AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ng
June 17, 2016 - July 06, 2016
this stuck-on behaviour is because the contact has tried to open due to low coil
voltage and welded itself shut because of an overcurrent condition.
>
> Twice overall I have seen it enter this failure mode during cranking and while
the prop is turning: the prop stops and bounces back against the cylinder compression,
the bus voltage drops out and the contactor starts to buzz.
>
> This is all consistent with a dead short either in, or downstream of the starter
contactor. I would be looking very hard at the starter motor, but I've already
had this overhauled, new springs, brushes etc., just yesterday.
>
> Has anyone seen a failure like this in their experience? Anywhere else I could
look? It's really a very simple circuit and it must be drawing several hundred
amps somewhere...
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
I did do a capacity check with a hand held device (basically it had a big heating
element in it) that runs for ten seconds and gives a go/no-go result - it said
the battery was "go".
The bit that confuses me about a failing battery being responsible is that on one
start the battery will produce enough current to pull the bus voltage down
to 6 volts and significantly heat the battery grounding strap (but in this scenario
not turn the prop), and on the very next try the bus voltage only drops
to 10 volts while the prop spins freely.
On 17Jun2016, at 4:56 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
Most likely your battery is on its last legs, or it has not achieved a full charge.
After being charged, and sitting overnight, the battery resting voltage should
be at least 12.7. If it is closer to 12.5, the battery is either weak or
didn't get fully charged. You could do, or have done a capacity check.
On 6/17/2016 1:44 PM, Alec Myers wrote:
>
> Fresh on the heels of asking for help with the low bus voltage with the engine
running in my C182, I now have an issue with intermittent cranking on start.
>
> Symptoms:
>
> About 5 times out of 10 turning the key switch to start elicits no prop movement.
Not even a tiny bit. The other times the cranking is healthy.
>
> During a no-turn start, I can hear the starter contactor oscillate on/off at
about 5Hz, the bus voltage drops to 6 volts or below, and after a few seconds
the earth braid from the battery to the fuselage gets warm/hot to touch.
>
> Yesterday I had the alternator overhauled, and replaced: no change in behaviour.
Sometimes it cranks well 10 times in a row, sometimes it fails to turn, 10
times in a row.
>
> After a few trial starts today the battery was dead. So I gave it an external
charge 20A for an hour. The next start failed. The one after that was fine, then
it went sulky and failed a few times.
>
> Twice in maybe 40 trial starts (been working on this at various times over two
days now) the main (battery) contactor has remained shut and I have been unable
to shut off the power by turning off the master switch. The second time this
happened I gently tapped the battery contactor with a rubber tool and the contact
was successfully broken. I have now replaced this contactor. I imagine
this stuck-on behaviour is because the contact has tried to open due to low coil
voltage and welded itself shut because of an overcurrent condition.
>
> Twice overall I have seen it enter this failure mode during cranking and while
the prop is turning: the prop stops and bounces back against the cylinder compression,
the bus voltage drops out and the contactor starts to buzz.
>
> This is all consistent with a dead short either in, or downstream of the starter
contactor. I would be looking very hard at the starter motor, but I've already
had this overhauled, new springs, brushes etc., just yesterday.
>
> Has anyone seen a failure like this in their experience? Anywhere else I could
look? It's really a very simple circuit and it must be drawing several hundred
amps somewhere...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
This sounds like an internal problem inside the starter or possibly a chaffing
wire (insulation rubbing thin or thru and grounding out) on the starter side on
the main contactor.
The problem with high current draws is that it can harm the components in the system.
The battery, wires, and both contactors can be destroyed.
Begin at the starter and trace the big wire all the way back to the battery looking
for any signs of chaffing or shorts. Do a continuity check between ground
and the main wire on the starter side of the contactors with the battery switch
off and battery disconnected from the airframe.
If you can't find an issue with the wire, try trying to disconnect the main wire
from the starter, insulate it (electricity isolating it) and attempt to crank
the starter as you would on a normal start (battery connected). If the battery
grounding braid gets hot, the starter isn't the issue and you have a short
to ground. If nothing happens, try a different starter.
Let us know.
Justin
> On Jun 17, 2016, at 16:56, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
>
> Most likely your battery is on its last legs, or it has not achieved a full charge.
After being charged, and sitting overnight, the battery resting voltage
should be at least 12.7. If it is closer to 12.5, the battery is either weak
or didn't get fully charged. You could do, or have done a capacity check.
>
>> On 6/17/2016 1:44 PM, Alec Myers wrote:
>>
>> Fresh on the heels of asking for help with the low bus voltage with the engine
running in my C182, I now have an issue with intermittent cranking on start.
>>
>> Symptoms:
>>
>> About 5 times out of 10 turning the key switch to start elicits no prop movement.
Not even a tiny bit. The other times the cranking is healthy.
>>
>> During a no-turn start, I can hear the starter contactor oscillate on/off at
about 5Hz, the bus voltage drops to 6 volts or below, and after a few seconds
the earth braid from the battery to the fuselage gets warm/hot to touch.
>>
>> Yesterday I had the alternator overhauled, and replaced: no change in behaviour.
Sometimes it cranks well 10 times in a row, sometimes it fails to turn, 10
times in a row.
>>
>> After a few trial starts today the battery was dead. So I gave it an external
charge 20A for an hour. The next start failed. The one after that was fine,
then it went sulky and failed a few times.
>>
>> Twice in maybe 40 trial starts (been working on this at various times over two
days now) the main (battery) contactor has remained shut and I have been unable
to shut off the power by turning off the master switch. The second time this
happened I gently tapped the battery contactor with a rubber tool and the
contact was successfully broken. I have now replaced this contactor. I imagine
this stuck-on behaviour is because the contact has tried to open due to low coil
voltage and welded itself shut because of an overcurrent condition.
>>
>> Twice overall I have seen it enter this failure mode during cranking and while
the prop is turning: the prop stops and bounces back against the cylinder compression,
the bus voltage drops out and the contactor starts to buzz.
>>
>> This is all consistent with a dead short either in, or downstream of the starter
contactor. I would be looking very hard at the starter motor, but I've already
had this overhauled, new springs, brushes etc., just yesterday.
>>
>> Has anyone seen a failure like this in their experience? Anywhere else I could
look? It's really a very simple circuit and it must be drawing several hundred
amps somewhere...
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
Alec, this is typical behavior of a short. See my last post to trouble shoot and
find the issue.
> On Jun 17, 2016, at 17:18, Alec Myers wrote:
>
>
> I did do a capacity check with a hand held device (basically it had a big heating
element in it) that runs for ten seconds and gives a go/no-go result - it
said the battery was "go".
>
> The bit that confuses me about a failing battery being responsible is that on
one start the battery will produce enough current to pull the bus voltage down
to 6 volts and significantly heat the battery grounding strap (but in this scenario
not turn the prop), and on the very next try the bus voltage only drops
to 10 volts while the prop spins freely.
>
>
>
>
> On 17Jun2016, at 4:56 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
>
> Most likely your battery is on its last legs, or it has not achieved a full charge.
After being charged, and sitting overnight, the battery resting voltage
should be at least 12.7. If it is closer to 12.5, the battery is either weak
or didn't get fully charged. You could do, or have done a capacity check.
>
>> On 6/17/2016 1:44 PM, Alec Myers wrote:
>>
>> Fresh on the heels of asking for help with the low bus voltage with the engine
running in my C182, I now have an issue with intermittent cranking on start.
>>
>> Symptoms:
>>
>> About 5 times out of 10 turning the key switch to start elicits no prop movement.
Not even a tiny bit. The other times the cranking is healthy.
>>
>> During a no-turn start, I can hear the starter contactor oscillate on/off at
about 5Hz, the bus voltage drops to 6 volts or below, and after a few seconds
the earth braid from the battery to the fuselage gets warm/hot to touch.
>>
>> Yesterday I had the alternator overhauled, and replaced: no change in behaviour.
Sometimes it cranks well 10 times in a row, sometimes it fails to turn, 10
times in a row.
>>
>> After a few trial starts today the battery was dead. So I gave it an external
charge 20A for an hour. The next start failed. The one after that was fine,
then it went sulky and failed a few times.
>>
>> Twice in maybe 40 trial starts (been working on this at various times over two
days now) the main (battery) contactor has remained shut and I have been unable
to shut off the power by turning off the master switch. The second time this
happened I gently tapped the battery contactor with a rubber tool and the
contact was successfully broken. I have now replaced this contactor. I imagine
this stuck-on behaviour is because the contact has tried to open due to low coil
voltage and welded itself shut because of an overcurrent condition.
>>
>> Twice overall I have seen it enter this failure mode during cranking and while
the prop is turning: the prop stops and bounces back against the cylinder compression,
the bus voltage drops out and the contactor starts to buzz.
>>
>> This is all consistent with a dead short either in, or downstream of the starter
contactor. I would be looking very hard at the starter motor, but I've already
had this overhauled, new springs, brushes etc., just yesterday.
>>
>> Has anyone seen a failure like this in their experience? Anywhere else I could
look? It's really a very simple circuit and it must be drawing several hundred
amps somewhere...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <joerhenry(at)suddenlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
---- Alec Myers wrote:
>
> I did do a capacity check with a hand held device (basically it had a big heating
element in it) that runs for ten seconds and gives a go/no-go result - it
said the battery was "go".
>
> The bit that confuses me about a failing battery being responsible is that on
one start the battery will produce enough current to pull the bus voltage down
to 6 volts and significantly heat the battery grounding strap (but in this scenario
not turn the prop), and on the very next try the bus voltage only drops
to 10 volts while the prop spins freely.
That the ground braid gets hot suggests a poor connection. I would disconnect the
braid and clean or replace and try again. jrh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
The wire between the contactor and the starter is only six inches long no chafing
anywhere or even contact with anything else.
I can be confident there's no short upstream of the starter contactor because the
bus voltage dips out only when the starter contactor is energized.
I have disconnected the starter from its contactor and hit the start switch. The
contactor closes but there is no drop in bus voltage. As you would expect. The
only thing that makes me hesitate from blaming the starter motor 100% is that
the fault is intermittent so not seeing it on a few tests without the starter
in the circuit isn't entirely dispositive that the starter is the problem.
I could have just got lucky, and without the starter and engine turning there's
no vibration to shake things up.
Is it at all possible the contactor is intermittently shorting to the can? I am
going to try to find a DC clamp-on current meter. If while stalled there's about
200+ amps in the contactor-starter wire then the motor has to be the issue.
Unfortunately sourcing another starter just to try is infeasible.
On Jun 17, 2016, at 17:32, Justin Jones wrote:
This sounds like an internal problem inside the starter or possibly a chaffing
wire (insulation rubbing thin or thru and grounding out) on the starter side on
the main contactor.
The problem with high current draws is that it can harm the components in the system.
The battery, wires, and both contactors can be destroyed.
Begin at the starter and trace the big wire all the way back to the battery looking
for any signs of chaffing or shorts. Do a continuity check between ground
and the main wire on the starter side of the contactors with the battery switch
off and battery disconnected from the airframe.
If you can't find an issue with the wire, try trying to disconnect the main wire
from the starter, insulate it (electricity isolating it) and attempt to crank
the starter as you would on a normal start (battery connected). If the battery
grounding braid gets hot, the starter isn't the issue and you have a short
to ground. If nothing happens, try a different starter.
Let us know.
Justin
> On Jun 17, 2016, at 16:56, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
>
> Most likely your battery is on its last legs, or it has not achieved a full charge.
After being charged, and sitting overnight, the battery resting voltage
should be at least 12.7. If it is closer to 12.5, the battery is either weak
or didn't get fully charged. You could do, or have done a capacity check.
>
>> On 6/17/2016 1:44 PM, Alec Myers wrote:
>>
>> Fresh on the heels of asking for help with the low bus voltage with the engine
running in my C182, I now have an issue with intermittent cranking on start.
>>
>> Symptoms:
>>
>> About 5 times out of 10 turning the key switch to start elicits no prop movement.
Not even a tiny bit. The other times the cranking is healthy.
>>
>> During a no-turn start, I can hear the starter contactor oscillate on/off at
about 5Hz, the bus voltage drops to 6 volts or below, and after a few seconds
the earth braid from the battery to the fuselage gets warm/hot to touch.
>>
>> Yesterday I had the alternator overhauled, and replaced: no change in behaviour.
Sometimes it cranks well 10 times in a row, sometimes it fails to turn, 10
times in a row.
>>
>> After a few trial starts today the battery was dead. So I gave it an external
charge 20A for an hour. The next start failed. The one after that was fine,
then it went sulky and failed a few times.
>>
>> Twice in maybe 40 trial starts (been working on this at various times over two
days now) the main (battery) contactor has remained shut and I have been unable
to shut off the power by turning off the master switch. The second time this
happened I gently tapped the battery contactor with a rubber tool and the
contact was successfully broken. I have now replaced this contactor. I imagine
this stuck-on behaviour is because the contact has tried to open due to low coil
voltage and welded itself shut because of an overcurrent condition.
>>
>> Twice overall I have seen it enter this failure mode during cranking and while
the prop is turning: the prop stops and bounces back against the cylinder compression,
the bus voltage drops out and the contactor starts to buzz.
>>
>> This is all consistent with a dead short either in, or downstream of the starter
contactor. I would be looking very hard at the starter motor, but I've already
had this overhauled, new springs, brushes etc., just yesterday.
>>
>> Has anyone seen a failure like this in their experience? Anywhere else I could
look? It's really a very simple circuit and it must be drawing several hundred
amps somewhere...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Lloyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
It is unusual but, a contactor can go bad.
Usually if it is mounted the wrong orientation and gets moisture inside
causing fungus or electrolysis corrosion on the contact surfaces that carry
the heavy current.
Since you state that the contactor and lead cable get warm/hot then, this
does not point to a failing ignition start switch usually. The starting
circuit to activate the contactor is fairly low current; about 5 amps or
less.
Another unusual failure is in the starter motor windings. The winding could
have a cracked armature heavy wire that makes or un-makes at random times.
Usually when heat is involved. I have seen this failure in alternators also.
Very difficult to chase down.. . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alec Myers" <alec(at)alecmyers.com>
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2016 1:44 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Problem with starting
>
> Fresh on the heels of asking for help with the low bus voltage with the
> engine running in my C182, I now have an issue with intermittent cranking
> on start.
>
> Symptoms:
>
> About 5 times out of 10 turning the key switch to start elicits no prop
> movement. Not even a tiny bit. The other times the cranking is healthy.
>
> During a no-turn start, I can hear the starter contactor oscillate on/off
> at about 5Hz, the bus voltage drops to 6 volts or below, and after a few
> seconds the earth braid from the battery to the fuselage gets warm/hot to
> touch.
>
> Yesterday I had the alternator overhauled, and replaced: no change in
> behaviour. Sometimes it cranks well 10 times in a row, sometimes it fails
> to turn, 10 times in a row.
>
> After a few trial starts today the battery was dead. So I gave it an
> external charge 20A for an hour. The next start failed. The one after that
> was fine, then it went sulky and failed a few times.
>
> Twice in maybe 40 trial starts (been working on this at various times over
> two days now) the main (battery) contactor has remained shut and I have
> been unable to shut off the power by turning off the master switch. The
> second time this happened I gently tapped the battery contactor with a
> rubber tool and the contact was successfully broken. I have now replaced
> this contactor. I imagine this stuck-on behaviour is because the contact
> has tried to open due to low coil voltage and welded itself shut because
> of an overcurrent condition.
>
> Twice overall I have seen it enter this failure mode during cranking and
> while the prop is turning: the prop stops and bounces back against the
> cylinder compression, the bus voltage drops out and the contactor starts
> to buzz.
>
> This is all consistent with a dead short either in, or downstream of the
> starter contactor. I would be looking very hard at the starter motor, but
> I've already had this overhauled, new springs, brushes etc., just
> yesterday.
>
> Has anyone seen a failure like this in their experience? Anywhere else I
> could look? It's really a very simple circuit and it must be drawing
> several hundred amps somewhere...
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com> |
| Subject: | Wrong email address - Re-send pls |
I will no longer be checking franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com due to excessive
and uncontrollable spam.
Please re-send your email to my new address:
franz.fux(at)lastfrontierheli.com and make a note of it for the future.
Apologies for the inconvenience,
Franz Fux
Last Frontier Heliskiing - Go Beyond
www.lastfrontierheli.com
---
Head Office: PO Box 1237, Vernon, BC V1T 6N6, CANADA
Tel: 250 558 7980
Fax: 250 558 7981
Reservations: 1-888-655-5566
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Neal George <ngeorge(at)continentalmotors.aero> |
| Subject: | Problem with starting |
Alec -
Which starter motor is on your engine?
If it is an ISKRA, you should take it out of service. Replace the starter adapter
while you're at it - it is probably damages as well. ISKRA starters feature
a planetary gear train that is subject to magnetization and binding. Catastrophic
engine failure from starter adapter failure is a real possibility.
I have a starter motor I'll let you borrow...
Neal
Continental Motors Tech Support
==========
Unfortunately sourcing another starter just to try is infeasible.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
Hi Neal
Tha
> On Jun 18, 2016, at 9:51 AM, Neal George wrote:
>
>
> Alec -
> Which starter motor is on your engine?
> If it is an ISKRA, you should take it out of service. Replace the starter adapter
while you're at it - it is probably damages as well. ISKRA starters feature
a planetary gear train that is subject to magnetization and binding. Catastrophic
engine failure from starter adapter failure is a real possibility.
>
> I have a starter motor I'll let you borrow...
>
> Neal
> Continental Motors Tech Support
>
> ==========
> Unfortunately sourcing another starter just to try is infeasible.
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
Hi Neal
That's very kind! The motor is an original Continental heavy one - direct drive.
No evidence of slipping in the adapter. Changing the adapter involves partially
removing the engine to gain clearance which I'd like to avoid if possible.
Can you get me a stater to borrow to Canada where I am?
> On Jun 18, 2016, at 10:45 AM, Alec Myers wrote:
>
> Hi Neal
>
> Tha
>
>> On Jun 18, 2016, at 9:51 AM, Neal George wrote:
>>
>>
>> Alec -
>> Which starter motor is on your engine?
>> If it is an ISKRA, you should take it out of service. Replace the starter adapter
while you're at it - it is probably damages as well. ISKRA starters feature
a planetary gear train that is subject to magnetization and binding. Catastrophic
engine failure from starter adapter failure is a real possibility.
>>
>> I have a starter motor I'll let you borrow...
>>
>> Neal
>> Continental Motors Tech Support
>>
>> ==========
>> Unfortunately sourcing another starter just to try is infeasible.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Neal George <ngeorge(at)continentalmotors.aero> |
| Subject: | Problem with starting |
Canada and the cost/aggravation of Customs makes it tough.
If you have a Hartzell Energizer, the probability of the starter motor being the
problem is low unless it has been badly abused. Pull the motor and take it
to your local automotive alternator & starter repair shop - they ought to be able
to test it.
Neal
-----Original Message-----
On Behalf Of Alec Myers
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2016 9:50 AM
Hi Neal
That's very kind! The motor is an original Continental heavy one - direct drive.
No evidence of slipping in the adapter. Changing the adapter involves partially
removing the engine to gain clearance which I'd like to avoid if possible.
Can you get me a stater to borrow to Canada where I am?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Lloyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
. . . never tell an "auto" shop that a part is off an aircraft. . .!
Tell them it is off a boat, tractor, etc. !!
Most shops in US have a built alarm system that they cannot "touch" anything
off of an aircraft, even to test it. . .
Maybe the same in Canada. . . .
Dave
_____________________________________________________________________-
----- Original Message -----
From: "Neal George" <ngeorge(at)continentalmotors.aero>
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2016 12:09 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Problem with starting
>
>
> Canada and the cost/aggravation of Customs makes it tough.
>
> If you have a Hartzell Energizer, the probability of the starter motor
> being the problem is low unless it has been badly abused. Pull the motor
> and take it to your local automotive alternator & starter repair shop -
> they ought to be able to test it.
>
> Neal
>
> -----Original Message-----
> On Behalf Of Alec Myers
> Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2016 9:50 AM
>
>
> Hi Neal
>
> That's very kind! The motor is an original Continental heavy one - direct
> drive. No evidence of slipping in the adapter. Changing the adapter
> involves partially removing the engine to gain clearance which I'd like to
> avoid if possible. Can you get me a stater to borrow to Canada where I am?
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
It's an Energiser 12, with a TCM label.
Is it possible that an intermittent open-circuit in the armature could cause this?
If the rotor goes open circuit the motor stops, the back EMF disappears and
the current rises, just like if the motor was stalled. That would draw a lot
of current, right?
I had the motor overhauled already this last week, after first seeing the problem.
Perhaps they missed the fault, but when I take it back it would be good to
know what to suggest, especially if looking for something intermittent.
On Jun 18, 2016, at 15:09, Neal George wrote:
Canada and the cost/aggravation of Customs makes it tough.
If you have a Hartzell Energizer, the probability of the starter motor being the
problem is low unless it has been badly abused. Pull the motor and take it
to your local automotive alternator & starter repair shop - they ought to be able
to test it.
Neal
-----Original Message-----
On Behalf Of Alec Myers
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2016 9:50 AM
Hi Neal
That's very kind! The motor is an original Continental heavy one - direct drive.
No evidence of slipping in the adapter. Changing the adapter involves partially
removing the engine to gain clearance which I'd like to avoid if possible.
Can you get me a stater to borrow to Canada where I am?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com> |
| Subject: | Wrong email address - Re-send pls |
I will no longer be checking franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com due to excessive
and uncontrollable spam.
Please re-send your email to my new address:
franz.fux(at)lastfrontierheli.com and make a note of it for the future.
Apologies for the inconvenience,
Franz Fux
Last Frontier Heliskiing - Go Beyond
www.lastfrontierheli.com
---
Head Office: PO Box 1237, Vernon, BC V1T 6N6, CANADA
Tel: 250 558 7980
Fax: 250 558 7981
Reservations: 1-888-655-5566
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Stephen Richards <stephencliverichards(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Problem with starting |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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
Neal
I see from the TCM service manual that faults in the windings of the Energizer
motor are not repairable. SIL02-04 says the TCM replacement is now the Iskra starter
that you don't recommend.
Given that I have the old-style starter adapter If I need a new motor which would
you recommend?
> On Jun 18, 2016, at 3:09 PM, Neal George wrote:
>
>
> Canada and the cost/aggravation of Customs makes it tough.
>
> If you have a Hartzell Energizer, the probability of the starter motor being
the problem is low unless it has been badly abused. Pull the motor and take it
to your local automotive alternator & starter repair shop - they ought to be
able to test it.
>
> Neal
>
> -----Original Message-----
> On Behalf Of Alec Myers
> Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2016 9:50 AM
>
>
> Hi Neal
>
> That's very kind! The motor is an original Continental heavy one - direct drive.
No evidence of slipping in the adapter. Changing the adapter involves partially
removing the engine to gain clearance which I'd like to avoid if possible.
Can you get me a stater to borrow to Canada where I am?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Neal George <ngeorge(at)continentalmotors.aero> |
| Subject: | Problem with starting |
Did I misunderstand that you just had the motor overhauled?
All Continental starter adapters have the same motor interface.
The current starter adapter for Sandcast engines is indeed different and is not
interchangeable with the older version. If you have the old-style adapter, if
it fails you will need to have it overhauled. Your engine can be modified to
accept the new adapter, but requires splitting the crankcase.
The Energizer starter motor from Hartzell Engine Technologies is the preferred
unit.
I'm still not convinced you have a motor problem. The chattering relay points
more to circuit / system and low voltage issues.
neal
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alec Myers
Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2016 7:40 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Problem with starting
Neal
I see from the TCM service manual that faults in the windings of the Energizer
motor are not repairable. SIL02-04 says the TCM replacement is now the Iskra starter
that you don't recommend.
Given that I have the old-style starter adapter If I need a new motor which would
you recommend?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Problem with starting |
>
>I'm still not convinced you have a motor problem. The chattering
>relay points more to circuit / system and low voltage issues.
>
>neal
Except that a contactor powered from the same
battery that is being pulled down by what amounts
to continuous stall current may well drop-out
during closures only to re-close when the contacts
break and stall-current goes away.
12v battery contactors drop at about 2v . . . and
are not likely to be candidates for 'buzzing' but
it's not impossible. A easy experiment would call
for powering the starter contactor from a separate
source . . . like another battery. It may well
stop chattering. But the energies being circulated
will be profound.
I'm puzzled by the intermittent nature of the
symptom. This implies a root cause that
is transient or loose to rattle around. Having
the starter motor come to rest on a bad pass
in the armature windings could account for such
behavior.
It would sure be illuminating to put a data acquisition
system on it to capture all the voltages/currents
during the event.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
The strangest symptom is that twice the motor has cut out (and the bus volta
ge was pulled down) mid-crank while the prop was already turning at a good s
tarting speed. I think that suggests it's not a bad spot on the commutator, f
or example.
I can rule out mechanical seizure at the crank because when the motor cut, t
he prop immediately bounced back off a compression stroke, and (I think) I c
an rule out a starter jam because the engine has started and run since.
I thought I was onto something with a possible fracture in the field winding
but that won't explain things if the motor isn't shunt wound.
> On Jun 19, 2016, at 09:29, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroelect
ric.com> wrote:
>
>
> I'm still not convinced you have a motor problem. The chattering relay po
ints more to circuit / system and low voltage issues.
>
> neal
Except that a contactor powered from the same
battery that is being pulled down by what amounts
to continuous stall current may well drop-out
during closures only to re-close when the contacts
break and stall-current goes away.
12v battery contactors drop at about 2v . . . and
are not likely to be candidates for 'buzzing' but
it's not impossible. A easy experiment would call
for powering the starter contactor from a separate
source . . . like another battery. It may well
stop chattering. But the energies being circulated
will be profound.
I'm puzzled by the intermittent nature of the
symptom. This implies a root cause that
is transient or loose to rattle around. Having
the starter motor come to rest on a bad pass
in the armature windings could account for such
behavior.
It would sure be illuminating to put a data acquisition
system on it to capture all the voltages/currents
during the event.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Neal George <ngeorge(at)continentalmotors.aero> |
| Subject: | Problem with starting |
I considered that, thought it unlikely since the motor was recently service
d.
I had a similar failure on my 99 Suburban.
Turn the key; nothing.
Smack the starter with a mallet, it would come to life...
neal
I'm puzzled by the intermittent nature of the
symptom. This implies a root cause that
is transient or loose to rattle around. Having
the starter motor come to rest on a bad pass
in the armature windings could account for such
behavior.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | s64woody(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Opinions on options |
Architecture: Twin battery,alternator and buss system with an electrically dependent
fuel system. Basically, two complete systems with a emergency cross-tie
relay. There are three fuse blocks, one of which I can power via diodes from
each system.
Question: Opinions wanted on FEMA between just powering each boost pump system
off of one of the alternators or using a dedicated, diode powered fuse block
as an essential buss. I can see simplicity in the first option. The second has
some elegance, but there is something of a single point failure there, as well.
Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Opinions on options |
From: s64woody(at)aol.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Opinions on options
Architecture: Twin battery,alternator and buss system with
an electrically dependent fuel system. Basically, two complete
systems with a emergency cross-tie relay. There are three
fuse blocks, one of which I can power via diodes from each system.
Question: Opinions wanted on FEMA between just powering each
boost pump system off of one of the alternators or using a
dedicated, diode powered fuse block as an essential buss. I
can see simplicity in the first option. The second has some
elegance, but there is something of a single point failure there, as well.
That may be much more electrical system than
is necessary . . . but if you're already committed,
run each pump from separate battery busses.
Likelihood of loosing both busses during expenditure
of one tank of fuel is vanishingly small.
If any part of your engine support is electrically
driven, run those items directly from battery
busses as well.
If you have bad smells in the cockpit, you want
to make the entire electrical system "cold" without
affecting engine operation.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Stephen Richards <stephencliverichards(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Problem with starting |
This still suggests to me that a intermittent ground is shorting out the ar
mature or field is shorting out .
Clive
-----Original Message-----
From: "Alec Myers" <alec(at)alecmyers.com>
Sent: =8E19/=8E06/=8E2016 14:51
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Problem with starting
The strangest symptom is that twice the motor has cut out (and the bus volt
age was pulled down) mid-crank while the prop was already turning at a good
starting speed. I think that suggests it's not a bad spot on the commutato
r, for example.
I can rule out mechanical seizure at the crank because when the motor cut,
the prop immediately bounced back off a compression stroke, and (I think) I
can rule out a starter jam because the engine has started and run since.
I thought I was onto something with a possible fracture in the field windin
g but that won't explain things if the motor isn't shunt wound.
On Jun 19, 2016, at 09:29, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectr
ic.com> wrote:
I'm still not convinced you have a motor problem. The chattering relay poi
nts more to circuit / system and low voltage issues.
neal
Except that a contactor powered from the same
battery that is being pulled down by what amounts
to continuous stall current may well drop-out
during closures only to re-close when the contacts
break and stall-current goes away.
12v battery contactors drop at about 2v . . . and
are not likely to be candidates for 'buzzing' but
it's not impossible. A easy experiment would call
for powering the starter contactor from a separate
source . . . like another battery. It may well
stop chattering. But the energies being circulated
will be profound.
I'm puzzled by the intermittent nature of the
symptom. This implies a root cause that
is transient or loose to rattle around. Having
the starter motor come to rest on a bad pass
in the armature windings could account for such
behavior.
It would sure be illuminating to put a data acquisition
system on it to capture all the voltages/currents
during the event.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com> |
| Subject: | Wrong email address - Re-send pls |
I will no longer be checking franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com due to excessive
and uncontrollable spam.
Please re-send your email to my new address:
franz.fux(at)lastfrontierheli.com and make a note of it for the future.
Apologies for the inconvenience,
Franz Fux
Last Frontier Heliskiing - Go Beyond
www.lastfrontierheli.com
---
Head Office: PO Box 1237, Vernon, BC V1T 6N6, CANADA
Tel: 250 558 7980
Fax: 250 558 7981
Reservations: 1-888-655-5566
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wrong email address - Re-send pls |
| From: | John Tipton <jmtipton(at)btopenworld.com> |
Hi Guys
This daily email is getting annoying now
Regards
John
Sent from my iPad
----x--O--x----
> On 20 Jun 2016, at 08:40 am, "Franz Fux" wrote:
>
>
> I will no longer be checking franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com due to excessive
> and uncontrollable spam.
