAgICAgLS0gUGxlYXNlIFN1 cHBvcnQgWW91ciBMaXN0cyBUaGlzIE1vbnRoIC0tCl8tPSAgICAgICAgICAgKEFuZCBHZXQgU29t ZSBBV0VTT01FIEZSRUUgR2lmdHMhKQpfLT0KXy09ICAgTm92ZW1iZXIgaXMgdGhlIEFubnVhbCBM aXN0IEZ1bmQgUmFpc2VyLiAgQ2xpY2sgb24KXy09ICAgdGhlIENvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbiBsaW5rIGJl bG93IHRvIGZpbmQgb3V0IG1vcmUgYWJvdXQKXy09ICAgdGhpcyB5ZWFyJ3MgVGVycmlmaWMgRnJl ZSBJbmNlbnRpdmUgR2lmdHMgcHJvdmlkZWQKXy09ICAgYnk6Cl8tPSAgIApfLT0gICAgICogVGhl IEJ1aWxkZXIncyBCb29rc3RvcmUgd3d3LmJ1aWxkZXJzYm9va3MuY29tCl8tPQpfLT0gICBMaXN0 IENvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbiBXZWIgU2l0ZToKXy09Cl8tPSAgIC0tPiBodHRwOi8vd3d3Lm1hdHJvbmlj cy5jb20vY29udHJpYnV0aW9uCl8tPQpfLT0gICBUaGFuayB5b3UgZm9yIHlvdXIgZ2VuZXJvdXMg c3VwcG9ydCEKXy09Cl8tPSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIC1NYXR0IERyYWxs ZSwgTGlzdCBBZG1pbi4KXy09Cl8tPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09Cl8tPSAgICAgICAgICAtIFRoZSBBZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMt TGlzdCBFbWFpbCBGb3J1bSAtCl8tPSBVc2UgdGhlIE1hdHJvbmljcyBMaXN0IEZlYXR1cmVzIE5h dmlnYXRvciB0byBicm93c2UKXy09IHRoZSBtYW55IExpc3QgdXRpbGl0aWVzIHN1Y2ggYXMgTGlz dCBVbi9TdWJzY3JpcHRpb24sCl8tPSBBcmNoaXZlIFNlYXJjaCAmIERvd25sb2FkLCA3LURheSBC cm93c2UsIENoYXQsIEZBUSwKXy09IFBob3Rvc2hhcmUsIGFuZCBtdWNoIG11Y2ggbW9yZToKXy09 Cl8tPSAgIC0tPiBodHRwOi8vd3d3Lm1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20vTmF2aWdhdG9yP0Flcm9FbGVjdHJp Yy1MaXN0Cl8tPQpfLT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQpfLT0gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAtIE1BVFJPTklDUyBXRUIgRk9SVU1T IC0KXy09IFNhbWUgZ3JlYXQgY29udGVudCBhbHNvIGF2YWlsYWJsZSB2aWEgdGhlIFdlYiBGb3J1 bXMhCl8tPQpfLT0gICAtLT4gaHR0cDovL2ZvcnVtcy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tCl8tPQpfLT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQpf LT0gICAgICAgICAgICAgLSBMaXN0IENvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbiBXZWIgU2l0ZSAtCl8tPSAgVGhhbmsg eW91IGZvciB5b3VyIGdlbmVyb3VzIHN1cHBvcnQhCl8tPSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgIC1NYXR0IERyYWxsZSwgTGlzdCBBZG1pbi4KXy09ICAgLS0+IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0 cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9jb250cmlidXRpb24KXy09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0KCgoKCg= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 2015
From: Jim Baker <jimbaker(at)npacc.net>
Subject: Re: Corrupted messages
The below is what I see when the message comes back to me when I send it from my tablet using Pegasus mail using Rich Text and not selecting plain text as the send encoding. The message below had but one word in the body and that was "Test" . Jim Baker 405 426 5377 -----Original Message----- From: Jim Baker <jimbaker(at)npacc.net> Sent: Sun, 01 Nov 2015 17:24 Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Corrupted messages ------=_Part_0_1116042640.1446416696797 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 VGVzdC4KCkppbSBCYWtlcgo0MDUgNDI2IDUzNzcKCi0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0t CkZyb206IERqIE1lcnJpbGwgPGRlZWpAZGVlai5uZXQ+ClRvOiAiYWVyb2VsZWN0cmljLWxpc3RA bWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbSIgPGFlcm9lbGVjdHJpYy1saXN0QG1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20+ClNlbnQ6IFN1 biwgMDEgTm92IDIwMTUgMTU6MzkKU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IEFlcm9FbGVjdHJpYy1MaXN0OiBDb3Jy dXB0ZWQgbWVzc2FnZXMKCi0tPiBBZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMtTGlzdCBtZXNzYWdlIHBvc3RlZCBieTog RGogTWVycmlsbCA8ZGVlakBkZWVqLm5ldD4KCgo+IAo+PiBPbiAxIE5vdiAyMDE1LCBhdCAwNzoy MCBwbSwgSmFuIGRlIEpvbmcgPGphbl9kZV9qb25nQGNhc2VtYS5ubD4gd3JvdGU6Cj4+IAo+PiBk byBub3QgYXJjaGl2ZQo+PiBJcyB0aGlzIGEgZ2VuZXJhbCBjb21wbGFpbnQ/Cj4+IFNpbmNlIHll c3RlcmRheSBJIHJlY2VpdmVkIHNldmVyYWwgbWVzc2FnZXMgY29udGFpbmluZyBvbmx5IHRoaXM6 Cj4gCgpTZWVpbmcgbG90cyBvZiB0aGVzZSBhcyB3ZWxsLiAgTG9va3MgbGlrZSBiYWRseSBmb3Jt YXR0ZWQgSFRNTCBjb2RlLgoKLURqCgoKCl8tPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09Cl8tPQpfLT0gICAgICAgLS0gUGxlYXNlIFN1 cHBvcnQgWW91ciBMaXN0cyBUaGlzIE1vbnRoIC0tCl8tPSAgICAgICAgICAgKEFuZCBHZXQgU29t ZSBBV0VTT01FIEZSRUUgR2lmdHMhKQpfLT0KXy09ICAgTm92ZW1iZXIgaXMgdGhlIEFubnVhbCBM aXN0IEZ1bmQgUmFpc2VyLiAgQ2xpY2sgb24KXy09ICAgdGhlIENvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbiBsaW5rIGJl bG93IHRvIGZpbmQgb3V0IG1vcmUgYWJvdXQKXy09ICAgdGhpcyB5ZWFyJ3MgVGVycmlmaWMgRnJl ZSBJbmNlbnRpdmUgR2lmdHMgcHJvdmlkZWQKXy09ICAgYnk6Cl8tPSAgIApfLT0gICAgICogVGhl IEJ1aWxkZXIncyBCb29rc3RvcmUgd3d3LmJ1aWxkZXJzYm9va3MuY29tCl8tPQpfLT0gICBMaXN0 IENvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbiBXZWIgU2l0ZToKXy09Cl8tPSAgIC0tPiBodHRwOi8vd3d3Lm1hdHJvbmlj cy5jb20vY29udHJpYnV0aW9uCl8tPQpfLT0gICBUaGFuayB5b3UgZm9yIHlvdXIgZ2VuZXJvdXMg c3VwcG9ydCEKXy09Cl8tPSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIC1NYXR0IERyYWxs ZSwgTGlzdCBBZG1pbi4KXy09Cl8tPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09Cl8tPSAgICAgICAgICAtIFRoZSBBZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMt TGlzdCBFbWFpbCBGb3J1bSAtCl8tPSBVc2UgdGhlIE1hdHJvbmljcyBMaXN0IEZlYXR1cmVzIE5h dmlnYXRvciB0byBicm93c2UKXy09IHRoZSBtYW55IExpc3QgdXRpbGl0aWVzIHN1Y2ggYXMgTGlz dCBVbi9TdWJzY3JpcHRpb24sCl8tPSBBcmNoaXZlIFNlYXJjaCAmIERvd25sb2FkLCA3LURheSBC cm93c2UsIENoYXQsIEZBUSwKXy09IFBob3Rvc2hhcmUsIGFuZCBtdWNoIG11Y2ggbW9yZToKXy09 Cl8tPSAgIC0tPiBodHRwOi8vd3d3Lm1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20vTmF2aWdhdG9yP0Flcm9FbGVjdHJp Yy1MaXN0Cl8tPQpfLT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQpfLT0gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAtIE1BVFJPTklDUyBXRUIgRk9SVU1T IC0KXy09IFNhbWUgZ3JlYXQgY29udGVudCBhbHNvIGF2YWlsYWJsZSB2aWEgdGhlIFdlYiBGb3J1 bXMhCl8tPQpfLT0gICAtLT4gaHR0cDovL2ZvcnVtcy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tCl8tPQpfLT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQpf LT0gICAgICAgICAgICAgLSBMaXN0IENvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbiBXZWIgU2l0ZSAtCl8tPSAgVGhhbmsg eW91IGZvciB5b3VyIGdlbmVyb3VzIHN1cHBvcnQhCl8tPSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgIC1NYXR0IERyYWxsZSwgTGlzdCBBZG1pbi4KXy09ICAgLS0+IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0 cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9jb250cmlidXRpb24KXy09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0KCgoKCg= ------=_Part_0_1116042640.1446416696797 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGRpdj5UZXN0Ljxici8+Cjxici8+Cjxmb250IGNvbG9yPSIjNGMzM2U1Ij5KaW08L2ZvbnQ+PGZv bnQgY29sb3I9IiM0YzMzZTUiPiA8L2ZvbnQ+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IiM0YzMzZTUiPkJha2VyPC9m b250Pjxici8+Cjxmb250IGNvbG9yPSIjNGMzM2U1Ij48YSBocmVmPSJ0ZWw6NDA1NDI2NTM3NyI+ NDA1IDQyNiA1Mzc3PC9hPjwvZm9udD48YnIvPjxici8+LS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0t LS08YnIvPkZyb206IERqIE1lcnJpbGwgJmx0O2RlZWpAZGVlai5uZXQmZ3Q7PGJyLz5UbzogJnF1 b3Q7YWVyb2VsZWN0cmljLWxpc3RAbWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbSZxdW90OyAmbHQ7YWVyb2VsZWN0cmlj LWxpc3RAbWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbSZndDs8YnIvPlNlbnQ6IFN1biwgMDEgTm92IDIwMTUgMTU6Mzk8 YnIvPlN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBBZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMtTGlzdDogQ29ycnVwdGVkIG1lc3NhZ2VzPGJy Lz48YnIvPjwvZGl2Pi0tJmd0OyBBZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMtTGlzdCBtZXNzYWdlIHBvc3RlZCBieTog RGogTWVycmlsbCAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmRlZWpAZGVlai5uZXQiPmRlZWpAZGVlai5u ZXQ8L2E+Jmd0OyYjMTM7PGJyLz4KJiMxMzs8YnIvPgomIzEzOzxici8+CiZndDsgJiMxMzs8YnIv PgomZ3Q7Jmd0OyBPbiAxIE5vdiAyMDE1LCBhdCAwNzoyMCBwbSwgSmFuIGRlIEpvbmcgJmx0Ozxh IGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpqYW5fZGVfam9uZ0BjYXNlbWEubmwiPmphbl9kZV9qb25nQGNhc2VtYS5u bDwvYT4mZ3Q7IHdyb3RlOiYjMTM7PGJyLz4KJmd0OyZndDsgJiMxMzs8YnIvPgomZ3Q7Jmd0OyBk byBub3QgYXJjaGl2ZSYjMTM7PGJyLz4KJmd0OyZndDsgSXMgdGhpcyBhIGdlbmVyYWwgY29tcGxh aW50PyYjMTM7PGJyLz4KJmd0OyZndDsgU2luY2UgeWVzdGVyZGF5IEkgcmVjZWl2ZWQgc2V2ZXJh bCBtZXNzYWdlcyBjb250YWluaW5nIG9ubHkgdGhpczomIzEzOzxici8+CiZndDsgJiMxMzs8YnIv PgomIzEzOzxici8+ClNlZWluZyBsb3RzIG9mIHRoZXNlIGFzIHdlbGwuJm5ic3A7IExvb2tzIGxp a2UgYmFkbHkgZm9ybWF0dGVkIEhUTUwgY29kZS4mIzEzOzxici8+CiYjMTM7PGJyLz4KLURqJiMx Mzs8YnIvPgomIzEzOzxici8+CiYjMTM7PGJyLz4KJiMxMzs8YnIvPgpfLT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PSYjMTM7PGJyLz4K Xy09JiMxMzs8YnIvPgpfLT0mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsgLS0g UGxlYXNlIFN1cHBvcnQgWW91ciBMaXN0cyBUaGlzIE1vbnRoIC0tJiMxMzs8YnIvPgpfLT0mbmJz cDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsg KEFuZCBHZXQgU29tZSBBV0VTT01FIEZSRUUgR2lmdHMhKSYjMTM7PGJyLz4KXy09JiMxMzs8YnIv PgpfLT0mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsgTm92ZW1iZXIgaXMgdGhlIEFubnVhbCBMaXN0IEZ1bmQgUmFpc2Vy LiZuYnNwOyBDbGljayBvbiYjMTM7PGJyLz4KXy09Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IHRoZSBDb250cmlidXRp b24gbGluayBiZWxvdyB0byBmaW5kIG91dCBtb3JlIGFib3V0JiMxMzs8YnIvPgpfLT0mbmJzcDsm bmJzcDsgdGhpcyB5ZWFyJ3MgVGVycmlmaWMgRnJlZSBJbmNlbnRpdmUgR2lmdHMgcHJvdmlkZWQm IzEzOzxici8+Cl8tPSZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyBieTomIzEzOzxici8+Cl8tPSZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyAm IzEzOzxici8+Cl8tPSZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyAqIFRoZSBCdWlsZGVyJ3MgQm9v a3N0b3JlIDxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuYnVpbGRlcnNib29rcy5jb20iPnd3dy5idWlsZGVy c2Jvb2tzLmNvbTwvYT4mIzEzOzxici8+Cl8tPSYjMTM7PGJyLz4KXy09Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IExp c3QgQ29udHJpYnV0aW9uIFdlYiBTaXRlOiYjMTM7PGJyLz4KXy09JiMxMzs8YnIvPgpfLT0mbmJz cDsmbmJzcDsgLS0mZ3Q7IDxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9jb250cmli dXRpb24iPmh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9jb250cmlidXRpb248L2E+JiMxMzs8YnIv PgpfLT0mIzEzOzxici8+Cl8tPSZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyBUaGFuayB5b3UgZm9yIHlvdXIgZ2VuZXJv dXMgc3VwcG9ydCEmIzEzOzxici8+Cl8tPSYjMTM7PGJyLz4KXy09Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5i c3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IC1NYXR0IERyYWxsZSwg TGlzdCBBZG1pbi4mIzEzOzxici8+Cl8tPSYjMTM7PGJyLz4KXy09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0mIzEzOzxici8+Cl8tPSZu YnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyAtIFRo ZSBBZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMtTGlzdCBFbWFpbCBGb3J1bSAtJiMxMzs8YnIvPgpfLT0gVXNlIHRoZSBN YXRyb25pY3MgTGlzdCBGZWF0dXJlcyBOYXZpZ2F0b3IgdG8gYnJvd3NlJiMxMzs8YnIvPgpfLT0g dGhlIG1hbnkgTGlzdCB1dGlsaXRpZXMgc3VjaCBhcyBMaXN0IFVuL1N1YnNjcmlwdGlvbiwmIzEz Ozxici8+Cl8tPSBBcmNoaXZlIFNlYXJjaCAmYW1wOyBEb3dubG9hZCwgNy1EYXkgQnJvd3NlLCBD aGF0LCBGQVEsJiMxMzs8YnIvPgpfLT0gUGhvdG9zaGFyZSwgYW5kIG11Y2ggbXVjaCBtb3JlOiYj MTM7PGJyLz4KXy09JiMxMzs8YnIvPgpfLT0mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsgLS0mZ3Q7IDxhIGhyZWY9Imh0 dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9OYXZpZ2F0b3I/QWVyb0VsZWN0cmljLUxpc3QiPmh0dHA6 Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9OYXZpZ2F0b3I/QWVyb0VsZWN0cmljLUxpc3Q8L2E+JiMxMzs8 YnIvPgpfLT0mIzEzOzxici8+Cl8tPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09JiMxMzs8YnIvPgpfLT0mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsm bmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJz cDsmbmJzcDsgLSBNQVRST05JQ1MgV0VCIEZPUlVNUyAtJiMxMzs8YnIvPgpfLT0gU2FtZSBncmVh dCBjb250ZW50IGFsc28gYXZhaWxhYmxlIHZpYSB0aGUgV2ViIEZvcnVtcyEmIzEzOzxici8+Cl8t PSYjMTM7PGJyLz4KXy09Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IC0tJmd0OyA8YSBocmVmPSJodHRwOi8vZm9ydW1z Lm1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20iPmh0dHA6Ly9mb3J1bXMubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbTwvYT4mIzEzOzxici8+ Cl8tPSYjMTM7PGJyLz4KXy09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0mIzEzOzxici8+Cl8tPSZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNw OyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyAtIExpc3Qg Q29udHJpYnV0aW9uIFdlYiBTaXRlIC0mIzEzOzxici8+Cl8tPSZuYnNwOyBUaGFuayB5b3UgZm9y IHlvdXIgZ2VuZXJvdXMgc3VwcG9ydCEmIzEzOzxici8+Cl8tPSZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZu YnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNw OyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZu YnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyAtTWF0dCBEcmFsbGUsIExp c3QgQWRtaW4uJiMxMzs8YnIvPgpfLT0mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsgLS0mZ3Q7IDxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHA6 Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9jb250cmlidXRpb24iPmh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNv bS9jb250cmlidXRpb248L2E+JiMxMzs8YnIvPgpfLT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PSYjMTM7PGJyLz4KJiMxMzs8YnIvPgom IzEzOzxici8+CiYjMTM7PGJyLz4KJiMxMzs8YnIvPgo ------=_Part_0_1116042640.1446416696797--
------=_Part_0_1116042640.1446416696797-- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: help with simple 12v motor reversing circuit
At 11:44 AM 11/1/2015, you wrote: >G'day, >Can someone please "roll"me a simple circuit for reversing a 12v dc motor. See a variety of options at: http://tinyurl.com/nhftedq Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Kale" <jimkale(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: help with simple 12v motor reversing circuit
Date: Nov 02, 2015
If it is a permanent magnet motor with brushes, you can probably just reverse the positive and negative leads. Other designs are more difficult. From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Sunday, November 1, 2015 6:54 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: help with simple 12v motor reversing circuit At 11:44 AM 11/1/2015, you wrote: G'day, Can someone please "roll"me a simple circuit for reversing a 12v dc motor. See a variety of options at: http://tinyurl.com/nhftedq Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 04, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Please Make A Contribution To Support Your Lists
Dear Listers, There is no advertising income to support the Matronics Email Lists and Forums. The operation is supported 100% by your personal Contributions during the November Fund Raiser. Please make your Contribution today to support the continued operation and upgrade of these services. You can pick up a really nice gift for making your Contribution too! You may use a Credit Card or Paypal at the Matronics Contribution Site here: http://www.matronics.com/contribution or, you can send a personal check to the following address: Matronics / Matt Dralle 581 Jeannie Way Livermore, CA 94550 Thank you in advance for your generous support! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List and Forum Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 05, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Coming Soon - The List of Contributors - Please Make
A Contribution Today! Each year at the end of the List Fund Raiser, I post a message acknowledging everyone that so generously made a Contribution to support the Lists. Its my way of publicly thanking everyone that took a minute to show their appreciation for the Lists. Please take a moment and assure that your name is on that List of Contributors (LOC)! As a number of members have pointed out over the years, the List seems at least as valuable a building / entertainment tool as your typical magazine subscription! Assure that your name is on this year's LOC! Show others that you appreciate the Lists. Making a Contribution to support the Lists is fast and easy using your Credit card or Paypal on the Secure Web Site: http://www.matronics.com/contribution or by dropping a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 I would like to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution thus far in this year's List Fund Raiser! Remember that its YOUR support that keeps these Lists going and improving! Don't forget to include a little comment about how the Lists have helped you! Best regards, Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 07, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Please Make a Contribution to Support Your Lists...
Dear Listers, Just a reminder that November is the Annual List Fund Raiser. Please make a Contribution today to support the continued operation and upgrade of these great List services!! Pick up a really nice free gift with your qualifying Contribution too! The Contribution Site is fast and easy: http://www.matronics.com/contribution or by dropping a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94551-0347 Thank you! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 09, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: A List Contribution - It's Your Personal Squelch Button...
There is an automatic "squelch button" of sorts for the Fund Raiser messages. Here's how it works... As soon as a List member makes a Contribution through the Matronics Fund Raiser web site, their email address is automatically added to this year's Contributor List and they instantly cease to receive further Fund Raiser messages for the rest of the month! Its just that simple! :-) I really do appreciate each and every one of your individual Contributions to support the Lists. It is your support that enables me to upgrade the hardware and software that are required to run a List Site such as this one. It also goes to pay for the commercial-grade Internet connection and to pay the huge electric bill to keep the computer gear running and the air conditioner powered on. I run all of the Matronics Email List and Forums sites here locally which allows me to control and monitor every aspect of the system for the utmost in reliably and performance. Your personal Contribution matters because, when combined with other Listers such as yourself, it pays the bills to keep this site up and running. I accept exactly ZERO advertising dollars for the Matronics Lists sites. I can't stand the pop-up ads and all other commercials that are so prevalent on the Internet these days and I particularly don't want to have it on my Email List sites. If you appreciate the ad-free, grass-roots, down-home feel of the Matronics Email Lists, please make a Contribution to keep it that way!! http://www.matronics.com/contribution or, you can send a personal check to the following address: Matronics / Matt Dralle 581 Jeannie Way Livermore, CA 94550 Thank you! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator [Note that there are certain circumstances where you might still see a Contribution related message. For example, if someone replies to one of the messages, when using the List Browse feature, or when accessing List message via the Forum. The system keys on the given email address and since most of these are anonymous public access methods, there is no simple way to filter them.] ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 11, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: [PLEASE READ] Why I Have A Fund Raiser...
