AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ol
June 04, 2018 - July 04, 2018
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: gps and alternator. |
Ernest:
Even if your cowl is fiberglass... You will be blocking satellite
reception when they are low on the horizon.
And what about the firewall? Isn't that meal? The you will be blocking in
that direction as well.
What about HEAT? What is the operation and storage temperatures for the
antenna?
You can always call the manufacture and get their recommendations?
Cutting drag is important, but so is navigation and with ADS-B so is being
seen. <-- I don't know if this is connected to ADS-B?
Barry
On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Ernest Christley wrote:
> The frequency that GPS works at is so far above anything the alternator
> produces, I can't imagine them ever being able to cross talk.
>
>
> On Saturday, June 2, 2018 8:56 AM, bobnoffs wrote:
>
>
> hi all,
> i have a really easy place to mount my gps antennas under the cowl but
> they would be within 4' of the alternator. will i be asking for trouble?
> thanks,
> bob noffs
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480579#480579
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List<= Same great content
> also available via the Web Forums!
> http://forums.matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution===================
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: gps and alternator. |
The PCB, traces, ground planes and assorted electronic components inside the antenna
module package and under the antenna element sure arent transparent.
Is Bob planning to mount it with the cable entry at the bottom and route the coax
outside the cowl?
On Jun 4, 2018, at 10:14 AM, Ernest Christley wrote:
A fiberglass cowling is practically transparent to GPS signals.
On Saturday, June 2, 2018 5:13 PM, Alec Myers wrote:
But a GPS antenna needs a good view of the sky. Theyre usually mounted on top of
the aircraft, not under it.
On Jun 2, 2018, at 16:21, bob noffs wrote:
thanks, good news ernest.
bob
Virus-free. www.avast.com
On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 2:08 PM, Ernest Christley wrote:
The frequency that GPS works at is so far above anything the alternator produces,
I can't imagine them ever being able to cross talk.
On Saturday, June 2, 2018 8:56 AM, bobnoffs wrote:
hi all,
i have a really easy place to mount my gps antennas under the cowl but they would
be within 4' of the alternator. will i be asking for trouble?
thanks,
bob noffs
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/ viewtopic.php?p=480579#480579
http://www.matronics.com/ Navigator?AeroElectric-List<= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/ contribution================== =
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: gps and alternator. |
| From: | "JohnInReno" <john(at)morgensen.com> |
bobnoffs wrote:
> hi all,
> i have a really easy place to mount my gps antennas under the cowl but they
would be within 4' of the alternator. will i be asking for trouble?
> thank
> bob noffs
I reluctantly moved my GPS antenna to the glare shield because of occasional "drop
outs". I left the XM radio antenna under the cowl.
--------
John Morgensen
RV-9A - Born on July 3, 2013
RV4 - for sale
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480655#480655
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: gps and alternator. |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
I've been flying for a couple years with my Dynon GPS-250 under the
cowl, just in front of the firewall and behind the metal engine baffles.
No problem for driving my Dynon Skyview displays. OTOH, I mounted my IFR
GTN650 antenna where Garmin calls for it, on top of the fiberglass
cabin, rather than bury it inside the glass. Guess which antenna is more
sensitive and sees satellites first.............The Dynon will pick up
enough satellites with the hangar door part way open, while the Garmin
requires vertical view of the sky.
On 6/4/2018 5:17 PM, JohnInReno wrote:
>
>
> bobnoffs wrote:
>> hi all,
>> i have a really easy place to mount my gps antennas under the cowl but they
would be within 4' of the alternator. will i be asking for trouble?
>> thank
>> bob noffs
>
>
> I reluctantly moved my GPS antenna to the glare shield because of occasional
"drop outs". I left the XM radio antenna under the cowl.
>
> --------
> John Morgensen
> RV-9A - Born on July 3, 2013
> RV4 - for sale
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480655#480655
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: gps and alternator. |
I've seen quite a few GPS mounted under the boot cowl, but not on the
engine side of the firewall. I would be more concerned about heat than
reception. Right now my SuperSTOL is in my shop, which has a metal roof and
a metal door, and my Dynon GPS has no problem at all locking on. That said,
I did choose to mount the GPS right on top of the airplane. Most of the
SuperSTOLs and Highlanders I have seen either put it under the boot cowl
(fiberglass) or on top of the glare shield.
Ken
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 3:43 PM, FLYaDIVE wrote:
> Ernest:
>
> Even if your cowl is fiberglass... You will be blocking satellite
> reception when they are low on the horizon.
> And what about the firewall? Isn't that meal? The you will be blocking
> in that direction as well.
> What about HEAT? What is the operation and storage temperatures for the
> antenna?
> You can always call the manufacture and get their recommendations?
> Cutting drag is important, but so is navigation and with ADS-B so is being
> seen. <-- I don't know if this is connected to ADS-B?
>
> Barry
>
> On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Ernest Christley
> wrote:
>
>> The frequency that GPS works at is so far above anything the alternator
>> produces, I can't imagine them ever being able to cross talk.
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, June 2, 2018 8:56 AM, bobnoffs wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> hi all,
>> i have a really easy place to mount my gps antennas under the cowl but
>> they would be within 4' of the alternator. will i be asking for trouble?
>> thanks,
>> bob noffs
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480579#480579
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List<= Same great
>> content also available via the Web Forums!
>> http://forums.matronics.com
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution===================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: gps and alternator. |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Alec,
Are we on the same page? The proposal is not *under* the cowl. It's
*inside* the cowl, on a shelf, mounted to the firewall just under the
*top* of the cowl. Cable would go through the firewall, like other
electrical stuff.
Charlie
On 6/4/2018 7:09 PM, Alec Myers wrote:
>
> The PCB, traces, ground planes and assorted electronic components inside the
antenna module package and under the antenna element sure arent transparent.
> Is Bob planning to mount it with the cable entry at the bottom and route the
coax outside the cowl?
>
>
> On Jun 4, 2018, at 10:14 AM, Ernest Christley wrote:
>
> A fiberglass cowling is practically transparent to GPS signals.
>
>
> On Saturday, June 2, 2018 5:13 PM, Alec Myers wrote:
>
>
> But a GPS antenna needs a good view of the sky. Theyre usually mounted on top
of the aircraft, not under it.
>
> On Jun 2, 2018, at 16:21, bob noffs wrote:
>
> thanks, good news ernest.
> bob
>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
>
> On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 2:08 PM, Ernest Christley wrote:
> The frequency that GPS works at is so far above anything the alternator produces,
I can't imagine them ever being able to cross talk.
>
>
> On Saturday, June 2, 2018 8:56 AM, bobnoffs wrote:
>
>
> hi all,
> i have a really easy place to mount my gps antennas under the cowl but they would
be within 4' of the alternator. will i be asking for trouble?
> thanks,
> bob noffs
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: gps and alternator. |
I have a really easy place to mount my gps antennas under the cowl....
My bad: I interpreted that as on the bottom surface of the cowl facing downwards
:/
Which, to be fair, would work just fine for whole lot of other antennas...
On Jun 4, 2018, at 21:41, Charlie England wrote:
Alec,
Are we on the same page? The proposal is not *under* the cowl. It's *inside* the
cowl, on a shelf, mounted to the firewall just under the *top* of the cowl.
Cable would go through the firewall, like other electrical stuff.
Charlie
> On 6/4/2018 7:09 PM, Alec Myers wrote:
>
> The PCB, traces, ground planes and assorted electronic components inside the
antenna module package and under the antenna element sure arent transparent.
> Is Bob planning to mount it with the cable entry at the bottom and route the
coax outside the cowl?
>
>
>
> On Jun 4, 2018, at 10:14 AM, Ernest Christley wrote:
>
> A fiberglass cowling is practically transparent to GPS signals.
>
>
> On Saturday, June 2, 2018 5:13 PM, Alec Myers wrote:
>
>
> But a GPS antenna needs a good view of the sky. Theyre usually mounted on top
of the aircraft, not under it.
>
> On Jun 2, 2018, at 16:21, bob noffs wrote:
>
> thanks, good news ernest.
> bob
>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
>
> On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 2:08 PM, Ernest Christley wrote:
> The frequency that GPS works at is so far above anything the alternator produces,
I can't imagine them ever being able to cross talk.
>
>
> On Saturday, June 2, 2018 8:56 AM, bobnoffs wrote:
>
>
>
> hi all,
> i have a really easy place to mount my gps antennas under the cowl but they would
be within 4' of the alternator. will i be asking for trouble?
> thanks,
> bob noffs
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | How to Wire My Alternator |
I need help. I bought a used engine and it came with an alternator that has
no labels that I can find. How do I hook it up?
Engine: Lycoming IO-360-A1A
Alternator: looks like this:
Back of the alternator has three Faston tabs and what looks like a screw
terminal next to them:
=8B
I bought a B&C LR3C-14 voltage regulator and ran the field wire to one of
the Faston tabs. I have confirmed that I do have voltage at the alternator
end of the wire. However, with the engine off, my EFIS does not show any
current draw when I turn on the primary alternator. When I run the engine,
the primary alternator does not produce any current.
I also have a B&C standby alternator with its B&C voltage regulator. That
one works just fine. With the engine off, I see it's field draw about 0.5
amps. With the engine running, the standby alternator pumps out plenty of
amps which the EFIS nicely displays.
How should I connect the primary alternator? And what is it?
Thanks,
-- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."*
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: How to Wire My Alternator |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 6/4/2018 9:40 PM, Art Zemon wrote:
> I need help. I bought a used engine and it came with an alternator
> that has no labels that I can find. How do I hook it up?
>
> Engine: Lycoming IO-360-A1A
>
> Alternator: looks like this:
>
>
> Back of the alternator has three Faston tabs and what looks like a
> screw terminal next to them:
>
>
> I bought a B&C LR3C-14 voltage regulator and ran the field wire to one
> of the Faston tabs. I have confirmed that I do have voltage at the
> alternator end of the wire. However, with the engine off, my EFIS does
> not show any current draw when I turn on the primary alternator. When
> I run the engine, the primary alternator does not produce any current.
>
> I also have a B&C standby alternator with its B&C voltage regulator.
> That one works just fine. With the engine off, I see it's field draw
> about 0.5 amps. With the engine running, the standby alternator pumps
> out plenty of amps which the EFIS nicely displays.
>
> How should I connect the primary alternator? And what is it?
>
> Thanks,
> -- Art Z.
>
That *looks* like one of the early internally regulated alternators. If
I'm right, it needs to see 12V on the 'I' (or 'IG', for Ignition)
terminal to 'turn on'. I'm attaching a drawing (let me know if it
doesn't come through) of a similar alternator. the 3 pin shell is shaped
differently, but I believe that the pinout is the same. On the rather
primitive electrical system I had, the IG pin was simply jumped to the B
lead terminal. Not advising you to operate it that way, but you can test
for operation by doing that. If you jump from B lead to IG, start the
engine, and get ~14V out on the B lead, then you have an internally
regulated alternator.
Note that I might be wrong; be sure none of your avionics are connected
when you do this test....
Charlie
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Beebe <rick(at)beebe.org> |
| Subject: | Troubleshooting open squelch |
I have a GlaStar with a pretty simple panel. Standard 6-pack, a Garmin
300XL GPS/Comm, a Garmin GTX320 transponder and a Sigtronics 2 place
intercom.
Step one of a probably multi-year upgrade is to get rid of the vacuum
system and go a little glass. I spent the past month (very part-time)
pulling all the vacuum instruments and installing a Garmin G5 in place
of the AI. It took some work to find a quiet spot for the GMU11
magnetometer. The strobes were a big interferer and part of my
mitigation was to pull the old wiring and replace with new 3 conductor
shielded (I had previously replaced the Whelen strobes with Aveo LED units.
While I had the plane apart I also installed a uAvionix EchoUAT ADS-B
In/Out and a WAAS GPS receiver.
I finished the installation Saturday and yesterday I took the plane
outside to calibrate the remote compass on the compass rose. To my
surprise I'm getting constant static on the comm. I can hear other
calls...it just seems the squelch got disabled or is being overcome by
something.
I had made one change to the radio--I attached a single wire, RS-232
out, from it to the G5 for position data.
I spent several hours troubleshooting today. First, I pulled the fuses
on all the devices I added. No change. I disconnected the RS-232 wire.
No change. I did the testing with the plane in the hangar and everything
except the master and avionics switch off. I even tried pulling each
circuit breaker (the legacy equipment). Nothing effects it.
I went into the 300XL configuration mode and the first screen shows you
all the buttons and lets you verify the unit is detecting button
presses. The 300XL has a squelch on/off button but no other adjustments.
And it's always supposed to power on with squelch on.
At this point I'm completely baffled. Any ideas on other things to look
at? Thanks for your help.
--Rick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob noffs <icubob(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: gps and alternator. |
correct like charlie said.......fwf, on a shelf at top of firewall under
the top of cowl.
bob
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 9:04 PM, Alec Myers wrote:
>
> =9CI have a really easy place to mount my gps antennas under the co
wl=9C....
>
> My bad: I interpreted that as =9Con the bottom surface of the cowl
facing
> downwards=9D :/
> Which, to be fair, would work just fine for whole lot of other antennas..
.
>
> On Jun 4, 2018, at 21:41, Charlie England wrote:
>
> ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
>
> Alec,
>
> Are we on the same page? The proposal is not *under* the cowl. It's
> *inside* the cowl, on a shelf, mounted to the firewall just under the *to
p*
> of the cowl. Cable would go through the firewall, like other electrical
> stuff.
>
> Charlie
>
> > On 6/4/2018 7:09 PM, Alec Myers wrote:
>
> >
> > The PCB, traces, ground planes and assorted electronic components insid
e
> the antenna module package and under the antenna element sure aren
=99t
> transparent.
> > Is Bob planning to mount it with the cable entry at the bottom and rout
e
> the coax outside the cowl?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jun 4, 2018, at 10:14 AM, Ernest Christley
> wrote:
> >
> > A fiberglass cowling is practically transparent to GPS signals.
> >
> >
> > On Saturday, June 2, 2018 5:13 PM, Alec Myers
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > But a GPS antenna needs a good view of the sky. They=99re usually
mounted
> on top of the aircraft, not under it.
> >
> > On Jun 2, 2018, at 16:21, bob noffs wrote:
> >
> > thanks, good news ernest.
> > bob
> >
> > Virus-free. www.avast.com
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 2:08 PM, Ernest Christley
> wrote:
> > The frequency that GPS works at is so far above anything the alternator
> produces, I can't imagine them ever being able to cross talk.
> >
> >
> > On Saturday, June 2, 2018 8:56 AM, bobnoffs wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > hi all,
> > i have a really easy place to mount my gps antennas under the cowl but
> they would be within 4' of the alternator. will i be asking for trouble?
> > thanks,
> > bob noffs
> >
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: How to Wire My Alternator |
| From: | C&K <yellowduckduo(at)gmail.com> |
It also *looks* like it could even be one of the millions of old
externally regulated ND units so you might be able to confirm the field
coil connections with an ohmeter.
I have one here that brought out both sides of the field to the 3 pin
connector IIRC. Usually there is a data plate with a part number that
can be googled.
Regardless before or after getting it to work, I would consider taking
it apart to confirm good brushes and slip rings, and probably put in new
bearings before I'd fly it.
Ken
On 04/06/2018 11:27 PM, Charlie England wrote:
> On 6/4/2018 9:40 PM, Art Zemon wrote:
>> I need help. I bought a used engine and it came with an alternator
>> that has no labels that I can find. How do I hook it up?
>>
>> Engine: Lycoming IO-360-A1A
>>
>> Alternator: looks like this:
>>
>>
>> Back of the alternator has three Faston tabs and what looks like a
>> screw terminal next to them:
>>
>>
>> I bought a B&C LR3C-14 voltage regulator and ran the field wire to
>> one of the Faston tabs. I have confirmed that I do have voltage at
>> the alternator end of the wire. However, with the engine off, my EFIS
>> does not show any current draw when I turn on the primary alternator.
>> When I run the engine, the primary alternator does not produce any
>> current.
>>
>> I also have a B&C standby alternator with its B&C voltage regulator.
>> That one works just fine. With the engine off, I see it's field draw
>> about 0.5 amps. With the engine running, the standby alternator pumps
>> out plenty of amps which the EFIS nicely displays.
>>
>> How should I connect the primary alternator? And what is it?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -- Art Z.
>>
> That *looks* like one of the early internally regulated alternators.
> If I'm right, it needs to see 12V on the 'I' (or 'IG', for Ignition)
> terminal to 'turn on'. I'm attaching a drawing (let me know if it
> doesn't come through) of a similar alternator. the 3 pin shell is
> shaped differently, but I believe that the pinout is the same. On the
> rather primitive electrical system I had, the IG pin was simply jumped
> to the B lead terminal. Not advising you to operate it that way, but
> you can test for operation by doing that. If you jump from B lead to
> IG, start the engine, and get ~14V out on the B lead, then you have an
> internally regulated alternator.
>
> Note that I might be wrong; be sure none of your avionics are
> connected when you do this test....
>
> Charlie
>
>
>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
>
>
>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: How to Wire My Alternator |
Art:
That is a Automotive Alternator. Not an Automotive Alternator that is used
on a certified aircraft.
The give-away is two (2) things:
1 - The alternator has the plug-in socket which indicates it has a BUILT IN
voltage regulator (ACU).
2 - The fan blades are facing the wrong direction.
Side Note: The Tension Adjustment Bolt is not Safety-Wired.
Since you have easy access to the alternator PULL it and take it to an
Automotive Part Shop and have them test it.
My bet is it will work, but NOT with a second ACU (plane's), since it has
one built in.
Barry
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 10:40 PM, Art Zemon wrote:
> I need help. I bought a used engine and it came with an alternator that
> has no labels that I can find. How do I hook it up?
>
> Engine: Lycoming IO-360-A1A
>
> Alternator: looks like this:
>
>
> Back of the alternator has three Faston tabs and what looks like a screw
> terminal next to them:
>
> =8B
> I bought a B&C LR3C-14 voltage regulator and ran the field wire to one of
> the Faston tabs. I have confirmed that I do have voltage at the alternato
r
> end of the wire. However, with the engine off, my EFIS does not show any
> current draw when I turn on the primary alternator. When I run the engine
,
> the primary alternator does not produce any current.
>
> I also have a B&C standby alternator with its B&C voltage regulator. That
> one works just fine. With the engine off, I see it's field draw about 0.5
> amps. With the engine running, the standby alternator pumps out plenty of
> amps which the EFIS nicely displays.
>
> How should I connect the primary alternator? And what is it?
>
> Thanks,
> -- Art Z.
>
> --
> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>
> *"We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."*
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: How to Wire My Alternator |
At 09:40 PM 6/4/2018, you wrote:
>I need help. I bought a used engine and it came with an alternator
>that has no labels that I can find. How do I hook it up?
>
>Engine: Lycoming IO-360-A1A
>
>Alternator: looks like this:
>
>
>Back of the alternator has three Faston tabs and what looks like a
>screw terminal next to them:
>
>I bought a B&C LR3C-14 voltage regulator and ran the field wire to
>one of the Faston tabs. I have confirmed that I do have voltage at
>the alternator end of the wire. However, with the engine off, my
>EFIS does not show any current draw when I turn on the primary
>alternator. When I run the engine, the primary alternator does not
>produce any current.
>I also have a B&C standby alternator with its B&C voltage regulator.
>That one works just fine. With the engine off, I see it's field draw
>about 0.5 amps. With the engine running, the standby alternator
>pumps out plenty of amps which the EFIS nicely displays.
>
>How should I connect the primary alternator? And what is it?
Unless you have specific information that
speaks to a modification of this alternator,
it's prudent to assume that it's a stock,
internally regulated alternator. It would
NOT benefit from the addition of an LR3C
until it is modified to bypass the internal
regulator and bring the field leads out
for interface with the LR3C.
This is essentially what B&C does with
stock ND alternators to make them more
'aircraft friendly'.
You may choose to run the stock alternator . . .
indeed a large number of OBAM aircraft are
flying stock automotive machines. The
only risk, albeit a small one, is that
these alternators have an internal failure
mode that produces an uncontrollable
voltage runaway condition.
The foundation philosophy for the B&C and
PlanePower products adopts a legacy notion
developed in TC aviation over the past
century or so. (1) ALL energy sources in the
system are provide with positive, crew operable
controls. (2) no failure mode for control
of alternator output is allowed to run 'barefoot'.
An independent monitor/shutdown system
is supplied that ALSO has positive control
over field excitation of the alternator.
Stock automotive alternators do not have
such features . . . which prompts purveyors
of automotive alternators to make suitable
modifications.
You an modify the alternator you have to
accept the attentions of the LR3C.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | Re: How to Wire My Alternator |
Bob,
Thanks for the explanation. Since I have no idea the age of this alternator
or the condition of is brushes or bearings, I am just going to replace it.
I've built an all-electric panel. The last thing I want is an overvoltage
situation to zap a critical component of the EFIS.
Cheers,
-- Art Z.
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 10:30 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 09:40 PM 6/4/2018, you wrote:
>
> I need help. I bought a used engine and it came with an alternator that
> has no labels that I can find. How do I hook it up?
>
> Engine: Lycoming IO-360-A1A
>
> Alternator: looks like this:
>
>
> Back of the alternator has three Faston tabs and what looks like a screw
> terminal next to them:
>
> I bought a B&C LR3C-14 voltage regulator and ran the field wire to one of
> the Faston tabs. I have confirmed that I do have voltage at the alternator
> end of the wire. However, with the engine off, my EFIS does not show any
> current draw when I turn on the primary alternator. When I run the engine,
> the primary alternator does not produce any current.
>
>
> I also have a B&C standby alternator with its B&C voltage regulator. That
> one works just fine. With the engine off, I see it's field draw about 0.5
> amps. With the engine running, the standby alternator pumps out plenty of
> amps which the EFIS nicely displays.
>
> How should I connect the primary alternator? And what is it?
>
>
> Unless you have specific information that
> speaks to a modification of this alternator,
> it's prudent to assume that it's a stock,
> internally regulated alternator. It would
> NOT benefit from the addition of an LR3C
> until it is modified to bypass the internal
> regulator and bring the field leads out
> for interface with the LR3C.
>
> This is essentially what B&C does with
> stock ND alternators to make them more
> 'aircraft friendly'.
>
> You may choose to run the stock alternator . . .
> indeed a large number of OBAM aircraft are
> flying stock automotive machines. The
> only risk, albeit a small one, is that
> these alternators have an internal failure
> mode that produces an uncontrollable
> voltage runaway condition.
>
> The foundation philosophy for the B&C and
> PlanePower products adopts a legacy notion
> developed in TC aviation over the past
> century or so. (1) ALL energy sources in the
> system are provide with positive, crew operable
> controls. (2) no failure mode for control
> of alternator output is allowed to run 'barefoot'.
> An independent monitor/shutdown system
> is supplied that ALSO has positive control
> over field excitation of the alternator.
>
> Stock automotive alternators do not have
> such features . . . which prompts purveyors
> of automotive alternators to make suitable
> modifications.
>
> You an modify the alternator you have to
> accept the attentions of the LR3C.
>
> Bob . . .
>
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: How to Wire My Alternator |
At 11:21 AM 6/5/2018, you wrote:
>Bob,
>
>Thanks for the explanation. Since I have no idea the age of this
>alternator or the condition of is brushes or bearings, I am just
>going to replace it. I've built an all-electric panel. The last
>thing I want is an overvoltage situation to zap a critical component
>of the EFIS.
Understand and agree.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Library opportunity |
While researching another task, I stumbled across
a nicely written textbook on electronics that is
part of the Sabre/BookAid projects for the worldwide
sharing of information. Any technowienies out there
that would like to expand/brush-up their skills
in herding electrons are are invited to visit
https://goo.gl/414U8J
for a library of down-loadable documents from the
AeroElectric.Com
The book is "Practical Electronics Handbook 6th
Edition"
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: gps and alternator. |
| From: | "Dave Hurd" <dbhurd(at)att.net> |
First time responder, so please excuse my fat fingers.....
Put a mounting bracket high in the engine compartment of the Glasair just forward
of the firewall, as I had seen an RV-8A builder do with his GPS antenna - (fiberglass
cowling on the RV.)
Over 220 hours on the airplane including 3 IFR round trips from just east of Buffalo
to Central Florida. No problems with the WAAS at all. The autopilot (and
sometimes yours truly) can shoot LPV approaches right down to 200 or 250 foot
decision heights.
The only caveat is to be sure the paint that goes on the cowling has no metal in
it. Some really slick looking paints have tiny metal flakes that make them look
great, but I'm told can mess up reception if the GPS antenna is inside the
cowling.
Heat has not been a problem, and difficulty picking up satellites low on the horizon
has never been an issue. Just guessing here, but the "geometry" of such
sources would seem to be less useful to the receiver than a source higher in the
sky.
Also have an Aspen which has it's own GPS receiver. If I recall the installation
instructions for that unit, it indicated an internal location for the antenna
would be OK in a plastic airplane, but there would not be a source for outside
air temp, which it uses for TAS calculations. So I mounted it on the outside
top of the cabin, just aft of the doors.
Dave
[quote="bobnoffs"]correct like charlie said.......fwf, on a shelf at top of firewall
under
the top of cowl.
bob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480693#480693
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: gps and alternator. |
At 04:11 PM 6/5/2018, you wrote:
>
>First time responder, so please excuse my fat fingers.....
>
>Put a mounting bracket high in the engine compartment of the Glasair
>just forward of the firewall, as I had seen an RV-8A builder do with
>his GPS antenna - (fiberglass cowling on the RV.)
>
>Over 220 hours on the airplane including 3 IFR round trips from just
>east of Buffalo to Central Florida. No problems with the WAAS at
>all. The autopilot (and sometimes yours truly) can shoot LPV
>approaches right down to 200 or 250 foot decision heights.
>
>The only caveat is to be sure the paint that goes on the cowling has
>no metal in it. Some really slick looking paints have tiny metal
>flakes that make them look great, but I'm told can mess up reception
>if the GPS antenna is inside the cowling.
>
>Heat has not been a problem, and difficulty picking up satellites
>low on the horizon has never been an issue. Just guessing here, but
>the "geometry" of such sources would seem to be less useful to the
>receiver than a source higher in the sky.
>
>Also have an Aspen which has it's own GPS receiver. If I recall the
>installation instructions for that unit, it indicated an internal
>location for the antenna would be OK in a plastic airplane, but
>there would not be a source for outside air temp, which it uses for
>TAS calculations. So I mounted it on the outside top of the cabin,
>just aft of the doors.
>
>Dave
Dave,
Welcome to the List . . . and thank you for the
data dump. The best prophylactic against ol'
pilot's tales and hangar lore is demonstrable
experience! Thanks for sharing.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sebastien <cluros(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Rotax Charging System |
Hello aeroelectric list,
My friend has a Searey with a Rotax 914. He's currently AOG with a non
charging electrical system. I don't know the Rotax electrical system at all
but the battery is an Odyssey in apparently good shape. System voltage
reads between 11.8 and 11.6 with engine running depending on what loads are
turned on. Increasing engine RPM has no effect on voltage. That's all the
info we have right now.
Would someone who knows this system please get in touch to help diagnose
the problem and suggest a proper fix?
Thank you.
Sebastien
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
The most likely problem is the voltage regulator.
Read this thread, especially post number 6 by Mike Miller.
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t487
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480762#480762
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com> |
| Subject: | Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe Grounds |
I've always had various levels of alternator and strobe noise in my audio
system, and have never been able to track down and eliminate the problem.
Today I was flying lots of short hops in the warm weather, sweating more
than usual, and I noticed an interesting clue.
The noise got much louder when I touched the metal part of the push/pull
throttle control. So then I tried the mixture, and prop controls, same
thing. Then I tried the ceiling-mounted aluminum elevator trim wheel (which
doesn't connect to the engine, of course), same thing. Touching the screws
that hold the instrument panel in place, or the aluminum air vent in the
panel did not generate the noise.
I'm not really sure where the circuit path is in this case. The headset
only makes contact with me through insulators like the leather ear seal
covers and the furry pad at the top. My shoes have rubber soles, and seat
upholstery is the only other thing I'm in contact with.
Has anyone encountered this before, and figured out what was causing it? It
almost reminds me of being able to make noise by pointing my fingers near
the heated windshield of some old plane I flew once. Sort of a windshield
theremin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
Joe,
Regarding the link you posted on Van's, it ends with the following
statement:
"Installing a higher output (non Rotax) regulator may shift the next
failure to another component, maybe the alternator $tator coil$."
I don't understand how this could be. I thought that the output (low,
medium, high, etc) was determined by the dynamo, and that the
regulator-rectifier merely took what it was given and transformed it
(regulate) into what the 12v system needs. I further thought that adding a
regulator capable of handling higher output would simply mean that the
regulator would be stressed more lightly. Do you agree with the poster's
statement? I am interested because I replaced the "Rotax regulator"
(actually Ducati) with the Silent Hektik.
Ken
On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 6:11 PM user9253 wrote:
>
> The most likely problem is the voltage regulator.
> Read this thread, especially post number 6 by Mike Miller.
> http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t487
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480762#480762
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
At 09:54 AM 6/10/2018, you wrote:
>Joe,
>
>Regarding the link you posted on Van's, it ends with the following statement:
>
>"Installing a higher output (non Rotax) regulator may shift the next
>failure to another component, maybe the alternator $tator coil$."
>
>I don't understand how this could be. I thought that the output
>(low, medium, high, etc) was determined by the dynamo, and that the
>regulator-rectifier merely took what it was given and transformed it
>(regulate) into what the 12v system needs. I further thought that
>adding a regulator capable of handling higher output would simply
>mean that the regulator would be stressed more lightly. Do you agree
>with the poster's statement? I am interested because I replaced the
>"Rotax regulator" (actually Ducati) with the Silent Hektik.
>
>Ken
It kind of depends on the cause for original failure.
The PM/RR power systems are not as gently current
limited as their wound-field cousins on cars. Further,
the PM alternators are not as easily cooled . . . they
tend to be tightly enclosed with respect to air movement.
The Rectifier/Regulator products) for which I'm privy
to schematics) do not include electronically derived
current limiting.
Given these two conditions, both the alternator
and rectifier regulator are subject to the effects
of over heat brought on by sustained overloading.
Overloaded operations can be realized by any
combination of system loads and battery
recharging loads. Assuming that the designer
has not inadvertently expected too much from
the alternator to run electrowhizzies, then
battery recharge demands from a badly dischared
battery might just stack on top of each other
for an interval long enough to smoke something.