>
> Please re-send your email to my new address:
>
> franz.fux(at)lastfrontierheli.com and make a note of it for the future.
>
> Apologies for the inconvenience,
>
> Franz Fux
> Last Frontier Heliskiing - Go Beyond
> www.lastfrontierheli.com
> ---
>
> Head Office: PO Box 1237, Vernon, BC V1T 6N6, CANADA
>
> Tel: 250 558 7980
> Fax: 250 558 7981
> Reservations: 1-888-655-5566
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Verwey <bob.verwey(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
I had the same problem recently....the thrust washer on the starter was
worn and this caused the end of the commutator to short out intermittently.
Very frustrating as the starter bench tested fine...
On 19 June 2016 at 19:28, Stephen Richards
wrote:
> This still suggests to me that a intermittent ground is shorting out the
> armature or field is shorting out .
> Clive
> ------------------------------
> From: Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com>
> Sent: =8E19/=8E06/=8E2016 14:51
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Problem with starting
>
> The strangest symptom is that twice the motor has cut out (and the bus
> voltage was pulled down) mid-crank while the prop was already turning at
a
> good starting speed. I think that suggests it's not a bad spot on the
> commutator, for example.
>
> I can rule out mechanical seizure at the crank because when the motor cut
,
> the prop immediately bounced back off a compression stroke, and (I think)
I
> can rule out a starter jam because the engine has started and run since.
>
> I thought I was onto something with a possible fracture in the field
> winding but that won't explain things if the motor isn't shunt wound.
>
>
> On Jun 19, 2016, at 09:29, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
>
> I'm still not convinced you have a motor problem. The chattering relay
> points more to circuit / system and low voltage issues.
>
> neal
>
>
> Except that a contactor powered from the same
> battery that is being pulled down by what amounts
> to continuous stall current may well drop-out
> during closures only to re-close when the contacts
> break and stall-current goes away.
>
> 12v battery contactors drop at about 2v . . . and
> are not likely to be candidates for 'buzzing' but
> it's not impossible. A easy experiment would call
> for powering the starter contactor from a separate
> source . . . like another battery. It may well
> stop chattering. But the energies being circulated
> will be profound.
>
> I'm puzzled by the intermittent nature of the
> symptom. This implies a root cause that
> is transient or loose to rattle around. Having
> the starter motor come to rest on a bad pass
> in the armature windings could account for such
> behavior.
>
> It would sure be illuminating to put a data acquisition
> system on it to capture all the voltages/currents
> during the event.
>
> Bob . . .
>
--
Best...
Bob Verwey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobbyPaulk(at)comcast.net |
When asked about aircraft parts or test at an automotive parts store I tell them
it is for "my very high clearance off road vehicle".
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wrong email address - Re-send pls |
At 02:49 AM 6/20/2016, you wrote:
>
>
>Hi Guys
>
>This daily email is getting annoying now
I've emailed him to request that he
UNsubscribe the old address from the
List . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rayj <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net> |
The one I use is the part is for an airboat.
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 06/20/2016 07:54 AM, BobbyPaulk(at)comcast.net wrote:
> When asked about aircraft parts or test at an automotive parts store I
> tell them it is for "my very high clearance off road vehicle".
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
| From: | "erich weaver" <erich.weaver(at)aecom.com> |
Hello Bob
Over on another popular forum, there was recently a discussion on whether it was preferable to have an electrical system with two batteries or with two alternators. Having previously read the Aeroelectric Connection and followed your forum here, my 2 cents worth would advocate for two alternators, as this provides unlimited duration backup; however, many disagreed. In particular, the owner of EFII (www.flyefii.com) said the following:
"Electrical system complexity follows a progression:
1. One batt, one alternator
2. Two batts, one alternator
3. Two batts, two alternators
One batt, two alternators is a problem. If you lose the batt, all you have left
is half wave rectified AC power off the alternator - this means unhappy electronics.
There needs to be a functioning battery in the system to absorb the pulses
from the alternator."
I feel pretty confident that if my battery successfully starts my engine that I
am unlikely to "lose the battery" during a flight, and I also have some doubts
about the need for a battery to absorb pulses from the alternator.
Don't want to start any war of the experts here, but I would welcome your comment,
and may repost your reply to the other forum as a followup, as many do respect
your opinion.
Best regards,
Erich
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457320#457320
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
Are you referring to the Vans forums?
> On Jun 20, 2016, at 17:55, erich weaver wrote:
>
>
> Hello Bob
>
> Over on another popular forum, there was recently a discussion on whether it was preferable to have an electrical system with two batteries or with two alternators. Having previously read the Aeroelectric Connection and followed your forum here, my 2 cents worth would advocate for two alternators, as this provides unlimited duration backup; however, many disagreed. In particular, the owner of EFII (www.flyefii.com) said the following:
>
> "Electrical system complexity follows a progression:
> 1. One batt, one alternator
> 2. Two batts, one alternator
> 3. Two batts, two alternators
>
> One batt, two alternators is a problem. If you lose the batt, all you have left
is half wave rectified AC power off the alternator - this means unhappy electronics.
There needs to be a functioning battery in the system to absorb the
pulses from the alternator."
>
> I feel pretty confident that if my battery successfully starts my engine that
I am unlikely to "lose the battery" during a flight, and I also have some doubts
about the need for a battery to absorb pulses from the alternator.
>
> Don't want to start any war of the experts here, but I would welcome your comment,
and may repost your reply to the other forum as a followup, as many do respect
your opinion.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Erich
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457320#457320
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Lloyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net> |
I like the ". . . very high clearance,. . . . " description. . .
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
----- Original Message -----
From: BobbyPaulk(at)comcast.net
To: aeroelectric-list
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 5:54 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Parts
When asked about aircraft parts or test at an automotive parts store I
tell them it is for "my very high clearance off road vehicle".
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
Erich,
I have a single battery dual alternator system wired like Bobs Z 13-8. I fly in
Remote Alaska and have the Dual ECU EFII system. Twice now I have run into alternator
trouble on a remote gravel bar 2 hours from civilization.
Once was a bad primary alternator and the next time was a pulley that came off
the primary alternator. In both cases, I didn't have use of the primary alternator.
Had I not had a secondary alternator. On the vacuum pad, I would not have
been able to depart because I wouldn't have safely had the battery longevity
to fly to civilization. I would have had to have someone fly parts out.
Since I had a secondary alternator, I switched off the primary, switched on the
secondary, and flew home safely.
I have no regrets and I am happy that I went with this architecture and Bob has
been more than helpful and displays masterful knowledge.
Hope this helps.
Justin.
> On Jun 20, 2016, at 17:55, erich weaver wrote:
>
>
> Hello Bob
>
> Over on another popular forum, there was recently a discussion on whether it was preferable to have an electrical system with two batteries or with two alternators. Having previously read the Aeroelectric Connection and followed your forum here, my 2 cents worth would advocate for two alternators, as this provides unlimited duration backup; however, many disagreed. In particular, the owner of EFII (www.flyefii.com) said the following:
>
> "Electrical system complexity follows a progression:
> 1. One batt, one alternator
> 2. Two batts, one alternator
> 3. Two batts, two alternators
>
> One batt, two alternators is a problem. If you lose the batt, all you have left
is half wave rectified AC power off the alternator - this means unhappy electronics.
There needs to be a functioning battery in the system to absorb the
pulses from the alternator."
>
> I feel pretty confident that if my battery successfully starts my engine that
I am unlikely to "lose the battery" during a flight, and I also have some doubts
about the need for a battery to absorb pulses from the alternator.
>
> Don't want to start any war of the experts here, but I would welcome your comment,
and may repost your reply to the other forum as a followup, as many do respect
your opinion.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Erich
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457320#457320
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
| From: | "erich weaver" <erich.weaver(at)aecom.com> |
All makes sense to me Justin; I followed the Z-13/8 architecture as well on my
RV-7A. Yes, original post was on the VAF forum. Just a bit surprised by the
response from EFII.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457325#457325
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
| From: | C&K <yellowduckduo(at)gmail.com> |
Surprised indeed.
I've never seen an alternator that normally put out "half wave rectified
power" and I have seen automotive EFI systems run fine with a
disconnected battery.
There have been cases of some alternators going offline when overloaded
to the point where the voltage drops way off but that isn't going to
happen with a PM alternator. I'd want to suss out that scenario though
with the alternator of choice if there are any heavy loads in the
aircraft. I just used two tiny Dekka batteries that together weigh the
same as the popular odysey battery and called it done. One has been in
use for 10 years and the other 9 years now which for me makes the
economics darn good compared to maintaining a single larger battery.
Ken
On 20/06/2016 7:06 PM, erich weaver wrote:
>
> All makes sense to me Justin; I followed the Z-13/8 architecture as well on
my RV-7A. Yes, original post was on the VAF forum. Just a bit surprised by the
response from EFII.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457325#457325
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Can not argue with the order of complexity. As for which architecture is best,
it is a matter of personal preference. A battery failing in flight is unlikely.
Even if it did, how would you know it? What are the symptoms? If the pilot
correctly identifies a battery failure, what is the correct action to take
and why? I question the statement, "all you have left is half wave rectified
AC power off the alternator". Most alternators put out rectified 3-phase full-wave
current, not half wave DC. I agree with your statement, "I also have some
doubts about the need for a battery to absorb pulses from the alternator."
Our electrical guru has stated that avionics should be designed to handle anything
an aircraft electrical system can throw at it.
The ideal electrical system will keep critical equipment functioning even if a
failure occurs and without requiring any action by the pilot, except to make
a note to do repairs after landing.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457329#457329
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with starting |
Progress.... I now have the motor on the test bench displaying its sometimes
-run sometimes-short-circuit behaviour. And I have video of both.
Given that I just had it overhauled, new brushes etc., I think I am going to
cut my losses and get a replacement motor - same model, from Hartzel.
On Jun 19, 2016, at 13:28, Stephen Richards
wrote:
This still suggests to me that a intermittent ground is shorting out the arm
ature or field is shorting out .
Clive
From: Alec Myers
Sent: =8E19/=8E06/=8E2016 14:51
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Problem with starting
The strangest symptom is that twice the motor has cut out (and the bus volta
ge was pulled down) mid-crank while the prop was already turning at a good s
tarting speed. I think that suggests it's not a bad spot on the commutator, f
or example.
I can rule out mechanical seizure at the crank because when the motor cut, t
he prop immediately bounced back off a compression stroke, and (I think) I c
an rule out a starter jam because the engine has started and run since.
I thought I was onto something with a possible fracture in the field winding
but that won't explain things if the motor isn't shunt wound.
> On Jun 19, 2016, at 09:29, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroelect
ric.com> wrote:
>
>
> I'm still not convinced you have a motor problem. The chattering relay po
ints more to circuit / system and low voltage issues.
>
> neal
Except that a contactor powered from the same
battery that is being pulled down by what amounts
to continuous stall current may well drop-out
during closures only to re-close when the contacts
break and stall-current goes away.
12v battery contactors drop at about 2v . . . and
are not likely to be candidates for 'buzzing' but
it's not impossible. A easy experiment would call
for powering the starter contactor from a separate
source . . . like another battery. It may well
stop chattering. But the energies being circulated
will be profound.
I'm puzzled by the intermittent nature of the
symptom. This implies a root cause that
is transient or loose to rattle around. Having
the starter motor come to rest on a bad pass
in the armature windings could account for such
behavior.
It would sure be illuminating to put a data acquisition
system on it to capture all the voltages/currents
during the event.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rayj <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | OT: PCB coating removal |
Greetings,
I'm working on a PCB that has a clear dip coating. Originally made in
the 70s-80s. The coating will melt with a soldering iron, but I'm
wondering if there is a better way to remove the coating.
The component I'm working is a quartz crystal that is part of the tone
generator on lineman's test handset. If any one is aware of a tutorial
for identifying the value of the crystal, I'd sure appreciate a head's up.
TIA
--
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)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
Robert at EFII wants you to use his bus manager. It's an additional $600-800 and
can't handle 2 alternators. Its economically advantageous for him to recommend
a system that works with his bus manager.
I don't want to sound like I'm trash talking Robert here. I'm not. He has incredible
customer service and is a stand up guy!
Justin
> On Jun 20, 2016, at 18:06, erich weaver wrote:
>
>
> All makes sense to me Justin; I followed the Z-13/8 architecture as well on
my RV-7A. Yes, original post was on the VAF forum. Just a bit surprised by the
response from EFII.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457325#457325
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
If you want the EFII Bus Manager set up for two alternators, you can get it
that way. It can indeed "handle two alternators."
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 5:18 PM, Justin Jones
wrote:
> jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
>
> Robert at EFII wants you to use his bus manager. It's an additional
> $600-800 and can't handle 2 alternators. Its economically advantageous for
> him to recommend a system that works with his bus manager.
>
> I don't want to sound like I'm trash talking Robert here. I'm not. He has
> incredible customer service and is a stand up guy!
>
> Justin
>
> > On Jun 20, 2016, at 18:06, erich weaver wrote:
> >
> erich.weaver(at)aecom.com>
> >
> > All makes sense to me Justin; I followed the Z-13/8 architecture as
> well on my RV-7A. Yes, original post was on the VAF forum. Just a bit
> surprised by the response from EFII.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457325#457325
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
Good to know. Thanks Ken. It doesn't show this on the manuals available onli
ne
> On Jun 20, 2016, at 20:33, Ken Ryan wrote:
>
> If you want the EFII Bus Manager set up for two alternators, you can get i
t that way. It can indeed "handle two alternators."
>
>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 5:18 PM, Justin Jones wrote:
ring.com>
>>
>> Robert at EFII wants you to use his bus manager. It's an additional $600-
800 and can't handle 2 alternators. Its economically advantageous for him to
recommend a system that works with his bus manager.
>>
>> I don't want to sound like I'm trash talking Robert here. I'm not. He has
incredible customer service and is a stand up guy!
>>
>> Justin
>>
>> > On Jun 20, 2016, at 18:06, erich weaver wrote:
>> >
ecom.com>
>> >
>> > All makes sense to me Justin; I followed the Z-13/8 architecture as we
ll on my RV-7A. Yes, original post was on the VAF forum. Just a bit surpris
ed by the response from EFII.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Read this topic online here:
>> >
>> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457325#457325
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> -
>> Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.
com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>> ==========
>> FORUMS -
>> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> WIKI -
>> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> b Site -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contributio
n
>> ==========
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
I've got one that has never been used (that I am not using) if anybody is
looking for a good price :) When I bought mine it was an either/or on the
two alternator set up, but Robert said the next run would have a jumper so
that it could be used either way (one alternator or two). I don't know if
that has happened yet or not.
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Justin Jones
wrote:
> Good to know. Thanks Ken. It doesn't show this on the manuals available
> online
>
> On Jun 20, 2016, at 20:33, Ken Ryan wrote:
>
> If you want the EFII Bus Manager set up for two alternators, you can get
> it that way. It can indeed "handle two alternators."
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 5:18 PM, Justin Jones
> wrote:
>
>> jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
>>
>> Robert at EFII wants you to use his bus manager. It's an additional
>> $600-800 and can't handle 2 alternators. Its economically advantageous for
>> him to recommend a system that works with his bus manager.
>>
>> I don't want to sound like I'm trash talking Robert here. I'm not. He has
>> incredible customer service and is a stand up guy!
>>
>> Justin
>>
>> > On Jun 20, 2016, at 18:06, erich weaver wrote:
>> >
>> erich.weaver(at)aecom.com>
>> >
>> > All makes sense to me Justin; I followed the Z-13/8 architecture as
>> well on my RV-7A. Yes, original post was on the VAF forum. Just a bit
>> surprised by the response from EFII.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Read this topic online here:
>> >
>> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457325#457325
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> -
>> Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>> ==========
>> FORUMS -
>> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> WIKI -
>> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> b Site -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
Robert may take yours and modify it for you. He is an awesome guy and I'm be
yond satisfied with the EFII products and his customer service!
> On Jun 20, 2016, at 21:03, Ken Ryan wrote:
>
> I've got one that has never been used (that I am not using) if anybody is l
ooking for a good price :) When I bought mine it was an either/or on the two
alternator set up, but Robert said the next run would have a jumper so that
it could be used either way (one alternator or two). I don't know if that h
as happened yet or not.
>
>
>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Justin Jones wrote:
>> Good to know. Thanks Ken. It doesn't show this on the manuals available o
nline
>>
>>> On Jun 20, 2016, at 20:33, Ken Ryan wrote:
>>>
>>> If you want the EFII Bus Manager set up for two alternators, you can get
it that way. It can indeed "handle two alternators."
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 5:18 PM, Justin Jones wrote:
spring.com>
>>>>
>>>> Robert at EFII wants you to use his bus manager. It's an additional $60
0-800 and can't handle 2 alternators. Its economically advantageous for him t
o recommend a system that works with his bus manager.
>>>>
>>>> I don't want to sound like I'm trash talking Robert here. I'm not. He h
as incredible customer service and is a stand up guy!
>>>>
>>>> Justin
>>>>
>>>> > On Jun 20, 2016, at 18:06, erich weaver wrot
e:
>>>> >
@aecom.com>
>>>> >
>>>> > All makes sense to me Justin; I followed the Z-13/8 architecture as w
ell on my RV-7A. Yes, original post was on the VAF forum. Just a bit surpri
sed by the response from EFII.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Read this topic online here:
>>>> >
>>>> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457325#457325
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>> -
>>>> Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>>>> ==========
>>>> FORUMS -
>>>> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>> ==========
>>>> WIKI -
>>>> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>>>> ==========
>>>> b Site -
>>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribut
ion
>>>> ==========
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
At 06:06 PM 6/20/2016, you wrote:
>
>
>All makes sense to me Justin; I followed the Z-13/8 architecture as
>well on my RV-7A. Yes, original post was on the VAF forum. Just a
>bit surprised by the response from EFII.
. . . which was?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
At 04:55 PM 6/20/2016, you wrote:
>
>
>Hello Bob
>
>Over on another popular forum, there was recently a discussion on
>whether it was preferable to have an electrical system with two
>batteries or with two alternators. Having previously read the
>Aeroelectric Connection and followed your forum here, my 2 cents
>worth would advocate for two alternators, as this provides unlimited
>duration backup; however, many disagreed. In particular, the owner
>of EFII (www.flyefii.com) said the following:
>
>"Electrical system complexity follows a progression:
> 1. One batt, one alternator
> 2. Two batts, one alternator
> 3. Two batts, two alternators
>
>One batt, two alternators is a problem. If you lose the batt, all
>you have left is half wave rectified AC power off the alternator -
>this means unhappy electronics. There needs to be a functioning
>battery in the system to absorb the pulses from the alternator."
>
>I feel pretty confident that if my battery successfully starts my
>engine that I am unlikely to "lose the battery" during a flight, and
>I also have some doubts about the need for a battery to absorb
>pulses from the alternator.
Okay, this is easy . . .
A battery SHOULD be the most reliable source of energy
in your airplane. Simple, no moving parts, easy to quantify
for performance.
Any time I've had a customer cite a battery 'failure',
I've had to ask, "What was the last cap check you did . . .
and how long ago?"
Like tires, oil and even propellers . . . the battery
is a commodity. It is subject to stresses of environment
and circumstance. Yet unlike tires and props that get
pre-flight check and oil that gets changed out every so
many hours . . . batteries tend to be treated in airplanes
like they do in our cars. Run 'em until they don't crank
the engine any more.
A battery that fails to get your engine started has
been essentially USELESS as back-up energy source for
a long time.
Z-13/8 was crafted with the notion that the SD-8
alternator was NOT installed to back up DUAL failures
of main alternator AND a battery . . . but simply to
run 8A or LESS of endurance loads after a single failure
of the main alternator. The idea was to hold all the
battery's contained energies in RESERVE for descent
and approach to landing.
If one is crafting a plan-B, plan-C or any other
plan assuming that alternators are there to back up
a failed battery simply does not appreciate the need
for KNOWING that your prop leading edges, alternator
drive belt, tires, oil levels AND BATTERY are ready
to deliver to mission requirements.
A battery that fails cap check for minimum battery
only endurance probably cranks the engine just fine. Getting
the engine started is NOT a substitute for battery
cap check. Z-13/8, when operated within its design
goals, gives you as much mission reliability as any
other architecture.
The biggest advantage of Z-13/8 is savings in WEIGHT.
A 3 pound alternator gives you unlimited endurance
at e-bus loads of 10A or less thus holding the battery
completely in reserve . . . which should allow you to
arrive at the airport of intended destination with
lights a-blazing and all the screens lit up in
vivid colors.
It's all about energy management and preventative
maintenance.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
At 06:44 PM 6/20/2016, you wrote:
>
>Surprised indeed.
>I've never seen an alternator that normally put out "half wave
>rectified power" and I have seen automotive EFI systems run fine
>with a disconnected battery.
The SD-8 is a single phase output with considerable
'trash' on the output . . .
>There have been cases of some alternators going offline when
>overloaded to the point where the voltage drops way off but that
>isn't going to happen with a PM alternator. I'd want to suss out
>that scenario though with the alternator of choice if there are any
>heavy loads in the aircraft. I just used two tiny Dekka batteries
>that together weigh the same as the popular odysey battery and
>called it done. One has been in use for 10 years and the other 9
>years now which for me makes the economics darn good compared to
>maintaining a single larger battery.
What did your batteries do at the last cap check?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
At 06:52 PM 6/20/2016, you wrote:
>
>Can not argue with the order of complexity. As for which
>architecture is best, it is a matter of personal preference.
How is parts count x weight x cost of ownership to achieve
the highest practical system reliability a matter of
'personal preferences'?
> A battery failing in flight is unlikely. Even if it did, how
> would you know it? What are the symptoms? If the pilot correctly
> identifies a battery failure, what is the correct action to take
> and why? I question the statement, "all you have left is half wave
> rectified AC power off the alternator". Most alternators put out
> rectified 3-phase full-wave current, not half wave DC. I agree
> with your statement, "I also have some doubts about the need for a
> battery to absorb pulses from the alternator." Our electrical guru
> has stated that avionics should be designed to handle anything an
> aircraft electrical system can throw at it.
> The ideal electrical system will keep critical equipment
> functioning even if a failure occurs and without requiring any
> action by the pilot, except to make a note to do repairs after landing.
Exactly. Check out the DAS plots for SD-8 output
under various combinations of load, battery and
presence of a 'filter' capacitor at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/Alternator_Performance/SD-8_Noise-Plots/SD-8_Noise_Data.pdf
In particular, page 8 where an SD-8 is operated
with a 47Kuf capacitor, NO battery, and 8.8A
load while supporting a 14.5v bus.
Note that ripple was 129 mv pk-pk and 38mv RMS.
My question of any detractors of SD-8 operations
would be, what is it about the quality of this
output that is deleterious to your product?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
At 09:25 PM 6/20/2016, you wrote:
>Robert may take yours and modify it for you. He is an awesome guy
>and I'm beyond satisfied with the EFII products and his customer service!
I would be interested to know how system reliability
is improved by any process that goes beyond running
all engine dependent components directly from a
battery bus . . . as a general rule, system reliability
DOES NOT improve with increased in parts count or
operational complexity.
All too often, system integrators get wrapped around
the "keep it powered up at all costs" axle while loosing
sight of vulnerabilities of the electrically dependent
device or system.
The LA-IFP accident
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Accidents/N811HB_Feb2008_LA-IVp/
is one such example. The guy was so worried about keeping
BOTH ignition systems powered up that he lost sight
of both single points of failure and loss of integrity
due to poor architecture.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com> |
| Subject: | Wrong email address - Re-send pls |
I will no longer be checking franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com due to excessive
and uncontrollable spam.
Please re-send your email to my new address:
franz.fux(at)lastfrontierheli.com and make a note of it for the future.
Apologies for the inconvenience,
Franz Fux
Last Frontier Heliskiing - Go Beyond
www.lastfrontierheli.com
---
Head Office: PO Box 1237, Vernon, BC V1T 6N6, CANADA
Tel: 250 558 7980
Fax: 250 558 7981
Reservations: 1-888-655-5566
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wrong email address - friggin autoreply |
| From: | Rob Turk <matronics(at)rtist.nl> |
This guy seems to have set up an auto-reply. The options to make this
stop are to have the moderator manually remove him from the list, or to
send a 500-page fax to the number listed below, requesting him to remove
his auto-reply.
On 6/21/2016 9:30 AM, Franz Fux wrote:
>
> I will no longer be checking franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com due to excessive
> and uncontrollable spam.
>
> Please re-send your email to my new address:
>
> franz.fux(at)lastfrontierheli.com and make a note of it for the future.
>
> Apologies for the inconvenience,
>
> Franz Fux
> Last Frontier Heliskiing - Go Beyond
> www.lastfrontierheli.com
> ---
>
> Head Office: PO Box 1237, Vernon, BC V1T 6N6, CANADA
>
> Tel: 250 558 7980
> Fax: 250 558 7981
> Reservations: 1-888-655-5566
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wrong email address - friggin autoreply |
At 02:53 AM 6/21/2016, you wrote:
>
>This guy seems to have set up an auto-reply. The options to make
>this stop are to have the moderator manually remove him from the
>list, or to send a 500-page fax to the number listed below,
>requesting him to remove his auto-reply.
I've asked Matt to remove his old address from
the list server's recognized addresses
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | do I need to change my capacitor |
| From: | "AirEupora" <AirEupora(at)sbcglobal.net> |
When I built my plane I got a copy of Bob N Electrical manual and started following
his advice on the way I should build my system. One of the first things
I did was install the capacitor on the Jabiru electrical charging system. That
was four years ago and hundred hours. I have had a couple of things happen
to charging system. Burnt Molex plug, replace with block and terminals. This
last incident was the voltage regulator went out, but it took couple of systems
with it. I was flying with the Trio/MGL auto-pilot on and the circuit breaker
popped. I waited a minute then pushed it back in and it popped again. I
left it out for the rest of the flight. I observed that my voltage had dropped
to 12.8, but it did not enter into my mind that I had loss voltage. Over
the next couple of flights I started having starting problems after a flight.
I finally figured out that my voltage regulator was bad. I replace it. Then
started finding burnt resistors on the auto-pilot wiring, a burnt diode on the
battery charging wire. It was still working correctly. Then Matt, at MGL
found my mother board damaged.
Today I read on the Europa List that I should check or replace my capacitor. Apparently
there is only one check I can do. I'm wondering if I should just replace
it for peace of mind as I'm planning on heading to KOSH in July.
Rick Stockton
N120EJ
3300L
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457354#457354
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: do I need to change my capacitor |
Subject: AeroElectric-List: do I need to change my capacitor
From: "AirEupora" <AirEupora(at)sbcglobal.net>
When I built my plane I got a copy of Bob N Electrical manual and
started following his advice on the way I should build my
system. One of the first things I did was install the capacitor on
the Jabiru electrical charging system. That was four years ago and
hundred hours. I have had a couple of things happen to charging system.
Burnt Molex plug, replace with block and terminals.
These connectors would not have been my
first choice for power wiring . . . I remember
seeing the open-barrel, b-crimp pins from
AMP, Inc back about 1968 when they were being
incorporated into Cessna's production harnesses.
They looked pretty cheesy to me . . . but
they have stood the test of time.
Having said that, they ARE very process and
environment sensitive. They must be properly
crimped and they have to be kept dry. It would
have been interesting to inspect the carcass
to see if we could deduce root cause. In any
case, the 'upgrade' to terminal block was
a safe bet.
This last incident was the voltage regulator went out, but it took
couple of systems with it. I was flying with the Trio/MGL auto-pilot
on and the circuit breaker popped. I waited a minute then pushed it
back in and it popped again. I left it out for the rest of the
flight. I observed that my voltage had dropped to 12.8, but it did
not enter into my mind that I had loss voltage.
If you had a low volts warning system, it would
have been flashing for anything below 13.5 volts.
The battery cannot be charged with voltages that
low. 14.2 to 14.6 is the target.
Over the next couple of flights I started having starting problems
after a flight. I finally figured out that my voltage regulator was
bad. I replace it. Then started finding burnt resistors on the
auto-pilot wiring, a burnt diode on the battery charging wire. It
was still working correctly. Then Matt, at MGL found my mother board damaged.
Where is this diode in the system? Did you pattern
your system to a Z-figure?
Today I read on the Europa List that I should check or replace my
capacitor. Apparently there is only one check I can do. I'm
wondering if I should just replace it for peace of mind as I'm
planning on heading to KOSH in July.
The capacitor is not a critical operational
device. Unless you've suffered an extended
over-voltage condition, the capacitor is
probably fine. Do you have ov protection?
What are your bus voltage readings with the
new regulator? Can you share a copy of your
architecture drawings with us?
Did your autopilot repair guy offer a probable
cause for what was discovered in the damage
patterns?
It's not clear to me that 'smoked' components
are necessarily linked to regulator failure
unless there was a sustained over-voltage
condition prior to the failure that caused it
to go belly-up. The constellation of failures
you've cited may well be separate incidents
with their own root causes.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | battery question |
I am installing a Rotax 914 which requires an electric fuel pump to run. My
electrical system architecture will have the primary pump running directly
off the integrated generator. The primary pump will be the ONLY load on the
generator. The backup pump will run off the battery bus, connected to the
external alternator. My question is, does it make any sense to include a
battery in the generator/primary pump system?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
At 12:09 PM 6/21/2016, you wrote:
>I am installing a Rotax 914 which requires an electric fuel pump to
>run. My electrical system architecture will have the primary pump
>running directly off the integrated generator. The primary pump will
>be the ONLY load on the generator. The backup pump will run off the
>battery bus, connected to the external alternator. My question is,
>does it make any sense to include a battery in the generator/primary
>pump system?
What does your system architecture look like?
Are you duplicating a system already flying
or is this something original?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
It was suggested to me by the Rotax dealer in Canada. Like I said, the
integrated generator only runs the main fuel pump. There is a 22K capacitor
specified. The external alternator powers the main bus and charges the
battery. There has been some recent discussion suggesting a need for a
battery in the system, but I was not planning one on the generator-fuel
pump circuit.
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 12:09 PM 6/21/2016, you wrote:
>
> I am installing a Rotax 914 which requires an electric fuel pump to run.