Since the beginning, the Matronics List and Forum experience has been free from advertising. I have been approached by fair number of vendors wanting to tap into the large volume of activity across the various lists hosted here, but have always flatly refused. Everywhere you go on the Internet these days, a user is pummeled with flashing banners and videos and ads for crap that they don't want. Yahoo, Google and that ilk are not "free". The user must constantly endure their barrage of commercialism thrust into their face at an ever increasing rate. Enough is enough, and the Lists at Matronics choose not to succumb to that. That being said, running a service of this size is not "free". It costs a lot of money to maintain the hardware, pay for the electricity, air conditioning, maintenance contracts, etc, etc. etc. I choose to hold a PBS-like fund raiser each year during the month of November where I simply send out a short email every other day asking the members to make a small contribution to support the operation. That being said, that contribution is completely voluntary and non-compulsory. Many members choose not to contribute and that's fine. However, a very modest percentage of the members do choose to make a contribution and it is that financial support that keeps the Lists running. And that's it. To my way of thinking, it is a much more pleasant way of maintaining the Lists and Forums. The other 11 months of the year, you don't see a single advertisement or request for support. That's refreshing and that is a List and Forum that I want to belong to. I think other people feel the same way. Won't you please take a minute to make your Contribution today and support these Lists? http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, drop a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 USA Thank you for your support! Matt Dralle Email List Admin. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Stratux Build
Date: Nov 13, 2015
For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going to tackle it early next month. The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to purchase. https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Donahue" <marktdonahue(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Stratux Build
Date: Nov 12, 2015
Would love to hear how your project works out and how difficult it is (was) to get it put together an place in service. Mark Donahue -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Justin Jones Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 4:55 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build --> For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going to tackle it early next month. The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to purchase. https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 12, 2015
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Nati Niv <n992dn(at)gmail.com>
Me too Would like to hear the progress, interesting...... Nati Niv On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 7:14 PM, Mark Donahue wrote: > marktdonahue(at)comcast.net> > > Would love to hear how your project works out and how difficult it is (was) > to get it put together an place in service. > Mark Donahue > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Justin > Jones > Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 4:55 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > > --> > > For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with > AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going > to tackle it early next month. > > The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to > purchase. > > https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: C&K <yellowduckduo(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 12, 2015
I bought the exact items except the (battery) and it seems to work fine. I use fltplango (it's free) on an ipad. To my surprise there were no tricks or hassles involved. Anyone who can type on this list and download a program should have no problem. My only reservation is that it is one more thing to distract me from looking outside... Ken On 12/11/2015 7:55 PM, Justin Jones wrote: > > For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going to tackle it early next month. > > The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to purchase. > > https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide > > > > > > . > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
Date: Nov 12, 2015
On 11/12/2015 7:55 PM, Justin Jones wrote: > For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going to tackle it early next month. It is very easy. I gathered the parts together and assembled it inside a 3D printed case during one of our EAA meetings. I had a chance to fly with it a couple of weeks ago, and the iPad/Stratux/WingX combination saw the same ADS-B traffic as the SkyRadar/GRT-HX combination. There is a beginners guide here: https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide The 3D case files can be found at: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1019324 -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 5 Msgs - 11/12/15
From: Tal Holloway <whodja(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 13, 2015
Will you be selling any steers? Thanks Tal Holloway On Nov 13, 2015, at 2:59 AM, AeroElectric-List Digest Server wrote: > * > > ================================================= > 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 15-11-12&Archive=AeroElectric > > Text Version: > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 15-11-12&Archive=AeroElectric > > > =============================================== > EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive > =============================================== > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > AeroElectric-List Digest Archive > --- > Total Messages Posted Thu 11/12/15: 5 > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Today's Message Index: > ---------------------- > > 1. 04:57 PM - Stratux Build (Justin Jones) > 2. 05:15 PM - Re: Stratux Build (Mark Donahue) > 3. 05:40 PM - Re: Stratux Build (Nati Niv) > 4. 05:59 PM - Re: Stratux Build (C&K) > 5. 06:02 PM - Re: Stratux Build (Dj Merrill) > > > > ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ > > > From: Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > > > For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with AHRS > if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going to tackle > it early next month. > > The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to purchase. > > https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide > > > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ > > > From: "Mark Donahue" <marktdonahue(at)comcast.net> > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > > > Would love to hear how your project works out and how difficult it is (was) > to get it put together an place in service. > Mark Donahue > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Justin > Jones > Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 4:55 PM > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > > --> > > For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with > AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going > to tackle it early next month. > > The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to > purchase. > > https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide > > > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ > > > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > From: Nati Niv <n992dn(at)gmail.com> > > Me too > > Would like to hear the progress, interesting...... > > > Nati Niv > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 7:14 PM, Mark Donahue > wrote: > >> marktdonahue(at)comcast.net> >> >> Would love to hear how your project works out and how difficult it is (was) >> to get it put together an place in service. >> Mark Donahue >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Justin >> Jones >> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 4:55 PM >> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; rv10-list(at)matronics.com >> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build >> >> --> >> >> For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with >> AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going >> to tackle it early next month. >> >> The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to >> purchase. >> >> https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide >> >> > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ > > > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > From: C&K <yellowduckduo(at)gmail.com> > > > I bought the exact items except the (battery) and it seems to work fine. > I use fltplango (it's free) on an ipad. > To my surprise there were no tricks or hassles involved. Anyone who can > type on this list and download a program should have no problem. > My only reservation is that it is one more thing to distract me from > looking outside... > Ken > > On 12/11/2015 7:55 PM, Justin Jones wrote: >> >> For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with AHRS > if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going to tackle > it early next month. >> >> The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to purchase. >> >> https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide >> >> >> >> >> >> . >> > > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ > > > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net> > > > On 11/12/2015 7:55 PM, Justin Jones wrote: >> For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with AHRS > if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going to tackle > it early next month. > > > It is very easy. I gathered the parts together and assembled it inside > a 3D printed case during one of our EAA meetings. > > I had a chance to fly with it a couple of weeks ago, and the > iPad/Stratux/WingX combination saw the same ADS-B traffic as the > SkyRadar/GRT-HX combination. > > There is a beginners guide here: > > https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide > > The 3D case files can be found at: > > http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1019324 > > -Dj > > > -- > Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 > Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ > Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Stratux Build
Date: Nov 13, 2015
As I understand it, this device is an ADS-B in only. Aren't we going to need ADS-B out as well?? -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Justin Jones Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 6:55 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going to tackle it early next month. The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to purchase. https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
Date: Nov 13, 2015
On 11/13/2015 11:47 AM, Bill Bradburry wrote: > As I understand it, this device is an ADS-B in only. Aren't we going to > need ADS-B out as well?? Correct, as of Jan 2020. -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Kyle Boatright <kboatright1(at)comcast.net>
Date: Nov 13, 2015
Yes, but there are some less expensive "out" options you could combine with the Stratux to wind up with a low cost overall solution. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 13, 2015, at 11:47 AM, "Bill Bradburry" wrote: > > > As I understand it, this device is an ADS-B in only. Aren't we going to > need ADS-B out as well?? > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Justin > Jones > Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 6:55 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > > > > For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with > AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going > to tackle it early next month. > > The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to > purchase. > > https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
Date: Nov 14, 2015
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
> On Nov 14, 2015, at 01:47, Bill Bradburry wrote: > > > As I understand it, this device is an ADS-B in only. Aren't we going to > need ADS-B out as well?? It depends on the type of flying you do. If you fly in uncontrolled airspace under 10k feet and do not enter a mode C ring, then you won't need it. If you do that sort of flying, then you will. There are guys up here in Alaska without an electrical system, that fly in and out of Lake Hood (Class C and right next to Anchorage international). They will not need the "out" either. Many of them use an iPad and foreflight (or similar) to fly as it requires no aircraft power source. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Justin > Jones > Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 6:55 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > > > > For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with > AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going > to tackle it early next month. > > The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to > purchase. > > https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 13, 2015
From: Sean Stephens <sean(at)stephensville.com>
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
Here's a good link to some videos. Chapter two defines when 978 vs 1090ES. http://www.freeflightsystems.com/ads-b-university > Justin Jones > November 13, 2015 at 11:21 AM > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Justin Jones > > >> On Nov 14, 2015, at 01:47, Bill Bradburry wrote: >> >> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Bradburry" >> >> As I understand it, this device is an ADS-B in only. Aren't we going to >> need ADS-B out as well?? > > It depends on the type of flying you do. If you fly in uncontrolled airspace under 10k feet and do not enter a mode C ring, then you won't need it. If you do that sort of flying, then you will. > > There are guys up here in Alaska without an electrical system, that fly in and out of Lake Hood (Class C and right next to Anchorage international). They will not need the "out" either. Many of them use an iPad and foreflight (or similar) to fly as it requires no aircraft power source. > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Justin >> Jones >> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 6:55 PM >> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; rv10-list(at)matronics.com >> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build >> >> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Justin Jones >> >> >> For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with >> AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going >> to tackle it early next month. >> >> The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to >> purchase. >> >> https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 13, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Make Sure You're Listed! List of Contributors Published
in December! Dear Listers, The List of Contributors (LOC) is just around the corner! In December I post a list of everyone that so generously made a Contribution to support the Lists. Its my way of publicly thanking everyone that took a minute to show their appreciation for the Lists. Won't you take minute and assure that your name is on the upcoming LOC? Tell others that you appreciate the Lists. Making a Contribution to support the Lists is fast and easy using your Visa, MasterCard, or Paypal account: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, drop a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 USA I would like to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution thus far during this year's List Fund Raiser! Remember that its YOUR support that keeps these Lists running and improving! Don't forget to include a little comment about how the Lists have helped you! Thank you! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Stratux Build
Date: Nov 13, 2015
What are those options? Can both in and out be combined in one box? Does the Stratux have an out option? -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kyle Boatright Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 11:03 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build Yes, but there are some less expensive "out" options you could combine with the Stratux to wind up with a low cost overall solution. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 13, 2015, at 11:47 AM, "Bill Bradburry" wrote: > > > As I understand it, this device is an ADS-B in only. Aren't we going to > need ADS-B out as well?? > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Justin > Jones > Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 6:55 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > > > > For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with > AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going > to tackle it early next month. > > The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to > purchase. > > https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
Date: Nov 13, 2015
On 11/13/2015 01:16 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote: > What are those options? Can both in and out be combined in one box? Does > the Stratux have an out option? Stratux is "IN" only, similar to SkyRadar, Stratus, and a bunch of other ADS-B receive solutions. It's claim to fame is the extreme low cost and DIY nature. There are "IN" and "OUT" solutions in a box. Check out Navworx as one example. My installed "OUT" solution is a TT22 transponder with ES (ADS-B Out on 1090 Mhz) coupled to a GNS480 WAAS GPS position source, which at the time was one of the lowest cost solutions overall, especially if you already have an acceptable GPS position source. My "IN" solution is a dual-band SkyRadar ADS-B receiver using USB to talk to a GRT HX EFIS. Cost and options are very dependent upon what equipment you already have in your aircraft that might be usable for part of the ADS-B solution, or if you are installing everything from scratch. -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 13, 2015
There are quite a few options that are relatively inexpensive now, and I'm pretty confident that prices will continue to fall. A mode S transponder with 'extended squitter' and a 'certified' WAAS GPS source is one way to get 'out' (1090 mhz), but far from the only way. The FAA is dancing around allowing uncertified boxes with built-in WAAS GPS that meet performance criteria to transmit into the 'system'. If that idea holds up, we should see in/out boxes for well under $2K pretty soon; possibly a lot cheaper. In the short term, those of us who don't fly IFR & don't need to regularly enter Class B/C airspace can get by just fine with in only (or nothing). The stratux is in-only, and it's very unlikely it will ever be more than that. If you use an Android phone/tablet, there's an even cheaper solution than the stratux. With https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ds.avare&hl=en (free) and https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=bs.Avare.ADSB.Pro&hl=en (~$3) and http://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00P2UOU72?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o04_s00 (~$22) and http://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B014AQOZSW?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o04_s00 (~$5) you can have a fully functional ADSB-in system that can receive both 978 and 1090 mhz data (must be manually selected at this point, but I wouldn't be surprised to see auto switching implemented sometime soon). I've got Avare & ADSB on Android running on an old Nexus 7 (original version). I've used Avare for a couple of years, but haven't had a chance to fly with the adsb add-on. It does pick up airliners & Mode S a/c flying in my area, even with me sitting on the ground. Once I'm in the air, I'll be able to get weather, notams, metars, etc in addition to (most) traffic. The limit on traffic if you don't have 'out', is that you're dependent on nearby a/c flying with 'out' to trigger traffic data, and the traffic they get (basically a donut of airspace around them) won't exactly match the donut of airspace around you. I can live with that, since I've been living with less since I started flying. Charlie On 11/13/2015 12:16 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote: > > What are those options? Can both in and out be combined in one box? Does > the Stratux have an out option? > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kyle > Boatright > Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 11:03 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > > > > Yes, but there are some less expensive "out" options you could combine with > the Stratux to wind up with a low cost overall solution. > > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Nov 13, 2015, at 11:47 AM, "Bill Bradburry" > wrote: > >> As I understand it, this device is an ADS-B in only. Aren't we going to >> need ADS-B out as well?? >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Justin >> Jones >> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 6:55 PM >> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; rv10-list(at)matronics.com >> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build >> >> >> >> For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with >> AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going >> to tackle it early next month. >> >> The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to >> purchase. >> >> https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Efraim Otero Leongomez <efraim.otero(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 13, 2015
Cool! We do not have ADS-B in South America and I find it difficult to justify forking up 800 dollars to buy a Stratus II to get AHRS and Virtual attitude data on my foreflight (which works amazing here in South America). This sounds like an interesting project. Even though I have never really soldered anything well it could work!! (yes I am THAT incompetent! haha!) Ephraim Otero On Nov 12, 2015, at 8:58 PM, C&K wrote: I bought the exact items except the (battery) and it seems to work fine. I use fltplango (it's free) on an ipad. To my surprise there were no tricks or hassles involved. Anyone who can type on this list and download a program should have no problem. My only reservation is that it is one more thing to distract me from looking outside... Ken On 12/11/2015 7:55 PM, Justin Jones wrote: > > For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (with AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am going to tackle it early next month. > > The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to purchase. > > https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide > > > > > > > > . > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 13, 2015
From: Paul Thomson <cyav8r(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
I had the L-3 NGT-9000 installed in my airplane and it does both in and out in a single box that replaced my KT76A. Traffic and weather products are d isplayed on the transponder touchscreen, and it also pushes TIS-B and FIS-B data to an iPad via wifi. There are other options out there as well, this is just what I chose to do to get traffic on the panel without needing more 'stuff'. From: Bill Bradburry <bbradburry(at)verizon.net> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 12:16 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build on.net> What are those options?=C2- Can both in and out be combined in one box? =C2- Does the Stratux have an out option? -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kyle Boatright Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 11:03 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build Yes, but there are some less expensive "out" options you could combine with the Stratux to wind up with a low cost overall solution. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 13, 2015, at 11:47 AM, "Bill Bradburry" wrote: > > > As I understand it, this device is an ADS-B in only.=C2- Aren't we goin g to > need ADS-B out as well?? > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Justin > Jones > Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 6:55 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > > > > For those of you looking for an inexpensive solution for an ADS-B in (wit h > AHRS if desired), this appears to be a relatively easy project. I am goin g > to tackle it early next month.=C2- > > The website has step-by-step instructions and a list of exact parts to > purchase. > > https://github.com/ssokol/stratux/wiki/Stratux-Beginner's-Guide > > > > > > > > > > > > =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin. - S - - =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 13, 2015
"Even though I have never really soldered anything " No soldering required. Some familiarity with Linux helps but not essential. AHRS is not yet working well (as of 4r4) with a precession problem but it is being worked on -------- Ira N224XS Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449369#449369 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Stratux Build
Date: Nov 13, 2015
Well, ok, here is a request for suggestions. What would be the best (cheapest!) option if I have the following avionics: Garmin GNS430W Com/Nav/GPS Garmin GTX327 Transponder KMD150 MFD/GPS I am considering purchasing a tablet as well, IPad or Galaxy. What are the recommendations here as well. B2 -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dj Merrill Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 12:33 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build On 11/13/2015 01:16 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote: > What are those options? Can both in and out be combined in one box? Does > the Stratux have an out option? Stratux is "IN" only, similar to SkyRadar, Stratus, and a bunch of other ADS-B receive solutions. It's claim to fame is the extreme low cost and DIY nature. There are "IN" and "OUT" solutions in a box. Check out Navworx as one example. My installed "OUT" solution is a TT22 transponder with ES (ADS-B Out on 1090 Mhz) coupled to a GNS480 WAAS GPS position source, which at the time was one of the lowest cost solutions overall, especially if you already have an acceptable GPS position source. My "IN" solution is a dual-band SkyRadar ADS-B receiver using USB to talk to a GRT HX EFIS. Cost and options are very dependent upon what equipment you already have in your aircraft that might be usable for part of the ADS-B solution, or if you are installing everything from scratch. -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 13, 2015
The *easiest* (and likely cheapest, due to minimal labor) path for 'out', with a G430W already installed and a G327 tray installed, would probably be a G330 ES transponder for 'out', and just about any cheap 'in' solution. Cheapest 'in' is an android phone/tablet running the Avare + SDR I described in the previous email (could be under $100 for a complete 'in' solution). Note that the above is purely plug & play; load the apps, plug in the cable to the tablet & SDR, and go. But I'm in no hurry to install 'out'. Stuff will change. FAA says they won't move the deadline, but according to many sources, we're already too close to the deadline for existing shops to get all a/c upgraded in time. And regardless, the equipment will get cheaper. Charlie On 11/13/2015 6:15 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote: > > Well, ok, here is a request for suggestions. > > What would be the best (cheapest!) option if I have the following avionics: > > Garmin GNS430W Com/Nav/GPS > Garmin GTX327 Transponder > KMD150 MFD/GPS > > I am considering purchasing a tablet as well, IPad or Galaxy. What are the > recommendations here as well. > > B2 > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dj > Merrill > Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 12:33 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > > > On 11/13/2015 01:16 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote: >> What are those options? Can both in and out be combined in one box? Does >> the Stratux have an out option? > > Stratux is "IN" only, similar to SkyRadar, Stratus, and a bunch of other > ADS-B receive solutions. It's claim to fame is the extreme low cost and > DIY nature. > > There are "IN" and "OUT" solutions in a box. Check out Navworx as one > example. > > My installed "OUT" solution is a TT22 transponder with ES (ADS-B Out on > 1090 Mhz) coupled to a GNS480 WAAS GPS position source, which at the > time was one of the lowest cost solutions overall, especially if you > already have an acceptable GPS position source. > > My "IN" solution is a dual-band SkyRadar ADS-B receiver using USB to > talk to a GRT HX EFIS. > > Cost and options are very dependent upon what equipment you already have > in your aircraft that might be usable for part of the ADS-B solution, or > if you are installing everything from scratch. > > -Dj > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Stratux Build
Date: Nov 14, 2015
I think you can upgrade the GTX330 to the ES version for about $1K, but per the Q&A at AC Spruce the GTX327 tray and harness is not interchangeable. Will the GTX 330 ES fit the same rack as the GTX 327? How about the harness? The Garmin GTX 330 ES and the GTX 327 use both different racks and harnesses. Bill -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charlie England Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 7:46 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build The *easiest* (and likely cheapest, due to minimal labor) path for 'out', with a G430W already installed and a G327 tray installed, would probably be a G330 ES transponder for 'out', and just about any cheap 'in' solution. Cheapest 'in' is an android phone/tablet running the Avare + SDR I described in the previous email (could be under $100 for a complete 'in' solution). Note that the above is purely plug & play; load the apps, plug in the cable to the tablet & SDR, and go. But I'm in no hurry to install 'out'. Stuff will change. FAA says they won't move the deadline, but according to many sources, we're already too close to the deadline for existing shops to get all a/c upgraded in time. And regardless, the equipment will get cheaper. Charlie On 11/13/2015 6:15 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote: > > Well, ok, here is a request for suggestions. > > What would be the best (cheapest!) option if I have the following avionics: > > Garmin GNS430W Com/Nav/GPS > Garmin GTX327 Transponder > KMD150 MFD/GPS > > I am considering purchasing a tablet as well, IPad or Galaxy. What are the > recommendations here as well. > > B2 > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dj > Merrill > Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 12:33 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > > > On 11/13/2015 01:16 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote: >> What are those options? Can both in and out be combined in one box? Does >> the Stratux have an out option? > > Stratux is "IN" only, similar to SkyRadar, Stratus, and a bunch of other > ADS-B receive solutions. It's claim to fame is the extreme low cost and > DIY nature. > > There are "IN" and "OUT" solutions in a box. Check out Navworx as one > example. > > My installed "OUT" solution is a TT22 transponder with ES (ADS-B Out on > 1090 Mhz) coupled to a GNS480 WAAS GPS position source, which at the > time was one of the lowest cost solutions overall, especially if you > already have an acceptable GPS position source. > > My "IN" solution is a dual-band SkyRadar ADS-B receiver using USB to > talk to a GRT HX EFIS. > > Cost and options are very dependent upon what equipment you already have > in your aircraft that might be usable for part of the ADS-B solution, or > if you are installing everything from scratch. > > -Dj > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 14, 2015
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Clive Richards <stephencliverichards(at)gmail.com>
A similar self build device using a raspberry Pi B+ is being developed as open source in the UK see http://www.pilotaware.com/ for ADS-B in this will also provide ADS-B out for connection to a ES equipped transponder and transmission to another pilotaware device I will wait for further development & testing before I build one. I read some prototypes have been tested with a GPS plugin dongle & air pressure sensing boards added all at a low cost but transmitter needs further screening work to make reliable. I assume it would also be usable in USA Clive On 13 November 2015 at 23:57, rampil wrote: > > "Even though I have never really soldered anything " > > No soldering required. Some familiarity with Linux helps but not essential. > AHRS is not yet working well (as of 4r4) with a precession problem but it > is being worked on > > -------- > Ira N224XS > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449369#449369 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 14, 2015
Sorry; I thought I'd read on the interwebs that the 330 would fit a 327 tray, with just a few added pins. I guess I've discovered the first error on the 'net. :-) Charlie On 11/14/2015 9:44 AM, Bill Bradburry wrote: > > I think you can upgrade the GTX330 to the ES version for about $1K, but per > the Q&A at AC Spruce the GTX327 tray and harness is not interchangeable. > > > Will the GTX 330 ES fit the same rack as the GTX 327? How about the harness? > The Garmin GTX 330 ES and the GTX 327 use both different racks and > harnesses. > > Bill > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charlie > England > Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 7:46 PM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build > > > > The *easiest* (and likely cheapest, due to minimal labor) path for > 'out', with a G430W already installed and a G327 tray installed, would > probably be a G330 ES transponder for 'out', and just about any cheap > 'in' solution. Cheapest 'in' is an android phone/tablet running the > Avare + SDR I described in the previous email (could be under $100 for a > complete 'in' solution). Note that the above is purely plug & play; load > the apps, plug in the cable to the tablet & SDR, and go. > > But I'm in no hurry to install 'out'. Stuff will change. FAA says they > won't move the deadline, but according to many sources, we're already > too close to the deadline for existing shops to get all a/c upgraded in > time. And regardless, the equipment will get cheaper. > > Charlie > > On 11/13/2015 6:15 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote: > >> Well, ok, here is a request for suggestions. >> >> What would be the best (cheapest!) option if I have the following > avionics: >> Garmin GNS430W Com/Nav/GPS >> Garmin GTX327 Transponder >> KMD150 MFD/GPS >> >> I am considering purchasing a tablet as well, IPad or Galaxy. What are > the >> recommendations here as well. >> >> B2 >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dj >> Merrill >> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 12:33 PM >> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com >> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stratux Build >> >> >> On 11/13/2015 01:16 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote: >>> What are those options? Can both in and out be combined in one box? > Does >>> the Stratux have an out option? >> Stratux is "IN" only, similar to SkyRadar, Stratus, and a bunch of other >> ADS-B receive solutions. It's claim to fame is the extreme low cost and >> DIY nature. >> >> There are "IN" and "OUT" solutions in a box. Check out Navworx as one >> example. >> >> My installed "OUT" solution is a TT22 transponder with ES (ADS-B Out on >> 1090 Mhz) coupled to a GNS480 WAAS GPS position source, which at the >> time was one of the lowest cost solutions overall, especially if you >> already have an acceptable GPS position source. >> >> My "IN" solution is a dual-band SkyRadar ADS-B receiver using USB to >> talk to a GRT HX EFIS. >> >> Cost and options are very dependent upon what equipment you already have >> in your aircraft that might be usable for part of the ADS-B solution, or >> if you are installing everything from scratch. >> >> -Dj >> > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 15, 2015
Just a Nota Bene: I have reviewed the Pilot Aware docs and discovered the following: 1) It is not open source. In fact it requires a license code from the author. 2) It uses the iOS hardware GPS. The GPS Chipset in an iPhone or iPad is not a certificated TSO location source, nor does it even meet TSO specs. Therefore it would not be legal to transmit data into the NAS in the US even under the lenient requirements for experimental aircraft. 3) It only does 1090 Extended squatter (for now). In the UK, ES is the only game in town. In the US most GA traffic is 978 Hz TISb. So, in the US PilotAware will show you mostly Transport Category stuff in the Flight Levels but basically no traffic below FL180 (except near big airports). -------- Ira N224XS Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449410#449410 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Date: Nov 15, 2015
