AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-pn
July 27, 2020 - August 25, 2020
are the negative consequences of omitting the fusable link?
>
> 2. Should current drawn through the above circuit be considered for the purpose
of load analysis to help me choose the right size alternator? If so, what range
of currents should I expect through it?
>
> 3. Same question for the bus voltage sense (pin 3) on the regulator. Does that
draw significantly current?
>
> Thank you!
>
I had similar questions, back when I first started studying the Z drawings.
The key thing to remember is that fuses (links, etc) always protect the
downstream wire from the current source. Without the link, the path from
buss to breaker is unprotected.
Your next question (or at least mine was) is the why of the various wire
sizes. The link is the smallest wire size that's reasonable for physical
ruggedness. Wire steps up 4 sizes so the link can do its job. After the
breaker, it can step back down to what the 5A breaker can protect.
The alternator ultimately must 'pay back' the energy used to drive its
field, so, yes.
There should be negligible current on the sense wire.
Have fun,
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z11 field supply circuit protection |
| From: | "johnbright" <john_s_bright(at)yahoo.com> |
Bob speaks briefly about alternator field current in the fourth post at http://forum.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=16775302
BTW: Are you aware the latest Z dwg revs are in the Adobe... folder at http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/
--------
John Bright, RV-6A, at FWF, O-360
Z-101 single batt dual alt SDS EM-5-F.
john_s_bright(at)yahoo.com, Newport News, Va
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1u6GeZo6pmBWsKykLNVQMvu4o1VEVyP4K
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497455#497455
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Transponder and/or ADSB Antenna Installation and |
Radiation
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
I'd strongly suggest reading your policy. Unrelated violations of the
FARs have been used in the past to deny coverage. Avemco denied
*liability* coverage to a guy back in the early '90s, when his crash did
hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage to structures on the ground.
The denial was based on an unlogged system change that was made, and
then changed back to the original configuration prior to the accident,
and had nothing to do with the accident.
Charlie
On 7/26/2020 6:49 PM, Sebastien wrote:
> The insurance company will not have anything to say about it unless
> there is some weird liability claim arising from a failure of the ELT.
> Not worth worrying about.
>
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2020, 16:18 Charlie England > wrote:
>
> Don't forget that while a homebrew ELT antenna may work better
> than the supplied version, it probably isn't legal. Unlike most
> radio stuff, the antenna is usually part of the certification of
> the ELT, and ELTs must be certificated in the USA; even in
> homebuilts.
>
> Won't matter until that picky a/w inspector comes to sign off the
> plane, or if you get past that, dealing with the Insurance company
> after you survive a crash.
>
> Charlie
>
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 11:42 AM > wrote:
>
> Thanks Bob for the informationgreatly appreciated.
>
> *From:* owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>
> > *On
> Behalf Of *Robert L. Nuckolls, III
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 22, 2020 9:17 PM
> *To:* aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: AeroElectric-List: Transponder and/or ADSB
> Antenna Installation and Radiation
>
>
> So the questions are:
>
> -Is the ground plane better to be square/ round/ or
> hexagon/ or some other shape?
>
>
> Why not eliminate the need for ground planes with
> vertically polarized dipoles mounted to inside surfaces
> of empannage?
>
> https://tinyurl.com/y3w4hf8y
>
>
> -If the diameter of the ground plane cannot be exactly a
> square and the same dimension as indicated on the
> installation guide what is the problem(s) with it being
> slightly to wide or slightly too narrow than spec, or if
> the antenna is not installed in the exact center?
>
>
> ditch the ground planes
>
>
> -The book says the two antennae should be mounted at least
> two feet from each other so what if they were installed
> closeror even co-located on the same ground plane?
>
>
> Mount one on left side forward, the other
> right side aft. Getting separation shouldn't
> be a problem.
>
>
> -What about mounting these masts near human body parts (ouch)?
>
> -What about mounting these masts near other avionics or
> other electrical equipment?
>
>
> back in the tail?
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
--
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: Z11 field supply circuit protection |
>
>
>The alternator ultimately must 'pay back' the energy used to drive
>its field, so, yes.
Alternator nameplate ratings account for internal
demands of the field winding and are not part
of your load analysis.
At low rpm and high loads, the field CAN be
on the order of 3A. At cruise on a lycoming
I've seen it as low as 1A. But it's not
a part of your energy management concerns.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John M Tipton <john(at)tipton.me.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Standard mags: Lycoming |
I presume my next question is: does a Lycoming that comes via Vans for an RV
come with one or two =98Impulse Coupled=99 mags.
John
Sent from my iPad
----x--O--x----
> On 28 Jul 2020, at 1:38 am, Charlie England wrote:
>
> =EF=BB
>
>
>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 8:30 AM John M Tipton w
rote:
tmail.com>
>>
>> Hi Guys
>>
>> With 'standard' mags as supplied by Lycoming, and an RV9a with ACS Key sw
itch WITHOUT starter position and using 'push switch' to operate starter, sh
ould the engine be started on LEFT MAG ONLY.
>>
>> John
>>
> The engine should be started with the impulse coupled mag 'on' (ungrounded
P lead), and the other P lead grounded. What you describe is how the switc
h *should* operate, but it's easy to verify operation for yourself. Without t
he P leads connected to the switch, Measure resistance from each P lead term
inal to the ground terminal, 1st with the switch 'off', then in 'L', then in
'R'. Both P lead terminals should show dead short to the ground terminal wi
th the switch 'Off'. The 'L' terminal should show an open circuit (infinite
ly high resistance) and the 'R' terminal should show a short to ground with t
he switch in 'L', and the reverse in 'R'. With the switch in 'Both', both te
rminals should show open to the ground terminal. (Don't forget that if you'r
e touching the terminals with your fingers, your body will conduct slightly,
so depending on the meter, you might see some high but not infinite resista
nce when the switch is open.)
>
> The left mag is *typically* the impulse mag, but it's pretty easy to check
. The impulse mag has what appears to be a spacer that's about an inch thick
between the body of the mag and the engine. So the 'taller' mag is the impu
lse mag.
>
> Charlie
>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Transponder and/or ADSB Antenna Installation and |
Radiation
| From: | "Beauvais" <BeauvaisGinnynw429(at)gmail.com> |
Basic economics tells us how important receiving a quality education is for bettering ourselves and the future of our children. Education enables upward socioeconomic mobility and is key to escaping poverty. It is also essential for empowering people globally to live more healthy and sustainable lives CLIK HERE (https://www.newsblogged.com/why-successful-entrepreneurs-prioritize-philanthropy/)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497461#497461
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z11 field supply circuit protection |
| From: | "draker" <ryan-ae(at)existens.org> |
Thank you, very informative answer. I erroneously assumed that a breaker or fuse
protected the whole circuit, not just what's downstream from it. Rookie mistake.
About the field supply current: It makes sense that if the field current draw is
accounted for by the alternator's advertised output, then you wouldn't include
it in your energy management calculations. Question is, how do you know if
a particular alternator accounts for it? Is this standard alternator marketing
practice? Do B&C alternators account for it? Will I get 40A out of a 40 or will
I get 40A minus field current?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497470#497470
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z11 field supply circuit protection |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
An alternator rated output is a nominal value, not an exact value. As the load
is increased, the alternator will increase its output to supply the demand. If
the load demands more than the alternator's rated output, the alternator
might still supply the current, but the voltage will start to sag as the load gets
larger. When the alternator voltage sags down to battery voltage, then the
battery will also supply current to the load.
Modern avionics and LED lights do not draw much current. My RV-12 needs
less than 10 amps. Of course heated pitot tubes and electric seats use more.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497474#497474
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z11 field supply circuit protection |
At 09:36 PM 7/28/2020, you wrote:
>
>Thank you, very informative answer. I erroneously assumed that a
>breaker or fuse protected the whole circuit, not just what's
>downstream from it. Rookie mistake.
>
>About the field supply current: It makes sense that if the field
>current draw is accounted for by the alternator's advertised
>output, then you wouldn't include it in your energy management
>calculations.
Consider the internally regulated alternator
wherein field current is supplied INTERNALLY.
The nameplate rating would be that current
available at the b-terminal irrespective of
that which is consumed internally. So bringing
the field lead out to accommodate an external
regulator doesn't change the overall energy
picture.
>Question is, how do you know if a particular alternator
>accounts for it? Is this standard alternator marketing practice?
> Do B&C alternators account for it? Will I get 40A out of a 40
>or will I get 40A minus field current?
Standard practice. You're guaranteed the nameplate
rating under worst case operations (lowest rpm for
full output combined with max rated internal temperatures).
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Position indicator needed |
| From: | "Aviator125" <kfc78128(at)bcaoo.com> |
I think you should look in the spec to see which one fits a particular type. If
it still does not fit, try to consult with some company.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497481#497481
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Position indicator needed |
| From: | "rparigoris" <rparigor(at)hotmail.com> |
Hi Group No joy with Actuonix. I have 2 burned up indicators and the internal potentiometer
wires going into unit melted. I urged them to bench test an actuator
with an indicator from same batch sent me. They finally got back to me and
said that their test works fine. They asked I ship back and they will repair
under warranty if it's defective. The actuator is working fine, I think if I
sent stuff back it's going to be a long drawn out battle with no joy in end. I
purchased a Ray Allen RP4 Indicator and POS 12 Position Sender. More work because
had to install additional sender. That said Ray Allen components very high
quality and amazing as it seems works perfectly! Ron P.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497482#497482
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Possible Brownout Protection Device |
At 06:29 PM 4/1/2019, you wrote:
>
>There needs to be a diode in the existing main power bus to prevent
>the DC-DC converter current from flowing to the starter.