The Ducatti rectifier-regulator supplied with
Rotax 9xx engines has been notoriously weak in
the knees. There have been numerous rectifier-
regulators with more robust designs, Silent
Hektik being a noteworthy example.
The statement in question has some validity
in that a builder that has suffered multiple
Ductatti failures may indeed suffer alternator
failures after upgrading the rectifier-regulator.
This is because failures due to persistent overloading
will open the weakest link in the chain . . . in
the original case, a Ducatti R-R. Beef up that
link and a different link may become vulnerable.
The prophylactic against such failures is
crew implementation of current limiting with
the aid of an alternator loadmeter.
Emacs!
I've got a couple dozen of these instruments left over
from the AEC9007 days. These can be paired with an appropriate
shunt to show read time loads on the PM/RR system.
Emacs!
Sort term operations at or above 100 percent would
be okay, like to recharge a battery that has started
the engine and then supported electrowhizzies out to
the departure runway.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Ken,
While I have great respect for Mike M. and admire his knowledge, I do disagree
with that ending statement. Heat caused by high current can damage alternator
windings. But the total current is determined by the load, not by the regulator.
I do not think that the Silent Hektik regulator will stress the alternator
any more than the Ducati regulator.
Two years ago I replaced the Ducati regulator in my RV-12 with a cheap John Deere
regulator from eBay. I made an adapter plate using 1/8" aluminum because
the mounting holes did not line up. I used heat conductive grease on both sides
of the mounting plate. A thermocouple attached to the John Deere regulator
measured a maximum temperature of 157 degrees Fahrenheit on a 90+ degree day.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480768#480768
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
>
> Sort term operations at or above 100 percent would
> be okay, like to recharge a battery that has started
> the engine and then supported electrowhizzies out to
> the departure runway.
I was remiss in the omission of a second
prophylactic which is load analysis confirmed
by experience which shows the PM/RR system is not
going to be overtaxed by predicted, normal
operations. If you have verified that normal
ops loads are within system ratings, then
failures can be assumed to be caused by
abnormal conditions like lack of regulator
robustness, attempting to recharge a really
depleted battery during flight ops, shorted
cell in battery, etc.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe |
Grounds
At 09:21 PM 6/9/2018, you wrote:
>I've always had various levels of alternator and
>strobe noise in my audio system, and have never
>been able to track down and eliminate the
>problem. Today I was flying lots of short hops
>in the warm weather, sweating more than usual,
>and I noticed an interesting clue.
>
>The noise got much louder when I touched the
>metal part of the push/pull throttle control. So
>then I tried the mixture, and prop controls,
>same thing. Then I tried the ceiling-mounted
>aluminum elevator trim wheel (which doesn't
>connect to the engine, of course), same thing.
>Touching the screws that hold the instrument
>panel in place, or the aluminum air vent in the
>panel did not generate the noise.=C2
>
>I'm not really sure where the circuit path is in
>this case. The headset only makes contact with
>me through insulators like the leather ear seal
>covers and the furry pad at the top. My shoes
>have rubber soles, and seat upholstery is the
>only other thing I'm in contact with.
>
>Has anyone encountered this before, and figured
>out what was causing it? It almost reminds me of
>being able to make noise by pointing my fingers
>near the heated windshield of some old plane I
>flew once. Sort of a windshield theremin
Have you run the traps on seeking to discover
at what point noise is entering the system?
What volume controls or switches have an
effect on the noise you hear? What does
your audio system look like? Stereo phones?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sebastien <cluros(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
Joe, do you have a part number for the John Deere regulator that will
replace the Ducati?
Thank you
On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 9:03 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> Ken,
> While I have great respect for Mike M. and admire his knowledge, I do
> disagree with that ending statement. Heat caused by high current can
> damage alternator windings. But the total current is determined by the
> load, not by the regulator. I do not think that the Silent Hektik
> regulator will stress the alternator any more than the Ducati regulator.
> Two years ago I replaced the Ducati regulator in my RV-12 with a cheap
> John Deere regulator from eBay. I made an adapter plate using 1/8"
> aluminum because the mounting holes did not line up. I used heat
> conductive grease on both sides of the mounting plate. A thermocouple
> attached to the John Deere regulator measured a maximum temperature of 157
> degrees Fahrenheit on a 90+ degree day.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480768#480768
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sebastien <cluros(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
Just looking at the Silent Hektik website and it seems to say that it
regulates between 13 and 14.2 V. Wouldn't this be totally inappropriate
(way too low) for lead acid and especially AGM batteries? Or can it be set
anywhere from 13 to 14.2? 14.2 still wouldn't be ideal for Odyssey but it
is within their specs.
On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 09:54 AM 6/10/2018, you wrote:
>
> Joe,
>
> Regarding the link you posted on Van's, it ends with the following
> statement:
>
> *"Installing a higher output (non Rotax) regulator may shift the next
> failure to another component, maybe the alternator $tator coil$."*
>
> I don't understand how this could be. I thought that the output (low,
> medium, high, etc) was determined by the dynamo, and that the
> regulator-rectifier merely took what it was given and transformed it
> (regulate) into what the 12v system needs. I further thought that adding a
> regulator capable of handling higher output would simply mean that the
> regulator would be stressed more lightly. Do you agree with the poster's
> statement? I am interested because I replaced the "Rotax regulator"
> (actually Ducati) with the Silent Hektik.
>
> Ken
>
>
> It kind of depends on the cause for original failure.
> The PM/RR power systems are not as gently current
> limited as their wound-field cousins on cars. Further,
> the PM alternators are not as easily cooled . . . they
> tend to be tightly enclosed with respect to air movement.
>
> The Rectifier/Regulator products) for which I'm privy
> to schematics) do not include electronically derived
> current limiting.
>
> Given these two conditions, both the alternator
> and rectifier regulator are subject to the effects
> of over heat brought on by sustained overloading.
>
> Overloaded operations can be realized by any
> combination of system loads and battery
> recharging loads. Assuming that the designer
> has not inadvertently expected too much from
> the alternator to run electrowhizzies, then
> battery recharge demands from a badly dischared
> battery might just stack on top of each other
> for an interval long enough to smoke something.
>
> The Ducatti rectifier-regulator supplied with
> Rotax 9xx engines has been notoriously weak in
> the knees. There have been numerous rectifier-
> regulators with more robust designs, Silent
> Hektik being a noteworthy example.
>
> The statement in question has some validity
> in that a builder that has suffered multiple
> Ductatti failures may indeed suffer alternator
> failures after upgrading the rectifier-regulator.
>
> This is because failures due to persistent overloading
> will open the weakest link in the chain . . . in
> the original case, a Ducatti R-R. Beef up that
> link and a different link may become vulnerable.
>
> The prophylactic against such failures is
> crew implementation of current limiting with
> the aid of an alternator loadmeter.
>
>
> [image: Emacs!]
>
> I've got a couple dozen of these instruments left over
> from the AEC9007 days. These can be paired with an appropriate
> shunt to show read time loads on the PM/RR system.
>
>
> [image: Emacs!]
>
> Sort term operations at or above 100 percent would
> be okay, like to recharge a battery that has started
> the engine and then supported electrowhizzies out to
> the departure runway.
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
Thx Bob and Joe.
On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 9:35 AM Sebastien wrote:
> Joe, do you have a part number for the John Deere regulator that will
> replace the Ducati?
>
> Thank you
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 9:03 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
>>
>> Ken,
>> While I have great respect for Mike M. and admire his knowledge, I do
>> disagree with that ending statement. Heat caused by high current can
>> damage alternator windings. But the total current is determined by the
>> load, not by the regulator. I do not think that the Silent Hektik
>> regulator will stress the alternator any more than the Ducati regulator.
>> Two years ago I replaced the Ducati regulator in my RV-12 with a cheap
>> John Deere regulator from eBay. I made an adapter plate using 1/8"
>> aluminum because the mounting holes did not line up. I used heat
>> conductive grease on both sides of the mounting plate. A thermocouple
>> attached to the John Deere regulator measured a maximum temperature of 157
>> degrees Fahrenheit on a 90+ degree day.
>>
>> --------
>> Joe Gores
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480768#480768
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ===================================
>> -
>> 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: | Sebastien <cluros(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
If it's the easy failure then great but I really don't know how to tell the
difference between a gen failure and a regulator failure. My regulator is
$12 so I keep a spare and would just swap that out. I guess your first line
of attack should be as you said: inspect all the wiring you can find for an
obvious break / bad ground / short / loose connector / unplugged wire. Give
each PIDG connector a strong pull to see if it comes apart. You should be
able to hold the connector in one hand and pull the other wire pretty much
as hard as you can (it should support a 50 pound pull no problem).
On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Ken Ryan wrote:
> Thx Bob and Joe.
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 9:35 AM Sebastien wrote:
>
>> Joe, do you have a part number for the John Deere regulator that will
>> replace the Ducati?
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 9:03 AM, user9253 wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Ken,
>>> While I have great respect for Mike M. and admire his knowledge, I do
>>> disagree with that ending statement. Heat caused by high current can
>>> damage alternator windings. But the total current is determined by the
>>> load, not by the regulator. I do not think that the Silent Hektik
>>> regulator will stress the alternator any more than the Ducati regulator.
>>> Two years ago I replaced the Ducati regulator in my RV-12 with a cheap
>>> John Deere regulator from eBay. I made an adapter plate using 1/8"
>>> aluminum because the mounting holes did not line up. I used heat
>>> conductive grease on both sides of the mounting plate. A thermocouple
>>> attached to the John Deere regulator measured a maximum temperature of 157
>>> degrees Fahrenheit on a 90+ degree day.
>>>
>>> --------
>>> Joe Gores
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480768#480768
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> -
>>> 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: | Sebastien <cluros(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
Whoops, sorry all, wrong address for the last email.
On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Sebastien wrote:
> If it's the easy failure then great but I really don't know how to tell
> the difference between a gen failure and a regulator failure. My regulator
> is $12 so I keep a spare and would just swap that out. I guess your first
> line of attack should be as you said: inspect all the wiring you can find
> for an obvious break / bad ground / short / loose connector / unplugged
> wire. Give each PIDG connector a strong pull to see if it comes apart. You
> should be able to hold the connector in one hand and pull the other wire
> pretty much as hard as you can (it should support a 50 pound pull no
> problem).
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Ken Ryan wrote:
>
>> Thx Bob and Joe.
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 9:35 AM Sebastien wrote:
>>
>>> Joe, do you have a part number for the John Deere regulator that will
>>> replace the Ducati?
>>>
>>> Thank you
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 9:03 AM, user9253 wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ken,
>>>> While I have great respect for Mike M. and admire his knowledge, I do
>>>> disagree with that ending statement. Heat caused by high current can
>>>> damage alternator windings. But the total current is determined by the
>>>> load, not by the regulator. I do not think that the Silent Hektik
>>>> regulator will stress the alternator any more than the Ducati regulator.
>>>> Two years ago I replaced the Ducati regulator in my RV-12 with a
>>>> cheap John Deere regulator from eBay. I made an adapter plate using 1/8"
>>>> aluminum because the mounting holes did not line up. I used heat
>>>> conductive grease on both sides of the mounting plate. A thermocouple
>>>> attached to the John Deere regulator measured a maximum temperature of 157
>>>> degrees Fahrenheit on a 90+ degree day.
>>>>
>>>> --------
>>>> Joe Gores
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480768#480768
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>> -
>>>> Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.mat
>>>> ronics.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: Rotax Charging System |
At 01:01 PM 6/10/2018, you wrote:
>Whoops, sorry all, wrong address for the last email.
>
>On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Sebastien
><cluros(at)gmail.com> wrote:
>If it's the easy failure then great but I really don't know how to
>tell the difference between a gen failure and a regulator failure.
>My regulator is $12 so I keep a spare and would just swap that out.
>I guess your first line of attack should be as you said: inspect all
>the wiring you can find for an obvious break / bad ground / short /
>loose connector / unplugged wire. Give each PIDG connector a strong
>pull to see if it comes apart. You should be able to hold the
>connector in one hand and pull the other wire pretty much as hard as
>you can (it should support a 50 pound pull no problem).
the fist like of attack in any failure resolution
is to make measurements. In the case of PM alternator
rectifier-regulator systems, we know that the output
of the alternator is an AC voltage that is proportional
to engine RPM. We also know that the device is electrically
simple . . . an array of windings of wire on a stator.
No brushes.
So to start with, get out an ohmmeter and look
at the resistance of the windings. Make a measurement
between the two or three wires that come out of the
device. The readings will be quite low . . . under
one ohm. His is where a low resistance ohmmeter
described in the 'Connection and discussed on
these pages would be handy.
The resistance between any two wires of a three
phase alternator should be nearly identical.
Variations between pairs suggests shorted turns
on the stator windings. If the alternator is
a single phase, then the ohmmeter test only
tells you that there is continuity . . . shorted
turns would be revealed only by knowing what
the resistance of the new, undamaged coil.
Then measure from the windings to engine
crankcase. This reading should always be
'infinite' . . . meaning that it's too high
for your instrument to measure. Usually
in excess of 20,000,000 ohms.
You could make an AC measurement of voltage at
the output wires with the engine running.
Idle RPM is fine. Knowing what the voltage is
for a new, known good alternator is a handy
thing to know.
Assuming all the above produces no hint
of a fault, then the only thing left is the
rectifier-regulator. We know that the Ducatti
product is not robust. For a solid state
device not to operate for the lifetime of the
airplane is a pretty rare condition in the
automotive world. The thing has a poor demonstrated
track record in aviation . . . no doubt similarly
poor in the motorcycle world from which I think
it hails.
There are dozens of PMA/RR systems on various
sport and utility vehicles where the RR is
no doubt beefier than the Rotax Ducatti offering.
You are at little risk for trying one of them . . .
A John Deere product has been mentioned. I think
it's similar to the device favored by the Corvair
conversions crowd . . . there's a 30A PMA/RR
system they favor.
The most common problem with the constellation
of off the shelf RR products is lack of adjustability
for regulation set point. Listers have complained
about the less than ideal charging voltage offered
by various 'bricks' with no adjusting screws.
The core principals for evaluating normal
performance and/or trouble shooting are MEASUREMENTS.
Lord Kelvin once opined: "I often say that when you can
measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers,
you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it,
when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of
a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of
knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced
to the stage of science, whatever the matter may be."
Having the tools with which to explore 'the numbers'
in a system that functions well are keys to discovering
how to make it work better . . . or to repair the
thing when it quits. As the honorable Lord Kelvin
suggests, the numbers are foundations for understanding
how things work.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sebastien <cluros(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
Thank you for the reply Bob. I thought that the normal Rotax system was a
generator, not an alternator. Is this correct?
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 1:53 AM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 01:01 PM 6/10/2018, you wrote:
>
> Whoops, sorry all, wrong address for the last email.
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Sebastien wrote:
>
> If it's the easy failure then great but I really don't know how to tell
> the difference between a gen failure and a regulator failure. My regulator
> is $12 so I keep a spare and would just swap that out. I guess your first
> line of attack should be as you said: inspect all the wiring you can find
> for an obvious break / bad ground / short / loose connector / unplugged
> wire. Give each PIDG connector a strong pull to see if it comes apart. You
> should be able to hold the connector in one hand and pull the other wire
> pretty much as hard as you can (it should support a 50 pound pull no
> problem).
> the fist like of attack in any failure resolution
> is to make measurements. In the case of PM alternator
> rectifier-regulator systems, we know that the output
> of the alternator is an AC voltage that is proportional
> to engine RPM. We also know that the device is electrically
> simple . . . an array of windings of wire on a stator.
> No brushes.
>
> So to start with, get out an ohmmeter and look
> at the resistance of the windings. Make a measurement
> between the two or three wires that come out of the
> device. The readings will be quite low . . . under
> one ohm. His is where a low resistance ohmmeter
> described in the 'Connection and discussed on
> these pages would be handy.
>
> The resistance between any two wires of a three
> phase alternator should be nearly identical.
> Variations between pairs suggests shorted turns
> on the stator windings. If the alternator is
> a single phase, then the ohmmeter test only
> tells you that there is continuity . . . shorted
> turns would be revealed only by knowing what
> the resistance of the new, undamaged coil.
>
> Then measure from the windings to engine
> crankcase. This reading should always be
> 'infinite' . . . meaning that it's too high
> for your instrument to measure. Usually
> in excess of 20,000,000 ohms.
>
> You could make an AC measurement of voltage at
> the output wires with the engine running.
> Idle RPM is fine. Knowing what the voltage is
> for a new, known good alternator is a handy
> thing to know.
>
> Assuming all the above produces no hint
> of a fault, then the only thing left is the
> rectifier-regulator. We know that the Ducatti
> product is not robust. For a solid state
> device not to operate for the lifetime of the
> airplane is a pretty rare condition in the
> automotive world. The thing has a poor demonstrated
> track record in aviation . . . no doubt similarly
> poor in the motorcycle world from which I think
> it hails.
>
> There are dozens of PMA/RR systems on various
> sport and utility vehicles where the RR is
> no doubt beefier than the Rotax Ducatti offering.
> You are at little risk for trying one of them . . .
> A John Deere product has been mentioned. I think
> it's similar to the device favored by the Corvair
> conversions crowd . . . there's a 30A PMA/RR
> system they favor.
>
> The most common problem with the constellation
> of off the shelf RR products is lack of adjustability
> for regulation set point. Listers have complained
> about the less than ideal charging voltage offered
> by various 'bricks' with no adjusting screws.
>
> The core principals for evaluating normal
> performance and/or trouble shooting are MEASUREMENTS.
>
> Lord Kelvin once opined: "
>
>
> *I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and
> express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot
> measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of
> a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge,
> but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the stage of
> science, whatever the matter may be."*
>
> Having the tools with which to explore 'the numbers'
> in a system that functions well are keys to discovering
> how to make it work better . . . or to repair the
> thing when it quits. As the honorable Lord Kelvin
> suggests, the numbers are foundations for understanding
> how things work.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
It seems that generator, alternator, and dynamo have all been used interchangeably.
I prefer to use dynamo. Rotax literature calls it a generator. Many Americans
call it an alternator. The important thing is to understand how it works.
Permanent magnets attached to a spinning engine flywheel move past stationary
coils of wire resulting in induced alternating current.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480790#480790
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sebastien <cluros(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
Oh, well that explains a lot. I thought it was a "generator" with brushes
making DC current.
Thank you Joe. Any luck on a part number or a way to determine an
appropriate John Deere regulator?
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 8:24 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> It seems that generator, alternator, and dynamo have all been used
> interchangeably. I prefer to use dynamo. Rotax literature calls it a
> generator. Many Americans call it an alternator. The important thing is
> to understand how it works. Permanent magnets attached to a spinning
> engine flywheel move past stationary coils of wire resulting in induced
> alternating current.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480790#480790
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
At 11:21 AM 6/11/2018, you wrote:
>Oh, well that explains a lot. I thought it was a "generator" with
>brushes making DC current.
The only place brushed generators are used these
days is on turbine engines where the motor that
starts the engine becomes a generator when the
engine is running.
If it's a piston engine, the power source will
be some form of alternator. When the alternator
is built into the engine, it will generally be
a Permanent Magnet device. On the 912/914 Rotax
engines . . .
Emacs!
A stator assembly (9) carries the power generation
windings along with special coils that power dual
ignition system. These windings are 'charged' by
magnets in a flywheel hub (18) on the crankshaft.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
A DC Generator uses SLIP-RINGS.
A AC Generator uses a COMMUTATOR.
BRUSHES are used on both applications.
A ALTERNATOR develops AC and then it is RECTIFIED to DC using Diodes.
Why? Because it is more efficient and cost wise more practical to create
AC an rectify it to DC.
There are way too many definitions of a DYNOMOTOR.
Some were mechanically driven.
Some were electrically driven.
Some were driven at 400 Hz with a DC output.
Some used a Mechanical Multi-vibrator to produce AC to drive it and then it
had a DC output via Slip-Rings.
Today the term has changed to include DYNAMETER aka DYNO which are used to
determine Horse Power.
Barry
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Sebastien wrote:
> Oh, well that explains a lot. I thought it was a "generator" with brushes
> making DC current.
>
> Thank you Joe. Any luck on a part number or a way to determine an
> appropriate John Deere regulator?
>
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 8:24 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
>>
>> It seems that generator, alternator, and dynamo have all been used
>> interchangeably. I prefer to use dynamo. Rotax literature calls it a
>> generator. Many Americans call it an alternator. The important thing is
>> to understand how it works. Permanent magnets attached to a spinning
>> engine flywheel move past stationary coils of wire resulting in induced
>> alternating current.
>>
>> --------
>> Joe Gores
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480790#480790
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ===================================
>> -
>> 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
>> ===================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Search eBay for AM101406 or MIA881279
Chances are that the $20 ones are the same as the more expensive ones.
Note that the terminals are arraigned in a different order than the Ducati. The
mounting holes are also spaced differently. Be sure to use heat conductive
grease on the mounting base to carry heat away.
> Any luck on a part number or a way to determine an appropriate John Deere regulator?
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480794#480794
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sebastien <cluros(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
Thank you Joe and thank you all. I think we now have a good plan for
tackling this problem.
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 11:15 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> Search eBay for AM101406 or MIA881279
> Chances are that the $20 ones are the same as the more expensive ones.
> Note that the terminals are arraigned in a different order than the
> Ducati. The mounting holes are also spaced differently. Be sure to use
> heat conductive grease on the mounting base to carry heat away.
>
> > Any luck on a part number or a way to determine an appropriate John
> Deere regulator?
>
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480794#480794
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
When talking about automotive or aviation devices, it is the AC generator (alternator)
that uses slip rings and a DC generator that uses a commutator. The AC
generator creates DC with diodes. A DC
generator creates DC using the commutator to feed the same polarity to the output
as the rotor rotates.
Dick Tasker
FLYaDIVE wrote:
> A DC Generator uses SLIP-RINGS.
> A AC Generator uses a COMMUTATOR.
> BRUSHES are used on both applications.
> A ALTERNATOR develops AC and then it is RECTIFIED to DC using Diodes.
> Why? Because it is more efficient and cost wise more practical to create AC an
rectify it to DC.
> There are way too many definitions of a DYNOMOTOR.
> Some were mechanically driven.
> Some were electrically driven.
> Some were driven at 400 Hz with a DC output.
> Some used a Mechanical Multi-vibrator to produce AC to drive it and then it had
a DC output via Slip-Rings.
> Today the term has changed to include DYNAMETER aka DYNO which are used to determine
Horse Power.
>
> Barry
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Sebastien > wrote:
>
> Oh, well that explains a lot. I thought it was a "generator" with brushes
making DC current.
>
> Thank you Joe. Any luck on a part number or a way to determine an appropriate
John Deere regulator?
>
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 8:24 AM, user9253 > wrote:
>
>
> It seems that generator, alternator, and dynamo have all been used interchangeably.
I prefer to use dynamo. Rotax literature calls it a generator.
Many Americans call it an alternator.
> The important thing is to understand how it works. Permanent magnets
attached to a spinning engine flywheel move past stationary coils of wire resulting
in induced alternating current.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480790#480790
>
>
> ==========
> -
> 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: | Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe Grounds |
Thanks for your help Bob. It's a 4-place airplane with stereo panel-powered
Lemo jacks, parallel two-plug jacks (all isolated from the airframe) and a
PS Engineering PAR100EX audio panel/intercom. In the past I've played with
the volume controls but didn't think to try it out on this most recent
flight. In the past, the noise was reduced when I turned down the intercom
volume level, or the local headset level on the Bose X.
On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 12:36 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 09:21 PM 6/9/2018, you wrote:
>
> I've always had various levels of alternator and strobe noise in my audio
> system, and have never been able to track down and eliminate the problem.
> Today I was flying lots of short hops in the warm weather, sweating more
> than usual, and I noticed an interesting clue.
>
> The noise got much louder when I touched the metal part of the push/pull
> throttle control. So then I tried the mixture, and prop controls, same
> thing. Then I tried the ceiling-mounted aluminum elevator trim wheel (whi
ch
> doesn't connect to the engine, of course), same thing. Touching the screw
s
> that hold the instrument panel in place, or the aluminum air vent in the
> panel did not generate the noise.=C3=82
>
> I'm not really sure where the circuit path is in this case. The headset
> only makes contact with me through insulators like the leather ear seal
> covers and the furry pad at the top. My shoes have rubber soles, and seat
> upholstery is the only other thing I'm in contact with.
>
> Has anyone encountered this before, and figured out what was causing it?
> It almost reminds me of being able to make noise by pointing my fingers
> near the heated windshield of some old plane I flew once. Sort of a
> windshield theremin
>
>
> Have you run the traps on seeking to discover
> at what point noise is entering the system?
> What volume controls or switches have an
> effect on the noise you hear? What does
> your audio system look like? Stereo phones?
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Question on Z-14 System |
| From: | "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com> |
I am planning on the Z-14 system in my RV-10. I have dual alternators, dual batteries,
electronic ignition, and electronic fuel injection (Dual EFII System).
Looking at the schematic, it appears that ECU 1 / Fuel Pump 1 would be on the main
battery bus and ECU 2 / Fuel Pump 2 would be on the aux battery bus.
This arrangement means power is always available to those items, even when the
battery masters are OFF.
I am planning on fuel pump ON/OFF switches and could also switch the individual
ECU power lines.
Anyone (maybe Bob?) care to weigh in on this arrangement?
Thanks!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480820#480820
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe Grounds |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Reposted from a few years ago, but this might help.
EDN of 23NOV1995 had an article entitled: "Assume nothing. Test everything." which
was a small guide to troubleshooting philosophy (although aimed more at computers
and high falutin designs but applicable to life in general).
He (Jack Ganssle) taught some critical elements of troubleshooting that have helped
me over the years. Allow me to share some of them them with you:
1) EVERYTHING YOU KNOW IS WRONG. I.e. Assume nothing. Is it really connected like
you think? Are your measuring instrument working? Etc. To facilitate this process-->
2) Keep a notebook of what you are doing, what you suspect, random suspicions,
sketches, details, notes for later improvements, hard-to-read numbers, EVERYTHING.
When you review your notebook the next day, important clues will often jump
out.
3) Start with an organized workbench with all tools at the ready. What are you
going to need to test assumptions?
4) Ask for help. Don't be shy! Anybody can help by listening to your explanation...where
the obvious might jump out.... Asking experts is how you'll learn, even
if they don't have the answer.
5) Use the Internet. Hardly a day goes by without someone asking me a question
and I reply (or would like to reply) "Let me Google that for you".
Google has developed the ability to understand plain language questions. The value
of searching the 'net cannot be overstated. And it will only get better.
6) Remember, most problems have simple answers. Think "Connectors" not Integrated
Circuits. Think "Horses" not Zebras.
We can all add tips to this list.
I ould also add my paper on Dabbling with Electricity.
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480821#480821
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dabbling_with_electricity_a_135.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Reed <robertr237(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Question on Z-14 System |
I am using the same configuration with each of the two power buses on guard
ed switches and powering only the ECI and Fuel Pumps.=C2- My original con
figuration was using the FADEC system but have replaced with the Dual FlyEf
ii system.
Bob Reed
From: Rocketman1988 <Rocketman(at)etczone.com>
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 11:05 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Question on Z-14 System
.com>
I am planning on the Z-14 system in my RV-10.=C2- I have dual alternators
, dual batteries, electronic ignition, and electronic fuel injection (Dual
EFII System).
Looking at the schematic, it appears that ECU 1 / Fuel Pump 1 would be on t
he main battery bus and ECU 2 / Fuel Pump 2 would be on the aux battery bus
.
This arrangement means power is always available to those items, even when
the battery masters are OFF.
I am planning on fuel pump ON/OFF switches and could also switch the indivi
dual ECU power lines.=C2-
Anyone (maybe Bob?) care to weigh in on this arrangement?
Thanks!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480820#480820
-
S -
WIKI -
-
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Question on Z-14 System |
At 11:04 AM 6/12/2018, you wrote:
>
>
>I am planning on the Z-14 system in my RV-10. I have dual
>alternators, dual batteries, electronic ignition, and electronic
>fuel injection (Dual EFII System).
>
>Looking at the schematic, it appears that ECU 1 / Fuel Pump 1 would
>be on the main battery bus and ECU 2 / Fuel Pump 2 would be on the
>aux battery bus.
>
>This arrangement means power is always available to those items,
>even when the battery masters are OFF.
>
>I am planning on fuel pump ON/OFF switches and could also switch the
>individual ECU power lines.
>
>Anyone (maybe Bob?) care to weigh in on this arrangement?
That's the idea. Electrically dependent engine
accessories driven from battery busses are avaiable
even when the electrical system(s) are shut down . . .
as in case of smoke in the cockpit. The only
operational concerns to explore are potential
difficulties if BOTH primary and secondary
accessories are energized at the same time.
Had a Z-14 builder some years back with dual
ECU's sthat would argue with each other if
energized at the same time. We arranged for a
little lockout mechanism that prevented a
BOTH on at the same time. There was no hazard
for having other dual accessories energized
at the same time.
We machined the lock out of a piece of 1/2"
aluminum. It mounted between the two ECU
switches on a single screw.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe |
Grounds
At 08:44 PM 6/11/2018, you wrote:
>Thanks for your help Bob. It's a 4-place airplane with stereo
>panel-powered Lemo jacks, parallel two-plug jacks (all isolated from
>the airframe) and a PS Engineering PAR100EX audio panel/intercom. In
>the past I've played with the volume controls but didn't think to
>try it out on this most recent flight. In the past, the noise was
>reduced when I turned down the intercom volume level, or the local
>headset level on the Bose X.
Okay, the fact that intercom volume has
an effect suggests that the noise is getting
in upstream of the intercom. The "touch
sensitivity" is suggestive of a possible
poor or even floating ground in the
upstream wiring.
Downloaded the manual . . . do you have
the remotely controlled comm transceiver?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe Grounds |
Yes, and also a gns430w and skyview system.
On June 12, 2018 15:39:16 "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
wrote:
> At 08:44 PM 6/11/2018, you wrote:
>
>> Thanks for your help Bob. It's a
>> 4-place airplane with stereo panel-powered Lemo jacks, parallel two-plug
>> jacks (all isolated from the airframe) and a PS Engineering PAR100EX
>> audio panel/intercom. In the past I've played with the volume controls
>> but didn't think to try it out on this most recent flight. In the past,
>> the noise was reduced when I turned down the intercom volume level, or
>> the local headset level on the Bose X.