A large proportion of high performance GA aircraft have or will get 1090ES because their aircraft can go above 18,000 and/or they already had a Garmin 330 and upgrade to ES is their cheapest option. Of flight schools in Phoenix that have ADS-B (all the big ones) one uses 978, the rest are all 1090ES. On 11/15/2015 7:11 AM, rampil wrote: > > Just a Nota Bene: > > I have reviewed the Pilot Aware docs and discovered the following: > > 1) It is not open source. In fact it requires a license code from the author. > > 2) It uses the iOS hardware GPS. The GPS Chipset in an iPhone or > iPad is not a certificated TSO location source, nor does it even meet > TSO specs. Therefore it would not be legal to transmit data into the > NAS in the US even under the lenient requirements for experimental > aircraft. > > 3) It only does 1090 Extended squatter (for now). In the UK, ES is the > only game in town. In the US most GA traffic is 978 Hz TISb. So, in the US > PilotAware will show you mostly Transport Category stuff in the Flight Levels > but basically no traffic below FL180 (except near big airports). > > -------- > Ira N224XS > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449410#449410 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
Date: Nov 15, 2015
On 11/15/2015 9:11 AM, rampil wrote: > 3) It only does 1090 Extended squatter (for now). In the UK, ES is the > only game in town. In the US most GA traffic is 978 Hz TISb. So, in the US > PilotAware will show you mostly Transport Category stuff in the Flight Levels > but basically no traffic below FL180 (except near big airports). It would be interesting to see actual numbers, but my guess is that at present, most traffic in the US is on 1090 since most of the aircraft that are currently equipped are commercial and business. There are also a likely large number of GA aircraft using 1090 as well, since they will want to do IFR at reasonably high altitudes. As we get closer to 2020, we will likely see more GA traffic using 978, but my gut is telling me that the largest number of traffic overall will still be on 1090 for the reasons above. There really doesn't seem to be an advantage to using 978 "Out" as far as I can see, but that does give good reasons for equipping with a dual band "In" so you can see both. -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 15, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Reminder
Dear Listers, A quick reminder that November is the annual Matronics List Fund Raiser. The Lists are 100% member supported and all of the operational costs are covered solely through your Contributions during this time of the year. *Your* personal Contribution makes a difference and keeps all of the Matronics Email Lists and Forums completely ad-free. Please make your Contribution today to keep these services up and running for another great year! Use a credit card or your PayPal account here: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, by sending a personal check to: Matronics / Matt Dralle 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 Thank you in advance! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List and Forum Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
Date: Nov 15, 2015
Are you saying that the FAA is not going to broadcast the "out" on both freqs? That makes absolutely not sense to me. You will be just as dead no matter what airplane you run into. With the possible exception of Wonder Woman's plane... :>) Does she have to install ADS-B as well?? -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dj Merrill Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2015 11:09 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Stratux Build On 11/15/2015 9:11 AM, rampil wrote: > 3) It only does 1090 Extended squatter (for now). In the UK, ES is the > only game in town. In the US most GA traffic is 978 Hz TISb. So, in the US > PilotAware will show you mostly Transport Category stuff in the Flight Levels > but basically no traffic below FL180 (except near big airports). It would be interesting to see actual numbers, but my guess is that at present, most traffic in the US is on 1090 since most of the aircraft that are currently equipped are commercial and business. There are also a likely large number of GA aircraft using 1090 as well, since they will want to do IFR at reasonably high altitudes. As we get closer to 2020, we will likely see more GA traffic using 978, but my gut is telling me that the largest number of traffic overall will still be on 1090 for the reasons above. There really doesn't seem to be an advantage to using 978 "Out" as far as I can see, but that does give good reasons for equipping with a dual band "In" so you can see both. -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV - EAA Chapter 87 Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Bill Maxwell <wrmaxwell(at)bigpond.com>
Date: Nov 16, 2015
I think your Nota Bene somewhat undersells Pilot Aware, Ira. It is not open-source but the beta licence is free and once it enters the market, the projected annual licence fee is very, very cheap. It can use the iOS GPS but it can equally use any other GPS. In fact, an external GPS is now the developer's preference. I take your point that it might not suit the US at the present time but the potential is there for most locations, provided they solve the ISM transmitter issues and there is widespread adoption so that lower level traffic use it and therefore can be seen. Bill. On 16/11/2015 1:11 AM, rampil wrote: > > Just a Nota Bene: > > I have reviewed the Pilot Aware docs and discovered the following: > > 1) It is not open source. In fact it requires a license code from the author. > > 2) It uses the iOS hardware GPS. The GPS Chipset in an iPhone or > iPad is not a certificated TSO location source, nor does it even meet > TSO specs. Therefore it would not be legal to transmit data into the > NAS in the US even under the lenient requirements for experimental > aircraft. > > 3) It only does 1090 Extended squatter (for now). In the UK, ES is the > only game in town. In the US most GA traffic is 978 Hz TISb. So, in the US > PilotAware will show you mostly Transport Category stuff in the Flight Levels > but basically no traffic below FL180 (except near big airports). > > -------- > Ira N224XS > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449410#449410 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Date: Nov 15, 2015
Your out signal contains what type of In receiver you have, and the ground station sends you data on your freq. Mostly a moot point for the ground stations...1090 does not have bandwith for more than TIS-A, so you get no weather or TIS-B traffic unless you have 978 receiver. Way more complex than it needed to be. On 11/15/2015 12:40 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote: > > Are you saying that the FAA is not going to broadcast the "out" on both > freqs? That makes absolutely not sense to me. > You will be just as dead no matter what airplane you run into. > > With the possible exception of Wonder Woman's plane... :>) Does she have > to install ADS-B as well?? > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dj > Merrill > Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2015 11:09 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Stratux Build > > > On 11/15/2015 9:11 AM, rampil wrote: >> 3) It only does 1090 Extended squatter (for now). In the UK, ES is the >> only game in town. In the US most GA traffic is 978 Hz TISb. So, in the > US >> PilotAware will show you mostly Transport Category stuff in the Flight > Levels >> but basically no traffic below FL180 (except near big airports). > > It would be interesting to see actual numbers, but my guess is that at > present, most traffic in the US is on 1090 since most of the aircraft > that are currently equipped are commercial and business. There are also > a likely large number of GA aircraft using 1090 as well, since they will > want to do IFR at reasonably high altitudes. > > As we get closer to 2020, we will likely see more GA traffic using 978, > but my gut is telling me that the largest number of traffic overall will > still be on 1090 for the reasons above. There really doesn't seem to be > an advantage to using 978 "Out" as far as I can see, but that does give > good reasons for equipping with a dual band "In" so you can see both. > > -Dj > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 15, 2015
Hi Bill, I noted the discrepancy about Open Source because the original poster Clive described it as such. I have not seen any hard data about the division between 1090 and 978. However, I have been using a dual receiver Stratux for more than a month. In my neck of the woods, the traffic I see is airline and corporate on 1090 and the traffic doing less than 300 kts is all 978. Time will tell. 1090 traffic received by an aircraft receiver is solely direct transmission from other aircraft in range. 978 traffic is a combination of direct reception from other aircraft plus ground-based retransmission of targets both 978 and 1090. (Not to mention the FISb data) -------- Ira N224XS Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449511#449511 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 16, 2015
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Clive Richards <stephencliverichards(at)gmail.com>
Hi Ira I am sorry for my mistake I should have written Open Hardware I have been following the topic on the Flyer Forum and got my misconception from their. As some of the other posters on the list were looking for ADSB out I thought it might be worth a look, any grade GPS could be used. If the concept is of any use to add to Stratus Pi they could write their own code. Our CAA are conducting trials at the moment using uncertified GPS. There are not a lot of Certified GA aircraft in UK with Mode S transponders using ES because it is a Major mod to connect the two wires to a certified GPS. I will build one when the transmit is sorted out as due to low cost I think a lot of pilots will take it up and we will be able to see each other + ES traffic. A lot of pilots are now using Tablets with navigation software like Skydemon or Easy VFR and GPS work with no problem this is where the traffic would be displayed. Clive On 16 November 2015 at 01:39, rampil wrote: > > Hi Bill, > > I noted the discrepancy about Open Source because the original poster Clive > described it as such. > > I have not seen any hard data about the division between 1090 and 978. > However, I have been using a dual receiver Stratux for more than a month. > In my neck of the woods, the traffic I see is airline and corporate on 1090 > and the traffic doing less than 300 kts is all 978. Time will tell. > > 1090 traffic received by an aircraft receiver is solely direct > transmission from other aircraft in range. > 978 traffic is a combination of direct reception from other aircraft plus > ground-based retransmission of targets both 978 and 1090. (Not to > mention the FISb data) > > -------- > Ira N224XS > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449511#449511 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 16, 2015
As things stand at the moment in the US domain, there are multiple distinct hurdles to homebuilding ADSB-Out 1) The first is that microwave (near 1 GHz) circuit design and construction is complex, much more so than VHF. Not to say it can't be done, but it requires expert level skill set. There some UHF amateur radio folks who are proficient, but it is way different than command line hacking a RaspPi. 2) Outside of the ham bands, transmitters of this power output require FCC certification for a variety of specs including frequency spread, power output, stability, etc. 3) Any transmitter sending data into the NAS (National Airspace System) requires FAA TSO or, for OBAM and gliders, as I understand the current state of affairs, meeting TSO spec without actual certification. The specs are onerous to meet, needless to say. You get around 1-3 by using a commercial transponder which will take position data and transmit 1090ES in a regulatory approved manner. 4) So far as I can determine, it is mandatory in the US to use a certified position source to feed the 1090ES. I'd be shocked to discover that the EU is less discerning about positional accuracy. I'm not saying that the specs of a cheap chip set like the RY835 aren't good, they just are not certified for TSO for ADSB out (so far as I know, and I have read their docx). -------- Ira N224XS Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449514#449514 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Date: Nov 16, 2015
The best comparison of what it takes is the Dynon Skyview system. They started with a Trig 1090ES transponder, and had EFIS and moving map running of commercial grade GPS WAAS chips, with the GPS unit costing $200 retail. To meet the 2020 requirement, after the FAA clarified that the GPS had to meet TSO performance specs, but did not need actual TSO approval for experimental OBAM aircraft; Dynon designed a GPS that had all the integrity checking features the TSO called for, and is now offering a "certified" grade GPS that will be legal in US for 2020, at retail cost of $590. Combined cost of the Trig transponder and the legal GPS is around $2700 on top of the cost of the EFIS. Not bad, but more than the Freeflight combination UAT and WAAS GPS unit that is TSO approved priced around $2000 plus install. On 11/16/2015 6:18 AM, rampil wrote: > > As things stand at the moment in the US domain, there are multiple distinct > hurdles to homebuilding ADSB-Out > > 1) The first is that microwave (near 1 GHz) circuit design and construction > is complex, much more so than VHF. Not to say it can't be done, but > it requires expert level skill set. There some UHF amateur radio folks who > are proficient, but it is way different than command line hacking a RaspPi. > > 2) Outside of the ham bands, transmitters of this power output require FCC > certification for a variety of specs including frequency spread, power output, stability, etc. > > 3) Any transmitter sending data into the NAS (National Airspace System) > requires FAA TSO or, for OBAM and gliders, as I understand the current state > of affairs, meeting TSO spec without actual certification. The specs are > onerous to meet, needless to say. > > You get around 1-3 by using a commercial transponder which will take > position data and transmit 1090ES in a regulatory approved manner. > > 4) So far as I can determine, it is mandatory in the US to use a certified > position source to feed the 1090ES. I'd be shocked to discover that the EU > is less discerning about positional accuracy. I'm not saying that the specs > of a cheap chip set like the RY835 aren't good, they just are not > certified for TSO for ADSB out (so far as I know, and I have read their docx). > > -------- > Ira N224XS > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449514#449514 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 16, 2015
From: <rd2(at)dejazzd.com>
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
Just wondering - could the same $590 "certified" GPS (antenna) be used to simultaneously feed a X-ponder and 430W or GTN650 with a splitter ? (instead of feeding the X-ponder from the 430W; the reasoning is to remain ADS-B compliant in case the 430W is temporarily removed) ---- Kelly McMullen wrote: ============ The best comparison of what it takes is the Dynon Skyview system. They started with a Trig 1090ES transponder, and had EFIS and moving map running of commercial grade GPS WAAS chips, with the GPS unit costing $200 retail. To meet the 2020 requirement, after the FAA clarified that the GPS had to meet TSO performance specs, but did not need actual TSO approval for experimental OBAM aircraft; Dynon designed a GPS that had all the integrity checking features the TSO called for, and is now offering a "certified" grade GPS that will be legal in US for 2020, at retail cost of $590. Combined cost of the Trig transponder and the legal GPS is around $2700 on top of the cost of the EFIS. Not bad, but more than the Freeflight combination UAT and WAAS GPS unit that is TSO approved priced around $2000 plus install. On 11/16/2015 6:18 AM, rampil wrote: > > As things stand at the moment in the US domain, there are multiple distinct > hurdles to homebuilding ADSB-Out > > 1) The first is that microwave (near 1 GHz) circuit design and construction > is complex, much more so than VHF. Not to say it can't be done, but > it requires expert level skill set. There some UHF amateur radio folks who > are proficient, but it is way different than command line hacking a RaspPi. > > 2) Outside of the ham bands, transmitters of this power output require FCC > certification for a variety of specs including frequency spread, power output, stability, etc. > > 3) Any transmitter sending data into the NAS (National Airspace System) > requires FAA TSO or, for OBAM and gliders, as I understand the current state > of affairs, meeting TSO spec without actual certification. The specs are > onerous to meet, needless to say. > > You get around 1-3 by using a commercial transponder which will take > position data and transmit 1090ES in a regulatory approved manner. > > 4) So far as I can determine, it is mandatory in the US to use a certified > position source to feed the 1090ES. I'd be shocked to discover that the EU > is less discerning about positional accuracy. I'm not saying that the specs > of a cheap chip set like the RY835 aren't good, they just are not > certified for TSO for ADSB out (so far as I know, and I have read their docx). > > -------- > Ira N224XS > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449514#449514 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Eric Page <edpav8r(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Nov 16, 2015
Assuming Dynon's GPS outputs standard NEMA sentences over serial comm (they don't have a proprietary data stream) it should be possible. Being a position source itself, does the 430W have provision for position input? Does anyone know if, or how, the Feds' ADS-B ground system verifies that data it receives from airborne sources is coming from a compliant position source? Does the data stream contain a model-specific code that's compared against an approved list? Or, is compliance enforced like the requirement for a pilot license (i.e. by ramp check)? And no, I'm not advocating $10 eBay GPS receivers! ;) Eric > On Nov 16, 2015, at 7:46 AM, wrote: > Just wondering - could the same $590 "certified" GPS (antenna) be used to simultaneously feed a X-ponder and 430W or GTN650 with a splitter (instead of feeding the X-ponder from the 430W; the reasoning is to remain ADS-B compliant in case the 430W is temporarily removed)? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 16, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: List Contribution - Value of the List...
If you look forward to checking your List email everyday (and a lot of you have written to say that you do!), then you're probably getting at least $20 or $30 worth of Entertainment from the Lists each year. You'd pay twice that for a subscription to some magazine or even a dinner out. Isn't the List worth at least that much to you? Wouldn't it be great if you could pay that amount and get a well-managed media source free of advertising, SPAM, and viruses? Come to think of it, you do... :-) Won't you please take a minute to make your Contribution today and support these Lists? http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, drop a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 USA I want to say THANK YOU to everyone that has made a Contribution thus far during this year's List Fund Raiser!! These Lists are made possible exclusively through YOUR generosity!! Thank you for your support! Matt Dralle Email List Admin. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Date: Nov 16, 2015
One thing I have been curious about lately is something I heard about back a couple years before ADS-B really took off. I've been running a 978 system since 2009 now, and I personally think it makes the most sense for 85%+ all of the piston singles. That said, I think that ideally all systems would be dual receive. I queried NavWorX about the ADS600B that I have and it does sound like they intend to add 1090 In to the box also, to make it a dual receive system, which will be a good thing. The thing I'm curious about is that I was told by a couple people within the avionics indrustry that were well knowing, that the 1090 Mhz system was already fairly "busy" and nearing saturation for what that frequency could handle for these communications. It was said at the time basically, to paraphrase a memory "If every aircraft equipped with 1090 out, it would bring the system to it's knees." So if that's true, I am surprised we haven't seen any rulemaking or guidance to the consumer that they should equip with the most *appropriate* system for their aircraft. So if you are a small GA aircraft owner, who has a plane that won't be flying above the 978mhz ceiling, you use that 978mhz system by default. Maybe they just assumed that so many pilots would want the 978Mhz systems anyway, for the free weather products? When getting my Ham radio license, it was clear that to be radio frequency friendly that you don't unnecessarily broadcast things that could interfere, and if the 1090 system is really that saturated already, I certainly don't need to broadcast there. So is there truth the saturation issue, or not? Tim On 11/15/2015 11:09 AM, Dj Merrill wrote: > > On 11/15/2015 9:11 AM, rampil wrote: >> 3) It only does 1090 Extended squatter (for now). In the UK, ES is the >> only game in town. In the US most GA traffic is 978 Hz TISb. So, in >> the US >> PilotAware will show you mostly Transport Category stuff in the Flight >> Levels >> but basically no traffic below FL180 (except near big airports). > > > It would be interesting to see actual numbers, but my guess is that at > present, most traffic in the US is on 1090 since most of the aircraft > that are currently equipped are commercial and business. There are also > a likely large number of GA aircraft using 1090 as well, since they will > want to do IFR at reasonably high altitudes. > > As we get closer to 2020, we will likely see more GA traffic using 978, > but my gut is telling me that the largest number of traffic overall will > still be on 1090 for the reasons above. There really doesn't seem to be > an advantage to using 978 "Out" as far as I can see, but that does give > good reasons for equipping with a dual band "In" so you can see both. > > -Dj > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 16, 2015
> >One thing I have been curious about lately is something I heard >about back a couple years before ADS-B really took off. >I've been running a 978 system since 2009 now, and I personally >think it makes the most sense for 85%+ all of the piston >singles. That said, I think that ideally all systems would >be dual receive. I queried NavWorX about the ADS600B that I have >and it does sound like they intend to add 1090 In to the box >also, to make it a dual receive system, which will be a good thing. > >The thing I'm curious about is that I was told by a couple >people within the avionics indrustry that were well knowing, >that the 1090 Mhz system was already fairly "busy" and >nearing saturation for what that frequency could handle for >these communications. It was said at the time basically, >to paraphrase a memory "If every aircraft equipped with >1090 out, it would bring the system to it's knees." > >So if that's true, I am surprised we haven't seen any >rulemaking or guidance to the consumer that they should >equip with the most *appropriate* system for their >aircraft. So if you are a small GA aircraft owner, who >has a plane that won't be flying above the 978mhz ceiling, >you use that 978mhz system by default. Maybe they just >assumed that so many pilots would want the 978Mhz systems >anyway, for the free weather products? When getting my Ham >radio license, it was clear that to be radio frequency >friendly that you don't unnecessarily broadcast things >that could interfere, and if the 1090 system is really >that saturated already, I certainly don't need to broadcast >there. > >So is there truth the saturation issue, or not? > >Tim > > >On 11/15/2015 11:09 AM, Dj Merrill wrote: >> >> On 11/15/2015 9:11 AM, rampil wrote: >>> 3) It only does 1090 Extended squatter (for now). In the UK, ES is >the >>> only game in town. In the US most GA traffic is 978 Hz TISb. So, in >>> the US >>> PilotAware will show you mostly Transport Category stuff in the >Flight >>> Levels >>> but basically no traffic below FL180 (except near big airports). >> >> >> It would be interesting to see actual numbers, but my guess is that >at >> present, most traffic in the US is on 1090 since most of the aircraft >> that are currently equipped are commercial and business. There are >also >> a likely large number of GA aircraft using 1090 as well, since they >will >> want to do IFR at reasonably high altitudes. >> >> As we get closer to 2020, we will likely see more GA traffic using >978, >> but my gut is telling me that the largest number of traffic overall >will >> still be on 1090 for the reasons above. There really doesn't seem to >be >> an advantage to using 978 "Out" as far as I can see, but that does >give >> good reasons for equipping with a dual band "In" so you can see both. >> >> -Dj >> > > Shouldn't be too hard to do the math. How many micro seconds does each squit occupy & how many Micro seconds must the transponder listen before squitting? The 'window' could be many seconds wide, so if there's, say, a 5 million micro second window and a 50 micro second 'listen/squit' interval, that would be room for 100,000 planes. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 16, 2015
> >One thing I have been curious about lately is something I heard >about back a couple years before ADS-B really took off. >I've been running a 978 system since 2009 now, and I personally >think it makes the most sense for 85%+ all of the piston >singles. That said, I think that ideally all systems would >be dual receive. I queried NavWorX about the ADS600B that I have >and it does sound like they intend to add 1090 In to the box >also, to make it a dual receive system, which will be a good thing. > >The thing I'm curious about is that I was told by a couple >people within the avionics indrustry that were well knowing, >that the 1090 Mhz system was already fairly "busy" and >nearing saturation for what that frequency could handle for >these communications. It was said at the time basically, >to paraphrase a memory "If every aircraft equipped with >1090 out, it would bring the system to it's knees." > >So if that's true, I am surprised we haven't seen any >rulemaking or guidance to the consumer that they should >equip with the most *appropriate* system for their >aircraft. So if you are a small GA aircraft owner, who >has a plane that won't be flying above the 978mhz ceiling, >you use that 978mhz system by default. Maybe they just >assumed that so many pilots would want the 978Mhz systems >anyway, for the free weather products? When getting my Ham >radio license, it was clear that to be radio frequency >friendly that you don't unnecessarily broadcast things >that could interfere, and if the 1090 system is really >that saturated already, I certainly don't need to broadcast >there. > >So is there truth the saturation issue, or not? > >Tim > > >On 11/15/2015 11:09 AM, Dj Merrill wrote: >> >> On 11/15/2015 9:11 AM, rampil wrote: >>> 3) It only does 1090 Extended squatter (for now). In the UK, ES is >the >>> only game in town. In the US most GA traffic is 978 Hz TISb. So, in >>> the US >>> PilotAware will show you mostly Transport Category stuff in the >Flight >>> Levels >>> but basically no traffic below FL180 (except near big airports). >> >> >> It would be interesting to see actual numbers, but my guess is that >at >> present, most traffic in the US is on 1090 since most of the aircraft >> that are currently equipped are commercial and business. There are >also >> a likely large number of GA aircraft using 1090 as well, since they >will >> want to do IFR at reasonably high altitudes. >> >> As we get closer to 2020, we will likely see more GA traffic using >978, >> but my gut is telling me that the largest number of traffic overall >will >> still be on 1090 for the reasons above. There really doesn't seem to >be >> an advantage to using 978 "Out" as far as I can see, but that does >give >> good reasons for equipping with a dual band "In" so you can see both. >> >> -Dj >> > > Slould have added, it *is* true that mode C can get saturated (mode c disable instructions at SNF, OSH, etc), but that's likely because a ground radar sweep triggers every transponder in its beam at once. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 16, 2015
On 11/16/2015 1:48 PM, Charlie England wrote: > > > One thing I have been curious about lately is something I heard > about back a couple years before ADS-B really took off. > I've been running a 978 system since 2009 now, and I personally > think it makes the most sense for 85%+ all of the piston > singles. That said, I think that ideally all systems would > be dual receive. I queried NavWorX about the ADS600B that I have > and it does sound like they intend to add 1090 In to the box > also, to make it a dual receive system, which will be a good thing. > > The thing I'm curious about is that I was told by a couple > people within the avionics indrustry that were well knowing, > that the 1090 Mhz system was already fairly "busy" and > nearing saturation for what that frequency could handle for > these communications. It was said at the time basically, > to paraphrase a memory "If > every aircraft equipped with > 1090 out, it would bring the system to it's knees." > > So if that's true, I am surprised we haven't seen any > rulemaking or guidance to the consumer that they should > equip with the most *appropriate* system for their > aircraft. So if you are a small GA aircraft owner, who > has a plane that won't be flying above the 978mhz ceiling, > you use that 978mhz system by default. Maybe they just > assumed that so many pilots would want the 978Mhz systems > anyway, for the free weather products? When getting my Ham > radio license, it was clear that to be radio frequency > friendly that you don't unnecessarily broadcast things > that could interfere, and if the 1090 system is really > that saturated already, I certainly don't need to broadcast > there. > > So is there truth the saturation issue, or not? > > Tim > > > On 11/15/2015 11:09 AM, Dj Merrill wrote: > > On 11/15/2015 9:11 AM, rampil wrote: > > 3) It only does 1090 Extended squatter (for now). In the > UK, ES is the only game in town. In the US most GA traffic > is 978 Hz TISb. So, in the US PilotAware will show you > mostly Transport Category stuff in the Flight Levels but > basically no traffic below FL180 (except near big airports). > > It would be interesting to see actual numbers, but my guess is > that at present, most traffic in the US is on 1090 since most > of the aircraft that are currently equipped are commercial and > business. There are also a likely large number of GA aircraft > using 1090 as well, since they will want to do IFR at > reasonably high altitudes. As we get closer to 2020, we will > likely see more GA traffic using 978, but my gut is telling me > that the largest number of traffic overall will still be on > 1090 for the reasons above. There really doesn't seem to be an > advantage to using 978 "Out" as far as I can see, but that > does give good reasons for equipping with a dual band "In" so > you can see both. -Dj > > > Shouldn't be too hard to do the math. How many micro seconds does each > squit occupy & how many Micro seconds must the transponder listen > before squitting? The 'window' could be many seconds wide, so if > there's, say, a 5 million micro second window and a 50 micro second > 'listen/squit' interval, that would be room for 100,000 planes. > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. Followup; just found a pdf comparing ES to mode A & C. max time according to the doc is ~120 uSeconds, & a/c transmit once per second, without interrogation. So, if we roughly double that to 250 uSeconds & assume a 1 second repetition rate, that's 1,000,000/250= only 4000 planes in a given area. If we halve that again to be really conservative, it's still 2k planes in an area. Link to the doc (1st one I landed on): http://www.ssd.dhmi.gov.tr/getBinaryFile.aspx?Type=3&dosyaID=195 Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: ptt isolation
From: "nodak" <epilipanko(at)comcast.net>
Date: Nov 17, 2015
What relays are recommended for pilot copilot ptt isolation on flightline fl760 transceivers. Thousands of relays are shown on suppliers web sites making it hard to pick out a suitable one. Thanks in advance. Eugene Pilipanko Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449608#449608 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Stratux Build
From: Rick Beebe <richard.beebe(at)yale.edu>
Date: Nov 17, 2015
For Experimental Aircraft, the Navworx ADS600-EXP is a self-contained ADS-B in and out for about $1200. The ADS600-B at $1999 is for certified aircraft and seems very similar to the FreeFlight unit. However the Navworx units are both in and out and for $100 you can add wifi to display traffic & weather on a tablet. The $1999 FreeFlight unit is out only. Their in/out box is $3700. I went to an ADS-B seminar on Sunday and the presenter said that Mexico is going to require 1090ES. I haven't been able to verify that, however. Just another datapoint if you're trying to decide on UAT vs 1090ES. Something else I hadn't realized--for those thinking they can avoid airspace where you need ADS-B out--is that you can't fly over the top of any Class-B (actually the mode C veil) without ADS-B because the veil extends to 10,000' and ADS-B is required (in most places) above 10,000'. In my part of the country that's a significant inconvenience. --Rick On 11/16/2015 09:57 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > > The best comparison of what it takes is the Dynon Skyview system. They > started with a Trig 1090ES transponder, and had EFIS and moving map > running of commercial grade GPS WAAS chips, with the GPS unit costing > $200 retail. To meet the 2020 requirement, after the FAA clarified that > the GPS had to meet TSO performance specs, but did not need actual TSO > approval for experimental OBAM aircraft; Dynon designed a GPS that had > all the integrity checking features the TSO called for, and is now > offering a "certified" grade GPS that will be legal in US for 2020, at > retail cost of $590. Combined cost of the Trig transponder and the legal > GPS is around $2700 on top of the cost of the EFIS. Not bad, but more > than the Freeflight combination UAT and WAAS GPS unit that is TSO > approved priced around $2000 plus install. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: ptt isolation
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 17, 2015
Search Mouser or Digikey for these relay characteristics: Non-latching, 12VDC nominal coil voltage (13 or 14 OK), SPDT or DPDT, 1 amp contact rating, price less than $5. A panel mounted switch can be used to disable the copilot PTT. A relay is needed to connect either the pilot or copilot mic. Both mics should not be connected to the radio at the same time. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449623#449623 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chuck" <ChuckGauthier(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: ptt isolation
Date: Nov 18, 2015
I had a conversation with the vendor and was told that relays are the only way to have PTT Cutout. I am putting the FL 760 in my panel and I didn't want to use relays so I developed a way to avoid using relays and still accomplish the same results. It requires using DPDT Momentary Push Button Switches for both Pilot and Co-Pilot/Pax. I paid about $20-$25 for each of the switches. Caveat: Buyer Beware! I have not finished installing it in my panel yet so the circuitry hasn't been tested and confirmed, however, I took the schematic to an avionics shop for their review and they confirmed that it should work. I'm attaching the schematics and info on the DPDT switches I used. Good Luck. Chuck Gauthier Cleanex N183SX (Sonex with a Corvair engine) Cell: (360) 901-7934 ChuckGauthier(at)comcast.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: ptt isolation
At 07:36 AM 11/17/2015, you wrote: > >What relays are recommended for pilot copilot ptt isolation on flightline >fl760 transceivers. Thousands of relays are shown on suppliers web sites >making it hard to pick out a suitable one. >Thanks in advance. >Eugene Pilipanko Joe's advice is solid but I'm curious as to how these would be used in your system. Can you share a link to the wiring diagrams that show the relays? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: What's Your Contribution Used For?