>Otherwise, that DC-DC converter will be unable to maintain 12 volts.
???? as shown in the z-drawings, brownout boosters are
switched to support ONLY the e-bus . . . just milliseconds
before the starter contactors close . . . and for as long
as the starter button is held closed. The "normal feed"
path includes the requisite diode.
> Depending on load, the DC-DC converter with a 5 amp
> rating might have trouble maintaining 12 volts, let
> alone putting out 33 volts.
33 volts? No . . . only 14v. We're keeping the
e-bus supported at 14 volts for the cranking
interval that the battery is below 11 volts.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: PC board fabrication |
| From: | "Tenzilla" <CaseyKLandwehri(at)yahoo.com> |
Hey, there are a lot of companies that are doing such a job. It is not hard to
make a click on Google and to find a good team.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497485#497485
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: IS a COM ANTENNA GROUND PLANE NECESSARY |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
My friend abandoned the antenna embedded in the vertical stabilizer on his
Kitfox. He purchased a new antenna and mounted it atop the fuselage just aft
of the cargo area. The antenna base is mounted to a steel plate that is part
of the tubular steel airframe. The SWR was 1.95 when transmitting on
122.75. The ground plane could probably be improved if necessary. The
wings were folded back during the SWR test. The aluminum flaperons were
within 6 inches of the antenna. Question: Do nearby metal objects
(flaperons) affect the SWR? If so, the the SWR test could be repeated when
the wings are unfolded.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497489#497489
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IS a COM ANTENNA GROUND PLANE NECESSARY |
At 07:26 AM 8/3/2020, you wrote:
>
>My friend abandoned the antenna embedded in the vertical stabilizer on his
>Kitfox. He purchased a new antenna and mounted it atop the fuselage just aft
>of the cargo area. The antenna base is mounted to a steel plate that is part
>of the tubular steel airframe.
Good
>The SWR was 1.95 when transmitting on 122.75.
You need to run a spectrum plot. Check SWR
every 0.5 Mhz from 118 to 132 and plot
a curve.
>The ground plane could probably be improved if necessary.
May not be necessary . . . you won't know
for sure until you get the 'big picture'
Generally speaking, an narrow-band antenna can have
a perfect or even low SWR at only one frequency.
That 'dip' in SWR may or may not be at the
antenna's resonant frequency.
The attached plot illustrates an exemplar
antenna's performance over a range of frequencies.
The antenna's 'sweet spot' is at 429Mhz. The
antenna is satisfactory (2:1 or less) over a range
of about 416-442Mhz. Useful (3:1 or less) over
a range of 403-452Mhz.
Your SWR meter is a minimal utility vector network
analyzer. It just doesn't 'scan' or 'plot' for you
like a full featured VNA. However, with a little
data gathering and pencil work on a graph, you can
still get the information you need.
>The wings were folded back during the SWR test. The aluminum flaperons were
>within 6 inches of the antenna. Question: Do nearby metal objects
>(flaperons) affect the SWR? If so, the the SWR test could be repeated when
>the wings are unfolded.
You want to do testing with the aircraft as
close to a flight condition as practical.
Yeah, conductors in close proximity do
have an effect.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IS a COM ANTENNA GROUND PLANE NECESSARY |
>The wings were folded back during the SWR test. The aluminum flaperons were
>within 6 inches of the antenna. Question: Do nearby metal objects
>(flaperons) affect the SWR? If so, the the SWR test could be repeated when
>the wings are unfolded.
You want to do testing with the aircraft as
close to a flight condition as practical.
Yeah, conductors in close proximity do
have an effect.
Just for grins, you might run a scan with
the wings folded then repeat the exercise
with the aircraft in flight configuration.
I would be interesting to see how much
effect there is due to proximity of folded
wings.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: SWR minima not at resonance? |
Followup:
Earlier I wrote:
>Generally speaking, an narrow-band antenna can have
>a perfect or even low SWR at only one frequency.
>That 'dip' in SWR may or may not be at the
>antenna's resonant frequency.
A Lister wrote that he thought lowest swr was
the primary manifestation resonance. I told
him I would elaborate with a posting to the
List.
Here's an exemplar plot of characteristics
for one of several communications antennas
I evaluated for use on our local EMS/
LE/FIRE services:
Note that the SWR minima is at 493.6Mhz while
the reactive component swing (resonance) is
at 457Mhz. At lowest SWR, the impedance of
the antenna is 56.9 Ohms, resistance is 56.6
Ohms, reactance is 5.8 Ohms inductive.
The 56.9 Ohm impedance produces the not quite
perfect but still satisfactory value of 1.18:1.
One COULD craft a matching network that would
yield 1:1 somewhere . . . but it would still
rise either side of optimal. In the illustrated
case, the 1.5:1 bandwidth (markers 1 and 2) is
66Mhz. NOT centered on our frequencies of
interest in the 460 to 470Mhz but still quite
satisfactory for task at hand with SWR of much
less than 2:1 over the range.
This is the kind of data you can get from
a Vector Network Analyzer, a test tool discussed
here on the List a few weeks ago. Quite
illuminating when it comes to matters of
feedlines and antennas.
The antenna Joe is working with will hopefully
offer 2:1 or better over his range of interest,
118 to 132Mhz.
Bob . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Matronics firewall down |
| From: | "nuckollsr" <bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
Mail coming into the matronics services is temporarily down. The Baracudda server
went TU a couple days ago. Matt is working to get it replaced. I think this
piece of hardware has been in service for some years and got tired. Matt tells
me that the machine stands off a virtual storm of malicious intrusions per day.
We'll be back up soon . . . in the mean time we can continue any conversations
you wish using the browser portal.
Bob . . .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497498#497498
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: IS a COM ANTENNA GROUND PLANE NECESSARY |
| From: | "Mahi01" <mahis4799(at)gmail.com> |
Roku is a streaming device, which is a reasonable roku activation (https://sites.google.com/site/rokuactivationn/)
and other Set-up Box. Roku is a bundle of
amusement, where client can stream for boundless motion appears, web arrangement,
news, animation and a lot more projects.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497501#497501
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Cover even weak subject via assignment help services |
| From: | "rickypauls" <rickypaul091(at)gmail.com> |
Lack of skills in a particular subject is not a big problem because it is not compulsory
that every student is great at every subject. While you studying in
college, you have to manage a lot of subjects. So, its quite possible to have
confusion regarding a subject or concept. Connect with the right
Assignment Help (https://www.greatassignmenthelp.com/) service providers to boost your knowledge and insight into your weak subject. You dont have to be stressed because of your submissions or due dates. On-time submission of your project will enhance your numbers as well as your performance. If you are in the situation that you could miss your deadlines, place your order, and get your assignment when you really need it. Moreover, you may have enough information but dont know how to create it. This situation leads you to bad scores. Hence, grab the best Assignment Help Online (https://www.greatassignmenthelp.com/) writing services and get a well-written essay for your academic progress.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497506#497506
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
Hello all! I started my research some time ago and have read and read on the electrics
of this thing. I am building what I thought would be a fairly simple
airplane. It a 912 engine, dual ignition and fuel injection, but will be VFR
flying only. With the single EFIS, radios, lighting, etc. I fear the Amperage
will be too much for the stock alternator alone, so I will be supplementing
with a Rotax external alternator.
Now, I see drawing Z-16 and that is what I was going to go with, but now I am adding
quite a major component and can't seem to figure out how/where it will add
in to the scheme. I'm not sure if it should be switched or not as it will
be "always on". The Z-16 idea for the Batt switch now does not seem like it would
be appropriate in this case, but I really don't know. I was looking at the
Rotax installation of the external alternator, and it is wired completely differently
than Bob's Z-16, which confused me even more.
I feel like I am making too much of this and that it should still be "simple" to
make happen, but I have a hard time putting the written word into practice without
being hands on. Can someone help? Any advice would certainly be appreciated.
If there is another place to find a diagram similar to what I am talking
about, that would be helpful as I am a visual learner.
Thanks all!!
Rob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497507#497507
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
The integrated alternator should be adequate without an external alternator.
Have you done a load analysis? How many amps will your system require?
What is the exact model of your engine, 912ULS or what?
What kind of plane are you building?
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497508#497508
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
user9253 wrote:
> The integrated alternator should be adequate without an external alternator.
> Have you done a load analysis? How many amps will your system require?
> What is the exact model of your engine, 912ULS or what?
> What kind of plane are you building?
Thanks, Joe.
I would agree with you, except after going through the manuals for everything,
it appears the alternator won't be adequate...assuming I am doing things correctly.
It will be a stock 912 ULS beefed up power-wise to about 145 HP and will
be installed into a Just Aircraft Highlander.
Below are the components and the strobes are what puts it over the edge, even though
they are LEDs. Hopefully, this is where I am incorrect. By my excel calculation,
add all those up and you get 21.96 amps
All Advanced Flight Systems/Dynon components.
AF5600 PFD/MFD 2.8 amps
SV-COM-C25 RADIO 3 amps
SV-INTERCOM-2S INTERCOM 0.1 amps
SV-XPNDR-261 ADSB OUT 0.4 amps
SV-ADSB-472 ADSB IN 0.1 amps
SV-EMS-220 ENGINE MONITOR 0.11 amps
SV-ADAHRS-200 ADAHRS 0.15 amps
SV-MAG-236 REMOTE MAGNETOMETER 0.15 amps
AF-BAT-3AH BACKUP BATTERY 1 amps
Video Adapter for SkyView 0.15 amps
SkyView Wi-Fi Adapter 0.1 amps
SV-GPS-2020 GPS RECEIVER/ANTENNA 0.1 amps
AeroLEDs Pulsar NSP Strobe 10 amps
Position 0.8 amps
AeroLEDs MicroSun Landing 1.5 amps
Taxi 1.5 amps
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497509#497509
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
No electric fuel pump(s)? How are you getting 145 hp from a Rotax 912
without a turbo?
