AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-nv
March 27, 2017 - April 25, 2017
30 amp circuit breaker and I placed it's 30 amp Potter and Brumfield
W23-x1a1g-30 circuit breaker on the end of the row however I discovered
that I have a slight space conflict to the point where the Potter and
Brumfield circuit breaker will not fit in its hole.=C3=82
I wouldn't bring this kind of
high current feeder up to the panel.
I'd use a current limiter at the battery
contactor thus keeping all the fat-wires
of the panel. If there's already a
spot for a breaker marked 'landing gear',
put a 5a breaker there to power the control
system.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "The Kuffels" <kuffel(at)cyberport.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight rechargeable battery backup unit |
Bob,
Hesitate to display my ignorance but with the schematic you drew won't the
ASX-1 draw power from the higher voltage source, the batteries, until they
are depleted to below the E-bus voltage? Won't replacing the diodes and SP
ST switch with a SPDT (even an on - off - on) with the center contact going
to the ASX-1 solve the issue and provide the same functionality?
Tom Kuffel
---
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: Klixon Circuit Breaker |
At 11:13 AM 3/27/2017, you wrote:
>Hi Bob, thanks (as always) for your advice!=C2
>
>I already have two circuit breaker holes =C2 (one
>labeled "gear control" and the other one labeled
>"gear hydraulic" and therefore I was trying to
>figure out some way to salvage this mess and
>make it look like it it's supposed to be that way.=C2
>
>So it looks like what I should do is simply
>remove this 30 amp circuit breaker and cover up
>its laser etched label with some sort of black
>paint or happy face sticker or something to make
>it look like it wasn't there.=C2
You could put a 5A breaker in there and use it
to POWER the coil on the hydraulic pump contactor . . .
>I know you stated "current limiter" =C2 in your
>reply however is an automotive automatically
>reseting inline circuit breaker sufficient for
>airplane use or should it be a real slow blow
>one shot for real current limiter?
>
>Bill Hunter
I recommend the mini-ANL devices now available
all over the 'net . . . and showing up in some
auto parts stores.
Here one example:
http://tinyurl.com/k4x4bua
Off the shelf holders for these fuses come
in TWO varieties (1) uses 'set screws' to mash
down on the fat-wires, ostensibly capturing
them in the end of the fuse holder . . . AVOID
THESE. (2) uses two threaded posts over which
the fuse is dropped along with the terminals
that bring fat-wires up to the fuse holder. Here's
one example . .
Emacs!
Obviously, you could make something like this yourself.
Get a piece of phenolic, delrin, lexan, etc, and cut
out a base. Drill 10-32 fuse mounting holes (counter bore
back side for electrical clearance to ground). A couple
more 6-32 attach holes. The cover is more cosmetic than
utilitarian.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight rechargeable battery backup |
unit
At 11:16 AM 3/27/2017, you wrote:
>Bob,
>
>Hesitate to display my ignorance but with the schematic you drew
>won't the ASX-1 draw power from the higher voltage source, the
>batteries, until they are depleted to below the E-bus
>voltage? Won't replacing the diodes and SPST switch with a SPDT
>(even an on - off - on) with the center contact going to the ASX-1
>solve the issue and provide the same functionality?
>
>Tom Kuffel
Nothing ignorant about your observation my friend . . . good
eye! Your suggestion eliminates the conflict you noted.
Here's another alternative. The diodes prevent back-feeding
of either source to the opposite source. The switch
isolates the standby batteries.
Preflight would be modified to close the sb battery
switch first to see that the ASX-1 lights up. Then
turn it back off for remainder of that flight op.
Thanks for the catch!
Emacs!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Klixon Circuit Breaker |
>
> Obviously, you could make something like this yourself.
> Get a piece of phenolic, delrin, lexan, etc, and cut
> out a base. Drill 10-32 fuse mounting holes (counter bore
> back side for electrical clearance to ground). A couple
> more 6-32 attach holes. The cover is more cosmetic than
> utilitarian . . .
P.S. Dug around and found some pix I'd taken
of an exemplar DIY Mini-ANL holder some years
ago . . .
http://tinyurl.com/mv2dq98
http://tinyurl.com/lvununh
http://tinyurl.com/m2tj9ux
http://tinyurl.com/mbmjoev
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | heater fan wiring |
I am building a cabin heater (Rotax) and the fan draws 4.3 amps. I have
read that on startup it can draw 12 amps. It is a permanent magnet type
fan. It looks like a large computer fan on steroids.
I have decided to use my "defrost" circuit, which was originally going to
power a couple of small, low draw computer fans. I wired it with 20 AWG
wire.
I would like to use the existing wiring for the fan, but I might need to
put in a 12 amp fuse, and am a little concerned that might be too much for
the 20 AWG wire.
The wire from the bus to the switch is about 18 inches and the wire from
the switch to the fan is about 24 inches.
I guess I have two questions:
1. What would be the largest fuse I could use and still be safe?
2. If I test it and it doesn't blow a 5 amp (or 7.5 amp) fuse, do you think
it would be likely to continue working indefinitely?
Thanks,
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
I would try a 7.5 amp fuse. I usually prefer fuses. But for a motor,
a circuit breaker will not nuisance trip as easily. Some day the motor
bearings will freeze up. If fused higher and the motor draws 12 amps continuously,
the wire will then get hot enough to boil water.
How hard is it to replace the wire? Sometimes it is easier to go ahead
and do it the hard way to start with. When faced with a decision like this,
I ask myself, what is best in the long run, not what is easiest right now.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467764#467764
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 3/28/2017 2:49 PM, Ken Ryan wrote:
> I am building a cabin heater (Rotax) and the fan draws 4.3 amps. I
> have read that on startup it can draw 12 amps. It is a permanent
> magnet type fan. It looks like a large computer fan on steroids.
>
> I have decided to use my "defrost" circuit, which was originally going
> to power a couple of small, low draw computer fans. I wired it with 20
> AWG wire.
>
> I would like to use the existing wiring for the fan, but I might need
> to put in a 12 amp fuse, and am a little concerned that might be too
> much for the 20 AWG wire.
>
> The wire from the bus to the switch is about 18 inches and the wire
> from the switch to the fan is about 24 inches.
>
> I guess I have two questions:
>
> 1. What would be the largest fuse I could use and still be safe?
>
> 2. If I test it and it doesn't blow a 5 amp (or 7.5 amp) fuse, do you
> think it would be likely to continue working indefinitely?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ken
Somebody on another forum recently posted a link to Cooper Bussman ATC
format circuit breakers. The time-to-trip vs overload percentage looks a
lot like traditional circuit breakers, instead of the near-instant trip
of an ATC fuse. Might be worth a look. The longer time constant should
allow for momentary startup loads.
http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/Transportation/Resources/catalog_pages/BUS_Tns_227_ATC_CB.pdf
http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/Transportation/Resources/catalog_pages/circuit-protection/bus-cbt-ds-series-22x-circuit-breakers.pdf
That's a really sturdy looking fan box. :-) What's it weigh?
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
Charlie, it weighs 3 pounds 14 ounces, but that does not include hoses or
fittings (or the additional fluid required). I estimate 5.5 pounds all
told, 6 pounds maximum. The stuff that I will be removing (heater box, scat
tubing, cables, etc. weighs about 3 pounds, so 2 or 3 pounds heavier the
airplane will be.
To me this is a no-brainer, as I look upon the typical method of scavenging
off the exhaust as a kind of Sword of Damocles, always poised to kill you.
Plus, I live in Alaska! Lots of cold weather flying, so a better heater is
really appreciated.
So anyway, I got my speed control this morning. I hooked it all up and
tried to blow the 5 amp fuse. I was not successful.
I am thinking that maybe the information that I read about 12 amp startup
draw is bogus. As I said, this is a permanent magnet type motor, very
similar to what I have seen on computers. Does this type of motor really
have large startup loads?
So now that I have tried and failed to blow the 5 amp fuse, unless this
list implores me to rewire for safety, I will stick with the 20 AWG.
I'm pretty sure Bob has said that there is no problem using a 7.5 amp fuse
with 20 AWG, right? If I did blow the 5 amp, I would still have the 7.5 amp
fuse option.
Ken
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Charlie England
wrote:
> ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
>
>
> On 3/28/2017 2:49 PM, Ken Ryan wrote:
>
>> I am building a cabin heater (Rotax) and the fan draws 4.3 amps. I have
>> read that on startup it can draw 12 amps. It is a permanent magnet type
>> fan. It looks like a large computer fan on steroids.
>>
>> I have decided to use my "defrost" circuit, which was originally going to
>> power a couple of small, low draw computer fans. I wired it with 20 AWG
>> wire.
>>
>> I would like to use the existing wiring for the fan, but I might need to
>> put in a 12 amp fuse, and am a little concerned that might be too much for
>> the 20 AWG wire.
>>
>> The wire from the bus to the switch is about 18 inches and the wire from
>> the switch to the fan is about 24 inches.
>>
>> I guess I have two questions:
>>
>> 1. What would be the largest fuse I could use and still be safe?
>>
>> 2. If I test it and it doesn't blow a 5 amp (or 7.5 amp) fuse, do you
>> think it would be likely to continue working indefinitely?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ken
>>
> Somebody on another forum recently posted a link to Cooper Bussman ATC
> format circuit breakers. The time-to-trip vs overload percentage looks a
> lot like traditional circuit breakers, instead of the near-instant trip of
> an ATC fuse. Might be worth a look. The longer time constant should allow
> for momentary startup loads.
> http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/
> Transportation/Resources/catalog_pages/BUS_Tns_227_ATC_CB.pdf
>
> http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/
> Transportation/Resources/catalog_pages/circuit-
> protection/bus-cbt-ds-series-22x-circuit-breakers.pdf
>
> That's a really sturdy looking fan box. :-) What's it weigh?
>
> Charlie
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
That's a good point Joe. Update: I got it all hooked up (temporary) and it
works great with a 5 amp fuse, so I think I will be okay. If necessary I
will go to 7.5 amp, but I won't go higher than that. Do these type motors
really have large startup current requirements? Would it make any
difference that I am running it through a PWM speed control? Like I said, I
am not blowing a 5 amp fuse.
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 1:12 PM, user9253 wrote:
>
> I would try a 7.5 amp fuse. I usually prefer fuses. But for a motor,
> a circuit breaker will not nuisance trip as easily. Some day the motor
> bearings will freeze up. If fused higher and the motor draws 12 amps
> continuously,
> the wire will then get hot enough to boil water.
> How hard is it to replace the wire? Sometimes it is easier to go ahead
> and do it the hard way to start with. When faced with a decision like
> this,
> I ask myself, what is best in the long run, not what is easiest right now.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467764#467764
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Ken, Some fan speed controllers put out a steady DC for several milliseconds to
start a motor, then change over to PWM. The motor might very well draw 12 amps
to start, but only for a fraction of a second, too short of a time to heat
up and blow a fuse. It looks like you have answered your own question by testing.
As long as it works, it is good enough.
Thanks for those links Charlie. I never knew ATC circuit breakers existed.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467771#467771
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eric Page <edpav8r(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
Does your speed control have a power on/off switch separate from the speed knob,
or do you twist the speed knob from the "off" detent to the lowest speed setting,
and up from there?
If the former, then it's possible to start the fan in its highest draw setting
(PWM at 100%). If the latter, it will always turn on at the lowest PWM value,
so inrush should be well controlled (unless you slam the knob to max speed, I
suppose).
In either case, the speed control may have inrush limiting as part of its design.
The best way to check this issue for sure is a DC clamp meter or series-connected
ammeter with max-hold function.
Eric
> On Mar 28, 2017, at 3:39 PM, Ken Ryan wrote:
> [SNIP] Do these type motors really have large startup current requirements?
Would it make any difference that I am running it through a PWM speed control?
Like I said, I am not blowing a 5 amp fuse.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
| From: | Bernie Willis <arcticarrow(at)gmail.com> |
This question is about USB charging ports and radio interference/noise.
Ive check out a couple charging ports that plug into the cigarette lighter and
they both produce noise when charging. Both purchased from pilot shops. Also
tried a couple direct wire USB charging ports from marine/auto applications with
the same result. Is there any way to filter or shield these devices to reduce
or eliminate the radio noise. The noise cant be eliminated with squelch adjustment.
Im using a hand held icom radio for the test, it doesnt see to make
any difference if the radio is 12 to 36 away from the charging port.
Thanks,
Bernie
> On Mar 28, 2017, at 4:01 PM, user9253 wrote:
>
>
> Ken, Some fan speed controllers put out a steady DC for several milliseconds
to start a motor, then change over to PWM. The motor might very well draw 12
amps to start, but only for a fraction of a second, too short of a time to heat
up and blow a fuse. It looks like you have answered your own question by testing.
As long as it works, it is good enough.
> Thanks for those links Charlie. I never knew ATC circuit breakers existed.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467771#467771
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
| From: | Kent or Jackie Ashton <kjashton(at)vnet.net> |
I understand the desire for a good heater but running lean of peak minimizes
the carbon monoxide
> On Mar 28, 2017, at 6:32 PM, Ken Ryan wrote:
>
> Charlie, it weighs 3 pounds 14 ounces, but that does not include hoses or f
ittings (or the additional fluid required). I estimate 5.5 pounds all told, 6
pounds maximum. The stuff that I will be removing (heater box, scat tubing,
cables, etc. weighs about 3 pounds, so 2 or 3 pounds heavier the airplane w
ill be.
>
> To me this is a no-brainer, as I look upon the typical method of scavengin
g off the exhaust as a kind of Sword of Damocles, always poised to kill you.
Plus, I live in Alaska! Lots of cold weather flying, so a better heater is r
eally appreciated.
>
> So anyway, I got my speed control this morning. I hooked it all up and tri
ed to blow the 5 amp fuse. I was not successful.
>
> I am thinking that maybe the information that I read about 12 amp startup d
raw is bogus. As I said, this is a permanent magnet type motor, very similar
to what I have seen on computers. Does this type of motor really have large
startup loads?
>
> So now that I have tried and failed to blow the 5 amp fuse, unless this li
st implores me to rewire for safety, I will stick with the 20 AWG.
>
> I'm pretty sure Bob has said that there is no problem using a 7.5 amp fuse
with 20 AWG, right? If I did blow the 5 amp, I would still have the 7.5 amp
fuse option.
>
> Ken
>
>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Charlie England w
rote:
l.com>
>>
>>
>>> On 3/28/2017 2:49 PM, Ken Ryan wrote:
>>> I am building a cabin heater (Rotax) and the fan draws 4.3 amps. I have r
ead that on startup it can draw 12 amps. It is a permanent magnet type fan. I
t looks like a large computer fan on steroids.
>>>
>>> I have decided to use my "defrost" circuit, which was originally going t
o power a couple of small, low draw computer fans. I wired it with 20 AWG wi
re.
>>>
>>> I would like to use the existing wiring for the fan, but I might need to
put in a 12 amp fuse, and am a little concerned that might be too much for t
he 20 AWG wire.
>>>
>>> The wire from the bus to the switch is about 18 inches and the wire from
the switch to the fan is about 24 inches.
>>>
>>> I guess I have two questions:
>>>
>>> 1. What would be the largest fuse I could use and still be safe?
>>>
>>> 2. If I test it and it doesn't blow a 5 amp (or 7.5 amp) fuse, do you th
ink it would be likely to continue working indefinitely?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Ken
>> Somebody on another forum recently posted a link to Cooper Bussman ATC fo
rmat circuit breakers. The time-to-trip vs overload percentage looks a lot l
ike traditional circuit breakers, instead of the near-instant trip of an ATC
fuse. Might be worth a look. The longer time constant should allow for mome
ntary startup loads.
>> http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/Transportatio
n/Resources/catalog_pages/BUS_Tns_227_ATC_CB.pdf
>>
>> http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/Transportatio
n/Resources/catalog_pages/circuit-protection/bus-cbt-ds-series-22x-circuit-b
reakers.pdf
>>
>> That's a really sturdy looking fan box. :-) What's it weigh?
>>
>> Charlie
>> =========================
>> -
>> 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: | "Craig L. Reding" <clr(at)redingaviation.com> |
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
> On Mar 28, 2017, at 8:58 PM, Kent or Jackie Ashton
wrote:
>
> I understand the desire for a good heater but running lean of peak
minimizes the carbon monoxide
>
> On Mar 28, 2017, at 6:32 PM, Ken Ryan > wrote:
>
>> Charlie, it weighs 3 pounds 14 ounces, but that does not include
hoses or fittings (or the additional fluid required). I estimate 5.5
pounds all told, 6 pounds maximum. The stuff that I will be removing
(heater box, scat tubing, cables, etc. weighs about 3 pounds, so 2 or 3
pounds heavier the airplane will be.
>>
>> To me this is a no-brainer, as I look upon the typical method of
scavenging off the exhaust as a kind of Sword of Damocles, always poised
to kill you. Plus, I live in Alaska! Lots of cold weather flying, so a
better heater is really appreciated.
>>
>> So anyway, I got my speed control this morning. I hooked it all up
and tried to blow the 5 amp fuse. I was not successful.
>>
>> I am thinking that maybe the information that I read about 12 amp
startup draw is bogus. As I said, this is a permanent magnet type motor,
very similar to what I have seen on computers. Does this type of motor
really have large startup loads?
>>
>> So now that I have tried and failed to blow the 5 amp fuse, unless
this list implores me to rewire for safety, I will stick with the 20
AWG.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure Bob has said that there is no problem using a 7.5 amp
fuse with 20 AWG, right? If I did blow the 5 amp, I would still have the
7.5 amp fuse option.
>>
>> Ken
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Charlie England
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 3/28/2017 2:49 PM, Ken Ryan wrote:
>> I am building a cabin heater (Rotax) and the fan draws 4.3 amps. I
have read that on startup it can draw 12 amps. It is a permanent magnet
type fan. It looks like a large computer fan on steroids.
>>
>> I have decided to use my "defrost" circuit, which was originally
going to power a couple of small, low draw computer fans. I wired it
with 20 AWG wire.
>>
>> I would like to use the existing wiring for the fan, but I might need
to put in a 12 amp fuse, and am a little concerned that might be too
much for the 20 AWG wire.
>>
>> The wire from the bus to the switch is about 18 inches and the wire
from the switch to the fan is about 24 inches.
>>
>> I guess I have two questions:
>>
>> 1. What would be the largest fuse I could use and still be safe?
>>
>> 2. If I test it and it doesn't blow a 5 amp (or 7.5 amp) fuse, do you
think it would be likely to continue working indefinitely?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ken
>> Somebody on another forum recently posted a link to Cooper Bussman
ATC format circuit breakers. The time-to-trip vs overload percentage
looks a lot like traditional circuit breakers, instead of the
near-instant trip of an ATC fuse. Might be worth a look. The longer time
constant should allow for momentary startup loads.
>>
http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/Transportation
/Resources/catalog_pages/BUS_Tns_227_ATC_CB.pdf
<http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/Transportatio
n/Resources/catalog_pages/BUS_Tns_227_ATC_CB.pdf>
>>
>>
http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/Transportation
/Resources/catalog_pages/circuit-protection/bus-cbt-ds-series-22x-circuit-
breakers.pdf
<http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/Transportatio
n/Resources/catalog_pages/circuit-protection/bus-cbt-ds-series-22x-circuit
-breakers.pdf>
>>
>> That's a really sturdy looking fan box. :-) What's it weigh?
>>
>> Charlie
>> ========================
===========
>> -
>> Electric-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navig
<http://www.matronics.com/Navig>ator?AeroElectric-List
>> ========================
===========
>> FORUMS -
>> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> ========================
===========
>> WIKI -
>> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
<http://wiki.matronics.com/>
>> ========================
===========
>> b Site -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contr
<http://www.matronics.com/contr>ibution
>> ========================
===========
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: headset matching to radio |
| From: | "Dana" <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
I haven't picked up the plane yet, but I have a system I'm confident will work.
On one side, an impedance matching transformer to convert the 8 ohm earphones
for a receiver output expecting 300 ohms, and for the mike side, rather than
working out an amplifier I bought a new replacement noise cancelling mike element
from Aircraft Spruce. Wired to the appropriate connectors, I've verified
they work, at least with the radio in a friend's Bonanza. Interestingly, they
also work with the Icom handheld in my old plane... I guess the Icom is a lot
more tolerant than the older radios.
As for the "why", I use the earbuds because they fit under a leather flying helmet.
The mike is on a flexible boom that clips to my shoulder harness, much more
comfortable than than being clamped around my head or over my ears.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467781#467781
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
Thanks Charlie. If I ever start blowing fuses I will try these. Good to
know that they exist.
Sent from my Android. Sorry Steve.
On Mar 28, 2017 2:10 PM, "Charlie England" wrote:
> ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
>
> On 3/28/2017 2:49 PM, Ken Ryan wrote:
>
>> I am building a cabin heater (Rotax) and the fan draws 4.3 amps. I have
>> read that on startup it can draw 12 amps. It is a permanent magnet type
>> fan. It looks like a large computer fan on steroids.
>>
>> I have decided to use my "defrost" circuit, which was originally going to
>> power a couple of small, low draw computer fans. I wired it with 20 AWG
>> wire.
>>
>> I would like to use the existing wiring for the fan, but I might need to
>> put in a 12 amp fuse, and am a little concerned that might be too much for
>> the 20 AWG wire.
>>
>> The wire from the bus to the switch is about 18 inches and the wire from
>> the switch to the fan is about 24 inches.
>>
>> I guess I have two questions:
>>
>> 1. What would be the largest fuse I could use and still be safe?
>>
>> 2. If I test it and it doesn't blow a 5 amp (or 7.5 amp) fuse, do you
>> think it would be likely to continue working indefinitely?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ken
>>
> Somebody on another forum recently posted a link to Cooper Bussman ATC
> format circuit breakers. The time-to-trip vs overload percentage looks a
> lot like traditional circuit breakers, instead of the near-instant trip of
> an ATC fuse. Might be worth a look. The longer time constant should allow
> for momentary startup loads.
> http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/
> Transportation/Resources/catalog_pages/BUS_Tns_227_ATC_CB.pdf
>
> http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/
> Transportation/Resources/catalog_pages/circuit-
> protection/bus-cbt-ds-series-22x-circuit-breakers.pdf
>
> That's a really sturdy looking fan box. :-) What's it weigh?
>
> Charlie
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Stephen Richards <stephencliverichards(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ASX-1 Supply |
At 12:36 AM 3/28/2017, you wrote:
>
>Fail to understand why the SPDT solution isn't much better. It
>eliminates two components, lets you test the battery supply anytime
>and allows power to the ASX-1 to be shut off (presumably only for
>maintenance). Or with a DPDT switch one could use the second pole
>to take power from the 3a fuse and light a big LED warning if the
>switch is in the battery position. Granted, there is a new single
>point of failure but don't see how failure of the ASX-1 prevents
>completion of the flight as planned.
>
>Tom
Tom's comments planted seeds of a new idea which
I massaged for several house on the "asphalt drafting
board" yesterday driving to Wichita.
I'll offer this configuration which I am considering
as a new z-figure to the 'Connection . . .
Emacs!
This idea adds a warning light for standby battery
switch position. This would reduce probability for
inadvertent depletion of the battery. I've also
added a fuse to the battery pack which is advised
especially when the appliance teamed with design goals
call for up-sizing the stand-by cells.
Let's digest this configuration for awhile . . .
Hat tip to Tom K!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Also, try SteinAir. They sell one that's supposed to be noise free.
On 3/29/2017 2:57 PM, Stephen Richards wrote:
> Bernie Not sure why you have put a question about USB chargers under
> this thread but I understand Anker products are noise free I have used
> a USB power drive 2 and can hold a hand held radio near this with no
> problem
> Clive
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: Bernie Willis <mailto:arcticarrow(at)gmail.com>
> Sent: 29/03/2017 02:09
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: heater fan wiring
>
>
>
> This question is about USB charging ports and radio interference/noise.
> Ive check out a couple charging ports that plug into the cigarette
> lighter and they both produce noise when charging. Both purchased from
> pilot shops. Also tried a couple direct wire USB charging ports from
> marine/auto applications with the same result. Is there any way to
> filter or shield these devices to reduce or eliminate the radio
> noise. The noise cant be eliminated with squelch adjustment. Im
> using a hand held icom radio for the test, it doesnt see to make any
> difference if the radio is 12 to 36 away from the charging port.
>
> Thanks,
> Bernie
> > On Mar 28, 2017, at 4:01 PM, user9253 wrote:
> >
> >
> > Ken, Some fan speed controllers put out a steady DC for several
> milliseconds to start a motor, then change over to PWM. The motor
> might very well draw 12 amps to start, but only for a fraction of a
> second, too short of a time to heat up and blow a fuse. It looks like
> you have answered your own question by testing. As long as it works,
> it is good enough.
> > Thanks for those links Charlie. I never knew ATC circuit breakers
> existed.
> >
> > --------
> > Joe Gores
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467771#467771
> >
> >
> >
> sp; - MATRONICS WEB F - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
> _= p; &======
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <jim(at)PoogieBearRanch.com> |
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
+1 on the Anker "aux port" chargers. They also make great USB and
Lightning cables, including 6-foot lengths.
Jim Parker
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: heater fan wiring
From: Stephen Richards <stephencliverichards(at)gmail.com>
Date: Wed, March 29, 2017 2:57 pm
Bernie Not sure why you have put a question about USB chargers under
this thread but I understand Anker products are noise free I have used a
USB power drive 2 and can hold a hand held radio near this with no
problem
Clive
From: Bernie Willis
Sent: 29/03/2017 02:09
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: heater fan wiring
This question is about USB charging ports and radio interference/noise.
Ive check out a couple charging ports that plug into the cigarette
lighter and they both produce noise when charging. Both purchased from
pilot shops. Also tried a couple direct wire USB charging ports from
marine/auto applications with the same result. Is there any way to
filter or shield these devices to reduce or eliminate the radio noise.
The noise cant be eliminated with squelch adjustment. Im using a
hand held icom radio for the test, it doesnt see to make any
difference if the radio is 12 to 36 away from the charging port.
Thanks,
Bernie
> On Mar 28, 2017, at 4:01 PM, user9253 wrote:
>
>
> Ken, Some fan speed controllers put out a steady DC for several milliseconds
to start a motor, then change over to PWM. The motor might very well draw 12
amps to start, but only for a fraction of a second, too short of a time to heat
up and blow a fuse. It looks like you have answered your own question by testing.
As long as it works, it is good enough.
> Thanks for those links Charlie. I never knew ATC circuit breakers existed.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467771#467771
>
>
>
sp; - MATRONICS WEB F - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
_= p; &======
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
At 02:49 PM 3/28/2017, you wrote:
>I am building a cabin heater (Rotax) and the fan draws 4.3 amps. I
>have read that on startup it can draw 12 amps.
This will be for milliseconds during spin-up . . . leave
the 20AWG in place and go with 10A fuse . . . it's probably
going to be fine.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
At 04:12 PM 3/28/2017, you wrote:
>
>I would try a 7.5 amp fuse. I usually prefer fuses. But for a motor,
> a circuit breaker will not nuisance trip as easily. Some day the motor
> bearings will freeze up. If fused higher and the motor draws 12
> amps continuously,
> the wire will then get hot enough to boil water.
Actually, 20AWG is pretty 'cool' at 12A. See
http://tinyurl.com/lk2tmhx
If a 22AWG at 20A just barely passes 100C in free
air . . . a 20AWG at 12A is pretty safe.
A 10A fuse would be fine . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: heater fan wiring |
Great! Thanks.
Sent from my Android. Sorry Steve.
On Mar 29, 2017 4:35 PM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 04:12 PM 3/28/2017, you wrote:
>
>
> I would try a 7.5 amp fuse. I usually prefer fuses. But for a motor,
> a circuit breaker will not nuisance trip as easily. Some day the motor
> bearings will freeze up. If fused higher and the motor draws 12 amps
> continuously,
> the wire will then get hot enough to boil water.
>
>
> Actually, 20AWG is pretty 'cool' at 12A. See
>
> http://tinyurl.com/lk2tmhx
>
> If a 22AWG at 20A just barely passes 100C in free
> air . . . a 20AWG at 12A is pretty safe.
>
> A 10A fuse would be fine . . .
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
I am installing an Appareo Stratus ESG transponder with internal GPS. It did not
come with antenna cables. I purchased a 19 inch RG400 GPS antenna cable before
reading the installation directions which state, "All wiring should have
a cable loss of minimum 2 dB . . . .Using RG400 the minimum cable length is 10
feet".
Will the GPS work satisfactorily with the short cable? If not, what is a cheap
and easy way to increase the dB loss? What is the theory behind the requirement
for at least 2 dB cable loss?
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467824#467824
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | steve harmon <sharmon32(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
I also installed an Appereo in my cozy I called the factory they said you need
at least 10 foot of antenna cable so you have some resistance my antenna is 2
ft. From the stratus they told me to just roll up the extra so that is what I
did . It. Works who am I to argue with success.
Steve build on
Sent from my iPad
> On Mar 30, 2017, at 5:01 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
>
> I am installing an Appareo Stratus ESG transponder with internal GPS. It did
not come with antenna cables. I purchased a 19 inch RG400 GPS antenna cable
before reading the installation directions which state, "All wiring should have
a cable loss of minimum 2 dB . . . .Using RG400 the minimum cable length is
10 feet".
> Will the GPS work satisfactorily with the short cable? If not, what is a cheap
and easy way to increase the dB loss? What is the theory behind the requirement
for at least 2 dB cable loss?
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467824#467824
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________
This Simple Step To Flawless Skin
gundrymd.com
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/58dcf56de30bf756c6215st01duc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 6:01 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> I am installing an Appareo Stratus ESG transponder with internal GPS. It
> did not come with antenna cables. I purchased a 19 inch RG400 GPS antenna
> cable before reading the installation directions which state, "All wiring
> should have a cable loss of minimum 2 dB . . . .Using RG400 the minimum
> cable length is 10 feet".
> Will the GPS work satisfactorily with the short cable? If not, what is
> a cheap and easy way to increase the dB loss? What is the theory behind
> the requirement for at least 2 dB cable loss?