Dear Listers, You might have wondered at some point, "What's my Contribution used for?" Here are just a few examples of what your direct List support enables... It provides for the expensive, commercial-grade Internet connection used on the List. It pays for the regular system hardware and software upgrades enabling the highest performance possible for List services such as the Archive Search Engine, List Browser, and the Web Forums. It pays for the over 23 years of on-line archive data always available for instant search and access. And, it offsets the many hours spent writing, developing, and maintaining the custom applications that power these List Service such as the List Browse, Search Engine, Forums, and Wiki. But most importantly, your List Contribution enables a forum where you and your peers can communicate freely in an environment that is free from moderation, censorship, advertising, commercialism, SPAM, and computer viruses. It is YOUR CONTRIBUTION that directly enables all these aspects of Matronics List services. Please support it today with your List Contribution. Its one of the best investments you can make in your Sport! List Contribution Web Site: http://www.matronics.com/contribution or, you can send a personal check to the following address: Matronics / Matt Dralle 581 Jeannie Way Livermore, CA 94550 Thank you for your support! Matt Dralle Email List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: ptt isolation
At 07:36 AM 11/17/2015, you wrote: > >What relays are recommended for pilot copilot ptt isolation on flightline >fl760 transceivers. Thousands of relays are shown on suppliers web sites >making it hard to pick out a suitable one. >Thanks in advance. >Eugene Pilipanko Gene, When you say PTT isolation, what functionality are you seeking? The radio has two microphone inputs that are simultaneously active. This supports the intercom functionality. When you push the pilot's ptt, are you wanting to quiet the copilot's mic, disable the copilot's ptt, or both. When the copilot's ptt is activated, do you want that source to have priority over the radio . . . in other words, disable the pilot's ptt, microphone or both? Are you intending to use the built in intercom function? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: ptt isolation
From: "nodak" <epilipanko(at)comcast.net>
Date: Nov 19, 2015
I was wanting to disable the copilots transmit function when the pilots ptt was activated & disabling the pilots transmit function when the copilots ptt was activated. What I am trying to accomplish is not have both mics on when only one ptt is activated. The flightline wiring diagram lists a isolation relay board which is no longer available. Thanks for the replies Eugene Pilipanko Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449747#449747 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: ptt isolation
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 19, 2015
Here is a link to a wiring diagram showing how MicroAir uses two relays to connect the mics. http://tinyurl.com/Microair-PTT Eugene, are you going to use the intercom function of the radio? -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449750#449750 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: ptt isolation
From: "nodak" <epilipanko(at)comcast.net>
Date: Nov 19, 2015
I was planning on using the intercom feature. I am trying to get some information on how to wire the unit before I install it. It will be couple of months before I will do the installation. Eugene Pilipanko Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449753#449753 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Rotax ignition wiring
From: "jrevens" <jrevens(at)comcast.net>
Date: Nov 19, 2015
This may be a dumb question, but would using a shielded twisted pair for the combined ignition control wiring to both modules be OK, or are 2 individual shielded single conductor wires preferred for some reason? I am basically using Bob's Z-16 diagram... I am very grateful to have that, Bob! -------- John Evens Thorp T-18 N71JE (built & flying) Kitfox SS7 N27JE (building) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449754#449754 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 19, 2015
It is better to have individual wires for each ignition to prevent one electrical problem from disabling both ignitions. The shield on each ignition wire (on my Rotax powered RV-12) is separated in the middle. The shield is grounded at each end. I suspect that Van's designed it that way to prevent starter current from burning open the shield if the engine ground wire ever breaks. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449755#449755 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
At 09:12 PM 11/19/2015, you wrote: > >This may be a dumb question, but would using a shielded twisted pair >for the combined ignition control wiring to both modules be OK, or >are 2 individual shielded single conductor wires preferred for some >reason? I am basically using Bob's Z-16 diagram... I am very >grateful to have that, Bob! My pleasure. What you propose would be fine. Do you already have some twisted pair 20 or 18AWG? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
At 09:46 PM 11/19/2015, you wrote: > >It is better to have individual wires for each ignition to prevent >one electrical problem from disabling both ignitions. The shield on >each ignition wire (on my Rotax powered RV-12) is separated in the >middle. The shield is grounded at each end. I suspect that Van's >designed it that way to prevent starter current from burning open >the shield if the engine ground wire ever breaks. Interesting . . . not sure I understand why that would be 'better' . . . I like to see the designer's white paper on the thought process. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: ptt isolation
At 07:53 PM 11/19/2015, you wrote: > >I was planning on using the intercom feature. I am trying to get some >information on how to wire the unit before I install it. It will be >couple of months before I will do the installation. Okay, let's talk about it a bit. I'm packing to go to Wichita today . . . got a garage door opener to install. We'll pick up this thread tomorrow. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: ptt isolation
At 11:17 AM 11/19/2015, you wrote: > >I was wanting to disable the copilots transmit function when the pilots >ptt was activated & disabling the pilots transmit function when the >copilots ptt was activated. What I am trying to accomplish is not have > both mics on when only one ptt is activated. The flightline wiring >diagram lists a isolation relay board which is no longer available. >Thanks for the replies I believe Chuck's suggestion earlier this thread accomplishes a talker-priority access to the transmitter. You might study that a bit and see if it's suited to your planning. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: ptt isolation
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 20, 2015
Attached is a PTT circuit using two DPDT relays. Both mics are normally connected for intercom use. If one pilot presses her PTT switch, the other pilot's mic is disabled. A disadvantage of this circuit is that if both PTT switches are pressed, both mics will be disabled. Of course the pilot will realize this when the side tone goes quiet. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449764#449764 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/ptt_relays_556.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Please Make a Contribution to Support Your Lists...
Dear Listers, Just a reminder that November is the Annual List Fund Raiser. Please make a Contribution today to support the continued operation and upgrade of these great List services!! Pick up a really nice free gift with your qualifying Contribution too! The Contribution Site is fast and easy: http://www.matronics.com/contribution or by dropping a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 Thank you! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: ptt isolation
From: Bill Maxwell <wrmaxwell(at)bigpond.com>
Date: Nov 21, 2015
Bt leaves the intercom function to be addressed, methinks... Bill On 21/11/2015 12:57 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > At 11:17 AM 11/19/2015, you wrote: >> >> I was wanting to disable the copilots transmit function when the pilots >> ptt was activated & disabling the pilots transmit function when the >> copilots ptt was activated. What I am trying to accomplish is not have >> both mics on when only one ptt is activated. The flightline wiring >> diagram lists a isolation relay board which is no longer available. >> Thanks for the replies > > I believe Chuck's suggestion earlier this > thread accomplishes a talker-priority access > to the transmitter. You might study that > a bit and see if it's suited to your > planning. > > > Bob . . . > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2015
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com>
All, The ignition modules and the pickups together cost almost $4,000 to replace. A few feet of shielded wire costs what, $1.49? I'd wire it exactly as Rotax says rather than experiment. Rick Girard On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 7:53 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote: > At 09:46 PM 11/19/2015, you wrote: > > > It is better to have individual wires for each ignition to prevent one > electrical problem from disabling both ignitions. The shield on each > ignition wire (on my Rotax powered RV-12) is separated in the middle. Th e > shield is grounded at each end. I suspect that Van's designed it that wa y > to prevent starter current from burning open the shield if the engine > ground wire ever breaks. > > > Interesting . . . not sure I understand > why that would be 'better' . . . I like > to see the designer's white paper on the > thought process. > > Bob . . . > -- =9CBlessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light.=9D Groucho Marx <http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/43244.Groucho_Marx> ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: "jrevens" <jrevens(at)comcast.net>
Date: Nov 21, 2015
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: > At 09:12 PM 11/19/2015, you wrote: > > > > > This may be a dumb question, but would using a shielded twisted pair for the combined ignition control wiring to both modules be OK, or are 2 individual shielded single conductor wires preferred for some reason? I am basically using Bob's Z-16 diagram... I am very grateful to have that, Bob! > > My pleasure. What you propose would be fine. > Do you already have some twisted pair 20 or > 18AWG? > > > Bob . . . Yes I do, Bob. Not sure if I'll use it, but I was just trying to educate myself a little further in analyzing if there were any issues with using 2 wires enclosed in a common shield for this application. I like your suggestion to ground at the engine only and use the shield for the conductor back to the module. Thanks to all for the replies. -------- John Evens Thorp T-18 N71JE (built & flying) Kitfox SS7 N27JE (building) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449854#449854 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: "jrevens" <jrevens(at)comcast.net>
Date: Nov 21, 2015
rickofudall wrote: > All, The ignition modules and the pickups together cost almost $4,000 to replace. A few feet of shielded wire costs what, $1.49? I'd wire it exactly as Rotax says rather than experiment. > > Rick Girard Yep, those modules and pickups are really stupidly expensive and over-priced. I'm amazed that someone hasn't come up with a viable aftermarket replacement that could probably be sold for a fraction of the price and still make a nice profit. I'm really not trying to "experiment" with this, Rick, but sometimes there is a little more elegant or simple way to do something that accomplishes the same result... maybe resulting in less weight, fewer connections, better design from a "noise" standpoint, etc. I'm not really convinced that doing everything "exactly as Rotax says..." is always the best that I can do. I've seen a couple of possible errors in their manuals for the 912 series engines. For instance, yesterday while studying the latest 912 Installation manual, I noticed the following on p.4 of section 80-00-00 regarding the starter system - "NOTICE - The starter relay must be isolated from the aircraft ground". What? I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding that or what. -------- John Evens Thorp T-18 N71JE (built & flying) Kitfox SS7 N27JE (building) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449856#449856 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 22, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Coming Soon - The List of Contributors - Please Make
A Contribution Today! Each year at the end of the List Fund Raiser, I post a message acknowledging everyone that so generously made a Contribution to support the Lists. Its my way of publicly thanking everyone that took a minute to show their appreciation for the Lists. Please take a moment and assure that your name is on that List of Contributors (LOC)! As a number of members have pointed out over the years, the List seems at least as valuable a building / entertainment tool as your typical magazine subscription! Assure that your name is on this year's LOC! Show others that you appreciate the Lists. Making a Contribution to support the Lists is fast and easy using your Credit card or Paypal on the Secure Web Site: http://www.matronics.com/contribution or by dropping a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 I would like to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution thus far in this year's List Fund Raiser! Remember that its YOUR support that keeps these Lists going and improving! Don't forget to include a little comment about how the Lists have helped you! Best regards, Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 22, 2015
Hi Folks, it's been a while since I've posted - it's nice to be back. I am the maintenance officer of a flying club which recently purchased a 1972 Cessna 182P and I've recently been quite busy... here is the story: A week ago I was flying VFR at night and the alternator breaker popped in flight. Luckily the battery had just been replaced and I was close to the airport so I was able to land without further incident. After I landed I reset the ALT breaker and noticed a whine in the headset and a low (12.9V bus voltage). The whine varies in pitch with RPM and in volume with electrical load (eg. when I turn on the landing lights). I replaced the alternator and that made no difference to either the whine or the low voltage. I then replaced the alternator regulator and bus voltage is back up to 14.1V but the whine is unchanged. Recent changes to the aircraft include: - new Slick magnetos (a month ago, right after purchasing a/c) - new battery (the day before the alternator failed), as previous battery appeared dead (had the charging system been broken for a while?) It all sounds like it could be the result of some kind of ground loop but I can't quite see how that hypothesis fits with the history of the problems. Does anyone have any ideas? Sacha PS. I've been reading the AeroElectric connection chapter 16 and based on that, here are the next tests I plan to do: a. Turn off alternator switch and see if noise disappears b. Disconnect antenna or turn down radio volume and see if noise disappears (means its entering the system through the antenna and not through the wiring) c. Check whether the phone and mic jacks are insulated from the (metal) airframe (but that's not something that recently changed, so unlikely to be the cause) d. If noise not generated by Alternator, suspect mags: i. try turning off one mag in turn and see if noise disappears. ii. Try disconnecting the p-leads and see if noise disappears. iii. Otherwise spark plug harnesses might be suspect and should be tested for conductivity. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449962#449962 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2015
The vast majority of electrical problems are caused by bad connections. Checking each connection in both the positive and negative side of the circuits will only cost your time. Take apart each connection, shine up the metal, apply a film of grease, and reassemble. Also tug hard on each terminal and check for corrosion between wires and crimped terminals. Switches can also have internal corrosion. Cycling them several times might clean the contacts. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=449967#449967 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 23, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Fund Raiser Behind By 22% - Please Contribute Today!
Dear Listers, The percentage of members making a Contribution to support the Lists this year is currently behind last year by at this time by roughly 22%. Please take this opportunity to show your support for the Matronics Lists and Forums! Please remember that it is *solely* your direct Contributions that keep these Lists and Forums up and running and most importantly - AD FREE! If the members don't want to support the Lists directly, then I might have to add advertisements to offset the costs of running the Lists. But I don't want to have to do that. I really like the non-commercial atmosphere here and I think that a lot of the members appreciate that too. Please take a moment to make a Contribution today in support of the continued ad-free operation of all these Lists: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, drop a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 USA I want to send out a word of appreciation to all of the members that have already made their generous Contribution to support the Lists! Thank you! Matt Dralle Email List and Forums Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ivan <hivanhaecker(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2015
Subject: Alternator Overvoltage
On a recent flight in my rv-4, my overvoltage relay (crowbar) apparently functioned properly as it tripped my field circuit breaker taking the alternator off line. Upon landing and checking, the problem would reoccur whenever the breaker was reset. I assumed the original voltage regulator had failed (1990 Van's unit). The alternator is a small 35 amp unit (from a mid 70's Honda Civic I believe). Unable to find an identical voltage regulator, I purchased a VR 440 unit from NAPA, and wired as suggested by previous posts on other lists. The problem reoccurred the same as before. My questions are: could this problem be related to the alternator itself, or might I have inadvertently purchased a defective voltage regulator. I believe the alternator is functioning because I measured its output with the field wired directly to the battery and saw 19+ volts. Any suggestions? Ivan Haecker ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 24, 2015
From: Jeff Luckey <jluckey(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Alternator Overvoltage
Ivan, Could the problem be the over-voltage module? Do you have a way to bench te st the module?=C2- Using a variable DC power supply you should be able to determine the trip p oint of your OVM.=C2- That's where I would start based upon your descript ion. -Jeff On Monday, November 23, 2015 3:59 PM, Ivan wro te: On a recent flight in my rv-4, my overvoltage relay (crowbar) apparently fu nctioned properly as it tripped my field circuit breaker taking the alterna tor off line. Upon landing and checking, the problem would reoccur whenever the breaker was reset. I assumed the original voltage regulator had failed (1990 Van's unit). The alternator is a small 35 amp unit=C2- (from a mid 70's Honda Civic I believe). Unable to find an identical voltage regulator , I purchased a VR 440 unit from NAPA, and wired as suggested by previous p osts on other lists. The problem reoccurred the same as before. My question s are: could this problem be related to the alternator itself, or might I h ave inadvertently purchased a defective voltage regulator. I believe the al ternator is functioning because=C2- I measured its output with the field wired directly to the battery and saw 19+ volts. Any suggestions? Ivan Haecker =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin. - S - - =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Alternator Overvoltage
From: C&K <yellowduckduo(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2015
Next thing I'd try is to see if the alternator is still outputting current and high voltage with the field disconnected to verify no internal field problem. Note that some of the Japanese alternators of that era were controlled with the regulator on the positive side of the field rather than on the negative side as per most alternators and most regulators. Ken On 23/11/2015 6:43 PM, Ivan wrote: > > On a recent flight in my rv-4, my overvoltage relay (crowbar) apparently functioned properly as it tripped my field circuit breaker taking the alternator off line. Upon landing and checking, the problem would reoccur whenever the breaker was reset. I assumed the original voltage regulator had failed (1990 Van's unit). The alternator is a small 35 amp unit (from a mid 70's Honda Civic I believe). Unable to find an identical voltage regulator, I purchased a VR 440 unit from NAPA, and wired as suggested by previous posts on other lists. The problem reoccurred the same as before. My questions are: could this problem be related to the alternator itself, or might I have inadvertently purchased a defective voltage regulator. I believe the alternator is functioning because I measured its output with the field wired directly to the battery and saw 19+ volts. Any suggestions? > > Ivan Haecker > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Alternator Overvoltage
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2015
I'd find the proper hookup diagram for both the alternator that you have, and the regulator that you're using. There's at least an outside chance something isn't hooked up correctly, since it's a different model regulator. What voltage do you measure if you disable the OV module & leave the regulator in the circuit? On 11/23/2015 6:16 PM, Jeff Luckey wrote: > Ivan, > > Could the problem be the over-voltage module? Do you have a way to > bench test the module? > > Using a variable DC power supply you should be able to determine the > trip point of your OVM. That's where I would start based upon your > description. > > -Jeff > > > On Monday, November 23, 2015 3:59 PM, Ivan wrote: > > > > > > On a recent flight in my rv-4, my overvoltage relay (crowbar) > apparently functioned properly as it tripped my field circuit breaker > taking the alternator off line. Upon landing and checking, the problem > would reoccur whenever the breaker was reset. I assumed the original > voltage regulator had failed (1990 Van's unit). The alternator is a > small 35 amp unit (from a mid 70's Honda Civic I believe). Unable to > find an identical voltage regulator, I purchased a VR 440 unit from > NAPA, and wired as suggested by previous posts on other lists. The > problem reoccurred the same as before. My questions are: could this > problem be related to the alternator itself, or might I have > inadvertently purchased a defective voltage regulator. I believe the > alternator is functioning because I measured its output with the > field wired directly to the battery and saw 19+ volts. Any > s.matronics.com/contribution" > target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/connbsp; -Matt > Dralle, List > Admin.http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List<; > http://forums.sp; - List Contribution Web Site - > _; &nb://www.matronics.com/contribution" > target="_blank">http://www.matronics.c================== > > > <http://forums.matronics.com/> > <http://forums.matronics.com/> > <http://forums.matronics.com/> > <http://forums.matronics.com/> > <http://forums.matronics.com/> ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Alternator Overvoltage
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2015
Does the field circuit breaker trip with the engine NOT running? If yes, then suspect the over voltage module or a wire shorted to ground. If it only trips with the engine running, does it trip at idle RPM? If it trips only at higher RPM, then the regulator is not working. It is unlikely that the alternator is at fault. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450075#450075 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2015
Hi Joe, thanks for that suggestion. I now know that the noise comes from the Alternator and not the Mags. I have a specific question: Regarding the ground connections my A&P did the following tests: - added a ground strap between the alternator and the engine crank case - added a ground strap between the (rear-mounted) battery and the airframe In neither case did the alternator whine disappear. Are these tests sufficient to prove that these connections are not the cause of the whine? Sacha Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450077#450077 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 23, 2015
Subject: Re: Alternator Overvoltage
From: "H. Ivan Haecker" <hivanhaecker(at)gmail.com>
Yes, I'm sure it the voltage regulator is wired correctly as I just checked Bob's Z-11 diagram. I have also checked the alternator with the ov module disconnected and the voltage regulator in the circuit. Still producing about 19 volts at 1000 rpm. I haven't tested the ov module trip point, but obviously without it in the circuit, the voltage is too high. If it is not the alternator, I just feel I must have a bad original voltage regulator and a bad new replacement. I don't know how to test a voltage regulator though. Ivan Haecker On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Charlie England wrote: > I'd find the proper hookup diagram for both the alternator that you have, > and the regulator that you're using. There's at least an outside chance > something isn't hooked up correctly, since it's a different model > regulator. What voltage do you measure if you disable the OV module & leave > the regulator in the circuit? > > On 11/23/2015 6:16 PM, Jeff Luckey wrote: > > Ivan, > > Could the problem be the over-voltage module? Do you have a way to bench > test the module? > > Using a variable DC power supply you should be able to determine the trip > point of your OVM. That's where I would start based upon your description. > > -Jeff > > > On Monday, November 23, 2015 3:59 PM, Ivan > wrote: > > > On a recent flight in my rv-4, my overvoltage relay (crowbar) apparently > functioned properly as it tripped my field circuit breaker taking the > alternator off line. Upon landing and checking, the problem would reoccur > whenever the breaker was reset. I assumed the original voltage regulator > had failed (1990 Van's unit). The alternator is a small 35 amp unit (from > a mid 70's Honda Civic I believe). Unable to find an identical voltage > regulator, I purchased a VR 440 unit from NAPA, and wired as suggested by > previous posts on other lists. The problem reoccurred the same as before. > My questions are: could this problem be related to the alternator itself, > or might I have inadvertently purchased a defective voltage regulator. I > believe the alternator is functioning because I measured its output with > the field wired directly to the battery and saw 19+ volts. Any > s.matronics.com/contribution" target="_blank"> > http://www.matronics.com/connbsp; -Matt Dralle, List Admin. > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List<; http://forums.sp; > - List Contribution Web Site - > _; &nb://www.matronics.com/contribution" > target="_blank">http://www.matronics.c================== > > > <http://forums.matronics.com/> > <http://forums.matronics.com/> > <http://forums.matronics.com/> > <http://forums.matronics.com/> > <http://forums.matronics.com/> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2015
> Are these tests sufficient to prove that these connections are not the cause of the whine? Probably. There is also the connection between the engine case and the airframe. And then there all of the connections on the positive side of the circuit. Pay particular attention to the alternator and voltage regulator. Also check all audio input circuits like mics and intercom and music input. Any audio circuit that gets amplified is vulnerable to noise. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450080#450080 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Alternator Overvoltage
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2015
> Still producing about 19 volts at 1000 rpm. The problem is either the voltage regulator or its related circuit. Using the voltage regulator case (or regulator ground terminal) as a reference point (not the airframe or battery negative), measure the voltage on the regulator "sense" terminal. If that voltage is higher than 14.5 volts with the engine running, then the regulator is bad. If the voltage is not higher than 14.5, then there is a bad connection someplace. The alternator on-off switch or circuit breaker contacts or a wire terminal could be corroded. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450081#450081 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Alternator Overvoltage
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2015