> My electrical system architecture will have the primary pump running
> directly off the integrated generator. The primary pump will be the ONLY
> load on the generator. The backup pump will run off the battery bus,
> connected to the external alternator. My question is, does it make any
> sense to include a battery in the generator/primary pump system?
>
>
> What does your system architecture look like?
> Are you duplicating a system already flying
> or is this something original?
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
At 02:03 PM 6/21/2016, you wrote:
>It was suggested to me by the Rotax dealer in Canada. Like I said,
>the integrated generator only runs the main fuel pump. There is a
>22K capacitor specified. The external alternator powers the main bus
>and charges the battery. There has been some recent discussion
>suggesting a need for a battery in the system, but I was not
>planning one on the generator-fuel pump circuit.
Giving well considered advice based on the information
you've supplied is difficult if not fraught with
risk. We're viewing your system through a 'knothole'.
With that much generation ability, consider Figures Z-13/8
in the 'Connection.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z13-8T.pdf
Use your external alternator as the MAIN and
the built in alternator as the STANDBY. Wire
the main pump to the battery bus, the standby
pump to the main bus.
This architecture has been vetted by hundreds of
builders over the past 20+ years and offers
very high system reliability with no weight
penalties over what the Rotax folks might offer.
Rotax builds pretty good engines but their
expertise in aircraft electrical systems is
not well demonstrated.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
Thanks Bob. I'll look at it.
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 02:03 PM 6/21/2016, you wrote:
>
> It was suggested to me by the Rotax dealer in Canada. Like I said, the
> integrated generator only runs the main fuel pump. There is a 22K capacitor
> specified. The external alternator powers the main bus and charges the
> battery. There has been some recent discussion suggesting a need for a
> battery in the system, but I was not planning one on the generator-fuel
> pump circuit.
>
>
> Giving well considered advice based on the information
> you've supplied is difficult if not fraught with
> risk. We're viewing your system through a 'knothole'.
>
> With that much generation ability, consider Figures Z-13/8
> in the 'Connection.
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z13-8T.pdf
>
> Use your external alternator as the MAIN and
> the built in alternator as the STANDBY. Wire
> the main pump to the battery bus, the standby
> pump to the main bus.
>
> This architecture has been vetted by hundreds of
> builders over the past 20+ years and offers
> very high system reliability with no weight
> penalties over what the Rotax folks might offer.
>
> Rotax builds pretty good engines but their
> expertise in aircraft electrical systems is
> not well demonstrated.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
Am I correct in thinking that if I wanted to do away with the endurance bus
I could eliminate the relay (1N4001) and the switch that energizes it?
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Ken Ryan wrote:
> Thanks Bob. I'll look at it.
>
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
>> At 02:03 PM 6/21/2016, you wrote:
>>
>> It was suggested to me by the Rotax dealer in Canada. Like I said, the
>> integrated generator only runs the main fuel pump. There is a 22K capacitor
>> specified. The external alternator powers the main bus and charges the
>> battery. There has been some recent discussion suggesting a need for a
>> battery in the system, but I was not planning one on the generator-fuel
>> pump circuit.
>>
>>
>> Giving well considered advice based on the information
>> you've supplied is difficult if not fraught with
>> risk. We're viewing your system through a 'knothole'.
>>
>> With that much generation ability, consider Figures Z-13/8
>> in the 'Connection.
>>
>> http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z13-8T.pdf
>>
>> Use your external alternator as the MAIN and
>> the built in alternator as the STANDBY. Wire
>> the main pump to the battery bus, the standby
>> pump to the main bus.
>>
>> This architecture has been vetted by hundreds of
>> builders over the past 20+ years and offers
>> very high system reliability with no weight
>> penalties over what the Rotax folks might offer.
>>
>> Rotax builds pretty good engines but their
>> expertise in aircraft electrical systems is
>> not well demonstrated.
>>
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
At 04:08 PM 6/21/2016, you wrote:
>Am I correct in thinking that if I wanted to do away with the
>endurance bus I could eliminate the relay (1N4001) and the switch
>that energizes it?
The endurance bus would be loaded with
only those goodies you would operate from
the stand-by alternator . . . generally
limited to 15-18 amps which is the
internal alternator's rated output.
Everything else goes on the Main bus.
During loss of main alternator, you continue
flight to airport of intended destination
with the battery contactor OFF, E-bus
alternate feed switch ON, S/B alternator
switch ON.
When airport is in sight, you now have all
the battery's reserves available to close
the battery contactor and operate all the
goodies for descent and approach to landing.
The e-bus is an integral component of the
energy management philosophy on which Z-13/8
is based. The big advantage for you is that
unlike an SD-8 s/b alternator mounted to the
back of a Lycoming, YOUR s/b alternator is about
twice that size. You have much larger e-bus
options for the endurance mode of flight.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
I already have the ability to turn each component on or off with its own
switch. Separate ebus with its wiring and relay etc. seem superfluous.
Sent from my Android. Sorry Steve.
On Jun 21, 2016 13:27, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 04:08 PM 6/21/2016, you wrote:
>
> Am I correct in thinking that if I wanted to do away with the endurance
> bus I could eliminate the relay (1N4001) and the switch that energizes it?
>
>
> The endurance bus would be loaded with
> only those goodies you would operate from
> the stand-by alternator . . . generally
> limited to 15-18 amps which is the
> internal alternator's rated output.
>
> Everything else goes on the Main bus.
> During loss of main alternator, you continue
> flight to airport of intended destination
> with the battery contactor OFF, E-bus
> alternate feed switch ON, S/B alternator
> switch ON.
>
> When airport is in sight, you now have all
> the battery's reserves available to close
> the battery contactor and operate all the
> goodies for descent and approach to landing.
>
> The e-bus is an integral component of the
> energy management philosophy on which Z-13/8
> is based. The big advantage for you is that
> unlike an SD-8 s/b alternator mounted to the
> back of a Lycoming, YOUR s/b alternator is about
> twice that size. You have much larger e-bus
> options for the endurance mode of flight.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
What advantage does an additional battery offer?
email me at fransew at gmail
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457369#457369
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
I'm not saying that a battery offers any advantages. I'm asking whether or
not it is necessary to have a battery in the system. Another poster on this
forum breached the idea (just a few days ago) that a battery might be
necessary to "smooth" the output. I "think" that idea was debunked, but I'm
never quite sure how to interpret some of the responses. In any event, that
discussion was about a "failed" battery. I have not seen the idea of
battery elimination discussed. I've been reviewing Z-13/8 and it seems to
have some advantages but also seems to add unnecessary complications.
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:59 PM, user9253 wrote:
>
> What advantage does an additional battery offer?
> email me at fransew at gmail
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457369#457369
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
At 04:34 PM 6/21/2016, you wrote:
>I already have the ability to turn each
>component on or off with its own
>switch.=C2 Separate ebus with its wiring and relay etc. seem superfluous.
The e-bus is NOT an avionics bus . . . it's
a plan-b configuration tool for gathering
a REDUCED electrical load onto an ENDURANCE
bus. It's a way to do all of your plan-b
authorship on the ground. When the LV warning
light comes on, flip 3 switches and trundle
on to airport of intended destination.
It's also a dual-source bus that functions
in the rare event of loss of battery contactor.
It is powered up from the main bus through
the normal feed diode . . . main bus up . . .
e-bus is up.
Have you done a load analysis to know
what energy is needed to get into an
optimized endurance mode?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
I don't think it's a big deal to flip a couple of switches if the LV light
comes on. I have done a load analysis, but I don't completely understand
what you mean by "optimized endurance mode."
The only thing necessary to keep the airplane in the air is one fuel pump,
approximately 5 amps. This is a VFR only airplane, so nothing else is
really necessary to get home safely.
The EFIS is Dynon with their proprietary backup battery.
If everything is turned on and working, the draw is about 25 amps (peak).
With the system I already planned, the primary fuel pump is driven by the
generator in an autonomous system. There isn't even a fuel pump switch in
this system. The system consists of generator, regulator, capacitor, fuel
pump, inline fuse, momentary contact switch to energize the generator, and
the wiring to connect things together.
The auxiliary fuel pump is switched off a battery bus (not really a bus,
just a wire from the hot side of the battery relay) with an inline fuse.
Everything else runs off the main bus, which is connected to the external
alternator and battery.
If the generator (or regulator) fails, the main fuel pump stops but there
is still the battery and the alternator to power the auxiliary fuel pump
and keep the engine running.
If the alternator fails, the engine keeps running because the main fuel
pump is not affected. The main bus becomes powered by the battery.
Depending upon the situation load shedding might be desirable to preserve
enough battery power to run the aux fuel pump for landing (normal takeoff
and landings use both pumps).
It seems the worst case scenario is the generator failure, as that takes
out the main fuel pump and should the auxiliary pump fail, the airplane
comes down.
I don't really know what happens if the EarthX ETX36C lithium battery
fails. Hopefully the airplane does not burn up in flight.
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 04:34 PM 6/21/2016, you wrote:
>
> I already have the ability to turn each component on or off with its own
> switch.=C3=82 Separate ebus with its wiring and relay etc. seem superflu
ous.
>
>
> The e-bus is NOT an avionics bus . . . it's
> a plan-b configuration tool for gathering
> a REDUCED electrical load onto an ENDURANCE
> bus. It's a way to do all of your plan-b
> authorship on the ground. When the LV warning
> light comes on, flip 3 switches and trundle
> on to airport of intended destination.
>
> It's also a dual-source bus that functions
> in the rare event of loss of battery contactor.
>
> It is powered up from the main bus through
> the normal feed diode . . . main bus up . . .
> e-bus is up.
>
> Have you done a load analysis to know
> what energy is needed to get into an
> optimized endurance mode?
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
Maybe a little off topic, but if anyone is worried about the single battery i
dea, I installed the EarthX set of jumper wires connecting directly to the b
attery (pos and neg). They come to the instrument panel and terminate in a s
ocket. It's the install kit that EarthX sells with their Lithium jump pack. W
hole kit is less than 1lb. It will work to jumpstart the plane (ask how I kn
ow) and it will extend battery life if you loose all alternators on your sys
tem.
The jump pack can't be recharged by plugging it in during flight. Only by pl
ugging it in to the charger that comes with it. It also charges any usb devi
ce.
Justin
> On Jun 21, 2016, at 18:32, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroelect
ric.com> wrote:
>
> At 04:34 PM 6/21/2016, you wrote:
>
>> I already have the ability to turn each component on or off with its own s
witch.=C3=82 Separate ebus with its wiring and relay etc. seem superfluous.
>
> The e-bus is NOT an avionics bus . . . it's
> a plan-b configuration tool for gathering
> a REDUCED electrical load onto an ENDURANCE
> bus. It's a way to do all of your plan-b
> authorship on the ground. When the LV warning
> light comes on, flip 3 switches and trundle
> on to airport of intended destination.
>
> It's also a dual-source bus that functions
> in the rare event of loss of battery contactor.
>
> It is powered up from the main bus through
> the normal feed diode . . . main bus up . . .
> e-bus is up.
>
> Have you done a load analysis to know
> what energy is needed to get into an
> optimized endurance mode?
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
kenryan, Your electrical system sounds perfect to me. Why change a proven design
by adding more weight, cost, time, and complexity? A backup to a backup is
not needed unless someone can offer data showing that the primary fuel pump will
perform better or last longer with a battery added to the system.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457376#457376
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: battery question |
Thanks Joe, that's what I'm thinking too.
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 3:23 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> kenryan, Your electrical system sounds perfect to me. Why change a proven
> design by adding more weight, cost, time, and complexity? A backup to a
> backup is not needed unless someone can offer data showing that the primary
> fuel pump will perform better or last longer with a battery added to the
> system.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457376#457376
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: OT: PCB coating removal |
| From: | "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com> |
I don't recall a crystal in my old 1013A, but be that as it may, it seems odd
that someone would use an xtal to generate audio tones unless they needed
extraordinary frequency precision (an a lot of divider steps).
You might try a bit of MEK on a corner of the board. it should not hurt the components,
but might remove the PCB and component printing. The old
potting compounds were pretty resistant to attack.
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457398#457398
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: OT: PCB coating removal |
| From: | rayj <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net> |
Thanks Ira,
I'll give mek a try. The board is from an old telephone lineman's test
hand set so it's generating 12 tones for dialing.
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 06/24/2016 07:08 AM, rampil wrote:
>
> I don't recall a crystal in my old 1013A, but be that as it may, it seems odd
> that someone would use an xtal to generate audio tones unless they needed
> extraordinary frequency precision (an a lot of divider steps).
>
> You might try a bit of MEK on a corner of the board. it should not hurt the components,
but might remove the PCB and component printing. The old
> potting compounds were pretty resistant to attack.
>
> --------
> Ira N224XS
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457398#457398
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: OT: PCB coating removal |
At 10:27 AM 6/24/2016, you wrote:
>
>Thanks Ira,
>
>I'll give mek a try. The board is from an old telephone lineman's
>test hand set so it's generating 12 tones for dialing.
Brings back memories . . . the DTMF tone encoders
of bygone times were indeed crystal controlled.
Here is an exemplar component.
http://tinyurl.com/hzxdjgw
Very popular devices in the ham radio repeater
communities 40 or so years ago.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: OT: PCB coating removal |
| From: | "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com> |
Ah yes, the sweet simple days of in-band signaling and Cap'n Crunch ;)
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457421#457421
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Master contactor temp? |
I was having the altimeter/transponder check done recently when I noticed the master
contactor was hot. Too hot to touch for very long. Now I've never touched
a master contactor before so I don't know what "normal" is (OAT was in the
mid 90's).
When I got back to the hangar, I turned on the master and checked it with my point-and-shoot
thermometer. I was seeing around 120 after about 5 minutes. I think
it was a bit hotter while at the shop but I'm positive.
Once back at home, I pulled up the data sheet for the White-Rodgers 90-907 solenoid
and the only reference I can find for temperature is "Temperature Range
-40F to 122F"
I don't know if that range is ambient or device. If it's device, then I'm right
at the upper limit.
Do I need to be worried? Time for a new master contactor?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457424#457424
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
At 07:17 AM 6/25/2016, you wrote:
<don@velocity-xl.com>
>
>I was having the altimeter/transponder check
>done recently when I noticed the master
>contactor was hot. Too hot to touch for very
>long. Now I've never touched a master contactor
>before so I don't know what "normal" is (OAT was in the mid 90's).
>
>When I got back to the hangar, I turned on the
>master and checked it with my point-and-shoot
>thermometer. I was seeing around 120 after
>about 5 minutes. I think it was a bit hotter
>while at the shop but I'm positive.
>
>Once back at home, I pulled up the data sheet
>for the White-Rodgers 90-907 solenoid and the
>only reference I can find for temperature is
>"Temperature Range =93=93 -40=C2=B0F to 122=C2=B0F"
>
>I don't know if that range is ambient or device.
>If it's device, then I'm right at the upper limit.
>
>Do I need to be worried? Time for a new master contactor?
No . . . all is right with the universe . . . See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/Battery_Contactor_Temps_1.jp
g
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/Battery_Contactor_Temps_2.jp
g
"too hot to touch" does not automatically translate
into un-desired performance. These contactors dissipate
about 8w at stable temps . . . which generates and expected
temperature rise of about 100F.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob McCallum" <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Master contactor temp? |
Contactors draw about 1 amp, so at 14 volts that's 14 watts of heat which needs
to be dissipated. If you think about a 15 watt conventional light bulb being
continuously illuminated then trying to hold onto that (which you're unlikely
to be able to) you'll understand how hot the contactor can become. In short what
you have sounds "normal". You're only 30 or so above ambient which isn't particularly
"hot".
The quoted figures of -40 to 122 F would be referring to "ambient".
Bob McC
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-
> server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of donjohnston
> Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2016 8:18 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Master contactor temp?
>
>
> I was having the altimeter/transponder check done recently when I noticed the
master
> contactor was hot. Too hot to touch for very long. Now I've never touched a
master
> contactor before so I don't know what "normal" is (OAT was in the mid 90's).
>
> When I got back to the hangar, I turned on the master and checked it with my
point-
> and-shoot thermometer. I was seeing around 120 after about 5 minutes. I think
it was a
> bit hotter while at the shop but I'm positive.
>
> Once back at home, I pulled up the data sheet for the White-Rodgers 90-907 solenoid
> and the only reference I can find for temperature is "Temperature Range -40F
> to 122F"
>
> I don't know if that range is ambient or device. If it's device, then I'm right
at the upper
> limit.
>
> Do I need to be worried? Time for a new master contactor?
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457424#457424
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
> _-
> =====================================================
> =====
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
At 300A continuous and 500A inrush for 1 second, this solid state battery master
relay has done me quite well for over 100 hours. No moving parts means no arcing
and no wearing out of contacts. It allows current to flow both ways and works
flawlessly as wired into Bob's 13/8 diagram.
The original application was for the medical package on an ambulance.
https://www.waytekwire.com/item/44407/Data-Panel-33034-Solid-State-Battery-Disconnect/
Justin.
> On Jun 25, 2016, at 07:17, donjohnston <don@velocity-xl.com> wrote:
>
>
> I was having the altimeter/transponder check done recently when I noticed the
master contactor was hot. Too hot to touch for very long. Now I've never touched
a master contactor before so I don't know what "normal" is (OAT was in the
mid 90's).
>
> When I got back to the hangar, I turned on the master and checked it with my
point-and-shoot thermometer. I was seeing around 120 after about 5 minutes. I
think it was a bit hotter while at the shop but I'm positive.
>
> Once back at home, I pulled up the data sheet for the White-Rodgers 90-907 solenoid
and the only reference I can find for temperature is "Temperature Range
-40F to 122F"
>
> I don't know if that range is ambient or device. If it's device, then I'm right
at the upper limit.
>
> Do I need to be worried? Time for a new master contactor?
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457424#457424
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: do I need to change my capacitor |
| From: | "AirEupora" <AirEupora(at)sbcglobal.net> |
The MGL provides for the low voltage readings, but I did not catch it. I was flying
around with the battery voltage being shown.
With the new voltage regulator I'm showing 13.8v to 14.4v volts during flight.
If I turn on landing lights it will drop to about 13.4v.
Yes, I pattern the diode to the Jabiru figure, but did not install the over protection.
I'm now planning on doing that when I return from KOSH.
Trio Avionics only told me that the mother boards were burnt. The same for MGL.
I'll see if I can find a architecture drawings. Most of mine are hand drawn as
I could never find a computer drawing program that I could use effectively.
Thanks for the help.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457428#457428
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Might be great for contactor temps, but I'm pretty sure that the
purchase would burn a hole in my backside....
On 6/25/2016 8:45 AM, Justin Jones wrote:
>
> At 300A continuous and 500A inrush for 1 second, this solid state battery master
relay has done me quite well for over 100 hours. No moving parts means no
arcing and no wearing out of contacts. It allows current to flow both ways and
works flawlessly as wired into Bob's 13/8 diagram.
>
> The original application was for the medical package on an ambulance.
>
> https://www.waytekwire.com/item/44407/Data-Panel-33034-Solid-State-Battery-Disconnect/
>
> Justin.
>
>> On Jun 25, 2016, at 07:17, donjohnston <don@velocity-xl.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I was having the altimeter/transponder check done recently when I noticed the
master contactor was hot. Too hot to touch for very long. Now I've never touched
a master contactor before so I don't know what "normal" is (OAT was in
the mid 90's).
>>
>> When I got back to the hangar, I turned on the master and checked it with my
point-and-shoot thermometer. I was seeing around 120 after about 5 minutes.
I think it was a bit hotter while at the shop but I'm positive.
>>
>> Once back at home, I pulled up the data sheet for the White-Rodgers 90-907 solenoid
and the only reference I can find for temperature is "Temperature Range
-40F to 122F"
>>
>> I don't know if that range is ambient or device. If it's device, then I'm right
at the upper limit.
>>
>> Do I need to be worried? Time for a new master contactor?
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
I wonder if this device can be used as a starter solenoid?=C2- The 300A c
ontinuous looks pretty good, and it has fins to dissipate heat.=C2- Max c
urrent would only flow for 2-10 seconds at a time, which means it will take
a heat breather before the next attempt.=C2- Our starters never use more
than 300A that I know of.
The data sheet says it has internal diode protection for inductive loads, b
ut there is a 150 msec turn off time.=C2- How different is this turn off
time from our accepted mechanical solenoids?
That burning a hole in the back pocket stuff may be cheap compared to a fai
lure of a mechanical device far away from home.
=C2-Henador Titzoff
From: Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2016 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Master contactor temp?
ng.com>
At 300A continuous and 500A inrush for 1 second, this solid state battery m
aster relay has done me quite well for over 100 hours. No moving parts mean
s no arcing and no wearing out of contacts. It allows current to flow both
ways and works flawlessly as wired into Bob's 13/8 diagram.
The original application was for the medical package on an ambulance.
https://www.waytekwire.com/item/44407/Data-Panel-33034-Solid-State-Battery-
Disconnect/
Justin.
> On Jun 25, 2016, at 07:17, donjohnston <don@velocity-xl.com> wrote:
>
om>
>
> I was having the altimeter/transponder check done recently when I noticed
the master contactor was hot.=C2- Too hot to touch for very long.=C2-
Now I've never touched a master contactor before so I don't know what "norm
al" is (OAT was in the mid 90's).
>
> When I got back to the hangar, I turned on the master and checked it with
my point-and-shoot thermometer.=C2- I was seeing around 120 after about
5 minutes. I think it was a bit hotter while at the shop but I'm positive.
>
> Once back at home, I pulled up the data sheet for the White-Rodgers 90-90
7 solenoid and the only reference I can find for temperature is "Temperatur
e Range =93=93 -40=C2=B0F to 122=C2=B0F"
>
> I don't know if that range is ambient or device. If it's device, then I'm
right at the upper limit.
>
> Do I need to be worried?=C2- Time for a new master contactor?
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457424#457424
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-
S -
WIKI -
-
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
They are $160. That's slightly more expensive than a good quality continuous duty
relay like Skytec, but you only make the purchase one time. Cheap when talking
about aircraft parts.
> On Jun 25, 2016, at 09:32, Charlie England wrote:
>
>
> Might be great for contactor temps, but I'm pretty sure that the purchase would
burn a hole in my backside....
>
>> On 6/25/2016 8:45 AM, Justin Jones wrote:
>>
>> At 300A continuous and 500A inrush for 1 second, this solid state battery master
relay has done me quite well for over 100 hours. No moving parts means no
arcing and no wearing out of contacts. It allows current to flow both ways and
works flawlessly as wired into Bob's 13/8 diagram.
>>
>> The original application was for the medical package on an ambulance.
>>
>> https://www.waytekwire.com/item/44407/Data-Panel-33034-Solid-State-Battery-Disconnect/
>>
>> Justin.
>>
>>> On Jun 25, 2016, at 07:17, donjohnston <don@velocity-xl.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I was having the altimeter/transponder check done recently when I noticed the
master contactor was hot. Too hot to touch for very long. Now I've never
touched a master contactor before so I don't know what "normal" is (OAT was in
the mid 90's).
>>>
>>> When I got back to the hangar, I turned on the master and checked it with my
point-and-shoot thermometer. I was seeing around 120 after about 5 minutes.
I think it was a bit hotter while at the shop but I'm positive.
>>>
>>> Once back at home, I pulled up the data sheet for the White-Rodgers 90-907
solenoid and the only reference I can find for temperature is "Temperature Range
-40F to 122F"
>>>
>>> I don't know if that range is ambient or device. If it's device, then I'm right
at the upper limit.
>>>
>>> Do I need to be worried? Time for a new master contactor?
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
Nice. And 125mAmp continuous for the control circuit is about 12% of
the standard contactor isn't it?
On 6/25/2016 9:45 AM, Justin Jones wrote:
>
> At 300A continuous and 500A inrush for 1 second, this solid state battery master
relay has done me quite well for over 100 hours. No moving parts means no
arcing and no wearing out of contacts. It allows current to flow both ways and
works flawlessly as wired into Bob's 13/8 diagram.
>
> The original application was for the medical package on an ambulance.
>
> https://www.waytekwire.com/item/44407/Data-Panel-33034-Solid-State-Battery-Disconnect/
>
> Justin.
>
>> On Jun 25, 2016, at 07:17, donjohnston <don@velocity-xl.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I was having the altimeter/transponder check done recently when I noticed the
master contactor was hot. Too hot to touch for very long. Now I've never touched
a master contactor before so I don't know what "normal" is (OAT was in
the mid 90's).
>>
>> When I got back to the hangar, I turned on the master and checked it with my
point-and-shoot thermometer. I was seeing around 120 after about 5 minutes.
I think it was a bit hotter while at the shop but I'm positive.
>>
>> Once back at home, I pulled up the data sheet for the White-Rodgers 90-907 solenoid
and the only reference I can find for temperature is "Temperature Range
-40F to 122F"
>>
>> I don't know if that range is ambient or device. If it's device, then I'm right
at the upper limit.
>>
>> Do I need to be worried? Time for a new master contactor?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457424#457424
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
I am not sure if it would work for a starter relay or not. One behavior I no
ticed is when I leave my LED instrument lights on and shut the battery off (
this solid state relay) the LEDs will dim down while shutting off (like dimm
ing them with a pwm). If I shut the LEDs off with their switch, they turn of
f instantly. Odd, but it doesn't seem to have any ill effects.
Justin
> On Jun 25, 2016, at 10:40, Henador Titzoff wro
te:
>
> I wonder if this device can be used as a starter solenoid? The 300A conti
nuous looks pretty good, and it has fins to dissipate heat. Max current wou
ld only flow for 2-10 seconds at a time, which means it will take a heat bre
ather before the next attempt. Our starters never use more than 300A that I
know of.
>
> The data sheet says it has internal diode protection for inductive loads, b
ut there is a 150 msec turn off time. How different is this turn off time f
rom our accepted mechanical solenoids?
>
> That burning a hole in the back pocket stuff may be cheap compared to a fa
ilure of a mechanical device far away from home.
>
> Henador Titzoff
>
>
> From: Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2016 9:45 AM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Master contactor temp?
>
ing.com>
>
> At 300A continuous and 500A inrush for 1 second, this solid state battery m
aster relay has done me quite well for over 100 hours. No moving parts means
no arcing and no wearing out of contacts. It allows current to flow both wa
ys and works flawlessly as wired into Bob's 13/8 diagram.
>
> The original application was for the medical package on an ambulance.
>
> https://www.waytekwire.com/item/44407/Data-Panel-33034-Solid-State-Battery
-Disconnect/
>
> Justin.
>
> > On Jun 25, 2016, at 07:17, donjohnston <don@velocity-xl.com> wrote:
> >
com>
> >
> > I was having the altimeter/transponder check done recently when I notice
d the master contactor was hot. Too hot to touch for very long. Now I've n
ever touched a master contactor before so I don't know what "normal" is (OAT
was in the mid 90's).
> >
> > When I got back to the hangar, I turned on the master and checked it wit
h my point-and-shoot thermometer. I was seeing around 120 after about 5 min
utes. I think it was a bit hotter while at the shop but I'm positive.
> >
> > Once back at home, I pulled up the data sheet for the White-Rodgers 90-9
07 solenoid and the only reference I can find for temperature is "Temperatur
e Range =93=93 -40=C2=B0F to 122=C2=B0F"
> >
> > I don't know if that range is ambient or device. If it's device, then I'
m right at the upper limit.
> >
> > Do I need to be worried? Time for a new master contactor?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457424#457424
> >
> >
> >
> &ga href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List" target=
"_tp://forums.matronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.comh
ttp://wiki.matronics.comp; -Matt Dralle, Li======
===
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
One of the problems with solid state devices is they will bleed current whe
n "OFF."=C2- The manufacturer of this device does not state the bleed cur
rent on the datasheet.=C2- They only state the max and max inrush current
s as well as the max voltage drop at 150A.
The bleeding of current was never a factor when incandescent lights were us
ed, because they required higher magnitudes of current relative to LEDs and
went totally dim at milliamps of current.=C2- LED lights, on the other h
and, are relatively efficient and use tens of milliamps of current when ope
rating.=C2- When "OFF," they still shine dimly at tens or hundreds of mic
roamps.=C2- Perhaps you can contact the relay manufacturer and ask when w
hat the current bleed spec is.=C2- Their leaving it off may be an indicat
ion of a problem.
This bleed is one good reason not to go with such a relay for both master a
nd starter unless you maintain your battery very well.=C2- In cars, we fi
re them up and charge them daily.=C2- In airplanes, it could be months be
fore they get fired up and charged.=C2- Leaving a charger on an airplane
battery while it's installed is pretty easy, but then there are more and mo
re owners going to lithium ion batteries, which could pose more risk.
NOTE: check out the split lock washer on the power connector bolts.=C2-
This is not a good way to lock those nuts in vibrating equipment.
Henador Titzoff
From: Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2016 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Master contactor temp?
I am not sure if it would work for a starter relay or not. One behavior I n
oticed is when I leave my LED instrument lights on and shut the battery off
(this solid state relay) the LEDs will dim down while shutting off (like d
imming them with a pwm). If I shut the LEDs off with their switch, they tur
n off instantly. Odd, but it doesn't seem to have any ill effects.=C2-
Justin
On Jun 25, 2016, at 10:40, Henador Titzoff wrot
e:
I wonder if this device can be used as a starter solenoid?=C2- The 300A c
ontinuous looks pretty good, and it has fins to dissipate heat.=C2- Max c
urrent would only flow for 2-10 seconds at a time, which means it will take
a heat breather before the next attempt.=C2- Our starters never use more
than 300A that I know of.
The data sheet says it has internal diode protection for inductive loads, b
ut there is a 150 msec turn off time.=C2- How different is this turn off
time from our accepted mechanical solenoids?
That burning a hole in the back pocket stuff may be cheap compared to a fai
lure of a mechanical device far away from home.
=C2-Henador Titzoff
From: Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2016 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Master contactor temp?
ng.com>
At 300A continuous and 500A inrush for 1 second, this solid state battery m
aster relay has done me quite well for over 100 hours. No moving parts mean
s no arcing and no wearing out of contacts. It allows current to flow both
ways and works flawlessly as wired into Bob's 13/8 diagram.
The original application was for the medical package on an ambulance.
https://www.waytekwire.com/item/44407/Data-Panel-33034-Solid-State-Battery-
Disconnect/
Justin.