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
The 1st thing that comes to mind is this. Most radio receivers have
multiple gain stages (in addition to frequency down-conversions) to get
weak RF signals up to a level that's useful. Each gain stage will typically
have automatic gain control (AGC) that prevents the amplifier from being
driven into distortion by a too-strong input signal. But there's a limit to
the range of AGC. They've probably calculated the max possible output from
the GPS puck (which probably has both the 1st frequency downconversion and
gain), and the cable loss prevents overdriving the 1st gain stage in the
box.
When the GPS RF signal is weaker, the box's AGC circuit can ramp up gain to
compensate.
If you ever fly formation, you might hear the same overdrive effect in your
comm radio. The wingman's radio might sound fine until they get within a
half mile or so, but as they get closer, their audio sounds fuzzy &
garbled. When they break formation & move a mile or two away, it clears up
again. The bad audio is your radio's AGC being overwhelmed by too much RF
or intermediate frequency signal level while the wingman's transmitter is
too 'hot' for your receiver to compensate.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
IIRC each connector in the line adds about 1/2 db of cable loss. So in
theory, 2 extra adapters in the cable would get you there. Don't know if
that is exactly correct. So maybe with an extra foot, a union connector
and 2 BNC connectors, or BNC to TNC adapters and you might have enough
loss. BTW, BNC to TNC adapter is lot cheaper than just buying a crimp
on TNC connector.
On 3/30/2017 4:01 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> I am installing an Appareo Stratus ESG transponder with internal GPS. It did
not come with antenna cables. I purchased a 19 inch RG400 GPS antenna cable
before reading the installation directions which state, "All wiring should have
a cable loss of minimum 2 dB . . . .Using RG400 the minimum cable length is
10 feet".
> Will the GPS work satisfactorily with the short cable? If not, what is a cheap
and easy way to increase the dB loss? What is the theory behind the requirement
for at least 2 dB cable loss?
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467824#467824
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carlos Trigo <trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt> |
| Subject: | Garmin GPS antenna |
>
> The G3X Installation Manual says, in a "Note" on page 20-1, that "GA35, GA36
and GA37 antennas cannot be used with GDU 37X/4XX units".
>
> Does anybody know why?
>
> (I'm asking because I bought the pretty expensive GA35, as an excellent GPS antenna,
before reading this "Note")
>
> Thanks
> Carlos
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron Springer <ron228rj(at)gmail.com> |
I had a different thought on backup power for the EFIS I am installing in
my day VFR plane. I figured the most likely scenario of having a problem
with the EFIS is loss of power to it. I would like to at least have
airspeed available while landing to troubleshoot the electrical problem,
but why not just restore the whole EFIS?
Also, I always have on board a couple freshly charged batteries for various
purposes. One is running the Raspberry Pi Stratux system. Another is
standby power (if needed for very long flights) for my Android tablet
running Avare.
So, why not put a round 2.1 mm jack for 12 volts on the panel routed the
secondary power input on the EFIS and then keep one of these cables stored
in the plane to go from 5 volts on the USB output of the battery to 12
volts for the EFIS:
https://www.amazon.com/LANMU-Module-Converter-Barrel-Connector/dp/B01G3ERI6U
Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
At 06:01 AM 3/30/2017, you wrote:
>
>I am installing an Appareo Stratus ESG transponder with internal
>GPS. It did not come with antenna cables. I purchased a 19 inch
>RG400 GPS antenna cable before reading the installation directions
>which state, "All wiring should have a cable loss of minimum 2 dB .
>. . .Using RG400 the minimum cable length is 10 feet".
> Will the GPS work satisfactorily with the short cable? If not,
> what is a cheap and easy way to increase the dB loss? What is the
> theory behind the requirement for at least 2 dB cable loss?
I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this
requirement. GPS satellite signals are exceedingly
tiny . . . down in the atmospheric noise levels.
The only reason our tiny wrist-watch, hand-held,
and self-navigating drones work so well is because
the 'smarts' in GPS receiver software is looking for
specific patterns of data in the chaotic patternless
noise.
Routine variations in received GPS signals
is all over the magnitude map spanning perhaps
tens of db . . . a required 2 db 'addition of
attenuation' simply doesn't make sense.
The idea that a receiver's performance is
predicated on a minimum of 2db of loss in the
antenna system by making the cable longer is a
real puzzle . . . usually, the instructions will
say something like "limit cable losses to a MAXIMUM
of 2db where a 10' run of RG-400 is the practical
limit".
I'm wondering if this manual wasn't originally crafted
in Chinese and then translated by some academic instead
of a systems engineer.
One thing is for sure, if you install your system
using only the needed length of coax, you can certainly
ADD some later. I'm betting a dollar to a dozen doughnuts
that it will not be necessary.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
Garmin came out with the same requirement when the GNS-430W was
approved. I believe they later reduced the minimum length to perhaps 6
ft. I suspect it has more to do with matching the output of the antenna
pre-amplifier to the main receiver, and doesn't have a lot to do with
signal strength at all.
On 3/31/2017 7:16 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> At 06:01 AM 3/30/2017, you wrote:
>>
>> I am installing an Appareo Stratus ESG transponder with internal GPS.
>> It did not come with antenna cables. I purchased a 19 inch RG400 GPS
>> antenna cable before reading the installation directions which state,
>> "All wiring should have a cable loss of minimum 2 dB . . . .Using
>> RG400 the minimum cable length is 10 feet".
>> Will the GPS work satisfactorily with the short cable? If not, what
>> is a cheap and easy way to increase the dB loss? What is the theory
>> behind the requirement for at least 2 dB cable loss?
>
> I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this
> requirement. GPS satellite signals are exceedingly
> tiny . . . down in the atmospheric noise levels.
> The only reason our tiny wrist-watch, hand-held,
> and self-navigating drones work so well is because
> the 'smarts' in GPS receiver software is looking for
> specific patterns of data in the chaotic patternless
> noise.
>
> Routine variations in received GPS signals
> is all over the magnitude map spanning perhaps
> tens of db . . . a required 2 db 'addition of
> attenuation' simply doesn't make sense.
>
> The idea that a receiver's performance is
> predicated on a minimum of 2db of loss in the
> antenna system by making the cable longer is a
> real puzzle . . . usually, the instructions will
> say something like "limit cable losses to a MAXIMUM
> of 2db where a 10' run of RG-400 is the practical
> limit".
>
> I'm wondering if this manual wasn't originally crafted
> in Chinese and then translated by some academic instead
> of a systems engineer.
>
> One thing is for sure, if you install your system
> using only the needed length of coax, you can certainly
> ADD some later. I'm betting a dollar to a dozen doughnuts
> that it will not be necessary.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
This is not that unusual. My Garman GNS480 had the same requirement.
Keep in mind that the antennas used are active antennas.
Tim
> On Mar 31, 2017, at 9:16 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroele
ctric.com> wrote:
>
> At 06:01 AM 3/30/2017, you wrote:
>>
>> I am installing an Appareo Stratus ESG transponder with internal GPS. It
did not come with antenna cables. I purchased a 19 inch RG400 GPS antenna c
able before reading the installation directions which state, "All wiring sho
uld have a cable loss of minimum 2 dB . . . .Using RG400 the minimum cable l
ength is 10 feet".
>> Will the GPS work satisfactorily with the short cable? If not, what is
a cheap and easy way to increase the dB loss? What is the theory behind th
e requirement for at least 2 dB cable loss?
>
> I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this
> requirement. GPS satellite signals are exceedingly
> tiny . . . down in the atmospheric noise levels.
> The only reason our tiny wrist-watch, hand-held,
> and self-navigating drones work so well is because
> the 'smarts' in GPS receiver software is looking for
> specific patterns of data in the chaotic patternless
> noise.
>
> Routine variations in received GPS signals
> is all over the magnitude map spanning perhaps
> tens of db . . . a required 2 db 'addition of
> attenuation' simply doesn't make sense.
>
> The idea that a receiver's performance is
> predicated on a minimum of 2db of loss in the
> antenna system by making the cable longer is a
> real puzzle . . . usually, the instructions will
> say something like "limit cable losses to a MAXIMUM
> of 2db where a 10' run of RG-400 is the practical
> limit".
>
> I'm wondering if this manual wasn't originally crafted
> in Chinese and then translated by some academic instead
> of a systems engineer.
>
> One thing is for sure, if you install your system
> using only the needed length of coax, you can certainly
> ADD some later. I'm betting a dollar to a dozen doughnuts
> that it will not be necessary.
>
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | don van santen <donvansanten(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
Bob,
The first Garmin 430 install manuals stated nothing about the GPS antenna
cable length. When the WAAS update was released Garmin stated that the GPS
antenna had to be at least 13 feet long. It also stated that it was alright
to "coil" the antenna. I know of two RV 10s with G 430s, o e with the 13
foot antenna cable and one with a 3 foot (roughly) anrenna cable. There is
no detectable difference in performance. I have not checked the current
G430 WAAS manual for cable length requirements.
Don
On Mar 31, 2017 7:26 AM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 06:01 AM 3/30/2017, you wrote:
>
>
> I am installing an Appareo Stratus ESG transponder with internal GPS. It
> did not come with antenna cables. I purchased a 19 inch RG400 GPS antenna
> cable before reading the installation directions which state, "All wiring
> should have a cable loss of minimum 2 dB . . . .Using RG400 the minimum
> cable length is 10 feet".
> Will the GPS work satisfactorily with the short cable? If not, what is
> a cheap and easy way to increase the dB loss? What is the theory behind
> the requirement for at least 2 dB cable loss?
>
>
> I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this
> requirement. GPS satellite signals are exceedingly
> tiny . . . down in the atmospheric noise levels.
> The only reason our tiny wrist-watch, hand-held,
> and self-navigating drones work so well is because
> the 'smarts' in GPS receiver software is looking for
> specific patterns of data in the chaotic patternless
> noise.
>
> Routine variations in received GPS signals
> is all over the magnitude map spanning perhaps
> tens of db . . . a required 2 db 'addition of
> attenuation' simply doesn't make sense.
>
> The idea that a receiver's performance is
> predicated on a minimum of 2db of loss in the
> antenna system by making the cable longer is a
> real puzzle . . . usually, the instructions will
> say something like "limit cable losses to a MAXIMUM
> of 2db where a 10' run of RG-400 is the practical
> limit".
>
> I'm wondering if this manual wasn't originally crafted
> in Chinese and then translated by some academic instead
> of a systems engineer.
>
> One thing is for sure, if you install your system
> using only the needed length of coax, you can certainly
> ADD some later. I'm betting a dollar to a dozen doughnuts
> that it will not be necessary.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | don van santen <donvansanten(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
My UPSAT 480 manual did mot list a cable length requirement. I used a 3
foot rg 400 csble and never had any issues with reception.
On Mar 31, 2017 08:00, "Tim Olson" wrote:
> This is not that unusual. My Garman GNS480 had the same requirement.
> Keep in mind that the antennas used are active antennas.
> Tim
>
> On Mar 31, 2017, at 9:16 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
> At 06:01 AM 3/30/2017, you wrote:
>
>
> I am installing an Appareo Stratus ESG transponder with internal GPS. It
> did not come with antenna cables. I purchased a 19 inch RG400 GPS antenna
> cable before reading the installation directions which state, "All wiring
> should have a cable loss of minimum 2 dB . . . .Using RG400 the minimum
> cable length is 10 feet".
> Will the GPS work satisfactorily with the short cable? If not, what is
> a cheap and easy way to increase the dB loss? What is the theory behind
> the requirement for at least 2 dB cable loss?
>
>
> I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this
> requirement. GPS satellite signals are exceedingly
> tiny . . . down in the atmospheric noise levels.
> The only reason our tiny wrist-watch, hand-held,
> and self-navigating drones work so well is because
> the 'smarts' in GPS receiver software is looking for
> specific patterns of data in the chaotic patternless
> noise.
>
> Routine variations in received GPS signals
> is all over the magnitude map spanning perhaps
> tens of db . . . a required 2 db 'addition of
> attenuation' simply doesn't make sense.
>
> The idea that a receiver's performance is
> predicated on a minimum of 2db of loss in the
> antenna system by making the cable longer is a
> real puzzle . . . usually, the instructions will
> say something like "limit cable losses to a MAXIMUM
> of 2db where a 10' run of RG-400 is the practical
> limit".
>
> I'm wondering if this manual wasn't originally crafted
> in Chinese and then translated by some academic instead
> of a systems engineer.
>
> One thing is for sure, if you install your system
> using only the needed length of coax, you can certainly
> ADD some later. I'm betting a dollar to a dozen doughnuts
> that it will not be necessary.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
It seems that the minimum cable length is a requirement of the GPS receiver and
not of the antenna. I agree with you Bob. I always thought that shorter cable
length is better.
I ordered 2 of 90 degree TNC adapters to increase the dB loss. eBay item number:
232142074744
Below is a quote from a separate unrelated company. Notice that they contradict
themselves in the last sentence.
http://utahscientific.com/support/protected/fb_contemp/GPS%20Installation%20V1_6.pdf
> In the world of GPS; too much signal gain can be just as detrimental as too little,
and RF noise, even if it is out of band, can severely disrupt the performance
of your GPS application.
> The Courtyard GPS receiver has a minimum input gain of 20dB and a maximum of
30dB.
> The recommended antenna has a 26dB gain.
> Recommended cable is RG58 and TNC connectors having a loss of 0.85dB per metre.
> (RG174 has a loss of 1.2dB per meter.)
> Maximum cable length is: (26dB-20dB)/0.85dBpermetre = 7.06 metres
> Minimum cable length is: (30dB -26dB)/0.85dBpermetre = 4.70 meters
> As a general rule, keep RF cable lengths as short as possible and use a good
quality GPS antenna with the correct gain.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467869#467869
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
That is a fairly accurate statement correct. For others who have 'used' or
'seen' shorter cables work, indeed sometimes they do...but I lost count of
the number of phone calls we've had from customers about antenna or GPS
issues, only to find out they had a short little cable. Once extending the
cable to the proper length most issues disappeared. Our recommendation is
to keep it on the longer side - sometimes shorter than 10' will be ok, but
something as short as 18" will almost certainly cause issues.
Cheers,
Stein
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly
McMullen
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 9:38 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length
-->
Garmin came out with the same requirement when the GNS-430W was approved. I
believe they later reduced the minimum length to perhaps 6 ft. I suspect it
has more to do with matching the output of the antenna pre-amplifier to the
main receiver, and doesn't have a lot to do with signal strength at all.
On 3/31/2017 7:16 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> At 06:01 AM 3/30/2017, you wrote:
>> -->
>>
>> I am installing an Appareo Stratus ESG transponder with internal GPS.
>> It did not come with antenna cables. I purchased a 19 inch RG400 GPS
>> antenna cable before reading the installation directions which state,
>> "All wiring should have a cable loss of minimum 2 dB . . . .Using
>> RG400 the minimum cable length is 10 feet".
>> Will the GPS work satisfactorily with the short cable? If not,
>> what is a cheap and easy way to increase the dB loss? What is the
>> theory behind the requirement for at least 2 dB cable loss?
>
> I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this
> requirement. GPS satellite signals are exceedingly
> tiny . . . down in the atmospheric noise levels.
> The only reason our tiny wrist-watch, hand-held,
> and self-navigating drones work so well is because
> the 'smarts' in GPS receiver software is looking for
> specific patterns of data in the chaotic patternless
> noise.
>
> Routine variations in received GPS signals
> is all over the magnitude map spanning perhaps
> tens of db . . . a required 2 db 'addition of
> attenuation' simply doesn't make sense.
>
> The idea that a receiver's performance is
> predicated on a minimum of 2db of loss in the
> antenna system by making the cable longer is a
> real puzzle . . . usually, the instructions will
> say something like "limit cable losses to a MAXIMUM
> of 2db where a 10' run of RG-400 is the practical
> limit".
>
> I'm wondering if this manual wasn't originally crafted
> in Chinese and then translated by some academic instead
> of a systems engineer.
>
> One thing is for sure, if you install your system
> using only the needed length of coax, you can certainly
> ADD some later. I'm betting a dollar to a dozen doughnuts
> that it will not be necessary.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Below is a quote from Garmin:
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showpost.php?p=824265&postcount=3
> Once the antenna mounting position has been prepared, route the coax cable from
the antenna to the 400W Series unit. Proper selection of coax cable and assembly
of connectors is critical to GPS signal performance. The cable loss from
the GPS antenna shall be between 1.5 dB and 6.5 dB in order to aintain proper
rejection to interference signals.
> The coaxial connectors and adapters, such as TNC to BNC, add additional loss
to the cable and should be considered when computing the cable loss. A typical
loss of 0.2 dB can be used for each connection.
> NOTE: If RG-142B or RG-400 is used, 1.5 dB equates to a length of approximately
6.5 feet of cable with a connector on each end. RG-142B or RG-400 cable can
be used as long as the length is less than 35 feet.
Another website says, "Be kind to the 0.000 000 000 000 000 1 watt GPS signal at
the Antenna !!"
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467874#467874
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
I think we may be losing sight of what signal we're actually talking about.
It's extremely unlikely that the GPS antenna puck is sending raw,
unamplified 1/5 GHZ RF to the receiver.
Most GPS pucks send either decoded digital data (serial or USB), or
amplified 1.5GHZ RF, or amplified and downconverted IF (intermediate
frequency) to the receiver. If it's either of the 2nd two options, then
the next stage (in the receiver) can be overdriven by a very strong
signal from the puck.
On 3/31/2017 10:57 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> Below is a quote from Garmin:
> http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showpost.php?p=824265&postcount=3
>
>> Once the antenna mounting position has been prepared, route the coax cable from
the antenna to the 400W Series unit. Proper selection of coax cable and assembly
of connectors is critical to GPS signal performance. The cable loss from
the GPS antenna shall be between 1.5 dB and 6.5 dB in order to aintain proper
rejection to interference signals.
>> The coaxial connectors and adapters, such as TNC to BNC, add additional loss
to the cable and should be considered when computing the cable loss. A typical
loss of 0.2 dB can be used for each connection.
>> NOTE: If RG-142B or RG-400 is used, 1.5 dB equates to a length of approximately
6.5 feet of cable with a connector on each end. RG-142B or RG-400 cable can
be used as long as the length is less than 35 feet.
> Another website says, "Be kind to the 0.000 000 000 000 000 1 watt GPS signal
at the Antenna !!"
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Minimum GPS Antenna Cable Length |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
I will follow Stein's (and the Mfg's) recommendation and will use a 10 foot cable.
They are the experts. It will be a lot easier to do it right the first time.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467885#467885
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Hunter <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Thermocouple Wires |
Hi all ,
Are thermocouple units polarized? In other words does it matter when
connecting up a thermocouple to a dynon EMS unit what wire goes in what pin?
THANKS!!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Thermocouple Wires |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
>From the SkyView Installation Manual:
> Polarity is important, so
> ensure that you are routing the positive side (yellow for K-type; white for J-type)
of the thermocouple to pin 27 or pin 36 on the 37-pin harness, and the
negative side to pin 28 or pin 37
Note that the red wire from type J thermocouples is NOT positive, but is negative.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467898#467898
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Hunter <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Thermocouple Wires |
Thanks!!!!
On Mar 31, 2017 7:03 PM, "user9253" wrote:
>
> >From the SkyView Installation Manual:
> > Polarity is important, so
> > ensure that you are routing the positive side (yellow for K-type; white
> for J-type) of the thermocouple to pin 27 or pin 36 on the 37-pin harness,
> and the negative side to pin 28 or pin 37
>
> Note that the red wire from type J thermocouples is NOT positive, but is
> negative.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467898#467898
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | Installing Mesh Sleeving |
Folks,
I am going to use some mesh sleeving to protect some coax in a couple of
places. Do I need to do anything to the ends of the mesh sleeving after
cutting it? Do I have to worry about it unraveling or anything?
Thanks,
-- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what
am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rnjcurtis(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Installing Mesh Sleeving |
I am going to use some mesh sleeving to protect some coax in a couple of pl
aces. Do I need to do anything to the ends of the mesh sleeving after cutti
ng it? Do I have to worry about it unraveling or anything?
Art,
A piece of shrink sleeving on each end works well.
Roger
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Installing Mesh Sleeving |
On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Art Zemon wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I am going to use some mesh sleeving to protect some coax in a couple of
> places. Do I need to do anything to the ends of the mesh sleeving after
> cutting it? Do I have to worry about it unraveling or anything?
>
> Thanks,
> -- Art Z.Brand/part # ?
>
> I'm using some TechFlex brand in two different varieties; one says it's
> 'fray resistant' when cut with scissors and the other recommends hot knife
> cutting to fuse the ends. (Both are better if the ends are melted slightly.)
>
> https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00C1OMARY/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o07_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
>
>
> https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B0008JHB0K/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o08_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
>
> The use instructions with your product should tell you if it's required,
> but playing with a sample is the best way to know.
>
> Charlie
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianxx2(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Installing Mesh Sleeving |
I used heat shrink tubing
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 1, 2017, at 1:58 PM, Art Zemon wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> I am going to use some mesh sleeving to protect some coax in a couple of p
laces. Do I need to do anything to the ends of the mesh sleeving after cutti
ng it? Do I have to worry about it unraveling or anything?
>
> Thanks,
> -- Art Z.
>
> --
> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>
> "If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what a
m I? And if not now, when?" Hillel
==========================
==========================
==========================
-=========================
==========================
-=========================
==========================
==========================
====================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | Re: Installing Mesh Sleeving |
Thanks, Charlie and Roger. I don't know the exact model number. I bought 15
feet of the stuff from the local electronics supply emporium. I played a
bit and found that a quick pass through the gas stove flame keeps the end
from fraying and still allows the opening to expand/contract.
Cheers,
-- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what
am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel*
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Installing Mesh Sleeving |
The way I do it is that I cut it with the mesh over a piece of pipe about the same
diameter as the final size. This isn't critical, but it's way I do it. Then
I use an old soldering iron to melt through the mesh.
Won't unravel and it will still expand and contract.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467954#467954
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
Because there is interest on this list I thought it might be appropriate to
post that there is an upcoming EAA Webinar on the subject of lithium
batteries:
http://pages.eaa.org/WBN2017-05-31LithiumBatteriesExplained_LP-Registration.html
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | old B and C SD-8 Dynamo failure |
| From: | Mark Todd <motodd(at)frontier.com> |
Well, after 27 years and 2300+ hours, my good old SD-8 dynamo finally
gave me a problem. It was installed in my day/VFR RV4 in 1989 as the
only charging source. It could produce up to 8.6 amps at high RPM and
met my modest electrical load requirements (<4 amps in cruise) for all
these years. Of course, I could expect my low voltage light to come on
(at 12.5V) at low rpms depending on the loads. I didn't mind. It made
for a nice reminder to turn off my boost pump as I exited the runway on
landing.
On a recent flight, I noticed that the low voltage light came on a
little earlier than I expected on landing. At high RPM, the voltage
was only going to 13.9 instead of the usual 14.1V. A quick run through
my switchable loads showed they were pulling their expected currents.
I have a switchable volt/amp gauge on my panel so I can look at one or
the other but not both simultaneously. The amp readings are taken off
my B lead and it takes several seconds for the amp reading to stabilize
on my gauge after it's selected. I never saw an unexpectedly high amp
reading on the gauge. Back at the hangar, a brief look at my B lead
connections didn't reveal any problems. On the next flight, the low
voltage light came on even sooner and the voltage only got to 13.7V.
A more detailed inspection was made of the wiring, including
micro-ohming some connections (using Bob's 100mA current clamp
micro-ohmmeter design I've enjoyed using for several years). I thought
I detected a little bit of a burnt electrical smell near the dynamo
housing where the armature leads pass through a clip screwed into the
rim of the housing. Using a cheap digital multimeter, I checked the
resistance across the disconnected dynamo leads and got 5.6 ohms. Not
sure what it's suppose to be.
I flew the plane again and this time, I got a low voltage light in
cruise and zero B lead amps when checked. I checked the resistance
across the dynamo leads again with the same meter.. and got a reading of
zero. My micro-ohm meter said it was about 700 milliohms. I bought a
new SD-8 and am back in the air trouble free. Since removing the
problem unit, I removed the clip that held the leads at the rim of the
dynamo housing and slid the protective sheathing back. The lead wires
look fine, including the half-inch of wire I can see inside the
housing. The resistance across the leads remains 'zero' when checked
with another cheap digital mulitmeter.
I concluded that I had probably experienced a progressive short within
the dynamo, probably in the windings themselves. This dynamo was from
the 1980's and the exterior design has changed a lot since then. This
includes a protected routing of the leads out of the dynamo housing with
a better clamping system. The insides have probably changed as well.
Lord knows the new unit is easier to install with much better access to
the mounting nuts.
I have no complaints about this SD-8 failure. I certainly got a
reasonable service life out of this unit. I just thought I'd share my
story as just one more data point, although I appreciate it's kinda
ancient history. I'm planning on taking the dynamo apart (curiosity)
and maybe salvaging the magnets.
Bob, if you wanted to look at this dynamo for some reason, I'll be happy
to mail it to you. I suspect you've got much better things to do than
'paleo-forensics' on this dated item.
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: old B and C SD-8 Dynamo failure |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
The saying, "Ring it out", when referring to electrical testing, got its beginnings
when troubleshooters used a doorbell for testing electrical motors. There
is not much difference in resistance between a good motor and one with a shorted
winding. But there is a difference in the inductance. An experienced electrician
could tell the difference in doorbell sound when connected in series
with a shorted motor winding compared to a good winding. Modern doorbells are
not suitable for this task. The doorbell must be of the old fashioned clanger
and bell type.
This information might be of use to you 27 years from now when your new SD-8
dynamo malfunctions. :-)
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468022#468022
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: old B and C SD-8 Dynamo failure |
>
>I have no complaints about this SD-8 failure. I certainly got a
>reasonable service life out of this unit. I just thought I'd share my
>story as just one more data point, although I appreciate it's kinda
>ancient history. I'm planning on taking the dynamo apart (curiosity)
>and maybe salvaging the magnets.
Are the windings smoked? Do they smell bad?
The DC resistance of this product is less than
0.25 ohms. So if you had a shorted turn or two,
you could not resolve it with jelly-bean test
equipment. The magnets are ferrites . . . rather
brittle. You probably couldn't get them loose
without breaking them up.
>Bob, if you wanted to look at this dynamo for some reason, I'll be happy
>to mail it to you. I suspect you've got much better things to do than
>'paleo-forensics' on this dated item.
>
>Mark
Actually, I would like to see it. I have
a drive stand running that fits the SD8
and I'm equipped to test/inspect it in
detail. Getting a close up look at a sample
with this kind of service on it would be
illuminating.
Send the rectifier/regulator too. I'll
get them checked out and repaired/replaced
as needed.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ashleysc(at)broadstripe.net |
| Subject: | Re: old B and C SD-8 Dynamo failure |
Hi Mark;
Hi All;
I read this as an endorsement, not a complaint. Who gets 27 years of operation
from a car, washing machine, or computer? It gives me great confidence in B &
C products.
Cheers! Stu.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Todd" <motodd(at)frontier.com>
Sent: Monday, April 3, 2017 10:32:48 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: old B and C SD-8 Dynamo failure
Well, after 27 years and 2300+ hours, my good old SD-8 dynamo finally
gave me a problem. It was installed in my day/VFR RV4 in 1989 as the
only charging source. It could produce up to 8.6 amps at high RPM and
met my modest electrical load requirements (<4 amps in cruise) for all
these years. Of course, I could expect my low voltage light to come on
(at 12.5V) at low rpms depending on the loads. I didn't mind. It made
for a nice reminder to turn off my boost pump as I exited the runway on
landing.
On a recent flight, I noticed that the low voltage light came on a
little earlier than I expected on landing. At high RPM, the voltage
was only going to 13.9 instead of the usual 14.1V. A quick run through
my switchable loads showed they were pulling their expected currents.
I have a switchable volt/amp gauge on my panel so I can look at one or
the other but not both simultaneously. The amp readings are taken off
my B lead and it takes several seconds for the amp reading to stabilize
on my gauge after it's selected. I never saw an unexpectedly high amp
reading on the gauge. Back at the hangar, a brief look at my B lead
connections didn't reveal any problems. On the next flight, the low
voltage light came on even sooner and the voltage only got to 13.7V.
A more detailed inspection was made of the wiring, including
micro-ohming some connections (using Bob's 100mA current clamp
micro-ohmmeter design I've enjoyed using for several years). I thought
I detected a little bit of a burnt electrical smell near the dynamo
housing where the armature leads pass through a clip screwed into the
rim of the housing. Using a cheap digital multimeter, I checked the
resistance across the disconnected dynamo leads and got 5.6 ohms. Not
sure what it's suppose to be.
I flew the plane again and this time, I got a low voltage light in
cruise and zero B lead amps when checked. I checked the resistance
across the dynamo leads again with the same meter.. and got a reading of
zero. My micro-ohm meter said it was about 700 milliohms. I bought a
new SD-8 and am back in the air trouble free. Since removing the
problem unit, I removed the clip that held the leads at the rim of the
dynamo housing and slid the protective sheathing back. The lead wires
look fine, including the half-inch of wire I can see inside the
housing. The resistance across the leads remains 'zero' when checked
with another cheap digital mulitmeter.
I concluded that I had probably experienced a progressive short within
the dynamo, probably in the windings themselves. This dynamo was from
the 1980's and the exterior design has changed a lot since then. This
includes a protected routing of the leads out of the dynamo housing with
a better clamping system. The insides have probably changed as well.
Lord knows the new unit is easier to install with much better access to
the mounting nuts.
I have no complaints about this SD-8 failure. I certainly got a
reasonable service life out of this unit. I just thought I'd share my
story as just one more data point, although I appreciate it's kinda
ancient history. I'm planning on taking the dynamo apart (curiosity)
and maybe salvaging the magnets.
Bob, if you wanted to look at this dynamo for some reason, I'll be happy
to mail it to you. I suspect you've got much better things to do than
'paleo-forensics' on this dated item.