>
>
> Okay, the fact that intercom volume has
> an effect suggests that the noise is getting
> in upstream of the intercom. The "touch
> sensitivity" is suggestive of a possible
> poor or even floating ground in the
> upstream wiring.
>
> Downloaded the manual . . . do you have
> the remotely controlled comm transceiver?
>
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Ducati Regulator (too little load) |
There is a respected member of a popular Rotax list asserting that the
Ducati regulator can be harmed by too little load. I don't believe this to
be true, and it interests me directly because my wiring architecture has
the regulator, under normal conditions, supplying only my primary fuel pump
(it can be tied to the main bus if necessary). To those of you familiar
with the Ducati regulator, is there any truth in the assertion that a light
load is bad for it?
Ken Ryan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe |
Grounds
At 03:01 PM 6/12/2018, you wrote:
>Yes, and also a gns430w and skyview system.
Just for grins . . . try unplugging the
data cable between the intercom/controll
panel and the remote transceiver . . . and
see if the noise is affected.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe |
Grounds
At 03:01 PM 6/12/2018, you wrote:
>Yes, and also a gns430w and skyview system.
Just for grins . . . try unplugging the
data cable between the intercom/controll
panel and the remote transceiver . . . and
see if the noise is affected.
Oh yeah, are you sure it's alternator whine . . .
pitch rises and falls with engine rpm?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sebastien <cluros(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Sequence for bringing alternators on line. |
I am writing checklists for a new homebuilt I will be doing the flight
testing on. Aircraft has a 40A main alternator and an SD-8 backup
alternator. The alternator switch allows either the main or backup
alternator to be on and also has an off position. I'm thinking of leaving
the switch on the main alternator all the time, except for a test of the
SD-8 during the runup. Does anyone see a problem with this plan or should I
wait until the load on the electrical system has come down to a certain
point before switching to the SD-8? As far as I know the SD-8 will put out
whatever it can and any load in excess will simply come from the battery.
Is it reasonable to test the SD-8 every flight or is this something that
can be done on a monthly or quarterly basis? Also I have run into a couple
pilots recently who start their engines with the alternator off in order to
"prevent damage to the alternator during start". I can't remember any
mention of this in the AEC. Is there any basis for this? Should I turn the
alternator off before shutdown and then on after startup?
I have attached the main electrical system diagram for the aircraft in
question.
Thank you,
Sebastien
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ducati Regulator (too little load) |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
I am on your side Ken. Roger should should reference the schematic and the laws
of physics to explain why too little of a load can damage the rectifier/regulator.
The greater the current, the greater the heat. A small load will result
in less heat.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480834#480834
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ducati Regulator (too little load) |
Some regulators "regulate" by dumping the excess power generated by the gen
erator.=C2- They dump the power by shorting it to ground.=C2- A direct
short would be a weld, so the regulator stands in the middle and acts as a
heater.=C2- If there is no load on the electrical system, the regulator i
s being heated by everything the generator can put out.
But, really, it is a poor engineer that could not have anticipated and and
properly designed for that eventuality.=C2- Of course, the proper design
may have been to install it in the exact position on the motorcycle that th
ey designed it to be install in (with its accompanying blast air).
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 7:27 PM, user9253 wrote:
I am on your side Ken.=C2- Roger should should reference the schematic an
d the laws of physics to explain why too little of a load can damage the re
ctifier/regulator.=C2- The greater the current, the greater the heat.=C2
- A small load will result in less heat.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480834#480834
-
S -
WIKI -
-
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ducati Regulator (too little load) |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Agreed. Some regulators regulate by adding a parallel resistance to short out
excess current.
Some regulators regulate by adding a series resistance to limit the current.
Some regulators regulate by turning the output on and off rapidly. The ratio between
the on time and the off time controls the average current.
The Ducati is the on-off type. It does not waste as much heat as the first two
types. But it still gets very warm due to IR losses. The greater the load,
the greater the heat.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480836#480836
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ducati Regulator (too little load) |
| From: | GTH <gilles.thesee(at)free.fr> |
Le 13/06/2018 01:25, user9253 a crit:
>
> I am on your side Ken. Roger should should reference the schematic and the laws
of physics to explain why too little of a load can damage the rectifier/regulator.
The greater the current, the greater the heat. A small load will result
in less heat.
>
Hi all,
I'll second that.
In the 15-18 past years we have been seeing lots of opinions about the
Rotax rectifier/regulator, but unfortunately very few hard data by
people who actually conducted experiments.
To date I am not aware of any data in addition to those we obtained
during our build, a short report of which can be seen here on Contrails !
http://contrails.free.fr/elec_ducati_en.php
More accurate versions of my schematics have been published since, but
no further bench tests have been reported.
FWIW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ducati Regulator (too little load) |
Thank you Joe and Ernest.
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 3:32 PM user9253 wrote:
>
> I am on your side Ken. Roger should should reference the schematic and
> the laws of physics to explain why too little of a load can damage the
> rectifier/regulator. The greater the current, the greater the heat. A
> small load will result in less heat.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480834#480834
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ducati Regulator (too little load) |
| From: | Lyle Peterson <lyleap(at)centurylink.net> |
Thinking, and that for me is dangerous.
The alternator in a Ducati or similar system is not controlled. It's
output is dependent on its RPM. I have two Honda motorcycles that use
the same type of system. To test the alternator one checks the output
voltage from each of three windings. The expected voltage is in the
range of 45 to 70 volts on each winding. When the vehicle system is not
demanding any output from the rectifier/regulator the alternator output
must go somewhere. It is converted to heat. Heat is the enemy of
electronics.
I may be way out in left field on this but it makes some sense to me.
I have one failure of the charging system on my Hondas. It was the
regulator. My wonderful wife brought the car so we could put a little
charge in the battery. It took two or three charges to get home. I
miss that lady so much. This would be hard to do with an airplane.
Lyle
On 6/12/2018 8:12 PM, Ken Ryan wrote:
> Thank you Joe and Ernest.
>
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 3:32 PM user9253 > wrote:
>
> >
>
> I am on your side Ken. Roger should should reference the
> schematic and the laws of physics to explain why too little of a
> load can damage the rectifier/regulator. The greater the current,
> the greater the heat. A small load will result in less heat.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480834#480834
>
>
> ==========
> -
> 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
> ==========
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Sequence for bringing alternators on line. |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
The two relays and starter contactor should all have diodes just like the battery
contactor does. Connect banded end of diodes to positive.
Can the start switch handle the start contactor coil current? Or is the E-123
Relay necessary?
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480840#480840
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ducati Regulator (too little load) |
At 07:18 PM 6/12/2018, you wrote:
Agreed. Some regulators regulate by adding a parallel resistance to
short out excess current.
nobody does that any more . . . VERY inefficient. The
silicon controlled bridge rectifier, series control
rectifier=regulator is teh gold standard. Ducatti is
but one example.
https://goo.gl/yYYeM5
Some regulators regulate by adding a series resistance to limit the current.
Not even sure how that would be done . . . ever see a
schematic?
Some regulators regulate by turning the output on and off
rapidly. The ratio between the on time and the off time controls the
average current. The Ducati is the on-off type. It does not waste
as much heat as the first two types. But it still gets very warm due
to IR losses. The greater the load, the greater the heat.
This kind-of describes the full-wave bridge
circuit cited above. The 'duty cycle' management
is rather coarse. The SCR's are triggered on the
UPswing of the AC waveform any time the bus is
perceived to be below setpoint. But unlike series
switches controlled by precision comparators, the
silicon controlled rectifier or triac will not . . .
indeed cannot be shut off until the AC waveform
goes to zero. So while there is some discrimination
for siwtch-on delay after zero crossing, the critter
stays 'locked' on until the next zero crossing
irrespective of instantaneous bus votlage.
Since this can happen as rapidly as every few
milliseconds, any raggedness in regulation value
is small and insignificant. Here are some typical
ripple profiles off an SD8 Dynamo under various
conditions.
https://goo.gl/tLDCSu
Except for the more 'advanced' full wave bridge
rectifier-regulators using MOS-Fets, I believe
that any rectifier-regulator rated for more than
5A or so will be VERY similar to the Ducatti
schematic cited.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ducati Regulator (too little load) |
At 08:27 PM 6/12/2018, you wrote:
>Thinking, and that for me is dangerous.
>
>The alternator in a Ducati or similar system is not controlled.
Agreed . . . the alternator output is proportional
to engine rpm but the rectifier-regulator is
a 'gated' device that disconnects the alternator
from the bus on a cycle-by-cycle basis, hence
its output IS managed for the purpose of charging
batteries and running electrowhizzies . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sequence for bringing alternators on line. |
At 05:46 PM 6/12/2018, you wrote:
>I am writing checklists for a new homebuilt I will be doing the
>flight testing on. Aircraft has a 40A main alternator and an SD-8
>backup alternator. The alternator switch allows either the main or
>backup alternator to be on and also has an off position. I'm
>thinking of leaving the switch on the main alternator all the time,
>except for a test of the SD-8 during the runup. Does anyone see a
>problem with this plan or should I wait until the load on the
>electrical system has come down to a certain point before switching
>to the SD-8? As far as I know the SD-8 will put out whatever it can
>and any load in excess will simply come from the battery.
Sequencing optoins are not critical. The alternator(s)
may be off or on before starting . . . and order of
shutdown at stopping is similarly unimportant.
Emacs!
>Is it reasonable to test the SD-8 every flight or is this something
>that can be done on a monthly or quarterly basis? Also I have run
>into a couple pilots recently who start their engines with the
>alternator off in order to "prevent damage to the alternator during
>start". I can't remember any mention of this in the AEC. Is there
>any basis for this? Should I turn the alternator off before shutdown
>and then on after startup?
The SD8 is very reliable . . . especially
when held in reserve, It's output at
run-up rpm will be rather limited. If you
run up at 1800 rpm, the SD8 will be turning
~2340 and produce about 4A of output.
Depending on the type and condition of
battery . . . and system loads . . .
you'll need to look closely at
bus voltage to make sure it changes
upward by any observable amount
when turned ON.
Testing ever so often while in-flight
would be easier to do . . . you can also
use the flight test to verify your plan-b
loads such that the battery is not discharged
during the en route phase of flight and
held in reserve for descent, approach
and landing.
The risk of damaging an alternator
or other electrowhizzies by the mismanagemet
of alternator switches during normal operations
is a myth. You may sequence their switching
in any manner that makes sense to you.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sequence for bringing alternators on line. |
At 09:07 PM 6/12/2018, you wrote:
>
>The two relays and starter contactor should all have diodes just
>like the battery contactor does. Connect banded end of diodes to positive.
> Can the start switch handle the start contactor coil current? Or
> is the E-123 Relay necessary?
The ACS/Bendix/Gerdes key switch will handle
the automotive starter contacter that's fitted
with a supression diode. Many (like the B&C
S702) have the diode built in. If in doubt,
install a second one . . . two are better
than none. The buffer relay is not necessary
but doesn't hurt anything . . . if left in
add the diode to it too as Joe suggests.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | STARTER VOLTAGE SPIKE |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Below is a quote from VansAirforce post #24 by Cumulo
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=160519
>
> Re:big bang
> The diode bridge inside the average alternator is robust enough to snub and dissipate
the starter energy provided the alternator "A" lead is intact and on
line across the bus.
> From my perspective Nuckolls is a new guy. He didn't start monkeying with this
stuff 'till Cessna had begun using alternators, so he is not well placed to
be the last word on this subject.
>
> Let me describe the sequence involving a starter that has the potential to damage
electronic stuff:
> 1. The Master is turned on, connecting the battery to the bus.
> 2. The starter button is pushed, energizing the starter solenoid
> 3. The starter solenoid connects the starter to the bus.
> 4. several hundred amps flow to the starter and the starter begins to spin the
engine.
> 5. Battery is low, so starter slows and and stalls.
> 6. the stalled starter with a hundreds of amps demand pulls the bus voltage down
to a few volts.
> 7. Master solenoid drops out , disconnecting battery from bus.
> 8. the very strong magnetic field of the starter collapses (the starer now is
just a massive inductor of copper and iron)
> 9. A very high energy spike WILL BE produced if there is nothing to snub and
dissipate it.
>
> The above is not the normal start sequence. Normally, the STARTER solenoid releases
first,turning the starter off and the starter energy is dissipated on the
solenoid copper contacts.
>
> BTW, proof by authority is not a good way to argue, but I DO have an A&P, accessories,
radio, instrument repairman certs, had a repair station for a decade
and stick wise most everything but an ATP. And way back when I worked for a living
I was an Electrical Engineer doing mostly military and computer design stuff.
>
> Nuckolls has done some really good stuff and I tip my hat to him, but I can demo
blowing a small diode out with a starter spike any old time.
>
> I think that having to start a dark airplane is too restrictive, too old timey.
Protection should be standard so strobes, radios, EFIS, EMS audio amps can
be on with no fear of damage from any cause. Stay tuned.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480847#480847
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carlos Trigo <trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt> |
| Subject: | Re: Sequence for bringing alternators on line. |
Bob
Are your assertions below, about the SD-8, also valid for the SD-20 (now BC-
410H)?
Thanks
Carlos
Enviado do meu iPhone
No dia 13/06/2018, =C3-s 14:19, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aero
electric.com>
> The SD8 is very reliable . . . especially
> when held in reserve, It's output at
> run-up rpm will be rather limited. If you
> run up at 1800 rpm, the SD8 will be turning
> ~2340 and produce about 4A of output.
>
> Depending on the type and condition of
> battery . . . and system loads . . .
> you'll need to look closely at
> bus voltage to make sure it changes
> upward by any observable amount
> when turned ON.
>
> Testing ever so often while in-flight
> would be easier to do . . . you can also
> use the flight test to verify your plan-b
> loads such that the battery is not discharged
> during the en route phase of flight and
> held in reserve for descent, approach
> and landing.
>
> The risk of damaging an alternator
> or other electrowhizzies by the mismanagemet
> of alternator switches during normal operations
> is a myth. You may sequence their switching
> in any manner that makes sense to you.
>
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Hunter <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sequence for bringing alternators on line. |
Regarding the SD 20, does anybody know what its output should at 1,000 RPM
(engine idle) and also at 2400 RPM Cruise?
Thanks,
Bill Hunter
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018, 11:23 Carlos Trigo wrote:
> Bob
>
> Are your assertions below, about the SD-8, also valid for the SD-20 (now
> BC-410H)?
>
> Thanks
> Carlos
>
> Enviado do meu iPhone
>
> No dia 13/06/2018, =C3-s 14:19, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
>
> The SD8 is very reliable . . . especially
> when held in reserve, It's output at
> run-up rpm will be rather limited. If you
> run up at 1800 rpm, the SD8 will be turning
> ~2340 and produce about 4A of output.
>
> Depending on the type and condition of
> battery . . . and system loads . . .
> you'll need to look closely at
> bus voltage to make sure it changes
> upward by any observable amount
> when turned ON.
>
> Testing ever so often while in-flight
> would be easier to do . . . you can also
> use the flight test to verify your plan-b
> loads such that the battery is not discharged
> during the en route phase of flight and
> held in reserve for descent, approach
> and landing.
>
> The risk of damaging an alternator
> or other electrowhizzies by the mismanagemet
> of alternator switches during normal operations
> is a myth. You may sequence their switching
> in any manner that makes sense to you.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sequence for bringing alternators on line. |
At 10:09 AM 6/13/2018, you wrote:
>Bob
>
>Are your assertions below, about the SD-8, also valid for the SD-20
>(now BC-410H)?
>
>Thanks
>Carlos
Any alternator . . .
I've been working with engine driven power sources on
aircraft and ground based vehicles for a long time. I've
spent hours in the lab with various alternators and generators
on test stands exploring system performance of the
various components with some pretty illuminating
test equipment.
Not once have I observed any adverse behaviors of
these machines when turning on or off EXCEPT for
the classic, uniquely AUTOMOTIVE definition of a
LOAD DUMP. This is a carefully orchestrated
condition where the system loads are low to zero.
The alternator is working hard to RECHARGE a
DEPLETED battery. The BATTERY becomes disconnected
from the bus.
This is the electronic equivalent of playing tug-of-war
wherein both sides have their heels dug in and are
straining on the rope . . . then you cut the rope
. . . EVERYBODY hits the ground.
I could duplicate this condition in a Bonanza or
Baron where the alternator(s) and battery are
on separate switches. Discharge the battery,
crank with ground power, turn on the alternator(s)
and then turn the battery off. Sho' 'nuf . . . you're
going to get a big bump in alternator output
due to a predictable delay in voltage regulator response
to a sudden drop in load wherein the BATTERY's
mitigating influence on such events is not present.
Now, how often and under what circumstances would
such an event happen in YOUR airplane?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sequence for bringing alternators on line. |
At 10:29 AM 6/13/2018, you wrote:
>Regarding the SD 20, does anybody know what its output should at
>1,000 RPM (engine idle) and also at 2400 RPM Cruise?
>
>Thanks,
See https://goo.gl/m6i8qR
At engine 1000 rpm, alternator rpm is about 1300 . . .
you might see 5 or so amps.
At engine 2400, alternator 3,000 the chart
says 29A
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: STARTER VOLTAGE SPIKE |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 6/13/2018 10:15 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> Below is a quote from VansAirforce post #24 by Cumulo
> http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=160519
>
>> Re:big bang
>> The diode bridge inside the average alternator is robust enough to snub and
dissipate the starter energy provided the alternator "A" lead is intact and on
line across the bus.
>> From my perspective Nuckolls is a new guy. He didn't start monkeying with this
stuff 'till Cessna had begun using alternators, so he is not well placed to
be the last word on this subject.
>>
>> Let me describe the sequence involving a starter that has the potential to damage
electronic stuff:
>> 1. The Master is turned on, connecting the battery to the bus.
>> 2. The starter button is pushed, energizing the starter solenoid
>> 3. The starter solenoid connects the starter to the bus.
>> 4. several hundred amps flow to the starter and the starter begins to spin the
engine.
>> 5. Battery is low, so starter slows and and stalls.
>> 6. the stalled starter with a hundreds of amps demand pulls the bus voltage
down to a few volts.
>> 7. Master solenoid drops out , disconnecting battery from bus.
>> 8. the very strong magnetic field of the starter collapses (the starer now is
just a massive inductor of copper and iron)
>> 9. A very high energy spike WILL BE produced if there is nothing to snub and
dissipate it.
>>
>> The above is not the normal start sequence. Normally, the STARTER solenoid releases
first,turning the starter off and the starter energy is dissipated on
the solenoid copper contacts.
>>
>> BTW, proof by authority is not a good way to argue, but I DO have an A&P, accessories,
radio, instrument repairman certs, had a repair station for a decade
and stick wise most everything but an ATP. And way back when I worked for a
living I was an Electrical Engineer doing mostly military and computer design
stuff.
>>
>> Nuckolls has done some really good stuff and I tip my hat to him, but I can
demo blowing a small diode out with a starter spike any old time.
>>
>> I think that having to start a dark airplane is too restrictive, too old timey.
Protection should be standard so strobes, radios, EFIS, EMS audio amps can
be on with no fear of damage from any cause. Stay tuned.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
Yeah, I replied to it, as well. Hilarious.
---
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: STARTER VOLTAGE SPIKE |
At 10:15 AM 6/13/2018, you wrote:
>
>Below is a quote from VansAirforce post #24 by Cumulo
>http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=160519
This is a myth that has been propagated for
decades and has no foundation in physics.
Recall that the bench demonstrations for dissipating
the magnetic field collapse in a battery contactor
showed that the energy resulting from the spike
was dissipated in an arc that forms between the
spreading contacts of the controlling device, i.e.
the switch. The energy did NOT propagate onto the
bus in any significant way.
The same thing happens with starters except the
device taking the abuse is the starter contactor.
Yeah, there's some fire between the opening
contacts but that energy has to jump the RESISTANCE
of the arc and then boost the bus voltage against
the surge mitigating effects of battery(s) and
a host of capacitors built into the electrowhizzies.
Not once in 50 years of pondering the vagaries of
electrical system gremlins on vehicles have I
seen a measured/demonstrated risk to electrowhizzies
from a release energy stored on the starter's
inductance.
WAaayyy back when, we thought that 'starter
spikes' were killing the transistors in the newly
minted solid state features of radios at Cessna.
It turned out that depressed bus voltage during
cranking due to soggy battery was killing the
radios . . . NOT starter spikes.
That REAL threat to EARLY solid state designs
has been fertilized into any number of ol' pilot's
tales that are without foundation.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Hunter" <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Sequence for bringing alternators on line. |
Thanks!!!
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: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 9:01 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Sequence for bringing alternators on line.
At 10:29 AM 6/13/2018, you wrote:
Regarding the SD 20, does anybody know what its output should at 1,000 RPM
(engine idle) and also at 2400 RPM Cruise?
Thanks,
See https://goo.gl/m6i8qR
At engine 1000 rpm, alternator rpm is about 1300 . . .
you might see 5 or so amps.
At engine 2400, alternator 3,000 the chart
says 29A
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sebastien <cluros(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sequence for bringing alternators on line. |
The starter contactor is a B&C S702 and SD-8 relay is included in the PMOV
kit so I think the diode is built in as well.
The E-123 relay is not necessary in the current setup but this system was
originally designed for P-Mags and the start switch was going to be an
S2000 button. I'm guessing that the S2000 needed the relay and when it was
replaced with an ACS switch the relay was left in for later conversion.
Thank you all for the replies, I'll just leave the alternator switch on
Main all the time since there's no advantage to turning it off for engine
start. Once the aircraft is through its test phase we plan on testing the
SD-8 on an every 4 months schedule.
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 6:22 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 09:07 PM 6/12/2018, you wrote:
>
>
> The two relays and starter contactor should all have diodes just like the
> battery contactor does. Connect banded end of diodes to positive.
> Can the start switch handle the start contactor coil current? Or is the
> E-123 Relay necessary?
>
>
> The ACS/Bendix/Gerdes key switch will handle
> the automotive starter contacter that's fitted
> with a supression diode. Many (like the B&C
> S702) have the diode built in. If in doubt,
> install a second one . . . two are better
> than none. The buffer relay is not necessary
> but doesn't hurt anything . . . if left in
> add the diode to it too as Joe suggests.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe Grounds |
Thanks Bob, I'll try that early next week and report back. What I was
calling alternator noise does rise and fall with engine RPM, and goes away
when I pull the main alternator field CB.
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 6:13 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 03:01 PM 6/12/2018, you wrote:
>
> Yes, and also a gns430w and skyview system.
>
>
> Just for grins . . . try unplugging the
> data cable between the intercom/controll
> panel and the remote transceiver . . . and
> see if the noise is affected.
>
> Oh yeah, are you sure it's alternator whine . . .
> pitch rises and falls with engine rpm?
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sebastien <cluros(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
Joe the Ducati has 6 pins instead of 5 for the John Deere. I believe the
extra pin on the Ducati is for a large capacitor but the John Deere ones
are MOSFET rectifiers which don't need the capacitor? So we could hook up
the two AC wires, the B+, the L, and the IGN wires the same as on the
Ducati and just remove the cap from the system? Am I making any sense?
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 11:15 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> Search eBay for AM101406 or MIA881279
> Chances are that the $20 ones are the same as the more expensive ones.
> Note that the terminals are arraigned in a different order than the
> Ducati. The mounting holes are also spaced differently. Be sure to use
> heat conductive grease on the mounting base to carry heat away.
>
> > Any luck on a part number or a way to determine an appropriate John
> Deere regulator?
>
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480794#480794
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Neither the Ducati or John Deere regulator has a terminal specifically for a capacitor,
although some installers might connect a capacitor to Ducati terminal
R. Terminals B and R are connected together internally. I believe the purpose
of the R terminal is not for redundancy, but rather to reduce current through
a single terminal. A capacitor is required regardless of which regulator is
used. It can be connected to the main power bus. I put a 10 amp fuse in series
with mine.
Splice the two wires together that were connected to Ducati terminals B & R and
connect to John Deere terminal B+.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480867#480867
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe |
Grounds
At 03:31 PM 6/13/2018, you wrote:
>Thanks Bob, I'll try that early next week and report back. What I
>was calling alternator noise does rise and fall with engine RPM, and
>goes away when I pull the main alternator field CB
very well . . . just making sure we're
peering into the right rabbit hole . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
At 03:41 PM 6/13/2018, you wrote:
>Joe the Ducati has 6 pins instead of 5 for the
>John Deere. I believe the extra pin on the
>Ducati is for a large capacitor but the John
>Deere ones are MOSFET rectifiers which don't
>need the capacitor? So we could hook up the two
>AC wires, the B+, the L, and the IGN wires the
>same as on the Ducati and just remove the cap
>from the system?=C2 Am I making any sense?
As long as you have a battery on line,
the capacitor serves no demonstrable
purpose.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Even if the battery is disconnected, I do not think that the capacitor does much
good. When my PC680 failed open, the alternator voltage was unstable. However,
Rotax documentation calls for a capacitor. It is best to follow manufacturer's
instructions. They might know something that I don't.
> As long as you have a battery on line,
> the capacitor serves no demonstrable purpose.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480875#480875
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | COIL INRUSH CURRENT |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Below is a quote from a VansAirforce post. Why is the inrush current higher than
steady state current? Inductors oppose any change in current. Why doesn't
that opposition limit the inrush current? I am not questioning the accuracy
of the measurements, just trying to understand the laws of physics.
> All of this is for the four-post starter solenoid (ACS 11-03162):
> Without flyback diode: -510V peak pulse
> Current through flyback diode: 6.3A decaying over about 40 ms
> Coil inrush current: 7.3A
> Coil steady state current: 3.6A
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480876#480876
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ducati Regulator (too little load) |
At 11:55 PM 6/12/2018, you wrote:
>At 07:18 PM 6/12/2018, you wrote:
>
>Agreed. Some regulators regulate by adding a parallel resistance to
>short out excess current.
>
> nobody does that any more . . . VERY inefficient.
Hmmmm . . . seems I was half right. The shunt regulator
is horribly inefficient but no . . . there ARE some
individuals pursuing the shunt style regulation
topology. For example, I found this article out
there on the web:
https://goo.gl/ofvHSe
It took a bit to noodle through the functionality
of this design. If one studies the wiring of
the bridge rectifiers, you see that they are
set up to be classic, three phase rectifiers
essentially UNCONTROLLED. This means that if
the SCR's were left out of the circuit, the
alternator's three phase output is simply
rectified and pumped directly to the bus.
The ONLY time an SCR would be capable of conducting
current is during the OFF or reverse-voltage
interval on the companion rectifier leg. Any
time the SCR is in conduction, there is a SHORT
across the windings of the alternator . . .
How to make a reliable motorcycle voltage regulator
Note the boss-hog heat sink recommended in this
design. As long as system demands are a substantial
percentage of the alternator's output, the ON-
time for SCRs is low. But during normal ops with
low system loads, the SCRs will be working hard . . .
as will the alternator.
One could argue that this design is thermally
robust and may indeed last longer than
the stock or aftermarket devices tried . . . but
as noted elsewhere in this thread, beefing up
the 'weakest link' in the chain may well move
the failure to some other component in the system.
Not sure that the first and follow-on authors
of the DIY thread will report their long term
experiences with alternator failures . . . and
who knows, maybe the heat rejection profile
of the alternator is robust enough to handle
this mode of operation.
I have to believe that there must be SOME
off-the-shelf designs out there that subscribe
to the shunt regulation philosophy. As seen
above, it's hard to beat the simplicity!
So I'll walk back my earlier assertion but
with a sense of . . . well . . . don't
need to go there.
We do know that the Ducatti design is not
a 'shunt regulation' topology . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: COIL INRUSH CURRENT |
| From: | Charles Davis <charlesdavis(at)iuncapped.co.za> |
From what I understand, once there is an iron core inside the coil, the
current through the coil will decrease, if the coil is energised for a
longish period without the iron, it will overheat - have seen this many
times with solenoids controlling gas in refrigeration systems where the
coil housing melts to destruction if not fitted onto the solenoid properly
Charles
On 14-Jun-18 2:08 PM, user9253 wrote:
>
> Below is a quote from a VansAirforce post. Why is the inrush current higher
than steady state current? Inductors oppose any change in current. Why doesn't
that opposition limit the inrush current? I am not questioning the accuracy
of the measurements, just trying to understand the laws of physics.
>
>> All of this is for the four-post starter solenoid (ACS 11-03162):
>> Without flyback diode: -510V peak pulse
>> Current through flyback diode: 6.3A decaying over about 40 ms
>> Coil inrush current: 7.3A
>> Coil steady state current: 3.6A
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480876#480876
>
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: COIL INRUSH CURRENT |
At 07:08 AM 6/14/2018, you wrote:
>
>Below is a quote from a VansAirforce post. Why is the inrush
>current higher than steady state current? Inductors oppose any
>change in current. Why doesn't that opposition limit the inrush
>current? I am not questioning the accuracy of the measurements,
>just trying to understand the laws of physics.
>
> > All of this is for the four-post starter solenoid (ACS 11-03162):
> > Without flyback diode: -510V peak pulse
> > Current through flyback diode: 6.3A decaying over about 40 ms
> > Coil inrush current: 7.3A
> > Coil steady state current: 3.6A
It's probably vagaries of semantics and
test setup. This is why it's important to
publish schematics of test setups, screen
shots of traces and showing all the
steps in the math.
We KNOW that unlike the charging profile
for a capacitor (infinite onset current
flow) the inductor has a zero onset
current flow. The begs explanation
for the author's definition of 'inrush'
current.
I'm guessing that the 7.3A figure was
measured at the greatest stabilized
current observed after application of power.
This would be the t=L/R plot coming
asymptotic to I=E/R several time constants
after switch closure. Not what we normally
refer to as inrush current. I'm guessing
that the 'steady state' value is due to
coil heating up after an extended period
of power on.
Here's what the numbers look like for
a continuous duty battery contactor:
https://goo.gl/gvX4mu
https://goo.gl/cpzthL
The starter contactor may well present
a higher ratio of cold to hot because it's
an intermittent duty device suffering a
greater copper temperature rise than the
battery contactor.
The 6.3A figure for diode current is
probably taken after a short but stabilized
contactor coil current of that same value.
The initial discharge of a capacitor is
the same as the voltage to which the capacitor
is charged. Discharge of the inductor yields
and initial current flow equal to that which
was flowing in the inductor . . . i.e. the
contactor was de=energized at 6.3A. Hence
catch diode current would peak at 6.3A
and decay along the t=L/R plot.