> On Jun 25, 2016, at 07:17, donjohnston <don@velocity-xl.com> wrote:
>
om>
>
> I was having the altimeter/transponder check done recently when I noticed
the master contactor was hot.=C2- Too hot to touch for very long.=C2-
Now I've never touched a master contactor before so I don't know what "norm
al" is (OAT was in the mid 90's).
>
> When I got back to the hangar, I turned on the master and checked it with
my point-and-shoot thermometer.=C2- I was seeing around 120 after about
5 minutes. I think it was a bit hotter while at the shop but I'm positive.
>
> Once back at home, I pulled up the data sheet for the White-Rodgers 90-90
7 solenoid and the only reference I can find for temperature is "Temperatur
e Range =93=93 -40=C2=B0F to 122=C2=B0F"
>
> I don't know if that range is ambient or device. If it's device, then I'm
right at the upper limit.
>
> Do I need to be worried?=C2- Time for a new master contactor?
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457424#457424
>
>
>
&ga href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List" target=
"_tp://forums.matronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
http://wiki.matronics.comp; =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2
- =C2- -Matt Dralle, Li=========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
The bleed off hasn't been an issue. I have let it sit for 9 weeks before and
no noted battery degradation (PC680). I also have a turn coordinator on the
battery bus that spins down and behaves normally when the master is shut of
f.
Overall, I am extremely pleased with the performance.
Justin
> On Jun 25, 2016, at 11:54, Henador Titzoff wro
te:
>
> One of the problems with solid state devices is they will bleed current wh
en "OFF." The manufacturer of this device does not state the bleed current o
n the datasheet. They only state the max and max inrush currents as well as
the max voltage drop at 150A.
>
> The bleeding of current was never a factor when incandescent lights were u
sed, because they required higher magnitudes of current relative to LEDs and
went totally dim at milliamps of current. LED lights, on the other hand, a
re relatively efficient and use tens of milliamps of current when operating.
When "OFF," they still shine dimly at tens or hundreds of microamps. Perh
aps you can contact the relay manufacturer and ask when what the current ble
ed spec is. Their leaving it off may be an indication of a problem.
>
> This bleed is one good reason not to go with such a relay for both master a
nd starter unless you maintain your battery very well. In cars, we fire the
m up and charge them daily. In airplanes, it could be months before they ge
t fired up and charged. Leaving a charger on an airplane battery while it's
installed is pretty easy, but then there are more and more owners going to l
ithium ion batteries, which could pose more risk.
> NOTE: check out the split lock washer on the power connector bolts. This i
s not a good way to lock those nuts in vibrating equipment.
>
> Henador Titzoff
>
>
> From: Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2016 12:04 PM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Master contactor temp?
>
> I am not sure if it would work for a starter relay or not. One behavior I n
oticed is when I leave my LED instrument lights on and shut the battery off (
this solid state relay) the LEDs will dim down while shutting off (like dimm
ing them with a pwm). If I shut the LEDs off with their switch, they turn of
f instantly. Odd, but it doesn't seem to have any ill effects.
>
> Justin
>
>> On Jun 25, 2016, at 10:40, Henador Titzoff wr
ote:
>>
>> I wonder if this device can be used as a starter solenoid? The 300A cont
inuous looks pretty good, and it has fins to dissipate heat. Max current wo
uld only flow for 2-10 seconds at a time, which means it will take a heat br
eather before the next attempt. Our starters never use more than 300A that I
know of.
>>
>> The data sheet says it has internal diode protection for inductive loads,
but there is a 150 msec turn off time. How different is this turn off time
from our accepted mechanical solenoids?
>>
>> That burning a hole in the back pocket stuff may be cheap compared to a f
ailure of a mechanical device far away from home.
>>
>> Henador Titzoff
>>
>>
>> From: Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
>> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>> Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2016 9:45 AM
>> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Master contactor temp?
>>
ring.com>
>>
>> At 300A continuous and 500A inrush for 1 second, this solid state battery
master relay has done me quite well for over 100 hours. No moving parts mea
ns no arcing and no wearing out of contacts. It allows current to flow both w
ays and works flawlessly as wired into Bob's 13/8 diagram.
>>
>> The original application was for the medical package on an ambulance.
>>
>> https://www.waytekwire.com/item/44407/Data-Panel-33034-Solid-State-Batter
y-Disconnect/
>>
>> Justin.
>>
>> > On Jun 25, 2016, at 07:17, donjohnston <don@velocity-xl.com> wrote:
>> >
.com>
>> >
>> > I was having the altimeter/transponder check done recently when I notic
ed the master contactor was hot. Too hot to touch for very long. Now I've n
ever touched a master contactor before so I don't know what "normal" is (OAT
was in the mid 90's).
>> >
>> > When I got back to the hangar, I turned on the master and checked it wi
th my point-and-shoot thermometer. I was seeing around 120 after about 5 mi
nutes. I think it was a bit hotter while at the shop but I'm positive.
>> >
>> > Once back at home, I pulled up the data sheet for the White-Rodgers 90-
907 solenoid and the only reference I can find for temperature is "Temperatu
re Range =93=93 -40=C2=B0F to 122=C2=B0F"
>> >
>> > I don't know if that range is ambient or device. If it's device, then I
'm right at the upper limit.
>> >
>> > Do I need to be worried? Time for a new master contactor?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Read this topic online here:
>> >
>> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457424#457424
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> &ga href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List" target=
"_tp://forums.matronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.comh
ttp://wiki.matronics.comp; -Matt Dralle, Li======
===
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: do I need to change my capacitor |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
> Most of mine are hand drawn as I could never find a computer drawing program
that I could use effectively.
Try a free program called ExpressSCH. It is very easy to learn and use. The program
is intended for designing printed circuit boards. The company makes their
money by selling PCBs. The program has two parts, the schematic part and
the PCB layout part. Just the schematic part needs to be used to make a schematic
of your aircraft electrical system. Designs can be printed. I use a another
free program called CutePDF Writer to emulate a printer. It will save an
ExpressSCH design as a PDF file that can be shared and zoomed in on without blurring.
http://www.cutepdf.com/Products/CutePDF/writer.asp
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457438#457438
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
"Ambient" refers to the contactor temperature. But keep in mind that "ambient"
doesn't refer to the temperature someplace outside, but AT and ON the contactor
can.
The Type 70 would not specified to use at many airports and inside the cowls of
many airplane based on these numbers. 122 deg F is not very hot. It was hatter
than that in Phoenix a couple days ago, and Death Valley that would be a nice
day.
Furthermore the type to is G-position sensitive, vibration sensitive, not liquid
proof and has many undesireable characterists compared to other solutions.
As for my choice? I go with the Flaming River Battery Switch, or any of the several
electronic contactor offerings, unless your mission doesn't take you far
from home.
Factoid: No NASCAR vehicle uses a type-70 contactor.
Factoid: Very old Type-70's were made from far better stuff.
Please, can we do better than "hot to the touch"
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457449#457449
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Roger <rnjcurtis(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
"Ambient" refers to the contactor temperature
This is not true! The Ambient temperature is the temperature of the
air in the general vicinity of the subject device, not the temperature of
the device itself.
Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
ambient
ambnt/
/adjective/
1.
*1*.
of or relating to the immediate surroundings of something.
"the liquid is stored at below ambient temperature"
Please, Eric; we can do better with our definitions.
;-)
On 6/26/2016 10:03 AM, Eric M. Jones wrote:
>
> "Ambient" refers to the contactor temperature. But keep in mind that "ambient"
doesn't refer to the temperature someplace outside, but AT and ON the contactor
can.
>
> The Type 70 would not specified to use at many airports and inside the cowls
of many airplane based on these numbers. 122 deg F is not very hot. It was hatter
than that in Phoenix a couple days ago, and Death Valley that would be a nice
day.
>
> Furthermore the type to is G-position sensitive, vibration sensitive, not liquid
proof and has many undesireable characterists compared to other solutions.
>
> As for my choice? I go with the Flaming River Battery Switch, or any of the several
electronic contactor offerings, unless your mission doesn't take you far
from home.
>
> Factoid: No NASCAR vehicle uses a type-70 contactor.
> Factoid: Very old Type-70's were made from far better stuff.
>
> Please, can we do better than "hot to the touch"
>
> --------
> Eric M. Jones
> www.PerihelionDesign.com
> 113 Brentwood Drive
> Southbridge, MA 01550
> (508) 764-2072
> emjones(at)charter.net
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
At 11:04 AM 6/25/2016, you wrote:
>I am not sure if it would work for a starter relay or not. One
>behavior I noticed is when I leave my LED instrument lights on and
>shut the battery off (this solid state relay) the LEDs will dim down
>while shutting off (like dimming them with a pwm). If I shut the
>LEDs off with their switch, they turn off instantly. Odd, but it
>doesn't seem to have any ill effects.
The solid state 'contactor' is a array
of field effect transistors controlled
by a variable voltage applied to their
'gates'. When used as a 'switch', on wants
them to be either 'on hard' or 'off hard'
like the behavior of contacts in relays
and switches . . . but depending on the
circuitry that drives the gates, the
transition time between ON and OFF states
may not be quite as fast as for metallic
contacts.
With solid state contactors, there is a much
longer intervale to achieve the same current
flow as an open sent of contacts and it's
most observable when controlling devices that
with activity at every low currents . . . like
an LED. In a dark room, an LED can produce
visible light with tens of micro-amps of current
flow.
Hence, what you've observed is an ordinary
circumstance that does not speak ill of the
contactor's performance. Airplanes with higher
levels of constant-on loads will drag the
bus down faster during contactor shut-down
make the behavior more like metallic contactors
but there's seldom a reason to make this a
design goal.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
At 10:56 AM 6/25/2016, you wrote:
>
>
>They are $160. That's slightly more expensive than a good quality
>continuous duty relay like Skytec, but you only make the purchase
>one time. Cheap when talking about aircraft parts.
What place do the legacy metallic contactors
hold in the hierarchy of cost-of-ownership
issues. Where to they stand on the list of
risk drivers?
At every airplane factory I've worked at, there
were periodic meetings to identify, discuss and
mount mitigation programs for hardware problems
in the field. The vast majority posed little if
any increase in risk . . . only cost of ownership
and loss of company image with the customer.
I have never seen a metallic contactor on the
top-ten list . . . one of them made it to the
'gee, should we do something about this?' list.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Failures/6041_Contactor_Failure.jpg
The answer was, "No, while perhaps spectacular
there was nothing beyond a cost-of-ownership
issue for less than a dozen aircraft in a fleet
of hundreds over ten years. None of the failures were
even in-warranty.
So what's the return on investment? How often do
you anticipate needing to replace el-cheapo whisky-
barrel/automotive contactors? The legacy contactors
of choice have a rich field history . . . yes . . .
they DO wear out or get damaged . . . but they're
easy to replace at little cost of ownership. Further,
if you've crafted a failure tolerant system, failure
of the $low$ contactor poses no increase in risk.
Further, besides the extra acquisition costs,
what's the weight, real-estate and volume
penalties for going all solid state?
Sometimes, the most practical way to drive a nail
is with a hammer.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
Good to know Bob. Thank you for sharing your knowledge. I am really happy wi
th the choice to go with contactor
Justin.
> On Jun 26, 2016, at 11:21, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroelect
ric.com> wrote:
>
> At 11:04 AM 6/25/2016, you wrote:
>> I am not sure if it would work for a starter relay or not. One behavior I
noticed is when I leave my LED instrument lights on and shut the battery of
f (this solid state relay) the LEDs will dim down while shutting off (like d
imming them with a pwm). If I shut the LEDs off with their switch, they turn
off instantly. Odd, but it doesn't seem to have any ill effects.
>
> The solid state 'contactor' is a array
> of field effect transistors controlled
> by a variable voltage applied to their
> 'gates'. When used as a 'switch', on wants
> them to be either 'on hard' or 'off hard'
> like the behavior of contacts in relays
> and switches . . . but depending on the
> circuitry that drives the gates, the
> transition time between ON and OFF states
> may not be quite as fast as for metallic
> contacts.
>
> With solid state contactors, there is a much
> longer intervale to achieve the same current
> flow as an open sent of contacts and it's
> most observable when controlling devices that
> with activity at every low currents . . . like
> an LED. In a dark room, an LED can produce
> visible light with tens of micro-amps of current
> flow.
>
> Hence, what you've observed is an ordinary
> circumstance that does not speak ill of the
> contactor's performance. Airplanes with higher
> levels of constant-on loads will drag the
> bus down faster during contactor shut-down
> make the behavior more like metallic contactors
> but there's seldom a reason to make this a
> design goal.
>
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
There could also be something else on the bus that has a smoothing capacitor
at its front end which is providing enough charge back to the bus to hold t
he LEDs up briefly when the master is shut off.
On Jun 26, 2016, at 12:52, Justin Jones wrote:
Good to know Bob. Thank you for sharing your knowledge. I am really happy wi
th the choice to go with contactor
Justin.
> On Jun 26, 2016, at 11:21, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroelect
ric.com> wrote:
>
> At 11:04 AM 6/25/2016, you wrote:
>> I am not sure if it would work for a starter relay or not. One behavior I
noticed is when I leave my LED instrument lights on and shut the battery of
f (this solid state relay) the LEDs will dim down while shutting off (like d
imming them with a pwm). If I shut the LEDs off with their switch, they turn
off instantly. Odd, but it doesn't seem to have any ill effects.
>
> The solid state 'contactor' is a array
> of field effect transistors controlled
> by a variable voltage applied to their
> 'gates'. When used as a 'switch', on wants
> them to be either 'on hard' or 'off hard'
> like the behavior of contacts in relays
> and switches . . . but depending on the
> circuitry that drives the gates, the
> transition time between ON and OFF states
> may not be quite as fast as for metallic
> contacts.
>
> With solid state contactors, there is a much
> longer intervale to achieve the same current
> flow as an open sent of contacts and it's
> most observable when controlling devices that
> with activity at every low currents . . . like
> an LED. In a dark room, an LED can produce
> visible light with tens of micro-amps of current
> flow.
>
> Hence, what you've observed is an ordinary
> circumstance that does not speak ill of the
> contactor's performance. Airplanes with higher
> levels of constant-on loads will drag the
> bus down faster during contactor shut-down
> make the behavior more like metallic contactors
> but there's seldom a reason to make this a
> design goal.
>
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Some object to my use of the term "ambient" as representative of the device temperature.
You would be right for solid devices, but the type 70 is a part in a
hollow housing.
To make this more clear. If the "surrounding temperature" (perhaps under the cowl)
is 130 deg F. What is the temperature of the can when the power is off? 130
deg F.
If the can is 120 deg F and the surrounding temperature is 0 degrees. What is the
temperature inside the can? It depends on the rate of heat removal, but it's
more than 120 deg F for sure, and a device rated for 122 deg F would be in trouble.
I know this is a more complicated issue. See my attachment on this subject that
was slated to have been published in ECN but can't be sure it ever was.
But don't get sidetracked. The type 70 isn't a reasonable device for GA aircraft.
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457458#457458
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/hot_potato_121.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: do I need to change my capacitor |
At 09:26 AM 6/25/2016, you wrote:
>
>The MGL provides for the low voltage readings, but I did not catch
>it. I was flying around with the battery voltage being shown.
>With the new voltage regulator I'm showing 13.8v to 14.4v volts
>during flight. If I turn on landing lights it will drop to about 13.4v.
>Yes, I pattern the diode to the Jabiru figure, but did not install
>the over protection. I'm now planning on doing that when I return from KOSH.
>Trio Avionics only told me that the mother boards were burnt. The
>same for MGL.
>I'll see if I can find a architecture drawings. Most of mine are
>hand drawn as I could never find a computer drawing program that I
>could use effectively.
Unless you're already proficient in CAD
drawing systems, the FAST and very effective
way to document your airplane goes something
like this.
Build a page-per-system wire book in a 3-ring
binder using #2 pencil and 'pink pearl' eraser.
Neat doesn't count at this stage. Just get all
the data down on paper so you don't have to
'go back an look' to refresh your memory of things
you did perhaps years ago.
Every time you make a change, record it. But keep
EACH page simple. Bus, breaker/fuse, wire, switch,
wire, connector, gizmo, wire, ground. This litany
might describe a landing light. Obviously, some
will be more complex but in terms of the WHOLE
airplane, each page is simple.
Download this document and check out the wirebook
pages in the back . . .
http://tinyurl.com/zlco6ke
These are examples of page-per-system drawings
that illustrate the technique for illustrating
wire segments, how and where they are terminated
and how to list all of the components and materials
that go into crafting that one system.
Make the same kinds of drawings for your airplane
filling in details as you go along. The 3-ring
binder on the shop-bench is all the tooling you
need.
When the airplane is all done and depending on
how legible your first-pass work is, you may
choose to redraw the work . . . use a straight
edge and gel pen. You can even draw your final
document on top of your draft document using
the draft data as a guide. When the final document
is complete and totally dry, use the pink pearl to
remove the pencil lines and smudges.
It takes less practice to go this route than to
search out, install and learn to use any kind
of CAD program. If you're going to do this stuff
for a living, having a CAD program may be useful.
If this but one of a very few numbers of airplanes
you're going to build, paper, pencil, eraser and
pen are excellent, time proven alternatives to
RECORD your work. The NEXT person to own your
airplane will thank you for it.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Roger <rnjcurtis(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
From: Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
At 10:03 AM 6/26/2016, you wrote:
>
>"Ambient" refers to the contactor temperature. But keep in mind that
>"ambient" doesn't refer to the temperature someplace outside, but AT
>and ON the contactor can.
No . . . ambient means SURROUNDING conditions . . .
>Furthermore the type to is G-position sensitive
Yes . . . more G's than it takes to pull
the wings off your airplane . . . as is
every other metallic contactor.
> vibration sensitive
Non-quantified . . . how many g's at what
frequency? Levels SMALLER than those found anywhere
on a light aircraft? I've never analyzed a
Type 70 failure that I could attribute to a
vibration stress . . . LOTS of failures attributable
to dripping water . . . a few failures due
to manufacturing defect . . . and none that
posed high-risk scenario.
> not liquid proof
Show me ONE contactor used on any TC light aircraft
that is liquid proof . . .
> and has many undesireable characterists
Many implies more than one . . . I'd settle for
just two . . .
> . . . compared to other solutions.
>
>As for my choice? I go with the Flaming River Battery Switch, or any
>of the several electronic contactor offerings, unless your mission
>doesn't take you far from home.
Can you cite any instance in the literature
where a contactor failure "far from home"
figured in elevation of risk to airframe
or people in it? If so, what were the circumstances
that promoted that failure?
>Factoid: No NASCAR vehicle uses a type-70 contactor.
For what reason(s) . . . can you cite conditions
on these vehicles that are analogous to conditions
on our airplanes?
>Factoid: Very old Type-70's were made from far better stuff.
Really? I've done some teardowns several
variations of 70 series contactors. See pictures
of inspected articles here:
http://tinyurl.com/kcc26jt
. . . they may be useful in explaining how the
materials illustrated in picture A of a failure
are 'better' than those in picture B. How
did they contribute to the failure?
One failure in a 'modern' 70 series contactor
had nothing to do with selection of materials
and lots to do with failure to solder a joint
on the production line . . .
http://tinyurl.com/zs42jpj
>Please, can we do better than "hot to the touch"
I will suggest that 'hot to touch' is more
definitive to stress boundaries than several
of your assertions above. "Too hot to touch" at
least says somewhere more than ~130 degrees.
I like "sizzle-spit" as being greater than
212 degrees. "Sticking your tongue to the flag
pole" says a whole lot colder than 32 degrees.
But 'sensitive to vibration' offers no bounded
image.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
Eric M. Jones wrote:
> Please, can we do better than "hot to the touch"
We can, and I did.
If you will read my post you will see that I checked it with a thermometer and
was seeing ~120F. Or do you require an exact temperature? Or do you need some
digits to the right of the decimal point?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457462#457462
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
>
>If the can is 120 deg F and the surrounding temperature is 0
>degrees. What is the temperature inside the can? It depends on the
>rate of heat removal, but it's more than 120 deg F for sure, and a
>device rated for 122 deg F would be in trouble.
Exactly . . .
If you take any 70 series device apart you
will find a collection of materials.
Threaded, copper terminal studs upon which
stationary contacts are formed.
A washer-like movable contact mounted to the
end of an iron armature that moves freely
within the cylindrical 'bore' of a coil
core.
The core has evolved a lot over the years.
But suffice it to say, that whether the
solenoid wires are (1) simply wound on a tube
and captured between disks of phenolic, (2)
embedded in a solidly potted assembly or (3)
wound on a complex molding that forms the
tube, end confines, terminals and mates with
contours of the shell . . . ALL materials used
must first hold components in their intended
positions while withstand expected internal
operating temperatures.
I used to work in a facility that specialized in
the design and manufacture of numerous electronic
and motor driven components . . . including the
actual motors.
I can tell you that ALL materials used in the
manufacture of a brushed DC motor including insulated
magnet wire, insulating varnishes, paper and molded
plastic insulators and components were RATED to
perform as advertised while enduring "Class H"
thermal conditions.
http://www.marathonelectric.com/generators/docs/manuals/thermal-life.pdf
Of course, these are INTERNAL conditions which
are expected to be hotter than external conditions.
122F is 50C . . . a rather benign condition for
many qualification levels in aircraft. 70C ambients
for black boxes are not uncommon. At the same time,
I can tell you that 100C ambients for most electronic
assemblies not dissipating a lot of power is no big
deal. An engineer I've worked with for years will often
throw his brass-board assemblies into the lab oven at
100C just to make sure he didn't overlook an unusually
vulnerable part in the design.
I trust this little dissertation goes to an understanding
that 'proper' temperatures for operation with limits
of design goals can be all over the map. Certainly
your cylinder heads will 'sizzle spit' under perfectly
normal conditions.
The contactor illustrated in
http://www.marathonelectric.com/generators/docs/manuals/thermal-life.pdf
demonstrates a temperature rise of ~50C with no air
flow over the device. Were we to operate this contactor
in its RATED 122F environment (70C) then we might expect the
contactor surface to go up to 120C . . . which will
sizzle-spit.
I can tell you that we didn't build a single motor
that could not be operated with surface temperatures in
sizzle-spit range . . . VERY much too hot to touch.
Hence I can assert confidently that while the observed
surface temperature for an operating 70 series contactor
is unfriendly the touch, the device is NOT being
unduly stressed internally. The 122F limit to operating
environment suggests something less than class-H ratings
for stuff inside . . . at the same time, it
poses no practical operating limits on how we use
the contactor.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
Is there any evidence it's actually a limiting temperature?
>>and the only reference I can find for temperature is "Temperature Range
=93=93 -40=C2=B0F to 122=C2=B0F"
The normal operating temperature for a device is given as the temperature ra
nge within which the given electrical specification is met. There's no expec
tation the the device can't or won't work, or shouldn't be used outside that
temperature range, merely that you are somewhat on your own with respect to
its characteristics.
> On Jun 26, 2016, at 21:37, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroelect
ric.com> wrote:
>
>
> If the can is 120 deg F and the surrounding temperature is 0 degrees. What
is the temperature inside the can? It depends on the rate of heat removal, b
ut it's more than 120 deg F for sure, and a device rated for 122 deg F would
be in trouble.
Exactly . . .
If you take any 70 series device apart you
will find a collection of materials.
Threaded, copper terminal studs upon which
stationary contacts are formed.
A washer-like movable contact mounted to the
end of an iron armature that moves freely
within the cylindrical 'bore' of a coil
core.
The core has evolved a lot over the years.
But suffice it to say, that whether the
solenoid wires are (1) simply wound on a tube
and captured between disks of phenolic, (2)
embedded in a solidly potted assembly or (3)
wound on a complex molding that forms the
tube, end confines, terminals and mates with
contours of the shell . . . ALL materials used
must first hold components in their intended
positions while withstand expected internal
operating temperatures.
I used to work in a facility that specialized in
the design and manufacture of numerous electronic
and motor driven components . . . including the
actual motors.
I can tell you that ALL materials used in the
manufacture of a brushed DC motor including insulated
magnet wire, insulating varnishes, paper and molded
plastic insulators and components were RATED to
perform as advertised while enduring "Class H"
thermal conditions.
http://www.marathonelectric.com/generators/docs/manuals/thermal-life.pdf
Of course, these are INTERNAL conditions which
are expected to be hotter than external conditions.
122F is 50C . . . a rather benign condition for
many qualification levels in aircraft. 70C ambients
for black boxes are not uncommon. At the same time,
I can tell you that 100C ambients for most electronic
assemblies not dissipating a lot of power is no big
deal. An engineer I've worked with for years will often
throw his brass-board assemblies into the lab oven at
100C just to make sure he didn't overlook an unusually
vulnerable part in the design.
I trust this little dissertation goes to an understanding
that 'proper' temperatures for operation with limits
of design goals can be all over the map. Certainly
your cylinder heads will 'sizzle spit' under perfectly
normal conditions.
The contactor illustrated in
http://www.marathonelectric.com/generators/docs/manuals/thermal-life.pdf
demonstrates a temperature rise of ~50C with no air
flow over the device. Were we to operate this contactor
in its RATED 122F environment (70C) then we might expect the
contactor surface to go up to 120C . . . which will
sizzle-spit.
I can tell you that we didn't build a single motor
that could not be operated with surface temperatures in
sizzle-spit range . . . VERY much too hot to touch.
Hence I can assert confidently that while the observed
surface temperature for an operating 70 series contactor
is unfriendly the touch, the device is NOT being
unduly stressed internally. The 122F limit to operating
environment suggests something less than class-H ratings
for stuff inside . . . at the same time, it
poses no practical operating limits on how we use
the contactor.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Master contactor temp? |
At 09:42 PM 6/26/2016, you wrote:
>Is there any evidence it's actually a limiting temperature?
>
> >>and the only reference I can find for
> temperature is "Temperature Range '' -40=C2=B0F to 1o 122=C2=B0F"
>
>The normal operating temperature for a device is
>given as the temperature range within which the
>given electrical specification is met. There's
>no expectation the the device can't or won't
>work, or shouldn't be used outside that
>temperature range, merely that you are somewhat
>on your own with respect to its characteristics.
Temperature ratings are a bit 'squishy' . . .
like contact ratings for current and voltage.
Most ratings are bounded by calculated or
laboratory demonstrations of service life.
The 70 series contactor isn't going to burst
into flames if operated in a 150F environment.
At the same time, it would probably not demonstrate
rated life limits either. Then again, we don't
even begin to stress the service life of any
switch or contactor in a GA single engine
airplane!
The 122F/50C recommended limit probably
assumes still air . . . sitting out on a
bench. Add a little moving air and internal
temperatures will fall like a stone . . .
which translates to a boost in recommended
limit to ambient air temperature.
I may have the data in my archives somewhere
that describes temperature conditions under
the cowl on a single engine airplane. We
were setting up a cooling test on a new alternator
installation and had 8 thermocouple channels
open on the DAS.
We scattered some extra thermocouples around and
discovered that in-flight temperatures are really
rather benign . . . the hottest spikes occurred
during cool-down after engine shutdown when
air flow dropped and heat stored on the engine
mass warmed things up under the cowl.
Of course, the thermocouples only gave us
total temperature of the air at various
locations. To assess cooling effects of air
movement, we would have to repeat the experiment
by mounting the thermocouples onto power resistors
and then plotting differences between static
air and in-flight conditions with stirred air
over components that were dissipating heat.
The constellation of variables can be all over
the map when it comes to in-situ thermal management
of components in the airplane . . . hence, making
a decision to buy brand X contactor rated at 50F
versus brand Y rated at 70C could very well be
a poor cost of ownership decision.
As our ol' buddy Lord Kelvin used to say, "Until you've
measured the thing . . . your knowledge of the
science is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind."
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dual batteries or dual alternators? |
| From: | "EFII" <robert(at)protekperformance.com> |
Hi Bob and everyone else,
Here is our take on the Bus Manager:
We wanted a simple one box solution to provide the management necessary for a two
battery setup to support electronically dependent engines. The creation of
a protected "Essential Bus" being the primary goal. The Essential Bus is the protected
power source for the engine electronics.
We also wanted some other items such as: Battery charge isolation, ability to start
the engine off of either battery (or both), and automatic management of a
dual electric fuel pump module.
The Bus Manager is simply the solution for the above requirement.
It does not require pilot intervention to supply current from either battery to
the Essential Bus. It also does not require pilot intervention to engage the
backup electric fuel pump.
In addition, there is a third level of redundancy via the Emergency Power switch.
There is a Main Bus output powered by the primary battery to power non-flight
critical systems. The Bus Manager also supports one or two alternator operation.
Most two seat airplanes can use two Odyssey PC625 batteries for the system.
Two of these batteries together are similar in size and weight to one Concord
(RG-25) aircraft battery.
The failure mode the we have seen most in small aircraft is simply a loose wire
somewhere. If the loose wire happens to be a battery cable or primary bus supply
wire, this can spell trouble for the engine electronics. Having multiple paths
for electricity to reach critical equipment is the simple solution to this
issue. An architecture that allows the backup process to occur without pilot
intervention means that the engine never skips a beat if one supply source goes
down - this is a big deal and provides a big comfort level. I have witnessed
an entire panel go black and the Bus Manager protect the engine without power
interruption.
Anyhow, those are the goals of the Bus Manager. It is a simple one-box solution
to a semi complicated problem. In most experimentals, the Bus Manager can provide
the the power distribution for the entire plane. It really makes power system
setup a simple task. And simple means reliable.
Robert Paisley
EFII
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457483#457483
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | New smartphone app for pilots |
| From: | "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com> |
Greetings All,
While being grounded for the past many months with a cracked engine block,
I have been amusing myself by writing software. Since there is a
preponderance of hardware geeks on the AeroElectric list, I thought you
guys might be interested this app from a long time list member/contributor.
Allow me to introduce avAltimeter
Not many many people are aware that in the iPhone 6 and later, Apple
has incorporated a Bosch barometer chip. I recently released to the
App Store a unique app which emulates an analog flight altimeter with
a number of "smart" features including a Kollsman window for setting
the current pressure, calculation of Density Altitude, true airspeed and
takeoff performance. The App also provides a warning for supplemental
oxygen consistent with US FARs.