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)wi.rr.com> |
I recently purchased the MGL 18mm spark plug CHT probes from Aircraft
Spruce. The photo on both their website and MGL's shows a copper ring
soldered to a K-type thermocouple wire, a pretty standard setup. What
they sent me is pictured below. Since the bare wire ends connect
directly to the RDAC brain box, I deduced that the other end- a 1/4 PIDG
fast-on, crimped to the thermocouple wires- must just attach to the
copper ring. The tab end of the copper ring is exactly 1/4 inch, so
this makes sense.
This seems like a pretty cheeseball setup. From what I know of K-type
thermocouples (mostly from reading the 'Connection) that wires must be
silver soldered to the probe and to each other. Or, am I mistaken and
is this a reasonable setup?
I am also reaching out to MGL about this, but I thought I'd ping this
group for your thoughts as well.
Thanks
Jeff Point
Milwaukee
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Hunter <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | K Type Thermocouple Wire Striping |
Hi All,
How does one (me) strip K Type Thermocouple Wires.
The wire I bought from eBay Aircraft Supply has a metal shield and two
wires inside that appear to be covered with some kind of a fabric type
insulator.
The metal shield can be stripped back with a pick, bandaids, and some bad
words. The two inner wires insulation do not strip back with a mechanical
wire stripper and if I use a razor blade the fabric insulation will simply
unravel like a sweater thread.
There has got to be a better way?!?!?
Thanks,
Bill Hunter
On Apr 4, 2017 8:55 PM, "Jeff Point" wrote:
I recently purchased the MGL 18mm spark plug CHT probes from Aircraft
Spruce. The photo on both their website and MGL's shows a copper ring
soldered to a K-type thermocouple wire, a pretty standard setup. What they
sent me is pictured below. Since the bare wire ends connect directly to
the RDAC brain box, I deduced that the other end- a 1/4 PIDG fast-on,
crimped to the thermocouple wires- must just attach to the copper ring.
The tab end of the copper ring is exactly 1/4 inch, so this makes sense.
This seems like a pretty cheeseball setup. From what I know of K-type
thermocouples (mostly from reading the 'Connection) that wires must be
silver soldered to the probe and to each other. Or, am I mistaken and is
this a reasonable setup?
I am also reaching out to MGL about this, but I thought I'd ping this group
for your thoughts as well.
Thanks
Jeff Point
Milwaukee
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kent or Jackie Ashton <kjashton(at)vnet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MGL CHT probe |
> On Apr 4, 2017, at 11:42 PM, Jeff Point wrote:
>
> This seems like a pretty cheeseball setup. =46rom what I know of
K-type thermocouples (mostly from reading the 'Connection) that wires
must be silver soldered to the probe and to each other. Or, am I
mistaken and is this a reasonable setup?
What you have will probably work just fine but yes, the high dollar
thermocouples usually silver-solder the wires to the copper ring and
incorporate a support (pic), however they=99re amazingly
expensive.
Silver-soldering is a good skill to learn and does not take much more
than a propane torch and the proper materials. Here are a couple I made
as an experiment (2nd pic). They use copper sparkplug gaskets and a
piece of stainless welding wire as the support. A =9Cresist=9D
is a material applied to the parts that you don=99t want the
solder to flow onto. Wite-out makes a pretty good resist. The tricky
part is jigging the parts while you heat them. This place has all the
supplies and there are many Youtube videos.
https://contenti.com
Time or money, take your choice. :-)
-Kent
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lithium Webinar |
At 05:34 PM 4/3/2017, you wrote:
>Because there is interest on this list I thought it might be
>appropriate to post that there is an upcoming EAA Webinar on the
>subject of lithium batteries:
>
><http://pages.eaa.org/WBN2017-05-31LithiumBatteriesExplained_LP-Registration.html>http://pages.eaa.org/WBN2017-05-31LithiumBatteriesExplained_LP-Registration.html
Thanks for the heads-up! I'll check it out . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: old B and C SD-8 Dynamo failure |
| From: | Mark Todd <motodd(at)frontier.com> |
> Are the windings smoked? Do they smell bad?
I thought there was a burnt smell from the dynamo before I pulled it off
the engine. Here at my bench, is smells fine. Now I wonder if that
burnt smell was from something else in that 2300+ hour engine compartment.
>
> The DC resistance of this product is less than
> 0.25 ohms. So if you had a shorted turn or two,
> you could not resolve it with jelly-bean test
> equipment. The magnets are ferrites . . . rather
> brittle. You probably couldn't get them loose
> without breaking them up.
OK.
>
>
>> Bob, if you wanted to look at this dynamo for some reason, I'll be happy
>> to mail it to you. I suspect you've got much better things to do than
>> 'paleo-forensics' on this dated item.
>>
>> Mark
> Actually, I would like to see it. I have
> a drive stand running that fits the SD8
> and I'm equipped to test/inspect it in
> detail. Getting a close up look at a sample
> with this kind of service on it would be
> illuminating.
>
> Send the rectifier/regulator too. I'll
> get them checked out and repaired/replaced
> as needed.
>
>
> Bob . . .
I'll get the dynamo and regulator off to you within the next couple of
days, using your PO Box 130 address unless you instruct otherwise.
Thanks for looking at this. If it checks out OK, I guess it'll mean
that I missed a faulty connection somewhere that got cleared up with the
replacement. After all these years of flawless service, I can't decide
whether I'm rooting for the dynamo or me!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: old B and C SD-8 Dynamo failure |
>
>
>I'll get the dynamo and regulator off to you within the next couple of
>days, using your PO Box 130 address unless you instruct otherwise.
>
>Thanks for looking at this. If it checks out OK, I guess it'll mean
>that I missed a faulty connection somewhere that got cleared up with the
>replacement. After all these years of flawless service, I can't decide
>whether I'm rooting for the dynamo or me!
Thank YOU for making it available. It's a rare
treat to get field returns on mature designs
for evaluation. Products I designed at Electro-Mech
were routinely serviced in house as E-M was the only
FAA qualified overhaul and repair shop for those
products . . . I was able to visit my former
colleagues at E-M and look through the R/R
records.
In the OBAM aviation world it's more difficult
to access such data.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Today's trivia dump . . . |
I think I've written about a project to repeat the
experiment I did on AA alkaline cells 14 years ago . . .
http://tinyurl.com/mhztc2b
I've been keeping a constellation of AA-cell products
in the super-duper-battery-runner-downer for several
weeks and at first blush at most of the data, the
original deductions about alkaline cell quality vs.
costs and advertising hype haven't changed.
There are a couple interesting things I've discovered
that I'll share with the List.
There's a line of alkaline cells purported to be
enhanced with lithium. A noteworthy example is
the Energizer 'Advanced Lithium' brand. These
are not lithium-ion cells . . . they still present
the expected 1.6 volt/cell open circuit potential
as their rudimentary cousins but unlike MOST 'enhanced
formulas' these do indeed offer improved performance in the
same envelope.
The energy traces below show a generic pair of alkaline
AA cells that have delivered ~1.4 Watt-Hrs of energy . . .
about the same numbers as the first experiment in 2002.
Then we have a trio of traces that have delivered 3.6
Watt-Hrs of energy or about 2.5 times that of the
non-lithium cell.
There are three additional traces of interest . . . they
too are generated by the discharge test of some advanced
lithium cells. The general shape of the curves are the
same as for the first three described above . . . but they
averaged a 15% lower value of delivered energy and the output
voltage is 'ragged' or unstable.
Emacs!
This is caused by tiny amounts of resistance introduced
by the connections to the test equipment that can arise when
the cells are connected with the spring-loaded holders
common to 99.999% of all cylindrical cell powered products.
Emacs!
These resistance values are small . . . and generally have
little effect on appliance performance for applications
with smaller current demands. The tests I'm conducting use
a 300 mA constant current discharge rate. At this rate . . .
and anything higher . . . there is a potential for battery
holder resistance to degrade system performance.
This fact is part of the foundation for why I explored
and ultimately recommended the 9v alkaline cells in a standby
battery application a few days ago. The very low current
demand in the application under discussion did not exclude
the 9V cell.
Obviously, the AA cell offers a larger energy bucket for
such tasks . . . but getting a firm electrical grip on
the cell's electrical energy is a bit more problematic.
My energy studies are being conducted with cells having
SOLDERED leads eliminating the holder issues . . .
indeed, one could build up disposable cell arrays using
similar techniques. But they need to be done with care
lest the cells be damaged by soldering heat.
It would be really cool to use tab-welders common the Ni-Mh
and Li-Ion arrays. The AA alkaline cell has a really small
(+) terminal . . . more difficult to weld on. I have some
alkaline D-cell arrays for video cameras that were welded . . .
but the AA-cell is more problematic.
I may do an article on the techniques I use for soldering
to AA-cell . . . it's not difficult.
It seems that the past few weeks discoveries in my AA-cell
testing offer another choice for DIY standby battery
construction. As soon as I've squashed all the energy
out of the current constellation of test articles, I'll
do some testing on the effects of soldered leads.
Watch this space . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Today's trivia dump . . . |
| From: | C&K <yellowduckduo(at)gmail.com> |
Good to see some quantified info on the advanced li alkalines.
While I've soldered a number of tabs on alkaline batteries it seems that
DIY tab welders are somewhat common for building battery packs. In the
crudest form, just two handheld copper wire "electrodes" fed by a lead
acid battery. More advanced units are AC powered using a few volts from
a couple of secondary turns on an old transformer and timed current
pulses. Two pulses of 50 ms or so each from what I've learned so far.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <jim(at)PoogieBearRanch.com> |
| Subject: | Today's trivia dump . . . |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Today's trivia dump . . . |
| From: | Eric Page <edpav8r(at)yahoo.com> |
For anyone interested in this project, search YouTube for "MOT spot welder" and
you'll find a number of videos on the subject of using a microwave oven transformer
(MOT) to build a spot welder.
Eric
> On Apr 6, 2017, at 11:10 AM, C&K wrote:
> While I've soldered a number of tabs on alkaline batteries it seems that DIY
tab welders are somewhat common for building battery packs. In the crudest form,
just two handheld copper wire "electrodes" fed by a lead acid battery. More
advanced units are AC powered using a few volts from a couple of secondary turns
on an old transformer and timed current pulses. Two pulses of 50 ms or so
each from what I've learned so far.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Stuart Hutchison <stuart(at)stuarthutchison.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Today's trivia dump . . . |
At around 3200mAh, the energy density of typical Lithium primary
(non-rechargeable) cells - which are not the same as Li-Ion secondary
(rechargeable) technology - is only about 15% more than a typical
quality Alkaline cell (about 2800mAh). The reason for the claims of 5-7
times longer lasting in high-energy devices is the C-rate. In other
words, Lithium cells can deliver their stored potential at a higher rate
of current without increasing internal resistance and getting hot.
Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, so when Alkaline cells used
in high-energy devices get hot, the heat represents a =98loss=99
or waste of stored energy from the cell itself. So, it is not that
Lithium cells have 5-7 times more stored energy density (commensurate
with the price difference), but Lithium cells can deliver much more of
their energy without the wasting it as heat. Putting Lithium batteries
in a very low drain wall-mounted clock would be pointless, but in my
Infra-Red Night Vision hunting scope they are excellent value for money.
V/R Stu
> On 7 Apr 2017, at 04:10,
wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> Thanks for this update. I had been really wondering if those Energizer
"Advanced Lithium" batteries were worth the extra cost. I just did a
lookup on Amazon to find the current pricing for the AA cells =93
seems to be around $1.27 each (cheapest I could find). By comparison,
the Kirkland brand alkaline cells from CostCo run about $0.25 per cell.
Even if the "Lithium" cells last 3 times longer, they still cost 5 times
as much! Looks like your old advice from 2002 still rings true: "Buy
cheap and change often!"
>
> By the way, I recently went on a lengthy cross-country trip in my '65
Champion 7ECA (pre-dates the "Citabria" name...) only to have the PTT
wiring under the stick the short out. That gave me a "hot mike" until I
shut off the aircraft radio. I switched over to my SP-400, which had an
alkaline battery pack installed that had already been used for 4+ hours
last year at OSH (listening to the Sunday arrivals). That pack lasted
another 4+ hours of "normal" use in the cockpit before the SP-400 would
no longer transmit. I keep a spare battery pack loaded and ready to go
(the only reason I didn't put new batteries in the 1st pack), so I
switched to the new pack to complete the flight. The "new" batteries
show a "full" charge on the SP-400 battery meter after about an hour of
use in flight.
>
> By the way, with the SP-400 connected to a dedicated coax and external
VHF comm antenna and a headset adapter, I was able to talk to both
enroute ATC and our local tower from 15 miles away pretty clearly, with
only a bit of "scratchiness" at 20 miles (still understandable to them,
though). Reception-only range was well over 30 miles.
>
> Jim Parker
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Today's trivia dump . . .
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com
>
> Date: Thu, April 06, 2017 11:29 am
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
> I think I've written about a project to repeat the
> experiment I did on AA alkaline cells 14 years ago . . .
>
> http://tinyurl.com/mhztc2b
>
> I've been keeping a constellation of AA-cell products
> in the super-duper-battery-runner-downer for several
> weeks and at first blush at most of the data, the
> original deductions about alkaline cell quality vs.
> costs and advertising hype haven't changed.
>
> There are a couple interesting things I've discovered
> that I'll share with the List.
>
> There's a line of alkaline cells purported to be
> enhanced with lithium. A noteworthy example is
> the Energizer 'Advanced Lithium' brand. These
> are not lithium-ion cells . . . they still present
> the expected 1.6 volt/cell open circuit potential
> as their rudimentary cousins but unlike MOST 'enhanced
> formulas' these do indeed offer improved performance in the
> same envelope.
>
> The energy traces below show a generic pair of alkaline
> AA cells that have delivered ~1.4 Watt-Hrs of energy . . .
> about the same numbers as the first experiment in 2002.
>
> Then we have a trio of traces that have delivered 3.6
> Watt-Hrs of energy or about 2.5 times that of the
> non-lithium cell.
>
> There are three additional traces of interest . . . they
> too are generated by the discharge test of some advanced
> lithium cells. The general shape of the curves are the
> same as for the first three described above . . . but they
> averaged a 15% lower value of delivered energy and the output
> voltage is 'ragged' or unstable.
>
>
> <13684fd9.jpg>
>
> This is caused by tiny amounts of resistance introduced
> by the connections to the test equipment that can arise when
> the cells are connected with the spring-loaded holders
> common to 99.999% of all cylindrical cell powered products.
>
> <13685027.jpg>
>
> These resistance values are small . . . and generally have
> little effect on appliance performance for applications
> with smaller current demands. The tests I'm conducting use
> a 300 mA constant current discharge rate. At this rate . . .
> and anything higher . . . there is a potential for battery
> holder resistance to degrade system performance.
>
> This fact is part of the foundation for why I explored
> and ultimately recommended the 9v alkaline cells in a standby
> battery application a few days ago. The very low current
> demand in the application under discussion did not exclude
> the 9V cell.
>
> Obviously, the AA cell offers a larger energy bucket for
> such tasks . . . but getting a firm electrical grip on
> the cell's electrical energy is a bit more problematic.
>
> My energy studies are being conducted with cells having
> SOLDERED leads eliminating the holder issues . . .
> indeed, one could build up disposable cell arrays using
> similar techniques. But they need to be done with care
> lest the cells be damaged by soldering heat.
>
> It would be really cool to use tab-welders common the Ni-Mh
> and Li-Ion arrays. The AA alkaline cell has a really small
> (+) terminal . . . more difficult to weld on. I have some
> alkaline D-cell arrays for video cameras that were welded . . .
> but the AA-cell is more problematic.
>
> I may do an article on the techniques I use for soldering
> to AA-cell . . . it's not difficult.
>
> It seems that the past few weeks discoveries in my AA-cell
> testing offer another choice for DIY standby battery
> construction. As soon as I've squashed all the energy
> out of the current constellation of test articles, I'll
> do some testing on the effects of soldered leads.
>
> Watch this space . . .
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Today's trivia dump . . . |
At 04:31 PM 4/6/2017, you wrote:
>At around 3200mAh, the energy density of typical
>Lithium primary (non-rechargeable) cells - which
>are not the same as Li-Ion secondary
>(rechargeable) technology - is only about 15%
>more than a typical quality Alkaline cell (about
>2800mAh). The reason for the claims of 5-7
>times longer lasting in high-energy devices is
>the C-rate. In other words, Lithium cells can
>deliver their stored potential at a higher rate
>of current without increasing internal
>resistance and getting hot. Energy can neither
>be created nor destroyed, so when Alkaline cells
>used in high-energy devices get hot, the heat
>represents a =98loss=99 or waste of stored
>energy from the cell itself. So, it is not that
>Lithium cells have 5-7 times more stored energy
>density (commensurate with the price
>difference), but Lithium cells can deliver much
>more of their energy without the wasting it as
>heat. Putting Lithium batteries in a very low
>drain wall-mounted clock would be pointless, but
>in my Infra-Red Night Vision hunting scope they are excellent value for
money.
>
>V/R Stu
I have encountered AA cells offered with creative
advertising hyperbole . . . and found them to
be short on snort.
However, the cells I posted about earlier today
were discharged on an well instrumented, 300 mA
constant current load. So irrespective of the
cell's c-rate, I was comparing the various
offerings under identical test conditions.
I'll do some more detailed comparisons of these
cells and get some internal resistance measurements
at various points along their discharge profiles.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Today's trivia dump . . . |
At 04:11 PM 4/6/2017, you wrote:
>
>For anyone interested in this project, search YouTube for "MOT spot
>welder" and you'll find a number of videos on the subject of using a
>microwave oven transformer (MOT) to build a spot welder.
I've seen those . . . while economical in
terms of purchased materials, they're kinda
labor intensive. I'm toying with the notion
of trying one of these.
http://tinyurl.com/knl5wrf
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Today's trivia dump . . . |
| From: | "Eric Page" <edpav8r(at)yahoo.com> |
Indeed; plus the dangers inherent in a mains-powered project.
I hadn't yet seen the eBay item you linked. The Chinese manufacturers never cease
to amaze with their ability to crank out high-dollar items at bargain basement
prices.
This got me thinking about a simple way to accomplish this with stuff we might
have on hand at the bench or could get cheap-and-quick. With the idea that lead-acid
batteries are ubiquitous, safe and able to provide ample current to weld
the tiny spots needed to secure battery tabs, here's what I came up with:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/knz5te2
...using a solenoid like this:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/n88f7tl
This could probably be lashed together in half an hour, for a few dollars in parts.
Thoughts?
Eric
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> I've seen those . . . while economical in terms of purchased materials, they're
kinda labor intensive. I'm toying with the notion of trying one of these.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/knl5wrf
>
> Bob . . .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468112#468112
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Today's trivia dump . . . |
At 01:09 AM 4/7/2017, you wrote:
>
>Indeed; plus the dangers inherent in a mains-powered project.
>
>I hadn't yet seen the eBay item you linked. The Chinese
>manufacturers never cease to amaze with their ability to crank out
>high-dollar items at bargain basement prices.
>
>This got me thinking about a simple way to accomplish this with
>stuff we might have on hand at the bench or could get
>cheap-and-quick. With the idea that lead-acid batteries are
>ubiquitous, safe and able to provide ample current to weld the tiny
>spots needed to secure battery tabs, here's what I came up with:
>
>http://preview.tinyurl.com/knz5te2
This is almost exactly what I crafted to
replace the failed pulse controller on a friend's
spot welder some years ago. This was an AC welder
so I could use a photo coupled triac to control
primary supply current. The only questions that come
to mind immediately about the battery+contactor
configuration is the ability to control pulse current
as well . . . some high current resistors (i've used
coils of steel clothesline wire). Also, you may want
to craft your solenoid driver to withstand the inductive
kick inherent in the solenoid's windings. Adding
a diode causes a large contactor increase in drop-out-delay
which MIGHT affect your selection of optimum current
x time . . . or not.
But the thing is worth pursuing . . . we could do
an Eric's Shop Notes page on the website to assist
others in repeating a useful experiment.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Today's trivia dump . . . |
At 01:10 PM 4/6/2017, you wrote:
>Bob,
>
>Thanks for this update. I had been really
>wondering if those Energizer "Advanced Lithium"
>batteries were worth the extra cost. I just did
>a lookup on Amazon to find the current pricing
>for the AA cells ' seems to be around $1.27 each
>(cheapest I ccould find). By comparison, the
>Kirkland brand alkaline cells from CostCo run
>about $0.25 per cell. Even if the "Lithium"
>cells last 3 times longer, they still cost 5
>times as much! Looks like your old advice from
>2002 still rings true: "Buy cheap and change often!"
Agreed . . . but with this 'special case'.
As a primary cell standby battery, cost of
ownership has to include a significant
$time$ expense. It occurs to me that a
welded (or carefully soldered) array of
these more robust cells might well offer
an attractive option for keeping these
nifty little panel appliances running
in situations where our preventative
maintenance and/or less than artfully
conducted FMEA does trigger a black-panel-
syndrome.
'Standby' batteries have been an intuitively
seductive idea since the first panel mounted
electro-whizzy was installed on an airplane.
As we've discussed on the List many times
over the years, bad days in the cockpit are
rarely based on loss of electrical power . . .
and when they do include total electrical
failure, we have generally deduced root cause
to be something OTHER than deficient hardware.
System architecture and/or pilot ignorance
plays a major role in virtually every
dark-n-stormy night story published in the
popular aviation rags.
The alkaline AA cell is a demonstrably
robust and predictable source of energy.
In the very first edition of the 'Connection,
I suggested DIY arrays of alkaline D-cells
as a potential back-up source. In the 25+ years
since, energy requirements for some useful appliances
are so low that the lowly 9v transistor radio
battery becomes a EMF to consider . . . with
attractive cost, weight, volume and performance
ratios.
This exploration into a world of flight
forced into Plan-C operations SHOULD be more
academic than practical . . . but it sounds
like fun.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ashleysc(at)broadstripe.net |
| Subject: | Re: Today's trivia dump . . . |
Hi Bob;
Hi All;
This is good work that you do. Much preferable to trusting manufacturer's hype.
Cheers! Stu.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 9:29:08 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Today's trivia dump . . .
I think I've written about a project to repeat the
experiment I did on AA alkaline cells 14 years ago . . .
http://tinyurl.com/mhztc2b
I've been keeping a constellation of AA-cell products
in the super-duper-battery-runner-downer for several
weeks and at first blush at most of the data, the
original deductions about alkaline cell quality vs.
costs and advertising hype haven't changed.
There are a couple interesting things I've discovered
that I'll share with the List.
There's a line of alkaline cells purported to be
enhanced with lithium. A noteworthy example is
the Energizer 'Advanced Lithium' brand. These
are not lithium-ion cells . . . they still present
the expected 1.6 volt/cell open circuit potential
as their rudimentary cousins but unlike MOST 'enhanced
formulas' these do indeed offer improved performance in the
same envelope.
The energy traces below show a generic pair of alkaline
AA cells that have delivered ~1.4 Watt-Hrs of energy . . .
about the same numbers as the first experiment in 2002.
Then we have a trio of traces that have delivered 3.6
Watt-Hrs of energy or about 2.5 times that of the
non-lithium cell.
There are three additional traces of interest . . . they
too are generated by the discharge test of some advanced
lithium cells. The general shape of the curves are the
same as for the first three described above . . . but they
averaged a 15% lower value of delivered energy and the output
voltage is 'ragged' or unstable.
This is caused by tiny amounts of resistance introduced
by the connections to the test equipment that can arise when
the cells are connected with the spring-loaded holders
common to 99.999% of all cylindrical cell powered products.
These resistance values are small . . . and generally have
little effect on appliance performance for applications
with smaller current demands. The tests I'm conducting use
a 300 mA constant current discharge rate. At this rate . . .
and anything higher . . . there is a potential for battery
holder resistance to degrade system performance.
This fact is part of the foundation for why I explored
and ultimately recommended the 9v alkaline cells in a standby
battery application a few days ago. The very low current
demand in the application under discussion did not exclude
the 9V cell.
Obviously, the AA cell offers a larger energy bucket for
such tasks . . . but getting a firm electrical grip on
the cell's electrical energy is a bit more problematic.
My energy studies are being conducted with cells having
SOLDERED leads eliminating the holder issues . . .
indeed, one could build up disposable cell arrays using
similar techniques. But they need to be done with care
lest the cells be damaged by soldering heat.
It would be really cool to use tab-welders common the Ni-Mh
and Li-Ion arrays. The AA alkaline cell has a really small
(+) terminal . . . more difficult to weld on. I have some
alkaline D-cell arrays for video cameras that were welded . . .
but the AA-cell is more problematic.
I may do an article on the techniques I use for soldering
to AA-cell . . . it's not difficult.
It seems that the past few weeks discoveries in my AA-cell
testing offer another choice for DIY standby battery
construction. As soon as I've squashed all the energy
out of the current constellation of test articles, I'll
do some testing on the effects of soldered leads.
Watch this space . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Today's trivia dump . . . |
| From: | "Eric Page" <edpav8r(at)yahoo.com> |
Good catch; there's not much point in having 50mS pulses if the relay takes 1/3
of that again to release. I've added a 200V Zener across the coil to allow its
stored energy to dissipate faster. I changed the MOSFET to an Infineon IPA65R650CEXKSA1
that's Vds=650V rated, and I've annotated a minimum Vds=500V for
substitution.
Updated schematic:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/knz5te2
WRT pulse current, I suppose you could use a power resistor or DIY facsimile -or-
get fancy with a beefy MOSFET gated by a pot-controlled op-amp sensing a shunt.
Based on the results shown in the various YouTube videos on this subject,
my gut says current control isn't really necessary for the limited purpose of
welding tabs onto cells. I think my first go at this would be to just control
heat with pulse width. More R would be easy to add if found necessary.
Let me know if I can put this together and send it to you to try. I don't have
a need for it at the moment and my ability to measure how it works is limited
(most of my equipment is in storage), but I do have the time to build it if you
can get some use from it or if you think it will add to our collective tool
box.
Is there anything else you would suggest changing?
Eric
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> At 01:09 AM 4/7/2017, you wrote:
> This is almost exactly what I crafted to replace the failed pulse controller
on a friend's spot welder some years ago. This was an AC welder so I could use
a photo coupled triac to control primary supply current. The only questions that
come to mind immediately about the battery+contactor configuration is the
ability to control pulse current as well . . . some high current resistors (i've
used coils of steel clothesline wire). Also, you may want to craft your solenoid
driver to withstand the inductive kick inherent in the solenoid's windings.
Adding a diode causes a large contactor increase in drop-out-delay which MIGHT
affect your selection of optimum current x time . . . or not.
>
> But the thing is worth pursuing . . . we could do an Eric's Shop Notes page on
the website to assist others in repeating a useful experiment.
>
> Bob . . .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468133#468133
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Today's trivia dump . . . |
>WRT pulse current, I suppose you could use a power resistor or DIY
>facsimile -or- get fancy with a beefy MOSFET gated by a
>pot-controlled op-amp sensing a shunt. Based on the results shown
>in the various YouTube videos on this subject, my gut says current
>control isn't really necessary for the limited purpose of welding
>tabs onto cells. I think my first go at this would be to just
>control heat with pulse width. More R would be easy to add if found necessary.
Remember that total heat = K x T x I(SQUARED)
. . . while there will be some current limiting
offered by wiring and contactor resistance, the
'weld current' available from a healthy battery
can exceed many hundreds of amps.
I would sure build in some sort of limiting.
It occurs to me that incandescent lamps in
parallel might offer an interesting current
profile.
Inrush tapering over tens of milliseconds
will come asymptotic to the running current
about 100 mS later. So an array of 10, 55w lamps
(4A running) would settle out at 40a but deliver
a pretty good start up jolt . . .
Just a thought. In any case, an open coil of clothesline
wire can be a pretty rugged, adjustable limiter. Used
the stuff in a motor inrush controller for the a/c
compressor motor on King Airs wayyyyy back when . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron Burnett <ronburnett(at)charter.net> |
I am redoing my panel after replacing my failed Subaru with a Lycoming and I would
like to do some cleanup in wire routing. Would using some knife splices on
some 16 and 18 wires to get some wire bundles untangled do any harm?
Thanks,
Ron Burnett
RV-6A
May you have the Lord's blessings today!
Sent from my iPad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 09:06 PM 4/8/2017, you wrote:
>
>I am redoing my panel after replacing my failed Subaru with a
>Lycoming and I would like to do some cleanup in wire routing. Would
>using some knife splices on some 16 and 18 wires to get some wire
>bundles untangled do any harm?
Generally, no . . . but why knife splices as opposed
to butt splices?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
Ron,
You could also solder the wires together, with is easy and reliable. See
the photos at the bottom of this post on my blog
.
Cheers,
-- Art Z.
On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Ron Burnett wrote:
> ronburnett(at)charter.net>
>
> I am redoing my panel after replacing my failed Subaru with a Lycoming and
> I would like to do some cleanup in wire routing. Would using some knife
> splices on some 16 and 18 wires to get some wire bundles untangled do any
> harm?
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what
am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron Burnett <ronburnett(at)charter.net> |
Bob,
My panel isn't easily assessable except from underneath, thru 2 access panel
s I cut and installed between the windscreen and firewall. Was thinking knif
e in case I needed to get in there again, but I like your plan better.
Thanks, what little I know is from attending your course twice and this lis
t. Thanks for all you do for all of us.
Ron Burnett
May you have the Lord's blessings today!
Sent from my iPad
> On Apr 8, 2017, at 9:21 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroelec
tric.com> wrote:
>
> At 09:06 PM 4/8/2017, you wrote:
net>
>>
>> I am redoing my panel after replacing my failed Subaru with a Lycoming an
d I would like to do some cleanup in wire routing. Would using some knife s
plices on some 16 and 18 wires to get some wire bundles untangled do any har
m?
>
> Generally, no . . . but why knife splices as opposed
> to butt splices?
>
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron Burnett <ronburnett(at)charter.net> |
Art,
Thanks but I prefer crimping as those are skills I am sharper at.
Ron Burnett
May you have the Lord's blessings today!