Without seeing the test setup and plots, it's just
guessing . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: COIL INRUSH CURRENT |
At 07:50 AM 6/14/2018, you wrote:
>
>
> From what I understand, once there is an iron core inside the coil,
> the current through the coil will decrease, if the coil is
> energised for a longish period without the iron, it will overheat -
> have seen this many times with solenoids controlling gas in
> refrigeration systems where the coil housing melts to destruction
> if not fitted onto the solenoid properly
Adding a core material does INCREASE the
inductance of a coil. The time constant
for charging an inductance is t(seconds)
L(henries)/R(ohms).
Adding the core increases L but the resistance
is unchanged. Hence, t= goes up. I.e. time to
charge the coil is longer. Keep in mind that
the values of t are on the order of tens of
milliseconds.
Heating is purely a function of the DC resistance
of the coil and the applied voltage which
has nothing to do with the magnitude
of inductance. The time constant for heating
is about 1000 times longer than for current
rise. I.e. measured in minutes.
The classic definition of 'inrush' is that
current which flows the instant power is applied
to the device. For capacitors, inrush is very
large, for inductors it is zero.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: COIL INRUSH CURRENT |
| From: | C&K <yellowduckduo(at)gmail.com> |
If we are thinking of similar "longish periods" perhaps the iron core is
just conducting heat away perhaps assisted by the refrigerant flow.
Ken
On 14/06/2018 8:50 AM, Charles Davis wrote:
>
>
> From what I understand, once there is an iron core inside the coil,
> the current through the coil will decrease, if the coil is energised
> for a longish period without the iron, it will overheat - have seen
> this many times with solenoids controlling gas in refrigeration
> systems where the coil housing melts to destruction if not fitted onto
> the solenoid properly
>
> Charles
>
>
> On 14-Jun-18 2:08 PM, user9253 wrote:
>>
>> Below is a quote from a VansAirforce post. Why is the inrush current
>> higher than steady state current? Inductors oppose any change in
>> current. Why doesn't that opposition limit the inrush current? I am
>> not questioning the accuracy of the measurements, just trying to
>> understand the laws of physics.
>>
>>> All of this is for the four-post starter solenoid (ACS 11-03162):
>>> Without flyback diode: -510V peak pulse
>>> Current through flyback diode: 6.3A decaying over about 40 ms
>>> Coil inrush current: 7.3A
>>> Coil steady state current: 3.6A
>>
>> --------
>> Joe Gores
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480876#480876
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub Connector |
Folks,
It's not my fault... I'm sure that the pins moved by themselves in the
middle of the night... but some of the pins in my high density D-Sub
connector are in the wrong places.
I have the right tool:
https://www.steinair.com/product/insertionremoval-tool-for-high-density-d-sub-pins-mil-spec/
I have successfully removed regular density pins from DB-25 connectors.
These darned high-density pins refuse to come loose.
Before I make things worse, do you have any suggestions?
-- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."*
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub Connector |
| From: | Roger Curtis <rnjcurtis(at)charter.net> |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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub Connector |
My advice is to buy multiples of the tool and in multiple versions. I have m
etal and plastic versions and have about 3 of each because they are so easy t
o wreck. The process works the same as standard pins and I know of no trick
other than to try the other version of tool.
Tim
> On Jun 14, 2018, at 10:49 AM, Roger Curtis wrote:
>
> Art, I assume you are using the correct tool since the high-density and re
gular D connector use different tools
>
>
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name>
> Date: 06/14/2018 10:42 (GMT-05:00)
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub Connecto
r
>
> Folks,
>
> It's not my fault... I'm sure that the pins moved by themselves in the mid
dle of the night... but some of the pins in my high density D-Sub connector a
re in the wrong places.
>
> I have the right tool: https://www.steinair.com/product/insertionremoval-t
ool-for-high-density-d-sub-pins-mil-spec/
> I have successfully removed regular density pins from DB-25 connectors.
> These darned high-density pins refuse to come loose.
>
> Before I make things worse, do you have any suggestions?
>
> -- Art Z.
>
> --
> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>
> "We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub Connector |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Yeah, it kinda comes down to 'holding your mouth right'. :-)
Instructions on extractor use are virtually non-existent. On the rare
occasions I've had to use one, it takes me about 15 minutes to get
everything right & get the pin out. Then I forget what I did before the
next time I need to extract one.
As nearly as I can tell, the goal is for the tool to push back the
little retainer 'burr' while the pin slides past. Problem is, the pin
can't get past the tool (same diameter). And if you have the bad luck to
insert the tool where the slot is over the 'burr', nothing works. What I
try is to push the tool in as deep as it will go, and while holding it
in, pull back slightly on the wire. Then grab the wire and tool with a
pair of needle nose pliers & pull. If it doesn't work, I rotate the tool
a quarter to 1/2 turn, and repeat.
Charlie
On 6/14/2018 10:10 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
> My advice is to buy multiples of the tool and in multiple versions. I
> have metal and plastic versions and have about 3 of each because they
> are so easy to wreck. The process works the same as standard pins and
> I know of no trick other than to try the other version of tool.
> Tim
>
> On Jun 14, 2018, at 10:49 AM, Roger Curtis > wrote:
>
>> Art, I assume you are using the correct tool since the high-density
>> and regular D connector use different tools
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
>>
>>
>> -------- Original message --------
>> From: Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name <mailto:art(at)zemon.name>>
>> Date: 06/14/2018 10:42 (GMT-05:00)
>> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>>
>> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub
>> Connector
>>
>> Folks,
>>
>> It's not my fault... I'm sure that the pins moved by themselves in
>> the middle of the night... but some of the pins in my high density
>> D-Sub connector are in the wrong places.
>>
>> I have the right tool:
>> https://www.steinair.com/product/insertionremoval-tool-for-high-density-d-sub-pins-mil-spec/
>> I have successfully removed regular density pins from DB-25 connectors.
>> These darned high-density pins refuse to come loose.
>>
>> Before I make things worse, do you have any suggestions?
>>
>> -- Art Z.
>>
>> --
>> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>>
>> /"We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."/
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carlos Trigo <trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt> |
| Subject: | Re: Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub Connector |
Art
Don=99t punish yourself because this is a real PIAxx task to achieve.
I have ruined several of those tools myself.
Never mind the plastic ones, they are useless!
Use the metal ones, and do it very patiently...
You have to involve the wire before inserting the tool to the pin, and then i
nsert it all the way down, very carefully.
Only pull the tool when you manage to insert it to reach the bottom of the h
ole.
In some cases, I even had to push the male pin from the other side of the Ds
ub connector.
Patience and mild perseverance are the secrets!
Cheers
Carlos
Enviado do meu iPhone
No dia 14/06/2018, =C3-s 15:42, Art Zemon escreveu:
> Folks,
>
> It's not my fault... I'm sure that the pins moved by themselves in the mid
dle of the night... but some of the pins in my high density D-Sub connector a
re in the wrong places.
>
> I have the right tool: https://www.steinair.com/product/insertionremoval-t
ool-for-high-density-d-sub-pins-mil-spec/
> I have successfully removed regular density pins from DB-25 connectors.
> These darned high-density pins refuse to come loose.
>
> Before I make things worse, do you have any suggestions?
>
> -- Art Z.
>
> --
> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>
> "We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Hunter" <billhuntersemail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub Connector |
I have found that the proper string of bad words is the only thing that
will get the tool to work correctly.
Turning the tool once it is fully inserted will only bend the tool. In
other wordsI think that inserting the tool into the connector
straight down and waiting for the satisfying click is the only way to
get it to workif the wire does not pull out do NOT turn the
tool in the bore as it will bend the tool causing more bad
wordsIf the wire does not pull out then pull the tool out and
then clock it 45 degrees and insert it again.
Magnifying headsets are a must for anyone over 12 years of age.
.
Thanks!!!
Bill Hunter
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Olson
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 8:10 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub
Connector
My advice is to buy multiples of the tool and in multiple versions. I
have metal and plastic versions and have about 3 of each because they
are so easy to wreck. The process works the same as standard pins and I
know of no trick other than to try the other version of tool.
Tim
On Jun 14, 2018, at 10:49 AM, Roger Curtis > wrote:
Art, I assume you are using the correct tool since the high-density and
regular D connector use different tools
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name <mailto:art(at)zemon.name> >
Date: 06/14/2018 10:42 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub
Connector
Folks,
It's not my fault... I'm sure that the pins moved by themselves in the
middle of the night... but some of the pins in my high density D-Sub
connector are in the wrong places.
I have the right tool:
https://www.steinair.com/product/insertionremoval-tool-for-high-density-d
-sub-pins-mil-spec/
I have successfully removed regular density pins from DB-25 connectors.
These darned high-density pins refuse to come loose.
Before I make things worse, do you have any suggestions?
-- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
"We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carlos Trigo <trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt> |
| Subject: | Re: Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub Connector |
Correction: when I wrote (below) =9COnly pull the tool when you manage
to insert it to reach the bottom=9D, you shall read =9COnly pul
l the wire when you manage to insert the tool till it reaches the bottom
=9D
Carlos
Enviado do meu iPhone
No dia 14/06/2018, =C3-s 16:52, Carlos Trigo escre
veu:
> Art
>
> Don=99t punish yourself because this is a real PIAxx task to achieve
.
> I have ruined several of those tools myself.
> Never mind the plastic ones, they are useless!
> Use the metal ones, and do it very patiently...
>
> You have to involve the wire before inserting the tool to the pin, and the
n insert it all the way down, very carefully.
> Only pull the tool when you manage to insert it to reach the bottom of the
hole.
>
> In some cases, I even had to push the male pin from the other side of the D
sub connector.
>
> Patience and mild perseverance are the secrets!
>
> Cheers
> Carlos
>
> Enviado do meu iPhone
>
> No dia 14/06/2018, =C3-s 15:42, Art Zemon escreveu:
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> It's not my fault... I'm sure that the pins moved by themselves in the mi
ddle of the night... but some of the pins in my high density D-Sub connector
are in the wrong places.
>>
>> I have the right tool: https://www.steinair.com/product/insertionremoval-
tool-for-high-density-d-sub-pins-mil-spec/
>> I have successfully removed regular density pins from DB-25 connectors.
>> These darned high-density pins refuse to come loose.
>>
>> Before I make things worse, do you have any suggestions?
>>
>> -- Art Z.
>>
>> --
>> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>>
>> "We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub Connector |
Push the tool over the pin.Push the pin into the tool from the backside of
the connector and hold it there.Push the tool over the pin again.Gently pul
l the wire.
If it doesn't come out, reseat the tool, then push the wire back in harder
while pushing the tool in harder.=C2- You have to get the pin to slide in
to the tool just a bit (and there is less than a bit of playroom to work wi
th.).
On Thursday, June 14, 2018 10:50 AM, Roger Curtis wrote:
Art, I assume you are using the correct tool since the high-density and r
egular D connector use different tools
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name>
Date: 06/14/2018 10:42 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub Connector
Folks,
It's not my fault... I'm sure that the pins moved by themselves in the midd
le of the night... but some of the pins in my high density D-Sub connector
are in the wrong places.
I have the right tool:=C2-https://www.steinair.com/product/insertionremov
al-tool-for-high-density-d-sub-pins-mil-spec/I have successfully removed re
gular density pins from DB-25 connectors.=C2-These darned high-density pi
ns refuse to come loose.
Before I make things worse, do you have any suggestions?
=C2- =C2- -- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
"We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: B&C switches |
Dave,
the MANL limiters came in and then I discovered
that the holder bases I had left over were mis-drilled
and should have been scrapped. Made some new
ones today. Your Care Package is in the mail
tomorrow.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | How to submit a reliable essay? |
| From: | "Glorie" <stewartajacobson(at)yahoo.com> |
Submitting a reliable essay is not an easy task. In this competitive world the
students give their best performance to obtain the top grades. Writing an essay
is considered as an activity to check the performance of the students in their
academics. Moreover Colleges/Universities conduct essay writing competition
where the student who submit best essay will be awarded. So essay is an important
part in the student life. Students can approach the best essay writing service
(https://buyessays.us) which provide the essay papers.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480918#480918
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Pengilly" <Peter(at)sportingaero.com> |
| Subject: | Alternators & Regulators - what is the difference between |
Ford and Chrysler?
Hi All,
I wonder if anyone can help me determine the suitability of a regulator
to
an alternator as I need to install a new regulator?
I have a Ford DOFF10300JR alternator on my RV-6 (15v/60A), the O-320-E2D
came from a C172 and the original builder retained the Cessna installed
alternator. I replaced the alternator 3 years ago. It has a generic 2
=BD=94
square regulator which has failed ' outputs only 0.05v when master is
on and
engine is not running.
I was going to install a B&C LR3C-14 regulator, but it will take a week
or
so (and $$) to ship across the Atlantic. I have now been offered a Lamar
B-00371-1 regulator (http://www.lamartech.com/files/50018505.pdf) by a
friend that will be here on Monday. I=92m trying to figure out if this
regulator will work with my alternator. Can anyone offer any advice?
I have a separate crowbar OV protection and a low volt monitor so do not
need these functions ' just the basic alternator control. I think the
main
differences between voltage regulators/alternator control units are
packaging [not an issue as I will have to drill new holes], connections
[not
an issue as I will have to carry some wiring changes] and additional
functions [OV protection, under volt warning, etc ' not required as
already
installed].
The B-00371-1 is listed as suitable for many Pipers (and many other
aircraft, but not Cessnas), the typical alternator it is used with is a
Chrysler ALY8520R.
I have been unable to find any information on the differences between
the
Ford and Chrysler alternators, and how their respective regulators might
differ, does anyone know?
Regards, Peter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternators & Regulators - what is the difference |
between Ford and Chrysler?
>
>
>The B-00371-1 is listed as suitable for many Pipers (and many other
>aircraft, but not Cessnas), the typical alternator it is used with
>is a Chrysler ALY8520R.
That reguator will be fine. It's got built
in OV protection but leaving your existing
OV protection in place doesn't hurt anything.
>
>I have been unable to find any information on the differences
>between the Ford and Chrysler alternators, and how their respective
>regulators might differ, does anyone know?
Alternators, unlike generators, are exceedingly
tolerant of mixing/matching regulators with
various alternators.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
Are there any Listers who can give me brands
and perhaps part numbers for non-metal airplane
paints understood to contain metallic fillers
of any kind?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
Do you mean like Polyfiber's Polyspray?
On June 16, 2018 11:52:26 "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
wrote:
>
>
> Are there any Listers who can give me brands
> and perhaps part numbers for non-metal airplane
> paints understood to contain metallic fillers
> of any kind?
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
At 11:00 AM 6/16/2018, you wrote:
>
>Do you mean like Polyfiber's Polyspray?
You tell me . . . finishes specific to airplanes
are not my field of expertise. I've read/heard
various assertions over the years concerning
the adverse effects of Paint X vs. Paint Y
on the performance of antennas mounting inside
the skin of a non-metal airplane. But I've
never had occasion to explore the facts and
physics of those assertions.
Just curious as to the most egregious of
supposed offenders . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com> |
Bob,
Diamond aircraft specify an 'Anti-Static' primer to be applied to their
aircraft, however the outer layers of cloth also include an aluminium mesh
woven into the carbon.
One such primer is,
http://www.ppgaerospace.com/Products/Coatings-Removers-Cleaners/Commercial-C
ivil-Aviation/Specialty-Products/5421-2921-Anti-Static-Kit-TYPE-I.aspx
Not sure if this is has a metallic filler ... I can look on Monday what
paints are specified in the manual.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: 16 June 2018 16:46
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Paint question
-->
Are there any Listers who can give me brands and perhaps part numbers for
non-metal airplane paints understood to contain metallic fillers of any
kind?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com> |
| Subject: | Alternators & Regulators - what is the difference |
between Ford and Chrysler?
Thanks, Bob!
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: 16 June 2018 13:35
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternators & Regulators - what is the
difference between Ford and Chrysler?
The B-00371-1 is listed as suitable for many Pipers (and many other
aircraft, but not Cessnas), the typical alternator it is used with is a
Chrysler ALY8520R.
That reguator will be fine. It's got built
in OV protection but leaving your existing
OV protection in place doesn't hurt anything.
I have been unable to find any information on the differences between the
Ford and Chrysler alternators, and how their respective regulators might
differ, does anyone know?
Alternators, unlike generators, are exceedingly
tolerant of mixing/matching regulators with
various alternators.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Peter Pengilly <peter(at)sportingaero.com> |
Bob,
Diamond aircraft specify an 'Anti-Static' primer to be applied to their
aircraft, however the outer layers of cloth also include an aluminium mesh
woven into the carbon.
One such primer is,
http://www.ppgaerospace.com/Products/Coatings-Removers-Cleaners/Commercial-C
ivil-Aviation/Specialty-Products/5421-2921-Anti-Static-Kit-TYPE-I.aspx
Not sure if this is has a metallic filler ... I can look on Monday what
paints are specified in the manual.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: 16 June 2018 16:46
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Paint question
-->
Are there any Listers who can give me brands and perhaps part numbers for
non-metal airplane paints understood to contain metallic fillers of any
kind?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
I was told not to mount any antennas inside my silver Oratex SuperSTOL
because the silver pigment contains metal that would block signals. I can
send you some scraps if you would like to test it. Ken Ryan
Sent from my Android. Sorry Steve.
On Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 08:52 Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 11:00 AM 6/16/2018, you wrote:
>
> >
>
> Do you mean like Polyfiber's Polyspray?
>
>
> You tell me . . . finishes specific to airplanes
> are not my field of expertise. I've read/heard
> various assertions over the years concerning
> the adverse effects of Paint X vs. Paint Y
> on the performance of antennas mounting inside
> the skin of a non-metal airplane. But I've
> never had occasion to explore the facts and
> physics of those assertions.
>
> Just curious as to the most egregious of
> supposed offenders . . .
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
The official description: A high-solids aluminum-pigmented, 1 part, air
drying resin used after the Poly-Brush preliminary coating to protect the
fabric from UV and prepare for a smooth finish
Polyspray has aluminum particles but I don't know about how it blocks or
does not block RF.
On June 16, 2018 12:54:44 "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
wrote:
> At 11:00 AM 6/16/2018, you wrote:
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message
>> posted by: Jared Yates
>>
>> Do you mean like Polyfiber's Polyspray?
>
>
> You tell me . . . finishes specific to airplanes
> are not my field of expertise. I've read/heard
> various assertions over the years concerning
> the adverse effects of Paint X vs. Paint Y
> on the performance of antennas mounting inside
> the skin of a non-metal airplane. But I've
> never had occasion to explore the facts and
> physics of those assertions.
>
> Just curious as to the most egregious of
> supposed offenders . . .
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 6/16/2018 11:47 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> At 11:00 AM 6/16/2018, you wrote:
>>
>>
>> Do you mean like Polyfiber's Polyspray?
>
> You tell me . . . finishes specific to airplanes
> are not my field of expertise. I've read/heard
> various assertions over the years concerning
> the adverse effects of Paint X vs. Paint Y
> on the performance of antennas mounting inside
> the skin of a non-metal airplane. But I've
> never had occasion to explore the facts and
> physics of those assertions.
>
> Just curious as to the most egregious of
> supposed offenders . . .
>
> Bob . . .
>
I hate paint, and I'm certainly no expert. But I'd bet that the only
paints that contain enough metal to be an RF issue would be the 'silver'
step of fabric coatings, some of which (likely all the old stuff)
contain aluminum dust as a UV blocker, and paints specifically sold as
metallic and/or metalflake colors.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | NASA Workmanship Chart |
| From: | "Jim Heekin" <heekin(at)knights.ucf.edu> |
This site was provided by a retired NASA engineer. I thought some of you might
find it to be of interest.
https://workmanship.nasa.gov/lib/insp/2%20books/frameset.html
Jim Heekin
Orlando, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480936#480936
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Z19 first try and smoke/wire melted I did a mistake |
| From: | "Achille" <mickael.t(at)live.fr> |
Good day,
After some months wiring my plane with Z19, long months, today was the day to set
the master switch in ON... [Wink]
And I did a mistake... THE mistake. (The Ridiculouse mistake !!!)
On the wire to connect to my battery, one have a red cap, the other for the moment
not cut. (only things that I have to do to finish completly) Weekend finishing
I would like to know after months if it works.... before the week.
I set a pair of jumper cable on the aircraft battery let on the ground i connected
it to the wire into the plane. (When I wire the battery cable, the red cap
was... the only one adaptable to my terminal...) It was the ground cable !!!
[Rolling Eyes]
So yes, I did the ridiculouse mistake. And after so much time to wire the plane
to have it perfectly i do this kind of ridiculouse mistake.
Then... I set master switch ON. and I see a light... it was not a light it was
a wire on the battery relay that it was on fire, melting completly his insulation.
my contactor :
http://www.bandc.aero/continuousdutycontactor.aspx
my master relay switch :
http://www.bandc.aero/toggleswitch-doublepole.aspx
After that I investiguate quickly, and I find that I set the polarity on the wrong
way. I set it in the good one.
Same result ! Wire coming red without no more insulation.
My first question is :
- my IFF/Radio/electronics ignitions and all the electronics parts are good to
the bin ? (I have a Trig S mode... new electronics Ignitions) wire like the Z19
with a diode and without avionics switch like the Z19.
- Why I have in the bad polarity, but also in the good this wire that is comming
hot and red ?
- I spoke about the electronics instruments, but the others wires could be damage
as the wire spoke above ?
If you have some advise for the next step for me... I will appreciate [Rolling
Eyes]
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480937#480937
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/capture_decran_2018_06_17_a_000034_117.png
http://forums.matronics.com//files/capture_decran_2018_06_17_a_000019_153.png
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | Re: NASA Workmanship Chart |
Thanks, Jim. That's very concise and helpful.
-- Art Z.
On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 3:26 PM Jim Heekin wrote:
> heekin(at)knights.ucf.edu>
>
> This site was provided by a retired NASA engineer. I thought some of you
> might find it to be of interest.
>
> https://workmanship.nasa.gov/lib/insp/2%20books/frameset.html
> =8B=8B
>
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | Re: Removing Pins from High Density D-Sub Connector |
Thanks for the empathy, everybody. It's too hot to take another crack at it
right now... wunderground says that it feels like 107 out there.... I'll
attack the pins again in the morning. Maybe if I swing a chicken over the
connector....
-- Art Z.
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 11:11 AM Charlie England
wrote:
> Yeah, it kinda comes down to 'holding your mouth right'. :-)
>
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z19 first try and smoke/wire melted I did a mistake |
>
>After that I investiguate quickly, and I find that I set the
>polarity on the wrong way. I set it in the good one.
>
>Same result ! Wire coming red without no more insulation.
>
>My first question is :
>
>- my IFF/Radio/electronics ignitions and all the electronics parts
>are good to the bin ? (I have a Trig S mode... new electronics
>Ignitions) wire like the Z19 with a diode and without avionics
>switch like the Z19.
>
>- Why I have in the bad polarity, but also in the good this wire
>that is comming hot and red ?
>
>- I spoke about the electronics instruments, but the others wires
>could be damage as the wire spoke above ?
>
>If you have some advise for the next step for me... I will
>appreciate [Rolling Eyes]
The first event probably shorted the diode across
the coil since it was in a FORWARD conduction mode.
Correcting the battery connection produced a similar
event because the diode was shorted.
Now, the good news. Since the diode fused and became
a 'wire burner', the contactor did not close. Similarly,
even with the proper battery connection, the shorted diode
kept the contactor from closing once again and only
the wiring was abused.
Replace the diode and any smoked wires. I'm hopeful that
the rest of your electrowhizzies are okay.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z19 first try and smoke/wire melted I did a mistake |
| From: | C&K <yellowduckduo(at)gmail.com> |
It might not be as bad as you think.
If a visual inspection doesn't find a problem, I would pull all the
fuses and look for what is shorted with a ohmeter or a low current
source such as a small light bulb in series with the battery.
Ken
On 16/06/2018 6:03 PM, Achille wrote:
>
> Good day,
>
> After some months wiring my plane with Z19, long months, today was the day to
set the master switch in ON... [Wink]
>
> And I did a mistake... THE mistake. (The Ridiculouse mistake !!!)
>
> On the wire to connect to my battery, one have a red cap, the other for the moment
not cut. (only things that I have to do to finish completly) Weekend finishing
I would like to know after months if it works.... before the week.
>
> I set a pair of jumper cable on the aircraft battery let on the ground i connected
it to the wire into the plane. (When I wire the battery cable, the red cap
was... the only one adaptable to my terminal...) It was the ground cable !!!
[Rolling Eyes]
>
> So yes, I did the ridiculouse mistake. And after so much time to wire the plane
to have it perfectly i do this kind of ridiculouse mistake.
>
> Then... I set master switch ON. and I see a light... it was not a light it was
a wire on the battery relay that it was on fire, melting completly his insulation.
>
>
> my contactor :
>
> http://www.bandc.aero/continuousdutycontactor.aspx
>
> my master relay switch :
>
> http://www.bandc.aero/toggleswitch-doublepole.aspx
>
> After that I investiguate quickly, and I find that I set the polarity on the
wrong way. I set it in the good one.
>
> Same result ! Wire coming red without no more insulation.
>
> My first question is :
>
> - my IFF/Radio/electronics ignitions and all the electronics parts are good to
the bin ? (I have a Trig S mode... new electronics Ignitions) wire like the
Z19 with a diode and without avionics switch like the Z19.
>
> - Why I have in the bad polarity, but also in the good this wire that is comming
hot and red ?
>
> - I spoke about the electronics instruments, but the others wires could be damage
as the wire spoke above ?
>
> If you have some advise for the next step for me... I will appreciate [Rolling
Eyes]
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480937#480937
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/capture_decran_2018_06_17_a_000034_117.png
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/capture_decran_2018_06_17_a_000019_153.png
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z19 first try and smoke/wire melted I did a mistake |
| From: | "Achille" <mickael.t(at)live.fr> |
Thank you bob for you reply. I hope to find just the diode end the wire U/S. Many
thanks.
I have to check just the intgrity of contactor ground wire (master switch to the
ground bus) easily accessible or I could have other wire damaged ?
Because all my wires are set in harness with sleeve.
About the possible damage, with luck just this wire and diode. But without
Alternator diode couldn't be damage at least ? and my ignitions and transpondeur
? (I checked on the user manuel they told that inversion of polarity damage
it) But in the case of switch was in OFF on the transpondeur (for exemple) it
can damage it ? (I ask the question because I was doing a quote of my error to
be prepared in the event of I have to change part.. and total price become quickly
crazy)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480944#480944
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z19 first try and smoke/wire melted I did |
a mistake
At 08:56 PM 6/16/2018, you wrote:
>
>Thank you bob for you reply. I hope to find just the diode end the
>wire U/S. Many thanks.
>
>I have to check just the integrity of contactor ground wire (master
>switch to the ground bus) easily accessible or I could have other
>wire damaged ?
If the burned wire is in a bundle, there is a
probability for damage to adjacent wires that
should be investigated.
>Because all my wires are set in harness with sleeve.
. . . oh . . . fooey. Not an enviable task.
You might open just a portion of the sleeved
bundle for inspection. Find the contactor control
wire as assess damage to it's insulation and
propagation of damage to other wires.
>About the possible damage, with luck just this wire and diode. But without
>Alternator diode couldn't be damage at least ?
No, it's unlikely that the rest of the
system suffered any damage. To connect the
battery to the system, you have to close the
battery contactor. When battery power is
backwards, the diode across the contactor
coil is essentially a dead short across the
coil. If the diode is small (like a plastic
1N4000 series) it may simply explode and
remove itself from the equation. Not good.
Then the contactor coil closes and reversed
power is applied to the. This still isn't
an automatic condition for total distaster.
The alternator diode array will now become
reverse biased. The array is 6 to 9 diodes
in series pairs that will (1) prevent the
bus voltage from rising to more than a couple
volts . . . for a short period of time. The
b-lead protection device will operate and
disconnect the alternator from the bus.
After this time, all bets are off. But bus
voltage does waayyyy negative to what ever
the battery supplies.
If your contactor diode is mechanically
intact AND the control wire is burned, this
tells us that the contactor never closed.
You'll also find that your b-lead protection
is closed.
>and my ignitions and transpondeur ? (I checked on the user manuel
>they told that inversion of polarity damage it) But in the case of
>switch was in OFF on the transpondeur (for exemple) it can damage it
>? (I ask the question because I was doing a quote of my error to be
>prepared in the event of I have to change part.. and total price
>become quickly crazy)
I think your misery for having suffered this
event will be limited to inspection and repair
of the burned wire and replacement of the
contactor coil suppression diode.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z19 first try and smoke/wire melted I did |
a mistake
If the OP had installed a "snapjack" rather than a diode on his battery
contactor, would the contactor have closed, and delivered the reverse
polarity current to the rest of the system? If so, then perhaps this is an
argument in favor of diodes vs snapjacks.
Ken Ryan
On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 7:35 AM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 08:56 PM 6/16/2018, you wrote:
>
>
> Thank you bob for you reply. I hope to find just the diode end the wire
> U/S. Many thanks.
>
> I have to check just the integrity of contactor ground wire (master switch
> to the ground bus) easily accessible or I could have other wire damaged ?
>
>
> If the burned wire is in a bundle, there is a
> probability for damage to adjacent wires that
> should be investigated.
>
> Because all my wires are set in harness with sleeve.
>
>
> . . . oh . . . fooey. Not an enviable task.
> You might open just a portion of the sleeved
> bundle for inspection. Find the contactor control
> wire as assess damage to it's insulation and
> propagation of damage to other wires.
>
>
> About the possible damage, with luck just this wire and diode. But without
> Alternator diode couldn't be damage at least ?
>
>
> No, it's unlikely that the rest of the
> system suffered any damage. To connect the
> battery to the system, you have to close the
> battery contactor. When battery power is
> backwards, the diode across the contactor
> coil is essentially a dead short across the
> coil. If the diode is small (like a plastic
> 1N4000 series) it may simply explode and
> remove itself from the equation. Not good.
> Then the contactor coil closes and reversed
> power is applied to the. This still isn't
> an automatic condition for total distaster.
> The alternator diode array will now become
> reverse biased. The array is 6 to 9 diodes
> in series pairs that will (1) prevent the
> bus voltage from rising to more than a couple
> volts . . . for a short period of time. The
> b-lead protection device will operate and
> disconnect the alternator from the bus.
>
> After this time, all bets are off. But bus
> voltage does waayyyy negative to what ever
> the battery supplies.
>
> If your contactor diode is mechanically
> intact AND the control wire is burned, this
> tells us that the contactor never closed.