Obviously avAltimeter is not FAA TSO approved and so I provide it for
entertainment only. At present it can only be run on iPhone 6 and later,
and not iPads or iPods. I understand the new Samsung Galaxy S7 now
has a barometer chip as well and I plan to transfer the code to Android
soon.
My software web site is http://www.aviametrix.com
or search for "avAltimeter" on the Apple App Store!
Thanks for your attention!
Cheers,
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457490#457490
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New smartphone app for pilots |
| From: | Robert Borger <rlborger(at)mac.com> |
Ira,
Just downloaded your app. Very nice. Looking forward to trying it out if I can
ever get this inner ear problem cleared up.
Blue skies & tailwinds,
Bob Borger
Europa XS Tri, Rotax 914, Airmaster C/S Prop (75 hrs).
Little Toot Sport Biplane, Lycoming Thunderbolt AEIO-320 EXP
3705 Lynchburg Dr.
Corinth, TX 76208-5331
Cel: 817-992-1117
rlborger(at)mac.com
On Jun 27, 2016, at 5:04 PM, rampil wrote:
Greetings All,
While being grounded for the past many months with a cracked engine block,
I have been amusing myself by writing software. Since there is a
preponderance of hardware geeks on the AeroElectric list, I thought you
guys might be interested this app from a long time list member/contributor.
Allow me to introduce avAltimeter
Not many many people are aware that in the iPhone 6 and later, Apple
has incorporated a Bosch barometer chip. I recently released to the
App Store a unique app which emulates an analog flight altimeter with
a number of "smart" features including a Kollsman window for setting
the current pressure, calculation of Density Altitude, true airspeed and
takeoff performance. The App also provides a warning for supplemental
oxygen consistent with US FARs.
Obviously avAltimeter is not FAA TSO approved and so I provide it for
entertainment only. At present it can only be run on iPhone 6 and later,
and not iPads or iPods. I understand the new Samsung Galaxy S7 now
has a barometer chip as well and I plan to transfer the code to Android
soon.
My software web site is http://www.aviametrix.com
or search for "avAltimeter" on the Apple App Store!
Thanks for your attention!
Cheers,
--------
Ira N224XS
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New smartphone app for pilots |
| From: | Stuart Hutchison <stuart(at)stuarthutchison.com.au> |
G'day Ira, thank you for developing the avAltimeter app, very handy!
One suggested improvement in many parts of the world (including here in Australia)
metric is needed for Celsius, but we still use Feet for altimetry (if not,
literally tens of thousands of altimeters would need to be replaced), so a combination
of Metric for Celsius and Imperial for Altimeter/DA in Feet would be
handy when you next update the app.
Cheers, Stu
> On 28 Jun 2016, at 09:26, Robert Borger wrote:
>
>
> Ira,
>
> Just downloaded your app. Very nice. Looking forward to trying it out if I
can ever get this inner ear problem cleared up.
>
> Blue skies & tailwinds,
> Bob Borger
> Europa XS Tri, Rotax 914, Airmaster C/S Prop (75 hrs).
> Little Toot Sport Biplane, Lycoming Thunderbolt AEIO-320 EXP
> 3705 Lynchburg Dr.
> Corinth, TX 76208-5331
> Cel: 817-992-1117
> rlborger(at)mac.com
>
> On Jun 27, 2016, at 5:04 PM, rampil wrote:
>
>
> Greetings All,
>
> While being grounded for the past many months with a cracked engine block,
> I have been amusing myself by writing software. Since there is a
> preponderance of hardware geeks on the AeroElectric list, I thought you
> guys might be interested this app from a long time list member/contributor.
>
> Allow me to introduce avAltimeter
>
> Not many many people are aware that in the iPhone 6 and later, Apple
> has incorporated a Bosch barometer chip. I recently released to the
> App Store a unique app which emulates an analog flight altimeter with
> a number of "smart" features including a Kollsman window for setting
> the current pressure, calculation of Density Altitude, true airspeed and
> takeoff performance. The App also provides a warning for supplemental
> oxygen consistent with US FARs.
>
> Obviously avAltimeter is not FAA TSO approved and so I provide it for
> entertainment only. At present it can only be run on iPhone 6 and later,
> and not iPads or iPods. I understand the new Samsung Galaxy S7 now
> has a barometer chip as well and I plan to transfer the code to Android
> soon.
>
> My software web site is http://www.aviametrix.com
> or search for "avAltimeter" on the Apple App Store!
>
> Thanks for your attention!
>
> Cheers,
>
> --------
> Ira N224XS
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Verwey <bob.verwey(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New smartphone app for pilots |
Nice one Ira,
We in South Africa also have the same system as the Aussies, so we would
welcome the upgrade!
On 28 June 2016 at 00:04, rampil wrote:
>
> Greetings All,
>
> While being grounded for the past many months with a cracked engine block,
> I have been amusing myself by writing software. Since there is a
> preponderance of hardware geeks on the AeroElectric list, I thought you
> guys might be interested this app from a long time list member/contributor.
>
> Allow me to introduce avAltimeter
>
> Not many many people are aware that in the iPhone 6 and later, Apple
> has incorporated a Bosch barometer chip. I recently released to the
> App Store a unique app which emulates an analog flight altimeter with
> a number of "smart" features including a Kollsman window for setting
> the current pressure, calculation of Density Altitude, true airspeed and
> takeoff performance. The App also provides a warning for supplemental
> oxygen consistent with US FARs.
>
> Obviously avAltimeter is not FAA TSO approved and so I provide it for
> entertainment only. At present it can only be run on iPhone 6 and later,
> and not iPads or iPods. I understand the new Samsung Galaxy S7 now
> has a barometer chip as well and I plan to transfer the code to Android
> soon.
>
> My software web site is http://www.aviametrix.com
> or search for "avAltimeter" on the Apple App Store!
>
> Thanks for your attention!
>
> Cheers,
>
> --------
> Ira N224XS
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457490#457490
>
>
--
Best...
Bob Verwey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Stephen Richards <stephencliverichards(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | New smartphone app for pilots |
Ira
The Uk & rest of EASA land uses hectopascal Europe new name for ( Millibar
) & feet. So a upgrade would be useful
-----Original Message-----
From: "Bob Verwey" <bob.verwey(at)gmail.com>
Sent: =8E28/=8E06/=8E2016 07:53
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: New smartphone app for pilots
Nice one Ira,
We in South Africa also have the same system as the Aussies, so we would we
lcome the upgrade!
On 28 June 2016 at 00:04, rampil wrote:
Greetings All,
While being grounded for the past many months with a cracked engine block,
I have been amusing myself by writing software. Since there is a
preponderance of hardware geeks on the AeroElectric list, I thought you
guys might be interested this app from a long time list member/contributor.
Allow me to introduce avAltimeter
Not many many people are aware that in the iPhone 6 and later, Apple
has incorporated a Bosch barometer chip. I recently released to the
App Store a unique app which emulates an analog flight altimeter with
a number of "smart" features including a Kollsman window for setting
the current pressure, calculation of Density Altitude, true airspeed and
takeoff performance. The App also provides a warning for supplemental
oxygen consistent with US FARs.
Obviously avAltimeter is not FAA TSO approved and so I provide it for
entertainment only. At present it can only be run on iPhone 6 and later,
and not iPads or iPods. I understand the new Samsung Galaxy S7 now
has a barometer chip as well and I plan to transfer the code to Android
soon.
My software web site is http://www.aviametrix.com
or search for "avAltimeter" on the Apple App Store!
Thanks for your attention!
Cheers,
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457490#457490
-
Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.co
m/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
FORUMS -
eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
WIKI -
errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
--
Best...
Bob Verwey
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New smartphone app for pilots |
| From: | "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com> |
Hi All!
Several of you have made the excellent point that in many more places
than I realized, the pressure setting is done in metric, but the output
required is in feet!
I modified the Setting Page to accommodate that requirement this morning.
I want to test it for a few days and then I will send it to Apple for App Store
review. It should be available by the weekend if Apple keeps up the recent
improvement in review time.
At the risk of spamming, I will post a very brief note here when the
improved version is available.
Many Thanks for the thoughtful comments!
Cheers
Ira
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457501#457501
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wade - Airdog77 <airdog77(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Z-13/8 Questions |
Hi Bob,
I'm building a Long-EZ and have a couple of questions on the Z-13/8
architecture.
1. In AEC 12th Ed. Chapter 11-3 you discuss "panel space conservation" and
that in the Z diagrams there's an example that shows "avionics master
switch controls essential bus connection to main bus, selects an emergency
mode essential bus feed directly from battery . . . " I couldn't find any
examples of that, but it did make me consider combining the AUX ALT and
E-BUS ALT FEED switches into one switch using a 2-10 ON-ON-ON switch. Is
there a specific reason that I'm missing that would preclude me from doing
so? My thought is that it would refine my focus if my main alternator goes
haywire, requiring me then to only concern myself with two actual switches
versus three. Plus, there's the added bonus of weight savings and panel
space.
2. I found a forum exchange where you discussed keeping feeds off the
battery bus no greater than 7A (if fused). Otherwise, the feed should have
a pilot controlled disconnect (relay) in local proximity to the bus.
Apparently, I missed taking this into account as I designed my electrical
system, and am now backtracking a bit to correct it. I wanted to clarify
this information since in many of the Z diagrams in the back of the AEC you
show a 10A fuel pump being fed off the battery bus. I also wanted to
confirm this because I have a couple items requiring 10A feeds that I would
like to keep on the battery bus. The first is a fuel pump, which I can
throw in a relay no problem. The other feed, however, is for the nose gear
actuator. On the gear actuator, the manufacturer's schematic shows the
feed coming off the battery bus to a panel mounted 10A circuit breaker
(required by manufacturer). I'm a bit stuck on how to design this,
especially since there's no included information as to whether the gear
actuator feed should be connected off the battery bus at a fused fast-on
tab or off the threaded fuseblock post? I'm trying to keep my electrical
system as safe, simple and elegant as possible, so I would greatly
appreciate your feedback on this.
Regards,
Wade Parton
(building) Long-EZ N916WP
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
At 01:11 PM 6/28/2016, you wrote:
>Hi Bob,
>
>I'm building a Long-EZ and have a couple of
>questions on the Z-13/8 architecture.
>
>1.=C2 In AEC 12th Ed. Chapter 11-3 you discuss
>"panel space conservation" and that in the Z
>diagrams there's an example that shows "avionics
>master switch controls essential (ENDURANCE) bus
>connection to main bus, selects an emergency
>(PLAN-B . . . we don't have emergencies) mode
>essential bus feed directly from battery . . . "
>=C2 I couldn't find any examples of that, but it
>did make me consider combining the AUX ALT and
>E-BUS ALT FEED switches into one switch using a 2-10 ON-ON-ON switch.
Not recommended. It's prudent not to
generate signle points of failure for
the e-bus feeds.
>=C2 Is there a specific reason that I'm missing
>that would preclude me from doing so?=C2 My
>thought is that it would refine my focus if my
>main alternator goes haywire, requiring me then
>to only concern myself with two actual switches
>versus three.=C2 Plus, there's the added bonus of
>weight savings and panel space.
That 'avionics switch' was illustrated to
placate builders deeply steeped in legacy
hangar lore. The original need for an avionics
switch was il-conceived. The REAL need for
any such switch evaporated a few years later
with the incorporation of DO160 design goals
and even less significant with the drop in
avionics power draw paired with more robust
cranking performance of batteries.
None of the z-figures illustrates or suggests
an avionics master switch.
>2.=C2 I found a forum exchange where you
>discussed keeping feeds off the battery bus no
>greater than 7A (if fused). Otherwise, the feed
>should have a pilot controlled disconnect
>(relay) in local proximity to the bus.
>Apparently, I missed taking this into account as
>I designed my electrical system, and am now backtracking a bit to correct
it.
What's on your e-bus? Remember, this is an
ENDURANCE bus . . . crafted and loaded such
that during loss of main alternator, energy
stored in the ship's battery is held in RESERVE
for descent and approach to landing. So if you've
got an SD-8 aux alternator, e-bus loading goals
are on the order of 8A or less. This is done
by operating only those items necessary for
the EN ROUTE phase of flight.
The e-bus first appeared on LongEz aircraft
before Z-13/8. Back then, the design goal was to
reduce EnRoute loads to some value assuring
arrival at airport of intended destination
battery-only. Often these loads added up to
less than 2 amps. Panel lite, nav receiver,
transponder.
With Z-13/8, the nature of e-bus ops changed
dramatically. Now you have an en route budget
on the order of 8A while holding the battery
in reserve. Shoot for 8A or less and don't
worry about the relay.
> I wanted to clarify this information since in
> many of the Z diagrams in the back of the AEC
> you show a 10A fuel pump being fed off the battery bus.
I don't show a fuel pump that DRAWS 10A,
I show a fuel pump that is POWERED through
a feeder protected at 10A.
>=C2 I also wanted to confirm this because I have
>a couple items requiring 10A feeds that I would
>like to keep on the battery bus.=C2 The first is
>a fuel pump, which I can throw in a relay no problem.
What is the current draw for this pump?
>=C2 The other feed, however, is for the nose gear
>actuator.=C2 On the gear actuator, the
>manufacturer's schematic shows the feed coming
>off the battery bus to a panel mounted 10A
>circuit breaker (required by manufacturer).
That is an intermittent load . . . lasting
only seconds. So like your starter that draws
a LOT of current, it only uses a few percent
of the battery's stored energy to get the fires
lit off.
>=C2 I'm a bit stuck on how to design this,
>especially since there's no included information
>as to whether the gear actuator feed should be
>connected off the battery bus at a fused fast-on
>tab or off the threaded fuseblock post?
Your nose gear actuator could draw lots of
current but it's only for a few seconds so the
ENERGY required is minimal. Wire it to a fast-on
location at the battery bus fuse block. Shucks, you can wire
the nose gear up with 12AWG driven by a 20 A fuse
if there's any concern for nuisance tripping the
fuse. I would do some testing on the ground
to put a rough measure on the motor's inrush
characteristics. What kind of information do you
have on the motor used in the gear assembly?
Does it have a lable with a manufacturer's name
and part number?
>=C2 I'm trying to keep my electrical system as
>safe, simple and elegant as possible, so I would
>greatly appreciate your feedback on this.
No problem, it's what we do here. If you're
putting Z-13/8 in an Ez, then tie all your
alternator feeds to the system at the HOT
size of the starter contactor which should
be on the firewall. What size wires are you
running aft for starter feed and ground?
Make us a list of all your fuses, what they
feed and which bus drives them.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Bendix King KY97A Tuning Problem |
| From: | "James Meade" <jnmeade(at)southslope.net> |
My Bendix King KY97A VHF Transceiver inner tuner knob skips tuning
adjustments. It is like a gear with some worn or missing teeth. It tunes
properly for a while and then skips repeatedly for a while. The radio
works fine in all other regards.
Has anyone ever experienced this or looked inside to see if there is an
obvious issue? I may open the case when I get a chance.
TIA
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Remove KY97A Replace With SL40 |
| From: | "James Meade" <jnmeade(at)southslope.net> |
As noted in another post, my Bendix King KY97A VHF transceiver has a
tuning problem. I have on hand a working Garmin SL40 VHF transceiver with
tray. If I can't fix the KY97A, I plan to pull the tray and put in the
SL40 tray. Then I plan to make a converter cable to go from the current
input cable to attach to the SL40.
The KY97A has a flat connector with 1-15 on the bottom and A-S on the
top. It is a very simple installation. The SL40 has a 15 pin D connector.
Does anyone have any experience or comments on making such a converter
cable? I already have plans to change out the panel next year to a
totally different system. I'd like to use the SL40 radio on hand for the
interim and minimize the rewiring until I do the full makeover.
Comments? Suggestions?
TIA
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | "Airdog77" <Airdog77(at)gmail.com> |
Bob,
Roger on NOT combining the AUX ALT and E-BUS ALT FEED switches into one switch.
It does make me curious though what would happen if either of those switches
becomes in-op, since there would still be no way to revert to the SD-8 backup
ALT, correct?
>
> What's on your e-bus?
This is what I currently have on my E-BUS:
E-Bus Relay/SD-8 Relay/VReg/OV 0.3A
ElectroAir Electronic Ignition System Coil 0.8A
Electronic Ignition System Controller 0.8A
EFIS GRT HXr - PFD 1.5A
EFIS GRT Mini-X MFD 0.3A
Engine Mgt System Module - GRT 0.2A
TruTrak ADI 0.5A
Trig TT22 Transponder Mode S 0.4A
Trig TY91 Radio - COM1 0.2A
Radenna SkyRadar-DX ADSB Receiver 0.4A
Fuel Computer 0.4A
MGL RTC-2 Clock 0.1A
USB Hub 0.4A
Nose Gear Auto Gear Extension 0.1A
Nav Lights 0.4A
TRIO Autopilot Control Head 0.5A
Trio A/P Servos (~2A transient)
Total nominal draw on E-BUS/SD-8: 7.9 amps (not including transient loads).
Also, The numbers above either came out of the manuals or from discussions with
the manufacturers.
I do currently have an S704-1 Relay wired into place between the battery bus and
E-Bus.
> What is the current draw for this pump?
Just under 5A according to the folks at EFII. According to them, a 16AWG wire
fused at 10A from the battery bus to the panel switch, then 16AWG to the pump
sitting just forward of the firewall would work fine.
>
> What kind of information do you
> have on the motor used in the gear assembly?
> Does it have a lable with a manufacturer's name
> and part number?
The nose gear actuator is under a cover right now that is difficult to get to,
but from my build pictures I found that on the motor cover it states:
> Thomson Saginaw Ball Screw Company, Inc., Performance Pak
And from looking at the manufacturer's website, it looks as if this is the Electrak
10 series motor. The nose gear actuator motor is actually part of the EZNoseLift
electric nose gear system. The purpose for the 10A CB is that in a
fiberglass plane like the Long-EZ it offers some protection if the up-travel microswitch
fails and the nose gear continues to travel up into the nose wheel
well. After some minor crushing the 10A CB is designed to pop and thus save the
rest of nose from any further damage. I checked with the manufacturer and
he recommended running a 16-AWG wire from the battery bus to the 10CB on the panel.
> What size wires are you
> running aft for starter feed and ground?
Planning on using the Super-4-CCA copper clad aluminum. This was recommended to
me by a number of EZ drivers that are currently using it and are quite happy
with it.
I'll work on compiling that list of fuses, feeds and busses.
Thanks Bob!
-Wade
--------
Airdog
Wade Parton
Building Long-EZ 916WP
www.longezpush.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457516#457516
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Remove KY97A Replace With SL40 |
> I'd like to use the SL40 radio on hand for the
>interim and minimize the rewiring until I do the full makeover.
>Comments? Suggestions?
Can probably be done. I have the connectors
and pin-outs. It would be useful to know
which pins are populated in the KY97 connector.
Don't need functionality, just the location.
I can sketch the wiring and send you connectors.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
At 06:17 PM 6/28/2016, you wrote:
>
>Bob,
>
>Roger on NOT combining the AUX ALT and E-BUS ALT FEED switches into
>one switch. It does make me curious though what would happen if
>either of those switches becomes in-op, since there would still be
>no way to revert to the SD-8 backup ALT, correct?
Not at all. Recall that the Plan-B for inop main
alternator is . . .
Ebus Alt Feed Switch . . . closed.
Aux alternator Switch . . . ON
Main alternator/battery contactor switch . . . . OPEN
This series of actions supports the e-bus
DIRECTLY from the battery, supports the battery
with 8A of engine driven energy, relieves the
system of parasitic battery contactor loads and
potentially parasitic alternator field loads.
The main bus goes dark.
This DOES not preclude the pilot from re-closing
the battery contactor to bring the main bus back
up . . . which brings the e-bus up as well through
the normal feed diode.
But keep in mind that ONE failure is rare,
in the interval defined by fuel aboard for engine
endurance. DUAL failures are exceedingly rare.
Hence, there are NO single failures of Z-13/8
that put the pilot in an uncomfortable condition.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Baker <jimbaker(at)npacc.net> |
| Subject: | KX155 alternative |
Now that Bendix King have stopped making parts for this radio, especially the display,
any advice concerning maintenance options or replacements? One of mine
was rehab'd so it works well but the other is starting to miss segments. Haven't
pulled it yet to try burnishing the zebra contacts.
I just love obsolescence.
Jim Baker
405 426 5377
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: KX155 alternative |
If it's 12v, and it has a glideslope receiver, and you decide to part it out, let
me know...
On Jun 28, 2016, at 21:56, Jim Baker wrote:
Now that Bendix King have stopped making parts for this radio, especially the display,
any advice concerning maintenance options or replacements? One of mine
was rehab'd so it works well but the other is starting to miss segments. Haven't
pulled it yet to try burnishing the zebra contacts.
I just love obsolescence.
Jim Baker
405 426 5377
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
>
>This is what I currently have on my E-BUS:
>E-Bus Relay/SD-8 Relay/VReg/OV 0.3A
>ElectroAir Electronic Ignition System Coil 0.8A
>Electronic Ignition System Controller 0.8A
>EFIS GRT HXr - PFD 1.5A
>EFIS GRT Mini-X MFD 0.3A
>Engine Mgt System Module - GRT 0.2A
>TruTrak ADI 0.5A
>Trig TT22 Transponder Mode S 0.4A
>Trig TY91 Radio - COM1 0.2A
>Radenna SkyRadar-DX ADSB Receiver 0.4A
>Fuel Computer 0.4A
>MGL RTC-2 Clock 0.1A
>USB Hub 0.4A
>Nose Gear Auto Gear Extension 0.1A
>Nav Lights 0.4A
>TRIO Autopilot Control Head 0.5A
> Trio A/P Servos (~2A transient)
>
>Total nominal draw on E-BUS/SD-8: 7.9 amps (not including transient loads).
Okay, looks like the SD8 is good
>Also, The numbers above either came out of the manuals or from
>discussions with the manufacturers.
>
>I do currently have an S704-1 Relay wired into place between the
>battery bus and E-Bus.
that could go away . . .
> > What is the current draw for this pump?
>
>Just under 5A according to the folks at EFII. According to them, a
>16AWG wire fused at 10A from the battery bus to the panel switch,
>then 16AWG to the pump sitting just forward of the firewall would work fine.
Is this a back up pump or does it run all the time?
> > Thomson Saginaw Ball Screw Company, Inc., Performance Pak
> And from looking at the manufacturer's website, it looks as if
> this is the Electrak 10 series motor. The nose gear actuator motor
> is actually part of the EZNoseLift electric nose gear system. The
> purpose for the 10A CB is that in a fiberglass plane like the
> Long-EZ it offers some protection if the up-travel microswitch
> fails and the nose gear continues to travel up into the nose wheel
> well. After some minor crushing the 10A CB is designed to pop and
> thus save the rest of nose from any further damage. I checked with
> the manufacturer and he recommended running a 16-AWG wire from the
> battery bus to the 10CB on the panel.
Hmmmm . . . IVO Props do a similar thing to
manage the stalled motor condition . . . not
very sanitary. If these are ball-screw actuators,
theres is potential for large forces on
the screw as a product of both stall torque and
dynamic torque when bringing the rotating armature
mass to an abrupt halt.
Have there been instances of limit switch failure?
> > What size wires are you
> > running aft for starter feed and ground?
>
>Planning on using the Super-4-CCA copper clad aluminum. This was
>recommended to me by a number of EZ drivers that are currently using
>it and are quite happy with it.
>
>I'll work on compiling that list of fuses, feeds and busses.
Looking forward to it . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | "Airdog77" <Airdog77(at)gmail.com> |
Bob,
I'm glad I asked the question!
> Not at all. Recall that the Plan-B for inop main
> alternator is . . .
>
> Ebus Alt Feed Switch . . . closed.
>
> Aux alternator Switch . . . ON
>
> Main alternator/battery contactor switch . . . . OPEN
For some reason I had this process exactly reversed... some vital info to know
right there!
Also good to know on the relay between the battery bus and E-bus: I'll remove it.
>
> Is this a back up pump or does it run all the time?
It's a back up pump to the engine driven fuel pump. It's only on during takeoffs
and landings, and as a backup if the mechanical fuel pump croaks.
>
> Have there been instances of limit switch failure?
I haven't heard of any limit switch failures, and I've been working this project
for over 5 years. I did get into the manual and here's the warning, which shows
that a failure of the micro-switch is protected more by the mechanical configuration
of the actuator, in conjunction with a CB, than any crunching of fiberglass.
Forgive my earlier dramatic paraphrasing on how this thing works:
"Warning:
The actuator is capable of 3000 lbs. of straight line lifting force that
will cause damage and injury even when protected by the slip clutch
and the circuit breaker. In case of micro switch failure or
misadjustment, the over travel in the up position is about .15 at the
actuator. The internal rubber shock cushion will absorb this and the
actuator will reach its mechanical limit and pop the breaker. This
feature will protect the aircraft structure from damage."
Thanks again Bob!
Regards,
-Wade
--------
Airdog
Wade Parton
Building Long-EZ 916WP
www.longezpush.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457522#457522
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | John Tipton <jmtipton(at)btopenworld.com> |
Hi Bob
Isn't 'closed' - 'ON' --- (and of course 'open' being 'OFF')
You used both 'styles' or am I wrong
John
Sent from my iPad
----x--O--x----
> On 29 Jun 2016, at 02:09 am, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroe
lectric.com> wrote:
>
> At 06:17 PM 6/28/2016, you wrote:
>>
>> Bob,
>>
>> Roger on NOT combining the AUX ALT and E-BUS ALT FEED switches into one s
witch. It does make me curious though what would happen if either of those s
witches becomes in-op, since there would still be no way to revert to the SD
-8 backup ALT, correct?
>
> Not at all. Recall that the Plan-B for inop main
> alternator is . . .
>
> Ebus Alt Feed Switch . . . closed.
>
> Aux alternator Switch . . . ON
>
> Main alternator/battery contactor switch . . . . OPEN
>
> This series of actions supports the e-bus
> DIRECTLY from the battery, supports the battery
> with 8A of engine driven energy, relieves the
> system of parasitic battery contactor loads and
> potentially parasitic alternator field loads.
> The main bus goes dark.
>
> This DOES not preclude the pilot from re-closing
> the battery contactor to bring the main bus back
> up . . . which brings the e-bus up as well through
> the normal feed diode.
>
> But keep in mind that ONE failure is rare,
> in the interval defined by fuel aboard for engine
> endurance. DUAL failures are exceedingly rare.
>
> Hence, there are NO single failures of Z-13/8
> that put the pilot in an uncomfortable condition.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
At 01:36 AM 6/29/2016, you wrote:
>Hi Bob
>
>Isn't 'closed' - 'ON' --- (and of course 'open' being 'OFF')
>
>You used both 'styles' or am I wrong
yes
open/off closed/on
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
While flying, suppose that there is failure in the battery contactor coil circuit
and that the alternator continues to function. Will the pilot notice any symptoms
prior to engine shutdown? If so, what are they? Thanks.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457526#457526
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: KX155 alternative |
| From: | Paul Millner <millner(at)me.com> |
I thought King is making an LED replacement but it's pricey!
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 28, 2016, at 6:56 PM, Jim Baker wrote:
>
>
> Now that Bendix King have stopped making parts for this radio, especially the
display, any advice concerning maintenance options or replacements? One of mine
was rehab'd so it works well but the other is starting to miss segments. Haven't
pulled it yet to try burnishing the zebra contacts.
>
> I just love obsolescence.
>
> Jim Baker
> 405 426 5377
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Lloyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
Hmmm. . . . Interesting scenario. . . .
First thought is. . . if one is good at watching steam gauge detail, the
amp/current meter should drop 1-2 amps because the support charge going to
the battery is cut off. Maybe some audio noise may increase in headsets,
etc., since the battery, acting as a huge filter capacitor, is not able to
do its secondary job being cut off via the open contactor. . . .
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 7:14 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure
>
> While flying, suppose that there is failure in the battery contactor coil
> circuit and that the alternator continues to function. Will the pilot
> notice any symptoms prior to engine shutdown? If so, what are they?
> Thanks.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457526#457526
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Lloyd" <skywagon(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: KX155 alternative |
Hi Jim,
You probably have already found this. . . the 155 display is easy to get to
and change.
Just remember to set the control knobs at some "known" position before you
pull them off. Once the front panel is removed, the display slides out of
it's large contact holder. Cleaning the contacts may help, but, being a
high voltage gas display, the problem of missing segments is usually
permanent. That display is expensive and a bugger to find. I would check
with large avionics shops and if they have some new old inventory, they
might sell you a new display. I like the -155. It is a same to send it to
the grave yard.
Dave
_______________________________________________________________________________-
----- Original Message -----
| From: | "Alec Myers" <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2016 7:36 PM
| Subject: | Re: KX155 alternative |
>
> If it's 12v, and it has a glideslope receiver, and you decide to part it
> out, let me know...
>
> On Jun 28, 2016, at 21:56, Jim Baker wrote:
>
>
> Now that Bendix King have stopped making parts for this radio, especially
> the display, any advice concerning maintenance options or replacements?
> One of mine was rehab'd so it works well but the other is starting to miss
> segments. Haven't pulled it yet to try burnishing the zebra contacts.
>
> I just love obsolescence.
>
> Jim Baker
> 405 426 5377
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jimbaker(at)npacc.net |
| Subject: | Re: KX155 alternative |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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jimbaker(at)npacc.net |
| Subject: | Re: KX155 alternative |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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: KX155 alternative |
in that case... sometimes you can encourage a missing segment to work again
by warm-soaking the unit (i.e. leaving radio in the on state) for an extend
ed period of time.
On Jun 29, 2016, at 19:27, jimbaker(at)npacc.net wrote:
Both are 12v and GS.....but not parting them anytime soon.....I'm a cheap ba
stard.
; )
Jim Baker
405.426.5377
-----Original Message-----
From: Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com>
Sent: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 22:36
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: KX155 alternative
If it's 12v, and it has a glideslope receiver, and you decide to part it out
, let me know...
On Jun 28, 2016, at 21:56, Jim Baker wrote:
Now that Bendix King have stopped making parts for this radio, especially th
e display, any advice concerning maintenance options or replacements? One of
mine was rehab'd so it works well but the other is starting to miss segment
s. Haven't pulled it yet to try burnishing the zebra contacts.