Sent from my iPad
> On Apr 8, 2017, at 9:35 PM, Art Zemon wrote:
>
> Ron,
>
> You could also solder the wires together, with is easy and reliable. See t
he photos at the bottom of this post on my blog.
>
> Cheers,
> -- Art Z.
>
>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Ron Burnett wrot
e:
net>
>>
>> I am redoing my panel after replacing my failed Subaru with a Lycoming an
d I would like to do some cleanup in wire routing. Would using some knife s
plices on some 16 and 18 wires to get some wire bundles untangled do any har
m?
>
>
> --
> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>
> "If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what a
m I? And if not now, when?" Hillel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Keen <john(at)johnkeen.com.au> |
| Subject: | Endurance bus switch |
Hi Bob,
I=99m building an RV-7 and tackling the wiring, thank you for
sharing the invaluable knowledge in your book.
I=99ve been grappling with whether or not to wire the endurance
bus directly through the switch or use a relay. The switch is rated at
20 amps but the bus could conceivably see up to 24 amps if everything on
the bus was on and drawing its maximum, eg radio transmitting,
transponder transponding and GPS charging for example.
Regards,
John.
John Keen
0412 141 833
15 Scott St
Scone NSW Australia 2337
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Endurance bus switch |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
The deciding factor is not ampacity because either a relay or a switch will work.
Even if a switch is operated above its rating, it will not immediately self
destruct. For example, if a 20 amp switch carries 24 amps, it might only last
50,000 cycles instead of its 100,000 cycle life expectancy. It could still
outlive the life of the aircraft.
The important consideration is remote control. Locating a relay close to the
battery allows power to be shut off close to the source. A small switch and
small wires can be used to control the relay. A government accident investigator
once made the comment that the chances of a post crash fire were greatly reduced
if the battery had departed the aircraft. Shutting off electrical power
close to the source should also reduce the chances of fire following a forced
landing.
The downside of a relay is that there is one more item to fail. If you do not
install it, it can not fail. I vote for using a relay. Your preference may
vary.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468173#468173
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Hunter" <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Is there M39029/63-3XX For 18 AWG Wire?!?!? |
Hi All,
I am rewiring my airplane and am therefore making wire runs to the
Lightspeed Plasma III ignition systems.
The Plasma ignition systems input connector uses DSub 15 plugs so I have
utilized the M39029/63-368 crimp on connectors for all of the 20-24 AWG
wires that push into the connector however I have according to the
directions used an 18 AWG positive wire and an 18 AWG negative wire for
the
power and ground. To make this phase of the project more dramatic, the
Plasma input connector has two positive pins and two negative pins on
its
connector so I need to figure out to go from my single 18 AWG positive
wire
and divide it up into two wires that will each fit into its respective
M39029/63-368 ORANGE-BLUE-GRAY crimp on connector.
Is there a M39029/63-3XX crimp on connector that is designed for 18 to
20
AWG wire?
If not, I could cut off a couple of strands of the 18 AWG wire to get it
to
fit into the 20 AWG connector barrel however that is not very elegant
because the remaining strand(s) will kinda poke out of the wire
insulation
however a needle nose pliers could fix that.
Then the next obstacle to Plasma Bliss is dealing with dividing out the
single wire and making it two wires.
I am considering peeling off a 1 inch section of the insulation of the
single wire about 3 inches away from the wire end and then once that
section
of wire is exposed, place a second wire with the insulation stripped off
the
end onto the exposed conductor and solder the second wire to the first
and
then cover the junction with heat shrink.
To expose the first wire 3 inches up from the end could be possible to
do by
using my wire stripper to make the two cuts by just squeezing the handle
only about =BC of the way to have it cut all the way around the
insulation and
move the insulation about 1/16 of an inch and then exacto off the
remaining
center section.
My soldering skills have much to be desired however if I use a =93second
hands=94 type contraption to hold the two wires together and then use a
clean
soldering iron tip and some flux I could do a respectable job.
I would think that=85IF=85there was an easier way someone here would
have
found/invented it by now.
Also, in the past someone told me that a crimp on butt end connector
creates
a more secure and durable wire splice than if the two ends were soldered
together. Is that true? Perhaps with my soldering skills that would
certainly be the case however for people with decent soldering skills I
am
interested in the actual answer.
Any feedback on this idea/proper suggestions/well wishes would be most
appreciated!!!
..
THANKS!!!
Bill Hunter
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Is there M39029/63-3XX For 18 AWG |
Wire?!?!?
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
Bill,
First, there is no need for 18ga wire in providing the power. 20Ga
is plenty. So just skip that. Be aware that Klaus does not
recommend anyone ever cut the connector off and reconnect it
their self. Other than not wanting someone to screw up such
a critical part of their ignition system, I don't know what his
motivation is. But be aware that he may not be as interested to
help once someone cuts that off.
Anyway, there's no reason to go 18ga, so just skip that and then
things get easier, and you can run 2 long 20Ga wires to the power
source, or join them into something thicker with your choice in
splice if you wish, further away from the connector.
Tim
On 4/9/2017 9:00 AM, William Hunter wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
> I am rewiring my airplane and am therefore making wire runs to the
> Lightspeed Plasma III ignition systems.
>
>
> The Plasma ignition systems input connector uses DSub 15 plugs so I have
> utilized the M39029/63-368 crimp on connectors for all of the 20-24 AWG
> wires that push into the connector however I have according to the
> directions used an 18 AWG positive wire and an 18 AWG negative wire for
> the power and ground. To make this phase of the project more dramatic,
> the Plasma input connector has two positive pins and two negative pins
> on its connector so I need to figure out to go from my single 18 AWG
> positive wire and divide it up into two wires that will each fit into
> its respective M39029/63-368 ORANGE-BLUE-GRAY crimp on connector.
>
>
> Is there a M39029/63-3XX crimp on connector that is designed for 18 to
> 20 AWG wire?
>
>
> If not, I could cut off a couple of strands of the 18 AWG wire to get it
> to fit into the 20 AWG connector barrel however that is not very elegant
> because the remaining strand(s) will kinda poke out of the wire
> insulation however a needle nose pliers could fix that.
>
>
> Then the next obstacle to Plasma Bliss is dealing with dividing out the
> single wire and making it two wires.
>
>
> I am considering peeling off a 1 inch section of the insulation of the
> single wire about 3 inches away from the wire end and then once that
> section of wire is exposed, place a second wire with the insulation
> stripped off the end onto the exposed conductor and solder the second
> wire to the first and then cover the junction with heat shrink.
>
>
> To expose the first wire 3 inches up from the end could be possible to
> do by using my wire stripper to make the two cuts by just squeezing the
> handle only about of the way to have it cut all the way around the
> insulation and move the insulation about 1/16 of an inch and then exacto
> off the remaining center section.
>
>
> My soldering skills have much to be desired however if I use a second
> hands type contraption to hold the two wires together and then use a
> clean soldering iron tip and some flux I could do a respectable job.
>
>
> I would think thatIFthere was an easier way someone here would have
> found/invented it by now.
>
>
> Also, in the past someone told me that a crimp on butt end connector
> creates a more secure and durable wire splice than if the two ends were
> soldered together. Is that true? Perhaps with my soldering skills that
> would certainly be the case however for people with decent soldering
> skills I am interested in the actual answer.
>
>
> Any feedback on this idea/proper suggestions/well wishes would be most
> appreciated!!!
>
> ..
>
>
> THANKS!!!
>
>
> Bill Hunter
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Is there M39029/63-3XX For 18 AWG Wire?!?!? |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
> Also, in the past someone told me that a crimp on butt end connector creates
a more secure and durable wire splice than if the two ends were soldered together.
Is that true?
No, the two methods are equal. Some might argue that soldering is better. The
disadvantage of soldering is that solder wicks into the wire and makes it stiff
which could lead to breaking if subject to vibration. But good support and
a couple of layers of heat shrink will prevent that. Crimped wires also need
support.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468179#468179
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Endurance bus switch |
At 05:01 AM 4/9/2017, you wrote:
>Hi Bob,
>
>I=99m building an RV-7 and tackling the wiring,
>thank you for sharing the invaluable knowledge in your book.
>I=99ve been grappling with whether or not to
>wire the endurance bus directly through the
>switch or use a relay. The switch is rated at 20
>amps but the bus could conceivably see up to 24
>amps if everything on the bus was on and drawing
>its maximum, eg radio transmitting, transponder
>transponding and GPS charging for example.
The switch 'rating' is largely irrelevant. The
number is an engineer's guide to service life
under tens of thousands of cycles at full load.
Your switch won't see 1000 cycles in its lifetime
and never under full load.
Tell us about this 'endurance' bus . . . what
are your design goals for battery only operations
and what electro-whizzies are fed from this bus?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Is there M39029/63-3XX For 18 AWG Wire?!?!? |
At 09:38 AM 4/9/2017, you wrote:
>
>
> > Also, in the past someone told me that a
> crimp on butt end connector creates a more
> secure and durable wire splice than if the two
> ends were soldered together.=EF=BD Is that true?
no
>No, the two methods are equal. Some might argue
>that soldering is better. The disadvantage of
>soldering is that solder wicks into the wire and
>makes it stiff which could lead to breaking if subject to vibration.
also not true
> But good support and a couple of layers of
> heat shrink will prevent that. Crimped wires also need support.
EXACTLY. risks from stress risers on strands of wire
rise at the TRANSITION from strands (flexible) to
solid (inflexible). That solid thingy happens
whether you solder or mash. Hence the PIDG
design which provides the SAME support to
crimped wires as that which is recommended
for soldered wires as well.
http://tinyurl.com/mz89on7
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Is there M39029/63-3XX For 18 AWG Wire?!?!? |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 4/9/2017 9:00 AM, William Hunter wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I am rewiring my airplane and am therefore making wire runs to the
> Lightspeed Plasma III ignition systems.
>
> The Plasma ignition systems input connector uses DSub 15 plugs so I
> have utilized the M39029/63-368 crimp on connectors for all of the
> 20-24 AWG wires that push into the connector however I have according
> to the directions used an 18 AWG positive wire and an 18 AWG negative
> wire for the power and ground. To make this phase of the project more
> dramatic, the Plasma input connector has two positive pins and two
> negative pins on its connector so I need to figure out to go from my
> single 18 AWG positive wire and divide it up into two wires that will
> each fit into its respective M39029/63-368 ORANGE-BLUE-GRAY crimp on
> connector.
>
> Is there a M39029/63-3XX crimp on connector that is designed for 18 to
> 20 AWG wire?
>
> If not, I could cut off a couple of strands of the 18 AWG wire to get
> it to fit into the 20 AWG connector barrel however that is not very
> elegant because the remaining strand(s) will kinda poke out of the
> wire insulation however a needle nose pliers could fix that.
>
> Then the next obstacle to Plasma Bliss is dealing with dividing out
> the single wire and making it two wires.
>
> I am considering peeling off a 1 inch section of the insulation of the
> single wire about 3 inches away from the wire end and then once that
> section of wire is exposed, place a second wire with the insulation
> stripped off the end onto the exposed conductor and solder the second
> wire to the first and then cover the junction with heat shrink.
>
> To expose the first wire 3 inches up from the end could be possible to
> do by using my wire stripper to make the two cuts by just squeezing
> the handle only about of the way to have it cut all the way around
> the insulation and move the insulation about 1/16 of an inch and then
> exacto off the remaining center section.
>
> My soldering skills have much to be desired however if I use a second
> hands type contraption to hold the two wires together and then use a
> clean soldering iron tip and some flux I could do a respectable job.
>
> I would think thatIFthere was an easier way someone here would have
> found/invented it by now.
>
> Also, in the past someone told me that a crimp on butt end connector
> creates a more secure and durable wire splice than if the two ends
> were soldered together. Is that true? Perhaps with my soldering
> skills that would certainly be the case however for people with decent
> soldering skills I am interested in the actual answer.
>
> Any feedback on this idea/proper suggestions/well wishes would be most
> appreciated!!!
>
> ..
>
> THANKS!!!
>
> Bill Hunter
>
I think there's a drawing in 'the Book' showing how to feed a bigger
power wire into a pair (or more) of the standard pins in a subD. It's
basically what you're describing: a pair of ~6" long 20 ga pigtails
brought together & attached to the larger wire. Soldering works great,
but if you're not confident in your skills, a crimp style butt splice is
fine, too. Solder + heat shrink is cheaper, less bulky, and properly
done, has no more risk of poor connection or breakage from stress
risers. Crimps are more expensive, but much faster and can be achieved
by 'unskilled labor'.
You can split the insulation & splice in another conductor as you
describe, but if the primary is 18 ga or larger, you still have the
issue of fitting it into the 20 ga pin. Snipping strands works, and if
you keep the insulation butted against the end of the pin, there's
little danger of a short, but the whole process is a lot more painful
and risky than just using 2 20 ga pigtails.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | Re: Is there M39029/63-3XX For 18 AWG Wire?!?!? |
Bill,
Bob has extensive advice on how to use multiple pins in a connector for
power. I documented his advice and included photos of my work (5 pins in
parallel) in my blog post Wiring Harness Installed
.
-- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what
am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Is there M39029/63-3XX For 18 AWG Wire?!?!? |
At 09:00 AM 4/9/2017, you wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I am rewiring my airplane and am therefore making wire runs to the
>Lightspeed Plasma III ignition systems.
>
>The Plasma ignition systems input connector uses DSub 15 plugs so I
>have utilized the M39029/63-368 crimp on connectors for all of the
>20-24 AWG wires that push into the connector however I have
>according to the directions used an 18 AWG positive wire and an 18
>AWG negative wire for the power and ground. To make this phase of
>the project more dramatic, the Plasma input connector has two
>positive pins and two negative pins on its connector so I need to
>figure out to go from my single 18 AWG positive wire and divide it
>up into two wires that will each fit into its respective
>M39029/63-368 ORANGE-BLUE-GRAY crimp on connector.
>
>Is there a M39029/63-3XX crimp on connector that is designed for 18
>to 20 AWG wire?
Those pins WILL accept a 20AWG wire. Run two pairs of 20AWG,
one for power the other for ground. Let each wire enjoy
its own d-sub pin; bring them together at the source and
ground connections.
The LightSpeed 6-cyl ignition system draws about
2.5A at 2700 rpm . . . the 4-cyl is about 2/3
that amount. The system would perform happily
with a single 22AWG feeder for power and ground.
A pair of 20AWG for each feeder is still . . .
shall we say? . . . exceedingly robust.
A bit of trivia on this topic, you CAN buy pins
for d-subs that will accept larger wires. The crimps
are OUTSIDE the pin cavity in the connector with a
longer stem extending into the connector cavity. They
are expensive and not easy to find and used ONLY
when the LENGTH of the wire run offers an unacceptable
voltage drop within the connector pin's normal rated
current. I've only seen such pins in the wild once in
my lifetime . . . and if memory serves, they were soldered
onto the wires.
The crimped mil-spec pins are rated at 7A under
benign environments . . . I generally never run
them at more than 5 . . . especially when paralleling
for high current applications.
http://tinyurl.com/mzauc8b
I used this technique on a super-sonic target
for the Navy and the process was repeated on some
power distribution components in the B4000 Horizon.
Oh yeah, if you need the too-large wire to compensate
for voltage drop, then it's perfectly acceptable to
prune the strands on an 18AWG to get them into the
20AWG pin. But I'm betting a dollar to a dozen donuts
that the OBAM aircraft owner will NEVER encounter such
a situation. It's also a certainty that the LightSpeed
system secures no performance enhancements with
the pudgy supply wires.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Hunter" <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Is there M39029/63-3XX For 18 AWG Wire?!?!? |
Hi All,
This advice is most helpful.THANKS!!!
Yes I know the Plasma instructions said to not fool with the input
connectors however I dinked up the cable so I had to.Grrr. Since the
ignition system is somewhat important I decided to go with the MIL spec
connector pins. I imagine that solder-on DSub connectors would be the best
way to go however with my soldering skills and lack of patients the crimp on
pins seemed to be the the way to go. I was very careful with each crimp and
did a pull test and they did not fall off. The Eclipse crimper tool is
really good and makes professional crimps even with me using it.
The airplane in question is a Velocity (plastic pusher) and I am running two
Plasma units each connected to the battery terminals of their respective
independent electrical system.
Electrical system 1 has the battery in the nose so its electrical path is
from the battery POS terminal to the CB, to the expensive MIL spec switch
mounted on the panel, to the POS D-Sub pins on the ignition module mounted
way back on the cold side (front) of the firewall and then from the ignition
module NEG pins all the way forward to the NEG terminal of the battery up in
the nose.
Electrical system 2 has the battery under the rear seat so its electrical
path is from the battery POS terminal forward to the CB, to the expensive
MIL spec switch mounted on the panel, and then back to the POS D-Sub pins on
the ignition module mounted way back on the cold side (front) of the
firewall and then from the ignition module NEG pins forward to the NEG
terminal of the battery mounted under the rear seat.
With these long distances I felt that 18 AWG wire was a good idea.
THANKS AGAIN!!!
..
Cheers!!!
Bill Hunter
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Sunday, April 9, 2017 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Is there M39029/63-3XX For 18 AWG Wire?!?!?
At 09:00 AM 4/9/2017, you wrote:
Hi All,
I am rewiring my airplane and am therefore making wire runs to the
Lightspeed Plasma III ignition systems.
The Plasma ignition systems input connector uses DSub 15 plugs so I have
utilized the M39029/63-368 crimp on connectors for all of the 20-24 AWG
wires that push into the connector however I have according to the
directions used an 18 AWG positive wire and an 18 AWG negative wire for the
power and ground. To make this phase of the project more dramatic, the
Plasma input connector has two positive pins and two negative pins on its
connector so I need to figure out to go from my single 18 AWG positive wire
and divide it up into two wires that will each fit into its respective
M39029/63-368 ORANGE-BLUE-GRAY crimp on connector.
Is there a M39029/63-3XX crimp on connector that is designed for 18 to 20
AWG wire?
Those pins WILL accept a 20AWG wire. Run two pairs of 20AWG,
one for power the other for ground. Let each wire enjoy
its own d-sub pin; bring them together at the source and
ground connections.
The LightSpeed 6-cyl ignition system draws about
2.5A at 2700 rpm . . . the 4-cyl is about 2/3
that amount. The system would perform happily
with a single 22AWG feeder for power and ground.
A pair of 20AWG for each feeder is still . . .
shall we say? . . . exceedingly robust.
A bit of trivia on this topic, you CAN buy pins
for d-subs that will accept larger wires. The crimps
are OUTSIDE the pin cavity in the connector with a
longer stem extending into the connector cavity. They
are expensive and not easy to find and used ONLY
when the LENGTH of the wire run offers an unacceptable
voltage drop within the connector pin's normal rated
current. I've only seen such pins in the wild once in
my lifetime . . . and if memory serves, they were soldered
onto the wires.
The crimped mil-spec pins are rated at 7A under
benign environments . . . I generally never run
them at more than 5 . . . especially when paralleling
for high current applications.
http://tinyurl.com/mzauc8b
I used this technique on a super-sonic target
for the Navy and the process was repeated on some
power distribution components in the B4000 Horizon.
Oh yeah, if you need the too-large wire to compensate
for voltage drop, then it's perfectly acceptable to
prune the strands on an 18AWG to get them into the
20AWG pin. But I'm betting a dollar to a dozen donuts
that the OBAM aircraft owner will NEVER encounter such
a situation. It's also a certainty that the LightSpeed
system secures no performance enhancements with
the pudgy supply wires.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Is there M39029/63-3XX For 18 AWG Wire?!?!? |
>
>Electrical system 2 has the battery under the rear seat so its
>electrical path is from the battery POS terminal forward to the CB,
>to the expensive MIL spec switch mounted on the panel, and then back
>to the POS D-Sub pins on the ignition module mounted way back on the
>cold side (front) of the firewall and then from the ignition module
>NEG pins forward to the NEG terminal of the battery mounted under
>the rear seat.
>
>With these long distances I felt that 18 AWG wire was a good idea.
Not very quantified . . .
Resistance of 22AWG wire = 0.016 ohms/foot = 16mv drop per amp
per foot of wire
20AWG wire = 0.010 ohms/foot = 10mv drop per amp
per foot of wire
18AWG wire = 0.006 ohms/foot = 6mv drop per amp per
foot of wire
Assume 20foot round trip from battery(+) to battery (-) and
2 amps of appliance draw.
22AWG drops 0.640 volts
20AWG drops 0.400 volts
18AWG drops 0.240 volts
Assuming your power pathways totaled 20 feet and
you indeed require 2A of supply power, voltage
variations presented over the range of wire
sizes explored above are trivial.
Further, LightSpeed's passion for hooking
things right to the battery is without president
in certified general aviation. The only folks
I know of that do this routinely are the kids
with 1000 Watt boom boxes in their vehicles.
In fact, driving BOTH systems through a common source
configuration violates the common sense for in the
analysis and mitigation of failure modes.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Hunter <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Is there M39029/63-3XX For 18 AWG Wire?!?!? |
Bob, just curious... how comfortable are you with using the M39029/63-3
crimp on pins for the ignition system D-Sub connector as opposed to the
solder on type?
Thanks again,
Bill Hunter
On Apr 9, 2017 1:42 PM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
> Electrical system 2 has the battery under the rear seat so its electrical
> path is from the battery POS terminal forward to the CB, to the expensive
> MIL spec switch mounted on the panel, and then back to the POS D-Sub pins
> on the ignition module mounted way back on the cold side (front) of the
> firewall and then from the ignition module NEG pins forward to the NEG
> terminal of the battery mounted under the rear seat.
>
> With these long distances I felt that 18 AWG wire was a good idea.
>
>
> Not very quantified . . .
>
> Resistance of 22AWG wire = 0.016 ohms/foot = 16mv drop per amp per foot
> of wire
> 20AWG wire = 0.010 ohms/foot = 10mv drop per amp per foot
> of wire
> 18AWG wire = 0.006 ohms/foot = 6mv drop per amp per foot
> of wire
>
> Assume 20foot round trip from battery(+) to battery (-) and
> 2 amps of appliance draw.
>
> 22AWG drops 0.640 volts
> 20AWG drops 0.400 volts
> 18AWG drops 0.240 volts
>
> Assuming your power pathways totaled 20 feet and
> you indeed require 2A of supply power, voltage
> variations presented over the range of wire
> sizes explored above are trivial.
>
> Further, LightSpeed's passion for hooking
> things right to the battery is without president
> in certified general aviation. The only folks
> I know of that do this routinely are the kids
> with 1000 Watt boom boxes in their vehicles.
>
> In fact, driving BOTH systems through a common source
> configuration violates the common sense for in the
> analysis and mitigation of failure modes.
>
> <#m_-4996803437017520622_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Is there M39029/63-3XX For 18 AWG Wire?!?!? |
At 01:55 PM 4/9/2017, you wrote:
>Bob, just curious... how comfortable are you
>with using the=C2 M39029/63-3 crimp on pins for
>the ignition system D-Sub connector as opposed to the solder on type?
No difference. Properly installed wires
passing though quality connectors are
generally considered to have failure
rates less than one per billion flight
hours.
I've read failure rate studies on dozens
of systems having high orders of system
criticality as demonstrated by detailed
studies of component failure rates for the
resistors, transistors, capacitors and
all manner of electro-jelly-beans. Then
they run even the simplest software
through rigorous certification and configuration
control protocols.
After all the bureaucratic thrashing dies
down you can ask: "Does this appliance have
and critical power or signal pathways that
pass through connectors?" "Of course," they
say. "But failure rates for those assemblies
are insignificant in the grand scheme of things."
For YOUR personal failure analysis consider
that you have TWO ignition systems. The engine
runs very happily on ONE system. If one system
fails, you probably won't notice it in flight
but you will at next pre-flight. Next consider
the probability that BOTH systems will go
T.U. on any single tank full of gas.
You can have terrible failure rates for each
system and still fly with confidence . . . like
we've been doing with dual magnetos for over
100 years.
If it were my airplane, one system would run
from the battery bus, the other would run
from the e-bus. Wire with single 20AWG feeders
and stay away from hooking anything directly
to the battery(ies).
It's far too easy to get wrapped around 'reliability
axles' and loose track of the real risk factors.
That's what happened with N811HB about ten years
ago http://tinyurl.com/msfmldj
KISS
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eric Page <edpav8r(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Today's trivia dump . . . |
> On Apr 7, 2017, at 5:08 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III
wrote:
> I would sure build in some sort of limiting.
You mentioned 40A. Would that be our target for max current in a system like this?
Would we want adjustability, and if so, through what range?
I have zero PIC time with a spot welder, hence the questions...
Eric
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Hunter <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Is there M39029/63-3XX For 18 AWG Wire?!?!? |
Very good and comforting information Bob. As always I am very grateful for
your advice!!!
Thanks,
Bill Hunter
On Apr 9, 2017 7:59 PM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 01:55 PM 4/9/2017, you wrote:
>
> Bob, just curious... how comfortable are you with using the=C3=82 M39029
/63-3
> crimp on pins for the ignition system D-Sub connector as opposed to the
> solder on type?
>
>
> No difference. Properly installed wires
> passing though quality connectors are
> generally considered to have failure
> rates less than one per billion flight
> hours.
>
> I've read failure rate studies on dozens
> of systems having high orders of system
> criticality as demonstrated by detailed
> studies of component failure rates for the
> resistors, transistors, capacitors and
> all manner of electro-jelly-beans. Then
> they run even the simplest software
> through rigorous certification and configuration
> control protocols.
>
> After all the bureaucratic thrashing dies
> down you can ask: "Does this appliance have
> and critical power or signal pathways that
> pass through connectors?" "Of course," they
> say. "But failure rates for those assemblies
> are insignificant in the grand scheme of things."
>
> For YOUR personal failure analysis consider
> that you have TWO ignition systems. The engine
> runs very happily on ONE system. If one system
> fails, you probably won't notice it in flight
> but you will at next pre-flight. Next consider
> the probability that BOTH systems will go
> T.U. on any single tank full of gas.
>
> You can have terrible failure rates for each
> system and still fly with confidence . . . like
> we've been doing with dual magnetos for over
> 100 years.
>
> If it were my airplane, one system would run
> from the battery bus, the other would run
> from the e-bus. Wire with single 20AWG feeders
> and stay away from hooking anything directly
> to the battery(ies).
>
> It's far too easy to get wrapped around 'reliability
> axles' and loose track of the real risk factors.
> That's what happened with N811HB about ten years
> ago http://tinyurl.com/msfmldj
>
> KISS
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Keen <john(at)johnkeen.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Endurance bus switch |
Thanks Bob,
My design goal for battery only operations is to be able to focus on
flying the aeroplane easily to a safe landing at the nearest airfield.
As the plane has conventional dual mags and a carb with engine driven
fuel pump, and a traditional panel with vacuum AH and DG, I imagine
wanting electrical help mainly for navigating and communicating (day
VFR).
This is my list for the endurance bus, the numbers with a ? are current
draw that I=99ve guesstimated until I have the correct value:
- Panel floodlights x2 (in case day VFR runs out) = 0.15
- Van=99s Voltmeter = 1?
- Van=99s fuel gauges x2 = 1.5?
- Dual USB outlet (charges iPad = 0.85 and GPS = 0.5)
- Transponder Garmin 330ES = 4
- Comm radio (has built-in intercom) Garmin GTR200 = 7.5
- Boost pump = 0.8
Total = 16.3
Better - I had some very round and generous numbers previously giving me
the 24! And I=99ve taken off the hour meter.
This leaves out the alternator; starting system; nav, landing and
interior lights; engine instruments; turn coordinator, flaps and trim;
hour meter...
Cheers,
John.
> On 10 Apr 2017, at 01:05, Robert L. Nuckolls, III
wrote:
>
> At 05:01 AM 4/9/2017, you wrote:
>> Hi Bob,
>>
>> I=C3=A2=C2=C2=99m building an RV-7 and tackling the wiring, thank
you for sharing the invaluable knowledge in your book.
>> I=C3=A2=C2=C2=99ve been grappling with whether or not to wire the
endurance bus directly through the switch or use a relay. The switch is
rated at 20 amps but the bus could conceivably see up to 24 amps if
everything on the bus was on and drawing its maximum, eg radio
transmitting, transponder transponding and GPS charging for example.
>
> The switch 'rating' is largely irrelevant. The
> number is an engineer's guide to service life
> under tens of thousands of cycles at full load.
>
> Your switch won't see 1000 cycles in its lifetime
> and never under full load.
>
> Tell us about this 'endurance' bus . . . what
> are your design goals for battery only operations
> and what electro-whizzies are fed from this bus?
>
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Endurance bus switch |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
The current draw estimates are way too high.
The voltmeter and fuel gauges combined are probably less than one amp.
The Transponder is 3 amps.
The GTR 200 is probably less than 1 amp except when transmitting.
I guesstimate less than 8 amps total.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468231#468231
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed Godfrey <egodfrey(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Circuit protection for backup alternator |
Bob,
I am building an RV10 and installing a B&C 410H backup alternator. I
have installed an ANL circuit protection next to the battery behind the
baggage compartment, to protect the #6 wire that I have going forward,
along the lines of your Z-13/8 schematic. But I was concerned about the
output of the alternator going aft. I have a contactor on the firewall
for the output of the alternator and I was considering installing a
fusible link between the alternator and the contactor for protection.
Are there any issues that you might see with a setup like this? Thanks.
Ed Godfrey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Circuit protection for backup alternator |
At 11:29 AM 4/10/2017, you wrote:
>
>Bob,
> I am building an RV10 and installing a B&C 410H backup
> alternator. I have installed an ANL circuit protection next to the
> battery behind the baggage compartment, to protect the #6 wire that
> I have going forward, along the lines of your Z-13/8 schematic. But
> I was concerned about the output of the alternator going aft. I
> have a contactor on the firewall for the output of the alternator
> and I was considering installing a fusible link between the
> alternator and the contactor for protection. Are there any issues
> that you might see with a setup like this? Thanks.