If you're seeing 19V on a regulated 14V system, then either the reg is bad or something isn't hooked up correctly. Most auto parts stores will test alternators and regulators for free these days (at least Autozone will). Just take the suspect reg to them & ask them to test it. You may need to tell them what 'car' it was installed on. :-) Just find a model that used that regulator & tell them that. BTW, I'd certainly pull the breakers or fuses on *all* electrical load items in the plane while doing your in-plane testing..... On 11/23/2015 8:57 PM, H. Ivan Haecker wrote: > Yes, I'm sure it the voltage regulator is wired correctly as I just > checked Bob's Z-11 diagram. I have also checked the alternator with > the ov module disconnected and the voltage regulator in the circuit. > Still producing about 19 volts at 1000 rpm. I haven't tested the ov > module trip point, but obviously without it in the circuit, the > voltage is too high. If it is not the alternator, I just feel I must > have a bad original voltage regulator and a bad new replacement. I > don't know how to test a voltage regulator though. > > Ivan Haecker > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Charlie England > wrote: > > I'd find the proper hookup diagram for both the alternator that > you have, and the regulator that you're using. There's at least an > outside chance something isn't hooked up correctly, since it's a > different model regulator. What voltage do you measure if you > disable the OV module & leave the regulator in the circuit? > > On 11/23/2015 6:16 PM, Jeff Luckey wrote: >> Ivan, >> >> Could the problem be the over-voltage module? Do you have a way >> to bench test the module? >> >> Using a variable DC power supply you should be able to determine >> the trip point of your OVM. That's where I would start based upon >> your description. >> >> -Jeff >> >> >> >> On Monday, November 23, 2015 3:59 PM, Ivan >> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> On a recent flight in my rv-4, my overvoltage relay (crowbar) >> apparently functioned properly as it tripped my field circuit >> breaker taking the alternator off line. Upon landing and >> checking, the problem would reoccur whenever the breaker was >> reset. I assumed the original voltage regulator had failed (1990 >> Van's unit). The alternator is a small 35 amp unit (from a mid >> 70's Honda Civic I believe). Unable to find an identical voltage >> regulator, I purchased a VR 440 unit from NAPA, and wired as >> suggested by previous posts on other lists. The problem >> reoccurred the same as before. My questions are: could this >> problem be related to the alternator itself, or might I have >> inadvertently purchased a defective voltage regulator. I believe >> the alternator is functioning because I measured its output with >> the field wired directly to the battery and saw 19+ volts. Any >> s.matronics.com/contribution >> <http://s.matronics.com/contribution>" >> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/connbsp; >> -Matt Dralle, List >> Admin.http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List<; >> http://forums.sp; - List Contribution Web Site - >> _; &nb://www.matronics.com/contribution" >> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.c================== >> >> >> >> >> >> <http://forums.matronics.com/> >> <http://forums.matronics.com/> >> <http://forums.matronics.com/> >> <http://forums.matronics.com/> >> <http://forums.matronics.com/> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2015
Microphone jacks should be insulated from the airframe. The coax should be grounded at the avionics end only. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450083#450083 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna
182P
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2015
> >Microphone jacks should be insulated from the airframe. The coax >should be grounded at the avionics end only. > >-------- >Joe Gores > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450083#450083 > > Careful; many circuits use the shield as the return for the signal. In that case, the shield must be 'grounded' at both ends. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Intercom volume
From: Stuart Hutchison <stuart(at)stuarthutchison.com.au>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Gday. Can someone please confirm whether the intercom signal (i.e. volume) is diluted by connecting other recording devices in parallel with the main intercom jacks? Id like to hardwire one or two sockets to connect multiple GoPro cameras to the intercom, but not if it will significantly degrade system performance. Cheers, Stu > On 24 Nov 2015, at 3:35 PM, user9253 wrote: > > > Microphone jacks should be insulated from the airframe. The coax should be grounded at the avionics end only. > > -------- > Joe Gores ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Intercom volume
From: Bill Maxwell <wrmaxwell(at)bigpond.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
In theory yes but you can probably wind up the volume control to compensate, Stu. If you have a 4 place intercom and dont usethe full four places, probably wont be an issue anyway? Bill On 24/11/2015 5:55 PM, Stuart Hutchison wrote: > > Gday. > > Can someone please confirm whether the intercom signal (i.e. volume) is diluted by connecting other recording devices in parallel with the main intercom jacks? Id like to hardwire one or two sockets to connect multiple GoPro cameras to the intercom, but not if it will significantly degrade system performance. > > Cheers, Stu > > >> On 24 Nov 2015, at 3:35 PM, user9253 wrote: >> >> >> Microphone jacks should be insulated from the airframe. The coax should be grounded at the avionics end only. >> >> -------- >> Joe Gores > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
If no problem is found with the aircraft wiring or components, you might consider a filter (if legal on a 182). This website tells how to make your own filter: http://www.sanantoniohams.org/tips/whine.htm Or you can buy a pre-wound toroid (rated for load current) and add a capacitor at the avionics end. Mouser and eBay sell both bare and pre-wound toroids. Mouser part number: 704-CTX100-2-52LP-R eBay item numbers: 400433590605, 191743622176, 370777920139 I am not necessarily recommending a filter but it might be worth a try if all else fails. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450093#450093 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Thanks. There is already an inductive and a capacitive noise filter on the 182. What I'm thinking of though is: two weeks ago (before the ALT breaker popped in flight) everything was fine. So that breaker popping and then the noise appearing as soon as I reset the breaker on the ground must mean that *SOMETHING* has changed: it's unlikely to be the mic/phone jacks so I'm wondering what it could be that was damaged/changed: - could it be that the noise filters were fried by an over-voltage event? (but if it was an overvoltage event, the ALT reg CB should have popped, not the ALT CB). There were actually two problems: - low bus voltage - noise Replacing the alternator solved neither. On Friday, my A&P made a temporary installation of a new voltage regulator and that solved the low voltage problem. But that installation did not allow the alternator to go offline when the ALT rocker switch was turned off. Yesterday, he finished the installation and verified that when the ALT is turned off, the noise disapears. But the interesting thing is that he mentioned that the bus voltage is now 13.5V vs 14.1V on Friday. So I'm now suspecting that the ALT rocker switch is offering some unusual resistance. Could that have been caused by whatever caused the ALT breaker to pop? I guess the next step is to bypass the ALT rocker switch and see if at least the bus voltage returns to 14.1V. Thoughts? The electrical schematic is on p.18 (numbered 2-4) of http://www.t-craft.org/Fleet/C182P-POH.pdf Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450095#450095 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna
182P
From: Jan <jan(at)CLAVER.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Stupid question maybe but is the new voltage regulator identical to the old unit ? All the best Jan > On Nov 24, 2015, at 15:02, sacha wrote: > > > Thanks. There is already an inductive and a capacitive noise filter on the 182. > > What I'm thinking of though is: two weeks ago (before the ALT breaker popped in flight) everything was fine. So that breaker popping and then the noise appearing as soon as I reset the breaker on the ground must mean that *SOMETHING* has changed: it's unlikely to be the mic/phone jacks so I'm wondering what it could be that was damaged/changed: > - could it be that the noise filters were fried by an over-voltage event? (but if it was an overvoltage event, the ALT reg CB should have popped, not the ALT CB). > > There were actually two problems: > - low bus voltage > - noise > Replacing the alternator solved neither. On Friday, my A&P made a temporary installation of a new voltage regulator and that solved the low voltage problem. But that installation did not allow the alternator to go offline when the ALT rocker switch was turned off. Yesterday, he finished the installation and verified that when the ALT is turned off, the noise disapears. But the interesting thing is that he mentioned that the bus voltage is now 13.5V vs 14.1V on Friday. So I'm now suspecting that the ALT rocker switch is offering some unusual resistance. > Could that have been caused by whatever caused the ALT breaker to pop? > > I guess the next step is to bypass the ALT rocker switch and see if at least the bus voltage returns to 14.1V. Thoughts? > > The electrical schematic is on p.18 (numbered 2-4) of http://www.t-craft.org/Fleet/C182P-POH.pdf > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450095#450095 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Hi Jan No it isn't. The old one is a Ford. The new one a Plane Power regulator. Can you explain why you're asking? Sacha Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450097#450097 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Neal George <ngeorge(at)continentalmotors.aero>
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna
182P
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Sasha - The PlanePower voltage regulators are adjustable, and must be adjusted at installation. It would probably be a good idea to replace the Split Master switch, too. neal -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of sacha Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 9:33 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P Hi Jan No it isn't. The old one is a Ford. The new one a Plane Power regulator. Can you explain why you're asking? Sacha ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna
182P
From: Jan <jan(at)CLAVER.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Well, depending on the technology used for the voltage regulation - the noise can be generated by the regulator. The noise filter that you currently have fitted would have been tuned to the old regulator - new regulator could very well need a new filter, tuned for the current regulator. If the noise pitch is changing with rpm - that would sound to me as if the noise is from the regulator as it does its work regulating the output voltage All the best Jan > On Nov 24, 2015, at 15:53, Neal George wrote: > > > Sasha - > The PlanePower voltage regulators are adjustable, and must be adjusted at installation. > It would probably be a good idea to replace the Split Master switch, too. > > neal > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of sacha > Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 9:33 AM > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P > > > Hi Jan > No it isn't. The old one is a Ford. The new one a Plane Power regulator. > Can you explain why you're asking? > Sacha > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Thank you for your inputs. I'm sorry it's a little difficult for me to know exactly what is going on as I am receiving reports from the A&P, not working on the plane directly (as I a not allowed to). I just got another email from the A&P saying that after multiple calls to Plane Power they think they have it correctly installed, but there is some concern that the bus voltage is very slow to come up. Could this be due in any way to a defect of the over voltage protection? Hmmmm.... maybe the most expeditious solution would be to install a Ford regulator and a new master switch. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450101#450101 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Using the voltage regulator CASE as a reference point (not the airframe or battery negative), measure the voltage on the regulator "sense" terminal. Is it the same as battery voltage? If not, find out where the voltage is being dropped. Over-voltage can destroy capacitors. The capacitors could be tested to make sure they are OK. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450102#450102 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Ok things are even more complicated as I just noticed that the plane power regulator has internal over voltage protection and so the over voltage protection on the a/c must now be bypassed. I get the feeling that I'm gonna have to carefully read the instructions and make sure that they are being followed by the shop! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450104#450104 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 24, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Just A Few Days Left...
Dear Listers, There are just a few days left for this year's List Fund Raiser. If you've been putting off making a Contribution until the last minute, well, this is it! The last minute, that is... :-) There are some GREAT new gift selections to choose from this year. I personally want at least three of them! There's probably something you can't live without too! And, best of all it supports your Lists! Please remember that there isn't any sort of commercial advertising on the Lists and the *only* means of keeping these Lists running is through your Contributions during this Fund Raiser. Let's make this a "Black Friday" for the Lists! Please make a Contribution today! http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, drop a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 Thank you! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "paulmillner" <paulmillner(at)COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
sacha wrote: > Ok things are even more complicated as I just noticed that the plane power regulator has internal over voltage protection and so the over voltage protection on the a/c must now be bypassed. > > I get the feeling that I'm gonna have to carefully read the instructions and make sure that they are being followed by the shop! Hi Sacha, Why can't you work on your own airplane, under A&P supervision? Who does not "allow" you to? You have to verify that the old OV relay was removed... it could be defective and causing your regulation problem. You do NOT want a Ford automotive regulator... it can cause an overvoltage situation that even an external OV relay cannot overcome (the automotive regulator sources regulator power directly from the alternator, and thus ignores whether the OV relay or alternator half of the master switch are providing power, or not.) Paul -------- Paul Millner, Berkeley CA [OAK] Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450106#450106 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
You're right Paul - that's a good idea. Problem is I Guest I would have to take time off work during weekdays (when the A&P is around) but I can't right now. The old OV system has been removed and the bus voltage is now 14.2V. So now we just have to figure out where the noise is entering the system. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450187#450187 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: jan <jan(at)CLAVER.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna
182P
Date: Nov 24, 2015
My money is on the regulator for the noise ... I do not think changing the master switch will solve your noise problem ... Prove it by just shorting out the switch !.. Or temporary mount any old 'toggle switch' to just prove the point .... -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of sacha Sent: 24 November 2015 16:38 Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P Thank you for your inputs. I'm sorry it's a little difficult for me to know exactly what is going on as I am receiving reports from the A&P, not working on the plane directly (as I a not allowed to). I just got another email from the A&P saying that after multiple calls to Plane Power they think they have it correctly installed, but there is some concern that the bus voltage is very slow to come up. Could this be due in any way to a defect of the over voltage protection? Hmmmm.... maybe the most expeditious solution would be to install a Ford regulator and a new master switch. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450101#450101 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna
182P
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
On 11/24/2015 12:39 PM, sacha wrote: > > You're right Paul - that's a good idea. Problem is I Guest I would have to take time off work during weekdays (when the A&P is around) but I can't right now. > > The old OV system has been removed and the bus voltage is now 14.2V. > > So now we just have to figure out where the noise is entering the system. > 'Under supervision' doesn't mean that he has to stand there looking over your shoulder. As long as he's willing to sign on the dotted line at the end of the process, you could rebuild the entire a/c while he's vacationing in Tahiti. From a previous post: >> You do NOT want a Ford automotive regulator... it can cause an overvoltage situation that even an external OV relay cannot overcome (the automotive regulator sources regulator power directly from the alternator, and thus ignores whether the OV relay or alternator half of the master switch are providing power, or not.) >> I can't make sense of this, as long as we're talking about an externally regulated alternator. Ford style regulators are flying in thousands of homebuilts safely (assuming that OV protection is used). As long as the wire to the field is interrupted, the alternator cannot produce power. Typical OV protection circuits either open the field lead or 'crowbar' it to ground, tripping the field circuit breaker (which breaks the field circuit). Either way, there's no way for the regulator to keep the alternator operating. For noise: What's the ground path from the alternator frame to the battery, and from the regulator negative to the battery? (Make sure neither uses the motor mount as part of the circuit.) What's the ground path back to the battery of the radio where you're hearing the noise? If the noise is happening in receive mode on the radio, try disconnecting the antenna coax from the radio (don't transmit while it's disconnected). If the noise stays the same, the noise is probably entering through the B+ lead or the ground. If the noise goes away, it's probably being radiated from the alternator and/or the regulator into the antenna or coax. Check the coax ground for continuity and check the antenna mount for proper grounding. Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
For testing purposes, temporarily connect a 12 AWG jumper wire from the alternator "B" terminal to the avionics bus and listen to see if the whine goes away. If that is not doable, measure the voltage between the alternator "B" terminal and the avionics bus while the engine is running and all electrical loads are turned on. I would expect that voltage drop to be only millivolts. Is measuring voltage considered "working" on an airplane? -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450193#450193 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Charles/Joe, thanks. I will do the antenna coax test, and, assuming it's not entering via the antenna, I'll do the test that Joe recommended by connecting the B-lead and the avionics bus. On the ground side of things, the alternator is tied to the engine crankcase which is tied to the airframe. The battery is rear mounted and locally grounded to the airframe. I think the best i can do there is to check each connection to make sure it's in tip-top condition and appropriately greased to prevent corrosion. I'll also check the capacitors that mounted on the B-lead so see if they are still operational. Sacha Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450195#450195 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Neal, thank you for that. I only just saw your post. It looks like the issue with the regulator has been sorted out. I'm guessing the master switch is fine too but I'll bypass it in a test just to be sure. Sacha Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450197#450197 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna
182P
From: Paul Millner <millner(at)me.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Charlie, The problem is that you're not aware of how Cessna wired the regulator in this 182... Instead of the OV relay interrupting the current path between the regulator and the field terminal as you propose OBAM folks usually do it, the OV relay and the alternator half of the master switch interrupt the power supply *to* the regulator, via the S or Supply terminal. However... the automotive version supplies the regulator and alternator from both the S and the A terminal... and once the master is on, the A terminal is hot... so the Cessna OV relay and alternator half of the master switch are irrelevant. So... an automotive regulator in the Cessna wiring diagram? The alternator is non-controllable... which could be a bad thing. See attached wiring diagram. Paul http://www.secure4host.net/upload/files/Cessna_Alternator_Wiring.pdf On 11/24/2015 11:18 AM, Charlie England wrote: > You do NOT want a Ford automotive regulator... it can cause an > overvoltage situation that even an external OV relay cannot overcome > (the automotive regulator sources regulator power directly from the > alternator, and thus ignores whether the OV relay or alternator half > of the master switch are providing power, or not.) > >>> > > I can't make sense of this, as long as we're talking about an > externally regulated alternator. Ford style regulators are flying in > thousands of homebuilts safely (assuming that OV protection is used). > As long as the wire to the field is interrupted, the alternator cannot > produce power. Typical OV protection circuits either open the field > lead or 'crowbar' it to ground, tripping the field circuit breaker > (which breaks the field circuit). Either way, there's no way for the > regulator to keep the alternator operating. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: neal.george(at)gmail.com
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna
182P
Date: Nov 24, 2015
I don't suggest that it is contributing to the noise problem, but I DO suspect it is old and has tarnished / corroded contacts that add resistance to the circuit. Could contribute to the voltage sensing and regulation issues... Neal George Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 24, 2015, at 6:34 PM, sacha wrote: > > > Neal, > thank you for that. I only just saw your post. It looks like the issue with the regulator has been sorted out. I'm guessing the master switch is fine too but I'll bypass it in a test just to be sure. > Sacha > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450197#450197 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Good point. It's not a big ticket item (thought $40 seems a lot for two switches) so I guess I ought to swap it out. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450200#450200 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on Cessna
182P
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Uh...I stand corrected. Shame Cessna can't be. On 11/24/2015 7:13 PM, Paul Millner wrote: > Charlie, > > The problem is that you're not aware of how Cessna wired the regulator > in this 182... > > Instead of the OV relay interrupting the current path between the > regulator and the field terminal as you propose OBAM folks usually do > it, the OV relay and the alternator half of the master switch > interrupt the power supply *to* the regulator, via the S or Supply > terminal. > > However... the automotive version supplies the regulator and > alternator from both the S and the A terminal... and once the master > is on, the A terminal is hot... so the Cessna OV relay and alternator > half of the master switch are irrelevant. > > So... an automotive regulator in the Cessna wiring diagram? The > alternator is non-controllable... which could be a bad thing. > > See attached wiring diagram. > > Paul > > http://www.secure4host.net/upload/files/Cessna_Alternator_Wiring.pdf > > On 11/24/2015 11:18 AM, Charlie England wrote: >> You do NOT want a Ford automotive regulator... it can cause an >> overvoltage situation that even an external OV relay cannot overcome >> (the automotive regulator sources regulator power directly from the >> alternator, and thus ignores whether the OV relay or alternator half >> of the master switch are providing power, or not.) >> >>>> >> >> I can't make sense of this, as long as we're talking about an >> externally regulated alternator. Ford style regulators are flying in >> thousands of homebuilts safely (assuming that OV protection is used). >> As long as the wire to the field is interrupted, the alternator >> cannot produce power. Typical OV protection circuits either open the >> field lead or 'crowbar' it to ground, tripping the field circuit >> breaker (which breaks the field circuit). Either way, there's no way >> for the regulator to keep the alternator operating. >> >> > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: "jrevens" <jrevens(at)comcast.net>
Date: Nov 24, 2015
Since there seem to be quite a few Rotax users on this forum, I have another question... is it really necessary to separate the wiring coming from the engine (pressure & temperature sensors, tachometer signal, etc). from the ignition wires when penetrating the firewall. In other words, should the ignition wire have their own penetration, separated from that other wiring? I believe this is what Kitfox recommends. I hope this specific subject hasn't already been discussed on this forum. -------- John Evens Thorp T-18 N71JE (built & flying) Kitfox SS7 N27JE (building) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450203#450203 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 25, 2015
> is it really necessary to separate the wiring coming from the engine I have a Van's RV-12 registered as an E-LSA. An E-LSA must be built exactly per the plans using only parts purchased from the manufacturer. There are about 500 RV-12s flying with the Rotax 912. All engine wires, including ignition, pass through one grommet in the firewall. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450208#450208 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 25, 2015
On 11/25/2015 12:38 AM, jrevens wrote: > > Since there seem to be quite a few Rotax users on this forum, I have another question... is it really necessary to separate the wiring coming from the engine (pressure & temperature sensors, tachometer signal, etc). from the ignition wires when penetrating the firewall. In other words, should the ignition wire have their own penetration, separated from that other wiring? I believe this is what Kitfox recommends. I hope this specific subject hasn't already been discussed on this forum. > > -------- > John Evens > Thorp T-18 N71JE (built & flying) > Kitfox SS7 N27JE (building) > I can't directly address the Rotax question, but 'normal' practice when wires must be near each other that may hav interference issues is to have them cross at as close to 90 degrees as possible. The longer the parallel run, the more likely the interference. Might be worth a try to bundle the noise makers separate from the sensors, and try to make an 'X' at the FW passthrough. Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2015
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: John Cox <rv10pro(at)gmail.com>
Does this imply Van's would discourage buying a second pass - thru from them and separating ignition wires from lower voltage signal wires. What does Dynon say? Van's has always supported Safety of Flight issues to the best of my knowledge. John Cox On Nov 25, 2015 06:43, "user9253" wrote: > > > > is it really necessary to separate the wiring coming from the engine > > I have a Van's RV-12 registered as an E-LSA. An E-LSA must be built > exactly per the plans using only parts purchased from the manufacturer. > There are about 500 RV-12s flying with the Rotax 912. All engine wires, > including ignition, pass through one grommet in the firewall. > > -------- > Joe Gores > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450208#450208 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 25, 2015
> Does this imply Van's would discourage buying a second pass - thru from them and separating ignition wires from lower voltage signal wires. Van's will sell whatever a customer wants to buy. Van's does discourage making changes to their designs. USA government regulations require that aircraft registered as E-LSA be built exactly per the plans. If a builder wanted to install two grommets for wires passing through the firewall, then the aircraft would have to be registered as E-AB, not E-LSA. The majority of RV-12 are registered as E-LSA and are built according to the plans. The point that I was trying to make is that it is OK to bundle all Rotax engine wires together because hundreds of RV-12s are flying with no electrical interference problems. The Rotax has electronic ignition, not magnetos. The Rotax ignition control circuit might not be high voltage like magneto control circuits. I do not know. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450212#450212 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: What Are You Thankful For...?