I just love obsolescence.
Jim Baker
405 426 5377
==========================
========
==========================
========
==========================
========
==========================
========
==========================
========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Saad Mahaini <n5ff(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: KX155 alternative |
Interesting timing for this thread. Just last Friday my 155 was acting up f
or the first time. Some digits will go blank, but the radio woks fine. The i
ssue goes away if I turn the radio off then back on again. That happened ab
out half a dozen times in about two hour flight. It was hot summer day here
in Texas so I thought maybe it was the heat, but reading this post sounds l
ike it's a chronicle problem with this radio ? Does this sound like the disp
lay is dying or is it the pins cleaning symptoms? Any recommendations for a c
ourse of action? Any good repair shop you can recommend that can recondition
the radio for a reasonable charge ? Thanks, Saad
Sent from my iPad
> On Jun 29, 2016, at 6:27 PM, jimbaker(at)npacc.net wrote:
>
> Both are 12v and GS.....but not parting them anytime soon.....I'm a cheap b
astard.
>
> ; )
>
> Jim Baker
> 405.426.5377
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com>
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 22:36
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: KX155 alternative
>
>
> If it's 12v, and it has a glideslope receiver, and you decide to part it o
ut, let me know...
>
> On Jun 28, 2016, at 21:56, Jim Baker wrote:
>
>
> Now that Bendix King have stopped making parts for this radio, especially t
he display, any advice concerning maintenance options or replacements? One o
f mine was rehab'd so it works well but the other is starting to miss segmen
ts. Haven't pulled it yet to try burnishing the zebra contacts.
>
> I just love obsolescence.
>
> Jim Baker
> 405 426 5377
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
==========================
==========
==========================
==========
==========================
==========
==========================
==========
==========================
==========
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
| From: | "racerjerry" <gnking2(at)verizon.net> |
On a simple aircraft such as my Cessna 172K, the voltage regulator "S" terminal
is supplied with power through the battery contactor. If no power is present
at the voltage regulator, the alternator field SHOULD not be energized rendering
the alternator inoperative. The first noticeable indication after battery
voltage bleeds down is that my VHF radio display (KX-155) goes blank.
In order to alert me to take necessary steps to conserve battery power after an
alternator failure, I installed a "13V Idiot Light" from Perihelion Design, which
I highly recommend. Only $50 and legally installed without paperwork using
Velcro and powered through cigar lighter. In addition, I added a Westach 6-16
VDC voltmeter to give me a REAL indication instead of the near worthless
ammeter.
--------
Jerry King
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457550#457550
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Once an engine is running above idle, the battery no longer supplies electrical
power to the aircraft. The alternator does. Many alternators will continue
to operate if the battery is then disconnected. The electrical current needed
to power the alternator field comes from the alternator output, whether the battery
is connected or not. There may be some alternators that will not continue
to run without a battery connected. Even for alternators that do continue
to operate without a battery, the alternator could stop working if a very large
electrical load is turned on which causes the system voltage to momentarily
drop.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457555#457555
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bendix King KY97A Tuning Problem |
| From: | "racerjerry" <gnking2(at)verizon.net> |
I am sure you know this already BUT... Before you tear it apart, make sure the
problem is not just a loose knob set screw
--------
Jerry King
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457561#457561
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
At 08:13 AM 6/30/2016, you wrote:
>
>Once an engine is running above idle, the battery no longer supplies
>electrical power to the aircraft. The alternator does. Many
>alternators will continue to operate if the battery is then
>disconnected. The electrical current needed to power the alternator
>field comes from the alternator output, whether the battery is
>connected or not. There may be some alternators that will not
>continue to run without a battery connected. Even for alternators
>that do continue to operate without a battery, the alternator could
>stop working if a very large electrical load is turned on which
>causes the system voltage to momentarily drop.
WWWaaaayyyy back when, it was generally
assumed that running the aircraft sans battery
was not a good thing to do. Before alternators,
generator and battery switches were separate
and generators would self-excite. Given that
batteries are NOT good filters of power
generation noise, it didn't matter if the
battery was on-line or not.
The earliest alternators on Cessnas (and indeed
all other S.E. TC aircraft) were automotive
derivatives. I was not privy to any investigative
tests at Cessna but the corporate policy was
that their airplanes should not be operated
sans battery. Hence, the split rocker switch
was birthed.
Apparently, Beech experience was different. While
many if not most of the smaller S.E. aircraft
did the same battery-first-then-alternator
switching protocol. Re: B-23 Sundowner panel
excerpt below . . .
Emacs!
The Bonanza and Barons were different. The first
regulator design I qualified for Beech was about 1978 and
their procurement specification stated that no feature
of the regulator's circuitry 'shall prevent the alternator
from coming up self-excited above xxxx rpm". This was
the first time I'd encountered an alternator EXPECTED to
come up all by itself. The Bonanza and Barons had totally
independent battery and alternator switches. Operation
sans battery was not prohibited and in fact the system
was designed to allow it.
I've got a new electro-mechanical test bench under
fabrication and will be doing some work on PM Dynamo
rectifier/regulators. The same facility will allow me
to explore and quantify the present state of the art
in production alternators. In the mean time, as long
as you don't hit the alternator with a really BIG load
(which few system are capable of doing anyhow), the
modern alternator runs self-excited and benefits immeasurably
from battery presence with respect to noise. More
details to follow.
So the answer to the opening question on this thread is:
"Loss of the battery contactor in flight will not
produce a behavior likely to be noticed in the air."
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks for the knowledgeable answer. Once your new test bench is up and running,
it would be interesting to verify or disprove this statement quoted from the
Rotax 912 Installation Manual,
> Never sever connection between terminal C and B of regulator (e.g. by removal
of a fuse) while the engine is running. Overvoltage and regulator damage can
occur.
I find that statement hard to believe. When voltage is removed from Rotax regulator
terminal C, its DC output should shut off, not increase. Of course the
AC voltage would increase due to lack of load, but not anymore than if all electrical
loads were shut off.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457567#457567
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
At 04:20 PM 6/30/2016, you wrote:
>
>Thanks for the knowledgeable answer. Once your new test bench is up
>and running, it would be interesting to verify or disprove this
>statement quoted from the Rotax 912 Installation Manual,
>
> > Never sever connection between terminal C and B of regulator
> (e.g. by removal of a fuse) while the engine is running.
> Overvoltage and regulator damage can occur.
If we had a VERIFIED copy of the schematic
for the Ducatti R/R, the validity of that
statement could be confirmed or debunked.
I have seen THIS schematic offered from various
sources over the years
http://tinyurl.com/zfkte7c
A simply analysis of this drawing demonstrates
that "C" is both the voltage regulation sense
lead -AND- power source for the low-level
regulating circuity. Simple analysis of this
schematic shows that disconnection of the C
terminal causes the R/R to shut down . . . which
is consistent with a legacy design philosophy for
voltage regulators of all stripe.
>I find that statement hard to believe. When voltage is removed from
>Rotax regulator terminal C, its DC output should shut off, not
>increase. Of course the AC voltage would increase due to lack of
>load, but not anymore than if all electrical loads were shut off.
This is an enduring problem with anecdotal
data gleaned from the catacombs of hangar-lore.
Open circuit voltage from the PM dynamo windings
may indeed be the voltage referred to by the
original assertions. Further, THAT voltage
generated by the engine running cruise rpm
just might be hazardous to the R/R . . . but
without the benefit of original designers
documentation, we might as well be discussing
Slobovian politics over a pitcher of beer.
In the TC world, we write specs, do test plans,
carry out experiments in the lab and airplanes on
the ground and airborne. Then we write test
reports which form the foundation for design
decisions or remedial actions to correct a deficiency.
Without that report (assuming one was ever produced)
the real meaning of the ideas floating around on
forums and hangars are at risk for (1) being mis-
interpreted and (2) being morphed with the telling
and re-telling into an entirely new significance.
If the FAA ever extends it's grip deeper into
OBAM aviation, a very strong excused is bound
to include our poor utilization of computing
and communications tools to keep (1) and (2)
in check.
So I'm with you my friend. I think the assertion
about the Rotax R/R is at best an idea that
suffered too many re-tellings by individuals
with little or no understanding.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Hunter" <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Composite Aircraft and Lightning Strikes |
Hi All,
There is a discussion brewing on the Velocity Owners Builders Association
about composite aircraft and lightning strikes.
What sparked (sorry) this discussion was a question about static wicks and
if they could be useful on composite aircraft and now there is some good
bantering going on about lightning strikes and composite
aircraft...so...naturally I thought since there is some really sharp
electrical folks on this forum I would ask you all for your feedback on the
subject and I will certainly give you credit for your feedback and
suggestions (of course I could not try to pass this knowledge off as being
my own because that cat is already out of the bag and they would never
believe it came from me).
Anyhoo...here are some questions (if you think up others please feel free to
add):
-Would static wicks be beneficial to add to a composite aircraft?
-If adding static wicks to a composite airplane, where should they be added?
-Should control surfaces be bonded to the aircraft structure if static wicks
are used (and even if static wicks are not used)?
-Should all of the metal components of the aircraft be bonded together and
if so what technique should be employed to do so?
-Does anyone know of any lightning strike incidents to composite aircraft
and if so what damage to the aircraft structure/components have occurred?
-What causes lightning to be attracted to airplanes and/or why does
lightning hit airplanes (yes, I can understand why lightning hits
trees/buildings/other items that are connected to earth but an airplane is
not connected to earth...if it had just taken off I could see the static in
the wake leading to ground however an airplane in cruise flight is another
story)?
-Are composite aircraft more or less likely to be hit by lightning than
metal airplanes?
-Are there any techniques or design considerations that would mitigate the
chance of lightning strikes on the composite aircraft and/or the damage
being done should the aircraft be hit?
-On production composite aircraft, what if any equipment/design
considerations have been required by the FAA to be employed in reducing the
chances of and/or in mitigating the effect of a lightning strike?
-Some guys are discussing using Carbon Fiber or mesh being installed under
the surfaces of the airplane to transfer the energy of a lightning strike so
if a mesh of some sort is indeed used, will it help or hurt in reducing the
chances of and/or in mitigating the effect of a lightning strike (if the
mesh is not robust enough to conduct the extreme electrical current by a
lightning strike could it make the problem worse (as a lightning rod on a
house has a too small conductor then the lightning rod attracts the
lightning and then once the lightning does actually hit the rod the
conductor to ground melts and now the house structure becomes the conduit to
ground)?
Please dream up other thoughts in the area of lightning strikes and I will
certainly forward them on.
We appreciate your help in making the design of the Velocity aircraft more
safe during this time of year!!!
..
Cheers!!!
Bill Hunter
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 6/30/2016 4:20 PM, user9253 wrote:
>
> Thanks for the knowledgeable answer. Once your new test bench is up and running,
it would be interesting to verify or disprove this statement quoted from
the Rotax 912 Installation Manual,
>
>> Never sever connection between terminal C and B of regulator (e.g. by removal
of a fuse) while the engine is running. Overvoltage and regulator damage can
occur.
> I find that statement hard to believe. When voltage is removed from Rotax regulator
terminal C, its DC output should shut off, not increase. Of course the
AC voltage would increase due to lack of load, but not anymore than if all electrical
loads were shut off.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
I don't know squat about Rotax stuff or their manual, but...
If it's a PM style alternator, and the regulator is a shunt style
regulator, and breaking that C-B connection removes the shunt load, then
I can see how the regulator might be damaged. If the regulator
sensing/control semiconductors are still connected to the alternator
output but the shunt *isn't*, then the alternator could well be able to
create a high enough voltage to exceed the max voltage ratings of the
devices.
Having the shunt *in* the circuit would ensure that the voltage never
got that high.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Composite Aircraft and Lightning Strikes |
>
>Anyhoo...here are some questions (if you think up others please feel free to
>add):
>
>-Would static wicks be beneficial to add to a composite aircraft?
Depends. A 'static wick' is intended to REDUCE coronal
resistance between CONDUCTIVE parts of the airframe and
the surrounding atmosphere. Without static wicks, electro
static potentials in the millions of volts can build up
in various places on the airframe. The existance of
high levels of static build up can manifest in (1) visible
light (St. Elmo's Fire on prop tips, around window frames,
sharp trailing edges), (2) radio noise that can totally
cripple some systems and sometimes (3) excessive erosion.
The purpose of a static wick is to ENCOURAGE dissipation of
electro-static energies at LOW levels . . . levels too low
to produce the deleterious effects cited.
-If adding static wicks to a composite airplane, where should
they be added?
EXCELLENT question. Figuring out were to put them nn a metal
airplane is not a simple task . . . an insulated airplne is
whole different ball game.
I've seen airplanes perched on insulating jacks and excited
with bunches of volts while a technician walks around the outside
probing potential leak-off points on the airframe with a very
long test probe. This is a good start on figuring out where
potentially
>-Should control surfaces be bonded to the aircraft structure if static wicks
>are used (and even if static wicks are not used)?
>
>-Should all of the metal components of the aircraft be bonded together and
>if so what technique should be employed to do so?
Can't think of a single reason to do such things.
I think Burt Rutan may have uttered such an opinion
WAaaayyyy back when about control surfaces on the Ez
series aircraft . . . But I'm at a lost to imagine, much
less demonstrate how the action would benefit anything.
>-Does anyone know of any lightning strike incidents to composite aircraft
>and if so what damage to the aircraft structure/components have occurred?
One of our very own suffered just such an event
http://tinyurl.com/hre2hkz
>-What causes lightning to be attracted to airplanes and/or why does
>lightning hit airplanes (yes, I can understand why lightning hits
>trees/buildings/other items that are connected to earth but an airplane is
>not connected to earth...if it had just taken off I could see the static in
>the wake leading to ground however an airplane in cruise flight is another
>story)?
>
>-Are composite aircraft more or less likely to be hit by lightning than
>metal airplanes?
Intuitively one might think so . . . but the airplane
is only a triggering influence in what was going to
be a strike whether the airplane was there or not.
All images of airplanes being struck show the airplane
in the middle of a strike that extends from one
area of the storm (usually cloud) to another area
or the ground.
>-Are there any techniques or design considerations that would mitigate the
>chance of lightning strikes on the composite aircraft and/or the damage
>being done should the aircraft be hit?
Yeah, it's called staying the @#$@ away from
areas for which no practical invincability can
be demonstrated. This included lightning, ice,
high winds, hail, etc.
>-On production composite aircraft, what if any equipment/design
>considerations have been required by the FAA to be employed in reducing the
>chances of and/or in mitigating the effect of a lightning strike?
It's exaclty the OPPOSITE. We cannot nor do we attempt
to avoid being struck. We must ASSUME we WILL be struck
and design for measured and predicted stresses.
>-Some guys are discussing using Carbon Fiber or mesh being installed under
>the surfaces of the airplane to transfer the energy of a lightning strike so
>if a mesh of some sort is indeed used, will it help or hurt in reducing the
>chances of and/or in mitigating the effect of a lightning strike (if the
>mesh is not robust enough to conduct the extreme electrical current by a
>lightning strike could it make the problem worse (as a lightning rod on a
>house has a too small conductor then the lightning rod attracts the
>lightning and then once the lightning does actually hit the rod the
>conductor to ground melts and now the house structure becomes the conduit to
>ground)?
Check with the Lancair and Glasair forums. These folks
would come a close as anyone to knowing what was tried
and either succeeded or failed to produce the desired
mitigation of effects. There is a wealth of discussion
on . . .
http://tinyurl.com/zeay3x5
. . . this is NOT a trivial task.
>Please dream up other thoughts in the area of lightning strikes and I will
>certainly forward them on.
>
>We appreciate your help in making the design of the Velocity aircraft more
>safe during this time of year!!!
History is rife with examples of work done
to make aircraft resistant to the effects of
lightning strike. Lancair, Glassair and contemporaries
wrestled with it. At Beech, we stayed with metal wings
but the fuselage structures have large, flat conductive
straps that run longitudinaly7 in the fuselage. These
'fixes' are tested in direct effects of lightning laboratories
to show that people, structure and systems within the airplane
remain intact after events that are ASSUMED WILL HAPPEN.
The simple answer to the question is: "Yes, you CAN do things
to airplanes of any stripe to reduce risk due to lightning
strike . . . but it's not a simple task. A task deeply intertwined
with issues of structural integrity, weight, aerodynamics . . . and cost.
In flight school, we were well advised to stay away from
ice and convective activity. Risks to body and airframe go
up exponentially . . . while costs for mitigation of those
risks are breathtaking.
Adding any feature intended to mitigate environmental
risk brings some human factor's issues with it. More that
one pilot with boots, prop-deice and a windshield heater
patch was willing to 'press on just a little further' . . .
with more than simply disappointing outcome. The same
effect could beset a pilot flying an airplane with
lightning mitigation enhancements . . . enhancements
that did not benefit from a through checkout in the
lightning lab by folks who have been there, done that.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
>If it's a PM style alternator, and the regulator is a shunt style
>regulator, and breaking that C-B connection removes the shunt load,
>then I can see how the regulator might be damaged. If the regulator
>sensing/control semiconductors are still connected to the alternator
>output but the shunt *isn't*, then the alternator could well be able
>to create a high enough voltage to exceed the max voltage ratings of
>the devices.
Nobody has built a shunt style regulator in
a very long time. A few small systems on motor
bikes and snowmobiles popularized the simple
design but the B&C regulators have never been
shunt . . . the alleged schematic of the Ducatti
R/R is also a series regulator.
They are manufactured as a spares item but better
regulators are so easy to design, there's no reason
to stay with shunt style.
>Having the shunt *in* the circuit would ensure that the voltage
>never got that high.
but it WOULD drive internal energy dissipation
to the max and, give the demonstrably poor
thermal management of many designs, could
toast the device. But I'm pretty sure
nobody builds/offers that control philosophy to
on the product we're using.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
The Rotax (Ducati) rectifier/regulator is a switching-power-supply type of regulator
that turns on for part of the dynamo AC cycle. There is no shunt.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457572#457572
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
>If it's a PM style alternator, and the regulator is a shunt style
>regulator, and breaking that C-B connection removes the shunt load,
>then I can see how the regulator might be damaged. If the regulator
>sensing/control semiconductors are still connected to the alternator
>output but the shunt *isn't*, then the alternator could well be able
>to create a high enough voltage to exceed the max voltage ratings of
>the devices.
Nobody has built a shunt style regulator in
a very long time. A few small systems on motor
bikes and snowmobiles popularized the simple
design but the B&C regulators have never been
shunt . . . the alleged schematic of the Ducatti
R/R is also a series regulator.
They are manufactured as a spares item but better
regulators are so easy to design, there's no reason
to stay with shunt style.
>Having the shunt *in* the circuit would ensure that the voltage
>never got that high.
but it WOULD drive internal energy dissipation
to the max and, give the demonstrably poor
thermal management of many designs, could
toast the device. But I'm pretty sure
nobody builds/offers that control philosophy to
on the product we're using.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Composite Aircraft and Lightning Strikes |
| From: | Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com> |
Before getting really wound up about lightning protection first understand
the risk and then figure the mitigation. Look at the accident statistics-
how many light aircraft have been struck by lightning and not survived? The
answer is very, very few - in the US and in Europe. For whatever reason.
Thunderstorms kill many people but lightning does not. My conclusion is
that airframe lightning protection is not worthwhile. Thunderstorm
protection is difficult so I avoid them.
Peter
On 1 Jul 2016 04:50, "William Hunter" wrote:
> billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com>
>
> Hi All,
>
> There is a discussion brewing on the Velocity Owners Builders Association
> about composite aircraft and lightning strikes.
>
> What sparked (sorry) this discussion was a question about static wicks and
> if they could be useful on composite aircraft and now there is some good
> bantering going on about lightning strikes and composite
> aircraft...so...naturally I thought since there is some really sharp
> electrical folks on this forum I would ask you all for your feedback on the
> subject and I will certainly give you credit for your feedback and
> suggestions (of course I could not try to pass this knowledge off as being
> my own because that cat is already out of the bag and they would never
> believe it came from me).
>
> Anyhoo...here are some questions (if you think up others please feel free
> to
> add):
>
> -Would static wicks be beneficial to add to a composite aircraft?
>
> -If adding static wicks to a composite airplane, where should they be
> added?
>
> -Should control surfaces be bonded to the aircraft structure if static
> wicks
> are used (and even if static wicks are not used)?
>
> -Should all of the metal components of the aircraft be bonded together and
> if so what technique should be employed to do so?
>
> -Does anyone know of any lightning strike incidents to composite aircraft
> and if so what damage to the aircraft structure/components have occurred?
>
> -What causes lightning to be attracted to airplanes and/or why does
> lightning hit airplanes (yes, I can understand why lightning hits
> trees/buildings/other items that are connected to earth but an airplane is
> not connected to earth...if it had just taken off I could see the static in
> the wake leading to ground however an airplane in cruise flight is another
> story)?
>
> -Are composite aircraft more or less likely to be hit by lightning than
> metal airplanes?
>
> -Are there any techniques or design considerations that would mitigate the
> chance of lightning strikes on the composite aircraft and/or the damage
> being done should the aircraft be hit?
>
> -On production composite aircraft, what if any equipment/design
> considerations have been required by the FAA to be employed in reducing the
> chances of and/or in mitigating the effect of a lightning strike?
>
> -Some guys are discussing using Carbon Fiber or mesh being installed under
> the surfaces of the airplane to transfer the energy of a lightning strike
> so
> if a mesh of some sort is indeed used, will it help or hurt in reducing the
> chances of and/or in mitigating the effect of a lightning strike (if the
> mesh is not robust enough to conduct the extreme electrical current by a
> lightning strike could it make the problem worse (as a lightning rod on a
> house has a too small conductor then the lightning rod attracts the
> lightning and then once the lightning does actually hit the rod the
> conductor to ground melts and now the house structure becomes the conduit
> to
> ground)?
>
> Please dream up other thoughts in the area of lightning strikes and I will
> certainly forward them on.
>
> We appreciate your help in making the design of the Velocity aircraft more
> safe during this time of year!!!
>
> ..
>
> Cheers!!!
>
> Bill Hunter
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Composite Aircraft and Lightning Strikes |
| From: | Werner Schneider <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
There is a very narrative report from a glider in the UK, which was hit
by lightning and disintegrated, in the same report a helicopter with
carbon fiber blades is described as well.
http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~cline/ASK%20lightning%20strike/ASK%20accident%20report.htm
For my feeling stay away from possible lightning ;)
Cheers Werner
On 01.07.2016 01:37, William Hunter wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> There is a discussion brewing on the Velocity Owners Builders Association
> about composite aircraft and lightning strikes.
>
> ........
>
> -Does anyone know of any lightning strike incidents to composite aircraft
> and if so what damage to the aircraft structure/components have occurred?
>
> -
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Composite Aircraft and Lightning Strikes |
| From: | Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com> |
Read the AAIB report, aircraft was in good VMC. The energy of the strike
meant that no protection would have made any difference. The control rods
melted - nothing much could be done about that...
On 1 Jul 2016 8:30 a.m., "Werner Schneider" wrote:
> >
>
> There is a very narrative report from a glider in the UK, which was hit by
> lightning and disintegrated, in the same report a helicopter with carbon
> fiber blades is described as well.
>
>
> http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~cline/ASK%20lightning%20strike/ASK%20accident%20report.htm
>
> For my feeling stay away from possible lightning ;)
>
> Cheers Werner
>
>
> On 01.07.2016 01:37, William Hunter wrote:
>
>> billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com>
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> There is a discussion brewing on the Velocity Owners Builders Association
>> about composite aircraft and lightning strikes.
>>
>> ........
>>
>> -Does anyone know of any lightning strike incidents to composite aircraft
>> and if so what damage to the aircraft structure/components have occurred?
>>
>> -
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bendix King KY97A Tuning Problem |
| From: | "jnmeade" <jnmeade(at)southslope.net> |
I did check the knob and it is securely on the shaft, but thanks for the reminder.
When one turns the knob, there is a distinctive aural and tactical click.
Sometimes the display updates and sometimes it doesn't. The display always
indicates the true frequency, so this may be a mechanical issue. I've moved the
knob enough that I'm confident it is not a dirty wiper.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457582#457582
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bendix King KY97A Tuning Problem |
| From: | "racerjerry" <gnking2(at)verizon.net> |
I searched for a KY97A Maintenance / Overhaul manual (not install manual) availability
on the web that might help you out. I found this manual preview for KY
96/97 that enables you to view all pages (scroll down to view each page) and
also has a magnifier to view detail. This requires some WORK, but the entire
manual appears to be viewable along with parts list.
http://www.manualslib.com/manual/835245/Bendixking-Ky-96a.html?
--------
Jerry King
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457583#457583
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
No argument on those points, but if the contents of the document are
artifacts from 'the bad old days'.....
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> If it's a PM style alternator, and the regulator is a shunt style
> regulator, and breaking that C-B connection removes the shunt load, then I
> can see how the regulator might be damaged. If the regulator
> sensing/control semiconductors are still connected to the alternator output
> but the shunt *isn't*, then the alternator could well be able to create a
> high enough voltage to exceed the max voltage ratings of the devices.
>
>
> Nobody has built a shunt style regulator in
> a very long time. A few small systems on motor
> bikes and snowmobiles popularized the simple
> design but the B&C regulators have never been
> shunt . . . the alleged schematic of the Ducatti
> R/R is also a series regulator.
>
> They are manufactured as a spares item but better
> regulators are so easy to design, there's no reason
> to stay with shunt style.
>
> Having the shunt *in* the circuit would ensure that the voltage never got
> that high.
>
>
> but it WOULD drive internal energy dissipation
> to the max and, give the demonstrably poor
> thermal management of many designs, could
> toast the device. But I'm pretty sure
> nobody builds/offers that control philosophy to
> on the product we're using.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Composite Aircraft and Lightning Strikes |
| From: | Lyle Peterson <lyleap(at)centurylink.net> |
On 6/30/2016 9:04 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> the problem worse (as a lightning rod on a
>
>
>> -Are there any techniques or design considerations that would
>> mitigate the
>> chance of lightning strikes on the composite aircraft and/or the damage
>> being done should the aircraft be hit?
>
> Yeah, it's called staying the @#$@ away from
> areas for which no practical invincability can
> be demonstrated. This included lightning, ice,
> high winds, hail, etc.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
ROTFLMAO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bendix King KY97A Tuning Problem |
On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 6:27 AM, jnmeade wrote:
> >
>
> I did check the knob and it is securely on the shaft, but thanks for the
> reminder. When one turns the knob, there is a distinctive aural and
> tactical click. Sometimes the display updates and sometimes it doesn't.
> The display always indicates the true frequency, so this may be a
> mechanical issue. I've moved the knob enough that I'm confident it is not
> a dirty wiper.
>
> As someone who was an electronics tech back in another life (in the epoch
when that radio was probably designed), I can tell you that you might be
over-confident. :-) Some corrosion issues on switch contacts or controls
just cannot be wiped away by switch action. Or even contact cleaner, in
some cases.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Composite Aircraft and Lightning Strikes |
At 01:35 AM 7/1/2016, you wrote:
>Before getting really wound up about lightning protection first
>understand the risk and then figure the mitigation. Look at the
>accident statistics- how many light aircraft have been struck by
>lightning and not survived? The answer is very, very few - in the US
>and in Europe. For whatever reason. Thunderstorms kill many people
>but lightning does not. My conclusion is that airframe lightning
>protection is not worthwhile. Thunderstorm protection is difficult
>so I avoid them.
Excellent point . . . Similarly, few engines
stop cold because of mechanical or electrical
failure. The majority of 'engine trouble' on
airplanes is fuel exhaustion. The moral of the
story is that the pilot is the weakest link in
the chain of risk for operating an airplane.
Static wicks (also a topic of this thread)
are another matter. They go to a more mundane
issue . . . radio noise and miscellaneous damage
to systems.
The windshields in many high performance airplanes
are vulnerable to the high voltage discharge
often observed around the edges of a window
frame. When that window is fitted with embedded
heater wires, replacement can be VERY expensive.
I thing the price tag on a GP180 window was around
$20K in 1980 dollars.
There have been many experiments with aircraft
finishes and shapes conducted to understand how
static electricity can be better managed on
high performance aircraft.
Not all static wicks are the same. Walk around
the ramp and check out the variations you'll find.
I recall John Cooper, head cheese of our EMC lab
building a fixture to survey static wick performance.
Various samples being tested might vary as much as
3:1 with respect to their 'conductivity'.
Once you identify a 'good' wick design, then finding
the 'right' place to install them was another
grand experiment. And this was on all metal
aircraft. Airplanes of glass and plastic are
another matter. Imagine how you might modify
a glass rod (used to demonstrate static electricity
phenomenon in physics class) to dampen if not
eliminate it's ability to stand up the hairs
on your cat.
Further, your successful technique cannot materially
change structural characteristics, it must be
durable, and it cannot add too much cost.
If anyone discovers some literature
describing successful application of static wicks
to plastic/glass/carbon aircraft . . . I'd REALLY
like to read it.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
| From: | "erich weaver" <erich.weaver(at)aecom.com> |
[quote="nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect"]At 08:13 AM 6/30/2016, you wrote:
>
> In the mean time, as long
> as you don't hit the alternator with a really BIG load
> (which few system are capable of doing anyhow), the
> modern alternator runs self-excited and benefits immeasurably
> from battery presence with respect to noise.
Just to clarify, did you really mean "benefits immeasurably"? I think maybe the
opposite.
Immeasurable: Too large, extensive or extreme to measure.
regards,
Erich
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457589#457589
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Composite Aircraft and Lightning Strikes |
| From: | William Hunter <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
Hi All,
THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP!!! Very good information and I will be passing the
information on to the VOBA Forum.
Bill Hunter
+1 408-464-1902
On Jul 1, 2016 7:14 AM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 01:35 AM 7/1/2016, you wrote:
>
> Before getting really wound up about lightning protection first understand
> the risk and then figure the mitigation. Look at the accident statistics-
> how many light aircraft have been struck by lightning and not survived? The
> answer is very, very few - in the US and in Europe. For whatever reason.
> Thunderstorms kill many people but lightning does not. My conclusion is
> that airframe lightning protection is not worthwhile. Thunderstorm
> protection is difficult so I avoid them.