On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 11:40 AM meat_ball wrote:
> arjayefem(at)fastmail.net>
>
>
> user9253 wrote:
> > The integrated alternator should be adequate without an external
> alternator.
> > Have you done a load analysis? How many amps will your system require?
> > What is the exact model of your engine, 912ULS or what?
> > What kind of plane are you building?
>
>
> Thanks, Joe.
>
> I would agree with you, except after going through the manuals for
> everything, it appears the alternator won't be adequate...assuming I am
> doing things correctly. It will be a stock 912 ULS beefed up power-wise to
> about 145 HP and will be installed into a Just Aircraft Highlander.
>
> Below are the components and the strobes are what puts it over the edge,
> even though they are LEDs. Hopefully, this is where I am incorrect. By my
> excel calculation, add all those up and you get 21.96 amps
>
> All Advanced Flight Systems/Dynon components.
> AF5600 PFD/MFD 2.8 amps
> SV-COM-C25 RADIO 3 amps
> SV-INTERCOM-2S INTERCOM 0.1 amps
> SV-XPNDR-261 ADSB OUT 0.4 amps
> SV-ADSB-472 ADSB IN 0.1 amps
> SV-EMS-220 ENGINE MONITOR 0.11 amps
> SV-ADAHRS-200 ADAHRS 0.15 amps
> SV-MAG-236 REMOTE MAGNETOMETER 0.15 amps
> AF-BAT-3AH BACKUP BATTERY 1 amps
> Video Adapter for SkyView 0.15 amps
> SkyView Wi-Fi Adapter 0.1 amps
> SV-GPS-2020 GPS RECEIVER/ANTENNA 0.1 amps
> AeroLEDs Pulsar NSP Strobe 10 amps
> Position 0.8 amps
> AeroLEDs MicroSun Landing 1.5 amps
> Taxi 1.5 amps
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497509#497509
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
kenryan wrote:
> No electric fuel pump(s)? How are you getting 145 hp from a Rotax 912 without
a turbo?
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 11:40 AM meat_ball wrote:
>
>
> >
> >
> > user9253 wrote:
> > > The integrated alternator should be adequate without an external alternator.
> > > Have you done a load analysis? How many amps will your system require?
> > > What is the exact model of your engine, 912ULS or what?
> > > What kind of plane are you building?
> >
> >
> > Thanks, Joe.
> >
> > I would agree with you, except after going through the manuals for everything,
it appears the alternator won't be adequate...assuming I am doing things
correctly. It will be a stock 912 ULS beefed up power-wise to about 145 HP and
will be installed into a Just Aircraft Highlander.
> >
> > Below are the components and the strobes are what puts it over the edge, even
though they are LEDs. Hopefully, this is where I am incorrect. By my excel
calculation, add all those up and you get 21.96 amps
> >
> > All Advanced Flight Systems/Dynon components.
> > AF5600 PFD/MFD 2.8 amps
> > SV-COM-C25 RADIO 3 amps
> > SV-INTERCOM-2S INTERCOM 0.1 amps
> > SV-XPNDR-261 ADSB OUT 0.4 amps
> > SV-ADSB-472 ADSB IN 0.1 amps
> > SV-EMS-220 ENGINE MONITOR 0.11 amps
> > SV-ADAHRS-200 ADAHRS 0.15 amps
> > SV-MAG-236 REMOTE MAGNETOMETER 0.15 amps
> > AF-BAT-3AH BACKUP BATTERY 1 amps
> > Video Adapter for SkyView 0.15 amps
> > SkyView Wi-Fi Adapter 0.1 amps
> > SV-GPS-2020 GPS RECEIVER/ANTENNA 0.1 amps
> > AeroLEDs Pulsar NSP Strobe 10 amps
> > Position 0.8 amps
> > AeroLEDs MicroSun Landing 1.5 amps
> > Taxi 1.5 amps
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497509#497509 (http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497509#497509)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ==========
> > -
> > 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
> > ==========
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
What a great question!!! See?!? Yet another reason Im posting here. I knew someone
would critique my stupidity. Add those in and you an add more amperage still.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497513#497513
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 8/5/2020 2:27 PM, meat_ball wrote:
>
>
> user9253 wrote:
>> The integrated alternator should be adequate without an external alternator.
>> Have you done a load analysis? How many amps will your system require?
>> What is the exact model of your engine, 912ULS or what?
>> What kind of plane are you building?
>
> Thanks, Joe.
>
> I would agree with you, except after going through the manuals for everything,
it appears the alternator won't be adequate...assuming I am doing things correctly.
It will be a stock 912 ULS beefed up power-wise to about 145 HP and will
be installed into a Just Aircraft Highlander.
>
> Below are the components and the strobes are what puts it over the edge, even
though they are LEDs. Hopefully, this is where I am incorrect. By my excel
calculation, add all those up and you get 21.96 amps
>
> All Advanced Flight Systems/Dynon components.
> AF5600 PFD/MFD 2.8 amps
> SV-COM-C25 RADIO 3 amps
> SV-INTERCOM-2S INTERCOM 0.1 amps
> SV-XPNDR-261 ADSB OUT 0.4 amps
> SV-ADSB-472 ADSB IN 0.1 amps
> SV-EMS-220 ENGINE MONITOR 0.11 amps
> SV-ADAHRS-200 ADAHRS 0.15 amps
> SV-MAG-236 REMOTE MAGNETOMETER 0.15 amps
> AF-BAT-3AH BACKUP BATTERY 1 amps
> Video Adapter for SkyView 0.15 amps
> SkyView Wi-Fi Adapter 0.1 amps
> SV-GPS-2020 GPS RECEIVER/ANTENNA 0.1 amps
> AeroLEDs Pulsar NSP Strobe 10 amps
> Position 0.8 amps
> AeroLEDs MicroSun Landing 1.5 amps
> Taxi 1.5 amps
>
Ask Dynon about idle current on the radio. That looks pretty steep
except when transmitting. Same with the strobe. It might spike to 10A,
but average should be *much* lower than that.
Remember that anything that sees intermittent use needs different
treatment from constant draw devices. Short term peaks can be absorbed
by the battery, as long as there's excess *average* charging ability to
replenish the battery.
The backup battery shouldn't draw anything, once it's fully charged
(unless it has its own charging circuit that draws power all the time).
Landing/taxi shouldn't see more than 5 or 10 minutes per flight, unless
you intend to leave them on as recognition lights.
As you just realized, you need to add the fuel pump draw. If you're
running automotive style injection with fuel supplied by only an
electric pump, it will obviously be running all the time. Most injection
pumps draw between 4 & 10 amps, with 5-6 amps being the most common draw.
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
I suppose I was thinking all that was taken care of by the on board, internal generator.
Im new to Rotax do this entire thing is a learning process for me. I
appreciate everyones help!!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497514#497514
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
So if it's a turbo 912 you will need to add in the two fuel pumps and the
turbo control unit. But the strobes don't draw 10 amps continuously. Since
they are intermittent, you can use a lower number for that (others might
know what actual number to use). Also, I believe the number for the comm
radio is only when transmitting, so that number might be brought down as
well. You have 1 amp for the backup battery, but that would only apply when
that battery needs charged.
There are other considerations as well. For one thing, the stock voltage
regulator that Rotax supplies (Ducati) has not proven to be particularly
robust. Many believe that it is not good to run them at full capacity
because it might lead to regulator failure.
Also, if you look at the Rotax wiring diagram for the 914 (which is
basically what you have) you will notice that the primary fuel pump is
wired directly to the internal generator, and that the bus and auxiliary
fuel pump are powered by the optional external alternator and battery. This
is a safety feature that completely separates the main fuel pump from the
auxiliary fuel pump. If, after re-assessing your loads you decide that you
can get by without the external alternator, remember that your engine
requires an electric fuel pump to keep running, and make sure that your
design does not introduce any common point of failure for the two fuel
pumps.
Ken
On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:25 PM meat_ball wrote:
> arjayefem(at)fastmail.net>
>
>
> kenryan wrote:
> > No electric fuel pump(s)? How are you getting 145 hp from a Rotax 912
> without a turbo?
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 11:40 AM meat_ball wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > user9253 wrote:
> > > > The integrated alternator should be adequate without an external
> alternator.
> > > > Have you done a load analysis? How many amps will your system
> require?
> > > > What is the exact model of your engine, 912ULS or what?
> > > > What kind of plane are you building?
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks, Joe.
> > >
> > > I would agree with you, except after going through the manuals for
> everything, it appears the alternator won't be adequate...assuming I am
> doing things correctly. It will be a stock 912 ULS beefed up power-wise
to
> about 145 HP and will be installed into a Just Aircraft Highlander.
> > >
> > > Below are the components and the strobes are what puts it over the
> edge, even though they are LEDs. Hopefully, this is where I am incorrect
.
> By my excel calculation, add all those up and you get 21.96 amps
> > >
> > > All Advanced Flight Systems/Dynon components.