Dear Listers, Here in the United States, Thursday is our National day of Thanksgiving. Many of us will be traveling to be with our families and friends to share in generous feasts of plenty and giving thanks for the many blessings that have been bestowed upon us. Many Listers have expressed over the last couple of weeks how thankful they are for the Email Lists and Forums here on the Matronics servers and for all of the assistance and comradery they have experienced being a part of the Lists. One of my favorite comments is when someone writes to me and says something like, "Its the first thing I do in the morning while I'm having my morning coffee!". That's a wonderful tribute to the purpose and function of these Lists. Its always great to hear I'm not the only one that jumps out of bed each morning to check my List email!! Won't you take a minute today and show your appreciation for these Lists and for their continued operation and upgrade? The List Contribution Site is: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, drop a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 USA Thank you in advance for your kind consideration, Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2015
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: John Cox <rv10pro(at)gmail.com>
Get with your intended DAR and ask about your "Must" understanding. You might be pleasantly surprised with a safety improvement to boot. I don't see the second pass-thru as a deal killer. John Cox On Nov 25, 2015 09:08, "user9253" wrote: > > > > Does this imply Van's would discourage buying a second pass - thru from > them and separating ignition wires from lower voltage signal wires. > > Van's will sell whatever a customer wants to buy. Van's does discourage > making changes to their designs. USA government regulations require that > aircraft registered as E-LSA be built exactly per the plans. If a builder > wanted to install two grommets for wires passing through the firewall, then > the aircraft would have to be registered as E-AB, not E-LSA. The majority > of RV-12 are registered as E-LSA and are built according to the plans. The > point that I was trying to make is that it is OK to bundle all Rotax engine > wires together because hundreds of RV-12s are flying with no electrical > interference problems. The Rotax has electronic ignition, not magnetos. > The Rotax ignition control circuit might not be high voltage like magneto > control circuits. I do not know. > > -------- > Joe Gores > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450212#450212 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2015
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: John Cox <rv10pro(at)gmail.com>
Once certificated E-LSA I would wager the modification would not invalidate your airworthiness and Not trigger a new Phase One. John Cox On Nov 25, 2015 09:08, "user9253" wrote: > > > > Does this imply Van's would discourage buying a second pass - thru from > them and separating ignition wires from lower voltage signal wires. > > Van's will sell whatever a customer wants to buy. Van's does discourage > making changes to their designs. USA government regulations require that > aircraft registered as E-LSA be built exactly per the plans. If a builder > wanted to install two grommets for wires passing through the firewall, then > the aircraft would have to be registered as E-AB, not E-LSA. The majority > of RV-12 are registered as E-LSA and are built according to the plans. The > point that I was trying to make is that it is OK to bundle all Rotax engine > wires together because hundreds of RV-12s are flying with no electrical > interference problems. The Rotax has electronic ignition, not magnetos. > The Rotax ignition control circuit might not be high voltage like magneto > control circuits. I do not know. > > -------- > Joe Gores > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450212#450212 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 25, 2015
What safety improvement is achieved by drilling another hole through the firewall? -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450294#450294 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: Rick Beebe <richard.beebe(at)yale.edu>
Date: Nov 25, 2015
Joe is correct that an E-LSA must be built exactly according to factory plans. However, once that's done it can be modified by the owner. If you're building the plane you can ask Vans if they would approve a second pass-thru. If so, then you can add it. If not, then you have to wait until after the plane is certified. Vans is pretty safety conscious so I agree that if they don't have a problem running all the wires through a single pass-thru then I probably wouldn't either. --Rick On 11/25/2015 12:24 PM, John Cox wrote: > Once certificated E-LSA I would wager the modification would not > invalidate your airworthiness and Not trigger a new Phase One. > > John Cox > > On Nov 25, 2015 09:08, "user9253" > wrote: > > > > > > > Does this imply Van's would discourage buying a second pass - > thru from them and separating ignition wires from lower voltage > signal wires. > > Van's will sell whatever a customer wants to buy. Van's does > discourage making changes to their designs. USA government > regulations require that aircraft registered as E-LSA be built > exactly per the plans. If a builder wanted to install two grommets > for wires passing through the firewall, then the aircraft would have > to be registered as E-AB, not E-LSA. The majority of RV-12 are > registered as E-LSA and are built according to the plans. The point > that I was trying to make is that it is OK to bundle all Rotax > engine wires together because hundreds of RV-12s are flying with no > electrical interference problems. The Rotax has electronic > ignition, not magnetos. The Rotax ignition control circuit might > not be high voltage like magneto control circuits. I do not know. > > -------- > Joe Gores ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Gerry van Dyk <gerry.vandyk(at)eastlink.ca>
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
Date: Nov 25, 2015
Have the rules for ELSA changed? My understanding was, while a SLSA must conform to the manufacturer's specs throughout its life, after an ELSA has been registered and the test flying restrictions lifted, the owner is free to modify their ELSA as he sees fit, but it must continue to comply with LSA rules. I reference these paragraphs from Kitplanes March 2012 "Understanding Experimental Light Sport Aircraft" by Dave Martin. (The last 5 paragraphs of the article. "I've already alluded to an FAA ruling that makes it legal for the builder of an ELSA to make changes. In the case of a kit such as the RV-12, any change that does not take the aircraft outside of the LSA definition may be made as soon as the pink airworthiness certificate is signed by the FAA's inspector, usually a DAR. Mel Asberry, who writes the "Ask the DAR" column for this magazine, confirms the FAA's point that this feature has been in the plan from the beginning. Its rationale is that ELSA come under the same rules as any other Experimental-category aircraft. "Some of us, myself included, missed this detail in our understanding of ELSA rules, and I found it to be a jaw-dropper. That's because no other Experimental-category aircraft is like a factory-approved ELSA. If I had built my RV-12 as an EAB, I could have modified it however I desired during construction. But as an ELSA, mine was required to be built initially exactly like the SLSA prototype. "In addition to building, all testing was exactly as specified by Van's Aircraft. On the first five flights, I flew as a production test pilot, not as an experimental test pilot as I would in a new EAB. Also, if I had built the RV-12 as an EAB, the builder block on the data plate could read "Martin RV-12." Because my shop was a subset of the kit factory, my data plate lists Van's Aircraft Company as the builder. "The result of this provision is that I could now change my airplane enough to cause it to operate quite differentlyas long as it remains within the LSA definition. It's almost as if Piper and Cessna owners were allowed to make any changes they wanted. "So this provision of ELSA remains, and it may explain the lack of ELSA kits competing with the Van's RV-12. Why should a company take on the additional liability of a customer making changes that are neither authorized nor tested by the factory?" Gerry van Dyk ------ Original Message ------ From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> Sent: 2015-11-25 7:34:10 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax ignition wiring > > >> is it really necessary to separate the wiring coming from the engine > >I have a Van's RV-12 registered as an E-LSA. An E-LSA must be built >exactly per the plans using only parts purchased from the manufacturer. > There are about 500 RV-12s flying with the Rotax 912. All engine >wires, including ignition, pass through one grommet in the firewall. > >-------- >Joe Gores > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450208#450208 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 25, 2015
> Have the rules for ELSA changed? No, the rules have not changed and your understanding is correct. Some builders have made modifications to their E-LSA RV-12 after certification. And Van's has even adopted some of those mods. The originator of this thread asked if it is OK to bundle all engine wires together in his Rotax powered Kitfox. I replied "yes" because that is the way that Van's designed the RV-12, which has the same engine. If it is explained why bundling all engine wires together is unsafe, then I will change my wiring. I do not think that the Kitfox can be registered as an E-LSA. So the Kitfox builder can wire his plane however he thinks is best. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450301#450301 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ivan <hivanhaecker(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Alternator Overvoltage
Date: Nov 25, 2015
I finally got back to my overvoltage problem. Today, I checked to see if the field circuit would trip my breaker with the engine not running. It did not . I decided to to reinstall my original voltage regulator since the VR 440 a ppeared to not be working properly due to the 19+ volts when I ran my last t est. Now, the original regulator functions properly and the regulated voltag e shows 14.6 without the OV module in the circuit throughout the rpm range. W hen I reinstalled the OV module, it tripped the field breaker every time I c ycled it. I now feel I should get the OV module tested to see what it's trip point is as some list responders suggested. My current assumption is that m y OV module has been the culprit all along. When it originally began trippin g in flight, I assumed it was my regulator and bought the replacement unit f rom NAPA. Since it apparently was DOA right out of the box, I mistakenly bla med it for my problem. I really appreciate the help from you guys. Ivan Haecker > On Nov 23, 2015, at 10:15 PM, Charlie England wrote : > > If you're seeing 19V on a regulated 14V system, then either the reg is bad or something isn't hooked up correctly. > > Most auto parts stores will test alternators and regulators for free these days (at least Autozone will). Just take the suspect reg to them & ask them to test it. You may need to tell them what 'car' it was installed on. :-) J ust find a model that used that regulator & tell them that. > > BTW, I'd certainly pull the breakers or fuses on *all* electrical load ite ms in the plane while doing your in-plane testing..... > >> On 11/23/2015 8:57 PM, H. Ivan Haecker wrote: >> Yes, I'm sure it the voltage regulator is wired correctly as I just check ed Bob's Z-11 diagram. I have also checked the alternator with the ov module disconnected and the voltage regulator in the circuit. Still producing abou t 19 volts at 1000 rpm. I haven't tested the ov module trip point, but obvio usly without it in the circuit, the voltage is too high. If it is not the al ternator, I just feel I must have a bad original voltage regulator and a bad new replacement. I don't know how to test a voltage regulator though. >> >> Ivan Haecker >> >>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Charlie England w rote: >>> I'd find the proper hookup diagram for both the alternator that you have , and the regulator that you're using. There's at least an outside chance so mething isn't hooked up correctly, since it's a different model regulator. W hat voltage do you measure if you disable the OV module & leave the regulato r in the circuit? >>> >>>> On 11/23/2015 6:16 PM, Jeff Luckey wrote: >>>> Ivan, >>>> >>>> Could the problem be the over-voltage module? Do you have a way to benc h test the module? >>>> >>>> Using a variable DC power supply you should be able to determine the tr ip point of your OVM. That's where I would start based upon your descriptio n. >>>> >>>> -Jeff >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Monday, November 23, 2015 3:59 PM, Ivan wro te: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On a recent flight in my rv-4, my overvoltage relay (crowbar) apparentl y functioned properly as it tripped my field circuit breaker taking the alte rnator off line. Upon landing and checking, the problem would reoccur whenev er the breaker was reset. I assumed the original voltage regulator had faile d (1990 Van's unit). The alternator is a small 35 amp unit (from a mid 70's Honda Civic I believe). Unable to find an ident ical voltage regulator, I purchased a VR 440 unit from NAPA, and wired as su ggested by previous posts on other lists. The problem reoccurred the same as before. My questions are: could this problem be related to the alternator i tself, or might I have inadvertently purchased a defective voltage regulator . I believe the alternator is functioning because I measured its output wit h the field wired directly to the battery and saw 19+ volts. Any s.matronics .com/contribution" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/connbsp; -Matt Dralle, List Admin.http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElect ric-List<; http://forums.sp; - List Contribution Web Site - >>>> _; &nb://www.matronics.com/contribution" target=" _blank">http://www.matronics.c================ == > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 25, 2015
Jan, I think at this point I would agree with you: the problem is most likely related to the voltage regulator, not to switches. I have ascertained that the noise is entering through the wires, not the antenna as its volume is independent of the radio volume. I also tested the noise suppressor capacitor (cessna part 0770038-2) today with a multi-meter but I could not get it to give a reading so it may be fried. Although I just realized that I did not make sure it was discharged before I attempted to take the reading. I'll have to take that reading again. Nevertheless, the look of the part (an old rusty box), age of the plane (43yrs young) and the fact that I have seen capacitors fail in other equipment makes me think this might be a good candidate for replacement. Regarding insulation of mic/headphone jacks, is it correct that mic jacks must be insulated from the airframe, but the headphone jacks may either be grounded to the airframe or insulated with a separate ground wire running back to the intercom? If it is correct, can someone explain the logic? Happy Thanksgiving Sacha Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450304#450304 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2015
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: John Cox <rv10pro(at)gmail.com>
The discussion point should center around "any" advantage of not bundling as a single penetration thru the firewall and the enhancements within E-LSA and the latitude if any to modify within the allowance by the chosen DAR. There are many DARs. I have seen mods. They make sense... In some cases. That is what is great about Amateur built. Happy Holidays! John Cox On Nov 25, 2015 15:50, "user9253" wrote: > > > > Have the rules for ELSA changed? > > No, the rules have not changed and your understanding is correct. Some > builders have made modifications to their E-LSA RV-12 after certification. > And Van's has even adopted some of those mods. > The originator of this thread asked if it is OK to bundle all engine > wires together in his Rotax powered Kitfox. I replied "yes" because that > is the way that Van's designed the RV-12, which has the same engine. If it > is explained why bundling all engine wires together is unsafe, then I will > change my wiring. > I do not think that the Kitfox can be registered as an E-LSA. So the > Kitfox builder can wire his plane however he thinks is best. > > -------- > Joe Gores > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450301#450301 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna
182P
From: Jan <jan(at)claver.demon.co.uk>
Date: Nov 26, 2015
Will be interesting to hear what the final outcome will be on your "noise" problem. Regarding the isolation of the microphone - I am sure someone can give a better technical answer than I can. Simply put I think of the microphone circuit as being electrically insulated from chassis ground - hence you need too run two separate wires back to your radio. Think of it this way ... The microphone receives a steady signal on one wire - you speak into the mic - that changes the signal which now go back to the radio in the other wire ... :-) The shield you have on the wire is to prevent any changes to the signal in the two wires ... All the best Jan > On Nov 26, 2015, at 01:38, sacha wrote: > > > Jan, > > I think at this point I would agree with you: the problem is most likely related to the voltage regulator, not to switches. > > I have ascertained that the noise is entering through the wires, not the antenna as its volume is independent of the radio volume. > > I also tested the noise suppressor capacitor (cessna part 0770038-2) today with a multi-meter but I could not get it to give a reading so it may be fried. Although I just realized that I did not make sure it was discharged before I attempted to take the reading. I'll have to take that reading again. Nevertheless, the look of the part (an old rusty box), age of the plane (43yrs young) and the fact that I have seen capacitors fail in other equipment makes me think this might be a good candidate for replacement. > > Regarding insulation of mic/headphone jacks, is it correct that mic jacks must be insulated from the airframe, but the headphone jacks may either be grounded to the airframe or insulated with a separate ground wire running back to the intercom? If it is correct, can someone explain the logic? > > Happy Thanksgiving > Sacha > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450304#450304 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rotax ignition wiring
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 26, 2015
Happy Thanksgiving ! -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450310#450310 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna 182P
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 26, 2015
The microphone jack should definitely not be grounded locally to the airframe, because other varying current (noise) through the airframe will get amplified along with the microphone signal. It is good practice not to ground the headphone jack either. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450311#450311 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 27, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Make Sure You're Listed! List of Contributors Coming
Soon! Dear Listers, There's just three more days left in this year's List Fund Raiser and that means the List of Contributors (LOC) is just around the corner! In December I post a list of everyone that so generously made a Contribution to support the Lists. Its my way of publicly thanking everyone that took a minute to show their appreciation for the Lists. Won't you take minute and assure that your name is on the upcoming LOC? Tell others that you appreciate the Lists. Making a Contribution to support the Lists is fast and easy using your Visa, MasterCard, or Paypal account: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, drop a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 I would like to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution thus far during this year's List Fund Raiser! Remember that its YOUR support that keeps these Lists running and improving! Don't forget to include a little comment about how the Lists have helped you! Thank you! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 28, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Fund Raiser - Just Two Days Left! - Still Well Behind...
Dear Listers, There are just two more full days left in this year's List Fund Raiser. Over the last couple of weeks I have received some really nice comments from members on what the Lists have meant to them and I really appreciate the feedback! At this point, unfortunately, we are still well behind last year in total Contributions to support the continued operation of these services. I really want to keep providing these Lists and Forums to the home built community, but it takes resources. Since there's no advertising budget or deep pockets to keep the operation a float, it's *solely your generosity* during the yearly Fund Raiser that keeps things going. Please make a Contribution today so that I can keep the bills paid and the services and systems turned on. If you've been putting off showing your support for the Lists, now is the time to do it! To make a contribution with a Credit Card or though PayPal at that Matronics Contribution web site: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, drop a check in the mail: Matronics / Matt Dralle 581 Jeannie Way Livermore, CA 94550 USA Thank you in advance for your support! It is very much appreciated... Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 29, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: [PLEASE READ] Why I Have A Fund Raiser...
Since the beginning, the Matronics List and Forum experience has been free from advertising. I have been approached by fair number of vendors wanting to tap into the large volume of activity across the various lists hosted here, but have always flatly refused. Everywhere you go on the Internet these days, a user is pummeled with flashing banners and videos and ads for crap that they don't want. Yahoo, Google and that elk are not "free". The user must constantly endure their barrage of commercialism thrust into their face at an ever increasing rate. Enough is enough, and the Lists at Matronics choose not to succumb to that. That being said, running a service of this size is not "free". It costs a lot of money to maintain the hardware, pay for the electricity, air conditioning, maintenance contracts, etc, etc. etc. I choose to hold a PBS-like fund raiser each year during the month of November where I simply send out a short email every other day asking the members to make a small contribution to support the operation. That being said, that contribution is completely voluntary and non-compulsory. Many members choose not to contribute and that's fine. However, a very modest percentage of the members do choose to make a contribution and it is that financial support that keeps the Lists running. And that's it. To my way of thinking, it is a much more pleasant way of maintaining the Lists and Forums. The other 11 months of the year, you don't see a single advertisement or request for support. That's refreshing and that is a List and Forum that I want to belong to. I think other people feel the same way. Won't you please take a minute to make your Contribution today and support these Lists? http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, drop a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 USA Thank you for your support! Matt Dralle Email List Admin. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 30, 2015
Subject: Testing of Overvoltage Module
From: "H. Ivan Haecker" <hivanhaecker(at)gmail.com>
I have a need to test my ov module. I found a link from the aeroelectric connection detailing the method. Not having a variable dc power supply, I have ordered one (Tekpower TP3005T). My question is what purpose is the precision voltmeter shown in the link for the test. Doesn't the dc power supply setting tell you what voltage you are supplying to the ov module? Sorry if my question displays a lack of basic knowledge, but that's how I learn. Ivan Haecker ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 30, 2015
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: [Please Read] - Last Official Day of List Fund Raiser!
Dear Listers, It's November 30th and that always means a couple of things. Its my birthday again - 52, so don't remind me! :-) But it also means that it's that last official day of the Matronics Email List Fund Raiser! If you been thinking about picking up one of those really nice incentive gifts now is the time to jump on it!! If you've been meaning to make a Contribution this month but have been putting it off for some reason, NOW is the time! I will be posting the List of Contributors in a few days, so you'll probably want to be known as a person that supported the Lists! I want to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution this year in support of our Lists. It is your generosity that keeps this operation running and I don't ever forget it. The List Contribution Web Site is fast and easy. Please support our habit by making your Contribution right now: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Or, by dropping a personal check in the mail to: Matt Dralle / Matronics 581 Jeannie Way Livermore CA 94550 USA Thank you in advance! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Testing of Overvoltage Module
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Nov 30, 2015
On 11/30/2015 5:44 PM, H. Ivan Haecker wrote: > I have a need to test my ov module. I found a link from the > aeroelectric connection detailing the method. Not having a variable dc > power supply, I have ordered one (Tekpower TP3005T). My question is > what purpose is the precision voltmeter shown in the link for the > test. Doesn't the dc power supply setting tell you what voltage you > are supplying to the ov module? Sorry if my question displays a lack > of basic knowledge, but that's how I learn. > > Ivan Haecker Answer is, it depends. :-) Lots of 'old school' variable supplies had analog meters that, even if inherently accurate, didn't have enough resolution to read less than ~1/2-1 volt of change; not good enough when you're trying to set something to the nearest tenth of a volt. Even if the PS has a built in digital meter, it'd be a good idea to verify it's accuracy with a known good digital meter before trying to set up something like the OV module. Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 01, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Testing of Overvoltage Module
At 05:44 PM 11/30/2015, you wrote: >I have a need to test my ov module. I found a link from the >aeroelectric connection detailing the method. Not having a variable >dc power supply, I have ordered one (Tekpower TP3005T). My question >is what purpose is the precision voltmeter shown in the link for the test. If your power supply voltmeter is of sufficient resolution/accuracy, then the external voltmeter is unnecessary. >Doesn't the dc power supply setting tell you what voltage you are >supplying to the ov module? Sorry if my question displays a lack of >basic knowledge, but that's how I learn. The TP3005 is adequate to the task 'barefoot'. Just turn the current setting all the way up, then hook the ovm across the power supply output terminals. Slowly increase the voltage until the ovm 'trips' (Current jumps up, voltage goes down). The trip should be in the range of 16.0 to 16.5 volts. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 02, 2015
I took some measurements of bus voltage using a Bluetooth oscilloscope called a Mooshimeter. Here are 3 graphs. I'm also including a fourth one which is picture of the voltage in my car cigar lighter for comparison. Two things are noticeable: 1. The amplitude of the ripple in the aircraft is smaller by a factor of 3 or 4. 2. There seem to be higher frequency components in the aircraft than in the car. Does anyone have any thoughts about this? I'm thinking that maybe the noise suppression capacitor is fried and I'd like to test this hypothesis without shelling out $125 for the Cessna part. Can anyone suggest a sensible capacitor I could try out? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450728#450728 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_147.png http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_348.png http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_806.png http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_413.png ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna
182P
From: Paul Millner <millner(at)me.com>
Date: Dec 02, 2015
There's a company in Texas that makes an aftermarket part... Aircraft Spruce used to carry them. Paul On 12/2/2015 11:06 AM, sacha wrote: > > I took some measurements of bus voltage using a Bluetooth oscilloscope called a Mooshimeter. Here are 3 graphs. I'm also including a fourth one which is picture of the voltage in my car cigar lighter for comparison. > > Two things are noticeable: > 1. The amplitude of the ripple in the aircraft is smaller by a factor of 3 or 4. > 2. There seem to be higher frequency components in the aircraft than in the car. > > Does anyone have any thoughts about this? > I'm thinking that maybe the noise suppression capacitor is fried and I'd like to test this hypothesis without shelling out $125 for the Cessna part. Can anyone suggest a sensible capacitor I could try out? > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450728#450728 > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_147.png > http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_348.png > http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_806.png > http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_413.png > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna
182P
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 02, 2015