> You'll also find that your b-lead protection
> is closed.
>
> and my ignitions and transpondeur ? (I checked on the user manuel they
> told that inversion of polarity damage it) But in the case of switch was in
> OFF on the transpondeur (for exemple) it can damage it ? (I ask the
> question because I was doing a quote of my error to be prepared in the
> event of I have to change part.. and total price become quickly crazy)
>
>
> I think your misery for having suffered this
> event will be limited to inspection and repair
> of the burned wire and replacement of the
> contactor coil suppression diode.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z19 first try and smoke/wire melted I did a mistake |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
It does not matter what kind of arc suppression device is in parallel with the
contactor coil. That coil is going to energize when the switch is turned on (unless
the master switch wire burns open). A diode in series with the contactor
coil would prevent it from being energized by a reverse polarity battery.
If a builder were concerned about reverse polarity, two diodes could be used,
one in parallel with the coil and one in series. But what about protection against
line boys with 24 volt jumper cables?
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480956#480956
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z19 first try and smoke/wire melted I did |
a mistake
At 02:33 PM 6/17/2018, you wrote:
>If the OP had installed a "snapjack" rather than a diode on his
>battery contactor, would the contactor have closed, and delivered
>the reverse polarity current to the rest of the system? If so, then
>perhaps this is an argument in favor of diodes vs snapjacks.
>
>Ken Ryan
Correct. A 'snapjack' is a zener/tvs device in series
with a diode . . . sometimes we see two tvs devices
back to back. The breakdown votlage for selected
devices has to be somewhat greater than system
voltage . . . so yes, this story might have
ended differently if something other than the
plain-vanilla diode were installed . . . or the
diode was not mechanically robust.
We generally don't incorporate reverse polarity
protection on battery contactors. Battery cables
are usually difficult or impossible to hook up
backwards. External batteries on jumper cables
is another matter.
I believe I've shown reverse polarity protection
on all the ground power circuits . . . some include
OV protection as well.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z19 first try and smoke/wire melted I did |
a mistake
At 03:52 PM 6/17/2018, you wrote:
>
>It does not matter what kind of arc suppression device is in
>parallel with the contactor coil. That coil is going to energize
>when the switch is turned on (unless the master switch wire burns
>open). A diode in series with the contactor coil would prevent it
>from being energized by a reverse polarity battery. If a builder
>were concerned about reverse polarity, two diodes could be used, one
>in parallel with the coil and one in series. But what about
>protection against line boys with 24 volt jumper cables?
Yeah, I had a line-crew feller hook 28v to my 14v
172XP for a start assist on a -5C morning in KC.
He had his back turned to me and the WWII surplus,
gas driven generator was pretty noisy so yelling
was futile.
I hit the starter and got a really energetic engine
start. Only then did he hit the disconnect switch
never having looked at me. I wanted to get out and
. . . well . . . but that would have called for
stopping the engine. A quick check of the panel didn't
show evidence of damage so I chalked it up to experience
and future planning:
Me: You know this is a 14v airplane, right?
LB: Sure
Me: you know that you're not to take your eyes off
me, or take your fingers off the switch at any
time external power is on the airplane?
LB: Yeah, sure.
Me: You know that power doesn't go ON until I give
you a thumbs up?
LB: I can do that.
Me; You know that thumbs down means turn it OFF?
Lb: Okay.
Me: You're a bright fellow.
Then I tip him $5 and invite him to have a beer
on me.
REAL airplanes have ground power jacks fitted with
polarity protection, ov protection and CREW CONTROLLED
ground power contactors.
https://goo.gl/xzixnk
https://goo.gl/CbPgUw
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z19 first try and smoke/wire melted I did a mistake |
| From: | "Achille" <mickael.t(at)live.fr> |
I will advise you this weekend I will asses.
The contactor wire is the only one that is alone, so it will be easy to change
it if it's the only one that could be damage. In my mind it don't keep clear my
mistake that it do du to lack of knowledge. I will see.
For the protection i checked user manuel the only one things that have a protection
for reversal is my old becker AR3201 that I have to change it before august
2018 du to eupean rules..
I hope you have right bob and I have no doubt. Just i did the quote in case of...
I was thinking about one things. My ignitions have the case grounded and have the
ground wire, both are grounded on the ground buses. I don't have short cut
the ignition module ?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480966#480966
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/capture_decran_2018_06_18_a_193042_250.png
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe Grounds |
Thanks Bob and everyone, I'm back with new data, having returned to the
airplane and flown it today.
Disregard what I said before about the volume- the noise is not impacted by
the local headset volume or by the intercom volume, or the 430 volume. It
seems to be not adjustable at all. It does not seem to be present when the
engine is not running, but then again the alternator noise is the majority
of the noise, and it would not be present with the engine off.
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 6:13 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 03:01 PM 6/12/2018, you wrote:
>
> Yes, and also a gns430w and skyview system.
>
>
> Just for grins . . . try unplugging the
> data cable between the intercom/controll
> panel and the remote transceiver . . . and
> see if the noise is affected.
>
> Oh yeah, are you sure it's alternator whine . . .
> pitch rises and falls with engine rpm?
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe |
Grounds
At 02:16 PM 6/18/2018, you wrote:
>Thanks Bob and everyone, I'm back with new data, having returned to
>the airplane and flown it today.
>
>Disregard what I said before about the volume- the noise is not
>impacted by the local headset volume or by the intercom volume, or
>the 430 volume. It seems to be not adjustable at all. It does not
>seem to be present when the engine is not running, but then again
>the alternator noise is the majority of the noise, and it would not
>be present with the engine off.
Are these headsets noise canceling? I.e. fitted with
electronics of some kind? I was looking for Bose X
Model info on the 'net with no success for the quick
look-see.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z19 first try and smoke/wire melted I did |
a mistake
At 12:38 PM 6/18/2018, you wrote:
>
>I will advise you this weekend I will asses.
>
>The contactor wire is the only one that is alone, so it will be easy
>to change it if it's the only one that could be damage. In my mind
>it don't keep clear my mistake that it do du to lack of knowledge. I will see.
The only OTHER wires at risk would be those
tightly bundled with the damaged wire. Even
so, the 'damage' may be limited to staining
of the insulation. If there are no wires in close
proximity to the damaged one, then you're
home almost free.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Daniell <wdaniell.longport(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
Joe,
can you confirm wiring for the JD voltage regulator please.
B+ = DC + output to capacitor and system
AC = yellow wires from generator
L = indicator light
IGW = master?
is that right?
thanks
Will
William Daniell
LONGPORT
+57 310 295 0744
On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 11:03 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> Ken,
> While I have great respect for Mike M. and admire his knowledge, I do
> disagree with that ending statement. Heat caused by high current can
> damage alternator windings. But the total current is determined by the
> load, not by the regulator. I do not think that the Silent Hektik
> regulator will stress the alternator any more than the Ducati regulator.
> Two years ago I replaced the Ducati regulator in my RV-12 with a cheap
> John Deere regulator from eBay. I made an adapter plate using 1/8"
> aluminum because the mounting holes did not line up. I used heat
> conductive grease on both sides of the mounting plate. A thermocouple
> attached to the John Deere regulator measured a maximum temperature of 157
> degrees Fahrenheit on a 90+ degree day.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480768#480768
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Will,
Yes, you are correct.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480974#480974
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Charging System |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Use heat conductive paste between the regulator and aluminum airframe or heat sink.
The regulator case should be well grounded. Some installers connect a ground
wire to one of the mounting bolts. Forced air cooling will prolong regulator
life.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=480977#480977
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe Grounds |
Yes, ANR heAdsets powered by the airplane electrical system.
On June 18, 2018 16:57:36 "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
wrote:
> At 02:16 PM 6/18/2018, you wrote:
>
>> Thanks Bob and everyone, I'm
>> back with new data, having returned to the airplane and flown it
>> today.
>>
>> Disregard what I said before about the volume- the noise is not impacted
>> by the local headset volume or by the intercom volume, or the 430 volume.
>> It seems to be not adjustable at all. It does not seem to be present when
>> the engine is not running, but then again the alternator noise is the
>> majority of the noise, and it would not be present with the engine
>> off.
>
>
> Are these headsets noise canceling? I.e. fitted with
> electronics of some kind? I was looking for Bose X
> Model info on the 'net with no success for the quick
> look-see.
>
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe |
Grounds
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
I don't think that is the question, and no, most ANR headsets are NOT
powered by the aircraft electrics...most are battery powered, only those
with a LEMO plug are aircraft powered.
Nonetheless, ANR circuitry can be affected by extraneous RF.
On 6/19/2018 5:37 AM, Jared Yates wrote:
> Yes, ANR heAdsets powered by the airplane electrical system.
>
> On June 18, 2018 16:57:36 "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> wrote:
>> Are these headsets noise canceling? I.e. fitted with
>> electronics of some kind? I was looking for Bose X
>> Model info on the 'net with no success for the quick
>> look-see.
>>
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe |
Grounds
At 07:37 AM 6/19/2018, you wrote:
>Yes, ANR heAdsets powered by the airplane electrical system.
Okay, do I correctly interpret that your
audio system is capable of using either
the Bose X or say a plain vanilla headset?
The fact that your noise is affected by
changes in body conduction suggests that the
stimulus is entering the system through
those spaces in close proximity to your
bod . . . like the things clamped on your
head?
Try another headset if you can . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe Grounds |
Good suggestion, thanks. So far all 4 lemo sets are the same. I have a dual
plug version of the same bose to try, and can do that and report back.
On June 19, 2018 09:10:19 "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
wrote:
> At 07:37 AM 6/19/2018, you wrote:
>
>> Yes, ANR heAdsets powered by the
>> airplane electrical system.
>
>
> Okay, do I correctly interpret that your
> audio system is capable of using either
> the Bose X or say a plain vanilla headset?
>
> The fact that your noise is affected by
> changes in body conduction suggests that the
> stimulus is entering the system through
> those spaces in close proximity to your
> bod . . . like the things clamped on your
> head?
>
> Try another headset if you can . . .
>
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
>I hate paint, and I'm certainly no expert. But I'd bet that the only
>paints that contain enough metal to be an RF issue would be the
>'silver' step of fabric coatings, some of which (likely all the old
>stuff) contain aluminum dust as a UV blocker, and paints
>specifically sold as metallic and/or metalflake colors.
I am skeptical of the claimed effects for metallic
particles in the paint. Intuitively, one can easily
accept that placing conductive/refractive materials
in the path of an electromagnetic wave will have
some 'effect' . . . but to what degree?
In electromagnetic compatibility schools we're taught
that 'breaks in shields should be kept to 1/10th
wavelength at frequency of interest to avoid degrading
that shield's effectiveness'.
We've seen reflectors for centimeter wave, dish
antennas made from metallic mesh with significant
openings . . . yet so small compared to the wavelength
of the operating frequency as to behave as a solid
surface.
When you place a conductor (like a dipole antenna)
out in the air and exposed it to some EM field,
then energy at the frequency where the antenna is
resonant will excite the antenna and manifest with
a strong current node in the middle and voltage nodes
at the ends.
Now, you've got the 1/2 wave piece of wire 'singing'
in harmony with the constellations of energy that
are harmonic multiples of the resonant frequency.
What happens to that energy? If you've got a feeding
attached at the current node, you can suck of a substantial
part of that energy and route it someplace else . . . like
your VOR receiver.
But unless there is a feed line, energy exciting
the antenna will be rejected as heat from ohmic
losses at the current node or re-radiated. After
all, it HAS to go somewhere.
So what about those little bits of metal suspended in
an otherwise non-conductive paint? I suspect that a
really 'chunky' filling (0.001") flakes would be
the largest practical filler. What portion of a wavelength
is 0.001" compared to the wavelength of the comm
transceiver or even GPS?
Pretty small. This suggests that the currents induced
in such particles at our frequencies of interest are
vanishingly small, i.e. insignificant. These particles
ARE significant at wavelengths of light, hence effective
modifiers for those electromagnetic fields. However,
I suspect that there are no measurable effects for such
particles at our frequencies of interest.
Particle sizes are simply too far removed from resonance where
significant currents would be induced. No current,
no heat, no re-radiation, no measurable effects.
It's an easy experiment to conduct and I have the equipment
to do it . . . just no time at the moment and I'll need
to acquire some exemplar coatings to test.
If anyone is aware of quantified studies conducted on
this topic, I'd be grateful for some linkage. Anyone
conversant in an alternative explanation is encouraged
to correct my mis-conception . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe |
Grounds
At 09:36 AM 6/19/2018, you wrote:
>Good suggestion, thanks. So far all 4 lemo sets are the same. I have
>a dual plug version of the same bose to try, and can do that and report back
Hmmmm . . . not sure I've got an accurate image
of the differences between 'lemo' and 'dual plug'.
Does this described the connectors at the end
of the headset cord . . . single mulit-pin as opposed
to "Y" plugs?
To be significant, the test headset needs to
be a generic, non-electronic . . . but go
ahead and try the dual-plug Bose X too.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Roger <rnjcurtis(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe |
Grounds
Is the noise still present when the ANR is turned off?
Roger
At 09:36 AM 6/19/2018, you wrote:
Good suggestion, thanks. So far all 4 lemo sets are the same. I have a dual
plug version of the same bose to try, and can do that and report back
=C2- Hmmmm . . . not sure I've got an accurate image
=C2- of the differences between 'lemo' and 'dual plug'.
=C2- Does this described the connectors at the end
=C2- of the headset cord . . . single mulit-pin as opposed
=C2- to "Y" plugs?
=C2- To be significant, the test headset needs to
=C2- be a generic, non-electronic . . . but go
=C2- ahead and try the dual-plug Bose X too.
=C2- Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | don van santen <donvansanten(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe Grounds |
A lemo plug has mic and audio plus the power in one plug. These are not
phone jack type plugs. The dual plugs are the typical phone jack with the
audio and mic cables seperate, also no power.
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018, 11:12 Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 09:36 AM 6/19/2018, you wrote:
>
> Good suggestion, thanks. So far all 4 lemo sets are the same. I have a
> dual plug version of the same bose to try, and can do that and report back
>
>
> Hmmmm . . . not sure I've got an accurate image
> of the differences between 'lemo' and 'dual plug'.
> Does this described the connectors at the end
> of the headset cord . . . single mulit-pin as opposed
> to "Y" plugs?
>
> To be significant, the test headset needs to
> be a generic, non-electronic . . . but go
> ahead and try the dual-plug Bose X too.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
If I'm not mistaken, Jim Weir did these experiments and documented them in
his antennae booklet.=C2- I may be wrong, since it was years ago that I w
ent through them, but I'm pretty sure that he even included a diagram.
On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 2:05 PM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
I hate paint, andI'm certainly no expert. But I'd bet that the only paints
that containenough metal to be an RF issue would be the 'silver' step of fa
briccoatings, some of which (likely all the old stuff) contain aluminum dus
tas a UV blocker, and paints specifically sold as metallic and/ormetalflake
colors.
=C2- I am skeptical of the claimed effects for metallic
=C2- particles in the paint. Intuitively, one can easily
=C2- accept that placing conductive/refractive materials
=C2- in the path of an electromagnetic wave will have
=C2- some 'effect' . . . but to what degree?
=C2- In electromagnetic compatibility schools we're taught
=C2- that 'breaks in shields should be kept to 1/10th
=C2- wavelength at frequency of interest to avoid degrading
=C2- that shield's effectiveness'.
=C2- We've seen reflectors for centimeter wave, dish
=C2- antennas made from metallic mesh with significant
=C2- openings . . . yet so small compared to the wavelength
=C2- of the operating frequency as to behave as a solid
=C2- surface.
=C2- When you place a conductor (like a dipole antenna)
=C2- out in the air and exposed it to some EM field,
=C2- then energy at the frequency where the antenna is
=C2- resonant will excite the antenna and manifest with
=C2- a strong current node in the middle and voltage nodes
=C2- at the ends.
=C2- Now, you've got the 1/2 wave piece of wire 'singing'
=C2- in harmony with the constellations of energy that
=C2- are harmonic multiples of the resonant frequency.
=C2- What happens to that energy? If you've got a feeding
=C2- attached at the current node, you can suck of a substantial
=C2- part of that energy and route it someplace else . . . like
=C2- your VOR receiver.
=C2- But unless there is a feed line, energy exciting
=C2- the antenna will be rejected as heat from ohmic
=C2- losses at the current node or re-radiated. After
=C2- all, it HAS to go somewhere.
=C2- So what about those little bits of metal suspended in
=C2- an otherwise non-conductive paint? I suspect that a
=C2- really 'chunky' filling (0.001") flakes would be
=C2- the largest practical filler. What portion of a wavelength
=C2- is 0.001" compared to the wavelength of the comm
=C2- transceiver or even GPS?
=C2- Pretty small. This suggests that the currentsinduced
=C2- in such particles at our frequencies of interest are
=C2- vanishingly small, i.e. insignificant. These particles
=C2- ARE significant at wavelengths of light, hence effective
=C2- modifiers for those electromagnetic fields. However,
=C2- I suspect that there are no measurable effects for such
=C2- particles at our frequencies of interest.
=C2- Particle sizes are simply too far removed from resonancewhere
=C2- significant currents would be induced. No current,
=C2- no heat, no re-radiation, no measurable effects.
=C2- It's an easy experiment to conduct and I have the equipment
=C2- to do it . . . just no time at the moment and I'll need
=C2- to acquire some exemplar coatings to test.
=C2- If anyone is aware of quantified studies conducted on
=C2- this topic, I'd be grateful for some linkage. Anyone
=C2- conversant in an alternative explanation is encouraged
=C2- to correct my mis-conception . . .=C2-
=C2- Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Cox <rv10pro(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
Lost navigation on one of our Bombardier Q400s. On researching the
circuitry wiring, components and attachments. We found a paint shop had
forgotten to mask the antenna's. That was Azko White..... no metallic.
Your mileage may vary. Paint can have an attenuation factor. Good Luck.
New unpainted antennas on the port and starboard side of the Vertical
corrected the problem.
could it have been corrosion from the antenna mount to the skin of the
Vertical. Mark it up the the incredible job I did preparing the
replacement antenna installation if you want to go there.
John Cox
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 12:01 PM Ernest Christley
wrote:
> If I'm not mistaken, Jim Weir did these experiments and documented them in
> his antennae booklet. I may be wrong, since it was years ago that I went
> through them, but I'm pretty sure that he even included a diagram.
>
>
> On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 2:05 PM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
>
> I hate paint, and I'm certainly no expert. But I'd bet that the only
> paints that contain enough metal to be an RF issue would be the 'silver'
> step of fabric coatings, some of which (likely all the old stuff) contain
> aluminum dust as a UV blocker, and paints specifically sold as metallic
> and/or metalflake colors.
>
>
> I am skeptical of the claimed effects for metallic
> particles in the paint. Intuitively, one can easily
> accept that placing conductive/refractive materials
> in the path of an electromagnetic wave will have
> some 'effect' . . . but to what degree?
>
> In electromagnetic compatibility schools we're taught
> that 'breaks in shields should be kept to 1/10th
> wavelength at frequency of interest to avoid degrading
> that shield's effectiveness'.
>
> We've seen reflectors for centimeter wave, dish
> antennas made from metallic mesh with significant
> openings . . . yet so small compared to the wavelength
> of the operating frequency as to behave as a solid
> surface.
>
> When you place a conductor (like a dipole antenna)
> out in the air and exposed it to some EM field,
> then energy at the frequency where the antenna is
> resonant will excite the antenna and manifest with
> a strong current node in the middle and voltage nodes
> at the ends.
>
> Now, you've got the 1/2 wave piece of wire 'singing'
> in harmony with the constellations of energy that
> are harmonic multiples of the resonant frequency.
>
> What happens to that energy? If you've got a feeding
> attached at the current node, you can suck of a substantial
> part of that energy and route it someplace else . . . like
> your VOR receiver.
>
> But unless there is a feed line, energy exciting
> the antenna will be rejected as heat from ohmic
> losses at the current node or re-radiated. After
> all, it HAS to go somewhere.
>
> So what about those little bits of metal suspended in
> an otherwise non-conductive paint? I suspect that a
> really 'chunky' filling (0.001") flakes would be
> the largest practical filler. What portion of a wavelength
> is 0.001" compared to the wavelength of the comm
> transceiver or even GPS?
>
> Pretty small. This suggests that the currents induced
> in such particles at our frequencies of interest are
> vanishingly small, i.e. insignificant. These particles
> ARE significant at wavelengths of light, hence effective
> modifiers for those electromagnetic fields. However,
> I suspect that there are no measurable effects for such
> particles at our frequencies of interest.
>
> Particle sizes are simply too far removed from resonance where
> significant currents would be induced. No current,
> no heat, no re-radiation, no measurable effects.
>
> It's an easy experiment to conduct and I have the equipment
> to do it . . . just no time at the moment and I'll need
> to acquire some exemplar coatings to test.
>
> If anyone is aware of quantified studies conducted on
> this topic, I'd be grateful for some linkage. Anyone
> conversant in an alternative explanation is encouraged
> to correct my mis-conception . . .
>
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
--
Johnny C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
Bob:
You are 100% correct!
The reason why you are told not to paint Antennas especially GPS Antennas
with any paint and especially Metal Flake paint is:
After you go back to the Manufacture and say: My GPS has weak reception,
whats wrong?
The Manufacture will ask what color is your plane? And, when you say Candy
Apple Red with Gold Flake.
The Manufacture will say: You are NOT ALLOWED to paint the Antennas and
ESPECIALLY not in Metal Flake... Go Strip Your Plane! I TOLD YOU NOT TO
PAINT THE ANTENNAS!!! I wash my hands of the problem until you STRIP your
plane.
When all else fails - Blame the Pilot/Builder!
Barry
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 2:03 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> I hate paint, and I'm certainly no expert. But I'd bet that the only
> paints that contain enough metal to be an RF issue would be the 'silver'
> step of fabric coatings, some of which (likely all the old stuff) contain
> aluminum dust as a UV blocker, and paints specifically sold as metallic
> and/or metalflake colors.
>
>
> I am skeptical of the claimed effects for metallic
> particles in the paint. Intuitively, one can easily
> accept that placing conductive/refractive materials
> in the path of an electromagnetic wave will have
> some 'effect' . . . but to what degree?
>
> In electromagnetic compatibility schools we're taught
> that 'breaks in shields should be kept to 1/10th
> wavelength at frequency of interest to avoid degrading
> that shield's effectiveness'.
>
> We've seen reflectors for centimeter wave, dish
> antennas made from metallic mesh with significant
> openings . . . yet so small compared to the wavelength
> of the operating frequency as to behave as a solid
> surface.
>
> When you place a conductor (like a dipole antenna)
> out in the air and exposed it to some EM field,
> then energy at the frequency where the antenna is
> resonant will excite the antenna and manifest with
> a strong current node in the middle and voltage nodes
> at the ends.
>
> Now, you've got the 1/2 wave piece of wire 'singing'
> in harmony with the constellations of energy that
> are harmonic multiples of the resonant frequency.
>
> What happens to that energy? If you've got a feeding
> attached at the current node, you can suck of a substantial
> part of that energy and route it someplace else . . . like
> your VOR receiver.
>
> But unless there is a feed line, energy exciting
> the antenna will be rejected as heat from ohmic
> losses at the current node or re-radiated. After
> all, it HAS to go somewhere.
>
> So what about those little bits of metal suspended in
> an otherwise non-conductive paint? I suspect that a
> really 'chunky' filling (0.001") flakes would be
> the largest practical filler. What portion of a wavelength
> is 0.001" compared to the wavelength of the comm
> transceiver or even GPS?
>
> Pretty small. This suggests that the currents induced
> in such particles at our frequencies of interest are
> vanishingly small, i.e. insignificant. These particles
> ARE significant at wavelengths of light, hence effective
> modifiers for those electromagnetic fields. However,
> I suspect that there are no measurable effects for such
> particles at our frequencies of interest.
>
> Particle sizes are simply too far removed from resonance where
> significant currents would be induced. No current,
> no heat, no re-radiation, no measurable effects.
>
> It's an easy experiment to conduct and I have the equipment
> to do it . . . just no time at the moment and I'll need
> to acquire some exemplar coatings to test.
>
> If anyone is aware of quantified studies conducted on
> this topic, I'd be grateful for some linkage. Anyone
> conversant in an alternative explanation is encouraged
> to correct my mis-conception . . .
>
> <#m_-6842432749595176325_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sebastien <cluros(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
A few years ago someone gave me an old Cessna VHF antenna which was all
pitted and looked like hell. After checking with my avionics guy I sanded
it a bit and painted it with plastic paint. The performance is not always
perfect but I always assumed that is because it is too close to the ELT
antenna. Is painting fiberglass antennas a no-no?
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 12:15 PM, John Cox wrote:
> Lost navigation on one of our Bombardier Q400s. On researching the
> circuitry wiring, components and attachments. We found a paint shop had
> forgotten to mask the antenna's. That was Azko White..... no metallic.
> Your mileage may vary. Paint can have an attenuation factor. Good Luck.
> New unpainted antennas on the port and starboard side of the Vertical
> corrected the problem.
>
> could it have been corrosion from the antenna mount to the skin of the
> Vertical. Mark it up the the incredible job I did preparing the
> replacement antenna installation if you want to go there.
>
> John Cox
>
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 12:01 PM Ernest Christley
> wrote:
>
>> If I'm not mistaken, Jim Weir did these experiments and documented them
>> in his antennae booklet. I may be wrong, since it was years ago that I
>> went through them, but I'm pretty sure that he even included a diagram.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 2:05 PM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <
>> nuckolls.bob@a4443518791543424097y_msg_container">
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I hate paint, and I'm certainly no expert. But I'd bet that the only
>> paints that contain enough metal to be an RF issue would be the 'silver'
>> step of fabric coatings, some of which (likely all the old stuff) contain
>> aluminum dust as a UV blocker, and paints specifically sold as metallic
>> and/or metalflake colors.
>>
>>
>>
>> I am skeptical of the claimed effects for metallic
>> particles in the paint. Intuitively, one can easily
>> accept that placing conductive/refractive materials
>> in the path of an electromagnetic wave will have
>> some 'effect' . . . but to what degree?
>>
>> In electromagnetic compatibility schools we're taught
>> that 'breaks in shields should be kept to 1/10th
>> wavelength at frequency of interest to avoid degrading
>> that shield's effectiveness'.
>>
>> We've seen reflectors for centimeter wave, dish
>> antennas made from metallic mesh with significant
>> openings . . . yet so small compared to the wavelength
>> of the operating frequency as to behave as a solid
>> surface.
>>
>> When you place a conductor (like a dipole antenna)
>> out in the air and exposed it to some EM field,
>> then energy at the frequency where the antenna is
>> resonant will excite the antenna and manifest with
>> a strong current node in the middle and voltage nodes
>> at the ends.
>>
>> Now, you've got the 1/2 wave piece of wire 'singing'
>> in harmony with the constellations of energy that
>> are harmonic multiples of the resonant frequency.
>>
>> What happens to that energy? If you've got a feeding
>> attached at the current node, you can suck of a substantial
>> part of that energy and route it someplace else . . . like
>> your VOR receiver.
>>
>> But unless there is a feed line, energy exciting
>> the antenna will be rejected as heat from ohmic
>> losses at the current node or re-radiated. After
>> all, it HAS to go somewhere.
>>
>> So what about those little bits of metal suspended in
>> an otherwise non-conductive paint? I suspect that a
>> really 'chunky' filling (0.001") flakes would be
>> the largest practical filler. What portion of a wavelength
>> is 0.001" compared to the wavelength of the comm
>> transceiver or even GPS?
>>
>> Pretty small. This suggests that the currents induced
>> in such particles at our frequencies of interest are
>> vanishingly small, i.e. insignificant. These particles
>> ARE significant at wavelengths of light, hence effective
>> modifiers for those electromagnetic fields. However,
>> I suspect that there are no measurable effects for such
>> particles at our frequencies of interest.
>>
>> Particle sizes are simply too far removed from resonance where
>> significant currents would be induced. No current,
>> no heat, no re-radiation, no measurable effects.
>>
>> It's an easy experiment to conduct and I have the equipment
>> to do it . . . just no time at the moment and I'll need
>> to acquire some exemplar coatings to test.
>>
>> If anyone is aware of quantified studies conducted on
>> this topic, I'd be grateful for some linkage. Anyone
>> conversant in an alternative explanation is encouraged
>> to correct my mis-conception . . .
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Johnny C.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
A friend built a very nice RV-7 (featured on cover of AS catalog a few
years ago.) It is bare aluminum, with the wing tips painted with very
metallic aluminum color over the fiberglass. It has Archer nav and com
antennas in the wingtips. Prior to painting the antennas performed
acceptably, if maybe 30% less range than external antennas. After
painting the antennas had perhaps a 10 mile or less range, which forced
installing an external com antenna.
Kelly
On 6/19/2018 11:56 AM, Ernest Christley wrote:
> If I'm not mistaken, Jim Weir did these experiments and documented them
> in his antennae booklet. I may be wrong, since it was years ago that I
> went through them, but I'm pretty sure that he even included a diagram.
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 2:05 PM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> wrote:
>
>
>> I hate paint, and I'm certainly no expert. But I'd bet that the only
>> paints that contain enough metal to be an RF issue would be the
>> 'silver' step of fabric coatings, some of which (likely all the old
>> stuff) contain aluminum dust as a UV blocker, and paints specifically
>> sold as metallic and/or metalflake colors.
>
>
> I am skeptical of the claimed effects for metallic
> particles in the paint. Intuitively, one can easily
> accept that placing conductive/refractive materials
> in the path of an electromagnetic wave will have
> some 'effect' . . . but to what degree?
>
> In electromagnetic compatibility schools we're taught
> that 'breaks in shields should be kept to 1/10th
> wavelength at frequency of interest to avoid degrading
> that shield's effectiveness'.
>
> We've seen reflectors for centimeter wave, dish
> antennas made from metallic mesh with significant
> openings . . . yet so small compared to the wavelength
> of the operating frequency as to behave as a solid
> surface.
>
> When you place a conductor (like a dipole antenna)
> out in the air and exposed it to some EM field,
> then energy at the frequency where the antenna is
> resonant will excite the antenna and manifest with
> a strong current node in the middle and voltage nodes
> at the ends.
>
> Now, you've got the 1/2 wave piece of wire 'singing'
> in harmony with the constellations of energy that
> are harmonic multiples of the resonant frequency.
>
> What happens to that energy? If you've got a feeding
> attached at the current node, you can suck of a substantial
> part of that energy and route it someplace else . . . like
> your VOR receiver.