> > > AF5600 PFD/MFD 2.8 amps
> > > SV-COM-C25 RADIO 3 amps
> > > SV-INTERCOM-2S INTERCOM 0.1 amps
> > > SV-XPNDR-261 ADSB OUT 0.4 amps
> > > SV-ADSB-472 ADSB IN 0.1 amps
> > > SV-EMS-220 ENGINE MONITOR 0.11 amps
> > > SV-ADAHRS-200 ADAHRS 0.15 amps
> > > SV-MAG-236 REMOTE MAGNETOMETER 0.15 amps
> > > AF-BAT-3AH BACKUP BATTERY 1 amps
> > > Video Adapter for SkyView 0.15 amps
> > > SkyView Wi-Fi Adapter 0.1 amps
> > > SV-GPS-2020 GPS RECEIVER/ANTENNA 0.1 amps
> > > AeroLEDs Pulsar NSP Strobe 10 amps
> > > Position 0.8 amps
> > > AeroLEDs MicroSun Landing 1.5 amps
> > > Taxi 1.5 amps
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Read this topic online here:
> > >
> > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497509#497509 (
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497509#497509)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ==========
> > > -
> > > 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
> > > ==========
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> What a great question!!! See?!? Yet another reason I=99m posting he
re. I
> knew someone would critique my stupidity. Add those in and you an add mor
e
> amperage still.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497513#497513
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 8/5/2020 3:41 PM, meat_ball wrote:
>
> I suppose I was thinking all that was taken care of by the on board, internal
generator. Im new to Rotax do this entire thing is a learning process for me.
I appreciate everyones help!!
Sorry; all of what was taken care of by the internal generator?
(Those of us using email delivery instead of reading the forum sometimes
lose context.)
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
If it's a Ronnie Smith turbo, ask Ronnie what the turbo control unit draws.
Probably 1 - 2 amps.
On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:53 PM meat_ball wrote:
> arjayefem(at)fastmail.net>
>
> I suppose I was thinking all that was taken care of by the on board,
> internal generator. I=99m new to Rotax do this entire thing is a le
arning
> process for me. I appreciate everyone=99s help!!
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497514#497514
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
"I suppose I was thinking all that was taken care of by the on board,
internal generator."
You may be thinking of the Rotax 912iS. It has two internal generators and
indeed one of them is dedicated to powering the engine electronics.
On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:55 PM Ken Ryan wrote:
> If it's a Ronnie Smith turbo, ask Ronnie what the turbo control unit
> draws. Probably 1 - 2 amps.
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:53 PM meat_ball wrote:
>
>> arjayefem(at)fastmail.net>
>>
>> I suppose I was thinking all that was taken care of by the on board,
>> internal generator. I=99m new to Rotax do this entire thing is a l
earning
>> process for me. I appreciate everyone=99s help!!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497514#497514
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
kenryan wrote:
>
>
> Also, if you look at the Rotax wiring diagram for the 914 (which is
> basically what you have) you will notice that the primary fuel pump is
> wired directly to the internal generator, and that the bus and auxiliary
> fuel pump are powered by the optional external alternator and battery. This
> is a safety feature that completely separates the main fuel pump from the
> auxiliary fuel pump. If, after re-assessing your loads you decide that you
> can get by without the external alternator, remember that your engine
> requires an electric fuel pump to keep running, and make sure that your
> design does not introduce any common point of failure for the two fuel
> pumps.
>
> Ken
And this is where I get confused...Looking at the 914 diagram side by side with
Bobs diagram. How can I incorporate all the safeguards Bob suggests while wiring?
They are wired so differently and I have a hard time figuring out how to
join the two safely. Ive looked for previously posted wiring diagrams for inspiration/reference
but havent been able to find what I need.
As far as the strobes and other higher draw units, I was using worst case scenario
for them in case they were all on at the same instant. However, Im hearing
the battery will be able to absorb those spikes, correct? Especially since the
strobes are so instantaneous I presume?
Thanks again.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497519#497519
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 4:20 PM meat_ball wrote:
> arjayefem(at)fastmail.net>
>
>
> kenryan wrote:
> >
> >
> > Also, if you look at the Rotax wiring diagram for the 914 (which is
> > basically what you have) you will notice that the primary fuel pump is
> > wired directly to the internal generator, and that the bus and auxiliar
y
> > fuel pump are powered by the optional external alternator and battery.
> This
> > is a safety feature that completely separates the main fuel pump from t
he
> > auxiliary fuel pump. If, after re-assessing your loads you decide that
> you
> > can get by without the external alternator, remember that your engine
> > requires an electric fuel pump to keep running, and make sure that your
> > design does not introduce any common point of failure for the two fuel
> > pumps.
> >
> > Ken
>
>
> And this is where I get confused...Looking at the 914 diagram side by sid
e
> with Bob=99s diagram. How can I incorporate all the safeguards Bob
suggests
> while wiring? They are wired so differently and I have a hard time figuri
ng
> out how to join the two safely. I=99ve looked for previously posted
wiring
> diagrams for inspiration/reference but haven=99t been able to find
what I
> need.
>
> As far as the strobes and other higher draw units, I was using worst case
> scenario for them in case they were all on at the same instant. However,
> I=99m hearing the battery will be able to absorb those spikes, corr
ect?
> Especially since the strobes are so instantaneous I presume?
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Right. You need to look at *average* continuous load. Extreme example: th
e
transponder has 250W output. At 14V, that's almost 18 amps. But it's a
microsecond burst, so the electrical system never really 'sees' it.
If you already own the strobe, hook it up through an amp meter to a 14V
supply (clipleads to your car battery with the engine running would work if
you don't have a power supply). An old analog meter would be easier to read
with a pulsing load like that, but you might be able to get useful info
even with a digital meter, especially one that includes an analog 'bar
graph' in the display. Or just call the mfgr. they should be able to tell
you the true average current consumption of the device, if you explain that
you are doing a load analysis and not trying to size a fuse for it.
Can't help much with the wiring diagrams; I don't have the 914 drawings.
You do need to specify whether you have a version with carbs or auto style
(high pressure) fuel injection to do load calcs.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
I found that the strobes have average output at 14V of .6 amps. As far as the rest
of the stuff, Ill have to look into that when I can sit down at the computer
with all my docs in one place.
Thanks again for everyone and their input! This is a huge reason I love the aviation
community! You can come dumb as you are and people are willing to impart
their knowledge.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497522#497522
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
I've done a bit of homework. The strobes are average 0.8 Amps and comm radio comes
down to about .5 amps. The engine components work out like this (I've used
a guesstimate for the Fuel pumps as I haven't heard back from manufacturer yet):
Fuel pump 3amps
fuel pump 3amps
TCU .3 amps
Servomotor 1 amp
two indicating lamps .25 amps each
extra ~8 amps.
using the averages of the other high draw components, it comes out to 17.86 amps
(which is using the draw for the backup battery as well). From my understanding,
the 18 amp internal alternator can handle that, but you want a bit of buffer.
It appears I will indeed need the external...do you agree? Am I thinking
correctly?
Thanks,
Rob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497527#497527
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 8:49 AM meat_ball wrote:
> arjayefem(at)fastmail.net>
>
> I've done a bit of homework. The strobes are average 0.8 Amps and comm
> radio comes down to about .5 amps. The engine components work out like this
> (I've used a guesstimate for the Fuel pumps as I haven't heard back from
> manufacturer yet):
>
> Fuel pump 3amps
> fuel pump 3amps
> TCU .3 amps
> Servomotor 1 amp
> two indicating lamps .25 amps each
>
> extra ~8 amps.
>
> using the averages of the other high draw components, it comes out to
> 17.86 amps (which is using the draw for the backup battery as well). From
> my understanding, the 18 amp internal alternator can handle that, but you
> want a bit of buffer. It appears I will indeed need the external...do you
> agree? Am I thinking correctly?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rob
>
You only need one fuel pump at a time (except takeoff & landing), but have
you told us whether it's carb'd or electronic injection? Electronic
injection pumps will use an absolute minimum of 4A each; likely more like
6A each. On the other hand, a little Facet cube pump for a carb only draws
around 2.5A.
But bottom line is, you need a decent margin between constant draw and
alternator capacity. Otherwise, you can't recharge the battery after engine
start and idle operation ('dynamo' style permanent magnet alternators don't
have much if any output when the engine is running near idle).
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
ceengland7(at)gmail.com wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 8:49 AM meat_ball wrote:
>
>
> >
> > I've done a bit of homework. The strobes are average 0.8 Amps and comm radio
comes down to about .5 amps. The engine components work out like this (I've
used a guesstimate for the Fuel pumps as I haven't heard back from manufacturer
yet):
> >
> > Fuel pump 3amps
> > fuel pump 3amps
> > TCU .3 amps
> > Servomotor 1 amp
> > two indicating lamps .25 amps each
> >
> > extra ~8 amps.
> >
> > using the averages of the other high draw components, it comes out to 17.86
amps (which is using the draw for the backup battery as well). From my understanding,
the 18 amp internal alternator can handle that, but you want a bit of
buffer. It appears I will indeed need the external...do you agree? Am I thinking
correctly?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Rob
> >
> You only need one fuel pump at a time (except takeoff & landing), but have you
told us whether it's carb'd or electronic injection? Electronic injection pumps
will use an absolute minimum of 4A each; likely more like 6A each. On the
other hand, a little Facet cube pump for a carb only draws around 2.5A.
>
>
> But bottom line is, you need a decent margin between constant draw and alternator
capacity. Otherwise, you can't recharge the battery after engine start and
idle operation ('dynamo' style permanent magnet alternators don't have much
if any output when the engine is running near idle).
Sorry, I thought I mentioned that at the top of this thread. It is electronic
ignition and fuel injected.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497529#497529
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
Attached is the Rotax 914 Electrical Diagram (hopefully you can make sense of it).
It shows just what kenryan suggests as far as the fuel pumps. What about
the master switch? From what I see when you turn it on, the battery gets connected
to the bus, but that also gives a ground to the master relay which allows
the Internal and External Alternators to connect to the bus/battery. Now turning
off the Master Switch will kill all power to the Bus Bar and battery from
the Alternators. Am I missing something? That seems like a bad thing...