No . . . the alternator is incapable of delivering
current needed to put the b-lead at risk.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Endurance bus switch |
At 09:43 AM 4/10/2017, you wrote:
>
>The current draw estimates are way too high.
>The voltmeter and fuel gauges combined are probably less than one amp.
>The Transponder is 3 amps.
>The GTR 200 is probably less than 1 amp except when transmitting.
>I guesstimate less than 8 amps total.
Generally agree . . . transponder energy draw
is under 1A except for very short bursts while
replying . . . so I'll suggest your e-bus loads
are smaller yet probably 5A or less.
A simple toggle switch and 10A fuse protection
for your e-bus alternate feed will be entirely
adequate.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "H. Ivan Haecker" <hivanhaecker(at)gmail.com> |
Is there a best place to wire a voltmeter to my electrical system? Should I
be most interested in the voltage at the main bus? And if so, can I piggy
back the voltmeter to an existing breaker (such as other electric engine
gauges) or does the voltmeter need it's own separate protection. Hope my
question isn't too naive.
Ivan Haecker (rewiring my ancient rv-4)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Circuit protection for backup alternator |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
IMHO you are getting things backwards. You do not need protection for
the heavy wire from the battery to the firewall/starter solenoid.
However, that cable should be #4 minimum, and better #2.
Use the ANL to protect the B lead from the alternator to the main bus,
with the ammeter shunt either right above or below it on the firewall.
Your #6 (or #8) is appropriate for that B lead.
Kelly
RV-10 40866, flying
On 4/10/2017 9:29 AM, Ed Godfrey wrote:
>
>
> Bob,
> I am building an RV10 and installing a B&C 410H backup alternator. I
> have installed an ANL circuit protection next to the battery behind the
> baggage compartment, to protect the #6 wire that I have going forward,
> along the lines of your Z-13/8 schematic. But I was concerned about the
> output of the alternator going aft. I have a contactor on the firewall
> for the output of the alternator and I was considering installing a
> fusible link between the alternator and the contactor for protection.
> Are there any issues that you might see with a setup like this? Thanks.
>
> Ed Godfrey
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Endurance bus switch |
| From: | John Keen <john(at)johnkeen.com.au> |
Thanks Joe, Bob!
Cheers,
John Keen
> On 11 Apr 2017, at 2:40 am, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroelec
tric.com> wrote:
>
> At 09:43 AM 4/10/2017, you wrote:
>>
>> The current draw estimates are way too high.
>> The voltmeter and fuel gauges combined are probably less than one amp.
>> The Transponder is 3 amps.
>> The GTR 200 is probably less than 1 amp except when transmitting.
>> I guesstimate less than 8 amps total.
>
> Generally agree . . . transponder energy draw
> is under 1A except for very short bursts while
> replying . . . so I'll suggest your e-bus loads
> are smaller yet probably 5A or less.
>
> A simple toggle switch and 10A fuse protection
> for your e-bus alternate feed will be entirely
> adequate.
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 02:05 PM 4/10/2017, you wrote:
>Is there a best place to wire a voltmeter to my electrical system?
>Should I be most interested in the voltage at the main bus?
generally, yes
> And if so, can I piggy back the voltmeter to an existing breaker
> (such as other electric engine gauges) or does the voltmeter need
> it's own separate protection. Hope my question isn't too naive.
Not at all. Tie it to any handy 5A breaker
on the main bus and wire it with 22AWG.
Alternatively you could simply drive the
voltmeter through its own 3A fuse in an
in-line fuseholder . . . easy to tuck behind
the panel.
Here's a guy who will sell you 5 holders with
small wire (18awg) more appropriate to this
task and 3A fuses to go with them for $10.
You'll have some holders/fuses left over but
you can't go down to Smiley Jack's Parts
Emporium and buy one holder and fuse after
you figure in time and mileage.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Circuit protection for backup alternator |
>>I have a contactor on the firewall for the output of the alternator
>>and I was considering installing a fusible link between the
>>alternator and the contactor for protection. Are there any issues
>>that you might see with a setup like this? Thanks.
You probably don't need that long #6 feeder . . .
you can feed the alternator's output into
the system at the starter contactor on the
firewall. A miniANL on a fuseblock or a
MAXI-blade in an in-line fuse holder could
be pressed into protection of this circuit
and eliminate the long wire run.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
There's an ongoing thread over at the VAF (RV-x) forum about an
overvoltage event. Very few of those guys seem to be subscribed here,
and most are quite.... let's say, limited, in electrical knowledge.
This case involves an alternator overvoltage event with (apparently) an
internally regulated alternator in a plane with no automatic overvoltage
protection. Where it gets interesting is that he was running an EarthX
12V lithium iron battery. The suspicion is that the battery's protection
circuit protected the battery by disconnecting it, and even though most
of the avionics were capable of handling overvoltage events in a 28V
system, the sudden loss of the battery load allowed the alternator
voltage to go high enough to trash almost everything in the plane.
Talk about your load dump event.....
Just something to explore, for anyone considering a lithium chemistry
battery. Will manual shutdown of the alternator be fast enough? Will
even automated OV shutdown be fast enough?
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed Godfrey <egodfrey(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Circuit protection for backup alternator |
Bob,
Following the Z-13/8, I am connecting up the backup alternator to
the hot side of the battery contactor. With the distance that the power
is traveling, I calculated that the #6 wire would be the best choice.
Did I choose wrong?
Ed
On 4/10/2017 4:04 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>>> I have a contactor on the firewall for the output of the alternator
>>> and I was considering installing a fusible link between the
>>> alternator and the contactor for protection. Are there any issues
>>> that you might see with a setup like this? Thanks.
>
> You probably don't need that long #6 feeder . . .
> you can feed the alternator's output into
> the system at the starter contactor on the
> firewall. A miniANL on a fuseblock or a
> MAXI-blade in an in-line fuse holder could
> be pressed into protection of this circuit
> and eliminate the long wire run.
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Circuit protection for backup alternator |
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
I have been flying my RV-10 with a 2 battery/2 alternator/2 bus Z-14
for 5+ years. Just for reference purposes my configuration includes:
* Both batteries and battery contactors are installed behind baggage
compartment
* 2 AWG wire used to to all contactors including a run forward of the
firewall for the starter contactor and the main alternator
* 8 AWG wire used for runs to 2 fuse blocks on cockpit sidewalls and
for run from SD20 alternator and it's battery contactor in the rear
* ANL current limiters installed on firewall close to alternators for
both B leads
* (there is no protection on runs from battery contactors in rear to
fuse blocks and starter in the front)
I wouldn't do it any differently if I did it again.
On 4/10/2017 12:29 PM, Ed Godfrey wrote:
>
>
> Bob,
> I am building an RV10 and installing a B&C 410H backup alternator.
> I have installed an ANL circuit protection next to the battery behind
> the baggage compartment, to protect the #6 wire that I have going
> forward, along the lines of your Z-13/8 schematic. But I was concerned
> about the output of the alternator going aft. I have a contactor on
> the firewall for the output of the alternator and I was considering
> installing a fusible link between the alternator and the contactor for
> protection. Are there any issues that you might see with a setup like
> this? Thanks.
>
> Ed Godfrey
>
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Here is a link to the VAF thread that Charlie mentioned.
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=1164359#post1164359
It seems that the pilot was unable to shut down the alternator with either the
field switch or master switch.
Anyone who installs a Lithium battery should read the Dynon Support post #7 in
that thread. Without aircraft electrical system over-voltage protection, a Lithium
battery could disconnect itself from the electrical system to protect itself
against an over-voltage event. Without a lead-acid battery to mitigate over-voltage,
very expensive avionics are at the mercy of a runaway alternator.
Post number 17 by Dynon Support is also interesting.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468273#468273
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
Minor correction; the owner said he didn't turn off the master until
everything had died. He *might* have saved some stuff if he'd turned the
master off sooner.
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 6:47 PM, user9253 wrote:
>
> Here is a link to the VAF thread that Charlie mentioned.
> http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=1164359#post1164359
> It seems that the pilot was unable to shut down the alternator with either
> the field switch or master switch.
> Anyone who installs a Lithium battery should read the Dynon Support post
> #7 in that thread. Without aircraft electrical system over-voltage
> protection, a Lithium battery could disconnect itself from the electrical
> system to protect itself against an over-voltage event. Without a
> lead-acid battery to mitigate over-voltage, very expensive avionics are at
> the mercy of a runaway alternator.
> Post number 17 by Dynon Support is also interesting.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468273#468273
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Circuit protection for backup alternator |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
Normally, I would agree. However, the RV-10 requires the main battery
behind the baggage compartment for W&B, so it does require one long
heavy lead from the battery to the firewall. IMHO it should be no less
than #4, and really should be #2 for good starter performance, given the
over 10 ft run from battery to starter. Ground is handled through the
aluminum airframe for the battery. Very conventional with master relay
at the battery and starter relay on firewall near where the battery
heavy lead comes through. Vans publishes a basic wiring diagram that is
very conventional for a VFR aircraft, that gives a good starting point
for wire sizes and physical locations. It is easy to modify to meet
goals for endurance bus, redundancy, etc.
On 4/10/2017 2:04 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>>> I have a contactor on the firewall for the output of the alternator
>>> and I was considering installing a fusible link between the
>>> alternator and the contactor for protection. Are there any issues
>>> that you might see with a setup like this? Thanks.
>
> You probably don't need that long #6 feeder . . .
> you can feed the alternator's output into
> the system at the starter contactor on the
> firewall. A miniANL on a fuseblock or a
> MAXI-blade in an in-line fuse holder could
> be pressed into protection of this circuit
> and eliminate the long wire run.
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Circuit protection for backup alternator |
At 05:39 PM 4/10/2017, you wrote:
>Bob,
> Following the Z-13/8, I am connecting up the backup alternator
> to the hot side of the battery contactor. With the distance that
> the power is traveling, I calculated that the #6 wire would be the
> best choice. Did I choose wrong?
How about Z12 instead? Tie both alternators to
the bus structure at the hot side of the starter
contactor.
Just use the smaller alternator like a stand-by
device like hundreds of TC aircraft. Which
regulator are you using on the small alternator?
Z-13/8 was crafted specifically for minimizing loads
on the diminutive SD-8 alternator with bypassing
the battery contactor. The extra snort
available from the larger wound field makes this
a moot point . . . Z12 would simplify your wiring.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
At 06:47 PM 4/10/2017, you wrote:
>
>Here is a link to the VAF thread that Charlie mentioned.
>http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=1164359#post1164359
>It seems that the pilot was unable to shut down the alternator with
>either the field switch or master switch.
>Anyone who installs a Lithium battery should read the Dynon Support
>post #7 in that thread. Without aircraft electrical system
>over-voltage protection, a Lithium battery could disconnect itself
>from the electrical system to protect itself against an over-voltage
>event. Without a lead-acid battery to mitigate over-voltage, very
>expensive avionics are at the mercy of a runaway alternator.
>Post number 17 by Dynon Support is also interesting.
The assertions made in this posting are largely
correct. The stock internally regulated alternator
has failure modes for ov conditions that cannot
be controlled from the outside.
With no battery on line to grunt the excess energy,
bus voltages of 100-200 volts are easily realized.
I had conversation with folks about this
very topic last week . . . the event chronicled
on the RV forum may have triggered the queries.
The battery has always been a CRITICAL component
of the overvoltage mitigation dynamic. The
auto-disconnect feature in EarthX batteries is
understandable from the battery safety
perspective . . . but it may upset the apple cart
when it fails to perform legacy duties expected
of lead-acid batteries.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed Godfrey <egodfrey(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Circuit protection for backup alternator |
Bob,
I am using the SB1B-14 regulator.
Ed
On 4/10/2017 7:26 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> At 05:39 PM 4/10/2017, you wrote:
>> Bob,
>> Following the Z-13/8, I am connecting up the backup alternator to
>> the hot side of the battery contactor. With the distance that the
>> power is traveling, I calculated that the #6 wire would be the best
>> choice. Did I choose wrong?
>
> How about Z12 instead? Tie both alternators to
> the bus structure at the hot side of the starter
> contactor.
>
> Just use the smaller alternator like a stand-by
> device like hundreds of TC aircraft. Which
> regulator are you using on the small alternator?
>
> Z-13/8 was crafted specifically for minimizing loads
> on the diminutive SD-8 alternator with bypassing
> the battery contactor. The extra snort
> available from the larger wound field makes this
> a moot point . . . Z12 would simplify your wiring.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Eckenroth <N509RV(at)eckenroth.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
Regarding the overvoltage event with an earthX battery. Apparently the
fried system did not have an overvoltage module installed. Would the B&C
overvoltage module have made this a non event?
Paul
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 06:47 PM 4/10/2017, you wrote:
>
>
> Here is a link to the VAF thread that Charlie mentioned.
> http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=1164359#post1164359
> It seems that the pilot was unable to shut down the alternator with either
> the field switch or master switch.
> Anyone who installs a Lithium battery should read the Dynon Support post
> #7 in that thread. Without aircraft electrical system over-voltage
> protection, a Lithium battery could disconnect itself from the electrical
> system to protect itself against an over-voltage event. Without a
> lead-acid battery to mitigate over-voltage, very expensive avionics are at
> the mercy of a runaway alternator.
> Post number 17 by Dynon Support is also interesting.
>
>
> The assertions made in this posting are largely
> correct. The stock internally regulated alternator
> has failure modes for ov conditions that cannot
> be controlled from the outside.
>
> With no battery on line to grunt the excess energy,
> bus voltages of 100-200 volts are easily realized.
> I had conversation with folks about this
> very topic last week . . . the event chronicled
> on the RV forum may have triggered the queries.
>
> The battery has always been a CRITICAL component
> of the overvoltage mitigation dynamic. The
> auto-disconnect feature in EarthX batteries is
> understandable from the battery safety
> perspective . . . but it may upset the apple cart
> when it fails to perform legacy duties expected
> of lead-acid batteries.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Circuit protection for backup alternator |
At 08:33 PM 4/10/2017, you wrote:
>Bob,
> I am using the SB1B-14 regulator.
Okay . . . I'd recommend a Z-12 with
endurance bus. Much simpler in terms
of wire and not significantly less
robust.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed Godfrey <egodfrey(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Circuit protection for backup alternator |
Bob,
Thanks for the insight. I will review the Z12 ans see if I want to
make the changes. Also, thank you to those others who offered up advice.
Ed
On 4/11/2017 10:27 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> At 08:33 PM 4/10/2017, you wrote:
>> Bob,
>> I am using the SB1B-14 regulator.
>
> Okay . . . I'd recommend a Z-12 with
> endurance bus. Much simpler in terms
> of wire and not significantly less
> robust.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
| From: | Werner Schneider <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
Paul,
the Alternator causing the issue was an internal regulated one, the B&C
OVM is for external regulated and yes it would tehre avoid such things.
Cheers Werner
On 11.04.2017 17:18, Paul Eckenroth wrote:
> Regarding the overvoltage event with an earthX battery. Apparently the
> fried system did not have an overvoltage module installed. Would the
> B&C overvoltage module have made this a non event?
>
> Paul
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
At 10:18 AM 4/11/2017, you wrote:
>Regarding the overvoltage event with an earthX
>battery.=C2 Apparently the fried system did not
>have an overvoltage module installed.=C2 Would
>the B&C overvoltage module have made this a non event?
Yes . . . sorta . . .
The B&C Crowbar OV module deliberately opens
the alternator's field supply breaker when
an ov event is detected.
The problem with STOCK automotive alternators
is difficulty of accessing the field supply
power path. The alternator must be disassembled
and modified for such service. This is what
B&C has routinely accomplished on all their
IR alternators since day-one.
Over the years, there have been numerous
articles in the OBAM aviation journals describing
techniques for modifying various brands of
IR alternator to external regulator service.
Early Plane Power products were modified to
to ADD the crowbar OV module right on the back
of the stock alternator housing . . . current
offerings have the module built in . . .
http://tinyurl.com/lnypyeq
Running an internally regulated
alternator with no ov protection is
a relatively low risk decision . . . but the
risk is NOT ZERO. Further, the stock alternators
do not permit the system integrator to offer
absolute on/off control of alternator output
by crew under all circumstances.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Trivia for the Day: Y2M Series Connectors |
There's a relatively new kid on the block in
the community of robust connectors. I've
been seeing offers for several years but didn't
have time/inclination to explore them.
A few weeks ago, I ordered a Y2M-5TK, 5-pin
'military' connector for a hands-on, look-see . . .
Emacs!
This connector has lots of cousins offered all
over the 'net. An exemplar constellation of
offerings can be found here.
http://tinyurl.com/mt78ajg
The prices are VERY attractive. The quality is excellent.
The only down-side is that you need to hone your
soldering skills. I'd have no problem with using these
connectors in application on our airplanes.
Note: The backshell on the cable end has a fine LEFT
HAND THREAD. Further, you need to have the connector
halves mated thus securing the cable innards for
tightening the backshell. The fine thread is a
little fussy getting it started . . . easy to
cross thread.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Trivia for the Day: Y2M Series Connectors |
| From: | Jan de Jong <jan_de_jong(at)casema.nl> |
Bob, thank you for the report.
Jan de Jong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)wi.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Starter engaged warning light |
Bob and fellow listers,
My starter solenoid (B&C) is not the type with a post for a starter
engaged warning light. It seems to me that I could simply run a wire
from the starter side of the solenoid to a warning lamp with no issues.
Once energized, the starter would draw it's large current and the lamp
it's very small current. Is it that simple of am I missing something?
Thanks
Jeff Point
Milwaukee
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Starter engaged warning light |
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
Hey Jeff,
I'm not 100% sure on this but I think I've seen a cutaway photo showing
that the
"I" terminal on the other type of solenoid is actually connected
internally to the same
basic spot as the big terminal is. So I would think it would work just
fine.
I can't think of any real reason not to do it, as long as the main
terminal is secure
and has enough exposed threads with an added ring terminal there, and I bet
it will fit fine. I did put the starter engaged light on my -14, but I
have the
regular Van's solenoid.
Mine is like the second one on page 6.
http://verticalpower.com/_documents/_pdf/contactor_wiring.pdf
I'm guessing that the reason they even added the terminal is for
simplicity in wiring those smaller wire ends to the solenoid without needing
a large ring terminal.
Tim
Up NorthWest of you
On 4/11/2017 10:27 PM, Jeff Point wrote:
>
> Bob and fellow listers,
>
> My starter solenoid (B&C) is not the type with a post for a starter
> engaged warning light. It seems to me that I could simply run a wire
> from the starter side of the solenoid to a warning lamp with no
> issues. Once energized, the starter would draw it's large current and
> the lamp it's very small current. Is it that simple of am I missing
> something?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jeff Point
> Milwaukee
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Digital Industrial Scales Outlets |
| From: | "barbykerry" <askewrvaa(at)gmail.com> |
i always buy products from Amazon such as body weight scale
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468321#468321
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starter engaged warning light |
At 11:21 PM 4/11/2017, you wrote:
>
>Hey Jeff,
>
>I'm not 100% sure on this but I think I've seen a cutaway photo
>showing that the
>"I" terminal on the other type of solenoid is actually connected
>internally to the same
>basic spot as the big terminal is. So I would think it would work just fine.
Correct . . .
>I'm guessing that the reason they even added the terminal is for
>simplicity in wiring those smaller wire ends to the solenoid without needing
>a large ring terminal.
Actually, the "I" terminal is a holdover from
the early days of the transition from 6 to 12
volt cars. It was deduced that the original
6v Kettering type ignition coil could be
retained if one simply added a resistor in
series with the coil . . . the added source
resistance REDUCES coil charging time and
you got better performance at higher RPM.
A further benefit was realized by adding
the "I" for ignition terminal to the starter
contactor. This was used to bypass the coil
resistor increased spark energy at low
RPM of engine cranking. You can see the
full disclosure of the 3-terminal starter
contactors here:
Emacs!
All three 'floating' terminals of the
power path through the contactor get connected
together simultaneously with the motion of
"B" against "A" as suggested by the schematic
below.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/Starter_Contact
Fully floating contacts were necessary to achieve
design goals for the automotive world . . . and
they're handy for our purposes 60 years later to
drive a light bulb . . . but the same goal can be
achieved by attaching driving the light directly
from the starter motor's power input terminal.
Don't forget to fuse the wire at the starter
end if driving a lamp . . . or you could put
the LED's current limiting resistor in series
with the wire at the starter end and eliminate
the fuse . . . the resistor will protect the
shorted wire.
>
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
Not strictly electrical but I'll be somebody here has some experience...
I am thinking about using the DecalPRO
<http://www.pulsarprofx.com/decalpro/Vertical/1_MENU/1a_Home/Aircraft/Aircraft.html>
system for my instrument panel. Do you have any experience with it?
-- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what
am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel*
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: [OT] DecalPRO |
| From: | Jim Dabney <jdabney(at)rice.edu> |
Art, I used that system on my panel. It takes some practice to get good
results, but it does work. I did the panel 8 years ago and it's held up
well.
Jim
On 4/12/2017 8:47 AM, Art Zemon wrote:
> Not strictly electrical but I'll be somebody here has some experience...
>
> I am thinking about using the DecalPRO
> <http://www.pulsarprofx.com/decalpro/Vertical/1_MENU/1a_Home/Aircraft/Aircraft.html>
> system for my instrument panel. Do you have any experience with it?
>
> -- Art Z.
>
> --
> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>
> /"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself,
> what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel/
> !DSPAM:729,58ee3381247391849433127!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ARGOLDMAN(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: [OT] DecalPRO |
Greetings Art.
I have the Decal Pro system and it is great, although somewhat complicated.
You print out your labels using a Laser printer (cannon, I think is not
allowed)
You then take your label sheet and using a heat/plastic laminatior-- has to
be the type they recommend, and I believe sell-- make several passes of
your label sheet with a few types of transfer foil and paper. You then
soak the labels that you have created to remove them from the carrier
paper, dry them and using a special fabric adhesive (available at fabric stores)
spray the back of your labels and apply them to their home burnishing them
in. I put them on my leather instrument panel and I think that they came
out well. There is a steep learning curve. Somewhere in the technique there
is a heat gun (hair dryer is not acceptable) (the labels on my panel were
black.\
My next step is to do my switch labels (in white) which requires yet an
additional step or two. I have postponed that for a year or two, but will get
back to that soon. Look at the videos on the website, although the actual
technique is slightly different... they will tell you.
Great product, difficult to use steep learning curve .
Rich
In a message dated 4/12/2017 8:51:27 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
art(at)zemon.name writes:
Not strictly electrical but I'll be somebody here has some experience...
I am thinking about using the _DecalPRO_
(http://www.pulsarprofx.com/decalpro/Vertical/1_MENU/1a_Home/Aircraft/Aircraft.html) system for my instrument
panel. Do you have any experience with it?
-- Art Z.
--
_https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/_ (https://cheerfulcurmudgeon.com/)
"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what
am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | RS-232 GPS Input |
Folks,
I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS signal to its
"Built-in GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA 0183 or RS 232)." If I
understand how to do this correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W, I just take the
RS-232 signal and a ground and run them to the ELT. Right?
The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC VAX computers and
VT-100 terminals in the 1980s. Is there anything that I should know with
regards to wiring these more modern devices?
Thanks,
-- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what
am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RS-232 GPS Input |
Art,
You're pretty much on the money...couple of tricks with the 430W:
The 430W has multiple output ports - if you have one set to "Aviation", you can
simply fork that output signal wire.
Make sure that output port on the 430W is set to the correct output type ("Aviation")
to match the ARTEX - the default 9600 baud rate should take care of it.
Wiring a different port from the 430W is a PITB unless your panel has real good
access. Configure your new port for "Aviation" and you should be good to go.
I just did this to add ADSB and learned the difference between ports and protocols
output from the 430W - I needed "ADS-B OUT+" (wasn't in the original manual
- found out while troubleshooting with vendor) and had it connected to the "Aviation"
port. I needed to run a separate wire just for this!
Good Luck,
Ralph
-----Original Message-----
From: Art Zemon
Sent: Apr 12, 2017 2:54 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
Folks,
I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS signal to its "Built-in
GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA 0183 or RS 232)." If I understand how to do this
correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W, I just take the RS-232 signal and a ground
and run them to the ELT. Right?
The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC VAX computers and VT-100
terminals in the 1980s. Is there anything that I should know with regards to wiring
these more modern devices?
Thanks, -- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what am I?
And if not now, when?" Hillel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RS-232 GPS Input |
Another option is to go to ebay for a $20 gps puck with serial output, &
have an independent source.
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ralph E. Capen
wrote:
> recapen(at)earthlink.net>
>
> Art,
> You're pretty much on the money...couple of tricks with the 430W:
> The 430W has multiple output ports - if you have one set to "Aviation",
> you can simply fork that output signal wire.
> Make sure that output port on the 430W is set to the correct output type
> ("Aviation") to match the ARTEX - the default 9600 baud rate should take
> care of it.
> Wiring a different port from the 430W is a PITB unless your panel has real
> good access. Configure your new port for "Aviation" and you should be good
> to go.
>
> I just did this to add ADSB and learned the difference between ports and
> protocols output from the 430W - I needed "ADS-B OUT+" (wasn't in the
> original manual - found out while troubleshooting with vendor) and had it
> connected to the "Aviation" port. I needed to run a separate wire just for
> this!
>
> Good Luck,
> Ralph
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Art Zemon
>
> Sent: Apr 12, 2017 2:54 PM
>
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
>
>
> Folks,
> I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS signal to its
> "Built-in GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA 0183 or RS 232)." If I
> understand how to do this correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W, I just take the
> RS-232 signal and a ground and run them to the ELT. Right?
> The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC VAX computers and
> VT-100 terminals in the 1980s. Is there anything that I should know with
> regards to wiring these more modern devices?
> Thanks, -- Art Z.
>
> --
> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>
> "If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what
> am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | don van santen <donvansanten(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RS-232 GPS Input |
Another option is to go to ebay for a $20 gps puck with serial output, &
have an independent source.
Charlie,
The 2020 rules for ADS-B out require an approved WAAS GPS source. I do not
know of ant "puck" GPS that meets this requirement. If you know of one
please let me know.
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Charlie England
wrote:
> Another option is to go to ebay for a $20 gps puck with serial output, &
> have an independent source.
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ralph E. Capen
> wrote:
>
>> recapen(at)earthlink.net>
>>
>> Art,
>> You're pretty much on the money...couple of tricks with the 430W:
>> The 430W has multiple output ports - if you have one set to "Aviation",
>> you can simply fork that output signal wire.
>> Make sure that output port on the 430W is set to the correct output type
>> ("Aviation") to match the ARTEX - the default 9600 baud rate should take
>> care of it.
>> Wiring a different port from the 430W is a PITB unless your panel has
>> real good access. Configure your new port for "Aviation" and you should be
>> good to go.
>>
>> I just did this to add ADSB and learned the difference between ports and
>> protocols output from the 430W - I needed "ADS-B OUT+" (wasn't in the
>> original manual - found out while troubleshooting with vendor) and had it
>> connected to the "Aviation" port. I needed to run a separate wire just for
>> this!
>>
>> Good Luck,
>> Ralph
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> From: Art Zemon
>>
>> Sent: Apr 12, 2017 2:54 PM
>>
>> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>>
>> Subject: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
>>
>>
>>
>> Folks,
>> I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS signal to its
>> "Built-in GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA 0183 or RS 232)." If I
>> understand how to do this correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W, I just take the
>> RS-232 signal and a ground and run them to the ELT. Right?
>> The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC VAX computers and
>> VT-100 terminals in the 1980s. Is there anything that I should know with
>> regards to wiring these more modern devices?
>> Thanks, -- Art Z.
>>
>> --
>> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>>
>> "If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what
>> am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel
>>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RS-232 GPS Input |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
1. He was using the GPS for ELT, not ADS-B. Does not need to meet any
approval.
2. The Dynon 2020 GPS puck meets the requirement, but it isn't cheap, at
$590. May not work with other brands.
On 4/12/2017 1:01 PM, don van santen wrote:
> Another option is to go to ebay for a $20 gps puck with serial output, &
> have an independent source.
>
> Charlie,
> The 2020 rules for ADS-B out require an approved WAAS GPS source. I do
> not know of ant "puck" GPS that meets this requirement. If you know of
> one please let me know.
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Charlie England > wrote:
>
> Another option is to go to ebay for a $20 gps puck with serial
> output, & have an independent source.
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ralph E. Capen
> > wrote:
>
> >
>
> Art,
> You're pretty much on the money...couple of tricks with the 430W:
> The 430W has multiple output ports - if you have one set to
> "Aviation", you can simply fork that output signal wire.
> Make sure that output port on the 430W is set to the correct
> output type ("Aviation") to match the ARTEX - the default 9600
> baud rate should take care of it.
> Wiring a different port from the 430W is a PITB unless your
> panel has real good access. Configure your new port for
> "Aviation" and you should be good to go.
>
> I just did this to add ADSB and learned the difference between
> ports and protocols output from the 430W - I needed "ADS-B OUT+"
> (wasn't in the original manual - found out while troubleshooting
> with vendor) and had it connected to the "Aviation" port. I
> needed to run a separate wire just for this!
>
> Good Luck,
> Ralph
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Art Zemon
>
> Sent: Apr 12, 2017 2:54 PM
>
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
>
>
> Folks,
> I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS signal to
> its "Built-in GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA 0183 or RS 232)."
> If I understand how to do this correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W,
> I just take the RS-232 signal and a ground and run them to the
> ELT. Right?
> The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC VAX
> computers and VT-100 terminals in the 1980s. Is there anything
> that I should know with regards to wiring these more modern devices?
> Thanks, -- Art Z.
>
> --
> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>
> "If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for
> myself, what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Is a battery contactor really needed? |
| From: | "rv8ch" <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
There seem to be a lot of advantages to not disconnecting the alternator from the
battery, so I'm wondering if the battery contactor is really necessary?
The things I can see as advantages are that it provides an extra layer of protection
from accidental starter engagement, and provides a big switch that can be
used to disconnect the battery from everything.
I'm curious if there are other advantages that I'm not seeing.
Thanks!
--------
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468348#468348
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RS-232 GPS Input |
This is for an ELT, not ADS-B.