>
> But unless there is a feed line, energy exciting
> the antenna will be rejected as heat from ohmic
> losses at the current node or re-radiated. After
> all, it HAS to go somewhere.
>
> So what about those little bits of metal suspended in
> an otherwise non-conductive paint? I suspect that a
> really 'chunky' filling (0.001") flakes would be
> the largest practical filler. What portion of a wavelength
> is 0.001" compared to the wavelength of the comm
> transceiver or even GPS?
>
> Pretty small. This suggests that the currents induced
> in such particles at our frequencies of interest are
> vanishingly small, i.e. insignificant. These particles
> ARE significant at wavelengths of light, hence effective
> modifiers for those electromagnetic fields. However,
> I suspect that there are no measurable effects for such
> particles at our frequencies of interest.
>
> Particle sizes are simply too far removed from resonance where
> significant currents would be induced. No current,
> no heat, no re-radiation, no measurable effects.
>
> It's an easy experiment to conduct and I have the equipment
> to do it . . . just no time at the moment and I'll need
> to acquire some exemplar coatings to test.
>
> If anyone is aware of quantified studies conducted on
> this topic, I'd be grateful for some linkage. Anyone
> conversant in an alternative explanation is encouraged
> to correct my mis-conception . . .
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Stuart Hutchison <stuart(at)stuarthutchison.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
G=99day Bob.
I=99m building a 200KTAS aeroplane, so very reluctant to put
anything out in the breeze that I don=99t have to. I mounted my
Garmin and Dynon GPS antennas under the windscreen, but being white they
will surely cause unwanted reflections. I intend to test some different
things, but first option was to tack some black stockings under the dash
mat and slip that over both antennas. I suppose black stockings are
darkened with carbon, so there may be some attenuation, but if there is
it should be immediately visible on the signal strength bar graphs on
screen. Alternatives are black tissue paper and a very light coat of
matt black paint as a last resort. It might take me a few weeks to
muster the courage to walk in store to buy black stockings, but will
come back the forum with some observations soon.
Kind regards, Stu
> On 20 Jun 2018, at 04:03, Robert L. Nuckolls, III
wrote:
>
>> I hate paint, and I'm certainly no expert. But I'd bet that the only
paints that contain enough metal to be an RF issue would be the 'silver'
step of fabric coatings, some of which (likely all the old stuff)
contain aluminum dust as a UV blocker, and paints specifically sold as
metallic and/or metalflake colors.
>
>
> I am skeptical of the claimed effects for metallic
> particles in the paint. Intuitively, one can easily
> accept that placing conductive/refractive materials
> in the path of an electromagnetic wave will have
> some 'effect' . . . but to what degree?
>
> In electromagnetic compatibility schools we're taught
> that 'breaks in shields should be kept to 1/10th
> wavelength at frequency of interest to avoid degrading
> that shield's effectiveness'.
>
> We've seen reflectors for centimeter wave, dish
> antennas made from metallic mesh with significant
> openings . . . yet so small compared to the wavelength
> of the operating frequency as to behave as a solid
> surface.
>
> When you place a conductor (like a dipole antenna)
> out in the air and exposed it to some EM field,
> then energy at the frequency where the antenna is
> resonant will excite the antenna and manifest with
> a strong current node in the middle and voltage nodes
> at the ends.
>
> Now, you've got the 1/2 wave piece of wire 'singing'
> in harmony with the constellations of energy that
> are harmonic multiples of the resonant frequency.
>
> What happens to that energy? If you've got a feeding
> attached at the current node, you can suck of a substantial
> part of that energy and route it someplace else . . . like
> your VOR receiver.
>
> But unless there is a feed line, energy exciting
> the antenna will be rejected as heat from ohmic
> losses at the current node or re-radiated. After
> all, it HAS to go somewhere.
>
> So what about those little bits of metal suspended in
> an otherwise non-conductive paint? I suspect that a
> really 'chunky' filling (0.001") flakes would be
> the largest practical filler. What portion of a wavelength
> is 0.001" compared to the wavelength of the comm
> transceiver or even GPS?
>
> Pretty small. This suggests that the currents induced
> in such particles at our frequencies of interest are
> vanishingly small, i.e. insignificant. These particles
> ARE significant at wavelengths of light, hence effective
> modifiers for those electromagnetic fields. However,
> I suspect that there are no measurable effects for such
> particles at our frequencies of interest.
>
> Particle sizes are simply too far removed from resonance where
> significant currents would be induced. No current,
> no heat, no re-radiation, no measurable effects.
>
> It's an easy experiment to conduct and I have the equipment
> to do it . . . just no time at the moment and I'll need
> to acquire some exemplar coatings to test.
>
> If anyone is aware of quantified studies conducted on
> this topic, I'd be grateful for some linkage. Anyone
> conversant in an alternative explanation is encouraged
> to correct my mis-conception . . .
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Prather <mapratherid(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
Hi Bob,
Long time no contact... I=99m happy you=99re still in this game
!
Regarding this topic, I wonder how much the the conductive bits are in conta
ct with each other. I don=99t know how isolated each bit of conductive
material is in such a paint, but I could imagine there could be billions of
contacts between neighboring bits of flake or powder such that there would b
e a random resistive path across the painted surface. So, maybe it=99
s not a constellation of very small dipoles, but a very large, random, resis
tive network? Maybe that=99s an easy theory to test - use an ohmmeter
to check how much conductivity there is across a painted surface? Might ha
ve to dig the probes around to get contact?
As far as non-metallic paint on antennas, I wonder if that=99s a detun
ing effect because of changing the dielectric...
Regards,
Matt Prather
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 19, 2018, at 12:56 PM, Ernest Christley wrote:
>
> If I'm not mistaken, Jim Weir did these experiments and documented them in
his antennae booklet. I may be wrong, since it was years ago that I went t
hrough them, but I'm pretty sure that he even included a diagram.
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 2:05 PM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" @aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
>
>> I hate paint, and I'm certainly no expert. But I'd bet that the only pain
ts that contain enough metal to be an RF issue would be the 'silver' step of
fabric coatings, some of which (likely all the old stuff) contain aluminum d
ust as a UV blocker, and paints specifically sold as metallic and/or metalfl
ake colors.
>
>
> I am skeptical of the claimed effects for metallic
> particles in the paint. Intuitively, one can easily
> accept that placing conductive/refractive materials
> in the path of an electromagnetic wave will have
> some 'effect' . . . but to what degree?
>
> In electromagnetic compatibility schools we're taught
> that 'breaks in shields should be kept to 1/10th
> wavelength at frequency of interest to avoid degrading
> that shield's effectiveness'.
>
> We've seen reflectors for centimeter wave, dish
> antennas made from metallic mesh with significant
> openings . . . yet so small compared to the wavelength
> of the operating frequency as to behave as a solid
> surface.
>
> When you place a conductor (like a dipole antenna)
> out in the air and exposed it to some EM field,
> then energy at the frequency where the antenna is
> resonant will excite the antenna and manifest with
> a strong current node in the middle and voltage nodes
> at the ends.
>
> Now, you've got the 1/2 wave piece of wire 'singing'
> in harmony with the constellations of energy that
> are harmonic multiples of the resonant frequency.
>
> What happens to that energy? If you've got a feeding
> attached at the current node, you can suck of a substantial
> part of that energy and route it someplace else . . . like
> your VOR receiver.
>
> But unless there is a feed line, energy exciting
> the antenna will be rejected as heat from ohmic
> losses at the current node or re-radiated. After
> all, it HAS to go somewhere.
>
> So what about those little bits of metal suspended in
> an otherwise non-conductive paint? I suspect that a
> really 'chunky' filling (0.001") flakes would be
> the largest practical filler. What portion of a wavelength
> is 0.001" compared to the wavelength of the comm
> transceiver or even GPS?
>
> Pretty small. This suggests that the currents induced
> in such particles at our frequencies of interest are
> vanishingly small, i.e. insignificant. These particles
> ARE significant at wavelengths of light, hence effective
> modifiers for those electromagnetic fields. However,
> I suspect that there are no measurable effects for such
> particles at our frequencies of interest.
>
> Particle sizes are simply too far removed from resonance where
> significant currents would be induced. No current,
> no heat, no re-radiation, no measurable effects.
>
> It's an easy experiment to conduct and I have the equipment
> to do it . . . just no time at the moment and I'll need
> to acquire some exemplar coatings to test.
>
> If anyone is aware of quantified studies conducted on
> this topic, I'd be grateful for some linkage. Anyone
> conversant in an alternative explanation is encouraged
> to correct my mis-conception . . .
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
At 07:56 AM 6/20/2018, you wrote:
>Hi Bob,
>Long time no contact... I=99m happy you=99re still in this
game!
>
>Regarding this topic, I wonder how much the the
>conductive bits are in contact with each other.
>I don=99t know how isolated each bit of
>conductive material is in such a paint, but I
>could imagine there could be billions of
>contacts between neighboring bits of flake or
>powder such that there would be a random
>resistive path across the painted surface. So,
>maybe it=99s not a constellation of very small
>dipoles, but a very large, random, resistive
>network? Maybe that=99s an easy theory to test
>- use an ohmmeter to check how much conductivity
>there is across a painted surface? Might have
>to dig the probes around to get contact?
Interesting hypothesis . . . I'm day-dreaming
a methodology for testing various coatings
as 'shields' . . .
>As far as non-metallic paint on antennas, I
>wonder if that=99s a detuning effect because of changing the
dielectric...
A valid hypothesis I think. I've been supplying
antennas to folks in the local prescribed burn
and fire fighting associations. There's a
product sold on eBay fabricated from 'ladder
line' that performs as a dual band (VHF/UHF)
antenna. I housed one in a piece of 1" thinwall
pvc but disappointed to find that the center
frequencies moved down about 10%.
The antenna was 'snug' in the pipl.
Tried a piece of 2" and things got
better . . . ~5% downshift. Hmmm . . .
getting ready to try a 3" piece with
spacers designed to hold the antenna central
to the radome. I'm betting this is going
to be 'the answer' but not the solution.
Wind-loading for so large a radome complicates
the support structures. I can use this antenna
on the little antenna farm on my roof but not
on top of a 30 foot mast in the Kansas winter
ice and all the time winds. I've ordered materials
to built all metal dual band antennas of this
configuration.
Emacs!
No radome necessary.
So I think your dielectric proximity idea is not without
merit . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Harry Bartel" <hlbartel(at)pld.com> |
Bob,
You=99ll like the antenna you have pictured, I believe. I have
been using a home-brewed version of that antenna now for several years
and I love it as a dual-band antenna.
Harry
N0HQG
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Paint question
At 07:56 AM 6/20/2018, you wrote:
Hi Bob,
Long time no contact... I=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2m happy
you=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2re still in this game!
Regarding this topic, I wonder how much the the conductive bits are in
contact with each other. I don=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2t know how
isolated each bit of conductive material is in such a paint, but I could
imagine there could be billions of contacts between neighboring bits of
flake or powder such that there would be a random resistive path across
the painted surface. So, maybe it=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2s not a
constellation of very small dipoles, but a very large, random, resistive
network? Maybe that=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2s an easy theory to test -
use an ohmmeter to check how much conductivity there is across a painted
surface? Might have to dig the probes around to get contact?
Interesting hypothesis . . . I'm day-dreaming
a methodology for testing various coatings
as 'shields' . . .
As far as non-metallic paint on antennas, I wonder if
that=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2s a detuning effect because of changing the
dielectric...
A valid hypothesis I think. I've been supplying
antennas to folks in the local prescribed burn
and fire fighting associations. There's a
product sold on eBay fabricated from 'ladder
line' that performs as a dual band (VHF/UHF)
antenna. I housed one in a piece of 1" thinwall
pvc but disappointed to find that the center
frequencies moved down about 10%.
The antenna was 'snug' in the pipl.
Tried a piece of 2" and things got
better . . . ~5% downshift. Hmmm . . .
getting ready to try a 3" piece with
spacers designed to hold the antenna central
to the radome. I'm betting this is going
to be 'the answer' but not the solution.
Wind-loading for so large a radome complicates
the support structures. I can use this antenna
on the little antenna farm on my roof but not
on top of a 30 foot mast in the Kansas winter
ice and all the time winds. I've ordered materials
to built all metal dual band antennas of this
configuration.
Emacs!
No radome necessary.
So I think your dielectric proximity idea is not without
merit . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: B&C switches |
| From: | "blues750" <den_beaulieu(at)yahoo.com> |
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote:
> Dave,
>
> the MANL limiters came in and then I discovered
> that the holder bases I had left over were mis-drilled
> and should have been scrapped. Made some new
> ones today. Your Care Package is in the mail
> tomorrow.
>
>
> Bob . . .
Hi Bob...care package received. I really like the form factor of the MANL
block, nice and compact!! Very much appreciate your generosity of time,
efforts and expertise with all this. I'll be sure to put a little extra into the
annual fund raising drive to the boards. Cheers...Dave
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481052#481052
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 11:54 AM 6/20/2018, you wrote:
>Bob,
>
>You=99ll like the antenna you have pictured, I
>believe.=C2 I have been using a home-brewed
>version of that antenna now for several years
>and I love it as a dual-band antenna.
Pleased to hear it. I've been aware of this design
for some years but never had an opportunity/need
to try it. Some of our local volunteer fire crews are
interested in outdoor antennas for their radios that
will cover both the MURS/GMRS frequencies which are,
like 2M/70CM, harmonically related.
Best yet, this is an antenna they can build themselves.
Basic cut, drill, thread and assemble. I don't have
to get into the hammer-n-tongs loop!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
At 09:46 AM 6/20/2018, you wrote:
>At 07:56 AM 6/20/2018, you wrote:
>>Hi Bob,
>>Long time no contact... I=99m happy you=99re still in this
game!
>>
>>Regarding this topic, I wonder how much the the
>>conductive bits are in contact with each other.
>>I don=99t know how isolated each bit of
>>conductive material is in such a paint, but I
>>could imagine there could be billions of
>>contacts between neighboring bits of flake or
>>powder such that there would be a random
>>resistive path across the painted surface.
I've been doing some 'asphalt contemplation' on a simple
test setup to evaluate the effects of various paints/coatings
on antenna performance.
I was trying to imagine how conductive particles suspended
in a non-conductive 'solution' would achieve a
microscopic version of the gas-tight contact needed
for reliable connection between conductors. It seems
that surface tension would cause each particle to
be totally enveloped, thus prevented from making
physical contact with other particles.
Not sure about what happens as the solution becomes
a solid when solvents evaporate and the paint dries.
I've seen volume resistivity measurements on some
coatings/fillers, like potting compounds. These
are always VERY high . . . including those designed
for thermal conductivity.
I'm thinking that there are three potential effects
of paint . . . the dielectric effects you hypothesized
which would probably be limited to a lowering of
resonant frequency, the shielding effects which
block and or re-direct the wave fronts of interest
and attenuation/dissipation effects that simply
turn the RF energy into heat.
I'm recalling a bit of a fire drill on the ELT
transmitters for Beechjets where a new version
of the ELT kept tripping off due to high SWR
on the VHF antenna. Seems the older version happily
existed with a pair of antennas tucked under
the fairing at the root of vertical fin leading
edge.
Emacs!
Oookkaaay . . .
Now, let's lay the VHF antenna back so that it
sorta conforms to the inside of the fairing . . .
except . . .
Fairing was also part of an air-intake ductwork
for the A/C . . . so the antennas wound up
looking like this:
Emacs!
There were metallic braces inside the
fairing along with bond straps that tied
the braces to airframe . . . for lighting
effects. Added on top of all this was a
composite fairing material . . .
capped off with paint often chosen by
the customer hence of uncontrolled pedigree.
What's a poor ELT transmitter to do?
Emacs!
I couldn't find anywhere in the archives where
this installation had been measured for
performance . . . a condition that didn't
raise its ugly head until a new ELT complained
about an 'unsatisfactory' antenna.
I suggested we design a new, top loaded vertical
for the VHF antenna that remained vertical with
better separation from the effects of overhead
structures.
Emacs!
Further, we could fine tune the antenna to accommodate
any residual effects from proximity of other structures.
This got the flying fuzz all in a dither . . . a new
antenna would violate the TSO on the ELT . . . but
abusing the TSO'd antenna did not . . . go figure.
I think they wound up widening the SWR trip tolerances
on the ELT transmitter.
Not one of my happier experiences with the bureaucracy.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Reed <robertr237(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Transponder and ADSB antennae question. |
I am in the process of locating best place to install the transponder and ADSB
antennae. I have been building for way too long and as a result some things planned
years ago are no longer viable. I initially installed two Archer NAV antennae,
one in each wing. Now I see little or no need for either antennae and have
no plans to install other than GPS.
My question is rather I could disconnect the coax to those antennae, install the
transponder and ADSB in the wing bottom and use the existing coax? I cant remove
the NAV antennae since I bonded them to the underside of the wing top. Will
the old antennae interfere with the transponder or ADSB? Any other issues
to consider? If I later decide to install a NAV system will it interfere with
either unit?
Bob Reed
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "The Kuffels" <kuffel(at)cyberport.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Transponder and ADSB antennae question. |
Robert,
<< disconnect the coax to those antennae, install the transponder and ADSB
in the wing bottom and use the existing coax? I cant remove the NAV
antennae since I bonded them to the underside of the wing top. Will the old
antennae interfere with the transponder or ADSB? Any other issues to
consider >>
First a confusion. Vanilla ADSB units have only one combined
ADSB/transponder antenna. Why do you need two?
Second confusion. Archer antennas need a metal wing to act as a
counterpoise. How are the Archer antennas bonded inboard of the wing tip.
Either you have a non-metal wing with no counterpoise or you have a shielded
antenna. Obviously there is something here I don't understand.
Potential problems:
By the wing bottom I assume you mean the bottom at the center of the
wingspan. Besides the extra complexity of a remote ADSB unit vs. a panel
mount you are faced with the manufacturers limit on cable length, usually
about 10 feet, because of cable signal attenuation.
Most of ADSB is still ground based. Thus the ADSB antenna needs a 360
degree view of the ground to function fully. At the wing tip much of the
ground (even half) is blocked. This will result in spotty performance and
whines from ATC each time your transponder signal drops out.
ADSB/transponder antennas are ground plane type. A short spike is mounted
on an 8 inch or so circle/octagon/etc. Mounting this antenna with the spike
horizontal and facing outward would shield the antenna from any conducting
metal inboard. But this also guarantees maximum signal blockage. Mounting
the ground plane on the bottom of the wingtip with the spike protruding
downward would work better.
If it were me, I'd mount the antenna on the bottom of the fuselage. On my
Sportsman, it is mounted to the underside of the fuselage cage with the
spike protruding through the fiberglass fuselage shell about 1 inch.
Tom Kuffel
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z19 first try and smoke/wire melted I did a mistake |
| From: | "Achille" <mickael.t(at)live.fr> |
At the end it cost me just a few cents, one diode and 3cm of wire. I just didn't
test my ignition but all the others things are working.
Thanks you bob !!! [Wink]
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481162#481162
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Transponder and ADSB antennae question. |
| From: | Robert Reed <robertr237(at)att.net> |
Bob Reed
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 23, 2018, at 11:47 PM, The Kuffels wrote:
>
>
>
> Robert,
>
> << disconnect the coax to those antennae, install the transponder and ADSB in
the wing bottom and use the existing coax? I cant remove the NAV antennae since
I bonded them to the underside of the wing top. Will the old antennae interfere
with the transponder or ADSB? Any other issues to consider >>
>
> First a confusion. Vanilla ADSB units have only one combined ADSB/transponder
antenna. Why do you need two?
The Dynon transponder and ADSB units do not share the same antenna and are required
to be separated.
> Second confusion. Archer antennas need a metal wing to act as a counterpoise.
How are the Archer antennas bonded inboard of the wing tip. Either you have
a non-metal wing with no counterpoise or you have a shielded antenna. Obviously
there is something here I don't understand.
>
The Archer antenna are designed to be installed in a non-metal location on inside
of wing. Yes I have a composite wing.
> Potential problems:
>
> By the wing bottom I assume you mean the bottom at the center of the wingspan.
Besides the extra complexity of a remote ADSB unit vs. a panel mount you are
faced with the manufacturers limit on cable length, usually about 10 feet, because
of cable signal attenuation.
>
I have an inspection panel on the bottom of the the wing about two feet from wing
root that allows access to wing bolts and the NAV antenna connectors. That
would also give me easy access to install the antenna for transponder on one side
and adsb on the other while still needing only a short lead to each
> Most of ADSB is still ground based. Thus the ADSB antenna needs a 360 degree
view of the ground to function fully. At the wing tip much of the ground (even
half) is blocked. This will result in spotty performance and whines from ATC
each time your transponder signal drops out.
>
> ADSB/transponder antennas are ground plane type. A short spike is mounted on
an 8 inch or so circle/octagon/etc. Mounting this antenna with the spike horizontal
and facing outward would shield the antenna from any conducting metal
inboard. But this also guarantees maximum signal blockage. Mounting the ground
plane on the bottom of the wingtip with the spike protruding downward would
work better.
>
> If it were me, I'd mount the antenna on the bottom of the fuselage. On my Sportsman,
it is mounted to the underside of the fuselage cage with the spike protruding
through the fiberglass fuselage shell about 1 inch.
>
> Tom Kuffel
>
>
Tom, I did my homework on the best locations and because theres other issues with
the fuselage locations I was trying to find a better place. My question was
will a disconnect antenna interfere with the transponder or ADSB. You answered
everything but.
Thanks
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Transponder and ADSB antennae question. |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Like Tom said, you only need one antenna if you are installing a new ADS-B transponder.
If you are installing an older transponder along with an ADS-B adapter,
then two antennas are required. Of course the GPS requires its own antenna
mounted with a view of the sky in all directions. The transponder has a maximum
coax length. The GPS antenna has both a minimum and a maximum coax length.
That is if it has coax. Some GPS units have the antenna and receiver all
in one.
It it unlikely the Archer antennas will interfere with either the transponder
or GPS antennas.
If you have not purchased an ADS-B transponder yet, you might consider the APPAREO
STRATUS ESG or the GARMIN GTX335. The Stratus ESG comes with a USB power
outlet.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481166#481166
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Transponder and ADSB antennae question. |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
I think that confusion about the number of antennas is because some brands have
one antenna for both transmitting and receiving and other brands have two separate
antennas. Have you already decided to go with all Dynon?
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481167#481167
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Transponder and ADSB antennae question. |
| From: | Robert Reed <robertr237(at)att.net> |
I am installing the Dynon Skyview system with their transponder and ADSB systems
(both in and out) which use two antenna. The GPS antenna is the new 2020 compliant
and mounted on top of fuselage with an older backup on the inside of fiberglass
top.
I would mount the transponder and ADSB antenna inside the fuselage but I dont have
the room to satisfy the distance from one of my COM antenna and keep the distance
between the two antenna to be installed.
I think you did answer my question which was would the disconnected antenna interfere.
Thanks
Bob Reed
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 24, 2018, at 8:40 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
>
> Like Tom said, you only need one antenna if you are installing a new ADS-B transponder.
If you are installing an older transponder along with an ADS-B adapter,
then two antennas are required. Of course the GPS requires its own antenna
mounted with a view of the sky in all directions. The transponder has a maximum
coax length. The GPS antenna has both a minimum and a maximum coax length.
That is if it has coax. Some GPS units have the antenna and receiver all
in one.
> It it unlikely the Archer antennas will interfere with either the transponder
or GPS antennas.
> If you have not purchased an ADS-B transponder yet, you might consider the APPAREO
STRATUS ESG or the GARMIN GTX335. The Stratus ESG comes with a USB power
outlet.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481166#481166
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Transponder and ADSB antennae question. |
| From: | Robert Reed <robertr237(at)att.net> |
Yes I have decided to go with the Dynon for many reasons but most important being
single source has always proven to be the best approach when possible. They
have integrated all of their units in the system making installation easier.
Most important is if theres a problem I have only one number to call and they
cant claim it is the other company at fault.
Bob Reed
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 24, 2018, at 8:44 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
>
> I think that confusion about the number of antennas is because some brands have
one antenna for both transmitting and receiving and other brands have two separate
antennas. Have you already decided to go with all Dynon?
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481167#481167
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Transponder and ADSB antennae question. |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
OK, I have the Dynon Skyview ADS-B in and out. The Archer antennas are
unlikely to interfere, assuming they are in the wing tips and the new
antennas will be close to the fuselage.
However, given you have composite wings, you will have to install a
ground plane for each antenna.
To quote from the Dynon install manual:
"When a conventional aircraft monopole antenna is used it relies on a
ground plane for correct behaviour. For ideal performance the ground
plane should be very large compared to the wavelength of the
transmission, which is 275 mm. In a metal skinned aircraft this is
usually easy to accomplish, but is more difficult in a composite or
fabric skinned aircraft. In these cases, a metallic ground plane should
be fabricated and fitted under the antenna.
The ground plane should be as large as you can sensibly make it. Because
it is a function of the wavelength of the transmission,
*the smallest practical ground plane for a transponder is a square
around 120mm per side(approx 4.75in); as the size increases the
performance improves until the ground plane is around 700mm (27.5in)on
each side*.
Anything much larger than that size is unlikely to show significant
further improvement."
You need that size ground plane for each ADS-B antenna, unless used on a
metal skinned aircraft. So ground plane will likely be as much a factor
as spacing from com antenna.
As a PS, your Archer antennas would not have worked, unless there is a
version I am unaware of. They were designed for a *metal* wing with
composite wingtips. The metal wing is required for grounding. I have one
in each wing tip of my Vans RV.
On 6/24/2018 6:37 AM, Robert Reed wrote:
>
>
>
> Bob Reed
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jun 23, 2018, at 11:47 PM, The Kuffels wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Robert,
>>
>> << disconnect the coax to those antennae, install the transponder and ADSB
in the wing bottom and use the existing coax? I cant remove the NAV antennae
since I bonded them to the underside of the wing top. Will the old antennae interfere
with the transponder or ADSB? Any other issues to consider >>
>>
>> First a confusion. Vanilla ADSB units have only one combined ADSB/transponder
antenna. Why do you need two?
>
> The Dynon transponder and ADSB units do not share the same antenna and are required
to be separated.
>
>> Second confusion. Archer antennas need a metal wing to act as a counterpoise.
How are the Archer antennas bonded inboard of the wing tip. Either you have
a non-metal wing with no counterpoise or you have a shielded antenna. Obviously
there is something here I don't understand.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "The Kuffels" <kuffel(at)cyberport.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Transponder and ADSB antennae question. |
Robert,
My mistake. Whenever someone talks about Archer antennas I think of the
wingtip versions.
<< My question was will a disconnect antenna interfere with the transponder
or ADSB. You answered everything but. >>
Perhaps the meaning of "shield the antenna from any conducting metal
inboard." is not clear. I was answering a broader question. The ground
plane of a ground plane type antenna shields the antenna from all metal
behind it: antennas, coax, bolts, attach fittings, etc.
If you have Archer Model 5 transponder antennas, things are a little
different. The fat elements end, furthest away from the cable connector,
needs to be as far from other metal as possible.
In any event, the likelihood of any interference with a disconnected
cable/antenna is minimal. With line-of-sight communication almost anything
will work satisfactorily.
Tom Kuffel
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Transponder and ADSB antennae question. |
| From: | Robert Reed <robertr237(at)att.net> |
Bob Reed
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 24, 2018, at 9:45 AM, The Kuffels wrote:
>
>
> Robert,
>
> My mistake. Whenever someone talks about Archer antennas I think of the wingtip
versions.
>
Archer makes a number of different antenna. I have two different Archer COM Antenna,
one installed in vertical stabilizer and one on fuselage side. Archer also
had two different NAV antenna one for composite wings and one that fit into
a fiberglass wing tip. I also have the Archer transponder antenna but its not
usable with Dynon transponder.
> << My question was will a disconnect antenna interfere with the transponder
or ADSB. You answered everything but. >>
>
> Perhaps the meaning of "shield the antenna from any conducting metal inboard."
is not clear. I was answering a broader question. The ground plane of a ground
plane type antenna shields the antenna from all metal behind it: antennas,
coax, bolts, attach fittings, etc.
>
> If you have Archer Model 5 transponder antennas, things are a little different.
The fat elements end, furthest away from the cable connector, needs to be
as far from other metal as possible.
>
> In any event, the likelihood of any interference with a disconnected cable/antenna
is minimal. With line-of-sight communication almost anything will work
satisfactorily.
>
> Tom Kuffel
>
I didnt think there would be an issue but antenna are not in my area of expertise.
Dynon instructions for the transponder specifically said to keep the antenna
three feet from NAV or COM antenna. Since I dont need both NAV antenna the
wing root seems to satisfy the requirements if the disabled antenna will not cause
a problem.
Too many antenna and too little space.
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Transponder and ADSB antennae question. |
| From: | Robert Reed <robertr237(at)att.net> |
Archer produced several different antenna for both composite and metal aircraft.
The NAV antenna I used were designed to be imbedded within the wing and not
the wing tip. Mine were bonded to the inside of the wing top.
I am very aware of the ground plane and is part of the problem trying to find space.
The ground plane for the ELT was a real issue to find room to install.
Sounds like theres no problem if the NAV antenna is not installed and further research
indicates the ADSB in will not have a problem with an active NAV.
Bob Reed
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 24, 2018, at 9:43 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
>
> OK, I have the Dynon Skyview ADS-B in and out. The Archer antennas are unlikely
to interfere, assuming they are in the wing tips and the new antennas will
be close to the fuselage.
> However, given you have composite wings, you will have to install a ground plane
for each antenna.
> To quote from the Dynon install manual:
> "When a conventional aircraft monopole antenna is used it relies on a ground
plane for correct behaviour. For ideal performance the ground plane should be
very large compared to the wavelength of the transmission, which is 275 mm. In
a metal skinned aircraft this is usually easy to accomplish, but is more difficult
in a composite or fabric skinned aircraft. In these cases, a metallic ground
plane should be fabricated and fitted under the antenna.
> The ground plane should be as large as you can sensibly make it. Because it is
a function of the wavelength of the transmission,
> *the smallest practical ground plane for a transponder is a square around 120mm
per side(approx 4.75in); as the size increases the performance improves until
the ground plane is around 700mm (27.5in)on each side*.
> Anything much larger than that size is unlikely to show significant further improvement."
>
> You need that size ground plane for each ADS-B antenna, unless used on a metal
skinned aircraft. So ground plane will likely be as much a factor as spacing
from com antenna.