On 12/2/2015 1:06 PM, sacha wrote: > > I took some measurements of bus voltage using a Bluetooth oscilloscope called a Mooshimeter. Here are 3 graphs. I'm also including a fourth one which is picture of the voltage in my car cigar lighter for comparison. > > Two things are noticeable: > 1. The amplitude of the ripple in the aircraft is smaller by a factor of 3 or 4. > 2. There seem to be higher frequency components in the aircraft than in the car. > > Does anyone have any thoughts about this? > I'm thinking that maybe the noise suppression capacitor is fried and I'd like to test this hypothesis without shelling out $125 for the Cessna part. Can anyone suggest a sensible capacitor I could try out? > > Is the Cessna device a simple capacitor? (If so, it'd have one lead connected to the B lead and the other lead connected to ground.) A simple capacitor could be purchased at any well stocked electronic supply; just ask for, for instance, a 2000 mfd 50 volt electrolytic capacitor. If it's an inductor, it will have 2 leads and be *in series* with the B lead (one terminal toward the B terminal of the alt; the other terminal toward the master contactor/buss). You could check ebay, Amazon, or your local parts store for 'alternator noise filter' & find one that's intended for hookup like I described. A third type actually includes both an inductor and a capacitor. It would have 3 leads: 1 to the alt B terminal, 1 toward the master contactor/buss, and the last one to ground. Again, same search & pick the device you need. Note that most of the combination inductor/capacitor filters intended for automotive use will have limited current carrying capacity because they're intended for insertion in line with a single load; not in the B lead, where they must carry the entire load of the generating system. For testing purposes, just leave all the really big electrical loads off (landing lights, etc) and make sure the battery is charged up prior to the test. The light-duty stuff I saw was in the $5-$25 range. You can see images & diagrams by googling 'alternator noise filter' & picking google's images display. BTW, a 3 terminal whole-a/c filter for $125 might not be that bad if that's what is broken. http://www.amazon.com/NewMar-150--150-Noise-Filter/dp/B008P0UPD4/ref=sr_1_2?s=car&ie=UTF8&qid=1449104711&sr=1-2&keywords=alternator+noise+filter Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 03, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna
182P At 01:06 PM 12/2/2015, you wrote: > >I took some measurements of bus voltage using a Bluetooth >oscilloscope called a Mooshimeter. Here are 3 graphs. I'm also >including a fourth one which is picture of the voltage in my car >cigar lighter for comparison. > >Two things are noticeable: >1. The amplitude of the ripple in the aircraft is smaller by a >factor of 3 or 4. >2. There seem to be higher frequency components in the aircraft than >in the car. > >Does anyone have any thoughts about this? >I'm thinking that maybe the noise suppression capacitor is fried and >I'd like to test this hypothesis without shelling out $125 for the >Cessna part. Can anyone suggest a sensible capacitor I could try out? Keep in mind that the noise you're hearing is an 'audio rate' signal . . . else it would not be audible. You've already determined that the noise is not coming through radio-frequency stages of receivers so the noise is not a modulation riding on top of a radio-frequency signal. "Filters" as a class of product are seldom useful for attenuation of audio-rate noise . . . especially noise represented by alternator ripple. The DC power systems guys recognized a century ago that the DC bus in a vehicle is normally VERY noisy . . . Attentive designers recognized that there's no such thing as a noise-free power distribution system . . . unless perhaps your vehicle runs on flashlight batteries that operating nothing but light bulbs and heaters. What should one EXPECT or be prepared to TOLERATE in terms of bus noise? Here's a plot of what has become the Mil Standard for normal noises on a DC bus. From Mil-Std-704 we find . . . http://tinyurl.com/b3rhjwq This is for a 28v system, so we cut the numbers in half for a 14v system. Note that over the frequency range of `1000 to 5000 Hz, on should expect to tolerate 0dBV (1 volt RMS) noise in a 28v; 1/2 volt RMS in a 14v system. That is about 1.5 volts peak-to-peak in the 14v system. Note further that lesser but still substantial components of noise can exist above and below that 1-5KHz range with numbers that diminish as the frequency of interest moves further away from the center. Here's a plot of the bus noise on my old '95 GMC Safari observed on a 100mHz oscilloscope with a rather flow sweep. http://tinyurl.com/nkrwqhk Spreading it out for a closer look http://tinyurl.com/qzj7vbl Yes, that bus is pretty trashy but how bad? The only way you can quantify it is to do measurements with a spectrum analyzer that measures the energy in narrow slices along the frequency domain and hands you a series of numbers that can be first plotted and then compared with the Mil-Std-704 plot cited above. You can deduce very little about noise by observing bus perturbations on a 'scope, even less with a data acquisition system. Understand further that any effective filter of noise must present a high series impedance or low shunt impedance to the noise source AT THE FREQUENCY OF INTEREST. A filter that would effectively remove 100 Hz to 10KHz AUDIO RATE noise from the output of a 60 Amp alternator would be a huge device probably weighing more than the alternator itself. Hence the legacy resignation to designing to LIVE with alternator ripple. Having said that, there have been filters of various kinds added to alternators, motors and sundry devices over the years but these are almost always sized to remove RADIO FREQUENCY noises that serve as carriers of the AUDIO FREQUENCY noises that plagued radios, etc. If the observed noise is affected by the radio's volume control, then it is probably, not always but probably a radio frequency energy coming in through the the antenna. In this case, some filtering of alternators, motors, p-leads, etc. etc. may produce the desired remedy. Stock automotive alternators already have a high- quality 4-10uF capacitor tied right across the b-lead terminal to ground inside the alternator. If I recall the current thread correctly, the noise in question popped up after some changes to the system. That it's an audio rate noise that varies with rpm (alternator whine). It's a noise not affected by radio volume control setting. The task is to identify the propagation mode but it's a 99% sure bet that adding a filter is not going to do the job. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Sheldon Olesen <saolesen(at)sirentel.net>
Subject: strobe capacitors
Date: Dec 04, 2015
My strobes aren't working and I am assuming that the power pack is bad. The fuses aren't blown and I have checked that there is voltage to the unit. I think the capacitors are to blame. Creativair, the company I bought the Avi-Pak strobe unit from, appears to be out of business. The capacitors are 400uf and 360vdc. I checked on Mouser and Digikey for equivalents but there none that match the specs, are in stocked in <12 weeks, or don't require the purchase of >30 units. Digikey showed nothing. The actual part reads: Nova-Cap-12 400uf 360vdc 658-0793-049 Does anyone know where to source these parts quickly or of an equivalent part that would work? Am I correct in thinking the capacitors are the problem? Sheldon Olesen Sent from my iPad ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 04, 2015
From: Jeff Luckey <jluckey(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: strobe capacitors
Sheldon, It would be good to confirm that the caps are the problem before you start swapping parts. Sometimes, as caps age, they swell or leak.=C2- Do yours exhibit those sy mptoms? Can you get one out of the circuit & test it? -Jeff On Friday, December 4, 2015 12:41 PM, Sheldon Olesen wrote: .net> My strobes aren't working and I am assuming that the power pack is bad.=C2 - The fuses aren't blown and I have checked that there is voltage to the unit.=C2- I think the capacitors are to blame.=C2- Creativair, the comp any I bought the Avi-Pak strobe unit from, appears to be out of business. =C2- The capacitors=C2- are 400uf and 360vdc.=C2- I checked on Mouser and Di gikey for equivalents but there none that match the specs, are in stocked i n <12 weeks, or don't require the purchase of >30 units.=C2- Digikey show ed nothing. The actual part reads: Nova-Cap-12=C2- 400uf=C2- 360vdc=C2- 658-0793- 049 Does anyone know where to source these parts quickly or of an equivalent pa rt that would work?=C2- Am I correct in thinking the capacitors are the p roblem? Sheldon Olesen Sent from my iPad =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin. - S - - =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Sheldon Olesen <saolesen(at)sirentel.net>
Subject: Re: strobe capacitors
Date: Dec 04, 2015
Jeff, There is no swelling or leakage. With my multimeter set CAP, one reads .051nf and the other .083nf. My ca pacitor testing knowledge is meager. Sheldon Sent from my iPad > On Dec 4, 2015, at 3:49 PM, Jeff Luckey wrote: > > Sheldon, > > It would be good to confirm that the caps are the problem before you start swapping parts. > > Sometimes, as caps age, they swell or leak. Do yours exhibit those sympto ms? Can you get one out of the circuit & test it? > > -Jeff > > > > On Friday, December 4, 2015 12:41 PM, Sheldon Olesen wrote: > > .net> > > My strobes aren't working and I am assuming that the power pack is bad. T he fuses aren't blown and I have checked that there is voltage to the unit. I think the capacitors are to blame. Creativair, the company I bought the A vi-Pak strobe unit from, appears to be out of business. > > The capacitors are 400uf and 360vdc. I checked on Mouser and Digikey for equivalents but there none that match the specs, are in stocked in <12 week s, or don't require the purchase of >30 units. Digikey showed nothing. > > The actual part reads: Nova-Cap-12 400uf 360vdc 658-0793-049 > > Does anyone know where to source these parts quickly or of an equivalent p art that would work? Am I correct in thinking the capacitors are the proble m? > > Sheldon Olesen > > Sent from my iPad > > > > htsp; -= - The AeroElectric-List Email Fo rum -avigator?AeroElectric-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/ Navi======================== ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 04, 2015
From: Charles Kuss <chaskuss(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: strobe capacitors
Sheldon, Before you start replacing parts, a question. Has the power pack sat unused for an extended period of time? [more than 1 year] If so, you can probably bring those capacitors back to life. You just need to reform them, by applying reduced voltages to the unit, in stages. See http://www.robotroom.com/Capacitor-Self-Discharge-3.html http://www.vcomp.co.uk/tech_tips/reform_caps.htm If you do need to replace them, read this first. http://www.robotroom.com/Capacitor-Self-Discharge-3.html I seem to remember that Bob Nuckolls listed a method to resurrect a dead strobe power supply. I believe I have that info stashed on my home computer. I'll look when I get home. Charlie -------------------------------------------- On Fri, 12/4/15, Sheldon Olesen wrote: Subject: AeroElectric-List: strobe capacitors To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com Date: Friday, December 4, 2015, 3:27 PM --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Sheldon Olesen My strobes aren't working and I am assuming that the power pack is bad.The fuses aren't blown and I have checked that there is voltage to the unit. I think the capacitors are to blame. Creativair, the company I bought the Avi-Pak strobe unit from, appears to be out of business. The capacitors are 400uf and 360vdc. I checked on Mouser and Digikey for equivalents but there none that match the specs, are in stocked in <12 weeks, or don't require the purchase of >30 units. Digikey showed nothing. The actual part reads: Nova-Cap-12 400uf360vdc 658-0793-049 Does anyone know where to source these parts quickly or of an equivalent part that would work? Am I correct in thinking the capacitors are the problem? Sheldon Olesen -Matt Dralle, List Admin. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: strobe capacitors
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 04, 2015
That certainly *looks* bad. Find another random value known-good capacitor you can use to verify your capacitance tester. (Electrolytic caps may measure as much as 80% higher than their rated capacitance.) The old school method of testing for bad vs 'maybe good' was to first, be sure it's discharged. (A 300V pop can be painful, and would destroy an analog ohm meter.) An old analog ohm meter was connected across the cap's leads, first in one direction, then the other. Idea is that if it's a good cap, it will accept a slight charge from the ohm meter's test voltage (even with reversed leads). When the leads are swapped, the meter will momentarily move toward low resistance, then rebound to show open circuit as the cap charges the other way. This does *not* prove the cap is good, but if you don't get meter movement, it will prove it's bad. For a replacement, you want the capacitance to be close to original (check the tolerance on the label, if possible), but voltage can be anything higher than the original rating. Here's an Allied search, showing one that should work (for a seemingly painful price; I remember paying <$10, but that was over 30 years ago...). http://www.alliedelec.com/passive-components/capacitors/?navigation=4294921432 Charlie On 12/4/2015 3:16 PM, Sheldon Olesen wrote: > Jeff, > > There is no swelling or leakage. > > With my multimeter set CAP, one reads .051nf and the other .083nf. > My capacitor testing knowledge is meager. > > Sheldon > > > Sent from my iPad > > On Dec 4, 2015, at 3:49 PM, Jeff Luckey > wrote: > >> Sheldon, >> >> It would be good to confirm that the caps are the problem before you >> start swapping parts. >> >> Sometimes, as caps age, they swell or leak. Do yours exhibit those >> symptoms? Can you get one out of the circuit & test it? >> >> -Jeff >> >> >> >> On Friday, December 4, 2015 12:41 PM, Sheldon Olesen >> > wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> My strobes aren't working and I am assuming that the power pack is >> bad. The fuses aren't blown and I have checked that there is voltage >> to the unit. I think the capacitors are to blame. Creativair, the >> company I bought the Avi-Pak strobe unit from, appears to be out of >> business. >> >> The capacitors are 400uf and 360vdc. I checked on Mouser and >> Digikey for equivalents but there none that match the specs, are in >> stocked in <12 weeks, or don't require the purchase of >30 units. >> Digikey showed nothing. >> >> The actual part reads: Nova-Cap-12 400uf 360vdc 658-0793-049 >> >> Does anyone know where to source these parts quickly or of an >> equivalent part that would work? Am I correct in thinking the >> capacitors are the problem? >> >> Sheldon Olesen >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> >> > htsp; -= - The AeroElectric-List Email >> Forum -avigator?AeroElectric-List" >> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navi======================== >> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: NanoCAD Software: resurrecting an old thread
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 04, 2015
*snipped** * > But, it does seem perfect for panel layouts and electrical plans. > > * Agreed > * > * There's another free program called NanoCAD > > * > *http://tinyurl.com/pqw35rw > > <http://tinyurl.com/pqw35rw> * > * Very powerful clone of AutoCAD. If you're already * > * familiar with driving autocad, the transition into * > * nanocad is smooth and painless. > > * > > Bob . . . > I installed NanoCAD many months ago, registered it then promptly forgot about it. Now, when I open it, it tells me my registration is expired, & when I try to re-register, as instructed, I get an email telling me....my registration is expired. Anyone else having these issues? Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: strobe capacitors
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 04, 2015
You could charge the capacitor using 120 VAC rectified with a bridge rectifier, and maybe a series resistor to limit inrush current. Observe capacitor polarity so that the capacitor does not explode like a firecracker. Then unplug the AC and measure the voltage across the capacitor. It should hold the charge for at least a few minutes. Some people check large value capacitors by charging them up, then shorting the capacitor leads together. If it sparks, it is assumed the capacitor is good. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450752#450752 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 06, 2015
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: strobe capacitors
At 02:49 PM 12/4/2015, you wrote: >Sheldon, > >It would be good to confirm that the caps are the problem before you >start swapping parts. Sudden failures in strobes are seldom, if ever, rooted in failures of the energy storage capacitors. Those devices decay with age and use resulting in a decrease of light output for each firing . . . but they don't suddenly turn turttle. A sudden failure is more likely a failure of the trigger circuitry -OR- loss of the dc/dc converter that develops high voltage to charge the capacitors. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 06, 2015
Thanks for your explanation about the radio grounding. It's obvious when one thinks about it. I'm still struggling with this. I rechecked the capacitors and they measure 5.7 uF for the S1915 which is correct and 3.54 uF for the RFI filter (Cessna part 0770038-2) which seems like a plausible value. So the only remaining possibility seems to be some bad connection somewhere, most likely on the ground side of things. But the puzzle remains as to why an alternator that fails can suddenly cause a grounding problem. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450764#450764 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Bradburry" <bbradburry(at)verizon.net>
Subject: strobe capacitors
Date: Dec 06, 2015
I had a problem with my strobes where they would fire 2-3 times and then stop. My VOM showed 12 volts at the connector going into the strobe. I finally replaced both the power and ground wires and connectors and the problem went away, apparently a high resistance connection on one or both ends of one of the power/ground wires. Have you checked for that? Bill _____ From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2015 11:34 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: strobe capacitors At 02:49 PM 12/4/2015, you wrote: Sheldon, It would be good to confirm that the caps are the problem before you start swapping parts. Sudden failures in strobes are seldom, if ever, rooted in failures of the energy storage capacitors. Those devices decay with age and use resulting in a decrease of light output for each firing . . . but they don't suddenly turn turttle. A sudden failure is more likely a failure of the trigger circuitry -OR- loss of the dc/dc converter that develops high voltage to charge the capacitors. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Sheldon Olesen <saolesen(at)sirentel.net>
Date: Dec 06, 2015
Subject: Re: strobe capacitors
I was hoping that the capacitors were the culprit because that was something I could possibly deal with. I tested the capacitors as suggested by Joe G ores and found they would spark if shorted, so from that I concluded that th ey were ok and the problem wasn't fixable by me. With a defunct manufactur er, replacement seems to be my only option. Thanks to all who replied. Sheldon Olesen Sent from my iPad > On Dec 6, 2015, at 12:33 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroele ctric.com> wrote: > > At 02:49 PM 12/4/2015, you wrote: >> Sheldon, >> >> It would be good to confirm that the caps are the problem before you star t swapping parts. > > Sudden failures in strobes are seldom, if ever, rooted > in failures of the energy storage capacitors. Those devices > decay with age and use resulting in a decrease of light > output for each firing . . . but they don't suddenly > turn turttle. > > A sudden failure is more likely a failure of the > trigger circuitry -OR- loss of the dc/dc converter > that develops high voltage to charge the capacitors. > > > Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 06, 2015
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna
182P
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 12:17 PM, sacha wrote: > > Thanks for your explanation about the radio grounding. It's obvious when > one thinks about it. > > I'm still struggling with this. I rechecked the capacitors and they > measure 5.7 uF for the S1915 which is correct and 3.54 uF for the RFI > filter (Cessna part 0770038-2) which seems like a plausible value. > > So the only remaining possibility seems to be some bad connection > somewhere, most likely on the ground side of things. But the puzzle > remains as to why an alternator that fails can suddenly cause a grounding > problem. > > Perhaps it wasn't the failure, but the repair/replacement process. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna 182P
From: "sacha" <uuccio(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 06, 2015
(Thanks to Neal/Bob/Paul/Charles/Joe/Jan and everyone else for patiently continuing to help me troubleshoot this issue). Charles>Perhaps it wasn't the failure, but the repair/replacement process. It couldn't have been the repair process because as soon as I landed I pushed the ALT CB back in and the whine appeared. I naturally assumed it was caused by a broken alternator but swapping it out didn't make the whine disappear. (On Friday I took some measurements on the old alternator and confirmed that it does have damage to it's stator coil - this was kindly confirmed to me by my local NAPA store***). Anyway, today I had the following thought process which makes me think that maybe the audio panel got damaged in some way: The alternator noise is audible even with the radios off. Therefore the noise must be entering one of the two wires to the headphone, either the positive or the ground. Thinking about the audio ground, I recall that the black wires are all locally grounded at a post below the instrument panel. So the test I did yesterday (unscrew the jacks from the locally grounded aluminium brackets and see if the noise disappears) was actually useless as a test. What needs to happen (as Joe and Jan have pointed out) is that the ground leads for each headphone needs to be run all the way back to the audio panel instead of being attached locally to the airframe. But I still can't see how loosing an Alternator could magically bring about this condition since nothing changed with the audio jacks. Unless of course the audio panel was damaged by this event. Fixing the audio grounds is cheap, so I guess I'm going to try that first, but I have a bad feeling that the audio panel might be damaged. I know little about audio panels - do they have failure modes in which they "transmit" alternator whine? Sacha *** I got lucky - the NAPA store did this for free. There was a guy there that managed to look up the equivalent automotive model... it took him a while since what was marked on the alternator (D0FF10300J) did not yield any immediate results. However he was persistent and eventually he found out that a 65A Alternator for a 1969 Ford pickup truck was practically identical. Once he had this information, he put the alternator into an automated bench tester which spit out the "stator failed" information a minute later. For those of you who are interested, I'm attaching the a nice PDF which documents the troubleshooting and overhaul procedure for Ford (now Motorcraft) alternators which I got here: http://vintage.mitchell1.com/PClubData/chassis/elt82/V2D824014.pdf Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450771#450771 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/motorcraft_alternators_troubleshooting_and_overhaul__v2d824014_188.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________
From: jan <jan(at)CLAVER.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna
182P
Date: Dec 06, 2015
How hard would it be for you to bypass the audio panel ? Could you make a jumper up so that you hard wired the headphones & mic directly to your radio for testing purpose ? -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of sacha Sent: 06 December 2015 22:33 Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Troubleshooting radio whine/noise on C essna 182P (Thanks to Neal/Bob/Paul/Charles/Joe/Jan and everyone else for patiently continuing to help me troubleshoot this issue). Charles>Perhaps it wasn't the failure, but the repair/replacement process. It couldn't have been the repair process because as soon as I landed I pushed the ALT CB back in and the whine appeared. I naturally assumed it was caused by a broken alternator but swapping it out didn't make the whine disappear. (On Friday I took some measurements on the old alternator and confirmed that it does have damage to it's stator coil - this was kindly confirmed to me by my local NAPA store***). Anyway, today I had the following thought process which makes me think that maybe the audio panel got damaged in some way: The alternator noise is audible even with the radios off. Therefore the noise must be entering one of the two wires to the headphone, either the positive or the ground. Thinking about the audio ground, I recall that the black wires are all locally grounded at a post below the instrument panel. So the test I did yesterday (unscrew the jacks from the locally grounded aluminium brackets and see if the noise disappears) was actually useless as a test. What needs to happen (as Joe and Jan have pointed out) is that the ground leads for each headphone needs to be run all the way back to the audio panel instead of being attached locally to the airframe. But I still can't see how loosing an Alternator could magically bring about this condition since nothing changed with the audio jacks. Unless of course the audio panel was damaged by this event. Fixing the audio grounds is cheap, so I guess I'm going to try that first, but I have a bad feeling that the audio panel might be damaged. I know little about audio panels - do they have failure modes in which they "transmit" alternator whine? Sacha *** I got lucky - the NAPA store did this for free. There was a guy there that managed to look up the equivalent automotive model... it took him a while since what was marked on the alternator (D0FF10300J) did not yield any immediate results. However he was persistent and eventually he found out that a 65A Alternator for a 1969 Ford pickup truck was practically identical. Once he had this information, he put the alternator into an automated bench tester which spit out the "stator failed" information a minute later. For those of you who are interested, I'm attaching the a nice PDF which documents the troubleshooting and overhaul procedure for Ford (now Motorcraft) alternators which I got here: http://vintage.mitchell1.com/PClubData/chassis/elt82/V2D824014.pdf Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450771#450771 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/motorcraft_alternators_troubleshooting_an d_overhaul__v2d824014_188.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 07, 2015
From: Jeff Luckey <jluckey(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: strobe capacitors
I find failed capacitors in all kinds of devices are the culprit on a regul ar basis. And specifically remember finding a bad caps in a strobe system o n a friends airplane several years ago. In addition, it is still generally good trouble-shooting practice to confir m the failure of a component, as opposed to a random remove & replace drill . -Jeff On Sunday, December 6, 2015 9:45 AM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote: At 02:49 PM 12/4/2015, you wrote: Sheldon, It would be good to confirm that the caps are the problem before youstart s wapping parts. =C2-Sudden failures in strobes are seldom, if ever, rooted =C2-in failures of the energy storage capacitors. Those devices =C2-decay with age and use resulting in a decrease of light =C2-output for each firing . . . but they don't suddenly =C2-turn turttle. =C2-A sudden failure is more likely a failure of the =C2-trigger circuitry -OR- loss of the dc/dc converter =C2-that develops high voltage to charge the capacitors. =C2- Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: John Morgensen <john(at)morgensen.com>
Subject: Weak Starter
Date: Dec 06, 2015
My Skytec starter barely turns over an IO320. I measured: Battery 13.12 volts. "On" side of master contactor to airframe ground 12.25 volts. "On" side of starter contactor to airframe ground while cranking 8.6 to 9.0 volts. Big wire on starter to airframe ground while cranking is 8.6 volts or less. All this was done with a genuine Harbor Freight $4.00 digital meter. I believe that this points to the starter contactor as the culprit. Correct? john ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Weak Starter
Date: Dec 06, 2015
Is say high resistance in the starter contactor More than likely due to internal arcing. This causes corrosion and pitting. Slap a new contactor on there and I bet it fixes the issue. Afterwards, dissect the old contactor to see exactly what happens internally. Justin. > On Dec 6, 2015, at 16:15, John Morgensen wrote: > > > My Skytec starter barely turns over an IO320. > > I measured: > > Battery 13.12 volts. > "On" side of master contactor to airframe ground 12.25 volts. > "On" side of starter contactor to airframe ground while cranking 8.6 to 9.0 volts. > Big wire on starter to airframe ground while cranking is 8.6 volts or less. > > All this was done with a genuine Harbor Freight $4.00 digital meter. I believe that this points to the starter contactor as the culprit. Correct? > > john > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Weak Starter
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 06, 2015
On 12/6/2015 6:15 PM, John Morgensen wrote: > > > My Skytec starter barely turns over an IO320. > > I measured: > > Battery 13.12 volts. > "On" side of master contactor to airframe ground 12.25 volts. > "On" side of starter contactor to airframe ground while cranking 8.6 > to 9.0 volts. > Big wire on starter to airframe ground while cranking is 8.6 volts or > less. > > All this was done with a genuine Harbor Freight $4.00 digital meter. I > believe that this points to the starter contactor as the culprit. > Correct? > > john 12.25 volts with minimal load (contactor coil only) *might* be a little weak for a fully charged battery. The measurement doesn't really mean a lot if there's no load on the other side of the contactor. You could put a 100,000 ohm resistor in series & still measure full battery voltage on the other side of the resistor, as long as there's no load to ground. What's the measurement at the 'on' side of the master contactor while cranking? (Don't change test conditions.) Another method of measurement when looking for bad joints/high resistance in a high current circuit: 1. Measure from the battery positive post (not the bolt or clamp) to the starter positive post while cranking. A voltage drop of greater than ~1/2 volt means you have a high resistance somewhere between battery & starter. 2. Measure from the frame (ground) of the starter to the actual negative post on the battery (not the bolt or clamp) while cranking. That measurement should again be less than 1/2 volt. If not, you have high resistance in the ground circuit. 8.5-9 volts across the starter windings while under load really doesn't sound bad, as long as the rest of the circuit is 'right' and the battery is in good shape. Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Weak Starter