> On Apr 12, 2017, at 3:01 PM, don van santen wrote
:
>
> Another option is to go to ebay for a $20 gps puck with serial output, & h
ave an independent source.
>
> Charlie,
> The 2020 rules for ADS-B out require an approved WAAS GPS source. I do not
know of ant "puck" GPS that meets this requirement. If you know of one plea
se let me know.
>
>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Charlie England w
rote:
>> Another option is to go to ebay for a $20 gps puck with serial output, & h
ave an independent source.
>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ralph E. Capen w
rote:
link.net>
>>>
>>> Art,
>>> You're pretty much on the money...couple of tricks with the 430W:
>>> The 430W has multiple output ports - if you have one set to "Aviation", y
ou can simply fork that output signal wire.
>>> Make sure that output port on the 430W is set to the correct output type
("Aviation") to match the ARTEX - the default 9600 baud rate should take ca
re of it.
>>> Wiring a different port from the 430W is a PITB unless your panel has re
al good access. Configure your new port for "Aviation" and you should be go
od to go.
>>>
>>> I just did this to add ADSB and learned the difference between ports and
protocols output from the 430W - I needed "ADS-B OUT+" (wasn't in the origi
nal manual - found out while troubleshooting with vendor) and had it connect
ed to the "Aviation" port. I needed to run a separate wire just for this!
>>>
>>> Good Luck,
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>
>>> From: Art Zemon
>>>
>>> Sent: Apr 12, 2017 2:54 PM
>>>
>>> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>>>
>>> Subject: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Folks,
>>> I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS signal to its "Bu
ilt-in GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA 0183 or RS 232)." If I understand ho
w to do this correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W, I just take the RS-232 signal
and a ground and run them to the ELT. Right?
>>> The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC VAX computers and V
T-100 terminals in the 1980s. Is there anything that I should know with rega
rds to wiring these more modern devices?
>>> Thanks, -- Art Z.
>>>
>>> --
>>> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>>>
>>> "If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, wha
t am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ARGOLDMAN(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RS-232 GPS Input |
The new Dynon GPS antenna/device is approved it may only talk to dynon,
however.
Rich
In a message dated 4/12/2017 3:44:16 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
Tim(at)MyRV10.com writes:
This is for an ELT, not ADS-B.
On Apr 12, 2017, at 3:01 PM, don van santen <_donvansanten(at)gmail.com_
(mailto:donvansanten(at)gmail.com) > wrote:
Another option is to go to ebay for a $20 gps puck with serial output, &
have an independent source.
Charlie,
The 2020 rules for ADS-B out require an approved WAAS GPS source. I do not
know of ant "puck" GPS that meets this requirement. If you know of one
please let me know.
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Charlie England <_ceengland7(at)gmail.com_
(mailto:ceengland7(at)gmail.com) > wrote:
Another option is to go to ebay for a $20 gps puck with serial output, &
have an independent source.
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ralph E. Capen <_recapen(at)earthlink.net_
(mailto:recapen(at)earthlink.net) > wrote:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ralph E. Capen"
<_recapen(at)earthlink.net_ (mailto:recapen(at)earthlink.net) >
Art,
You're pretty much on the money...couple of tricks with the 430W:
The 430W has multiple output ports - if you have one set to "Aviation",
you can simply fork that output signal wire.
Make sure that output port on the 430W is set to the correct output type
("Aviation") to match the ARTEX - the default 9600 baud rate should take
care of it.
Wiring a different port from the 430W is a PITB unless your panel has real
good access. Configure your new port for "Aviation" and you should be
good to go.
I just did this to add ADSB and learned the difference between ports and
protocols output from the 430W - I needed "ADS-B OUT+" (wasn't in the
original manual - found out while troubleshooting with vendor) and had it
connected to the "Aviation" port. I needed to run a separate wire just for this!
Good Luck,
Ralph
-----Original Message-----
From: Art Zemon
Sent: Apr 12, 2017 2:54 PM
(mailto:aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com)
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
Folks,
I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS signal to its
"Built-in GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA 0183 or RS 232)." If I understand
how to do this correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W, I just take the RS-232
signal and a ground and run them to the ELT. Right?
The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC VAX computers and
VT-100 terminals in the 1980s. Is there anything that I should know with
regards to wiring these more modern devices?
Thanks, -- Art Z.
--
_https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.comh_ (https://cheerfulcurmudgeon.com/)
"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what
am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | don van santen <donvansanten(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RS-232 GPS Input |
Sorry. I guess I need to get my eyes checked. DDon
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Tim Olson wrote:
> This is for an ELT, not ADS-B.
>
>
> On Apr 12, 2017, at 3:01 PM, don van santen
> wrote:
>
> Another option is to go to ebay for a $20 gps puck with serial output, &
> have an independent source.
>
> Charlie,
> The 2020 rules for ADS-B out require an approved WAAS GPS source. I do not
> know of ant "puck" GPS that meets this requirement. If you know of one
> please let me know.
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Charlie England
> wrote:
>
>> Another option is to go to ebay for a $20 gps puck with serial output, &
>> have an independent source.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ralph E. Capen
>> wrote:
>>
>>> recapen(at)earthlink.net>
>>>
>>> Art,
>>> You're pretty much on the money...couple of tricks with the 430W:
>>> The 430W has multiple output ports - if you have one set to "Aviation",
>>> you can simply fork that output signal wire.
>>> Make sure that output port on the 430W is set to the correct output type
>>> ("Aviation") to match the ARTEX - the default 9600 baud rate should take
>>> care of it.
>>> Wiring a different port from the 430W is a PITB unless your panel has
>>> real good access. Configure your new port for "Aviation" and you should be
>>> good to go.
>>>
>>> I just did this to add ADSB and learned the difference between ports and
>>> protocols output from the 430W - I needed "ADS-B OUT+" (wasn't in the
>>> original manual - found out while troubleshooting with vendor) and had it
>>> connected to the "Aviation" port. I needed to run a separate wire just for
>>> this!
>>>
>>> Good Luck,
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>
>>> From: Art Zemon
>>>
>>> Sent: Apr 12, 2017 2:54 PM
>>>
>>> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>>>
>>> Subject: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Folks,
>>> I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS signal to its
>>> "Built-in GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA 0183 or RS 232)." If I
>>> understand how to do this correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W, I just take the
>>> RS-232 signal and a ground and run them to the ELT. Right?
>>> The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC VAX computers and
>>> VT-100 terminals in the 1980s. Is there anything that I should know with
>>> regards to wiring these more modern devices?
>>> Thanks, -- Art Z.
>>>
>>> --
>>> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>>>
>>> "If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself,
>>> what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel
>>>
>>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | Re: RS-232 GPS Input |
Ralph,
Thanks for confirming. I do intend to feed both the ADS-B and the ELT from
the 430W. I read of lots of people just splitting the signal to feed two
devices, which seems odd to me but then this is one-way communication so I
guess it ought to work. And I will check my ADS-B documentation carefully
to be sure that I get the right signal from the 430W.
So... just a single twisted pair for these RS-232 devices? I don't need any
of the other pins besides + and - ???
Should I shield it and, if so, where do I ground the shield?
-- Art Z.
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ralph E. Capen
wrote:
> recapen(at)earthlink.net>
>
> Art,
> You're pretty much on the money...couple of tricks with the 430W:
> The 430W has multiple output ports - if you have one set to "Aviation",
> you can simply fork that output signal wire.
> Make sure that output port on the 430W is set to the correct output type
> ("Aviation") to match the ARTEX - the default 9600 baud rate should take
> care of it.
> Wiring a different port from the 430W is a PITB unless your panel has real
> good access. Configure your new port for "Aviation" and you should be good
> to go.
>
> I just did this to add ADSB and learned the difference between ports and
> protocols output from the 430W - I needed "ADS-B OUT+" (wasn't in the
> original manual - found out while troubleshooting with vendor) and had it
> connected to the "Aviation" port. I needed to run a separate wire just for
> this!
>
> Good Luck,
> Ralph
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Art Zemon
>
> Sent: Apr 12, 2017 2:54 PM
>
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
>
>
> Folks,
> I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS signal to its
> "Built-in GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA 0183 or RS 232)." If I
> understand how to do this correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W, I just take the
> RS-232 signal and a ground and run them to the ELT. Right?
> The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC VAX computers and
> VT-100 terminals in the 1980s. Is there anything that I should know with
> regards to wiring these more modern devices?
> Thanks, -- Art Z.
>
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what
am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel*
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Starter engaged warning light |
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)wi.rr.com> |
Thanks Bob (and others) for the detailed explanation confirming what I
thought. Protecting this run of 22ga wire seems like a perfect job for
a fusible link, and since I have some 26ga left over from the Ray Allen
servos, I will make one. The panel LED has a resistor built in so that
option is not available.
Jeff
On 4/12/17 4:25 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RS-232 GPS Input |
Art,
I may not have been clear enough...
>From my reading of the ARTEX ELT manual, it needs "Aviation" from the 430W. It
looks like you can use a single pin shielded wire (grounded at the 430W end)
for the TX (at the 430W end) to the RX (at the ARTEX end - pin 9). If you have
something else that already uses "Aviation", you can do a take-off from that
port/wire - otherwise, see the next paragraph.
Depending on the ADSB box, it will most likely need "ADS-B OUT+" from the 430W
- mine did. This required me to use a different port on the 430W for the ADSB
box. I used a single pin shielded wire (grounded at the 430W end) for the TX
(at the 430W end) to the RX (at the ADSB end) for mine. It was a different port!
I have already 'wasted' the troubleshooting hours figuring out why it wasn't working
(install manual didn't call out "ADS-B OUT+" - I had to get that from tech
support after I had already wired it the other way.
I've got a picture of the 430W config if you want it - let me know and I'll send
it direct!
Hope this clears the mud I stirred up!
Ralph
-----Original Message-----
From: Art Zemon
Sent: Apr 12, 2017 6:10 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
Ralph,
Thanks for confirming. I do intend to feed both the ADS-B and the ELT from the
430W. I read of lots of people just splitting the signal to feed two devices,
which seems odd to me but then this is one-way communication so I guess it ought
to work. And I will check my ADS-B documentation carefully to be sure that
I get the right signal from the 430W.
So... just a single twisted pair for these RS-232 devices? I don't need any of
the other pins besides + and - ???Should I shield it and, if so, where do I ground
the shield?
-- Art Z.
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ralph E. Capen wrote:
Art,
You're pretty much on the money...couple of tricks with the 430W:
The 430W has multiple output ports - if you have one set to "Aviation", you can
simply fork that output signal wire.
Make sure that output port on the 430W is set to the correct output type ("Aviation")
to match the ARTEX - the default 9600 baud rate should take care of it.
Wiring a different port from the 430W is a PITB unless your panel has real good
access. Configure your new port for "Aviation" and you should be good to go.
I just did this to add ADSB and learned the difference between ports and protocols
output from the 430W - I needed "ADS-B OUT+" (wasn't in the original manual
- found out while troubleshooting with vendor) and had it connected to the "Aviation"
port. I needed to run a separate wire just for this!
Good Luck,
Ralph
-----Original Message-----
From: Art Zemon
Sent: Apr 12, 2017 2:54 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
Folks,
I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS signal to its "Built-in
GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA 0183 or RS 232)." If I understand how to do this
correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W, I just take the RS-232 signal and a ground
and run them to the ELT. Right?
The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC VAX computers and VT-100
terminals in the 1980s. Is there anything that I should know with regards to wiring
these more modern devices?
Thanks, -- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what am I?
And if not now, when?" Hillel
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Is a battery contactor really needed? |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
In case of an immanent forced landing or smoke in the cockpit, it is advisable
to shut off electrical power as close to the source as possible.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468357#468357
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: old B and C SD-8 Dynamo failure |
>>Bob, if you wanted to look at this dynamo for some reason, I'll be happy
>>to mail it to you. I suspect you've got much better things to do than
>>'paleo-forensics' on this dated item.
>>
>>Mark
>
> Actually, I would like to see it. I have
> a drive stand running that fits the SD8
> and I'm equipped to test/inspect it in
> detail. Getting a close up look at a sample
> with this kind of service on it would be
> illuminating.
>
> Send the rectifier/regulator too. I'll
> get them checked out and repaired/replaced
> as needed.
Got Mark's SD8 and R/R from the post office
today. Ran the SD8. As I would have predicted,
it runs just fine.
The construction of these machines doesn't have
much of a wear-out mode. The bearings
are VERY lightly loaded. There are no brushes
or slip rings. The stationary windings might
be a some risk for aging were they operated
at temperatures that pushed the insulation
limits on the magnet wire.
The numbers on Mr. Todd's SD8 track very
closely with those from a new, current protection
unit.
I've got some wiring details to fiddle with
before I can add the R/R to the bench setup . . .
perhaps tomorrow.
Watch this space . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | Re: RS-232 GPS Input |
That clears it up. Thank you, Ralph. When I get to actually making wires,
I'll be back in touch if I am confused.
-- Art Z.
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Ralph E. Capen
wrote:
> recapen(at)earthlink.net>
>
>
> Art,
>
> I may not have been clear enough...
>
> >From my reading of the ARTEX ELT manual, it needs "Aviation" from the
> 430W. It looks like you can use a single pin shielded wire (grounded at
> the 430W end) for the TX (at the 430W end) to the RX (at the ARTEX end -
> pin 9). If you have something else that already uses "Aviation", you can
> do a take-off from that port/wire - otherwise, see the next paragraph.
>
> Depending on the ADSB box, it will most likely need "ADS-B OUT+" from the
> 430W - mine did. This required me to use a different port on the 430W for
> the ADSB box. I used a single pin shielded wire (grounded at the 430W end)
> for the TX (at the 430W end) to the RX (at the ADSB end) for mine. It was
> a different port!
>
> I have already 'wasted' the troubleshooting hours figuring out why it
> wasn't working (install manual didn't call out "ADS-B OUT+" - I had to get
> that from tech support after I had already wired it the other way.
>
> I've got a picture of the 430W config if you want it - let me know and
> I'll send it direct!
>
> Hope this clears the mud I stirred up!
>
> Ralph
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Art Zemon
>
> Sent: Apr 12, 2017 6:10 PM
>
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
>
>
> Ralph,
> Thanks for confirming. I do intend to feed both the ADS-B and the ELT from
> the 430W. I read of lots of people just splitting the signal to feed two
> devices, which seems odd to me but then this is one-way communication so I
> guess it ought to work. And I will check my ADS-B documentation carefully
> to be sure that I get the right signal from the 430W.
> So... just a single twisted pair for these RS-232 devices? I don't need
> any of the other pins besides + and - ???Should I shield it and, if so,
> where do I ground the shield?
> -- Art Z.
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ralph E. Capen
> wrote:
> recapen(at)earthlink.net>
>
>
> Art,
>
> You're pretty much on the money...couple of tricks with the 430W:
>
> The 430W has multiple output ports - if you have one set to "Aviation",
> you can simply fork that output signal wire.
>
> Make sure that output port on the 430W is set to the correct output type
> ("Aviation") to match the ARTEX - the default 9600 baud rate should take
> care of it.
>
> Wiring a different port from the 430W is a PITB unless your panel has real
> good access. Configure your new port for "Aviation" and you should be good
> to go.
>
>
> I just did this to add ADSB and learned the difference between ports and
> protocols output from the 430W - I needed "ADS-B OUT+" (wasn't in the
> original manual - found out while troubleshooting with vendor) and had it
> connected to the "Aviation" port. I needed to run a separate wire just for
> this!
>
>
> Good Luck,
>
> Ralph
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
>
> From: Art Zemon
>
>
> Sent: Apr 12, 2017 2:54 PM
>
>
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
>
>
> Folks,
>
> I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS signal to its
> "Built-in GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA 0183 or RS 232)." If I
> understand how to do this correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W, I just take the
> RS-232 signal and a ground and run them to the ELT. Right?
>
> The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC VAX computers and
> VT-100 terminals in the 1980s. Is there anything that I should know with
> regards to wiring these more modern devices?
>
> Thanks, -- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what
am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RS-232 GPS Input |
Happy to help!
-----Original Message-----
From: Art Zemon
Sent: Apr 12, 2017 7:19 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
That clears it up. Thank you, Ralph. When I get to actually making wires, I'll
be back in touch if I am confused.
-- Art Z.
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Ralph E. Capen wrote:
Art,
I may not have been clear enough...
>From my reading of the ARTEX ELT manual, it needs "Aviation" from the 430W. It
looks like you can use a single pin shielded wire (grounded at the 430W end)
for the TX (at the 430W end) to the RX (at the ARTEX end - pin 9). If you have
something else that already uses "Aviation", you can do a take-off from that
port/wire - otherwise, see the next paragraph.
Depending on the ADSB box, it will most likely need "ADS-B OUT+" from the 430W
- mine did. This required me to use a different port on the 430W for the ADSB
box. I used a single pin shielded wire (grounded at the 430W end) for the TX
(at the 430W end) to the RX (at the ADSB end) for mine. It was a different port!
I have already 'wasted' the troubleshooting hours figuring out why it wasn't working
(install manual didn't call out "ADS-B OUT+" - I had to get that from tech
support after I had already wired it the other way.
I've got a picture of the 430W config if you want it - let me know and I'll send
it direct!
Hope this clears the mud I stirred up!
Ralph
-----Original Message-----
From: Art Zemon
Sent: Apr 12, 2017 6:10 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
Ralph,
Thanks for confirming. I do intend to feed both the ADS-B and the ELT from the
430W. I read of lots of people just splitting the signal to feed two devices,
which seems odd to me but then this is one-way communication so I guess it ought
to work. And I will check my ADS-B documentation carefully to be sure that
I get the right signal from the 430W.
So... just a single twisted pair for these RS-232 devices? I don't need any of
the other pins besides + and - ???Should I shield it and, if so, where do I ground
the shield?
-- Art Z.
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ralph E. Capen wrote:
Art,
You're pretty much on the money...couple of tricks with the 430W:
The 430W has multiple output ports - if you have one set to "Aviation", you can
simply fork that output signal wire.
Make sure that output port on the 430W is set to the correct output type ("Aviation")
to match the ARTEX - the default 9600 baud rate should take care of it.
Wiring a different port from the 430W is a PITB unless your panel has real good
access. Configure your new port for "Aviation" and you should be good to go.
I just did this to add ADSB and learned the difference between ports and protocols
output from the 430W - I needed "ADS-B OUT+" (wasn't in the original manual
- found out while troubleshooting with vendor) and had it connected to the "Aviation"
port. I needed to run a separate wire just for this!
Good Luck,
Ralph
-----Original Message-----
From: Art Zemon
Sent: Apr 12, 2017 2:54 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
Folks,
I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS signal to its "Built-in
GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA 0183 or RS 232)." If I understand how to do this
correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W, I just take the RS-232 signal and a ground
and run them to the ELT. Right?
The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC VAX computers and VT-100
terminals in the 1980s. Is there anything that I should know with regards to wiring
these more modern devices?
Thanks, -- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what am I?
And if not now, when?" Hillel
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RS-232 GPS Input |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
It might be worth mentioning that the electrons have to get back home,
even if it's only signal data. If you float the shield on one end, then
the return path is the airframe. *If* it's a metal airplane, and both of
the devices are grounded to the airframe.
So that idea may work fine in an aluminum or steel tube a/c, but in a
Velocity/Lancair/etc, not so much. And even in a metal a/c, it *could*
leave the signal vulnerable to noise on the ground side of the circuit.
There's a lot of myth & metaphysics parading as universal truth around
shields and grounding. (Pardon the pun...)
Charlie
On 4/12/2017 6:19 PM, Art Zemon wrote:
> That clears it up. Thank you, Ralph. When I get to actually making
> wires, I'll be back in touch if I am confused.
>
> -- Art Z.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Ralph E. Capen > wrote:
>
> >
>
>
> Art,
>
> I may not have been clear enough...
>
> >From my reading of the ARTEX ELT manual, it needs "Aviation" from
> the 430W. It looks like you can use a single pin shielded wire
> (grounded at the 430W end) for the TX (at the 430W end) to the RX
> (at the ARTEX end - pin 9). If you have something else that
> already uses "Aviation", you can do a take-off from that port/wire
> - otherwise, see the next paragraph.
>
> Depending on the ADSB box, it will most likely need "ADS-B OUT+"
> from the 430W - mine did. This required me to use a different
> port on the 430W for the ADSB box. I used a single pin shielded
> wire (grounded at the 430W end) for the TX (at the 430W end) to
> the RX (at the ADSB end) for mine. It was a different port!
>
> I have already 'wasted' the troubleshooting hours figuring out why
> it wasn't working (install manual didn't call out "ADS-B OUT+" - I
> had to get that from tech support after I had already wired it the
> other way.
>
> I've got a picture of the 430W config if you want it - let me know
> and I'll send it direct!
>
> Hope this clears the mud I stirred up!
>
> Ralph
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Art Zemon
>
> Sent: Apr 12, 2017 6:10 PM
>
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
>
>
> Ralph,
> Thanks for confirming. I do intend to feed both the ADS-B and the
> ELT from the 430W. I read of lots of people just splitting the
> signal to feed two devices, which seems odd to me but then this is
> one-way communication so I guess it ought to work. And I will
> check my ADS-B documentation carefully to be sure that I get the
> right signal from the 430W.
> So... just a single twisted pair for these RS-232 devices? I don't
> need any of the other pins besides + and - ???Should I shield it
> and, if so, where do I ground the shield?
> -- Art Z.
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ralph E. Capen
> > wrote:
> >
>
>
> Art,
>
> You're pretty much on the money...couple of tricks with the 430W:
>
> The 430W has multiple output ports - if you have one set to
> "Aviation", you can simply fork that output signal wire.
>
> Make sure that output port on the 430W is set to the correct
> output type ("Aviation") to match the ARTEX - the default 9600
> baud rate should take care of it.
>
> Wiring a different port from the 430W is a PITB unless your panel
> has real good access. Configure your new port for "Aviation" and
> you should be good to go.
>
>
> I just did this to add ADSB and learned the difference between
> ports and protocols output from the 430W - I needed "ADS-B OUT+"
> (wasn't in the original manual - found out while troubleshooting
> with vendor) and had it connected to the "Aviation" port. I
> needed to run a separate wire just for this!
>
>
> Good Luck,
>
> Ralph
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
>
> From: Art Zemon
>
>
> Sent: Apr 12, 2017 2:54 PM
>
>
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
>
>
> Folks,
>
> I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS signal to
> its "Built-in GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA 0183 or RS 232)."
> If I understand how to do this correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W, I
> just take the RS-232 signal and a ground and run them to the ELT.
> Right?
>
> The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC VAX
> computers and VT-100 terminals in the 1980s. Is there anything
> that I should know with regards to wiring these more modern devices?
>
> Thanks, -- Art Z.
>
>
> --
> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>
> /"If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself,
> what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel/
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RS-232 GPS Input |
Good point - I was only considering a metal frame! If bonding is a part of the
builder scenario, the return path becomes an actual requirement - which can be
satisfied in a number of ways!
The documents for the ARTEX make a similar consideration as well.....
-----Original Message-----
From: Charlie England
Sent: Apr 12, 2017 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
It might be worth mentioning that the
electrons have to get back home, even if it's only signal data. If
you float the shield on one end, then the return path is the
airframe. *If* it's a metal airplane, and both of the devices are
grounded to the airframe.
So that idea may work fine in an aluminum or steel tube a/c, but
in a Velocity/Lancair/etc, not so much. And even in a metal a/c,
it *could* leave the signal vulnerable to noise on the ground side
of the circuit.
There's a lot of myth & metaphysics parading as universal
truth around shields and grounding. (Pardon the pun...)
Charlie
On 4/12/2017 6:19 PM, Art Zemon wrote:
That clears it up. Thank you, Ralph. When I get to
actually making wires, I'll be back in touch if I am confused.
-- Art Z.
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 5:55 PM,
Ralph E. Capen
wrote:
"Ralph E. Capen"
Art,
I may not have been clear enough...
>From my reading of the ARTEX ELT manual, it needs
"Aviation" from the 430W. It looks like you can use a
single pin shielded wire (grounded at the 430W end) for
the TX (at the 430W end) to the RX (at the ARTEX end - pin
9). If you have something else that already uses
"Aviation", you can do a take-off from that port/wire -
otherwise, see the next paragraph.
Depending on the ADSB box, it will most likely need "ADS-B
OUT+" from the 430W - mine did. This required me to use a
different port on the 430W for the ADSB box. I used a
single pin shielded wire (grounded at the 430W end) for
the TX (at the 430W end) to the RX (at the ADSB end) for
mine. It was a different port!
I have already 'wasted' the troubleshooting hours figuring
out why it wasn't working (install manual didn't call out
"ADS-B OUT+" - I had to get that from tech support after I
had already wired it the other way.
I've got a picture of the 430W config if you want it - let
me know and I'll send it direct!
Hope this clears the mud I stirred up!
Ralph
-----Original Message-----
From: Art Zemon
Sent: Apr 12, 2017 6:10 PM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
Ralph,
Thanks for confirming. I do intend to feed both the
ADS-B and the ELT from the 430W. I read of lots of
people just splitting the signal to feed two devices,
which seems odd to me but then this is one-way
communication so I guess it ought to work. And I will
check my ADS-B documentation carefully to be sure that I
get the right signal from the 430W.
So... just a single twisted pair for these RS-232
devices? I don't need any of the other pins besides + and
- ???Should I shield it and, if so, where do I ground the
shield?
-- Art Z.
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ralph E. Capen
wrote:
Capen"
Art,
You're pretty much on the money...couple of tricks with
the 430W:
The 430W has multiple output ports - if you have one set
to "Aviation", you can simply fork that output signal
wire.
Make sure that output port on the 430W is set to the
correct output type ("Aviation") to match the ARTEX -
the default 9600 baud rate should take care of it.
Wiring a different port from the 430W is a PITB unless
your panel has real good access. Configure your new
port for "Aviation" and you should be good to go.
I just did this to add ADSB and learned the difference
between ports and protocols output from the 430W - I
needed "ADS-B OUT+" (wasn't in the original manual -
found out while troubleshooting with vendor) and had it
connected to the "Aviation" port. I needed to run a
separate wire just for this!
Good Luck,
Ralph
-----Original Message-----
From: Art Zemon
Sent: Apr 12, 2017 2:54 PM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RS-232 GPS Input
Folks,
I am considering an ARTEX ELT 345 which requires a GPS
signal to its "Built-in GPS Navigational Interface (NMEA
0183 or RS 232)." If I understand how to do this
correctly from a Garmin GNS-430W, I just take the RS-232
signal and a ground and run them to the ELT. Right?
The last time I did any RS-232 wiring was between DEC
VAX computers and VT-100 terminals in the 1980s. Is
there anything that I should know with regards to wiring
these more modern devices?
Thanks, -- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
"If
I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only
for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jonlaury" <jonlaury(at)impulse.net> |
Electromotive vehicle range limitations may have just become a non-issue.
http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/seaweed-could-revolutionize-how-we-power-our-devices
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468367#468367
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
| From: | Jan de Jong <jan_de_jong(at)casema.nl> |
Rotax, LiFePO4 and OVP
LiFePO4 batteries do not have a voltage limiting effect in OV situations
as lead acid batteries do.
In Rotax systems with builtin 20A PM alternator the capacitor on the
output of the R/R can give a little time for OVP to operate.
Some ruminations.
With the standard 22mF, 25V capacitor there is 9V room above 16V.
DO160-capable devices can take 40V for 100ms, 24V above 16V.
Say the alternator is capable of an excess 14A or 14,000mC/s.
The bus voltage will climb at 14,000/22 = 636V/s = 0.64V/ms.
The 9V room to 25V is consumed in 9/0.64 = 14ms.
With a 22mF, 40V capacitor there would be 24/0.64 = 37.5ms available
until the DO160 limit is reached.
If a 47mF/40V capacitor were installed the bus voltage would climb at
0.30V/ms and it would take 24/0.30 = 80ms for the DO160 limit to be reached.
At 1500 RPM (idle) the ripple frequency is 10 x 1500 / 60 = 250Hz (there
are 10 coils I believe), the ripple period is 4ms (each of these
consists of 2 ripples, not quite identical (different rectifiers)).
Shorter periods at higher RPM.
A fast OVP would sample several ripple periods before deciding on an OV
condition.
Relay release time (10ms or so (diode/zener question)) would be added.
In total 20 or 30ms may be enough.
All in all limiting the potential voltage excursion with LiFePO4 using
fast OVP and a somewhat oversized R/R capacitor seems doable for the
small engine users among us.
Don't know who supply fast OVP though.
Don't know if nuisance tripping can be avoided.
Jan de Jong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Is a battery contactor really needed? |
At 03:35 PM 4/12/2017, you wrote:
>
>There seem to be a lot of advantages to not disconnecting the
>alternator from the battery, so I'm wondering if the battery
>contactor is really necessary?
>
>The things I can see as advantages are that it provides an extra
>layer of protection from accidental starter engagement, and provides
>a big switch that can be used to disconnect the battery from everything.
>
>I'm curious if there are other advantages that I'm not seeing.
There is a legacy train of thought that goes
back nearly 100 years . . . when on short final
to the rocks, it's a good idea to suppress
risk to the smallest values.
Hence, the POH for most if not all TC aircraft
calls for shutting off the fuel and killing
the electrical system. Getting the electrical
system stone-cold calls for independent, positive
control over power sources like alternators, generators
and . . . you guessed it . . . batteries.
Of course, the contactor is also a hedge against
a stuck starter contactor . . .
Don't know what 'advantages' might be secured
with permanent pathways between alternators
and batteries.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Is a battery contactor really needed? |
| From: | "rv8ch" <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote:
> At 03:35 PM 4/12/2017, you wrote:
> Don't know what 'advantages' might be secured
> with permanent pathways between alternators
> and batteries.
Thanks for the feedback gents, looks like the off field landing scenario slipped
my mind when thinking about this. The "advantages" I was thinking of were one
less component, and the possible avoidance of a load dump if the alternator
is pumping hard and the battery is disconnected. Avoiding issues with a load
dump are pretty easy by following the recommended designs in the 'connection.