> As a PS, your Archer antennas would not have worked, unless there is a version
I am unaware of. They were designed for a *metal* wing with composite wingtips.
The metal wing is required for grounding. I have one in each wing tip of my
Vans RV.
>
>> On 6/24/2018 6:37 AM, Robert Reed wrote:
>> Bob Reed
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> On Jun 23, 2018, at 11:47 PM, The Kuffels wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Robert,
>>>
>>> << disconnect the coax to those antennae, install the transponder and ADSB
in the wing bottom and use the existing coax? I cant remove the NAV antennae
since I bonded them to the underside of the wing top. Will the old antennae interfere
with the transponder or ADSB? Any other issues to consider >>
>>>
>>> First a confusion. Vanilla ADSB units have only one combined ADSB/transponder
antenna. Why do you need two?
>> The Dynon transponder and ADSB units do not share the same antenna and are required
to be separated.
>>> Second confusion. Archer antennas need a metal wing to act as a counterpoise.
How are the Archer antennas bonded inboard of the wing tip. Either you have
a non-metal wing with no counterpoise or you have a shielded antenna. Obviously
there is something here I don't understand.
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | speedy11(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Transponder and ADSB antennae question |
Robert,
For the same reasons as you, I am going through the same aggravations of mounting
the ADSB and Txpndr antennae. Mine is a RV-8 and I also used the Archer in
the wingtip. I, too, have resigned myself to living with GPS only approaches.
I am keeping my original mode C transponder and adding the Echo UAT ADSB solution
- mainly because I want the ability to turn off ADSB while continuing to
operate the mode C.
I have run out of suitable real estate on the bottom of the fuselage and considered
mounting the antennae on the bottom of the wing. After multiple considerations,
one of which was the length of the coax, I've decided to mount the ADSB
far aft on the bottom of the fuselage and adding a second comm antenna near
the step (A model).
Stan Sutterfield
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Can a low voltage situation cause a fuse to blow? |
| From: | "thanhquy2207" <lotuzzdiabetes(at)yahoo.com> |
Hello all. First, let me say that have very little education in the electronics
field, but I do know the basics. I recently got hired as a service tech for pressure
washers and had encountered a unit that had a small engine (electric start
12v) with a blown fuse. A co-worker of mine has been doing this work for
about 15 years. He is the know it all type. Very good with wiring and troubleshooting
electrical problems with the bigger electrical units (120v - 460v), however
he told me that the reason this machine I was working on blew a fuse because
the battery was low(which it was dead when it came in). I explained to him
that according to my understanding of ohms law, that doesn't make sense. If
the voltage was low the amperage should have dropped too. Is this correct? He
told me that he has seen when low voltage had caused a fuse to blow or breaker
to trip (in high voltage machines). Is there any situation at all that this would
be true? It is really making me curious. Thanks for any insight you can help
provide.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481200#481200
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Josephson <dlj04(at)josephson.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 06/25/18 |
> On Jun 25, 2018, at 11:30 PM, AeroElectric-List Digest Server
wrote:
>
> electrical problems with the bigger electrical units (120v - 460v), however
> he told me that the reason this machine I was working on blew a fuse because
> the battery was low(which it was dead when it came in). I explained to him
> that according to my understanding of ohms law, that doesn't make sense. If
It doesnt make sense if the load that the fuse was supplying behaves like a simple
resistor, as you suggest. But you dont know thats the case. For instance,
if the load is a motor and there wasnt enough current to turn it, it could very
well try to draw much more than rated current while stuck on one part of the
commutator, unable to move to the next. A switching power supply can draw more
current as the input voltage drops as it tries to maintain regulation. This
happens in aircraft avionics some times, a breaker will pop in low voltage conditions
because the load is trying to pull more current.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Can a low voltage situation cause a fuse to blow? |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
A fuse holder with weak springs can create a bad connection which will make heat.
Heat can blow a fuse. Not saying this is the problem in your case, but is
something to check in future troubleshooting.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481211#481211
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Radio or Television Tower Buzz |
| From: | "mike>bentley" <mikeeeb(at)gmail.com> |
Just an update. I rechecked all the grounds; antenna, radio, etc., made a larger
ground plane (as big as I could fit under the antenna with radius just shy of
the length of antenna), and tried a different coax from radio to antenna. My
long distance transmission and reception is slightly better but and may have
improved the interference some but it is still there. It does seem to be a characteristic
of the vertically mounted antenna. I'll keep you posted if I discover
anything else.
Thanks for the suggestions.
--------
Mike Bentley
Joplin, MO
N5498B
Kitfox Model 4-1200
Jabiru 2200 #438
Rotec Aerosport LCH Heads
Prince Prop (64 x 34)
Ellison EFS-2 Throttle Body
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481212#481212
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Can a low voltage situation cause a fuse to blow? |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
First of all, low voltage IN GENERAL does not cause a fuse to blow. Look at all
the cars with dead batteries for an example. Fuses are never even investigated.
Two phenomena contribute to the notion: 1) Back EMF, which reduces the running
current when the motor comes up to speed, and 2) Starter circuits for motors which
draw large currents UNTIL the motor gets up to speed. I won't go into the
details, but they are similar, and both have to do with motor starting circuits.
I might add a third (rare) one: electronic circuits that try to keep an output
constant. Usually these circuits have enough smarts to not blow an input fuse.
For circuits that only power resistive loads, fuse-blowing at low voltage is never
an issue.
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481213#481213
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Can a low voltage situation cause a fuse to |
blow?
I have a radio that requires 7.5A breakers on a 28v supply, and 10A breakers on
a 12V supply. If the voltage drops the supply current requirement rises.
On Jun 26, 2018, at 09:02, Eric M. Jones wrote:
First of all, low voltage IN GENERAL does not cause a fuse to blow. Look at all
the cars with dead batteries for an example. Fuses are never even investigated.
Two phenomena contribute to the notion: 1) Back EMF, which reduces the running
current when the motor comes up to speed, and 2) Starter circuits for motors which
draw large currents UNTIL the motor gets up to speed. I won't go into the
details, but they are similar, and both have to do with motor starting circuits.
I might add a third (rare) one: electronic circuits that try to keep an output
constant. Usually these circuits have enough smarts to not blow an input fuse.
For circuits that only power resistive loads, fuse-blowing at low voltage is never
an issue.
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481213#481213
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Can a low voltage situation cause a fuse to |
blow?
'Switcher' power supply.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 8:11 AM, Alec Myers wrote:
>
> I have a radio that requires 7.5A breakers on a 28v supply, and 10A
> breakers on a 12V supply. If the voltage drops the supply current
> requirement rises.
>
> On Jun 26, 2018, at 09:02, Eric M. Jones wrote:
>
> emjones(at)charter.net>
>
> First of all, low voltage IN GENERAL does not cause a fuse to blow. Look
> at all the cars with dead batteries for an example. Fuses are never even
> investigated.
>
> Two phenomena contribute to the notion: 1) Back EMF, which reduces the
> running current when the motor comes up to speed, and 2) Starter circuits
> for motors which draw large currents UNTIL the motor gets up to speed. I
> won't go into the details, but they are similar, and both have to do with
> motor starting circuits.
>
> I might add a third (rare) one: electronic circuits that try to keep an
> output constant. Usually these circuits have enough smarts to not blow an
> input fuse.
>
> For circuits that only power resistive loads, fuse-blowing at low voltage
> is never an issue.
>
> --------
> Eric M. Jones
> www.PerihelionDesign.com
> 113 Brentwood Drive
> Southbridge, MA 01550
> (508) 764-2072
> emjones(at)charter.net
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481213#481213
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Can a low voltage situation cause a fuse to |
blow?
no doubt. but the results stand.
On Jun 26, 2018, at 09:23, Charlie England wrote:
'Switcher' power supply.
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 8:11 AM, Alec Myers wrote:
>
> I have a radio that requires 7.5A breakers on a 28v supply, and 10A breake
rs on a 12V supply. If the voltage drops the supply current requirement rise
s.
>
> On Jun 26, 2018, at 09:02, Eric M. Jones wrote:
>
net>
>
> First of all, low voltage IN GENERAL does not cause a fuse to blow. Look a
t all the cars with dead batteries for an example. Fuses are never even inve
stigated.
>
> Two phenomena contribute to the notion: 1) Back EMF, which reduces the run
ning current when the motor comes up to speed, and 2) Starter circuits for m
otors which draw large currents UNTIL the motor gets up to speed. I won't go
into the details, but they are similar, and both have to do with motor star
ting circuits.
>
> I might add a third (rare) one: electronic circuits that try to keep an ou
tput constant. Usually these circuits have enough smarts to not blow an inpu
t fuse.
>
> For circuits that only power resistive loads, fuse-blowing at low voltage i
s never an issue.
>
> --------
> Eric M. Jones
> www.PerihelionDesign.com
> 113 Brentwood Drive
> Southbridge, MA 01550
> (508) 764-2072
> emjones(at)charter.net
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481213#481213
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> =========================
> -
> Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.c
om/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: Can a low voltage situation cause a fuse |
to blow?
At 08:23 AM 6/26/2018, you wrote:
>'Switcher' power supply.=C2
>
>On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 8:11 AM, Alec Myers
><alec(at)alecmyers.com> wrote:
>Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com>
>I have a radio that requires 7.5A breakers on a
>28v supply, and 10A breakers on a 12V supply. If
>the voltage drops the supply current requirement rises.
Breaker size isn't necessarily a 'tell' on an appliance's
behaviors during a low voltage event. It has ALWAYS been
the case that 28v appliances were feed with smaller wire
and breakers than their 14v cousins.
If you had a system that needed 100W of input energy to
function, then the 14v draw was on the order of 7A,
the 28v draw would be about half that. It matters not
whether the appliance is a vacuum tube radio in a 1948
Stinson or a Garmin GeeWhiz in a brand new RV7.
There have been many a tale citing the tripping of
breakers, burning of wires and popping of fuses
attributed to a reduction in supply voltage . . .
tales that go back a century or more.
But the laws of physics are immutable. Any
system that needs more current as input
voltage is reduced has some UNIQUE
characteristic that seeks to maintain a
constant POWER in spite of supply voltage
variations. This includes many modern
electrowhizzies designed to function on
a wide range of input voltages. For most
avionics in this class, 10-32 volts is
a common design goal.
To be sure, if you run such a device from
a bench power supply, input current times
supply voltage is relatively constant
meaning that the current demand at 10v
exceeds the 32v demand by a factor of
about 3.2
But all other devices like incandescent
landing lights, fan motors, pump motors
vintage electronics, etc will draw
less current as supply is reduced.
Some motor driven systems MAY demand
more current as the voltage drops
IF the TORQUE load on the motor
goes up as speed and voltage drops.
Motor current is proportional to
output torque. So as speed drops on
things like fans, the torque will
go down. A motor driving a pump at
some target pressure MIGHT tend to
hold a constant current as the speed/
voltage go down . . . but at some
point the system can't keep up and
pressure/torque/current falls.
As Eric pointed out, there must be uncountable
instances where some DC vehicular system
went to sleep as the battery ran down . . .
without blowing fuses.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Can a low voltage situation cause a fuse |
to blow?
In the past, the 14V avionics product and its 28V cousin were distinct items. These
days its the same unit, nor does it need configuring for voltage. Its therefore
possible, even if not likely in practice, that a low supply voltage could
cause an overcorrect trip.
On Jun 26, 2018, at 1:28 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III
wrote:
Breaker size isn't necessarily a 'tell' on an appliance's
behaviors during a low voltage event. It has ALWAYS been
the case that 28v appliances were feed with smaller wire
and breakers than their 14v cousins.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
I've had a couple of queries about observed motor
behaviors wherein the writer was certain they
observed situations where motors struggling under
low voltage caused protection devices to operate.
It's easy to characterize the physics of a DC motor.
A motor reveals most of its secrets when you measure
three characteristics: (1) The motor's DC resistance;
it's torque constant (Kt) wherein you measure the
output torque when excited by some value of test
current. From this you can derive In-Oz of torque
per amp of current draw; (3) the counter EMF constant
(Ke) in RPM/Volt by spinning the motor at some known
RPM and measuring the motor's output voltage as
a generator.
Once you have these three numbers you can construct
a plot of motor performance at various voltages. An exemplar
plot is shown below:
Emacs!
Applying 10V to this hypothetical motor with a locked rotor
would produce a stall current of 20 amps. If a torque watch
were attached to the immobilized shaft it would read 60 in-oz.
This experiment yields a motor resistance of 0.5 ohms and
Kt - 3.0 in-oz/amp.
Okay, now spin hte motor with a drill motor. Measure the
RPM and voltage at the power leads. In this case we would
find that the motor 'generates' 1.0 volts per 300 RPM
of the shaft. This number lets us put a counter-emf scale
alongside the RPM scale.
Note that the family of voltage lines are parallel
to each other. The SLOPE of these lines is proportional
to the motor's DC resistance. If the motor's resistance
were 1.0 ohms, then stall current at the lower end of each
voltage line would be 1/2 that presently illustrated.
I.e. a new family of lines having 2x the slope of the
0.5 ohm lines shown.
Let's take a hypothetical application where we operate
this motor at 15.0 volts applied and a load of 38 in-oz.
The plotted characteristics tells us that the motor will
run at 2600 RPM and draw a current of about 12.6 Amps.
15 Volts applied across an Rm = 0.5 ohms yields an inrush
current of 30A . . . which could be added to the plot
above if I extended it another 5A to the right.
You can pick any spot on the face of the plot, draw a 0.5
ohm load line thorough it and you have a new applied voltage,
running current, RPM and stall current.
But without increasing the load on the motor shaft, there
is no way we can make the motor draw MORE current by
reducing its applied voltage.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron Springer <ron228rj(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Mysterious Solution to Radio Noise |
I recently started flying with a new Garmin GTR-200 radio. My antenna design and
placement is new and highly experimental. I made a full wave loop from 22 AWG
and installed it one foot in front of my instrument panel. Since the fuselage
circumference is too small there, it is more of a zigzag loop.
Initial results are good. I transmitted from 10 miles away from the airport and
the Unicom reported loud and clear. When low on final, I heard a radio transmission
from and airport 70 miles away. And, I had no problem talking to ATC in
the DC SFRA.
BUT, on many frequencies I get continuous noise on the radio. Increasing the squelch
configuration didnt help. I noticed that when I changed screens on my GRT
Sport EX EFIS the noise changed its character. And, sure enough, with the EFIS
off, the continuous noise goes away. I did discover that the back of the case
of my EFIS is not grounded like everything else on the panel. But, connecting
ground to it didnt change anything.
However, the noise completely goes away if I just touch the radio or radio rack
with my finger. The radio case and rack are both grounded. I checked that. So,
I grabbed a two foot length of 22 AWG wire and taped one end to the radio rack
and connected the other end to nothing. The result was the same as when I touched
it. The noise is gone and the radio works normally.
So, theres the fix, but how and why does it work?
Thanks,
Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | IMPORTANCE OF ESSAY WRITING |
| From: | "christopherkates" <christopherkates035(at)gmail.com> |
Essay writing is a vital part of your academic year. Students think of essay writing
as a boring and valueless activity but essay writing tends to hold much
value. Writing essays involves serious thinking. It is not a difficult task to
search for the material for an essay but what is complicated is the arrangement
of the information gathered while writing an essay. Accumulating and creating
a flow of writing an essay is an art to be owned. Students get no of assignments
in various subjects to write essays on different topics. To write their
paper on different subjects is a challenging task, as they need to gather all
the required information and then they need to assemble it in a well and organized
manner.
Many students find it boring since they don't have that creative mind in gathering
the information and accumulating them to write their paper. So they approach
the professional people from custom essay writing service (https://essaycaptains.com/)
that helps them in writing essay as per their requirements. Students
just give them the topic and the required information title to be included
in their paper. The writers gather the information and prepare the best and unique
paper for them.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481245#481245
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Verwey <bob.verwey(at)gmail.com> |
Bob thanks for that very coherent expose of the dark secrets of DC motors
Neophytes such as I benefit greatly from your missives...
Best...
Bob Verwey
082 331 2727
On 28 June 2018 at 04:54, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> I've had a couple of queries about observed motor
> behaviors wherein the writer was certain they
> observed situations where motors struggling under
> low voltage caused protection devices to operate.
>
> It's easy to characterize the physics of a DC motor.
> A motor reveals most of its secrets when you measure
> three characteristics: (1) The motor's DC resistance;
> it's torque constant (Kt) wherein you measure the
> output torque when excited by some value of test
> current. From this you can derive In-Oz of torque
> per amp of current draw; (3) the counter EMF constant
> (Ke) in RPM/Volt by spinning the motor at some known
> RPM and measuring the motor's output voltage as
> a generator.
>
> Once you have these three numbers you can construct
> a plot of motor performance at various voltages. An exemplar
> plot is shown below:
>
>
> [image: Emacs!]
>
> Applying 10V to this hypothetical motor with a locked rotor
> would produce a stall current of 20 amps. If a torque watch
> were attached to the immobilized shaft it would read 60 in-oz.
> This experiment yields a motor resistance of 0.5 ohms and
> Kt - 3.0 in-oz/amp.
>
> Okay, now spin hte motor with a drill motor. Measure the
> RPM and voltage at the power leads. In this case we would
> find that the motor 'generates' 1.0 volts per 300 RPM
> of the shaft. This number lets us put a counter-emf scale
> alongside the RPM scale.
>
> Note that the family of voltage lines are parallel
> to each other. The SLOPE of these lines is proportional
> to the motor's DC resistance. If the motor's resistance
> were 1.0 ohms, then stall current at the lower end of each
> voltage line would be 1/2 that presently illustrated.
> I.e. a new family of lines having 2x the slope of the
> 0.5 ohm lines shown.
>
> Let's take a hypothetical application where we operate
> this motor at 15.0 volts applied and a load of 38 in-oz.
> The plotted characteristics tells us that the motor will
> run at 2600 RPM and draw a current of about 12.6 Amps.
> 15 Volts applied across an Rm = 0.5 ohms yields an inrush
> current of 30A . . . which could be added to the plot
> above if I extended it another 5A to the right.
>
> You can pick any spot on the face of the plot, draw a 0.5
> ohm load line thorough it and you have a new applied voltage,
> running current, RPM and stall current.
>
> But without increasing the load on the motor shaft, there
> is no way we can make the motor draw MORE current by
> reducing its applied voltage.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: IMPORTANCE OF ESSAY WRITING |
| From: | Robert Reed <robertr237(at)att.net> |
What exactly does this have to do with Aircraft electrical systems?
Bob Reed
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 28, 2018, at 5:38 AM, christopherkates
wrote:
>
>
> Essay writing is a vital part of your academic year. Students think of essay
writing as a boring and valueless activity but essay writing tends to hold much
value. Writing essays involves serious thinking. It is not a difficult task
to search for the material for an essay but what is complicated is the arrangement
of the information gathered while writing an essay. Accumulating and creating
a flow of writing an essay is an art to be owned. Students get no of assignments
in various subjects to write essays on different topics. To write their
paper on different subjects is a challenging task, as they need to gather all
the required information and then they need to assemble it in a well and organized
manner.
> Many students find it boring since they don't have that creative mind in gathering
the information and accumulating them to write their paper. So they approach
the professional people from custom essay writing service (https://essaycaptains.com/)
that helps them in writing essay as per their requirements. Students
just give them the topic and the required information title to be included
in their paper. The writers gather the information and prepare the best and
unique paper for them.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481245#481245
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: IMPORTANCE OF ESSAY WRITING |
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
I'm sure his email account is probably just compromised.
Tim
On 6/28/2018 7:43 AM, Robert Reed wrote:
>
> What exactly does this have to do with Aircraft electrical systems?
>
> Bob Reed
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jun 28, 2018, at 5:38 AM, christopherkates
wrote:
>>
>>
>> Essay writing is a vital part of your academic year. Students think of essay
writing as a boring and valueless activity but essay writing tends to hold much
value. Writing essays involves serious thinking. It is not a difficult task
to search for the material for an essay but what is complicated is the arrangement
of the information gathered while writing an essay. Accumulating and creating
a flow of writing an essay is an art to be owned. Students get no of assignments
in various subjects to write essays on different topics. To write their
paper on different subjects is a challenging task, as they need to gather all
the required information and then they need to assemble it in a well and organized
manner.
>> Many students find it boring since they don't have that creative mind in gathering
the information and accumulating them to write their paper. So they approach
the professional people from custom essay writing service (https://essaycaptains.com/)
that helps them in writing essay as per their requirements. Students
just give them the topic and the required information title to be included
in their paper. The writers gather the information and prepare the best and
unique paper for them.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481245#481245
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: IMPORTANCE OF ESSAY WRITING |
| From: | John Tipton <jmtipton(at)btopenworld.com> |
Or is it to help some write a decent comprehensible email message
Sent from my iPad
----x--O--x----
> On 28 Jun 2018, at 1:56 pm, Tim Olson wrote:
>
>
> I'm sure his email account is probably just compromised.
> Tim
>
>
>> On 6/28/2018 7:43 AM, Robert Reed wrote:
>> What exactly does this have to do with Aircraft electrical systems?
>> Bob Reed
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> On Jun 28, 2018, at 5:38 AM, christopherkates
wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Essay writing is a vital part of your academic year. Students think of essay
writing as a boring and valueless activity but essay writing tends to hold much
value. Writing essays involves serious thinking. It is not a difficult task
to search for the material for an essay but what is complicated is the arrangement
of the information gathered while writing an essay. Accumulating and creating
a flow of writing an essay is an art to be owned. Students get no of assignments
in various subjects to write essays on different topics. To write their
paper on different subjects is a challenging task, as they need to gather
all the required information and then they need to assemble it in a well and organized
manner.
>>> Many students find it boring since they don't have that creative mind in gathering
the information and accumulating them to write their paper. So they approach
the professional people from custom essay writing service (https://essaycaptains.com/)
that helps them in writing essay as per their requirements. Students
just give them the topic and the required information title to be included
in their paper. The writers gather the information and prepare the best and
unique paper for them.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481245#481245
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com> |
All,
I am going to use the Z-14 layout for my RV-10. The -10 has aft mounted batteries,
so I will need to run the main buss wires from the back to the front, where
all of the electronics are.
My question is: Do these wires need to have individual current limiters on them?
The distance from the batteries to the battery buss location is about 8 1/2
feet. I am planning on using #8 AWG wire to feed each respective battery buss.
Thoughts?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481258#481258
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
At 03:22 PM 6/28/2018, you wrote:
>
>
>All,
>
>I am going to use the Z-14 layout for my RV-10. The -10 has aft
>mounted batteries, so I will need to run the main buss wires from
>the back to the front, where all of the electronics are.
>
>My question is: Do these wires need to have individual current
>limiters on them? The distance from the batteries to the battery
>buss location is about 8 1/2 feet. I am planning on using #8 AWG
>wire to feed each respective battery buss.
>
>Thoughts?
put the crossfeed contactor on the firewall and use it as
the grand-central-station for fat wires. Then all you
need running back to the batteries is a pair
of cranking feeders. 4AWG would be fine for these
as you'll have the the pair in parallel for
engine cranking.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Current limiters should not be used in the start circuit because they will drop
the voltage to the starter motor.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481261#481261
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
On 6/28/2018 7:08 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> At 03:22 PM 6/28/2018, you wrote:
>>
>>
>> All,
>>
>> I am going to use the Z-14 layout for my RV-10. The -10 has aft
>> mounted batteries, so I will need to run the main buss wires from the
>> back to the front, where all of the electronics are.
>>
>> My question is: Do these wires need to have individual current
>> limiters on them? The distance from the batteries to the battery
>> buss location is about 8 1/2 feet. I am planning on using #8 AWG
>> wire to feed each respective battery buss.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> put the crossfeed contactor on the firewall and use it as
> the grand-central-station for fat wires. Then all you
> need running back to the batteries is a pair
> of cranking feeders. 4AWG would be fine for these
> as you'll have the the pair in parallel for
> engine cranking.
>
> Bob . . .
>
I have a Z-14 in an RV10. Bob's approach sounds great. I like the
symmetry. Not having asked the question 10 years ago when laying my
Z-14 out, I took a different approach.
I have the Xfeed mounted with the other two contactors back on the
battery tray. 2 AWG links them all up. Then I have a single 2AWG lead
going to the starter Contactor. The other side has an 8AWG link going
forward to one fuse panel (bus) and an 8AWG link going from the starter
contactor to the other fuse panel (bus).
The current limiters on mounted on the firewall and protect the lines
going from the 2 alternators to the 2 main bus feeds.
I've attached a schematic with the locations of devices implied.
Bill "I love my Z-14" Watson
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com> |
Thanks! That is pretty much what I am going to do...all three contractors near
battery, one #2 to starter solenoid, two #8 battery buss feeders going forward...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481263#481263
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 6/28/2018 7:01 PM, Bill Watson wrote:
> On 6/28/2018 7:08 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>> At 03:22 PM 6/28/2018, you wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> I am going to use the Z-14 layout for my RV-10. The -10 has aft
>>> mounted batteries, so I will need to run the main buss wires from
>>> the back to the front, where all of the electronics are.
>>>
>>> My question is: Do these wires need to have individual current
>>> limiters on them? The distance from the batteries to the battery
>>> buss location is about 8 1/2 feet. I am planning on using #8 AWG
>>> wire to feed each respective battery buss.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>> put the crossfeed contactor on the firewall and use it as
>> the grand-central-station for fat wires. Then all you
>> need running back to the batteries is a pair
>> of cranking feeders. 4AWG would be fine for these
>> as you'll have the the pair in parallel for
>> engine cranking.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
> I have a Z-14 in an RV10. Bob's approach sounds great. I like the
> symmetry. Not having asked the question 10 years ago when laying my
> Z-14 out, I took a different approach.
>
> I have the Xfeed mounted with the other two contactors back on the
> battery tray. 2 AWG links them all up. Then I have a single 2AWG
> lead going to the starter Contactor. The other side has an 8AWG link
> going forward to one fuse panel (bus) and an 8AWG link going from the
> starter contactor to the other fuse panel (bus).
>
> The current limiters on mounted on the firewall and protect the lines
> going from the 2 alternators to the 2 main bus feeds.
>
> I've attached a schematic with the locations of devices implied.
>
> Bill "I love my Z-14" Watson
>
Bill,
Your install is obviously working, but it should be noted that your
alternator B lead protection should be on the other end. If there's a
fault in that wire, it should be big enough to handle everything the
alternator can throw at it, but it'll never be big enough to handle
everything the battery(s) can throw at it.
FWIW,
Charlie
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
Having a flying IFR RV-10 myself I question the benefits of dual
batteries along with dual alternators, etc. Almost all EFIS panels these
days offer a backup battery, good for 1 hour or more. I have one for
each of my EFIS screens. Most ship's batteries these days are good for
an hour or more of minimized current. An Ipad can provide hours of
moving map and GPS, and with some extras a nearly full EFIS screen.
I can see if you choose to have dual electronic ignition systems that
then you are vulnerable to lack of electrons for at least one. It seems
to me that the SD-20 alternator for a backup source of power, with a
small, Odessey 680 or less mounted on the firewall should handle any of
those needs. You only need one good sized battery, such as the Odessey
925 mounted in stock rear location, for starter operation.s Or just keep
one magneto for the backup, and eliminate need for dual electric power
sources. You get 85% of the electronic ignition by replacing one mag.
Just my opinion, but I would strive to keep the design as simple as
possible, and avoid having totally dual everything just because you can.
Just thinking your goals might be achieved with a simpler system.
Kelly
On 6/28/2018 6:56 PM, Charlie England wrote:
>>>
>> I have a Z-14 in an RV10. Bob's approach sounds great. I like the
>> symmetry. Not having asked the question 10 years ago when laying my
>> Z-14 out, I took a different approach.
>>
>> I have the Xfeed mounted with the other two contactors back on the
>> battery tray. 2 AWG links them all up. Then I have a single 2AWG
>> lead going to the starter Contactor. The other side has an 8AWG link
>> going forward to one fuse panel (bus) and an 8AWG link going from the
>> starter contactor to the other fuse panel (bus).
>>
>> The current limiters on mounted on the firewall and protect the lines
>> going from the 2 alternators to the 2 main bus feeds.
>>
>> I've attached a schematic with the locations of devices implied.
>>
>> Bill "I love my Z-14" Watson
>>
> Bill,
>
> Your install is obviously working, but it should be noted that your
> alternator B lead protection should be on the other end. If there's a
> fault in that wire, it should be big enough to handle everything the
> alternator can throw at it, but it'll never be big enough to handle
> everything the battery(s) can throw at it.
>
> FWIW,
>
> Charlie
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IMPORTANCE OF ESSAY WRITING |
HMmmmm... Do you think the subject of the posted mail was 'essay' writing?
Hard to say - They only repeated the word 'essay' 10 times in one paragraph
of 10 sentences.
Ya can't say they deivated off topic!
That's OK, in my day it was called Technical Writing.
AND... Because of the type of people that read technical reports and made
Dollar Deci$ion$ based on them - You HAD to emphasize the important points
by constantly repeating the key facts. ALSO! You had to make sure their
minds did not wander by substituting pronouns for nouns.
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 6:38 AM, christopherkates <
christopherkates035(at)gmail.com> wrote:
> christopherkates035(at)gmail.com>
>
> Essay writing is a vital part of your academic year. Students think of
> essay writing as a boring and valueless activity but essay writing tends to
> hold much value. Writing essays involves serious thinking. It is not a
> difficult task to search for the material for an essay but what is
> complicated is the arrangement of the information gathered while writing an
> essay. Accumulating and creating a flow of writing an essay is an art to be
> owned. Students get no of assignments in various subjects to write essays
> on different topics. To write their paper on different subjects is a
> challenging task, as they need to gather all the required information and
> then they need to assemble it in a well and organized manner.
> Many students find it boring since they don't have that creative mind in
> gathering the information and accumulating them to write their paper. So
> they approach the professional people from custom essay writing service (
> https://essaycaptains.com/) that helps them in writing essay as per their
> requirements. Students just give them the topic and the required
> information title to be included in their paper. The writers gather the
> information and prepare the best and unique paper for them.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481245#481245
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Ignitions harness chafe repair W/ pic |
| From: | "matt9923" <matt9923(at)gmail.com> |
Found some chafing on the ignition harness the other day. I plan to move the harness
so it wont continue. My question is the best product to cover the shielding.