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 06, 2015
On 12/6/2015 7:50 PM, Charlie England wrote: > On 12/6/2015 6:15 PM, John Morgensen wrote: >> >> >> My Skytec starter barely turns over an IO320. >> >> I measured: >> >> Battery 13.12 volts. >> "On" side of master contactor to airframe ground 12.25 volts. >> "On" side of starter contactor to airframe ground while cranking 8.6 >> to 9.0 volts. >> Big wire on starter to airframe ground while cranking is 8.6 volts or >> less. >> >> All this was done with a genuine Harbor Freight $4.00 digital meter. >> I believe that this points to the starter contactor as the culprit. >> Correct? >> >> john Edit: I missed the 1st line, battery 13.2 & load side of contactor at 12.25. The contacts in the master contactor have really high resistance to see that much drop. > 12.25 volts with minimal load (contactor coil only) *might* be a > little weak for a fully charged battery. The measurement doesn't > really mean a lot if there's no load on the other side of the > contactor. You could put a 100,000 ohm resistor in series & still > measure full battery voltage on the other side of the resistor, as > long as there's no load to ground. What's the measurement at the 'on' > side of the master contactor while cranking? (Don't change test > conditions.) > > Another method of measurement when looking for bad joints/high > resistance in a high current circuit: > > 1. Measure from the battery positive post (not the bolt or clamp) to > the starter positive post while cranking. A voltage drop of greater > than ~1/2 volt means you have a high resistance somewhere between > battery & starter. > > 2. Measure from the frame (ground) of the starter to the actual > negative post on the battery (not the bolt or clamp) while cranking. > That measurement should again be less than 1/2 volt. If not, you have > high resistance in the ground circuit. > > 8.5-9 volts across the starter windings while under load really > doesn't sound bad, as long as the rest of the circuit is 'right' and > the battery is in good shape. > > Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Weak Starter
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Date: Dec 06, 2015
You probably need to replace both starter relay and master relay. Download Skytec's troubleshooting chart and follow it carefully. On 12/6/2015 5:15 PM, John Morgensen wrote: > > > My Skytec starter barely turns over an IO320. > > I measured: > > Battery 13.12 volts. > "On" side of master contactor to airframe ground 12.25 volts. > "On" side of starter contactor to airframe ground while cranking 8.6 > to 9.0 volts. > Big wire on starter to airframe ground while cranking is 8.6 volts or > less. > > All this was done with a genuine Harbor Freight $4.00 digital meter. I > believe that this points to the starter contactor as the culprit. > Correct? > > john > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "William Greenley" <wgreenley(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Weak Starter
Date: Dec 07, 2015
I agree, I had these same issues on my 172 and it was the master relay, the starter relay was fine. I replaced both as they were both of the same vintage. Starting problems gone. Bill -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2015 9:41 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Weak Starter --> You probably need to replace both starter relay and master relay. Download Skytec's troubleshooting chart and follow it carefully. On 12/6/2015 5:15 PM, John Morgensen wrote: > > > My Skytec starter barely turns over an IO320. > > I measured: > > Battery 13.12 volts. > "On" side of master contactor to airframe ground 12.25 volts. > "On" side of starter contactor to airframe ground while cranking 8.6 > to 9.0 volts. > Big wire on starter to airframe ground while cranking is 8.6 volts or > less. > > All this was done with a genuine Harbor Freight $4.00 digital meter. I > believe that this points to the starter contactor as the culprit. > Correct? > > john > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Weak Starter
From: John Morgensen <john(at)morgensen.com>
Date: Dec 07, 2015
Thanks for all of the replies. Skytec's troubleshooting chart says that the starter needs to see 10+ volts. I will be replacing both relays. john On 12/6/2015 6:41 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > > You probably need to replace both starter relay and master relay. > Download Skytec's troubleshooting chart and follow it carefully. > > On 12/6/2015 5:15 PM, John Morgensen wrote: >> >> >> My Skytec starter barely turns over an IO320. >> >> I measured: >> >> Battery 13.12 volts. >> "On" side of master contactor to airframe ground 12.25 volts. >> "On" side of starter contactor to airframe ground while cranking 8.6 >> to 9.0 volts. >> Big wire on starter to airframe ground while cranking is 8.6 volts or >> less. >> >> All this was done with a genuine Harbor Freight $4.00 digital meter. >> I believe that this points to the starter contactor as the culprit. >> Correct? >> >> john >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Lloyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Weak Starter
Date: Dec 07, 2015
John, A problem like you are seeing can also be caused by an "aged" main battery. The battery V measures fine with no load, may also measure fine with just a buss current load, but, when it sees a "starter" type current load (200 - 300 amps), it slumps badly. Usually caused by a cell or two that are too aged to produce the amps needed. Only answer is to install a new battery and keep it fresh by keeping a low current "maintainer" style charger on it during hangar periods. David ____________________________________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Morgensen" <john(at)morgensen.com> Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 6:06 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Weak Starter > > > Thanks for all of the replies. > > Skytec's troubleshooting chart says that the starter needs to see 10+ > volts. I will be replacing both relays. > > john > > On 12/6/2015 6:41 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: >> >> >> You probably need to replace both starter relay and master relay. >> Download Skytec's troubleshooting chart and follow it carefully. >> >> On 12/6/2015 5:15 PM, John Morgensen wrote: >>> >>> >>> My Skytec starter barely turns over an IO320. >>> >>> I measured: >>> >>> Battery 13.12 volts. >>> "On" side of master contactor to airframe ground 12.25 volts. >>> "On" side of starter contactor to airframe ground while cranking 8.6 to >>> 9.0 volts. >>> Big wire on starter to airframe ground while cranking is 8.6 volts or >>> less. >>> >>> All this was done with a genuine Harbor Freight $4.00 digital meter. I >>> believe that this points to the starter contactor as the culprit. >>> Correct? >>> >>> john >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Weak Starter
From: John Morgensen <john(at)morgensen.com>
Date: Dec 07, 2015
David, Be careful with "maintainer" style chargers and Odyssey PC680 batteries. Notice that the warranty can be voided: C. The warranty does not cover a Battery that is damaged or destroyed as a result of one for more of the following: Willful abuse, misuse, physical damage, neglect or if the top decorative cover has been removed. Natural forces such as wind, lightning, hail; damage due to fire, collision, explosion, vandalism, theft, penetration or opening of the Battery case in any manner. Overcharging, undercharging, charging or installing in reverse polarity, improper maintenance, allowing the Battery to be deeply discharged via a parasitic load or mishandling of the Battery such as but not limited to using the terminals for lifting or carrying the Battery._Trickle chargers that do not have a regulated __ __trickle charge voltage between 13.5V and 13.8V (no lower than 13.5V and no higher than 13.8V) will cause __ __early failure of the Battery. _Use of such chargers with the Battery will also void the Batterys warranty. For applications where an alternator is present, the alternator must deliver between 14.0V and 14.7V when measured at the Batterys terminals. Alternators that do not have a regulated charge between 14.0V and 14.7V (no lower than 14.0V and no higher than 14.7V) will cause early failure of the Battery. Use of such alternators with the Battery will also void the Batterys warranty I thought I was doing the right thing by religiously using a quality Battery Minder but it destroyed the battery. They use to publish a list of unacceptable chargers but I can't find it on their web site any more. john On 12/7/2015 10:11 AM, David Lloyd wrote: > > > John, > A problem like you are seeing can also be caused by an "aged" main > battery. > The battery V measures fine with no load, may also measure fine with > just a buss current load, but, when it sees a "starter" type current > load (200 - 300 amps), it slumps badly. Usually caused by a cell or > two that are too aged to produce the amps needed. > Only answer is to install a new battery and keep it fresh by keeping a > low current "maintainer" style charger on it during hangar periods. > David > > ____________________________________________________________ > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Morgensen" <john(at)morgensen.com> > To: > Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 6:06 AM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Weak Starter > > >> >> >> Thanks for all of the replies. >> >> Skytec's troubleshooting chart says that the starter needs to see 10+ >> volts. I will be replacing both relays. >> >> john >> >> On 12/6/2015 6:41 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: >>> >>> >>> You probably need to replace both starter relay and master relay. >>> Download Skytec's troubleshooting chart and follow it carefully. >>> >>> On 12/6/2015 5:15 PM, John Morgensen wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> My Skytec starter barely turns over an IO320. >>>> >>>> I measured: >>>> >>>> Battery 13.12 volts. >>>> "On" side of master contactor to airframe ground 12.25 volts. >>>> "On" side of starter contactor to airframe ground while cranking >>>> 8.6 to 9.0 volts. >>>> Big wire on starter to airframe ground while cranking is 8.6 volts >>>> or less. >>>> >>>> All this was done with a genuine Harbor Freight $4.00 digital >>>> meter. I believe that this points to the starter contactor as the >>>> culprit. Correct? >>>> >>>> john >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Weak Starter
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Date: Dec 07, 2015
I would second the points made below in John's post. Over the past 9 years I've managed to abuse and slowly kill a number of PC680s in a variety of ways. Simply reading and FOLLOWING the guidelines documented in their Owner's Manual, including the fine print of the Warranty, will avoid ALL of the problems I've experienced. Why didn't I? Well, since I grew up charging batteries from early 60s electric tooth brushes that could barely handle a full set of teeth, to gliders, boats, cars and 50 years of RC aircraft, I must know what I'm doing. So I've taken the time to rediscover and learn anew all that was already known about Odessy's AGM line of batteries. I'm almost done with my studies... Regarding trickle chargers, according to the Manual, "..there is no need to trickle or float charge during winter months." It continues, "It can be stored for 2 years or more below 77F." If you insist, see Warranty notes reproduced below. If you do have some kind of parasitic load on the battery during storage (I had that), get it fully charged (you must start there) , apply a trickle charger that can produce the regulated voltage (I didn't), then for good measure, fully charge it before using it. Better, just disconnect the load and save the cost of the trickle charger.... or $150 lets you start the learning process from the beginning again. Just to repeat, I've found the information in Odyssey's Owner's Manual to be complete and accurate in every way. The only thing that upsets me is that they cost $150 a copy, but at least it comes with a fresh battery. Bill "content to remain ignorant about Lithium technologies and to simply enjoy their performance" Watson On 12/7/2015 2:21 PM, John Morgensen wrote: > David, > Be careful with "maintainer" style chargers and Odyssey PC680 > batteries. Notice that the warranty can be voided: > > C. The warranty does not cover a Battery that is damaged or destroyed > as a result of one for more of the > following: > > Willful abuse, misuse, physical damage, neglect or if the top > decorative cover has been removed. > > Natural forces such as wind, lightning, hail; damage due to fire, > collision, explosion, vandalism, theft, > penetration or opening of the Battery case in any manner. > > Overcharging, undercharging, charging or installing in reverse > polarity, improper maintenance, allowing > the Battery to be deeply discharged via a parasitic load or > mishandling of the Battery such as but not > limited to using the terminals for lifting or carrying the > Battery._Trickle chargers that do not have a regulated __ > __trickle charge voltage between 13.5V and 13.8V (no lower than 13.5V > and no higher than 13.8V) will cause __ > __early failure of the Battery. _Use of such chargers with the Battery > will also void the Batterys warranty. For > applications where an alternator is present, the alternator must > deliver between 14.0V and 14.7V when > measured at the Batterys terminals. Alternators that do not have a > regulated charge between 14.0V and > 14.7V (no lower than 14.0V and no higher than 14.7V) will cause early > failure of the Battery. Use of such > alternators with the Battery will also void the Batterys warranty > > I thought I was doing the right thing by religiously using a quality > Battery Minder but it destroyed the battery. They use to publish a > list of unacceptable chargers but I can't find it on their web site > any more. > > john > > > On 12/7/2015 10:11 AM, David Lloyd wrote: >> >> >> John, >> A problem like you are seeing can also be caused by an "aged" main >> battery. >> The battery V measures fine with no load, may also measure fine with >> just a buss current load, but, when it sees a "starter" type current >> load (200 - 300 amps), it slumps badly. Usually caused by a cell or >> two that are too aged to produce the amps needed. >> Only answer is to install a new battery and keep it fresh by keeping >> a low current "maintainer" style charger on it during hangar periods. >> David >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Morgensen" <john(at)morgensen.com> >> To: >> Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 6:06 AM >> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Weak Starter >> >> >>> >>> >>> Thanks for all of the replies. >>> >>> Skytec's troubleshooting chart says that the starter needs to see >>> 10+ volts. I will be replacing both relays. >>> >>> john >>> >>> On 12/6/2015 6:41 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> You probably need to replace both starter relay and master relay. >>>> Download Skytec's troubleshooting chart and follow it carefully. >>>> >>>> On 12/6/2015 5:15 PM, John Morgensen wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> My Skytec starter barely turns over an IO320. >>>>> >>>>> I measured: >>>>> >>>>> Battery 13.12 volts. >>>>> "On" side of master contactor to airframe ground 12.25 volts. >>>>> "On" side of starter contactor to airframe ground while cranking >>>>> 8.6 to 9.0 volts. >>>>> Big wire on starter to airframe ground while cranking is 8.6 volts >>>>> or less. >>>>> >>>>> All this was done with a genuine Harbor Freight $4.00 digital >>>>> meter. I believe that this points to the starter contactor as the >>>>> culprit. Correct? >>>>> >>>>> john >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Circuit breaker question
Date: Dec 07, 2015
Hangar talk with a neighbor. He is designing a circuit using 4awg wire for his alternator. He asked me if he could use 2 - 50A circuit breakers wired in Parallel for this purpose instead of a single 100A breaker. Chapter 11 in AC 43 says to use a 100A breaker or a 70A fuse for 4AWG wire. I suggested the use of a 70A ANL fuse, but wasnt sure what the answer is to the CB question he had. Any insight? Justin ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Circuit breaker question
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 07, 2015
On 12/7/2015 6:02 PM, Justin Jones wrote: > > Hangar talk with a neighbor. He is designing a circuit using 4awg wire for his alternator. He asked me if he could use 2 - 50A circuit breakers wired in Parallel for this purpose instead of a single 100A breaker. Chapter 11 in AC 43 says to use a 100A breaker or a 70A fuse for 4AWG wire. I suggested the use of a 70A ANL fuse, but wasnt sure what the answer is to the CB question he had. > > Any insight? > > Justin No. (To using 2 breakers in parallel.) And that's a weird recommendation, too, unless the fuse mentioned is a special long-time-constant 'slow blow' type fuse. A breaker would take a lot longer to trip than a standard fuse of the same value; going 30A higher with the breaker *and* having slower response sounds really strange. Buying 2 50 A a/c breakers (or even one 100 A breaker) would just kill my (wallet's) soul. A fuse-able link would be lighter, take no panel space, a *lot* cheaper, and if soldered in place, a *lot* more reliable than a breaker (no joints to corrode or contacts to fail). If it's properly sized, it shouldn't need attention for the life of the a/c, unlike a CB. FWIW, Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Circuit breaker question
Date: Dec 07, 2015
The ANL fuse suggestion came from Bob's Z diagrams (note 10) > On Dec 7, 2015, at 16:16, Charlie England wrote: > > >> On 12/7/2015 6:02 PM, Justin Jones wrote: >> >> Hangar talk with a neighbor. He is designing a circuit using 4awg wire for his alternator. He asked me if he could use 2 - 50A circuit breakers wired in Parallel for this purpose instead of a single 100A breaker. Chapter 11 in AC 43 says to use a 100A breaker or a 70A fuse for 4AWG wire. I suggested the use of a 70A ANL fuse, but wasnt sure what the answer is to the CB question he had. >> >> Any insight? >> >> Justin > No. (To using 2 breakers in parallel.) > > And that's a weird recommendation, too, unless the fuse mentioned is a special long-time-constant 'slow blow' type fuse. A breaker would take a lot longer to trip than a standard fuse of the same value; going 30A higher with the breaker *and* having slower response sounds really strange. > > Buying 2 50 A a/c breakers (or even one 100 A breaker) would just kill my (wallet's) soul. A fuse-able link would be lighter, take no panel space, a *lot* cheaper, and if soldered in place, a *lot* more reliable than a breaker (no joints to corrode or contacts to fail). If it's properly sized, it shouldn't need attention for the life of the a/c, unlike a CB. > > FWIW, > > Charlie > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Circuit breaker question
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 07, 2015
ANL would obviously be fine, but I was assuming that AC43 wouldn't be recommending ANL fuses. Even with ANL, it's still weird that they would equate a 100A breaker to a 70A fuse. On 12/7/2015 8:02 PM, Justin Jones wrote: > > The ANL fuse suggestion came from Bob's Z diagrams (note 10) > > > >> On Dec 7, 2015, at 16:16, Charlie England wrote: >> >> >>> On 12/7/2015 6:02 PM, Justin Jones wrote: >>> >>> Hangar talk with a neighbor. He is designing a circuit using 4awg wire for his alternator. He asked me if he could use 2 - 50A circuit breakers wired in Parallel for this purpose instead of a single 100A breaker. Chapter 11 in AC 43 says to use a 100A breaker or a 70A fuse for 4AWG wire. I suggested the use of a 70A ANL fuse, but wasnt sure what the answer is to the CB question he had. >>> >>> Any insight? >>> >>> Justin >> No. (To using 2 breakers in parallel.) >> >> And that's a weird recommendation, too, unless the fuse mentioned is a special long-time-constant 'slow blow' type fuse. A breaker would take a lot longer to trip than a standard fuse of the same value; going 30A higher with the breaker *and* having slower response sounds really strange. >> >> Buying 2 50 A a/c breakers (or even one 100 A breaker) would just kill my (wallet's) soul. A fuse-able link would be lighter, take no panel space, a *lot* cheaper, and if soldered in place, a *lot* more reliable than a breaker (no joints to corrode or contacts to fail). If it's properly sized, it shouldn't need attention for the life of the a/c, unlike a CB. >> >> FWIW, >> >> Charlie >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Circuit breaker question
Date: Dec 07, 2015
I thought it was strange too. It's table 11-3 on page 11-15 in chapter 11 of AC 43.13.1B > On Dec 7, 2015, at 18:19, Charlie England wrote: > .com> > > ANL would obviously be fine, but I was assuming that AC43 wouldn't be reco mmending ANL fuses. Even with ANL, it's still weird that they would equate a 100A breaker to a 70A fuse. > >> On 12/7/2015 8:02 PM, Justin Jones wrote: ring.com> >> >> The ANL fuse suggestion came from Bob's Z diagrams (note 10) >> >> >>> On Dec 7, 2015, at 16:16, Charlie England wrote: >>> il.com> >>> >>>> On 12/7/2015 6:02 PM, Justin Jones wrote: spring.com> >>>> >>>> Hangar talk with a neighbor. He is designing a circuit using 4awg wire f or his alternator. He asked me if he could use 2 - 50A circuit breakers wir ed in Parallel for this purpose instead of a single 100A breaker. Chapter 11 in AC 43 says to use a 100A breaker or a 70A fuse for 4AWG wire. I suggeste d the use of a 70A ANL fuse, but wasn=99t sure what the answer is to t he CB question he had. >>>> >>>> Any insight? >>>> >>>> Justin >>> No. (To using 2 breakers in parallel.) >>> >>> And that's a weird recommendation, too, unless the fuse mentioned is a s pecial long-time-constant 'slow blow' type fuse. A breaker would take a lot l onger to trip than a standard fuse of the same value; going 30A higher with t he breaker *and* having slower response sounds really strange. >>> >>> Buying 2 50 A a/c breakers (or even one 100 A breaker) would just kill m y (wallet's) soul. A fuse-able link would be lighter, take no panel space, a *lot* cheaper, and if soldered in place, a *lot* more reliable than a break er (no joints to corrode or contacts to fail). If it's properly sized, it sh ouldn't need attention for the life of the a/c, unlike a CB. >>> >>> FWIW, >>> >>> Charlie > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 08, 2015
From: Jeff Luckey <jluckey(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Circuit breaker question
Keep in mind that ANL are really current limiters (as opposed to fuses) whi ch have a different (slower acting) current curve=C2- than a regular fuse and/or breaker (faster acting).=C2- They can hold a little over their ra ted value for a fairly long time (like minutes).=C2- Google "ANL current curve" for details ... -Jeff On Monday, December 7, 2015 8:01 PM, Justin Jones wrote: I thought it was strange too. It's table 11-3 on page 11-15 in chapter 11 of AC 43.13.1B > On Dec 7, 2015, at 18:19, Charlie England wrote: > l.com> > > ANL would obviously be fine, but I was assuming that AC43 wouldn't be rec ommending ANL fuses. Even with ANL, it's still weird that they would equate a 100A breaker to a 70A fuse. > >> On 12/7/2015 8:02 PM, Justin Jones wrote: pring.com> >> >> The ANL fuse suggestion came from Bob's Z diagrams (note 10) >> >>=C2- >>> On Dec 7, 2015, at 16:16, Charlie England wrote: >>> ail.com> >>> >>>> On 12/7/2015 6:02 PM, Justin Jones wrote: dspring.com> >>>> >>>> Hangar talk with a neighbor. He is designing a circuit using 4awg wire for his alternator.=C2- He asked me if he could use 2 - 50A circuit brea kers wired in Parallel for this purpose instead of a single 100A breaker. C hapter 11 in AC 43 says to use a 100A breaker or a 70A fuse for 4AWG wire. I suggested the use of a 70A ANL fuse, but wasn=99t sure what the ans wer is to the CB question he had. >>>> >>>> Any insight? >>>> >>>> Justin >>> No. (To using 2 breakers in parallel.) >>> >>> And that's a weird recommendation, too, unless the fuse mentioned is a special long-time-constant 'slow blow' type fuse. A breaker would take a lo t longer to trip than a standard fuse of the same value; going 30A higher w ith the breaker *and* having slower response sounds really strange. >>> >>> Buying 2=C2- 50 A a/c breakers (or even one 100 A breaker) would just kill my (wallet's) soul. A fuse-able link would be lighter, take no panel space, a *lot* cheaper, and if soldered in place, a *lot* more reliable tha n a breaker (no joints to corrode or contacts to fail). If it's properly si zed, it shouldn't need attention for the life of the a/c, unlike a CB. >>> >>> FWIW, >>> >>> Charlie > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Circuit breaker question
From: John Tipton <jmtipton(at)btopenworld.com>
Date: Dec 08, 2015
Jeff is right: in this situation the ANL fuse is matched to the alternator o utput, not to the wire size John Sent from my iPad ----x--O--x---- > On 8 Dec 2015, at 06:32 am, Jeff Luckey wrote: > > > Keep in mind that ANL are really current limiters (as opposed to fuses) wh ich have a different (slower acting) current curve than a regular fuse and/ or breaker (faster acting). They can hold a little over their rated value f or a fairly long time (like minutes). Google "ANL current curve" for detail s ... > > -Jeff > > > > > > On Monday, December 7, 2015 8:01 PM, Justin Jones <jmjones2000@mindspring. com> wrote: > > > I thought it was strange too. It's table 11-3 on page 11-15 in chapter 11 o f AC 43.13.1B > > > > > > > > On Dec 7, 2015, at 18:19, Charlie England wrote: > > il.com> > > > > ANL would obviously be fine, but I was assuming that AC43 wouldn't be re commending ANL fuses. Even with ANL, it's still weird that they would equate a 100A breaker to a 70A fuse. > > > >> On 12/7/2015 8:02 PM, Justin Jones wrote: spring.com> > >> > >> The ANL fuse suggestion came from Bob's Z diagrams (note 10) > >> > >> > >>> On Dec 7, 2015, at 16:16, Charlie England wrote : > >>> mail.com> > >>> > >>>> On 12/7/2015 6:02 PM, Justin Jones wrote: ndspring.com> > >>>> > >>>> Hangar talk with a neighbor. He is designing a circuit using 4awg wir e for his alternator. He asked me if he could use 2 - 50A circuit breakers w ired in Parallel for this purpose instead of a single 100A breaker. Chapter 1 1 in AC 43 says to use a 100A breaker or a 70A fuse for 4AWG wire. I suggest ed the use of a 70A ANL fuse, but wasn=99t sure what the answer is to t he CB question he had. > >>>> > >>>> Any insight? > >>>> > >>>> Justin > >>> No. (To using 2 breakers in parallel.) > >>> > >>> And that's a weird recommendation, too, unless the fuse mentioned is a special long-time-constant 'slow blow' type fuse. A breaker would take a lo t longer to trip than a standard fuse of the same value; going 30A higher wi th the breaker *and* having slower response sounds really strange. > >>> > >>> Buying 2 50 A a/c breakers (or even one 100 A breaker) would just kil l my (wallet's) soul. A fuse-able link would be lighter, take no panel space , a *lot* cheaper, and if soldered in place, a *lot* more reliable than a br eaker (no joints to corrode or contacts to fail). If it's properly sized, it shouldn't need attention for the life of the a/c, unlike a CB. > >>> > >>> FWIW, > >>> > >>> Charlie > > > > > ========================= > ========================= > ========== > ========================= > ========== > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Circuit breaker question
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 08, 2015
Circuit breakers should not be connected in parallel. An ANL fuse is fine. Circuit protection should be located near the source of power. One might think that the alternator is the source of power. But in this case, the battery and wires are what need protection in case the alternator or its "B" lead shorts out. A disadvantage of using a circuit breaker for this application is that it would be located inside of the cockpit and fed with a hot unprotected wire. An ANL fuse can be located near the contactors on the engine side of the firewall, thus eliminating at least one heavy wire from running into the cockpit. Is 4 AWG wire really needed? Maybe 6 AWG or even 8 AWG could be used, depending on the expected load. Modern avionics and LED lights use less current than older equipment. -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450818#450818 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Circuit breaker question
From: Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 08, 2015
> >Circuit breakers should not be connected in parallel. An ANL fuse is >fine. Circuit protection should be located near the source of power. >One might think that the alternator is the source of power. But in >this case, the battery and wires are what need protection in case the >alternator or its "B" lead shorts out. A disadvantage of using a >circuit breaker for this application is that it would be located inside >of the cockpit and fed with a hot unprotected wire. An ANL fuse can be >located near the contactors on the engine side of the firewall, thus >eliminating at least one heavy wire from running into the cockpit. Is >4 AWG wire really needed? Maybe 6 AWG or even 8 AWG could be used, >depending on the expected load. Modern avionics and LED lights use >less current than older equipment. > >-------- >Joe Gores > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=450818#450818 > > Wire must be large enough to handle max possible current from alt (which is > rated output). Fuse must be sized to protect wire. Otherwise there will be nuisance trips. I think that it's covered in the 'book'. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 08, 2015
From: speedy11(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Weak Starter
John, I had the same issue on my IO-390. Skytec worked okay for five years then got slower and slower. I did all of the same checks you are talking about. Replaced the starter. Problem solved. See if you can borrow a starter from someone and try it on your plane. Stan My Skytec starter barely turns over an IO320. I measured:

October 19, 2015 - December 08, 2015

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-mx