Thanks for the tips!
--------
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468379#468379
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carlos Trigo <trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt> |
| Subject: | Re: Is a battery contactor really needed? |
Hello Mickey
I suppose everything is ok with you and your family, and you are flying your RV-8
in beautiful Switzerland
Cheers
Carlos
Enviado do meu iPhone
No dia 14/04/2017, s 05:26, rv8ch escreveu:
>
>
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote:
>> At 03:35 PM 4/12/2017, you wrote:
>> Don't know what 'advantages' might be secured
>> with permanent pathways between alternators
>> and batteries.
> Thanks for the feedback gents, looks like the off field landing scenario slipped
my mind when thinking about this. The "advantages" I was thinking of were
one less component, and the possible avoidance of a load dump if the alternator
is pumping hard and the battery is disconnected. Avoiding issues with a load
dump are pretty easy by following the recommended designs in the 'connection.
Thanks for the tips!
>
> --------
> Mickey Coggins
> http://www.rv8.ch/
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468379#468379
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
Eric says his works in about 200ms:
http://www.periheliondesign.com/lovm.htm
Mickey Coggins
On 13 April 2017 at 16:32, Jan de Jong wrote:
> jan_de_jong(at)casema.nl>
>
> Rotax, LiFePO4 and OVP
>
> LiFePO4 batteries do not have a voltage limiting effect in OV situations
> as lead acid batteries do.
> In Rotax systems with builtin 20A PM alternator the capacitor on the
> output of the R/R can give a little time for OVP to operate.
> Some ruminations.
>
> With the standard 22mF, 25V capacitor there is 9V room above 16V.
> DO160-capable devices can take 40V for 100ms, 24V above 16V.
> Say the alternator is capable of an excess 14A or 14,000mC/s.
> The bus voltage will climb at 14,000/22 = 636V/s = 0.64V/ms.
> The 9V room to 25V is consumed in 9/0.64 = 14ms.
> With a 22mF, 40V capacitor there would be 24/0.64 = 37.5ms available until
> the DO160 limit is reached.
> If a 47mF/40V capacitor were installed the bus voltage would climb at
> 0.30V/ms and it would take 24/0.30 = 80ms for the DO160 limit to be reached.
>
> At 1500 RPM (idle) the ripple frequency is 10 x 1500 / 60 = 250Hz (there
> are 10 coils I believe), the ripple period is 4ms (each of these consists
> of 2 ripples, not quite identical (different rectifiers)). Shorter periods
> at higher RPM.
> A fast OVP would sample several ripple periods before deciding on an OV
> condition.
> Relay release time (10ms or so (diode/zener question)) would be added.
> In total 20 or 30ms may be enough.
>
> All in all limiting the potential voltage excursion with LiFePO4 using
> fast OVP and a somewhat oversized R/R capacitor seems doable for the small
> engine users among us.
> Don't know who supply fast OVP though.
> Don't know if nuisance tripping can be avoided.
>
> Jan de Jong
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
| From: | "MMiller" <mmill(at)optonline.net> |
In a PM generator like the Rotax, frequency is not a function of the number of
coils in the stator, it's a function of the number of magnets in the rotor divided
by two. Divided by two because the magnets are installed in the rotor with
the poles alternating. Just look at the flux lines of one circuit. Two magnets
in series inducing a field through the laminated stator of two coils. The
two coils are connected in series with one of the coils "crossed" so the magnetic
effect is additive.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468412#468412
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Audio Isolation Amplifier Boards |
At 10:47 PM 12/11/2016, you wrote:
>
>
>I've had some requests for the bare etched circuit board called out
>in the DIY amplifier
>project featured at http://tinyurl.com/hn28p2q Also for the
>lvwarn/aux battery manager
>project at http://tinyurl.com/6mvso29
I ordered a second batch of audio
and lv/abmm boards. There
are 4 audio boards and 1 lv/abmm
board left . . .
Email me directly if intereseted.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Hunter" <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | FW: ADS-B and Transponder Antenna Radiation Concerns |
Hi All,
I am building a radio rack/shelf in a Velocity (fiberglass pusher) and I
am thinking of getting creative in the installation location of the
ADS-B and/or transponder antenna location so as to reduce antennae farms
under the airplane and the resultant drag.
I was considering mounting the transponder and/or ADS-B antenna upside
down under my newly built radio shelf that will be installed on top of
the =9Ccanard=9D in the =9Ccanard doghouse=9D.
In the Velocity pusher design, the =9Ccanard=9D is the front
wing of the airplane and the =9Cdoghouse=9D is the space
above the canard center section and it is essentially a large faring
that streamlines the airplane nose and fuselage to the canard. The
design is such that the canard mounts to the airplane in front of the
windshield and it is installed pretty much directly above the
pilot/copilot foot well (above the rudder pedals).
See attached picture of partially built radio shelf and this view is as
if you were looking down from the windshield to the top of the canard
center section (doghouse) and directly below this radio shelf would be
the pilot/copilot foot well and rudder pedals.
I could drill a hole in the aluminum shelf and install the antenna
(antennae) sticking straight down below the aluminum sheet metal and
that would require drilling a vertical hole straight down through the
canard skin and foam (making sure to avoid drilling through the canard
spar). That area of the canard is not considered to be a structural
component because the canard has a main spar and this is just a
fiberglass skin/foam core/skin sandwich construction. The antenna would
pretty much be completely inside the fuselage envelope and surrounded by
foam and fiberglass and the aluminum shelf would act as the ground
plane.
My electrical concerns are:
-Is having a high frequency transponder antenna mounted 24 inches above
my feet a good idea?
-The ADS-B antenna is a dual band receive only antenna so if I just went
with the ADS-B antenna mounted above my feet there would not be a
concern of irradiating my feet however the other concern would be the
interference of the metal rudder pedals and the metal control linkage
below the antenna interfering with its signal. Would that make the
ADS-B reception less sensitive?
Just some thoughts to ponder for the transponder.
THANKS!!!
Bill Hunter
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: ADS-B and Transponder Antenna Radiation Concerns |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
> Is having a high frequency transponder antenna mounted 24 inches above my feet
a good idea?
I do not know, but probably is a bad idea.
> Would that make the ADS-B reception less sensitive?
Yes, but probably not significantly. I would install the receiving antenna wherever
you want, then try it out. You can always move it if necessary.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468431#468431
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: FW: ADS-B and Transponder Antenna Radiation Concerns |
| From: | Kent or Jackie Ashton <kjashton(at)vnet.net> |
> On Apr 15, 2017, at 11:14 AM, William Hunter wrote:
>
>
> I was considering mounting the transponder and/or ADS-B antenna upside down under
my newly built radio shelf that will be installed on top of the canard in
the canard doghouse.
>
The transponder antenna must have line-of-sight to the radar station with no engines,
avionics or people (bags of water) in between. When departing a radar
station at say 5000 AGL and 25 NM, the look angle from the airplane to the station
is only about 2 degrees down so the antenna almost has to go on the bottom
of the airplane.
Even fiberglass builders who mount them in the nose have problems keeping radar
contact on departure. A 2 degree angle of attack and 1 degree climb angle puts
the passengers between the antenna and the radar station.
It is fine to mount the antenna under your seat or under your feet. The transmit
pulse is so brief that it has negligible effect. My ground plane in under
the seat and the antenna sticks out the bottom of the airplane.
-Kent
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Matronics Internet Connectivity Upgrades April 17-18 |
2017
Dear Matronics Email List an/or Forum User,
The Matronics Internet connectivity will be upgraded on April 17 through April
18, 2017. During the upgrade connections to the Matronics and AeroElectric web
servers may be unavailable. Additionally, Matronics Email List email will not
be redistributed.
Internet Connectivity bandwidth will be significantly increased by a factor of
7X for downloads and 50X for uploads, which represents a significant increase
in performance. Reliability should also increase in terms.
I will send out a follow up message when the upgrade has been completed.
Best Regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List and Forum Admin.
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | 581 Jeannie Way | Livermore | CA | 94550
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Hunter <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud |
Hi and Happy Easter!!!
I am struggling to find a crimp on terminal ring that will work with 20 AWG
wire and a 5/16 stud. The Google keeps showing results for 8 AWG wire.
Does anyone have a part number to share?
Thanks,
Bill Hunter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carlos Trigo <trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt> |
| Subject: | Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud |
Bilk
That will be SA-044 from SteinAir
Carlos
Enviado do meu iPhone
No dia 16/04/2017, =C3-s 16:56, William Hunter escreveu:
> Hi and Happy Easter!!!
>
> I am struggling to find a crimp on terminal ring that will work with 20 AW
G wire and a 5/16 stud. The Google keeps showing results for 8 AWG wire.
>
> Does anyone have a part number to share?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bill Hunter
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Sta-Kon RA18-516
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468531#468531
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Hunter" <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud |
Joe,
I knew I could count on you!!!
I guess I figured out why I could not find them on The Google...all of the
results I found were for around 85 bucks because they only sell them in 100
pc boxes!!!
..
Cheers!!!
Bill Hunter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of user9253
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 9:48 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud
Sta-Kon RA18-516
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468531#468531
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Hunter" <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud |
Amazon Aircraft Supply had a different manufacturer for only 15 bucks!!!
https://www.amazon.com/Terminal-Connectors-Plus-Parts-House/dp/B00N9RYQDI/re
f=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1492363881&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=22-16+AWG+5%2F16
%22+Stud+Nylon+Insulated+Double+Crimp+Ring+Terminal
..
Cheers!!!
Bill Hunter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of user9253
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 9:48 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud
Sta-Kon RA18-516
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468531#468531
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Bill,
Just a data point, but that link is for a product with a vinyl
insulator, and it's unlikely to be configured as PIDG (where the crimp
grabs both the wire and a small portion of the insulation). I'm not
saying that it's a deal breaker; I've used a few of those in my build &
I'm not afraid the plane will fall out of the sky because of them. Just
wanted to note that you're not comparing apples to apples. (The 'real'
PIDG terminals are grossly overpriced, in my not so humble opinion. An
order of magnitude price increase to go from vinyl to nylon and a
slightly longer metal barrel is a real stretch.)
A tip for finding products when a google search doesn't instantly find
what you want: If you look on ebay & find something that's similar from
one of the web stores that list there, try clicking on the store's
direct link, then search within that store. You can often find what
you're looking for that way. Bigger ebay sellers rarely list every
product they sell as a separate listing on ebay, but you can still
purchase through ebay by looking within the store's listings.
Charlie
On 4/16/2017 12:33 PM, William Hunter wrote:
>
> Amazon Aircraft Supply had a different manufacturer for only 15 bucks!!!
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Terminal-Connectors-Plus-Parts-House/dp/B00N9RYQDI/re
> f=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1492363881&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=22-16+AWG+5%2F16
> %22+Stud+Nylon+Insulated+Double+Crimp+Ring+Terminal
>
>
> ..
>
> Cheers!!!
>
> Bill Hunter
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of user9253
> Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 9:48 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud
>
>
> Sta-Kon RA18-516
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | don van santen <donvansanten(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud |
I would recommend using only AMP or TE PIDG terminals. They are available
from Steinair, Allied Electronics, Mouser and digikey for as little as 37
cents each in lots of 1.
Just my opinion, the junk stuff does not provide insulation support or good
material so they tend to fail fairly quickly.
On Apr 16, 2017 12:56, "Charlie England" wrote:
> ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
>
> Bill,
>
> Just a data point, but that link is for a product with a vinyl insulator,
> and it's unlikely to be configured as PIDG (where the crimp grabs both the
> wire and a small portion of the insulation). I'm not saying that it's a
> deal breaker; I've used a few of those in my build & I'm not afraid the
> plane will fall out of the sky because of them. Just wanted to note that
> you're not comparing apples to apples. (The 'real' PIDG terminals are
> grossly overpriced, in my not so humble opinion. An order of magnitude
> price increase to go from vinyl to nylon and a slightly longer metal barrel
> is a real stretch.)
>
> A tip for finding products when a google search doesn't instantly find
> what you want: If you look on ebay & find something that's similar from one
> of the web stores that list there, try clicking on the store's direct link,
> then search within that store. You can often find what you're looking for
> that way. Bigger ebay sellers rarely list every product they sell as a
> separate listing on ebay, but you can still purchase through ebay by
> looking within the store's listings.
>
> Charlie
>
> On 4/16/2017 12:33 PM, William Hunter wrote:
>
>> billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com>
>>
>> Amazon Aircraft Supply had a different manufacturer for only 15 bucks!!!
>>
>> https://www.amazon.com/Terminal-Connectors-Plus-Parts-House/
>> dp/B00N9RYQDI/re
>> f=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1492363881&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords
>> 22-16+AWG+5%2F16
>> %22+Stud+Nylon+Insulated+Double+Crimp+Ring+Terminal
>>
>>
>> ..
>>
>> Cheers!!!
>>
>> Bill Hunter
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>> user9253
>> Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 9:48 AM
>> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud
>>
>>
>> Sta-Kon RA18-516
>>
>> --------
>> Joe Gores
>>
>>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Off Topic: Amazon tip for the charitable among us |
The recent link to an Amazon-listed product made me thing about this; a
heads-up if you have charitable tendencies. Amazon has a feature called
'smile' (just add 'smile.' between the slashes and the word 'amazon' in
the url.) If you sign up for it, your prices stay the same, but Amazon
will donate some small % of your purchase price to the charity of your
choosing, from a pretty large list of charities & worthy causes.
St Jude's Children's Hospital gets ours, but you get to pick where yours
goes.
Just thought I'd mention the option, which only costs you a few minutes
to activate but can add up to quite a boost for your favorite cause.
Now, back to your regularly scheduled programming...
Charlie
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Hunter" <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud |
Good informationTHANKS!!!
..
Cheers!!!
Bill Hunter
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of don
van santen
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16
Stud
I would recommend using only AMP or TE PIDG terminals. They are
available from Steinair, Allied Electronics, Mouser and digikey for as
little as 37 cents each in lots of 1.
Just my opinion, the junk stuff does not provide insulation support or
good material so they tend to fail fairly quickly.
On Apr 16, 2017 12:56, "Charlie England" > wrote:
>
Bill,
Just a data point, but that link is for a product with a vinyl
insulator, and it's unlikely to be configured as PIDG (where the crimp
grabs both the wire and a small portion of the insulation). I'm not
saying that it's a deal breaker; I've used a few of those in my build &
I'm not afraid the plane will fall out of the sky because of them. Just
wanted to note that you're not comparing apples to apples. (The 'real'
PIDG terminals are grossly overpriced, in my not so humble opinion. An
order of magnitude price increase to go from vinyl to nylon and a
slightly longer metal barrel is a real stretch.)
A tip for finding products when a google search doesn't instantly find
what you want: If you look on ebay & find something that's similar from
one of the web stores that list there, try clicking on the store's
direct link, then search within that store. You can often find what
you're looking for that way. Bigger ebay sellers rarely list every
product they sell as a separate listing on ebay, but you can still
purchase through ebay by looking within the store's listings.
Charlie
On 4/16/2017 12:33 PM, William Hunter wrote:
>
Amazon Aircraft Supply had a different manufacturer for only 15 bucks!!!
https://www.amazon.com/Terminal-Connectors-Plus-Parts-House/dp/B00N9RYQDI
/re
f=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1492363881&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=22-
16+AWG+5%2F16
%22+Stud+Nylon+Insulated+Double+Crimp+Ring+Terminal
..
Cheers!!!
Bill Hunter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
] On Behalf Of
user9253
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 9:48 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud
>
Sta-Kon RA18-516
--------
Joe Gores
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-
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: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud |
At 12:18 PM 4/16/2017, you wrote:
>
>
>Joe,
>
>I knew I could count on you!!!
>
>I guess I figured out why I could not find them on The Google...all of the
>results I found were for around 85 bucks because they only sell them in 100
>pc boxes!!!
How many do you need? Perhaps I can simply
mail you some . . . ship me an address . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Hunter" <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud |
THANKS Bob.That is very kind of you!!!
I need to buy some more stuff from Stein so I will just get some from him
next week.
..
Cheers!!!
Bill Hunter
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 2:24 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Red Crimp On Terminal Ring For 5/16 Stud
At 12:18 PM 4/16/2017, you wrote:
>
Joe,
I knew I could count on you!!!
I guess I figured out why I could not find them on The Google...all of the
results I found were for around 85 bucks because they only sell them in 100
pc boxes!!!
How many do you need? Perhaps I can simply
mail you some . . . ship me an address . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Off Topic: Amazon tip for the charitable among |
us
Even the Soaring Society of America is on their list of organizations.
Rick Girard
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Charlie England
wrote:
> ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
>
> The recent link to an Amazon-listed product made me thing about this; a
> heads-up if you have charitable tendencies. Amazon has a feature called
> 'smile' (just add 'smile.' between the slashes and the word 'amazon' in t
he
> url.) If you sign up for it, your prices stay the same, but Amazon will
> donate some small % of your purchase price to the charity of your choosin
g,
> from a pretty large list of charities & worthy causes.
>
> St Jude's Children's Hospital gets ours, but you get to pick where yours
> goes.
>
> Just thought I'd mention the option, which only costs you a few minutes t
o
> activate but can add up to quite a boost for your favorite cause.
>
> Now, back to your regularly scheduled programming...
>
> Charlie
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
--
=9CBlessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light.=9D
Groucho Marx
<http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/43244.Groucho_Marx>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: old B and C SD-8 Dynamo failure |
Got Mark's SD-8 and original stock R/R running
on the bench. The R/R seems to be fine too. I
initially used a LiFePO4 battery (ETX36) in the
test setup and observed some unexpected behaviors.
Got a small lead-acid from the store a few minutes
ago and put it on a maintainer. Will resume the
experiment when the battery tops off . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: old B and C SD-8 Dynamo failure |
>Bob, if you wanted to look at this dynamo for some reason, I'll be happy
>to mail it to you. I suspect you've got much better things to do than
>'paleo-forensics' on this dated item.
I've finished some preliminary operations on the
as received SD8 and companion R/R. They seem to
function pretty much as designed.
2800 RPM produces 3+ amps at 14.4v
3300 RPM produces 4+ amps at 14.3v
3800 RPM produces 8+ amps at 14.1v
At the final load setting, current
in the SD8 windings was 10.5 A(rms)
I can return this hardware if you'd like to
have it around for spares. At the same time,
it would be interesting/useful to add it to
the constellation of test tools I'm
building around a 2HP drive-stand with
and AND20000 spline pad on it.
Emacs!
As an interesting aside, test data were taken
without a battery on line . . . this prevented
pollution of current values dialed into the dynamic
load bank. I was able to 'tickle' the dynamo-r/r
into operation with a momentary application of battery
power. On one fire-up/shut-down cycle, the capacitor
was still charged to about 3 volts and the system came
on-line with only a small fraction of start up
excitation offered by the ship's battery.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Off Topic: Amazon tip for the charitable among |
us
| From: | Rick Beebe <rick(at)beebe.org> |
If you go into "Accounts & Lists" and "Your Amazon Smile" you can choose
your charity. I typed "Aviation" into the search box and got 861
results. Amazon claims there are almost a million charities in the
system so if you can think of one, they're probably there.
--Rick
On 4/17/2017 12:02 AM, Richard Girard wrote:
> Even the Soaring Society of America is on their list of organizations.
>
> Rick Girard
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Charlie England > wrote:
>
> >
>
> The recent link to an Amazon-listed product made me thing about
> this; a heads-up if you have charitable tendencies. Amazon has a
> feature called 'smile' (just add 'smile.' between the slashes and
> the word 'amazon' in the url.) If you sign up for it, your prices
> stay the same, but Amazon will donate some small % of your purchase
> price to the charity of your choosing, from a pretty large list of
> charities & worthy causes.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: old B and C SD-8 Dynamo failure |
| From: | Mark Todd <motodd(at)frontier.com> |
>
> I can return this hardware if you'd like to
> have it around for spares. At the same time,
> it would be interesting/useful to add it to
> the constellation of test tools I'm
> building around a 2HP drive-stand with
> and AND20000 spline pad on it.
Bob, I'm happy to contribute them to the cause. BTW, I never had a big
cap or OVP module until I installed the new dynamo and regulator.
After just a couple of flights with the replacement hardware, I've had
no indication of a return of the problem. To be at ease, I'll just have
to go fly some more!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
| From: | "nuckollsr" <bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
After the server upgrade at matronics, I'm still wrestling with some email issues
. . . but these too will pass . . .
In the mean time, I subjected a fully charged ETX36 lithium battery to a 40v, 15A
constant current source.
Didn't take time to record and plot the data but my suspicions were correct, these
batteries WILL grunt some level of over-charge current.
In this experiment, it took several seconds for battery voltage to rise above 16.0
volts. Risks to accessories in an airplane fitted with a PM (read small)
alternator and legacy ov protection (16.2v) are small. Indeed, if the system loads
are a significant fraction of the alternators maximum output, one might well
never trip a legacy ov protection system.
We're in the late stages of bringing a new suite of OV protection devices easily
calibrated-to-task. A 16.2v trip point was derived from a series of bench tests
on various ov scenarios . . . for airplanes with 60A or larger alternators.
Trip dynamics is generally based on a simple RC integrator calibrated to trip
in 50 mS after a step up from 14.4 to 20.0 volts. This generally produced
a trip response tolerant of the Mil-Std-704 envelope for NORMAL bus excursions
while minimizing nuisance trips.
The next generation of ov discriminators will be software based and easily tailored
to the target system. It's a certainty that trip point can be lowered for
systems with PM alternators.
In any case, this experiment confirms the idea that legacy ov protection is still
okay, even with lithium paired with small alternators. Electronics internal
tot he ETX battery allowed 'overcharge' energy to be grunted by the battery.
However, we can and will do better.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468639#468639
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Plumery <barber_seville(at)msn.com> |
SXMgaXQgb2sgdG8gZXh0ZW5kIHRoZSBsZW5ndGggb2YgYSBhbnRlbm5hIGNhYmxlIGJ5IG1ha2lu
ZyBhIHNob3J0IHBpZ3RhaWwgc2F5IGZpdmUgZmVldCB3aXRoIGNvbm5lY3RvcnMgb24gZWFjaCBl
bmQgdG8gZ28gYmV0d2VlbiBhIFZIRiBhbmQgdGhlIGV4aXN0aW5nIGNhYmxlIHRoYXQgaXMgdG8g
c2hvcnQ/DQoNCkNodWNrDQoNCg0K
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Antenna cable |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
You will have a small signal loss from the connectors, but otherwise
fine. It is fairly common to build an 18-24" coax from the radio tray to
make future changes and servicing easier. AFAIK only GPS has constraints
about allowable dB loss between antenna and receiver.
Kelly
On 4/21/2017 6:24 AM, Charles Plumery wrote:
> Is it ok to extend the length of a antenna cable by making a short
> pigtail say five feet with connectors on each end to go between a VHF
> and the existing cable that is to short?
>
> Chuck
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna cable |
At 08:24 AM 4/21/2017, you wrote:
>Is it ok to extend the length of a antenna cable by making a short
>pigtail say five feet with connectors on each end to go between a
>VHF and the existing cable that is to short?
Yes
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Plumery <barber_seville(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna cable |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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Plumery <barber_seville(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna cable |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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
At 12:27 PM 4/20/2017, you wrote:
>
>
>After the server upgrade at matronics, I'm still wrestling with some
>email issues . . . but these too will pass . . .
Got 2 out of 3 email channels 'unclogged' . . . we're back
in the saddle on the AeroElectric-List.
I'm working on a couple of new regulator designs.
There's a need for data describing performance
studies and system integration questions that bubbled
up with the advent of LiFePo4 batteries. The plan is
to fit the drive stand with a 12-bit, 8 channel data
acquisition system that will let us go measure things
. . . things that that both suppliers and users of products
offered to OBAM aviation should know.
Need to get the regulators into production first but
we'll add everything but the kitchen sink to the test
stand after that. Got all the hardware in boxes
waiting for software to be installed on the hosting
computers.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Hunter <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
Hi,
I am installing a GTN-650 in my Velocity and the antenna location is only
2.0 feet from the unit itself. The Garmin instruction manual states that
the cable loss needs to be between 1.5 and 6.5 DB. The manual also states
that the calculated loss of a 6.5 foot cable with two BNC ends is 1.5 DB.
I assume that this means that I need to run a 6.5 foot cable for my short
run?
If so, what is the minimum radius of the bends I would need to make in the
cable to coil it up?
Thanks for your kind help!!!
Bill Hunter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chuck Birdsall <cbirdsall6(at)cox.net> |
Bill,
Yes, you need a minimum of 6.5 feet of cable length. The GPS antenna is an active
antenna, having a pre-amplifier built into it that's powered by a bias voltage
applied on the antenna center conductor (power comes from the GTN). The 1.5
dB of loss is to keep the receiver in the GPS unit from being over-driven and
thus degrading the signal.
The minimum 1-time bend radius from the RG400 spec is 1" - and the FAA spec from
AC 43.13-1 is 10 times the diameter of the cable (which would make it just under
a 2" radius). Both of these are a bit tight in my mind, and I would suggest
a 3" radius (6" dia) or larger loop. That'll give about 19" of length per
loop, which means three loops would get you what you need (or there about).
Chuck
---- William Hunter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am installing a GTN-650 in my Velocity and the antenna location is only
> 2.0 feet from the unit itself. The Garmin instruction manual states that
> the cable loss needs to be between 1.5 and 6.5 DB. The manual also states
> that the calculated loss of a 6.5 foot cable with two BNC ends is 1.5 DB.
>
> I assume that this means that I need to run a 6.5 foot cable for my short
> run?
>
> If so, what is the minimum radius of the bends I would need to make in the
> cable to coil it up?
>
>
> Thanks for your kind help!!!
>
> Bill Hunter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
In order to meet the minimum cable length requirement, I purchased a 10 foot RG400
cable with TNC connections from eBay for $12 with free shipping. Item number:
131817000902
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468711#468711
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Hunter <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
Well I came to the right place for advice. Thanks for the item number as I
will visit eBay Aircraft Supply this afternoon in order one
Thanks again,
Bill Hunter
On Apr 23, 2017 16:59, "user9253" wrote:
>
> In order to meet the minimum cable length requirement, I purchased a 10
> foot RG400 cable with TNC connections from eBay for $12 with free shipping.
> Item number: 131817000902
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468711#468711
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
cbirdsall6(at)cox.net wrote:
> Bill,
>
> Yes, you need a minimum of 6.5 feet of cable length. The GPS antenna is an active
antenna, having a pre-amplifier built into it that's powered by a bias voltage
applied on the antenna center conductor (power comes from the GTN). The
1.5 dB of loss is to keep the receiver in the GPS unit from being over-driven
and thus degrading the signal.
What's the long term impact from an antenna lead that's too short?
I have a GTN625 which has been operating for about 18 months with a 1.5' antenna
lead.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468748#468748
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Read Stein's post is this thread:
http://forum.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467885&sid=0551c7cee028f1697ba54f038595af00
I think that if it works, do not worry about it.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468750#468750
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
| From: | "rv8ch" <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
One point that is not clear for me about the internal/external VR discussion.
I apologize in advance if this has been clarified somewhere else and I just missed
it.
I don't understand why or how an external voltage regulator can safely cut the
field using the crowbar method and an internal regulator cannot. If I look at
the wiring diagrams there does not seem to be a difference. Is it just that
the external VR is more robust?
Thanks for any clarity you can provide.
--------
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468755#468755
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MICK MULLER bigpond <mmul6471(at)bigpond.net.au> |
| Subject: | TSU'd Usb charger?? |
Hello Electrical Gurus.
I recently got an email from Aircraft Spruce advertising Appeareo stratus dual
power usb charging port which was TSOd.
I am aware that TSO defines technical standards to which each device must conform.
But I am wondering just what is in a TSOd version of a USB charger port versus
a non TSOd one.
Especially given the price quoted on the Spruce website is $399.95.
For that money, I would want it gold plated at least.
Mick building an RV9A.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
What is included for the price is FAA permission to hardwire it to a type-certificates
aircraft without invalidating the certificate of airworthiness.
If you have such an airplane and want legally to install a USB charger that's worth
10x any amount of gold plating.
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 5:45 AM, MICK MULLER bigpond wrote:
>
>
> Hello Electrical Gurus.
> I recently got an email from Aircraft Spruce advertising Appeareo stratus dual
power usb charging port which was TSOd.
> I am aware that TSO defines technical standards to which each device must conform.
> But I am wondering just what is in a TSOd version of a USB charger port versus
a non TSOd one.
> Especially given the price quoted on the Spruce website is $399.95.
> For that money, I would want it gold plated at least.
> Mick building an RV9A.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
The Appareo Stratus ESG already has two of 5 VDC outputs. All you have to do is
buy the USB ports from eBay for about $2 and connect the wires.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468759#468759
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
The internally regulated alternator gets its field power from within the alternator.
There is no easy way for the pilot or for an over-voltage protection module
to interrupt that power.
The externally regulated alternator gets its field power from a panel mounted
fuse or circuit breaker or switch. It is much easier to interrupt the external
field power source.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468760#468760
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 4:45 AM, rv8ch wrote:
>
> One point that is not clear for me about the internal/external VR
> discussion. I apologize in advance if this has been clarified somewhere
> else and I just missed it.
>
> I don't understand why or how an external voltage regulator can safely cut
> the field using the crowbar method and an internal regulator cannot. If I
> look at the wiring diagrams there does not seem to be a difference. Is it
> just that the external VR is more robust?
>
> Thanks for any clarity you can provide.
>
> --------
> Mickey Coggins
> http://www.rv8.ch/
>
>
> With an external regulator, the crowbar shorts the field winding to
ground, tripping the field circuit breaker (typically 5 amp rating). One
cycle on the breaker; no damage done.