I have some PTFE film tape p422 i was going to use. Also have f4 tape and
spiral wrap. Any guidance would be helpful.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481269#481269
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/260729c5_3a95_4ecb_a1cf_50df33cb72ba_302.jpeg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com> |
Kelly,
Thanks for your opinion. I hesitate posting on these forums due to the nay sayers
when anything other than the simplest tech from the 50s is suggested. I have
chosen to use a full EFII system and fully accept the additional complexities.
I do appreciate your insight on things...
As for the previous post about the B lead current limiters, I would disagree with
putting the fuse at the other end as that would place it between the battery
and starter.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481273#481273
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
As I said, it is all about the builder's choices. I have too many years
working on type certified airplanes as well as homebuilts, fixing self
induced errors, etc. to be very enamored of new-fangled EFII. My
experience in automotive arena tells me that the incremental
improvements from continuous flow fuel injection that arrived in the
late '50s to single cylinder electronic fuel injection of all but the
latest cars is fairly small..while the current direct injection into the
cylinder has had a much bigger improvement than anything since the
switch from carburetors to fuel injection.
I applaud your willingness to take on the challenge of EFII. When it all
works as advertised, it certainly will make starting easier and may also
help reduce maintenance.
However, I don't believe it justifies having two separate systems of
equal capacity. Still, your choice.
Kelly
On 6/29/2018 6:46 AM, Rocketman1988 wrote:
>
> Kelly,
>
> Thanks for your opinion. I hesitate posting on these forums due to the nay sayers
when anything other than the simplest tech from the 50s is suggested. I have
chosen to use a full EFII system and fully accept the additional complexities.
I do appreciate your insight on things...
>
> As for the previous post about the B lead current limiters, I would disagree
with putting the fuse at the other end as that would place it between the battery
and starter.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481273#481273
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
Help me here Charlie, I'm not quite following you. The B-lead
protection (current limiters) are installed between the Alternator
B-lead terminal and main bus line. The battery is not 'behind' the
protection and the bus. Rather the battery has no protection between it
and the bus fuse block(s).
What am I missing?
Bill
On 6/28/2018 9:56 PM, Charlie England wrote:
> Bill,
>
> Your install is obviously working, but it should be noted that your
> alternator B lead protection should be on the other end. If there's a
> fault in that wire, it should be big enough to handle everything the
> alternator can throw at it, but it'll never be big enough to handle
> everything the battery(s) can throw at it.
>
> FWIW,
>
> Charlie
>
>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
>
>
>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 6/29/2018 8:46 AM, Rocketman1988 wrote:
>
> Kelly,
>
> Thanks for your opinion. I hesitate posting on these forums due to the nay sayers
when anything other than the simplest tech from the 50s is suggested. I have
chosen to use a full EFII system and fully accept the additional complexities.
I do appreciate your insight on things...
>
> As for the previous post about the B lead current limiters, I would disagree
with putting the fuse at the other end as that would place it between the battery
and starter.
>
>
I guess I should have been more specific. The other end of the *wire*;
not the entire path. Look at the wire protection for the main alt, which
is at the hot side of the starter contactor end of the 8 ga wire
(correct). Now look at the protection on the aux alt B lead, at the
alternator end, instead of at the source end, which is the cross-tie
contactor.
When I took another look for this email, I also noticed that the 8 ga
wires feeding both fuse blocks don't have any protection. 'Conventional
wisdom' is that the battery contactor protects the 'fat wires', but
smaller wires need protection. What I see is 2 ga wires stepping down
in size to 8 ga wires, with no switching (disconnect) and protection at
the start of the 8 ga wires.
That's not a problem, as long as there isn't a problem. :-)
Charlie
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Protection devices are to protect *wires*. In our aircraft environments
the source of damage to wires is always the battery. Alternator B leads
should be sized big enough to handle the max that the alternator can
deliver, so they need no protection from the alternator. But the battery
can deliver hundreds of amps (sometimes *many hundreds* of amps). The 4
ga and larger stuff can survive long enough to use the master contactor
as protection, but smaller stuff runs a big risk of lighting up the
insulation if there's no circuit protection.
No protection device on a wire is there to protect the battery.
Charlie
On 6/29/2018 9:58 AM, Bill Watson wrote:
> Help me here Charlie, I'm not quite following you. The B-lead
> protection (current limiters) are installed between the Alternator
> B-lead terminal and main bus line. The battery is not 'behind' the
> protection and the bus. Rather the battery has no protection between
> it and the bus fuse block(s).
>
> What am I missing?
>
> Bill
>
> On 6/28/2018 9:56 PM, Charlie England wrote:
>> Bill,
>>
>> Your install is obviously working, but it should be noted that your
>> alternator B lead protection should be on the other end. If there's a
>> fault in that wire, it should be big enough to handle everything the
>> alternator can throw at it, but it'll never be big enough to handle
>> everything the battery(s) can throw at it.
>>
>> FWIW,
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>>
>> Virus-free. www.avast.com
>>
>>
>>
>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
I think Bob refers to my Z-14 in an RV-10 as 'everything including the
kitchen sink'. I other words, a bit too much.
Ten years ago when I started laying out my electrical system, I went
through the Z-schematics and frankly struggled to understand the various
backup scenarios. At one point I started sketching the Z-14 out and
everything became simple and symmetrical (I may have an excess of the
symmetry gene or something). More important, my desire coming into this
project was to have a state of the art panel which I could run for 10-15
even 30 minutes on the ground without worrying about a subsequent engine
start.
The need for this was driven home by 2 previous incidents; one being
flying in to New Orleans less than a year after the big hurricane and
finding myself sitting in my Maule staring at my Garmin 396 waiting for
a break in the usual gulf coast cu-nims. Why couldn't I sit in the FBO
and watch a Nexrad screen? Because it was still under reconstructions,
it lacked resources, and required a longish sprint to get to the
tiedowns. The other involved the Bahamas.
As my design came together, I ended up with (3) GRT HX EFIS screens and
assorted accessories. The GRTs did not have an integrated on/off switch
(or backup batts) and I wasn't interested in adding any. Main power on,
EFISs on; no accidental power-offs or reboots in the soup. Turned out
that those (3) screens are real power hogs, even dimmed down. Even now,
to run them for 30 mins on one Odyssey 680 suggests pulling a fuse on 1
or 2 might be a good idea (not really necessary). It made me question
the need for 3 screens but after encountering a couple of failures after
6 years of operation, it's cool to be able to swap out one of the 2
pilot oriented screens on the ramp at a remote location and fly with
100% of your normally used panel working.
The Z-14 has turned out to be a simple solution for me. I have 2 mags
and no electrically dependent ignition. I have 2 Odyssey 680s. Either
will start the engine, both guarantee it (I was happy to get rid of the
light weight starters in favor of the slow turning but stronger standard
starter). I can run my panel as long as I wish with the engine off.
Came in handy after the Breezy crash at Oshkosh a few years ago caused a
conga line of epic proportions. Etc etc.
I recently lost a voltage regulator. What did it require me to do?
Nothing except keep the x-feed switch on and turn off the non-working
side. No blip in the air, no shortened trip, no precautionary landing.
Flew 2 more legs like that with the same redundancy that most pilots fly
with most of the time.
Bill "I go what I wanted" Watson
On 6/28/2018 10:19 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
>
> Having a flying IFR RV-10 myself I question the benefits of dual
> batteries along with dual alternators, etc. Almost all EFIS panels
> these days offer a backup battery, good for 1 hour or more. I have one
> for each of my EFIS screens. Most ship's batteries these days are good
> for an hour or more of minimized current. An Ipad can provide hours of
> moving map and GPS, and with some extras a nearly full EFIS screen.
> I can see if you choose to have dual electronic ignition systems that
> then you are vulnerable to lack of electrons for at least one. It
> seems to me that the SD-20 alternator for a backup source of power,
> with a small, Odessey 680 or less mounted on the firewall should
> handle any of those needs. You only need one good sized battery, such
> as the Odessey 925 mounted in stock rear location, for starter
> operation.s Or just keep one magneto for the backup, and eliminate
> need for dual electric power sources. You get 85% of the electronic
> ignition by replacing one mag.
> Just my opinion, but I would strive to keep the design as simple as
> possible, and avoid having totally dual everything just because you can.
> Just thinking your goals might be achieved with a simpler system.
> Kelly
>
> On 6/28/2018 6:56 PM, Charlie England wrote:
>
>>>>
>>> I have a Z-14 in an RV10. Bob's approach sounds great. I like the
>>> symmetry. Not having asked the question 10 years ago when laying
>>> my Z-14 out, I took a different approach.
>>>
>>> I have the Xfeed mounted with the other two contactors back on the
>>> battery tray. 2 AWG links them all up. Then I have a single 2AWG
>>> lead going to the starter Contactor. The other side has an 8AWG
>>> link going forward to one fuse panel (bus) and an 8AWG link going
>>> from the starter contactor to the other fuse panel (bus).
>>>
>>> The current limiters on mounted on the firewall and protect the
>>> lines going from the 2 alternators to the 2 main bus feeds.
>>>
>>> I've attached a schematic with the locations of devices implied.
>>>
>>> Bill "I love my Z-14" Watson
>>>
>> Bill,
>>
>> Your install is obviously working, but it should be noted that your
>> alternator B lead protection should be on the other end. If there's a
>> fault in that wire, it should be big enough to handle everything the
>> alternator can throw at it, but it'll never be big enough to handle
>> everything the battery(s) can throw at it.
>>
>> FWIW,
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
I guess I didn't understand the fat wire versus the less-than-fat wire
exposure. My take on unprotected main power lines was that they can be
run and terminated in robust and simple ways with minimal exposure to
chafing, breaching of their insulation or shorting at the terminal
ends. With that view in mind, I was thinking of my 8AWG wires as 'fat
wires' just as my 2AWG wire is. So I view the 8AWG on the Aux side as a
'fat wire' with robust and simple terminations at the contactor and the
fuse block.... with a firewall stud in the path which happens to be part
of the current limiter unit. I'm quite confident that those 8AWG runs
are simple and safe.
I should note that the 8AWG runs from the current limiter firewall studs
to the fuse panels by the copilot's leg are quite short. Putting the
current limiter on the Aux side near the x-feed contactor behind the
luggage area would have required 2 long runs of 8AWG instead of 1.
I never considered the contactors as any kind of circuit protection. I
thought of them as simply switches, switches for high current loads
that can conveniently be thrown remotely by small switches. They enable
you to manually disconnect a high current line but there's no automatic
protection.
Bill
On 6/29/2018 11:18 AM, Charlie England wrote:
> Protection devices are to protect *wires*. In our aircraft
> environments the source of damage to wires is always the battery.
> Alternator B leads should be sized big enough to handle the max that
> the alternator can deliver, so they need no protection from the
> alternator. But the battery can deliver hundreds of amps (sometimes
> *many hundreds* of amps). The 4 ga and larger stuff can survive long
> enough to use the master contactor as protection, but smaller stuff
> runs a big risk of lighting up the insulation if there's no circuit
> protection.
>
> No protection device on a wire is there to protect the battery.
>
> Charlie
>
> On 6/29/2018 9:58 AM, Bill Watson wrote:
>> Help me here Charlie, I'm not quite following you. The B-lead
>> protection (current limiters) are installed between the Alternator
>> B-lead terminal and main bus line. The battery is not 'behind' the
>> protection and the bus. Rather the battery has no protection
>> between it and the bus fuse block(s).
>>
>> What am I missing?
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> On 6/28/2018 9:56 PM, Charlie England wrote:
>>> Bill,
>>>
>>> Your install is obviously working, but it should be noted that your
>>> alternator B lead protection should be on the other end. If there's
>>> a fault in that wire, it should be big enough to handle everything
>>> the alternator can throw at it, but it'll never be big enough to
>>> handle everything the battery(s) can throw at it.
>>>
>>> FWIW,
>>>
>>> Charlie
>>>
>>>
>>> Virus-free. www.avast.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>>
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Ah, the joys of trying to communicate via the interwebs. :-)
I'd agree that really short runs (the Aeroelectric 'gold standard' seems
to be 6", but I've probably fudged that in a place or two) are low risk.
But if that #8 from the right side of the x-feed contactor to the
current limiter runs the length of the plane, I'd want protection at the
source end. Not sure why moving the protection would require two runs.
If the protection is at the contactor, the #8 could run to either fuse
block #2, or to the aux alternator B lead, as 'geographically
convenient'. Then it would continue to the other component. Electrically
identical to what you have now, except the long run (and the short run)
of #8 would be protected from the battery. If the current limiter is now
on the firewall, the only #8 in that run that's actually protected is
between the limiter and the alternator B lead.
I'm not trying to tell you what to do; just wanted to mention a
potential vulnerability. If you're comfortable with the design, then run
with it. It's obviously been working ok so far. I know I've done a few
things that others wouldn't be comfortable with, but I am, with my plane.
FWIW, I have a similar arrangement for my engine bus (electrically
dependent alternative engine) to your fuse block #1, with the bus being
fed off the hot terminal of the contactor. In my case, it's the master
because everything's on the firewall in my plane, but same risk of
unprotected #8 wire. I protected it, and both my #8 alternator B leads,
by using #12 fuse link wire on the 'battery end' of each #8 wire. Just a
4"-6" long piece of the fuse link wire soldered on the end, with the
joint insulated with heat shrink. Then the fuse link gets the terminal
that connects to the contactor. The fuse link wire is an 'off the shelf'
item available from automotive supply houses; it has built-in insulation
to contain the heat if the protection is 'tripped'.
Charlie
On 6/29/2018 11:36 AM, Bill Watson wrote:
> I guess I didn't understand the fat wire versus the less-than-fat wire
> exposure. My take on unprotected main power lines was that they can
> be run and terminated in robust and simple ways with minimal exposure
> to chafing, breaching of their insulation or shorting at the terminal
> ends. With that view in mind, I was thinking of my 8AWG wires as 'fat
> wires' just as my 2AWG wire is. So I view the 8AWG on the Aux side as
> a 'fat wire' with robust and simple terminations at the contactor and
> the fuse block.... with a firewall stud in the path which happens to
> be part of the current limiter unit. I'm quite confident that those
> 8AWG runs are simple and safe.
>
> I should note that the 8AWG runs from the current limiter firewall
> studs to the fuse panels by the copilot's leg are quite short.
> Putting the current limiter on the Aux side near the x-feed contactor
> behind the luggage area would have required 2 long runs of 8AWG
> instead of 1.
>
> I never considered the contactors as any kind of circuit protection.
> I thought of them as simply switches, switches for high current loads
> that can conveniently be thrown remotely by small switches. They
> enable you to manually disconnect a high current line but there's no
> automatic protection.
>
> Bill
>
> On 6/29/2018 11:18 AM, Charlie England wrote:
>> Protection devices are to protect *wires*. In our aircraft
>> environments the source of damage to wires is always the battery.
>> Alternator B leads should be sized big enough to handle the max that
>> the alternator can deliver, so they need no protection from the
>> alternator. But the battery can deliver hundreds of amps (sometimes
>> *many hundreds* of amps). The 4 ga and larger stuff can survive long
>> enough to use the master contactor as protection, but smaller stuff
>> runs a big risk of lighting up the insulation if there's no circuit
>> protection.
>>
>> No protection device on a wire is there to protect the battery.
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>> On 6/29/2018 9:58 AM, Bill Watson wrote:
>>> Help me here Charlie, I'm not quite following you. The B-lead
>>> protection (current limiters) are installed between the Alternator
>>> B-lead terminal and main bus line. The battery is not 'behind' the
>>> protection and the bus. Rather the battery has no protection
>>> between it and the bus fuse block(s).
>>>
>>> What am I missing?
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>> On 6/28/2018 9:56 PM, Charlie England wrote:
>>>> Bill,
>>>>
>>>> Your install is obviously working, but it should be noted that your
>>>> alternator B lead protection should be on the other end. If there's
>>>> a fault in that wire, it should be big enough to handle everything
>>>> the alternator can throw at it, but it'll never be big enough to
>>>> handle everything the battery(s) can throw at it.
>>>>
>>>> FWIW,
>>>>
>>>> Charlie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Virus-free. www.avast.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
---
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: Z-14 Question |
At 11:36 AM 6/29/2018, you wrote:
>I guess I didn't understand the fat wire versus the less-than-fat
>wire exposure. My take on unprotected main power lines was that
>they can be run and terminated in robust and simple ways with
>minimal exposure to chafing, breaching of their insulation or
>shorting at the terminal ends. With that view in mind, I was
>thinking of my 8AWG wires as 'fat wires' just as my 2AWG wire
>is. So I view the 8AWG on the Aux side as a 'fat wire' with robust
>and simple terminations at the contactor and the fuse block.... with
>a firewall stud in the path which happens to be part of the current
>limiter unit. I'm quite confident that those 8AWG runs are simple and safe.
Agreed.
>I should note that the 8AWG runs from the current limiter firewall
>studs to the fuse panels by the copilot's leg are quite
>short. Putting the current limiter on the Aux side near the x-feed
>contactor behind the luggage area would have required 2 long runs of
>8AWG instead of 1.
>
>I never considered the contactors as any kind of circuit
>protection. I thought of them as simply switches, switches for
>high current loads that can conveniently be thrown remotely by small
>switches. They enable you to manually disconnect a high current
>line but there's no automatic protection.
Correct . . . powers-that-be consider them
'crew controlled protection', i.e. they're
used to disconnect sources of energy to smallest
practical footprint in times of stress . . .
like smoke or . . . short approach to the rocks.
B-lead protection is needed ONLY for the exceedingly
rare instance of shorted alternator diodes so
any such protection is located as close to the
bus/distribution node as practical.
Properly sized b-lead protection CANNOT be
opened by alternator energy.
Having recited the legacy philosophy I'll
note that all three of the vehicles in my
driveway ranging from 87GMC to 2006KIA
ALL connect the b-lead directly to the battery . . .
not even fusible links. In over 50 years
of driving alternators, never had diodes
short . . . I have had two instances of
diodes opening . . . one just two weeks
ago . . . but no shorts.
Of course, smoke from the b-lead in a
car is no big deal . . . as long as it
doesn't set the engine grease on fire.
Airplanes not so much.
Current limiters scattered around the bus
structures are very low return on investment . ..
probably zero.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Prather <mapratherid(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
Good point about the surface tension effect causing the conductive particles
to be completely covered and surrounded...
And, any detuning effect is probably limited - can=99t lower the reson
ant frequency of particles from GHz (?) to MHz...
How about capacitive coupling of one particle to the next? Capacitance has A
rea in the numerator and distance in the denominator... Probably not much t
here - the A is to small and the d too large. Hmm.
Regards,
Matt Prather
> On Jun 21, 2018, at 8:59 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroele
ctric.com> wrote:
>
> At 09:46 AM 6/20/2018, you wrote:
>> At 07:56 AM 6/20/2018, you wrote:
>>> Hi Bob,
>>> Long time no contact... I=99m happy you=99re still in this g
ame!
>>>
>>> Regarding this topic, I wonder how much the the conductive bits are in c
ontact with each other. I don=99t know how isolated each bit of conduc
tive material is in such a paint, but I could imagine there could be billion
s of contacts between neighboring bits of flake or powder such that there wo
uld be a random resistive path across the painted surface.
>
> I've been doing some 'asphalt contemplation' on a simple
> test setup to evaluate the effects of various paints/coatings
> on antenna performance.
>
> I was trying to imagine how conductive particles suspended
> in a non-conductive 'solution' would achieve a
> microscopic version of the gas-tight contact needed
> for reliable connection between conductors. It seems
> that surface tension would cause each particle to
> be totally enveloped, thus prevented from making
> physical contact with other particles.
>
> Not sure about what happens as the solution becomes
> a solid when solvents evaporate and the paint dries.
> I've seen volume resistivity measurements on some
> coatings/fillers, like potting compounds. These
> are always VERY high . . . including those designed
> for thermal conductivity.
>
> I'm thinking that there are three potential effects
> of paint . . . the dielectric effects you hypothesized
> which would probably be limited to a lowering of
> resonant frequency, the shielding effects which
> block and or re-direct the wave fronts of interest
> and attenuation/dissipation effects that simply
> turn the RF energy into heat.
>
> I'm recalling a bit of a fire drill on the ELT
> transmitters for Beechjets where a new version
> of the ELT kept tripping off due to high SWR
> on the VHF antenna. Seems the older version happily
> existed with a pair of antennas tucked under
> the fairing at the root of vertical fin leading
> edge.
>
> <25ac6ff7.jpg>
>
> Oookkaaay . . .
>
> Now, let's lay the VHF antenna back so that it
> sorta conforms to the inside of the fairing . . .
> except . . .
>
> Fairing was also part of an air-intake ductwork
> for the A/C . . . so the antennas wound up
> looking like this:
>
> <25ac7006.jpg>
>
> There were metallic braces inside the
> fairing along with bond straps that tied
> the braces to airframe . . . for lighting
> effects. Added on top of all this was a
> composite fairing material . . .
> capped off with paint often chosen by
> the customer hence of uncontrolled pedigree.
>
> What's a poor ELT transmitter to do?
>
> <25ac7016.jpg>
>
>
> I couldn't find anywhere in the archives where
> this installation had been measured for
> performance . . . a condition that didn't
> raise its ugly head until a new ELT complained
> about an 'unsatisfactory' antenna.
>
> I suggested we design a new, top loaded vertical
> for the VHF antenna that remained vertical with
> better separation from the effects of overhead
> structures.
>
> <25ac7026.jpg>
>
> Further, we could fine tune the antenna to accommodate
> any residual effects from proximity of other structures.
>
> This got the flying fuzz all in a dither . . . a new
> antenna would violate the TSO on the ELT . . . but
> abusing the TSO'd antenna did not . . . go figure.
> I think they wound up widening the SWR trip tolerances
> on the ELT transmitter.
>
> Not one of my happier experiences with the bureaucracy.
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint question |
At 10:21 PM 6/29/2018, you wrote:
>Good point about the surface tension effect
>causing the conductive particles to be completely covered and surrounded...
>
>And, any detuning effect is probably limited -
>can=99t lower the resonant frequency of particles from GHz (?) to
MHz...
>
>How about capacitive coupling of one particle to
>the next? Capacitance has Area in the numerator
>and distance in the denominator... Probably not
>much there - the A is to small and the d too large. Hmm.
The effect cannot be zero . . . but it's
beyond my current understanding to assess
its significance. Plan B is an empirical
test. Got all the stuff laying around here
to do it . . . just no time at the moment
and besides, my 'antenna range' temperatures
are in the high 90's right now.
I need to identify all the 'suspect' paints
and get samples. Will test some 'aluminum'
off-the-shelf paints too.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question (OOPS!) |
> Having recited the legacy philosophy I'll
> note that all three of the vehicles in my
> driveway ranging from 87GMC to 2006KIA
> ALL connect the b-lead directly to the battery . . .
> not even fusible links.
Not true. My 87GMC alternator wire goes
directly to battery(+) but it's only about
18" long and hangs out in the air.
The 98SAT battery(+) does have a fusible link at the
starter solenoid.
The 06KIA has an MANL style fuse right at
the battery(+) terminal.
In both cases, b-lead protection is at the
BATTERY end of the b-lead.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question (OOPS!) |
| From: | "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com> |
Bob,
Along these same lines, I will have to run two battery buss leads from the aft
batteries to the forward busses...about 8.5'.
Using the logic presented here, I need to install a current limiter in each battery
lead, near the batteries...
Does this sound like a good plan, or am I missing something?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481316#481316
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
At 08:22 AM 7/1/2018, you wrote:
>
>
>Bob,
>
>Along these same lines, I will have to run two battery buss leads
>from the aft batteries to the forward busses...about 8.5'.
>
>Using the logic presented here, I need to install a current limiter
>in each battery lead, near the batteries...
>
>Does this sound like a good plan, or am I missing something?
Yes, it's the NATURE of any probable fault that
determines the value of upstream protection.
Conduct a mental exercise considering all the
ways that your 8AWG bus feeders might experience
loads that put the 8AWG at risk for getting really
hot, smoking lots of insulation and perhaps burning
the wire in two.
This kind of fault (hard fault) simply cannot
arise in a properly installed/protected feeder
(a condition cited by another Lister a few days
ago). Fat wires in aircraft are at risk only
for soft faults . . . conditions that cause
arcing and heating levels too low to actually
damage the wire. This exercise is called an
FMEA (Failure Mode Effects Analysis).
Example: A C-90 on short final to Clovis NM about 1990 was
suddenly stricken with complete disconnect of control in pitch.
Elevator forces in wheel went to zero. The pilots did a go around
and managed to land safely with power and pitch trim.
A teardown revealed a mis-positioned wire bundle under the
cockpit floorboards where a 40A protected wire for co-pilot's
windshield heat had had been rubbing against the elevator
cable for a considerable period of time.
No smoke, no fire, no flickers in the electrical system, no
trips of the 40A breaker. Over the pre-failure interval,
MegaJoules of energy were released in the erosion of steel
wires (the copper wire was in pretty good shape . . . this
demonstrates why layers of copper are included in the design
of safes . . . nearly impossible to penetrate with a cutting
torch).
In other instances, it's easy to imagine a 10-cent resistor
burning up in a radio and making lots of nasty smells in the
cockpit while failing to open a 5A fuse that protects the
feed wire to the failed device.
Bottom line is that ALL thermally actuated protective devices
(fuses, heater actuated breakers, current limiters, fusible
links) and even magnetic breakers are incapable of reacting to
the low-rate, long-duration soft faults that are exemplified
by the two scenarios I offered above.
In the case for your intended bus feeders, it is sufficient
to route, support and otherwise eliminate probability
of a soft fault (like rubbing an elevator cable or vibrating
against the EDGE of a lightening hole in a bulkhead).
The FAA acknowledges the unique fault probabilities
of fat wires with words that speak to the design
of light aircraft:
Emacs!
Emacs!
Your proposed fat wires fall under
clause (2).
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
| From: | "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com> |
Sooo...I do NOT need to use an ANL fuse on those 8AWG battery feeders...
Correct?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481336#481336
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-14 Question |
At 02:34 PM 7/1/2018, you wrote:
>
>
>Sooo...I do NOT need to use an ANL fuse on those 8AWG battery feeders...
>
>Correct?
yes
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jared Yates <email(at)jaredyates.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Noise When Touching Metal Airframe Grounds |
I've confirmed that the noise is present regardless of whether the ANR is
on or off. I have not yet been able to round up a plain headset to try. My
troubleshooting is a little slow at the moment because I'm only getting to
the airplane once a week. If there is a floating ground somewhere in the
audio system, are there any hints about where I might try looking for it?
I have another alternator to try, and hope to have time to do that on
Friday.
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 2:27 PM, Roger wrote:
> Is the noise still present when the ANR is turned off?
>
>
> Roger
>
>
> At 09:36 AM 6/19/2018, you wrote:
>
> Good suggestion, thanks. So far all 4 lemo sets are the same. I have a
> dual plug version of the same bose to try, and can do that and report back
>
>
> Hmmmm . . . not sure I've got an accurate image
> of the differences between 'lemo' and 'dual plug'.
> Does this described the connectors at the end
> of the headset cord . . . single mulit-pin as opposed
> to "Y" plugs?
>
> To be significant, the test headset needs to
> be a generic, non-electronic . . . but go
> ahead and try the dual-plug Bose X too.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | Re: How to Wire My Alternator |
Quick follow-up for y'all. I fired up the engine a couple of weeks ago or
so and did not see any output from the new B&C alternator. When I debugged
it, I found a blown fuse on the field wire. This morning, I ran the engine
and the alternator worked like a champ, pumping out about 15 amps.
Thanks for the advice.
-- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: How to Wire My Alternator |
At 01:31 PM 7/3/2018, you wrote:
>Quick follow-up for y'all. I fired up the engine a couple of weeks
>ago or so and did not see any output from the new B&C alternator.
>When I debugged it, I found a blown fuse on the field wire. This
>morning, I ran the engine and the alternator worked like a champ,
>pumping out about 15 amps.
What kind of ov protection? If you're
using a B&C regulator or one of the
several crowbar ov protection modules,
upstream power for the field should be
on a PANEL MOUNTED BREAKER . . . not
a fuse.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com> |
For those who are making their own battery cables, what is the recommended crimp?
Is the indent crimp preferred of a hex crimp?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=481392#481392
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | Re: How to Wire My Alternator |
On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 6:58 PM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 01:31 PM 7/3/2018, you wrote:
>
> Quick follow-up for y'all. I fired up the engine a couple of weeks ago or
> so and did not see any output from the new B&C alternator. When I debugge
d
> it, I found a blown fuse on the field wire. This morning, I ran the engin
e
> and the alternator worked like a champ, pumping out about 15 amps.
>
>
> What kind of ov protection? If you're
> using a B&C regulator or one of the
> several crowbar ov protection modules,
> upstream power for the field should be
> on a PANEL MOUNTED BREAKER . . . not
> a fuse.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
=8B
Bob=8B,
You are absolutely right, of course. I discovered that a month ago, after I
hooked everything up according to Z-13 and *then* actually read the
installation instructions for the B&C voltage regulator. Installing the
breaker is high on my to-do list.
=8BThanks for the eagle-eye.
-- Art Z.=8B
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery cables |
I soldered mine according to the instructions here:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/big_term.pdf
Easy and seems like I got physically sound, low resistance connections.
-- Art Z.
On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 10:03 PM Rocketman1988 wrote:
> Rocketman(at)etczone.com>
>
> For those who are making their own battery cables, what is the recommended
> crimp?
>
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*"We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."*
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Battery cables |
| From: | Ron Burnett <ronburnett(at)charter.net> |
Art,
I have a Harbor Freight set of hydraulic squeezers that work great for that.
It has a big set of fittings for every size.
Ron Burnett
May you have the Lord's blessings today!
Sent from my iPad
> On Jul 3, 2018, at 11:00 PM, Art Zemon wrote:
>
> I soldered mine according to the instructions here: http://www.aeroelectri
c.com/articles/big_term.pdf
> Easy and seems like I got physically sound, low resistance connections.
>
> -- Art Z.
>
>
>> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 10:03 PM Rocketman1988 wro
te:
ne.com>
>>
>> For those who are making their own battery cables, what is the recommende
d crimp?
>
>
> --
> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
>
> "We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery cables |
At 05:24 AM 7/4/2018, you wrote:
>Art,
>I have a Harbor Freight set of hydraulic squeezers that work great
>for that. It has a big set of fittings for every size.
>
>Ron Burnett
>
Take a proposed 4 or 2 awg terminal with
you when you go crimp-tool shopping at HF.
I purchased one a few years ago where
the numbers stamped on the die-sets had
no practical relationship to reality.
June 04, 2018 - July 04, 2018
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ol