Is this where I would wire in the s700-2-10, 3 position ON-ON-ON switch? the positions
would be off, battery on, and battery/alternators on. Or would it be
better to have a separate switch for the external alternator just after the field
output and before the master switch?
Again, I sincerely appreciate all the help!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497530#497530
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/scannable_document_on_aug_6_2020_at_9_27_03_am_991.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 8/6/2020 9:04 AM, meat_ball wrote:
>
>
> ceengland7(at)gmail.com wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 8:49 AM meat_ball wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I've done a bit of homework. The strobes are average 0.8 Amps and comm radio
comes down to about .5 amps. The engine components work out like this (I've
used a guesstimate for the Fuel pumps as I haven't heard back from manufacturer
yet):
>>>
>>> Fuel pump 3amps
>>> fuel pump 3amps
>>> TCU .3 amps
>>> Servomotor 1 amp
>>> two indicating lamps .25 amps each
>>>
>>> extra ~8 amps.
>>>
>>> using the averages of the other high draw components, it comes out to 17.86
amps (which is using the draw for the backup battery as well). From my understanding,
the 18 amp internal alternator can handle that, but you want a bit
of buffer. It appears I will indeed need the external...do you agree? Am I thinking
correctly?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>> You only need one fuel pump at a time (except takeoff & landing), but have you
told us whether it's carb'd or electronic injection? Electronic injection pumps
will use an absolute minimum of 4A each; likely more like 6A each. On the
other hand, a little Facet cube pump for a carb only draws around 2.5A.
>>
>>
>> But bottom line is, you need a decent margin between constant draw and alternator
capacity. Otherwise, you can't recharge the battery after engine start and
idle operation ('dynamo' style permanent magnet alternators don't have much
if any output when the engine is running near idle).
>
> Sorry, I thought I mentioned that at the top of this thread. It is electronic
ignition and fuel injected.
You probably did and I missed it. I was probably confused by the
reference to it being a 912, and the 145 HP reference; didn't know what
mods were made. In that case, you need to budget at least 4A per pump.
Do you have the brand/model number of the pump you intend to use? As an
example, the Walbro GSL393, likely the most common pump being used in
aircraft electronic injection systems, is recommended to be fused at 15A
and average current consumption is 5 A-6 A.
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
ceengland7(at)gmail.com wrote:
> On 8/6/2020 9:04 AM, meat_ball wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > ceengland7(at)gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 8:49 AM meat_ball wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I've done a bit of homework. The strobes are average 0.8 Amps and comm
radio comes down to about .5 amps. The engine components work out like this (I've
used a guesstimate for the Fuel pumps as I haven't heard back from manufacturer
yet):
> > >>
> > >> Fuel pump 3amps
> > >> fuel pump 3amps
> > >> TCU .3 amps
> > >> Servomotor 1 amp
> > >> two indicating lamps .25 amps each
> > >>
> > >> extra ~8 amps.
> > >>
> > >> using the averages of the other high draw components, it comes out to
17.86 amps (which is using the draw for the backup battery as well). From my understanding,
the 18 amp internal alternator can handle that, but you want a bit
of buffer. It appears I will indeed need the external...do you agree? Am I
thinking correctly?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >>
> > >> Rob
> > >>
> > > You only need one fuel pump at a time (except takeoff & landing), but have
you told us whether it's carb'd or electronic injection? Electronic injection
pumps will use an absolute minimum of 4A each; likely more like 6A each. On
the other hand, a little Facet cube pump for a carb only draws around 2.5A.
> > >
> > >
> > > But bottom line is, you need a decent margin between constant draw and alternator
capacity. Otherwise, you can't recharge the battery after engine start
and idle operation ('dynamo' style permanent magnet alternators don't have much
if any output when the engine is running near idle).
> >
> > Sorry, I thought I mentioned that at the top of this thread. It is electronic
ignition and fuel injected.
> > You probably did and I missed it. I was probably confused by the
> >
>
> reference to it being a 912, and the 145 HP reference; didn't know what
> mods were made. In that case, you need to budget at least 4A per pump.
> Do you have the brand/model number of the pump you intend to use? As an
> example, the Walbro GSL393, likely the most common pump being used in
> aircraft electronic injection systems, is recommended to be fused at 15A
> and average current consumption is 5 A-6 A.
>
> Charlie
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
I just got a reply. He said pumps draw 5-7 amps but only one pump used at a time.
I'm clarifying whether or not they will EVER be used at the same time such
as t/o and landing.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497532#497532
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
I would NOT buy an external alternator now, but wait until you determine that
it is actually needed. I added up your loads and the total came to 13 amps. I
did not include intermittent loads: landing - taxi lights, or charging two
batteries. Run the engine and measure the actual alternator output with all
continuous loads turned on. If the total current is 15 amps or less, an aux
alternator is not needed.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497533#497533
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
user9253 wrote:
> I would NOT buy an external alternator now, but wait until you determine that
> it is actually needed. I added up your loads and the total came to 13 amps.
I
> did not include intermittent loads: landing - taxi lights, or charging two
> batteries. Run the engine and measure the actual alternator output with all
> continuous loads turned on. If the total current is 15 amps or less, an aux
> alternator is not needed.
Okay! I'll give that a shot. However, I will need to wire the plane to make it
easy to add the external alternator if needed. So I go back to my previous
question about the "master switch".
> Attached is the Rotax 914 Electrical Diagram (hopefully you can make sense of
it). It shows just what kenryan suggests as far as the fuel pumps. What about
the master switch toward the bottom? From what I see when you turn it on, the
battery gets connected to the bus, but that also gives a ground to the master
relay which allows the Internal and External Alternators to connect to the bus/battery.
Now turning off the Master Switch will kill all power to the Bus Bar
and battery from the Alternators. Am I missing something? That seems like a
bad thing...
>
> Is this where I would wire in the s700-2-10, 3 position ON-ON-ON switch?
>
How would I wire this switch to make it work for the single alternator, and also
in the case that I add an external?
Again, thank you for indulging my ignorance.
Rob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497535#497535
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/scannable_document_on_aug_6_2020_at_9_27_03_am_149.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
| From: | "Paul Eckenroth" <jeckenroth(at)nbn.net> |
I have a Revmaster engine in my Onex which is not dealing well with my EarthX battery.
The engine has a total of 12 coils arranged on the stator which consists
of 2 each of 5 coils making up the dual generator and 2 coils powering the
ignition. It all sounded good on paper with much redundancy but apparently
the generator coils produce too much heat at full output which can cause them
to short out. When used with the old fashioned lead acid battery the charge rate
is less and therefore less heat. Is there any proper method to throttle the
generator output or reduce the EarthX input to approach the charging rate of
the lead acid battery and not cause the generator to create the excessive heat.
I know the easy way is to just replace the battery but that would not be
good for my W&B. Thanks for any help and suggestions.
Paul
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497543#497543
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
All you have to do is put a diode between the alternator and battery. That will
drop the voltage that the battery sees and limit the current.
An EarthX battery has very low internal resistance. When the battery is low,
it will take the full output of an alternator. That is why the size of the battery
has to be matched to the alternator size.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497544#497544
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
At 07:52 PM 8/6/2020, you wrote:
>
>I have a Revmaster engine in my Onex which is not dealing well with
>my EarthX battery. The engine has a total of 12 coils arranged on
>the stator which consists of 2 each of 5 coils making up the dual
>generator and 2 coils powering the ignition. It all sounded good
>on paper with much redundancy but apparently the generator coils
>produce too much heat at full output which can cause them to short
>out. When used with the old fashioned lead acid battery the charge
>rate is less and therefore less heat. Is there any proper method to
>throttle the generator output or reduce the EarthX input to approach
>the charging rate of the lead acid battery and not cause the
>generator to create the excessive heat. I know the easy way is to
>just replace the battery but that would not be good for my
>W&B. Thanks for any help and suggestions.
I've been hearing/reading about shortfalls in
the design of that alternator for years.
The thing is thermally marginal at best.
If you can acquire an adjustable regulator
for PM alternators, you can set the charging
voltage down such that the alternator is
not working quite so hard at the LOWEST
voltage that will still charge the battery.
The attached plot show EarthX test data from
some years back. A bus voltage of 13.0 falls
far short of fully charging the battery . . . while
voltages of 13.5, 14.0 and 15.0 will all
fully charge the battery. The BMS takes
care of moderating any 'excess' voltage but
its design rules will allow the battery
to accept any safe level of replenishment . . .
safe for the battery. Unfortunately,
that current value is more than your
alternator/regulator combination is able
to grunt without smoking the windings.
B&C has a new product that MIGHT be a
solution . . . albeit an unfortunate
'band aid' on the Revmaster's shortcomings.
https://tinyurl.com/y6mr4x7e
You would want to set the bus voltage
to 13.6 +/- 0.1 volts. I'm thinking this
MIGHT do the trick.
Give B&C a call and talk with their
technowienies about this.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | The new email firewall is up and running . . . |
Matt tells me that the new Barracuda server
is many times faster that the vintage hardware
that it replaced.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
At 09:30 PM 8/6/2020, you wrote:
>
>All you have to do is put a diode between the alternator and
>battery. That will
>drop the voltage that the battery sees and limit the current.
That's worth exploring . . . you could take one
of the bridge rectifiers commonly used as an
e-bus, normal feed path isolator and wire it
so that you have one or perhaps two diodes in
series with the regulator's output. You're
shooting for a bus voltage just barely higher
than what's required to fully charge the battery . . .
i.e. 13.5 volts. Even that may not 'fix' the
problem. The alternator can still be overloaded
by other system loads. This just goes to mitigation
of battery demands as one of those loads.
>An EarthX battery has very low internal resistance. When the battery is low,
>it will take the full output of an alternator. That is why the size
>of the battery
>has to be matched to the alternator size.