You can achieve the exact same thing with an internally regulated
alternator, but you must open up the alternator, find the field lead from
the internal regulator to the field winding, and bring it outside the
alternator to a field CB, then back to the winding. It can be done, if you
know what you're doing. But it *is* a significant 'invasion' into a very
well thought-out and tested (by auto engineers) system, so there's risk of
doing it wrong, or just upsetting the design. It could be as simple as: the
act of re-routing the field wire could make it more vulnerable to vibration
induced failure. (Just one example.)
The simpler method is to add an external contactor in series with the
B-lead, and feed its coil through that 5A breaker. Then the OV module would
short the coil circuit to ground, tripping the breaker and opening the
contactor. That's the technique used on the permanent magnet alternators,
that have no field winding. Bob no longer includes that method in the book.
If memory serves, there were issues many years ago where some were
'testing' the OV feature (or their 'traditionally wired' split master
switch) while in flight (with the alternator loaded), and by 'dumping' the
load, the perfectly good alternator could fry its internal regulator
because the regulator couldn't respond quickly enough to keep the sharp
rise in voltage from damaging internal semiconductors. In the immortal
words of the Hee Haw TV show doctor, 'If it hurts when you do that, don't
do that.' The only reason to operate that contactor is if the alternator
has already failed.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
| From: | "rv8ch" <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
user9253 wrote:
> The internally regulated alternator gets its field power from within the alternator.
There is no easy way for the pilot or for an over-voltage protection
module to interrupt that power.
> The externally regulated alternator gets its field power from a panel mounted
fuse or circuit breaker or switch. It is much easier to interrupt the external
field power source.
Yes, this is what I thought as well, but looking at the Z diagrams for how to wire
an external VR, it looks like control of the F is only done by the VR, so
I'm struggling to see a difference between and Internal and and External VR.
--------
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468761#468761
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/voltage_regulator_113.png
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Borger <rlborger(at)mac.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
Aero Folks,
And if you happen to need one in your Experimental OBAM aircraft where
the TSO isn=99t necessary there=99s a nice unit available
for $75 from:
http://commitlift.com
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 Apr 25, 2017, at 4:45 AM, MICK MULLER bigpond
wrote:
>
>
> Hello Electrical Gurus.
> I recently got an email from Aircraft Spruce advertising Appeareo
stratus dual power usb charging port which was TSO=99d.
> I am aware that TSO defines technical standards to which each device
must conform.
> But I am wondering just what is in a TSO=99d version of a USB
charger port versus a non TSO=99d one.
> Especially given the price quoted on the Spruce website is $399.95.
> For that money, I would want it gold plated at least.
> Mick building an RV9A.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
| From: | C&K <yellowduckduo(at)gmail.com> |
Mickey
I suspect that something about the diagram you are looking at is
misleading you.
Recall that the voltage sense wire (or any of the small wires) going
into an internal vr alternator do not normally supply the field. The
internal vr alternators that I'm familiar with will continue to output
power if all the small wires are disconnected.
As mentioned, there is no external connection or wire between the
internal vr and the field winding unless you modify the stock alternator.
Ken
On 25/04/2017 8:19 AM, rv8ch wrote:
>
>
> user9253 wrote:
>> The internally regulated alternator gets its field power from within the alternator.
There is no easy way for the pilot or for an over-voltage protection
module to interrupt that power.
>> The externally regulated alternator gets its field power from a panel mounted
fuse or circuit breaker or switch. It is much easier to interrupt the external
field power source.
> Yes, this is what I thought as well, but looking at the Z diagrams for how to
wire an external VR, it looks like control of the F is only done by the VR, so
I'm struggling to see a difference between and Internal and and External VR.
>
> --------
> Mickey Coggins
> http://www.rv8.ch/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
At 04:45 AM 4/25/2017, you wrote:
>
>One point that is not clear for me about the internal/external VR
>discussion. I apologize in advance if this has been clarified
>somewhere else and I just missed it.
>
>I don't understand why or how an external voltage regulator can
>safely cut the field using the crowbar method and an internal
>regulator cannot. If I look at the wiring diagrams there does not
>seem to be a difference. Is it just that the external VR is more robust?
>
>Thanks for any clarity you can provide.
The externally regulated alternator has NO electronics
inside . . . just a rudimentary alternator.
Emacs!
Interrupting the 'field input' line offers total
control over alternator output.
The internally regulated alternator has solid
state devices that control alternator output.
There is no field power input connection, only
a 'control' connection that talks to the
electronics.
Emacs!
There are failure modes INTERNAL to the alternator
that can cause an over voltage condition . . . a
condition not controllable from outside.
Hence, the legacy preference for externally regulated
alternators that allow a system integrator to include
over voltage protection in some form. It doesn't
have to be the 'crowbar' style . . . there are several
satisfactory approaches.
The crowbar ov module offers the simplest and most
robust configuration but it's not intended to displace
any other demonstrably functioning ov management system.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
At 04:45 AM 4/25/2017, you wrote:
>MULLER bigpond
>
>Hello Electrical Gurus.
>I recently got an email from Aircraft Spruce
>advertising Appeareo stratus dual power usb charging port which was
TSO=99d.
>I am aware that TSO defines technical standards
>to which each device must conform.
>But I am wondering just what is in a TSO=99d
>version of a USB charger port versus a non TSO=99d one.
>Especially given the price quoted on the Spruce website is $399.95.
>For that money, I would want it gold plated at least
or perhaps platinum plated . . .
Try any usb power port product you like. It's
an experimental airplane . . . this means you
can try things that may be discarded for one
reason or another later.
Risks for incorporation of jelly-bean usb
power products include noise in radios
and/or perhaps simple lack of robustness for
the aviation environment. Just be aware
of the potential risks and explore them
under comfortable, low risk flying conditions.
If you plan to run some appliance that is
extraordinarily useful/necessary for comfortable
conduct of your flight, consider building your
own usb power port. It's just a 5v power source.
A linear regulator generates no noise and is
only a little larger/heavier.
But yeah, give me a break. . . . 'TSO' in
this case is a license to extort . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
>Yes, this is what I thought as well, but looking at the Z diagrams
>for how to wire an external VR, it looks like control of the F is
>only done by the VR, so I'm struggling to see a difference between
>and Internal and and External VR.
But the crowbar ov module in turn controls power
to the external regulator. Opening the field power
source to the regulator will also shut down the
alternator. That 'control' lead into an IR
alternator cannot be guaranteed to offer
absolute control under all failure modes.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
>>But yeah, give me a break. . . . 'TSO' in
this case is a license to extort . . .
Bob, I think that's a little harsh. If you own a TC aircraft - which can be anything
up to a multi-million dollar business jet, remember, and you want a USB
socket, you need something TSO'd. You yourself probably know better than anyone
the cost of pushing the paperwork through on that, versus the number of units
likely to be sold.
If there's any "extortion" going on it's by the FAA and the ICAO - it seems unfair
to single out this product for criticism.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Josh Tinkham <unitink72(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
I've been thinking about the alternator setup for my RV-10 lately. I think
OV protection is necessary, but also would like to have a high capacity alt
(60-70amp) so I can run some seat heaters (I know, blame the wife). The
best thing I had found so far was the externally regulated Honda alt that
puts out 45amps. Also have found the write-up for hacking up an IR
alternator to bring out the field wire, but not very fond of that idea as
it complicates (at best) field maintenance.
This is the first I've seen of the Perihelion design module. At first
glance it seems like it may allow me to run a bigger IR altenator but still
have effective OV protection. Jan's comments though make it sound like a
200ms trip time might not work.
Bob what kind of new setup are you testing? Very interested to hear what
you have going on.
-Josh
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 3:09 PM, Mickey Coggins
wrote:
> Eric says his works in about 200ms: http://www.periheliondesign.
> com/lovm.htm
>
> Mickey Coggins
>
> On 13 April 2017 at 16:32, Jan de Jong wrote:
>
>> With a 22mF, 40V capacitor there would be 24/0.64 = 37.5ms available
>> until the DO160 limit is reached.
>> If a 47mF/40V capacitor were installed the bus voltage would climb at
>> 0.30V/ms and it would take 24/0.30 = 80ms for the DO160 limit to be reached.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 4/25/2017 8:35 AM, Alec Myers wrote:
>
>
>>> But yeah, give me a break. . . . 'TSO' in
> this case is a license to extort . . .
>
>
> Bob, I think that's a little harsh. If you own a TC aircraft - which can be anything
up to a multi-million dollar business jet, remember, and you want a USB
socket, you need something TSO'd. You yourself probably know better than anyone
the cost of pushing the paperwork through on that, versus the number of units
likely to be sold.
>
> If there's any "extortion" going on it's by the FAA and the ICAO - it seems unfair
to single out this product for criticism.
>
People seem to almost always blame regulations on the regulator
(government). It's rarely that simple a case.
Example from one of my past lives:
One aspect of my former business was installing and maintaining security
systems (burglar/fire alarms). At the time, there were 2 or 3 big
companies in my area, and me (much smaller, but I was probably the only
one who would service 'orphaned' systems). As fear of crime heated up,
demand went up and new players appeared on the supply side. One day I
got a call from one of the big companies, inviting me to help form a new
local organization of alarm companies *so that we could lobby the
legislature for regulations requiring any new companies to be
'certified' and licensed. *Got to protect those consumers from those
inexperienced, incompetent new companies, right? Existing**companies
would be grandfathered in, of course...
For an example closer to home, look at the most common a/c carburetor.
Do some historical research, tracking the dates of ownership changes
(remembering that typically, big money changes hands) of the carb
design, and overlay the dates of the series of AD's on the float.
Correlation? Causation? You decide.
We get the government we lobby for. Or we get the government that
someone else lobbies for, while we do nothing.
Charlie
*
*
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
Because I am installing the optional 40 amp Rotax alternator (internally
regulated Denso) this discussion is very interesting to me. From what I am
reading, it sounds like the only way to shut it down would be to interrupt
the output (B wire) with a switch or pull breaker.
If that is the case, what is the purpose of the IG wire, which runs from
the bus, through the master switch, to the alternator?
Thanks,
Ken
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 4:04 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> The internally regulated alternator gets its field power from within the
> alternator. There is no easy way for the pilot or for an over-voltage
> protection module to interrupt that power.
> The externally regulated alternator gets its field power from a panel
> mounted fuse or circuit breaker or switch. It is much easier to interrupt
> the external field power source.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468760#468760
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Daniel Hooper <enginerdy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
Some of these USB chargers out there are utter crap though!
I=92ve now racked up a handful of reported instances where people
(temporarily) wire in some sort of 5V converter for their flight
computers or other electronics and end up with =91terrible screeching=92
on the radio.
For a guy flying around in a mid-6-figure airplane, a $400 USB jack is a
no-brainer. For the rest of us, be careful what you buy. That $12 USB
charger from Walmart may not be very good.
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:52 AM, Charlie England
wrote:
>
> On 4/25/2017 8:35 AM, Alec Myers wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> But yeah, give me a break. . . . 'TSO' in
>> this case is a license to extort . . .
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob, I think that's a little harsh. If you own a TC aircraft - which
can be anything up to a multi-million dollar business jet, remember, and
you want a USB socket, you need something TSO'd. You yourself probably
know better than anyone the cost of pushing the paperwork through on
that, versus the number of units likely to be sold.
>>
>> If there's any "extortion" going on it's by the FAA and the ICAO - it
seems unfair to single out this product for criticism.
>>
> People seem to almost always blame regulations on the regulator
(government). It's rarely that simple a case.
>
> Example from one of my past lives:
> One aspect of my former business was installing and maintaining
security systems (burglar/fire alarms). At the time, there were 2 or 3
big companies in my area, and me (much smaller, but I was probably the
only one who would service 'orphaned' systems). As fear of crime heated
up, demand went up and new players appeared on the supply side. One day
I got a call from one of the big companies, inviting me to help form a
new local organization of alarm companies so that we could lobby the
legislature for regulations requiring any new companies to be
'certified' and licensed. Got to protect those consumers from those
inexperienced, incompetent new companies, right? Existing companies
would be grandfathered in, of course...
>
> For an example closer to home, look at the most common a/c carburetor.
Do some historical research, tracking the dates of ownership changes
(remembering that typically, big money changes hands) of the carb
design, and overlay the dates of the series of AD's on the float.
Correlation? Causation? You decide.
>
> We get the government we lobby for. Or we get the government that
someone else lobbies for, while we do nothing.
>
> Charlie
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Virus-free. www.avast.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bernie <arcticarrow(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
Bob
Could you right up the details on building our own Quiet USB charger?
Thanks
Bernie Willis
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 7:07 AM, Daniel Hooper wrote:
>
> Some of these USB chargers out there are utter crap though!
>
> I=99ve now racked up a handful of reported instances where people (t
emporarily) wire in some sort of 5V converter for their flight computers or o
ther electronics and end up with =98terrible screeching=99 on th
e radio.
>
> For a guy flying around in a mid-6-figure airplane, a $400 USB jack is a n
o-brainer. For the rest of us, be careful what you buy. That $12 USB charger
from Walmart may not be very good.
>
>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:52 AM, Charlie England wrote
:
>>
>> On 4/25/2017 8:35 AM, Alec Myers wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> But yeah, give me a break. . . . 'TSO' in
>>> this case is a license to extort . . .
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bob, I think that's a little harsh. If you own a TC aircraft - which can
be anything up to a multi-million dollar business jet, remember, and you wa
nt a USB socket, you need something TSO'd. You yourself probably know better
than anyone the cost of pushing the paperwork through on that, versus the n
umber of units likely to be sold.
>>>
>>> If there's any "extortion" going on it's by the FAA and the ICAO - it se
ems unfair to single out this product for criticism.
>>>
>> People seem to almost always blame regulations on the regulator (governme
nt). It's rarely that simple a case.
>>
>> Example from one of my past lives:
>> One aspect of my former business was installing and maintaining security s
ystems (burglar/fire alarms). At the time, there were 2 or 3 big companies i
n my area, and me (much smaller, but I was probably the only one who would s
ervice 'orphaned' systems). As fear of crime heated up, demand went up and n
ew players appeared on the supply side. One day I got a call from one of the
big companies, inviting me to help form a new local organization of alarm c
ompanies so that we could lobby the legislature for regulations requiring an
y new companies to be 'certified' and licensed. Got to protect those consum
ers from those inexperienced, incompetent new companies, right? Existing com
panies would be grandfathered in, of course...
>>
>> For an example closer to home, look at the most common a/c carburetor. Do
some historical research, tracking the dates of ownership changes (remember
ing that typically, big money changes hands) of the carb design, and overlay
the dates of the series of AD's on the float. Correlation? Causation? You d
ecide.
>>
>> We get the government we lobby for. Or we get the government that someone
else lobbies for, while we do nothing.
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Virus-free. www.avast.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Daniel Hooper <enginerdy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
I did all the background research necessary to do a fully-protected and
whisper-quiet (and probably TSO-able) one a while back, but then Commit
Lift and a few others came along and it wasn=99t really worth it
anymore.
My chip-level design was going to be a minimum of $100 a unit to sell
anyway, and it=99s hard to compete when people don=99t
understand the difference between your $100 product and a $10 product.
Just my 0.02.. : /
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 11:30 AM, Bernie wrote:
>
> Bob
> Could you right up the details on building our own Quiet USB charger?
>
> Thanks
> Bernie Willis
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 7:07 AM, Daniel Hooper > wrote:
>
>> Some of these USB chargers out there are utter crap though!
>>
>> I=99ve now racked up a handful of reported instances where
people (temporarily) wire in some sort of 5V converter for their flight
computers or other electronics and end up with =98terrible
screeching=99 on the radio.
>>
>> For a guy flying around in a mid-6-figure airplane, a $400 USB jack
is a no-brainer. For the rest of us, be careful what you buy. That $12
USB charger from Walmart may not be very good.
>>
>>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:52 AM, Charlie England > wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4/25/2017 8:35 AM, Alec Myers wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> But yeah, give me a break. . . . 'TSO' in
>>>> this case is a license to extort . . .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bob, I think that's a little harsh. If you own a TC aircraft -
which can be anything up to a multi-million dollar business jet,
remember, and you want a USB socket, you need something TSO'd. You
yourself probably know better than anyone the cost of pushing the
paperwork through on that, versus the number of units likely to be sold.
>>>>
>>>> If there's any "extortion" going on it's by the FAA and the ICAO -
it seems unfair to single out this product for criticism.
>>>>
>>> People seem to almost always blame regulations on the regulator
(government). It's rarely that simple a case.
>>>
>>> Example from one of my past lives:
>>> One aspect of my former business was installing and maintaining
security systems (burglar/fire alarms). At the time, there were 2 or 3
big companies in my area, and me (much smaller, but I was probably the
only one who would service 'orphaned' systems). As fear of crime heated
up, demand went up and new players appeared on the supply side. One day
I got a call from one of the big companies, inviting me to help form a
new local organization of alarm companies so that we could lobby the
legislature for regulations requiring any new companies to be
'certified' and licensed. Got to protect those consumers from those
inexperienced, incompetent new companies, right? Existing companies
would be grandfathered in, of course...
>>>
>>> For an example closer to home, look at the most common a/c
carburetor. Do some historical research, tracking the dates of ownership
changes (remembering that typically, big money changes hands) of the
carb design, and overlay the dates of the series of AD's on the float.
Correlation? Causation? You decide.
>>>
>>> We get the government we lobby for. Or we get the government that
someone else lobbies for, while we do nothing.
>>>
>>> Charlie
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
Virus-free. www.avast.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bernie Willis <arcticarrow(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
Bob,
Found Committ Lift.
Thanks,
Bernie
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:00 AM, Daniel Hooper
wrote:
>
> I did all the background research necessary to do a fully-protected
and whisper-quiet (and probably TSO-able) one a while back, but then
Commit Lift and a few others came along and it wasn=99t really
worth it anymore.
>
> My chip-level design was going to be a minimum of $100 a unit to sell
anyway, and it=99s hard to compete when people don=99t
understand the difference between your $100 product and a $10 product.
>
> Just my 0.02.. : /
>
>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 11:30 AM, Bernie > wrote:
>>
>> Bob
>> Could you right up the details on building our own Quiet USB charger?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Bernie Willis
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 7:07 AM, Daniel Hooper > wrote:
>>
>>> Some of these USB chargers out there are utter crap though!
>>>
>>> I=99ve now racked up a handful of reported instances where
people (temporarily) wire in some sort of 5V converter for their flight
computers or other electronics and end up with =98terrible
screeching=99 on the radio.
>>>
>>> For a guy flying around in a mid-6-figure airplane, a $400 USB jack
is a no-brainer. For the rest of us, be careful what you buy. That $12
USB charger from Walmart may not be very good.
>>>
>>>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:52 AM, Charlie England > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 4/25/2017 8:35 AM, Alec Myers wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> But yeah, give me a break. . . . 'TSO' in
>>>>> this case is a license to extort . . .
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bob, I think that's a little harsh. If you own a TC aircraft -
which can be anything up to a multi-million dollar business jet,
remember, and you want a USB socket, you need something TSO'd. You
yourself probably know better than anyone the cost of pushing the
paperwork through on that, versus the number of units likely to be sold.
>>>>>
>>>>> If there's any "extortion" going on it's by the FAA and the ICAO -
it seems unfair to single out this product for criticism.
>>>>>
>>>> People seem to almost always blame regulations on the regulator
(government). It's rarely that simple a case.
>>>>
>>>> Example from one of my past lives:
>>>> One aspect of my former business was installing and maintaining
security systems (burglar/fire alarms). At the time, there were 2 or 3
big companies in my area, and me (much smaller, but I was probably the
only one who would service 'orphaned' systems). As fear of crime heated
up, demand went up and new players appeared on the supply side. One day
I got a call from one of the big companies, inviting me to help form a
new local organization of alarm companies so that we could lobby the
legislature for regulations requiring any new companies to be
'certified' and licensed. Got to protect those consumers from those
inexperienced, incompetent new companies, right? Existing companies
would be grandfathered in, of course...
>>>>
>>>> For an example closer to home, look at the most common a/c
carburetor. Do some historical research, tracking the dates of ownership
changes (remembering that typically, big money changes hands) of the
carb design, and overlay the dates of the series of AD's on the float.
Correlation? Causation? You decide.
>>>>
>>>> We get the government we lobby for. Or we get the government that
someone else lobbies for, while we do nothing.
>>>>
>>>> Charlie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
Virus-free. www.avast.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Daniel Hooper <enginerdy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
Just for clarity=99s sake, I am not Bob.
=94Daniel
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 12:26 PM, Bernie Willis
wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> Found Committ Lift.
>
> Thanks,
> Bernie
>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:00 AM, Daniel Hooper > wrote:
>>
>> I did all the background research necessary to do a fully-protected
and whisper-quiet (and probably TSO-able) one a while back, but then
Commit Lift and a few others came along and it wasn=99t really
worth it anymore.
>>
>> My chip-level design was going to be a minimum of $100 a unit to sell
anyway, and it=99s hard to compete when people don=99t
understand the difference between your $100 product and a $10 product.
>>
>> Just my 0.02.. : /
>>
>>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 11:30 AM, Bernie > wrote:
>>>
>>> Bob
>>> Could you right up the details on building our own Quiet USB
charger?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Bernie Willis
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 7:07 AM, Daniel Hooper > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Some of these USB chargers out there are utter crap though!
>>>>
>>>> I=99ve now racked up a handful of reported instances where
people (temporarily) wire in some sort of 5V converter for their flight
computers or other electronics and end up with =98terrible
screeching=99 on the radio.
>>>>
>>>> For a guy flying around in a mid-6-figure airplane, a $400 USB jack
is a no-brainer. For the rest of us, be careful what you buy. That $12
USB charger from Walmart may not be very good.
>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:52 AM, Charlie England > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/25/2017 8:35 AM, Alec Myers wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But yeah, give me a break. . . . 'TSO' in
>>>>>> this case is a license to extort . . .
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bob, I think that's a little harsh. If you own a TC aircraft -
which can be anything up to a multi-million dollar business jet,
remember, and you want a USB socket, you need something TSO'd. You
yourself probably know better than anyone the cost of pushing the
paperwork through on that, versus the number of units likely to be sold.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If there's any "extortion" going on it's by the FAA and the ICAO
- it seems unfair to single out this product for criticism.
>>>>>>
>>>>> People seem to almost always blame regulations on the regulator
(government). It's rarely that simple a case.
>>>>>
>>>>> Example from one of my past lives:
>>>>> One aspect of my former business was installing and maintaining
security systems (burglar/fire alarms). At the time, there were 2 or 3
big companies in my area, and me (much smaller, but I was probably the
only one who would service 'orphaned' systems). As fear of crime heated
up, demand went up and new players appeared on the supply side. One day
I got a call from one of the big companies, inviting me to help form a
new local organization of alarm companies so that we could lobby the
legislature for regulations requiring any new companies to be
'certified' and licensed. Got to protect those consumers from those
inexperienced, incompetent new companies, right? Existing companies
would be grandfathered in, of course...
>>>>>
>>>>> For an example closer to home, look at the most common a/c
carburetor. Do some historical research, tracking the dates of ownership
changes (remembering that typically, big money changes hands) of the
carb design, and overlay the dates of the series of AD's on the float.
Correlation? Causation? You decide.
>>>>>
>>>>> We get the government we lobby for. Or we get the government that
someone else lobbies for, while we do nothing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Charlie
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
Virus-free. www.avast.com
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eric Page <edpav8r(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
My experience was virtually identical to Daniel's. I spent several months and
a several $hundred$ on prototypes of a ground-up design to get a charger that
worked well and -- with some guidance from our mentor here -- was electrically
quiet. Then I sat down and figured out what I would have to charge for it to
make it worth my trouble. When I considered what would be involved (form an
LLC; get panels of PCBs fabricated and robotically assembled; stock shipping supplies;
build a website; set up payment acceptance; handle federal, state and
local tax reporting; traipse to the post office to fulfill orders; deal with
tech support requests; handle the inevitable returns -- and after all that, make
a reasonable profit), in the end, it just didn't make any sense.
For an existing company with engineers on staff, an established supply chain and
a dealer network, it's feasible; for an electronics and aviation hobbyist, not
so much.
Eric
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 10:00 AM, Daniel Hooper wrote:
> I did all the background research necessary to do a fully-protected and whisper-quiet
(and probably TSO-able) one a while back, but then Commit Lift and a
few others came along and it wasnt really worth it anymore.
>
> My chip-level design was going to be a minimum of $100 a unit to sell anyway,
and its hard to compete when people dont understand the difference between your
$100 product and a $10 product.
>
> Just my 0.02.. : /
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bernie Willis <arcticarrow(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
Thanks, Daniel
Bernie
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:54 AM, Daniel Hooper
wrote:
>
> Just for clarity=99s sake, I am not Bob.
>
> =94Daniel
>
>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 12:26 PM, Bernie Willis > wrote:
>>
>> Bob,
>>
>> Found Committ Lift.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bernie
>>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:00 AM, Daniel Hooper > wrote:
>>>
>>> I did all the background research necessary to do a fully-protected
and whisper-quiet (and probably TSO-able) one a while back, but then
Commit Lift and a few others came along and it wasn=99t really
worth it anymore.
>>>
>>> My chip-level design was going to be a minimum of $100 a unit to
sell anyway, and it=99s hard to compete when people don=99t
understand the difference between your $100 product and a $10 product.
>>>
>>> Just my 0.02.. : /
>>>
>>>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 11:30 AM, Bernie > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Bob
>>>> Could you right up the details on building our own Quiet USB
charger?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Bernie Willis
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 7:07 AM, Daniel Hooper > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Some of these USB chargers out there are utter crap though!
>>>>>
>>>>> I=99ve now racked up a handful of reported instances where
people (temporarily) wire in some sort of 5V converter for their flight
computers or other electronics and end up with =98terrible
screeching=99 on the radio.
>>>>>
>>>>> For a guy flying around in a mid-6-figure airplane, a $400 USB
jack is a no-brainer. For the rest of us, be careful what you buy. That
$12 USB charger from Walmart may not be very good.
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:52 AM, Charlie England
> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/25/2017 8:35 AM, Alec Myers wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But yeah, give me a break. . . . 'TSO' in
>>>>>>> this case is a license to extort . . .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bob, I think that's a little harsh. If you own a TC aircraft -
which can be anything up to a multi-million dollar business jet,
remember, and you want a USB socket, you need something TSO'd. You
yourself probably know better than anyone the cost of pushing the
paperwork through on that, versus the number of units likely to be sold.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If there's any "extortion" going on it's by the FAA and the ICAO
- it seems unfair to single out this product for criticism.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> People seem to almost always blame regulations on the regulator
(government). It's rarely that simple a case.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Example from one of my past lives:
>>>>>> One aspect of my former business was installing and maintaining
security systems (burglar/fire alarms). At the time, there were 2 or 3
big companies in my area, and me (much smaller, but I was probably the
only one who would service 'orphaned' systems). As fear of crime heated
up, demand went up and new players appeared on the supply side. One day
I got a call from one of the big companies, inviting me to help form a
new local organization of alarm companies so that we could lobby the
legislature for regulations requiring any new companies to be
'certified' and licensed. Got to protect those consumers from those
inexperienced, incompetent new companies, right? Existing companies
would be grandfathered in, of course...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For an example closer to home, look at the most common a/c
carburetor. Do some historical research, tracking the dates of ownership
changes (remembering that typically, big money changes hands) of the
carb design, and overlay the dates of the series of AD's on the float.
Correlation? Causation? You decide.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We get the government we lobby for. Or we get the government that
someone else lobbies for, while we do nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Charlie
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
Virus-free. www.avast.com
>>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TSU'd Usb charger?? |
At 09:52 AM 4/25/2017, you wrote:
>On 4/25/2017 8:35 AM, Alec Myers wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>But yeah, give me a break. . . . 'TSO' in
>>
>> this case is a license to extort . . .
>>
>>
>>
>>Bob, I think that's a little harsh. If you own a TC aircraft -
>>which can be anything up to a multi-million dollar business jet,
>>remember, and you want a USB socket, you need something TSO'd. You
>>yourself probably know better than anyone the cost of pushing the
>>paperwork through on that, versus the number of units likely to be sold.
>>
>>If there's any "extortion" going on it's by the FAA and the ICAO -
>>it seems unfair to single out this product for criticism.
You are right of course . . . I wasn't clear. It's the
primary reason I have departed the TC aircraft
scene professionally. Back about 1980, I proposed,
prototyped, submitted samples, reworked to customer
desires, did a production drawing package, built
qual test articles, wrote the test plan, did all
but EMC testing in our labs, wrote the test report,
got it bought off by FAA, wrote the acceptance test
procedure and coordinated with the production line
to put a new, all electronic stall and gear warning
horn on the Bonanza and Baron lines at Beech.
Did it all by myself in about 90 days start to finish. To
get that SAME exact product on an airplane today would
probably command a 'team' of a half dozen specialists
and take 6 months to a year to wind it's way through
the ISO9000 policies and procedures mine-field.
I had similar successes with a constant speed pitch
trim system for the Lears and a sprinkling of other
devices at Cessna, Lear and Beech.
My last exertions in TC aircraft were expended about two
years ago. The goal was to convince Beech DERs that we
could take the guts out of a Cessna regulator (made by Lamar)
and put them inside the housing for a Beech regulator (also built
by Lamar). The Beech regulator had been a pain the
the arse for about 30 years. The Cessna regulator had
a flawless field history for about 20 years. Since
both Beech and Cessna were now the same company, you'd
think it was a no-brainer . . . BOTH products were qualified
and had been in production for decades.
Fortunately, my consulting contract ran out about three
weeks into this 'simple fix' . . . and I did not have to
hang around and watch the various 'teams' turn a little
problem into a huge one . . . that took about a year
to get resolved. In the mean time, Bonanza and Baron owners
were suffering the consequences of 'our' inadequacies.
So yes Alec, you're point is well taken . . . to which
I will add the idea that (1) nobody sets out to build a
marginal product and (2) the path to perfection is paved
with spontaneous order, the collegial cooperation of
all interested parties to do the best we know how to do
today and improve on it tomorrow. Improvements that
are now burdened with tons of regulatory mill stones.
Thanks for calling me out on it!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interesting thread on overvoltage event |
March 27, 2017 - April 25, 2017
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-nv