>
>
> Excellent point . . . Similarly, few engines
> stop cold because of mechanical or electrical
> failure. The majority of 'engine trouble' on
> airplanes is fuel exhaustion. The moral of the
> story is that the pilot is the weakest link in
> the chain of risk for operating an airplane.
>
> Static wicks (also a topic of this thread)
> are another matter. They go to a more mundane
> issue . . . radio noise and miscellaneous damage
> to systems.
>
> The windshields in many high performance airplanes
> are vulnerable to the high voltage discharge
> often observed around the edges of a window
> frame. When that window is fitted with embedded
> heater wires, replacement can be VERY expensive.
> I thing the price tag on a GP180 window was around
> $20K in 1980 dollars.
>
> There have been many experiments with aircraft
> finishes and shapes conducted to understand how
> static electricity can be better managed on
> high performance aircraft.
>
> Not all static wicks are the same. Walk around
> the ramp and check out the variations you'll find.
> I recall John Cooper, head cheese of our EMC lab
> building a fixture to survey static wick performance.
> Various samples being tested might vary as much as
> 3:1 with respect to their 'conductivity'.
>
> Once you identify a 'good' wick design, then finding
> the 'right' place to install them was another
> grand experiment. And this was on all metal
> aircraft. Airplanes of glass and plastic are
> another matter. Imagine how you might modify
> a glass rod (used to demonstrate static electricity
> phenomenon in physics class) to dampen if not
> eliminate it's ability to stand up the hairs
> on your cat.
>
> Further, your successful technique cannot materially
> change structural characteristics, it must be
> durable, and it cannot add too much cost.
>
> If anyone discovers some literature
> describing successful application of static wicks
> to plastic/glass/carbon aircraft . . . I'd REALLY
> like to read it.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
"Benefits immeasurably" can be interpreted two ways:
Benefits are so small that they can not be measured.
Benefits are so greats that no scale exists to measure them.
Judging by his ending statement, I assume that he meant the benefits are very small.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457594#457594
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New smartphone app for pilots |
| From: | "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com> |
Hi All,
Just a very quick note to let you know that the revised version of avAltimeter
is now available from the Apple App Store.
The new revision allows QNH entry in millibars and Altitude reading in Feet
Also, I caught and squashed a nasty little bug which might have caused crashing.
Cheers
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457596#457596
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New smartphone app for pilots |
| From: | Robert Borger <rlborger(at)mac.com> |
Ira,
Just updated. Nice app, easy to use and it provides useful information.
Blue skies & tailwinds,
Bob Borger
Europa XS Tri, Rotax 914, Airmaster C/S Prop (75 hrs).
Little Toot Sport Biplane, Lycoming Thunderbolt AEIO-320 EXP
3705 Lynchburg Dr.
Corinth, TX 76208-5331
Cel: 817-992-1117
rlborger(at)mac.com
> On Jul 1, 2016, at 12:56 PM, rampil wrote:
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> Just a very quick note to let you know that the revised version of
avAltimeter
> is now available from the Apple App Store.
>
> The new revision allows QNH entry in millibars and Altitude reading in
Feet
>
> Also, I caught and squashed a nasty little bug which might have caused
crashing.
>
> Cheers
>
> --------
> Ira N224XS
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New smartphone app for pilots |
| From: | John Tipton <jmtipton(at)btopenworld.com> |
Strange: can't find it ---
Sent from my iPad
----x--O--x----
> On 1 Jul 2016, at 07:28 pm, Robert Borger wrote:
>
> Ira,
>
> Just updated. Nice app, easy to use and it provides useful information.
>
> Blue skies & tailwinds,
> Bob Borger
> Europa XS Tri, Rotax 914, Airmaster C/S Prop (75 hrs).
> Little Toot Sport Biplane, Lycoming Thunderbolt AEIO-320 EXP
> 3705 Lynchburg Dr.
> Corinth, TX 76208-5331
> Cel: 817-992-1117
> rlborger(at)mac.com
>
>> On Jul 1, 2016, at 12:56 PM, rampil wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Just a very quick note to let you know that the revised version of avAlti
meter
>> is now available from the Apple App Store.
>>
>> The new revision allows QNH entry in millibars and Altitude reading in Fe
et
>>
>> Also, I caught and squashed a nasty little bug which might have caused cr
ashing.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> --------
>> Ira N224XS
==========================
==========================
==========================
-=========================
==========================
-=========================
==========================
==========================
====================
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New smartphone app for pilots |
| From: | "rampil" <ira.rampil(at)gmail.com> |
Hi John!
If you searched for it via your iPad, it probably will not be visible.
None of the iPads extent to this point have the Baro chip, so
I selected iPhone only. The app actually runs on an iPad or older
iPhone, but when it fails to detect the Bosch chip, it sets a pressure
of zero. Not much I can do about it, sorry.
If you were searching from your phone, it is conceivable
that the latest version 1.0.4 did not make it to Apple's
Server farms across the pond yet.
Please let me know if you still have issues.
Ira
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457606#457606
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
| From: | "erich weaver" <erich.weaver(at)aecom.com> |
Right, and many believe that a battery DOES provide great benefit with respect
to buffering electrical noise, so thought it would be important to clarify That
Bob does not believe that to be the case.
Thanks
E
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457616#457616
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
At 10:48 AM 7/1/2016, you wrote:
>
>
>[quote="nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect"]At 08:13 AM 6/30/2016, you wrote:
>
> >
> > In the mean time, as long
> > as you don't hit the alternator with a really BIG load
> > (which few system are capable of doing anyhow), the
> > modern alternator runs self-excited and benefits immeasurably
> > from battery presence with respect to noise.
>
>
>Just to clarify, did you really mean "benefits immeasurably"? I
>think maybe the opposite.
>
>Immeasurable: Too large, extensive or extreme to measure.
I've been thinking that word described an unquantifiable
entity; impossible to express in terms of quantity for any reason.
In fact, I've learned that it refers not to generally unknowable
numbers but only to nebulously large numbers.
I can go to bed tonight knowing something I did not
know this morning . . . it's a good day. Thanks for
the heads-up!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
At 04:53 PM 7/1/2016, you wrote:
>
>
>Right, and many believe that a battery DOES provide great benefit
>with respect to buffering electrical noise, so thought it would be
>important to clarify That Bob does not believe that to be the case.
It's easily demonstrated. I've made
numerous measurements on vehicles and
on the bench that show how the fully
charged battery becomes chemically
'disconnected' from its charging source.
I.e. its influence on minor wiggles (noise)
is diminished to insignificance.
Yes, during alternator runaway the battery
becomes the major 'load' that prevents
an predictable rise in bus voltage to 100
volts or more. An during high-inrush events,
the alternator's momentary overload or
slow dynamics in voltage regulation will also be
mitigated by the battery's ability to
dump energy back into the system during
the transient.
But for the itty-bitty wiggles we call
noise . . . excursions in hundreds of
millivolts over a broad range of frequencies,
the battery offers no significant 'filtering'
of these events.
The new test bench taking shape in my
shop is fitted with a large bonding surface
(copper clad top), lots of 120 vac outlets,
and a 2hp variable speed drive. The bench
is a shrine to Lord Kelvin. We will endeavor
to discover all the operating characteristics
of various components down to every measurable
detail with particular emphasis regulation
stability and efficiency.
I'll repeat the experiments that speak to
the battery's filtering qualities. The cool
thing is that we can document and publish
significant findings.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carlos Trigo <trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt> |
Guys
This switch
is model LT-2561-601-012 from Carling Technologies, which is a DPDT switch w
ith illuminated lever tip.
I know that the 2 sets of 3 contacts on each side are the DPDT contacts, so n
o doubt about their wiring.
Now about the other 2 middle contacts, which are for the tip illumination, h
ow are they wired?
Thanks
Carlos
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carlos Trigo" <trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt> |
Guys
The switch in the attached images is model LT-2561-601-012 from Carling
Technologies, which is a DPDT switch with illuminated lever tip.
I know that the 2 sets of contacts on each side are the DPDT contacts, so n
o
doubt about their wiring.
Now about the other 2 middle contacts, which are for the LED tip
illumination, how are they wired?
Thanks
Carlos
---
Este e-mail foi verificado em termos de v=C3=ADrus pelo software antiv=C3
=ADrus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Switch wiring |
| From: | Werner Schneider <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
Carlos there are some pictures on google for boats:
https://www.fpmarine.com/Articles.asp?ID=245
On 02.07.2016 16:46, Carlos Trigo wrote:
>
> is model LT-2561-601-012 from Carling Technologies, which is a DPDT switch with
illuminated lever tip.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Switch wiring |
| From: | Eric Page <edpav8r(at)yahoo.com> |
Carlos,
The Carling datasheet for this switch...
http://www.mouser.com/ds/2/65/LT-Series_Details___COS-275734.pdf
...is curiously silent on terminal connections.
I can only conceive of one way to connect it: as you said, the terminals down each
side are the switch contacts, with the center terminal common in each circuit.
+12V is connected to the common terminals and switched to the terminals
on the corners.
My guess is that +12V is also switched to the lamp internally, and the upper and
lower middle terminals would be connected to ground for illumination in each
toggle position. You would only ground the side you want to light up, or both
if you want illumination in both ON positions.
This would allow you to control the switch illumination by grounding it through
another switch elsewhere; say, a limit switch. If the switch were used to control
flaps, for example, the toggle would be lit while flaps are moving, and
extinguish when they reach the limit switch, breaking the bulb's ground path.
You may find that the lamp operates from only one of the +12V common terminals
but not the other, or that each toggle position illuminates from a different common
terminal. This would be done to maintain separation between the two SPDT
circuits that make up the DPDT switch.
A quick bench test would confirm or refute my hypothesis. If you don't have a
bench power supply handy, a 9V battery should suffice to light the toggle's bulb.
Or even an ohmmeter set to test continuity should work through an incandescent
bulb.
Eric
> On Jul 2, 2016, at 7:46 AM, Carlos Trigo wrote:
> Guys
>
> This switch
>
>
>
>
> is model LT-2561-601-012 from Carling Technologies, which is a DPDT switch with
illuminated lever tip.
>
> I know that the 2 sets of 3 contacts on each side are the DPDT contacts, so no
doubt about their wiring. Now about the other 2 middle contacts, which are
for the tip illumination, how are they wired?
>
> Thanks
> Carlos
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Switch wiring |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
You could try emailing team2(at)carlingtech.com for advice.
The two extra terminals could power the lamp independent of the switch mechanism.
Then it would be up to the installer to add jumper wires. The spec sheet
says, Independent lamp is Standard, dependent lamp is available. Other than having
an internal lamp, the switch could operate exactly like any other DPDT switch.
For switching higher voltages, a separate 12 volt supply would be needed
for the lamp. The lamp might be located in a fixed position and shines through
fiber optics in the actuator lever.
This is all guessing on my part.
I like Eric's ohmmeter or 9 volt battery suggestion.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457650#457650
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch wiring |
At 10:34 AM 7/2/2016, you wrote:
>Guys
>
>The switch in the attached images is model LT-2561-601-012 from Carling
>Technologies, which is a DPDT switch with illuminated lever tip.
>I know that the 2 sets of contacts on each side are the DPDT contacts, so no
>doubt about their wiring.
>Now about the other 2 middle contacts, which are for the LED tip
>illumination, how are they wired?
Here's the carling data sheet on that series
of switches.
http://tinyurl.com/jda6zop
Looking at an exerpt we see
Emacs!
Your LT2561 is two pole, three position on-off-on
with .25" quick connects, satin chrome handle,
red display in all three positions and a 12 volt
incandescent lamp (so you don't have to worry about
polarity).
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | z-13/8 questions |
Regarding drawing Z-13/8 ...
1. Why is there a 30 amp inline fuse on the 14 gauge wire coming from the 8
amp dynamo?
2. Why doesn't the 4AWG cable connect to the battery side of the battery
contactor?
Thanks,
Ken Ryan
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
If the over-voltage module shorts out, it is desired that the 2 amp circuit breaker
trip before the fuse blows. A larger size fuse will take longer to blow.
There is a 4 awg wire connected to the battery side of the battery contactor.
I do not understand the question.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457664#457664
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
Thanks Joe. I was thinking 30 amps was too high for 14 gauge but I now see
that it's not. The other question is why not run the big cable to the
starter from the battery side of the contactor? That way the engine could
be started in the event of battery contactor failure. Is it because cutting
current to that wire when the contactor is turned off is considered more
important than being able to start the engine if the contactor fails? That
would make sense I guess for forced landings, etc. But not for getting
maximum voltage to the starter. The reason I ask is because the Rotax 914
installation manual shows the starter wire going to the battery side of the
battery contactor. And it does seem like it would make sense to maximize
voltage getting to the starter.
On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 6:14 PM, user9253 wrote:
>
> If the over-voltage module shorts out, it is desired that the 2 amp
> circuit breaker trip before the fuse blows. A larger size fuse will take
> longer to blow.
>
> There is a 4 awg wire connected to the battery side of the battery
> contactor. I do not understand the question.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457664#457664
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Hunter" <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Non-Working Radio Help Needed |
Hi All,
Can you all please help a cyber friend with a second King radio that is
no longer working. It was working fine and now all of a sudden it is no
longer working. He has two radios however they are not identical radios
so he cannot swap them to see if the problem follows.
Here is his latest report:
---------------------------COPY-----------------------
I tried a few things and here are what I found.
The antenna is confirmed to be working.
The radio doesn't work on either receiving or transmitting.
However, when I pushed the push-to-talk, the 'T' on the radio display
did show up so it tried to transmit.
When I used a handheld to detect the transmission, the handheld didn't
receive anything when the radio tried to transmit. (The same handheld
can be heard when I switched to the working radio. Besides the
handheld's indicator light turned to green when the working radio was
transmitting.)
In the headset, I can hear "static noise" from the radio when the volume
was turned up. When I pulled the volume button out for "pull to test",
the static noise is loud.
I removed the radio from the panel. The connectors looked clean but I
cleaned the connectors using rubbing alcohol anyway which didn't help.
The model is Bendix/King KX-155 (P/N 069-1024-42).
What else I can try?
..
Cheers!!!
Bill Hunter
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Switch wiring |
| From: | Carlos Trigo <trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt> |
Well, I had to ask exactly because the Carling documents don't have any info
rmation about the contacts, not even a wiring schematic, as it is usual.
Thanks Werner, Eric and Bob; Now I know that the middle contacts are very si
mply the 2 lamp contacts.
Nice! It is already wired...
Carlos
Enviado do meu iPhone
No dia 02/07/2016, =C3-s 20:57, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aero
electric.com> escreveu:
> At 10:34 AM 7/2/2016, you wrote:
>> Guys
>>
>> The switch in the attached images is model LT-2561-601-012 from Carling
>> Technologies, which is a DPDT switch with illuminated lever tip.
>> I know that the 2 sets of contacts on each side are the DPDT contacts, so
no
>> doubt about their wiring.
>> Now about the other 2 middle contacts, which are for the LED tip
>> illumination, how are they wired?
>
> Here's the carling data sheet on that series
> of switches.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/jda6zop
>
> Looking at an exerpt we see
>
>
>
> Your LT2561 is two pole, three position on-off-on
> with .25" quick connects, satin chrome handle,
> red display in all three positions and a 12 volt
> incandescent lamp (so you don't have to worry about
> polarity).
>
>
>
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Non-Working Radio Help Needed |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
It sure sounds like an antenna problem. If the antenna has been confirmed good,
maybe the problem is the interface between the antenna and radio.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457670#457670
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
A 30 amp fuse is normally too high for protecting a #14 wire. There are two purposes
for circuit protection, overload and short circuits. Since a PM dynamo
is self current limiting, overload protection does not need to the provided.
But short circuit protection does. The battery and the rest of the electrical
system needs to be protected against the PM dynamo circuit shorting out. A
30 amp fuse will definitely blow when a 14 awg wire shorts out. The event will
happen so quickly that the tefzel insulation will not get hot enough to be damaged.
B and C provides a schematic that is wired as you suggested. In fact, there
is no battery contactor at all.
http://www.bandc.aero/pdfs/420-506_REVB.pdf
Most aircraft are wired with the battery contactor and starter contactor in series.
One advantage is being able to shut off the battery contactor if the starter
contactor gets stuck closed. I understand Rotax's reasoning. There is
more than one way to wire an airplane. Like other design considerations, compromises
need to be made. The advantage of one feature causes a disadvantage someplace
else.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457672#457672
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
Thanks Joe, especially for the explanation regarding overload and short
circuit. I never clearly understood that before. Here's another question:
With the Rotax the rotary keyed ignition switch is not allowed. Independent
toggles for the ignitions are clearly specified. Given that, what would be
the options for inserting a keyed switch to prevent unauthorized starting?
The only thing I have come up with is to put it in series with the battery
contactor (given that the starter cable is connected to the output side of
that contactor). If I moved the starter cable to the battery side of the
contactor, where might I use a keyed switch?
Ken
On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 4:38 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> A 30 amp fuse is normally too high for protecting a #14 wire. There are
> two purposes for circuit protection, overload and short circuits. Since a
> PM dynamo is self current limiting, overload protection does not need to
> the provided. But short circuit protection does. The battery and the rest
> of the electrical system needs to be protected against the PM dynamo
> circuit shorting out. A 30 amp fuse will definitely blow when a 14 awg
> wire shorts out. The event will happen so quickly that the tefzel
> insulation will not get hot enough to be damaged.
> B and C provides a schematic that is wired as you suggested. In fact,
> there is no battery contactor at all.
> http://www.bandc.aero/pdfs/420-506_REVB.pdf
> Most aircraft are wired with the battery contactor and starter contactor
> in series. One advantage is being able to shut off the battery contactor
> if the starter contactor gets stuck closed. I understand Rotax's
> reasoning. There is more than one way to wire an airplane. Like other
> design considerations, compromises need to be made. The advantage of one
> feature causes a disadvantage someplace else.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457672#457672
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Ken, assuming that you are installing a starter contactor, how about wiring it
as shown in Z13/8?
Battery, Battery Contactor, Starter Contactor, Starter
Replace the push button switch in Z13/8 with a momentary key switch like Mouser
part number 611-Y208122A203NQ
Ignore the Mouser Switch Function description. The C&K data sheet shows that the
DPDT that can be wired to function as desired.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457674#457674
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
If your starter contactor does not have an internal diode, install an exterior
one with the arrow pointing towards positive. The banded end of a diode is the
end of the diode that the arrow points towards. A diode will protect the start
switch from arcing.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457676#457676
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | GTH <gilles.thesee(at)free.fr> |
/Le 03/07/2016 17:17, Ken Ryan a crit :
/
> /
> /
> /With the Rotax the rotary keyed ignition switch is not allowed.
> Independent toggles for the ignitions are clearly specified.
> /
Hi Ken and all,
Didn't know about that.
Maybe it concerns the latest engines. Or maybe it is in the new
installation documents, but as Rotax didn't change the engines already
flying, I would not lose sleep on the keyswitch vs separate switches
problem.
Hundreds of airplanes have been flying for years with a standard
ignition keyswitch for their Rotax without the slightest issue.
I'd even state that the Rotax circuit wiring suggestions are to be taken
with a grain of salt, especially concerning the 914.
--
Best regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
Thanks Joe, good idea.
On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 8:20 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> Ken, assuming that you are installing a starter contactor, how about
> wiring it as shown in Z13/8?
> Battery, Battery Contactor, Starter Contactor, Starter
> Replace the push button switch in Z13/8 with a momentary key switch like
> Mouser part number 611-Y208122A203NQ
> Ignore the Mouser Switch Function description. The C&K data sheet shows
> that the DPDT that can be wired to function as desired.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457674#457674
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
Thanks Gilles. As I tend to be biased towards the manufacturer when it
comes to guidance, I am referring heavily to the Rotax 914 installation
instructions. Can you tell me specifically which areas that you feel are
suspect? If you could do that it would help me to evaluate their
"suggestions" against my installation.
On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 10:53 AM, GTH wrote:
>
> *Le 03/07/2016 =C3- 17:17, Ken Ryan a =C3=A9crit : *
>
>
> *With the Rotax the rotary keyed ignition switch is not allowed.
> Independent toggles for the ignitions are clearly specified. *
>
>
> Hi Ken and all,
>
> Didn't know about that.
> Maybe it concerns the latest engines. Or maybe it is in the new
> installation documents, but as Rotax didn't change the engines already
> flying, I would not lose sleep on the keyswitch vs separate switches
> problem.
> Hundreds of airplanes have been flying for years with a standard ignition
> keyswitch for their Rotax without the slightest issue.
> I'd even state that the Rotax circuit wiring suggestions are to be taken
> with a grain of salt, especially concerning the 914.
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Gilles
> http://contrails.free.fr
> http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
I agree with Gilles. What difference does it make if both ignition switches and
start switch are within one housing or are independent switches? Unless you
consider the switch handle being a common point of failure. Advantage of individual
switches are less cost and easier to replace and troubleshoot.
> I'd even state that the Rotax circuit wiring suggestions are to be taken with
a grain of salt
Agree, how about the warning not to run the engine with regulator terminal C not
connected or the regulator will self destruct?
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457690#457690
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Hypothetical Battery Contactor Failure |
| From: | rayj <raymondj(at)frontiernet.net> |
Bob,
Don't tuck that piece of knowledge away just yet. I believe you usage
was correct.
The following is from my correspondence with my sister. Her
qualifications include a B.A. in English, an M.A. in Library Science and
a career as a technical writer, copy writer, college instructor teaching
creative writing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
First off, "immeasurably" is the adverbial form of the adjective
"immeasurable," so the difference is how they are used in relation to
the other parts of the sentence rather than in their fundamental meanings.
Cutting to the chase, we begin with the OED definition of "immeasurable"
(adjective) which is given as "Not measurable; that cannot be measured;
immense."
This takes us to the definition of "immeasurably" (adverb) which is
given as "To an immeasurable extent or degree; beyond measure;
immensely, vastly."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The essence of the terms in question is to describe things that can't be
measured. This includes things which are too small to be measured as
well as too large to be measured. The terms are also used to describe
things which are too large to be measured.
From a usage stand point I again refer to my sister's correspondence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
... the phrase "benefits immeasurably" (which indeed uses the correct
form, an adverb modifying the verb 'benefits')...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottom line the words "benefits immeasurably" convey the idea correctly
and are used properly from a sentence construction stand point.
Hope this information is useful.
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 07/02/2016 08:31 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> At 10:48 AM 7/1/2016, you wrote:
>>
>>
>> [quote="nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect"]At 08:13 AM 6/30/2016, you wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > In the mean time, as long
>> > as you don't hit the alternator with a really BIG load
>> > (which few system are capable of doing anyhow), the
>> > modern alternator runs self-excited and benefits immeasurably
>> > from battery presence with respect to noise.
>>
>>
>> Just to clarify, did you really mean "benefits immeasurably"? I think
>> maybe the opposite.
>>
>> Immeasurable: Too large, extensive or extreme to measure.
>
> I've been thinking that word described an unquantifiable
> entity; impossible to express in terms of quantity for any reason.
> In fact, I've learned that it refers not to generally unknowable
> numbers but only to nebulously large numbers.
>
> I can go to bed tonight knowing something I did not
> know this morning . . . it's a good day. Thanks for
> the heads-up!
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV6-List: Official RV6-List Usage Guidelines |
| From: | Richard Dudley <rhdudley331(at)cfl.rr.com> |
Dear Mat,
I have been on the RV list, RV-6 list and Aeroelectric list for about 16
years.
I sold my RV-6A in 2008 and have monitored those lists ever since. I
consider
all your lists a great service to the aviation community and especially
to the
home building community. They were a great help to me while building
my RV-6A and even enjoyed them, even after selling my airplane.
I would like to discontinue my subscriptions. I have long since
lost my login and pass words. So, I have been unable to unsubscribe
on your website. Over the years, I have received e-mailings to
two different addresses: rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.net and
rhdudley331(at)cfl.rr.com.
Please unsuscribe me form all Matronix lists.
Thank you in advance.
Yours truly,
Richard H Dudley
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | GTH <gilles.thesee(at)free.fr> |
/Le 03/07/2016 21:30, Ken Ryan a crit :
/
> /Thanks Gilles. As I tend to be biased towards the manufacturer when
> it comes to guidance, I am referring heavily to the Rotax 914
> installation instructions. Can you tell me specifically which areas
> that you feel are suspect? If you could do that it would help me to
> evaluate their "suggestions" against my installation./
/
/Hi Ken and all,
It took me some time to download and peruse the latest 914 Installation
Manual (February 2015).
Concerning the ignition switches, it seems there has been no changes
since the 1996 version that was current when we wired our project. The
manual just mentions
"Type : two separate, suitable on-off switches" (page 114 newer edition)
The Rotax 914 relies on two electrical pumps to keep running.
Rotax suggests to feed the main pump from the voltage
rectifier/regulator, and the aux pump from the main bus.
If the regulator fails - not a rare occurence - you are left with only
the aux pump and the battery to stay aloft.
I feel a critical pump should run direct from a battery bus.
--
Best regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
Thanks Giles. Does that mean that you would run both pumps from the same
battery bus, or just the main pump? I thought about putting them both on
the battery bus but that would violate the clearly stated requirement that
"...the fuel pumps are connected on two completely independent power
supplies." On airplane that you are familiar with that have both generator
and alternator, do they both feed the same battery? Rotax in British
Columbia steered me away from trying to combine the outputs, even though
that is what is shown on the installation manual drawing.
The way I have things drawn now I have the main pump wired to the
integrated generator (as shown in the 914 installation manual) but I have
the auxiliary pump wired to a battery bus. The auxiliary pump should run
continuously as long as the external alternator is working. If both
alternator and generator were to quit, then it would be battery only on the
auxiliary pump.
My current drawing is different from the Rotax 914 installation manual in
that I don't have the integrated generator connected to the main bus
(except through a momentary contact switch for exciting it into action). So
the only thing the generator and regulator are doing is powering that one
pump. I also plan on mounting the regulator on the cabin side of the
firewall, where it is cooler. I am thinking that given the low load and
cooler environment, the regulator might be more reliable.
All comments are appreciated. My starting/charging/fuel pump wiring is
still all on paper only at this point, so I can still make changes.
Ken
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 4:55 AM, GTH wrote:
>
> *Le 03/07/2016 =C3- 21:30, Ken Ryan a =C3=A9crit : *
>
> *Thanks Gilles. As I tend to be biased towards the manufacturer when it
> comes to guidance, I am referring heavily to the Rotax 914 installation
> instructions. Can you tell me specifically which areas that you feel are
> suspect? If you could do that it would help me to evaluate their
> "suggestions" against my installation.*
>
>
> Hi Ken and all,
>
> It took me some time to download and peruse the latest 914 Installation
> Manual (February 2015).
>
> Concerning the ignition switches, it seems there has been no changes sinc
e
> the 1996 version that was current when we wired our project. The manual
> just mentions
> "Type : two separate, suitable on-off switches" (page 114 newer edition)
>
> The Rotax 914 relies on two electrical pumps to keep running.
> Rotax suggests to feed the main pump from the voltage rectifier/regulator
,
> and the aux pump from the main bus.
> If the regulator fails - not a rare occurence - you are left with only
> the aux pump and the battery to stay aloft.
> I feel a critical pump should run direct from a battery bus.
> --
> Best regards,
> Gilles
> http://contrails.free.fr
> http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Stephen Richards <stephencliverichards(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
I understood Rotax recommended separate switches so you could turn the engi
ne on the starter with ignition off to check oil pressure after a oil chang
e. We have fitted a keyed ignition switch as we were given one and a start
pushbutton, Not ready to run engine yet.
Clive
-----Original Message-----
From: "GTH" <gilles.thesee(at)free.fr>
Sent: =8E03/=8E07/=8E2016 20:25
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Z-13/8 Questions
Le 03/07/2016 =C3- 17:17, Ken Ryan a =C3=A9crit :
With the Rotax the rotary keyed ignition switch is not allowed. Independent
toggles for the ignitions are clearly specified.
Hi Ken and all,
Didn't know about that.
Maybe it concerns the latest engines. Or maybe it is in the new installatio
n documents, but as Rotax didn't change the engines already flying, I would
not lose sleep on the keyswitch vs separate switches problem.
Hundreds of airplanes have been flying for years with a standard ignition k
eyswitch for their Rotax without the slightest issue.
I'd even state that the Rotax circuit wiring suggestions are to be taken wi
th a grain of salt, especially concerning the 914.
--
Best regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
Thanks for that info Stephen. Makes sense to me.
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Stephen Richards <
stephencliverichards(at)gmail.com> wrote:
> I understood Rotax recommended separate switches so you could turn the
> engine on the starter with ignition off to check oil pressure after a oil
> change. We have fitted a keyed ignition switch as we were given one and a
> start pushbutton, Not ready to run engine yet.
> Clive
> ------------------------------
> From: GTH <gilles.thesee(at)free.fr>
> Sent: =8E03/=8E07/=8E2016 20:25
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Z-13/8 Questions
>
>
> *Le 03/07/2016 =C3- 17:17, Ken Ryan a =C3=A9crit : *
>
>
> *With the Rotax the rotary keyed ignition switch is not allowed.
> Independent toggles for the ignitions are clearly specified. *
>
>
> Hi Ken and all,
>
> Didn't know about that.
> Maybe it concerns the latest engines. Or maybe it is in the new
> installation documents, but as Rotax didn't change the engines already
> flying, I would not lose sleep on the keyswitch vs separate switches
> problem.
> Hundreds of airplanes have been flying for years with a standard ignition
> keyswitch for their Rotax without the slightest issue.
> I'd even state that the Rotax circuit wiring suggestions are to be taken
> with a grain of salt, especially concerning the 914.
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Gilles
> http://contrails.free.fr
> http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
At 07:55 AM 7/4/2016, you wrote:
>Le 03/07/2016 =C3 21:30, Ken Ryan a =C3=A9crit=C2 :
>>Thanks Gilles. As I tend to be biased towards
>>the manufacturer when it comes to guidance, I
>>am referring heavily to the Rotax 914
>>installation instructions. Can you tell me
>>specifically which areas that you feel are
>>suspect? If you could do that it would help me
>>to evaluate their "suggestions" against my installation.
>
>Hi Ken and all,
>
>It took me some time to download and peruse the
>latest 914 Installation Manual (February 2015).