Not really a 'matching' problem so much as a
poor design in the alternator/regulator
combination. Too many folks have been burning
the alternators on these engines for some
time . . . it has little if any to do with
choice of battery.
Is this an older production engine? Has Revmaster
offered any positive response to fixing this?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
There is more than one way to wire the alternators. You can use the
3 position OFF-Battery-Both switch or separate switches.
Since you might eventually add a second alternator, to make it less confusing
for you or future pilots, I would use 3 separate switches:
Master battery contactor switch, alternator-1 switch, and alternator-2 switch.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497550#497550
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
user9253 wrote:
> There is more than one way to wire the alternators. You can use the
> 3 position OFF-Battery-Both switch or separate switches.
> Since you might eventually add a second alternator, to make it less confusing
> for you or future pilots, I would use 3 separate switches:
> Master battery contactor switch, alternator-1 switch, and alternator-2 switch.
Of course!! Next question is about the fuses. I want to use the fuse blocks instead
of breakers, but is there a hard and fast rule about which components should
have a panel circuit breaker instead of the fuse?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497551#497551
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 8:20 AM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 09:30 PM 8/6/2020, you wrote:
>
>
> All you have to do is put a diode between the alternator and battery.
> That will
> drop the voltage that the battery sees and limit the current.
>
>
> That's worth exploring . . . you could take one
> of the bridge rectifiers commonly used as an
> e-bus, normal feed path isolator and wire it
> so that you have one or perhaps two diodes in
> series with the regulator's output. You're
> shooting for a bus voltage just barely higher
> than what's required to fully charge the battery . . .
> i.e. 13.5 volts. Even that may not 'fix' the
> problem. The alternator can still be overloaded
> by other system loads. This just goes to mitigation
> of battery demands as one of those loads.
>
> An EarthX battery has very low internal resistance. When the battery is
> low,
> it will take the full output of an alternator. That is why the size of
> the battery
> has to be matched to the alternator size.
>
>
> Not really a 'matching' problem so much as a
> poor design in the alternator/regulator
> combination. Too many folks have been burning
> the alternators on these engines for some
> time . . . it has little if any to do with
> choice of battery.
>
> Is this an older production engine? Has Revmaster
> offered any positive response to fixing this?
>
> Bob . . .
>
If it's the coils in the alternator that are dying due to overcurrent (and
Revmaster won't help you), a 'bandaid' might be a current regulator in
series with the alt output (actually, the rectifier/voltage regulator
output). Set it for the alt's max survivable current. The regulator would
lower voltage to limit current, and as the battery slowly charges and
demand drops, voltage will rise to normal preset level.
But you need to be aware that under excessive loads, voltage will sag to
keep current at the regulator preset current. Additional failure mode, so a
way to switch around it might be needed if alt output is critical to
flight, which adds complexity....
Are the coils failing due to overcurrent, or heat? Yeah, they are related,
but if you can cool the coils with blast tubes...
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Some builders use all circuit breakers. It is a matter of personal choice.
I prefer fuses. They are lighter weight, cost a lot less, and never fail to open
the
circuit when required. Some breakers have been known to smoke instead of opening.
Circuit breakers should be used for circuits that might be expected to
momentarily draw too much current. Perhaps a landing gear pump.
Bob's drawings use a circuit breaker in series with the over-voltage crowbar module.
Your Rotax 20 amp alternator will be heavily loaded, thus unlikely to put out
too high
voltage. If you have a lead acid battery, it will absorb extra current for a
short time. You might risk not having over-voltage protection. Van's Aircraft
designed the RV-12 without over-voltage protection. Over 500 of them are flying.
If you have a lithium battery, over-voltage protection is highly recommeded.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497556#497556
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | two fuses in a circuit |
There has been some discussion about possible issues related to having two
fuses in the same circuit. I'm not sure if this was ever resolved.
My situation has to do with the indicator lights that tell me whether or
not each of my two fuel pumps is getting power. Of course the wire that
powers each pump is fused. But the wire that powers each indicator light is
tied to the same circuit as its respective pump, and that wire is protected
separately by a 2 amp fuse.
I have attached a picture of my wiring diagram. Wiring is 100% complete,
but airplane has not flown yet. Limited testing has not uncovered any
issues.
If the existence of these two amp fuses in my system could cause me to lose
power to a fuel pump, I would remove them, unless removing them causes
other problems.
See attached and as always, thanks!
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alec Myers <alec(at)alecmyers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
Noob question... why is a separate fuse for the indicator light a good idea, if
the circuit is already protected?
On Aug 7, 2020, at 13:03, Ken Ryan wrote:
There has been some discussion about possible issues related to having two fuses
in the same circuit. I'm not sure if this was ever resolved.
My situation has to do with the indicator lights that tell me whether or not each
of my two fuel pumps is getting power. Of course the wire that powers each
pump is fused. But the wire that powers each indicator light is tied to the same
circuit as its respective pump, and that wire is protected separately by a
2 amp fuse.
I have attached a picture of my wiring diagram. Wiring is 100% complete, but airplane
has not flown yet. Limited testing has not uncovered any issues.
If the existence of these two amp fuses in my system could cause me to lose power
to a fuel pump, I would remove them, unless removing them causes other problems.
See attached and as always, thanks!
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Those 2 amp fuses are not a problem. If you want to experiment, you could short
out
an indicator light to make sure that the fuel pump fuse does not blow along with
the 2 amp fuse.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497559#497559
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
If the indicator light shorts out I would not want that to take down the
pump itself.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020, 09:18 Alec Myers wrote:
>
> Noob question... why is a separate fuse for the indicator light a good
> idea, if the circuit is already protected?
>
> On Aug 7, 2020, at 13:03, Ken Ryan wrote:
>
> =EF=BB
> There has been some discussion about possible issues related to having tw
o
> fuses in the same circuit. I'm not sure if this was ever resolved.
>
> My situation has to do with the indicator lights that tell me whether or
> not each of my two fuel pumps is getting power. Of course the wire that
> powers each pump is fused. But the wire that powers each indicator light
is
> tied to the same circuit as its respective pump, and that wire is protect
ed
> separately by a 2 amp fuse.
>
> I have attached a picture of my wiring diagram. Wiring is 100% complete,
> but airplane has not flown yet. Limited testing has not uncovered any
> issues.
>
> If the existence of these two amp fuses in my system could cause me to
> lose power to a fuel pump, I would remove them, unless removing them caus
es
> other problems.
>
> See attached and as always, thanks!
>
> Ken
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Carter <david(at)carter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
It's not the circuit that is protected by the breaker or fuse, it's the
*wire*. If the wire running to the indicator lamp is smaller than the 16
gauge running to the pump, the fuse is appropriate. I don't see the wire
size labeled. That fuse should be as near as possible to the junction of
the pump wire & the smaller indicator wire. If it's wired according to the
diagram, I don't see any way the fuse to the indicator could take out the
pump, because that fuse is not in the path of the electrons going through
the pump.
---
David Carter
david(at)carter.net
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 1:13 PM Alec Myers wrote:
>
> Noob question... why is a separate fuse for the indicator light a good
> idea, if the circuit is already protected?
>
> On Aug 7, 2020, at 13:03, Ken Ryan wrote:
>
> =EF=BB
> There has been some discussion about possible issues related to having tw
o
> fuses in the same circuit. I'm not sure if this was ever resolved.
>
> My situation has to do with the indicator lights that tell me whether or
> not each of my two fuel pumps is getting power. Of course the wire that
> powers each pump is fused. But the wire that powers each indicator light
is
> tied to the same circuit as its respective pump, and that wire is protect
ed
> separately by a 2 amp fuse.
>
> I have attached a picture of my wiring diagram. Wiring is 100% complete,
> but airplane has not flown yet. Limited testing has not uncovered any
> issues.
>
> If the existence of these two amp fuses in my system could cause me to
> lose power to a fuel pump, I would remove them, unless removing them caus
es
> other problems.
>
> See attached and as always, thanks!
>
> Ken
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 8/7/2020 11:58 AM, Ken Ryan wrote:
> There has been some discussion about possible issues related to having
> two fuses in the same circuit. I'm not sure if this was ever resolved.
>
> My situation has to do with the indicator lights that tell me whether
> or not each of my two fuel pumps is getting power. Of course the wire
> that powers each pump is fused. But the wire that powers each
> indicator light is tied to the same circuit as its respective pump,
> and that wire is protected separately by a 2 amp fuse.
>
> I have attached a picture of my wiring diagram. Wiring is 100%
> complete, but airplane has not flown yet. Limited testing has not
> uncovered any issues.
>
> If the existence of these two amp fuses in my system could cause me to
> lose power to a fuel pump, I would remove them, unless removing them
> causes other problems.
>
> See attached and as always, thanks!
>
> Ken
If you move the lamp connection point (and fuse) back to the source, any
issue disappears. Unless you're using the CB to control the pump, of course.
What pumps are you using? Facets run on about 2-3A; Walbro injection
pumps expect a 15A protection device (startup surge). The Wabros are
marked right on the pump.
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
Thanks everyone.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020, 09:36 user9253 wrote:
>
> Those 2 amp fuses are not a problem. If you want to experiment, you could
> short out
> an indicator light to make sure that the fuel pump fuse does not blow
> along with the 2 amp fuse.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497559#497559
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Eckenroth <N509RV(at)eckenroth.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
Thank you for all of the comments and suggestions. The Revmaster engine
is their latest iteration. The generators are rated at 18 amps each but
have the ability to open a 30 amp fuse located before the regulator.
Revmaster has suggested possibly reducing the number of wire layers in each
coil to 2 from the current 3 which I assume would lower the peak current
and therefore heat but I don't know what that will do to the final output.