>
>Concerning the ignition switches, it seems there
>has been no changes since the 1996 version that
>was current when we wired our project. The manual just mentions
>"Type : two separate, suitable on-off switches" (page 114 newer edition)
>
>The Rotax 914 relies on two electrical pumps to keep running.
>Rotax suggests to feed the main pump from the
>voltage rectifier/regulator, and the aux pump from the main bus.
>If the regulator fails - not a rare occurence
>-=C2 you are left with only the aux pump and the battery to stay aloft.
>I feel a critical pump should run direct from a battery bus.
How is one 'critical' and the other not?
The magic in having two pumps and separate
power sources is that the likelihood of
dual failures in any given tank of fuel
is vanishingly small. If the engine runs
per published performance specs on either
pump, then there are no 'critical' pumps,
just one pump backing up another pump.
How would you ever get down to one, battery
operated pump? Wasn't his airplane going to
get an external alternator in addition to
the stock, 912/914 PM alternator-rectifier/regulator?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
>
>If the regulator fails - not a rare occurence
The failure driver for the Rotax/Ducatti R/R
has root cause in thermal considerations . . .
where the ship attempts to use full rated output
from the power source.
What kind of fuel pump are we talking about?
How much current does it draw? Certainly nothing
approaching the 18A capability of the power
source.
It seems that the rather strange recommendation
for dedicating the stock Alternator-R/R to simple
powering of the fuel pump is a hedge . . . with
loads limited to a fraction of the system's
advertised output capabilities, the regulator
should last a very long time.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV6-List: Official RV6-List Usage Guidelines |
>
>I would like to discontinue my subscriptions. I have long since
>lost my login and pass words. So, I have been unable to unsubscribe
>on your website. Over the years, I have received e-mailings to
>two different addresses: rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.net and
>rhdudley331(at)cfl.rr.com.
>Please unsuscribe me form all Matronix lists.
You don't need a password to subscribe/unsubscribe
the email lists . . . only for browser access to
the forums.
Go to http://matrontics.com/subscribe and you'll
be offered a page that will let you modify your
emailed list subscriptions. After dropping from
the lists, you'll get one last email asking
you to confirm the decision.
Good luck!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV6-List: Official RV6-List Usage Guidelines |
| From: | Richard Dudley <rhdudley331(at)cfl.rr.com> |
Thanks, Bob!!!
RH Dudley
On 7/4/2016 5:17 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>>
>> I would like to discontinue my subscriptions. I have long since
>> lost my login and pass words. So, I have been unable to unsubscribe
>> on your website. Over the years, I have received e-mailings to
>> two different addresses: rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.net and
>> rhdudley331(at)cfl.rr.com.
>> Please unsuscribe me form all Matronix lists.
>
> You don't need a password to subscribe/unsubscribe
> the email lists . . . only for browser access to
> the forums.
>
> Go to http://matrontics.com/subscribe
> <http://matrontics.com/subscribe> and you'll
> be offered a page that will let you modify your
> emailed list subscriptions. After dropping from
> the lists, you'll get one last email asking
> you to confirm the decision.
>
> Good luck!
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks for those comments Bob. Your reasoning makes sense to me.
Sent from my Android. Sorry Steve.
On Jul 4, 2016 1:23 PM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
> If the regulator fails - not a rare occurence
>
>
> The failure driver for the Rotax/Ducatti R/R
> has root cause in thermal considerations . . .
> where the ship attempts to use full rated output
> from the power source.
>
> What kind of fuel pump are we talking about?
> How much current does it draw? Certainly nothing
> approaching the 18A capability of the power
> source.
>
> It seems that the rather strange recommendation
> for dedicating the stock Alternator-R/R to simple
> powering of the fuel pump is a hedge . . . with
> loads limited to a fraction of the system's
> advertised output capabilities, the regulator
> should last a very long time.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | GTH <gilles.thesee(at)free.fr> |
/Le 04/07/2016 17:52, Ken Ryan a crit :
/
> /Thanks Giles. Does that mean that you would run both pumps from the
> same battery bus, or just the main pump? I thought about putting them
> both on the battery bus but that would violate the clearly stated
> requirement that "...the fuel pumps are connected on two completely
> independent power supplies." /
On our airplane the main pump runs from the main battery bus any time
the ignition switch is on.
The aux pump runs from a dedicated aux battery fed through a battery
management module.
> /On airplane that you are familiar with that have both generator and
> alternator, do they both feed the same battery?/
I'm aware of only one other Rotax aircraft with two alternators, but I
don't know how they wired their machine.
--
Best regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | GTH <gilles.thesee(at)free.fr> |
Le 04/07/2016 18:30, Stephen Richards a crit :
> I understood Rotax recommended separate switches so you could turn the
> engine on the starter with ignition off to check oil pressure after a
> oil change. We have fitted a keyed ignition switch as we were given
> one and a start pushbutton, Not ready to run engine yet.
I'll bet the two separate ignition switches are for the magneto checks
before each flight.
Rotax doesn't give recommadations for the starter switch, which may or
may not be combined with an ignition keyswitch.
It's up to the homebuilder.
There are different ways of priming the oil circuit, but no problem for
oil pressure if you perform the oil changes as recommended. Unless you
drain the oil lines, but then the procedure is in in the maintenance
manual, separate starter switch or not.
--
A+
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | GTH <gilles.thesee(at)free.fr> |
/Le 04/07/2016 23:10, Robert L. Nuckolls, III a crit :
/
> /
> If the engine runs
> per published performance specs on either
> pump, then there are no 'critical' pumps,
> just one pump backing up another pump.
> /
Hi Bob,
Of course.
I'd say that for us the "critical" one is the pump that we think should
run anytime the ignition is on.
And the backup the one that is pilot operated.
I saw so many voltage regulator failures around that I would not like to
depend on the regulator to keep the engine running
>
> /How would you ever get down to one, battery
> operated pump? Wasn't his airplane going to
> get an external alternator in addition to
> the stock, 912/914 PM alternator-rectifier/regulator?/
The point was "why do you say some of Rotax suggestions are to be taken
with a grain of salt ?", not any suggestion as to how Ken should or
shouldn't wire his airplane.
--
Best regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
Gilles, I hear you loud and clear on depending on the regulator to keep the
engine running. At this point, I am considering that to the the weakest
point in my proposed design. But, I am not convinced that there is a
significant probability of regulator failure, given that my plan is to run
only the pump (approx 5 amps) off the generator. That would mean that the
regulator is only being stressed to less than 1/3 capacity. Also, given
that I plan to install the regulator on the cabin side of the firewall,
that would further mitigate heat issues. Like Bob, I'm thinking this should
significantly lower the probability of regulator failure.
My question for you, and for the group, is this: what is the normal (if
there is a normal) mode of failure for these regulators? Do they just
suddenly stop working, or is there typically some warning of failure?
As always, thanks. It's amazing how many things there are to consider.
Ken
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 2:41 PM, GTH wrote:
>
> *Le 04/07/2016 =C3- 23:10, Robert L. Nuckolls, III a =C3=A9crit : *
>
>
> * If the engine runs per published performance specs on either pump
,
> then there are no 'critical' pumps, just one pump backing up another
> pump. *
>
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> Of course.
> I'd say that for us the "critical" one is the pump that we think should
> run anytime the ignition is on.
> And the backup the one that is pilot operated.
> I saw so many voltage regulator failures around that I would not like to
> depend on the regulator to keep the engine running
>
>
> * How would you ever get down to one, battery operated pump? Wasn't his
> airplane going to get an external alternator in addition to the stock
,
> 912/914 PM alternator-rectifier/regulator?*
>
>
> The point was "why do you say some of Rotax suggestions are to be taken
> with a grain of salt ?", not any suggestion as to how Ken should or
> shouldn't wire his airplane.
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Gilles
> http://contrails.free.fr
> http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)GMAIL.COM> |
Mike Miller has done autopsies on several failed Ducati regulators and he attributes
the failures to poor manufacturing and vibration, not from heat. Some RV-12
owners have reported a gradual failure where they get low voltage alarms
at RPMs where they used to have normal voltage. Each regulator could fail differently.
Some builders are reluctant to mount the regulator inside of the passenger compartment
because they do not want to breath smoke if the regulator does fail
in that location.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457742#457742
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | GTH <gilles.thesee(at)free.fr> |
/Le 05/07/2016 13:37, user9253 a crit :
/
> Mike Miller has done autopsies on several failed
> Ducati regulators and he attributes the failures to poor manufacturing
> and vibration, not from heat. Some RV-12 owners have reported a
> gradual failure where they get low voltage alarms at RPMs where they
> used to have normal voltage. Each regulator could fail differently.
> Some builders are reluctant to mount the regulator inside of the
> passenger compartment because they do not want to breath smoke if the
> regulator does fail in that location. /
Hi all,
In the past years we performed some study of the Rotax alternator and
regulator.
My buddy Jerome Delamarre studied the functionning of the switching
regulator, and conducted some thermal analysis of the unit. It seems
there is definitely a thermal issue with the regulator.
I published some data here
http://contrails.free.fr/elec_ducati_en.php
The rest of the study will be published some day in an indefinite future ;-)
Re the smoke, the components are potted inside a metal case, and the
failed regulators I saw showed no external trace of failure. So the
possibility of smoke seems to be remote.
For instance, about 500 Dyn'Aero MCRs have the regulator inside the
cabin, and although the cases of regulator failures are not infrequent,
I never heard of a smoking unit.
What *can* be happen though, is a capacitor bursting, very disturbing
for the crew they told me.
Bottom line, after some thorough analysis of the Ducati regulator and a
Schicke, we elected to install a Schicke GR4. Worked flawlessly since
the beginning.
FWIW
--
Best regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
Thanks Joe, all good points.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 3:37 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> Mike Miller has done autopsies on several failed Ducati regulators and he
> attributes the failures to poor manufacturing and vibration, not from
> heat. Some RV-12 owners have reported a gradual failure where they get low
> voltage alarms at RPMs where they used to have normal voltage. Each
> regulator could fail differently.
> Some builders are reluctant to mount the regulator inside of the
> passenger compartment because they do not want to breath smoke if the
> regulator does fail in that location.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457742#457742
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
Thanks for the input. Reading the information you linked to, it looks like
your conclusion was that if the regulator is making full power (240 watts)
then in order for the operating temperature to remain safe, the ambient
temperature must be no greater than MINUS 59 C (-74F). Meanwhile, Rotax
says that ambient temperature must not exceed PLUS 90 C (+194F). That's
quite a discrepancy, -74F vs +194F. Please, tell me I have mis-interpreted
your paper.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 4:24 AM, GTH wrote:
>
> *Le 05/07/2016 =C3- 13:37, user9253 a =C3=A9crit : *
>
>
> Mike Miller has done autopsies on several failed Ducati regulators and he
attributes the failures to poor manufacturing and vibration, not from heat
. Some RV-12 owners have reported a gradual failure where they get low vol
tage alarms at RPMs where they used to have normal voltage. Each regulator
could fail differently.
> Some builders are reluctant to mount the regulator inside of the passen
ger compartment because they do not want to breath smoke if the regulator d
oes fail in that location.
> *
>
> Hi all,
>
> In the past years we performed some study of the Rotax alternator and
> regulator.
> My buddy Jerome Delamarre studied the functionning of the switching
> regulator, and conducted some thermal analysis of the unit. It seems ther
e
> is definitely a thermal issue with the regulator.
> I published some data here
> http://contrails.free.fr/elec_ducati_en.php
> The rest of the study will be published some day in an indefinite future
> ;-)
>
> Re the smoke, the components are potted inside a metal case, and the
> failed regulators I saw showed no external trace of failure. So the
> possibility of smoke seems to be remote.
> For instance, about 500 Dyn'Aero MCRs have the regulator inside the cabin
,
> and although the cases of regulator failures are not infrequent, I never
> heard of a smoking unit.
> What *can* be happen though, is a capacitor bursting, very disturbing for
> the crew they told me.
>
> Bottom line, after some thorough analysis of the Ducati regulator and a
> Schicke, we elected to install a Schicke GR4. Worked flawlessly since the
> beginning.
> FWIW
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Gilles
> http://contrails.free.fr
> http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
The ambient temperature can be greater if the air is moving.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457750#457750
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
So I guess if it's in the high pressure area of the engine compartment, it
should be good in flight, but maybe not so much during taxi and cool down?
Maybe a timer like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJG2f2ZjPxQ&t=0s
could be connected to a computer fan such that the fan always runs when the
master switch is on, and continues to run for a period of time (10
minutes?) after the master switch is turned off. Alternatively, it could be
set to come on only after the master switch is turned off.
The regulator on a UL engine that I installed on a Zenith had two features
for dissipating heat: 1) it was mounted to aluminum engine shrouding using
a heat conducting gel to facilitate heat transfer from the regulator body
to the aluminum engine shroud and 2) it was blasted by cooling air through
a dedicated 1 inch scat hose.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 7:39 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> The ambient temperature can be greater if the air is moving.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457750#457750
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
At 06:37 AM 7/5/2016, you wrote:
>
>Mike Miller has done autopsies on several failed Ducati regulators
>and he attributes the failures to poor manufacturing and vibration,
vibration in a potted assembly?
> not from heat.
Has he published a teardown report?
> Some RV-12 owners have reported a gradual failure where they get
> low voltage alarms at RPMs where they used to have normal
> voltage. Each regulator could fail differently.
Color me skeptical . . . these regulators have
been in production for decades. There must have
been thousands sold. Over that period of time
and numbers of examples, I find it curious that
a constellation of failure modes would emerge.
At the debut of the 912/914 series engines on
this side of the pond . . . a SINGLE phase
PM dynamo in the 18-20A class was really pushing
the state of the art. The control devices
capable of handling that much current would
normally have been mounted directly to metallic
heatsinks with fins.
To my knowledge, production examples still
expect the potting compound to bring BTUs to
the outside world. Why Rotax continues to
sell/recommend this device is curious considering
the fact that there are much more robust/modern
devices available.
The OBAM aviation community has been slicing/dicing
this sad piece of technology for too long. It
has been thermally challenged since day-one.
I cannot argue against 'constellations' of
other failure modes . . . but debating a broader
spectrum of issues seems a waste of $time$.
It's like worrying about whether or not the
a/c and stereo are working in a car with
3 flat tires.
>Some builders are reluctant to mount the regulator inside of the
>passenger compartment because they do not want to breath smoke
>if the regulator does fail in that location.
Has one EVER 'smoked'? Has a 'smoked' R/R
every been preserved for examination? Our ranks are
rife with anecdotal information on a product
with a very long service history . . . and
and continues to be offered by a company with
a lot of 'skin in the game'. Why jepoardize
consumer relations on a product costing
$thousands$ by sticking with a demonstrably
marginal accessory that probably costs them
less than $50?
I've observed some pretty strange marketing
decisions by big-name manufacturers.
To be sure, there are really powerful cultural
forces in company behaviors. I could tell you
some interesting stories about the intractability
of several supposed European 'project partners.'
So just maybe, the Rotax decision to stay with
Ducatti has nothing to do with science and
economics.
Emacs!
My advice to Rotax customers. Pitch the Ducatti
R/R right out of the box . . . or put it up on
eBay. There's a bunch of ultralights flying the
912 that can probably make good use of an R/R that
should probably be rated at 10A.
The Silent-Hektick electronics cavity volume
is a fraction of that in the Ducatti. Square-
inches of fin area for heat dissipation is much
greater. Further, the thing is RATED at 47A . . .
so de-rating to run it on an 18A Rotax dynamo
seems a rational decision that goes toward
longevity and serviceability.
There are probably other devices out there
with equal or better performance than the Ducatti.
There will come a time when incandescent landing
lights will be a thing of the past along with carburetors,
VOR receivers and E6B computers. It's time for the
Ducatti R/R to be retired as the best Rotax could
offer at introduction . . . but long since
surpassed by better ideas.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | GTH <gilles.thesee(at)free.fr> |
/Le 05/07/2016 17:23, Ken Ryan a crit :
/
> /Thanks for the input. Reading the information you linked to, it looks
> like your conclusion was that if the regulator is making full power
> (240 watts) then in order for the operating temperature to remain
> safe, the ambient temperature must be no greater than MINUS 59 C
> (-74F). Meanwhile, Rotax says that ambient temperature must not exceed
> PLUS 90 C (+194F). That's quite a discrepancy, -74F vs +194F. Please,
> tell me I have mis-interpreted your paper./
Hi Ken,
You correctly read the info on my webpage.
We got the regulator thermal characteristics actually measured in a lab.
Concerning what Rotax says, well unless they publish their own results,
I'd stick with the grain of salt ;-)
Especially when you consider the failures around as soon as people draw
much current from their alternator & regulator.
Besides they are not wrong : temperatures no greater than 90 C doesn't
mean that 70 or 80 C are safe...
--
Best regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | GTH <gilles.thesee(at)free.fr> |
/Le 05/07/2016 18:18, Ken Ryan a crit :
/
> /
> /
> / two features for dissipating heat: 1) it was mounted to aluminum
> engine shrouding using a heat conducting gel to facilitate heat
> transfer from the regulator body to the aluminum engine shroud and 2)
> it was blasted by cooling air through a dedicated 1 inch scat hose./
Add to that a safe and cool place with no exhaust, turbo, engine block
radiating or convecting heat at the regulator (i.e. not in the engine
comparment ;-), and everything will be well.
--
Best regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-13/8 Questions |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
I am not taking sides here, just reporting Mike Miller's postings. Joe G.
> My motivation for the analyses was based on the abysmal failure rate, with no
good data available on a cause. I cant make any broad claims as to the cause
of the failures, only claims based on a sample of one unit. I think the electrical
design is fine, simple and safe for the use in a VFR aircraft, Im not so
sure about the mechanical design/assembly. I first thought the failures were based
on the stress of thermal cycles. After the analysis I think its simply vibration.
I base this on the review of the fretted solder joints you can see in
the pictures. The main failure on mine (and Im guessing yours too) is a broken
lead on the SCR (the SCR is the power switch that controls the regulator output.)
The likely cause of the failure is the movement between SCRs bolted to the
case (required as a heat sink) and floating PCB in the epoxy jel. Your post
questioned the SCR installation with the bent over leads to attach to the PCB.
This is not uncommon, for a component requiring a heat sink. I would be confident
your regulator is fixed by re-soldering the SCR leads. I would touch up
all three pins, on both SCRs, also inspect all the other solder connections for
fretting. I dont think you need to remove the PCB from the case, unless an SCR
lead is broken at the component (like mine was.) I use several epoxy potting
compounds here at work, so for me repotting was a non issue. I did use a harder
epoxy to reduce the gel effect. I suggest you not remove the board from the
case, and after you are finished, cover the bottom with high temp RTV. There
are no heat issues on the bottom of the regulator. All you want to do is seal
it up, Just my opinion.
>
> Oh, the reason you found two layers of epoxy, its part of the manufacturing process.
The regulator is filled with epoxy, placed in a vacuum chamber to remove
the air bubbles, after curing its topped off again.
>
> I asked LEAF about the two failed regulators I returned under warrantee. They
said they just trash them, Rotax doesnt want them back. They also told me, Rotax
will not give me anymore credits for failed regulators, because the problem
is the aircraft/aircraft design, not the regulator. I sent Vans a feedback form
for the failures, not to blame Vans for the problem, I just thought they would
have more pull with Rotax to get it fixed. With that said, I think Rotax
knows there is a problem, I say this based on the cost of the regulator. $160.00
may be a lot of money, but its cheap as Rotax prices go. Im guessing Ducati
sells it for about $50 to Rotax, but it goes through Kodiak, in the Bahamas,
then a distributor (LEAF/Lockwood,) each tacking on freight and markup, before
we see it. "
See http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showpost.php?p=1092091&postcount=23 for pictures
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457760#457760
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | EXPBUS Circuit Failure |
| From: | "hmanvel" <hmanvel(at)manvel.com> |
I found several conversations on this site relating to the Expbus system, and Electronic
Circuit Breakers. I wanted to relate my recent experience. I have
two Expbus systems in my Rutan Defiant. They have operated flawlessly for 16
years, or about 870 hours on the airplane. Recently one circuit, with two devices
on it, started shutting down intermittently, but with no indication of a
short on the indicator board. I found the problem the other day, by pulling the
two devices (terra nav and Gemini backup efis) and checking voltage at each
connector. Both read normal 12+ volts. I then plugged in the Gemini, checked
voltage at the nav connector, now it was 3.4 volts. I plugged in the nav radio,
pulled out the Gemini, and IT was now showing about 3.4 volts. Apparently
the one circuit/breaker was dropping out with any sort of load on it. Not sure
why, but I have fixed it by wiring an inline fuse to the devices, and disconnecting
from the output on the EXPBUS.
--------
Harry Manvel
Defiant N2HM
PTK / Pontiac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457761#457761
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dennis Wright <wright.dennis(at)icloud.com> |
From: Dennis Wright
> Trying to figure out if I have an issue with my electrical system in my sonex
or just bad luck. Have had multiple battery failures. Here's the situation.
Battery is an odyssey pc625. , 12 volt. Engine is an Aerovee 2180. First flight
was in December 2015. Battery at that time was about 2.5 years old. During
the time before first flight had to charge batter several times due to minimal
use. After about 5 hrs of flying started experiencing a dead battery. Would
charge, fly, and next day battery would be dead again. Figured it was due to
age and fact that battery had sat uncharged for prolonged periods. Replaced
battery. After about 15 hrs flying time (about 3 months) on new battery, went
dead. Tried to charge but would not hold a charge. Had battery tested and showed
that it had a bad cell. Replaced battery. After about 25 hrs (about 3 months),
another dead battery and will not hold a charge Each time everything
is working perfect one day and dead the next. Not blo!
> wing any fuses, no smoking wires, system voltage is showing 13.5 volts when
I'm flying. Have not checked to see if there is a load on the battery when the
battery solenoid is open but do not have anything connected on the battery side
of the solenoid so unless the solenoid is bad, shouldn't have any load when
off. Would appreciate any thoughts on what the problem might be or where to
start to figure it out.
>
> From: Dennis Wright
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dead battery |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 7/5/2016 10:37 PM, Dennis Wright wrote:
>
>
> From: Dennis Wright
>
>> Trying to figure out if I have an issue with my electrical system in my sonex
or just bad luck. Have had multiple battery failures. Here's the situation.
Battery is an odyssey pc625. , 12 volt. Engine is an Aerovee 2180. First flight
was in December 2015. Battery at that time was about 2.5 years old. During
the time before first flight had to charge batter several times due to minimal
use. After about 5 hrs of flying started experiencing a dead battery. Would
charge, fly, and next day battery would be dead again. Figured it was due to
age and fact that battery had sat uncharged for prolonged periods. Replaced
battery. After about 15 hrs flying time (about 3 months) on new battery, went
dead. Tried to charge but would not hold a charge. Had battery tested and showed
that it had a bad cell. Replaced battery. After about 25 hrs (about 3
months), another dead battery and will not hold a charge Each time everything
is working perfect one day and dead the next. Not b!
> lo!
>> wing any fuses, no smoking wires, system voltage is showing 13.5 volts when
I'm flying. Have not checked to see if there is a load on the battery when the
battery solenoid is open but do not have anything connected on the battery
side of the solenoid so unless the solenoid is bad, shouldn't have any load when
off. Would appreciate any thoughts on what the problem might be or where to
start to figure it out.
>>
>> From: Dennis Wright
>>
>>
13.5v won't charge the battery.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dead battery |
| From: | Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com> |
Agree, charging voltage should be more like 14.2 to 14.5 v, especially for
an Odessey type battery.
On 6 Jul 2016 05:07, "Charlie England" wrote:
> ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
>
> On 7/5/2016 10:37 PM, Dennis Wright wrote:
>
>> wright.dennis(at)icloud.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Dennis Wright
>>
>> Trying to figure out if I have an issue with my electrical system in my
>>> sonex or just bad luck. Have had multiple battery failures. Here's the
>>> situation. Battery is an odyssey pc625. , 12 volt. Engine is an Aerovee
>>> 2180. First flight was in December 2015. Battery at that time was about
>>> 2.5 years old. During the time before first flight had to charge batter
>>> several times due to minimal use. After about 5 hrs of flying started
>>> experiencing a dead battery. Would charge, fly, and next day battery would
>>> be dead again. Figured it was due to age and fact that battery had sat
>>> uncharged for prolonged periods. Replaced battery. After about 15 hrs
>>> flying time (about 3 months) on new battery, went dead. Tried to charge
>>> but would not hold a charge. Had battery tested and showed that it had a
>>> bad cell. Replaced battery. After about 25 hrs (about 3 months), another
>>> dead battery and will not hold a charge Each time everything is working
>>> perfect one day and dead the next. Not !
>>>
>> b!
>
>> lo!
>>
>>> wing any fuses, no smoking wires, system voltage is showing 13.5 volts
>>> when I'm flying. Have not checked to see if there is a load on the battery
>>> when the battery solenoid is open but do not have anything connected on the
>>> battery side of the solenoid so unless the solenoid is bad, shouldn't have
>>> any load when off. Would appreciate any thoughts on what the problem might
>>> be or where to start to figure it out.
>>>
>>> From: Dennis Wright
>>>
>>>
>>> 13.5v won't charge the battery.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dead battery |
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
And I can confirm, that if your system charging voltage is 13.5, you
will kill your battery in amazing short order.
You have to get it up to 14.5 or so. In the mean time, charge it on a
proper charger (for AGM Batts) between flights.
Bill "killer of at least 3" Watson
On 7/6/2016 1:53 AM, Peter Pengilly wrote:
>
> Agree, charging voltage should be more like 14.2 to 14.5 v, especially
> for an Odessey type battery.
>
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: EXPBUS Circuit Failure |
> Apparently the one circuit/breaker was dropping out with any sort
> of load on it. Not sure why, but I have fixed it by wiring an
> inline fuse to the devices, and disconnecting from the output on the EXPBUS.
I don't know what the failure modes are for the
polyfuses . . . we looked at them on two separate
occasions at Beech and just couldn't figure out
how to integrate them into system wiring . . .
Had the idea progressed any further, we proably
would have done some endurance/halt testing on
the devices to see if their weaknesses would
present . . . but given the service life demonstrated
on your airplane, I'm not sure we could have
'turned that rock over' as a part of preliminary
design studies.
Those polyfuses are widely available parts. If
you choose to identify and replace the one that
went belly up, I can help you find a replacement.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | dielectric grease vs conductive grease: when and where |
When and where should electrical connections receive grease? What type of
grease should be used? --Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dead battery |
Just to add one more datapoint, I'd been running on a charging voltage of 13
.2 to 13.4 for three years+ on a Comcorde sealed gel battery - and while it h
as been sluggish starts for the past three Canadian winters I don't see any e
vidence that it's damaged, certainly not dead.
On Jul 6, 2016, at 11:15, Bill Watson wrote:
And I can confirm, that if your system charging voltage is 13.5, you will ki
ll your battery in amazing short order.
You have to get it up to 14.5 or so. In the mean time, charge it on a prope
r charger (for AGM Batts) between flights.
Bill "killer of at least 3" Watson
> On 7/6/2016 1:53 AM, Peter Pengilly wrote:
> Agree, charging voltage should be more like 14.2 to 14.5 v, especially for
an Odessey type battery.
>
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: dielectric grease vs conductive grease: when and |
where
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Everything you ever wanted to know about grease and electrical connections:
http://www.w8ji.com/dielectric_grease_vs_conductive_grease.htm
I have never used conductive grease on electrical connections.
I use dielectric grease on connections exposed to moisture.
Dielectric grease does NOT increase resistance in a connection because it gets
squeezed out from between electrical terminals.
That squeezed out grease prevents air and dirt and water from entering.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457798#457798
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: dielectric grease vs conductive grease: when |
and where
At 11:20 AM 7/6/2016, you wrote:
>When and where should electrical connections receive grease? What
>type of grease should be used? --Thanks.
If the connections are subject to water drip/splash.
Dow Corning DC4 is my favorite.
http://tinyurl.com/hbty5z2
http://tinyurl.com/heqjw25
it's a silicone based grease that doesn't
attack rubbers and plastics. There are,
no doubt, others.
We also used DC4 to 'pot' coax connectors
on towers before wrapping with Scotch 33
tape.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dead battery |
| From: | John Morgensen <john(at)morgensen.com> |
I have a similar problem with an RV4 that I purchased.
Dead battery.
Discovered field wire broken - repaired.
Field wire is jumpered directly to the alternator output. No fuse, cb,
or switch.
The alternator appears to be internally regulated.
I am seeing no more than 13.5 volts.
With no load at all on the field wire, is that what is keeping the
voltage down?
john
On 7/6/2016 8:15 AM, Bill Watson wrote:
> And I can confirm, that if your system charging voltage is 13.5, you
> will kill your battery in amazing short order.
>
> You have to get it up to 14.5 or so. In the mean time, charge it on a
> proper charger (for AGM Batts) between flights.
>
> Bill "killer of at least 3" Watson
>
> On 7/6/2016 1:53 AM, Peter Pengilly wrote:
>>
>> Agree, charging voltage should be more like 14.2 to 14.5 v,
>> especially for an Odessey type battery.
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Avast logo
>
>
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dead battery |
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
On 7/6/2016 1:44 PM, John Morgensen wrote:
>
> I have a similar problem with an RV4 that I purchased.
>
> Dead battery.
> Discovered field wire broken - repaired.
> Field wire is jumpered directly to the alternator output. No fuse, cb,
> or switch.
> The alternator appears to be internally regulated.
>
> I am seeing no more than 13.5 volts.
>
> With no load at all on the field wire, is that what is keeping the
> voltage down?
Well, charging at 13.5 will kill an Odyssey AGM battery.
I have a regulator and alternator - my regulator is adjustable and
needed to be set to 14.5 to get a normal charge on my Odysseys.
In general, 13.5 is fine for lead acid batteries.
I'm doing this from memory and experience but the place to look is the
spec sheets.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dead battery |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
JohnInReno,
A bad connection could be causing low voltage. Check both ends of the wire from
the alternator "B" terminal. Pull hard on the terminals to make sure they are
solid with no corrosion. Also check the engine ground wire. The engine mount
should NOT be part of the ground circuit.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457815#457815
________________________________________________________________________________
June 17, 2016 - July 06, 2016
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ng