After testing the generators today for continuity, I believe that I may
have avoided the need for a new stator. So my plan going forward is to buy
and install the B&C adjustable regulator. Install a current probe. And
try to fly the plane without burning up the generators. EarthX suggested
setting the voltage as low as 13.3 which would also reduce available amps.
I would certainly appreciate any additional suggestions.
Paul
On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 10:54 PM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 07:52 PM 8/6/2020, you wrote:
>
> jeckenroth(at)nbn.net>
>
> I have a Revmaster engine in my Onex which is not dealing well with my
> EarthX battery. The engine has a total of 12 coils arranged on the stator
> which consists of 2 each of 5 coils making up the dual generator and 2
> coils powering the ignition. It all sounded good on paper with much
> redundancy but apparently the generator coils produce too much heat at full
> output which can cause them to short out. When used with the old fashioned
> lead acid battery the charge rate is less and therefore less heat. Is
> there any proper method to throttle the generator output or reduce the
> EarthX input to approach the charging rate of the lead acid battery and not
> cause the generator to create the excessive heat. I know the easy way is
> to just replace the battery but that would not be good for my W&B. Thanks
> for any help and suggestions.
>
>
> I've been hearing/reading about shortfalls in
> the design of that alternator for years.
> The thing is thermally marginal at best.
> If you can acquire an adjustable regulator
> for PM alternators, you can set the charging
> voltage down such that the alternator is
> not working quite so hard at the LOWEST
> voltage that will still charge the battery.
>
> The attached plot show EarthX test data from
> some years back. A bus voltage of 13.0 falls
> far short of fully charging the battery . . . while
> voltages of 13.5, 14.0 and 15.0 will all
> fully charge the battery. The BMS takes
> care of moderating any 'excess' voltage but
> its design rules will allow the battery
> to accept any safe level of replenishment . . .
> safe for the battery. Unfortunately,
> that current value is more than your
> alternator/regulator combination is able
> to grunt without smoking the windings.
>
> B&C has a new product that MIGHT be a
> solution . . . albeit an unfortunate
> 'band aid' on the Revmaster's shortcomings.
>
> https://tinyurl.com/y6mr4x7e
>
> You would want to set the bus voltage
> to 13.6 +/- 0.1 volts. I'm thinking this
> MIGHT do the trick.
>
> Give B&C a call and talk with their
> technowienies about this.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
| From: | "dj_theis" <djtheis58(at)gmail.com> |
>B&C has a new product that MIGHT be a
>solution . . . albeit an unfortunate
>'band aid' on the Revmaster's shortcomings.
I own the Revmaster R2300 with the same alternator. (I've asked for advice from
the forum on my project the past.) I also considered using the B&C regulator
to provide an adjustable voltage regulator in a more robust package than what
Revmaster provides. One thing that makes me pause is this thought process:
1) the original R/R is a half wave recitifer design.
2) The noted problem is an underdesigned PM alternator unable to reject heat produced
with both sides running. So, what's recommended is to run only one side
at a time.
Isn't running one PM alternator with full wave rectification about the same current
/ heat level as two regulators, each with a half wave rectifier?
Attached is my simpified sketch of the revmaster's PM alternators (for reference)
with a design I cleaved from Bob's Z16 drawings, including overvoltage protection
and switching (overvoltage not shown). I think my drawing is finding it's
way around the "net," which is fine. I'm pretty sure it depicts the R2300
alternator accurately.
BTW, I do like the current limiting idea, despite it's possible drawback with added
complexity.
Dan Theis
--------
Scratch building Sonex #1362
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497570#497570
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/revmaster_voltage_regulators_516.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
| From: | Finn Lassen <finn.usa(at)gmail.com> |
My GSL393 is marked "20 amp fuse".
Finn
On 8/7/2020 1:45 PM, Charlie England wrote:
>
>
> On 8/7/2020 11:58 AM, Ken Ryan wrote:
>> There has been some discussion about possible issues related to
>> having two fuses in the same circuit. I'm not sure if this was ever
>> resolved.
>>
>> My situation has to do with the indicator lights that tell me whether
>> or not each of my two fuel pumps is getting power. Of course the wire
>> that powers each pump is fused. But the wire that powers each
>> indicator light is tied to the same circuit as its respective pump,
>> and that wire is protected separately by a 2 amp fuse.
>>
>> I have attached a picture of my wiring diagram. Wiring is 100%
>> complete, but airplane has not flown yet. Limited testing has not
>> uncovered any issues.
>>
>> If the existence of these two amp fuses in my system could cause me
>> to lose power to a fuel pump, I would remove them, unless removing
>> them causes other problems.
>>
>> See attached and as always, thanks!
>>
>> Ken
> If you move the lamp connection point (and fuse) back to the source,
> any issue disappears. Unless you're using the CB to control the pump,
> of course.
>
> What pumps are you using? Facets run on about 2-3A; Walbro injection
> pumps expect a 15A protection device (startup surge). The Wabros are
> marked right on the pump.
>
> Charlie
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks Finn; I'm having a bad memory day (as you probably saw over on
the rotary list).
On 8/7/2020 7:45 PM, Finn Lassen wrote:
>
> My GSL393 is marked "20 amp fuse".
>
> Finn
>
>
> On 8/7/2020 1:45 PM, Charlie England wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 8/7/2020 11:58 AM, Ken Ryan wrote:
>>> There has been some discussion about possible issues related to
>>> having two fuses in the same circuit. I'm not sure if this was ever
>>> resolved.
>>>
>>> My situation has to do with the indicator lights that tell me
>>> whether or not each of my two fuel pumps is getting power. Of course
>>> the wire that powers each pump is fused. But the wire that powers
>>> each indicator light is tied to the same circuit as its respective
>>> pump, and that wire is protected separately by a 2 amp fuse.
>>>
>>> I have attached a picture of my wiring diagram. Wiring is 100%
>>> complete, but airplane has not flown yet. Limited testing has not
>>> uncovered any issues.
>>>
>>> If the existence of these two amp fuses in my system could cause me
>>> to lose power to a fuel pump, I would remove them, unless removing
>>> them causes other problems.
>>>
>>> See attached and as always, thanks!
>>>
>>> Ken
>> If you move the lamp connection point (and fuse) back to the source,
>> any issue disappears. Unless you're using the CB to control the pump,
>> of course.
>>
>> What pumps are you using? Facets run on about 2-3A; Walbro injection
>> pumps expect a 15A protection device (startup surge). The Wabros are
>> marked right on the pump.
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
Charlie, the pumps are Walbro. I believe they are GSL395. I was advised to
use 10 amp fuse but I will double check. I did go to the Walbro website but
couldn't find specs.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 9:56 AM Charlie England wrote:
> ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
>
> On 8/7/2020 11:58 AM, Ken Ryan wrote:
> > There has been some discussion about possible issues related to having
> > two fuses in the same circuit. I'm not sure if this was ever resolved.
> >
> > My situation has to do with the indicator lights that tell me whether
> > or not each of my two fuel pumps is getting power. Of course the wire
> > that powers each pump is fused. But the wire that powers each
> > indicator light is tied to the same circuit as its respective pump,
> > and that wire is protected separately by a 2 amp fuse.
> >
> > I have attached a picture of my wiring diagram. Wiring is 100%
> > complete, but airplane has not flown yet. Limited testing has not
> > uncovered any issues.
> >
> > If the existence of these two amp fuses in my system could cause me to
> > lose power to a fuel pump, I would remove them, unless removing them
> > causes other problems.
> >
> > See attached and as always, thanks!
> >
> > Ken
> If you move the lamp connection point (and fuse) back to the source, any
> issue disappears. Unless you're using the CB to control the pump, of
> course.
>
> What pumps are you using? Facets run on about 2-3A; Walbro injection
> pumps expect a 15A protection device (startup surge). The Wabros are
> marked right on the pump.
>
> Charlie
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
I will check the pump and see if it is marked.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 6:26 PM Ken Ryan wrote:
> Charlie, the pumps are Walbro. I believe they are GSL395. I was advised to
> use 10 amp fuse but I will double check. I did go to the Walbro website but
> couldn't find specs.
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 9:56 AM Charlie England
> wrote:
>
>> ceengland7(at)gmail.com>
>>
>> On 8/7/2020 11:58 AM, Ken Ryan wrote:
>> > There has been some discussion about possible issues related to having
>> > two fuses in the same circuit. I'm not sure if this was ever resolved.
>> >
>> > My situation has to do with the indicator lights that tell me whether
>> > or not each of my two fuel pumps is getting power. Of course the wire
>> > that powers each pump is fused. But the wire that powers each
>> > indicator light is tied to the same circuit as its respective pump,
>> > and that wire is protected separately by a 2 amp fuse.
>> >
>> > I have attached a picture of my wiring diagram. Wiring is 100%
>> > complete, but airplane has not flown yet. Limited testing has not
>> > uncovered any issues.
>> >
>> > If the existence of these two amp fuses in my system could cause me to
>> > lose power to a fuel pump, I would remove them, unless removing them
>> > causes other problems.
>> >
>> > See attached and as always, thanks!
>> >
>> > Ken
>> If you move the lamp connection point (and fuse) back to the source, any
>> issue disappears. Unless you're using the CB to control the pump, of
>> course.
>>
>> What pumps are you using? Facets run on about 2-3A; Walbro injection
>> pumps expect a 15A protection device (startup surge). The Wabros are
>> marked right on the pump.
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>> --
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Found a link showing the 395 along with the other Walbro gerotor pumps=2E I
t shows 130 lph @ 15 psi, so the 10A fusing sounds more plausible=2E
https:
//walbrofuelpumps=2Ecom/walbro-gsl-series-universal-inline-fuel-pumps
I wa
s expecting either 3-6 psi for a carb, or 40-60 psi for electronic injectio
n=2E
Charlie
=81=A3Sent from BlueMail =8B
On Aug 7, 2020, 9:36
PM, at 9:36 PM, Ken Ryan wrote:
>Charlie, the pum
ps are Walbro=2E I believe they are GSL395=2E I was advised
>to
>use 10 amp
fuse but I will double check=2E I did go to the Walbro website
>but
>could
n't find specs=2E
>
>On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 9:56 AM Charlie England
>wrote:
>
rlie England <
>> ceengland7@gmail=2Ecom>
>>
>> On 8/7/2020 11:58 AM, Ken R
yan wrote:
>> > There has been some discussion about possible issues relate
d to
>having
>> > two fuses in the same circuit=2E I'm not sure if this was
ever
>resolved=2E
>> >
>> > My situation has to do with the indicator ligh
ts that tell me
>whether
>> > or not each of my two fuel pumps is getting p
ower=2E Of course the
>wire
>> > that powers each pump is fused=2E But the
wire that powers each
>> > indicator light is tied to the same circuit as i
ts respective pump,
>> > and that wire is protected separately by a 2 amp f
use=2E
>> >
>> > I have attached a picture of my wiring diagram=2E Wiring i
s 100%
>> > complete, but airplane has not flown yet=2E Limited testing has
not
>> > uncovered any issues=2E
>> >
>> > If the existence of these two a
mp fuses in my system could cause me
>to
>> > lose power to a fuel pump, I
would remove them, unless removing
>them
>> > causes other problems=2E
>> >
>> > See attached and as always, thanks!
>> >
>> > Ken
>> If you move the
lamp connection point (and fuse) back to the source,
>any
>> issue disappea
rs=2E Unless you're using the CB to control the pump, of
>> course=2E
>>
>>
What pumps are you using? Facets run on about 2-3A; Walbro injection
>> pu
mps expect a 15A protection device (startup surge)=2E The Wabros are
>> mar
ked right on the pump=2E
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>> --
>> This email has been chec
ked for viruses by Avast antivirus software=2E
>> https://www=2Eavast=2Ecom
/antivirus
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
| From: | "johnbright" <john_s_bright(at)yahoo.com> |
Walbro 395 flow and current... the Walbro page I found had broken links to the
jpg graphs but those broken links have the file name and with that one can google
and get https://walbrofuelpumps.com/images/flow-charts/
In that file space is "GSL395-Flow-Chart.jpg"... attached.
--------
John Bright, RV-6A, at FWF, O-360
Z-101 single batt dual alt SDS EM-5-F.
john_s_bright(at)yahoo.com, Newport News, Va
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1u6GeZo6pmBWsKykLNVQMvu4o1VEVyP4K
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497578#497578
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/gsl395_flow_chart_373.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
Thanks again, Joe! I appreciate everyones input. Ill try to iron this out, but
Im sure Ill be back with more questions.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497580#497580
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
If you use an LED indicator, the obligatory
current limiting resistor for the LED can
be installed at the 'head end' of the indicator
feeder where the fuse would be located . . .
putting the resistor there limits current
in that feeder to milliamps even when shorted
to ground. The fuse goes away.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: two fuses in a circuit |
Thanks for that Bob, and thanks Charlie for the fusing advice.
On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 7:01 AM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> If you use an LED indicator, the obligatory
> current limiting resistor for the LED can
> be installed at the 'head end' of the indicator
> feeder where the fuse would be located . . .
> putting the resistor there limits current
> in that feeder to milliamps even when shorted
> to ground. The fuse goes away.
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Fritz" <Dfritzj(at)yahoo.com> |
When I started my Velocity build, I installed embedded antennas in the wings with
RG58 also embedded from the wing root to the antennas. Now I need to complete
the rest of the coax runs to the radios (about 12 additional feet). Is there
any reason I can't use RG400 for this section of the cable, connecting the
two with BNC connectors?
Dan
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497584#497584
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
>
>
>http://forums.matronics.com//files/revmaster_voltage_regulators_516.pdf
>
>
I'm confused . . . this drawing does not illustrate
location of rectifier/regulators in the system.
Also, are the crowbar modules pulling down against
the energy of a dynamo or energy of the battery?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
| From: | "dj_theis" <djtheis58(at)gmail.com> |
>I'm confused . . . this drawing does not illustrate
>location of rectifier/regulators in the system.
>Also, are the crowbar modules pulling down against
>the energy of a dynamo or energy of the battery?
I'm honored by your response, but crushed by the fact that my drawings are obscuring
what I am trying to convey.
The rectifiers / regulators are part of the circuit, depicted in the lower left
and lower right. The rectifiers are modeled as a box with an SCR and a control
circuit that simply open the charging path for the PM alternator.
Yes, Revmaster installs two rectifiers, one for each PMA. The R/R they supply
confused me at first, as they are 3 wire devices (actually shown in the Revmaster
manual as two wires with the body of the recifier being grounded). I've spent
a considerable amount of time trying to understand their operation and believe
what I'm showing (a series, 1/2 wave rectifier / regulator for each PMA)
is accurate. I'm happe to be shown the error in my understanding and depiction
of the charging circuit. Maybe a better understanding will expose a weakness
beyond poor heat rejection for the design.
I've attached a larger drawing that shows the full circuit with your very elegant
crowbar, overvoltage protection.
I've not cleaned up this version so it likely has numerous wire size and details
errors. If you can overlook these shortcomings, hopefully the full drawing
is more easily
Kind regards,
Dan Theis
--------
Scratch building Sonex #1362
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497589#497589
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/z16m_revmaster_2300_r10a_pg1_176.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chuck Birdsall <cbirdsall6(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RG400 with RG58 |
In short - that would work just fine.
The only caution I would add is that RG400 is slightly different in size than RG58.
Make sure the connectors you use are compatible with the cable. A dual-crimp
BNC designed for RG 58 may not fit on RG400 as 400 has dual (thus thicker)
shielding. You wont know this until you try to push the crimp ferrule into position
prior to final crimp.
Chuck
On Aug 8, 2020, at 11:50, Dan Fritz wrote:
When I started my Velocity build, I installed embedded antennas in the wings with
RG58 also embedded from the wing root to the antennas. Now I need to complete
the rest of the coax runs to the radios (about 12 additional feet). Is there
any reason I can't use RG400 for this section of the cable, connecting the
two with BNC connectors?
Dan
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497584#497584
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RG400 with RG58 |
At 06:46 PM 8/8/2020, you wrote:
>
>In short - that would work just fine.
>
>The only caution I would add is that RG400 is slightly different in size
>than RG58. Make sure the connectors you use are compatible with the cable.
Both are nominally 0.195" diameter and use
the same connectors. The shield grip sleeve
is a bit harder to push over the RG400 shields
because there are 2 of them . . . but it will
go.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Eckenroth <N509RV(at)eckenroth.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
Dan
your schematic as depicted is exactly how my Onex is wired. I would
caution you to use a lead acid battery if you can unless a good solution
materializes that will keep the generator from developing full throttle. I
think the B&C regulator is essential since it has adjustable voltage output.
Paul.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 7:05 PM dj_theis wrote:
>
> >B&C has a new product that MIGHT be a
> >solution . . . albeit an unfortunate
> >'band aid' on the Revmaster's shortcomings.
>
> I own the Revmaster R2300 with the same alternator. (I've asked for
> advice from the forum on my project the past.) I also considered using the
> B&C regulator to provide an adjustable voltage regulator in a more robust
> package than what Revmaster provides. One thing that makes me pause is
> this thought process:
>
> 1) the original R/R is a half wave recitifer design.
> 2) The noted problem is an underdesigned PM alternator unable to reject
> heat produced with both sides running. So, what's recommended is to run
> only one side at a time.
>
> Isn't running one PM alternator with full wave rectification about the
> same current / heat level as two regulators, each with a half wave
> rectifier?
>
> Attached is my simpified sketch of the revmaster's PM alternators (for
> reference) with a design I cleaved from Bob's Z16 drawings, including
> overvoltage protection and switching (overvoltage not shown). I think my
> drawing is finding it's way around the "net," which is fine. I'm pretty
> sure it depicts the R2300 alternator accurately.
>
> BTW, I do like the current limiting idea, despite it's possible drawback
> with added complexity.
>
> Dan Theis
>
> --------
> Scratch building Sonex #1362
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497570#497570
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/revmaster_voltage_regulators_516.pdf
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
| From: | "dj_theis" <djtheis58(at)gmail.com> |
[quote]Dan
your schematic as depicted is exactly how my Onex is wired. I would cautionyou
to use a lead acid battery if you can unless a good solution materializes that
will keep the generator from developing full throttle. I think the B&C regulator
is essential since it has adjustable voltage output.
Paul.[/quote]
Thanks Paul,
I appreciate the advice and am doing exactly that (using the Oddesey PC680)
I like the idea of the variable regulator, as noted by you and Bob, offered by
B&C. It would take a little fanagling to wire two PMAs through a single regulator
but certainly possible (i.e., I'm suggesting using a single B&C RR wired
through relays so only one PMA is active at at time. All this to avoid the space,
weight and cost of two regulators).
I am planning (hoping) on adding temperature sensors to the stators on my engine,
before I modify the circuit with a different regulator. My thought is that
in many instances, (Glen Bradley's Thatcher, for example) the R2300 has ran for
many hours (again, 600 plus in Glen's case) without any issue. Again, in Bradley's
case, he had an event where (I think likely) the stars aligned and his
alternator went up in smoke. He had been running with both PMAs active up until
then and I suspect the charging system worked hard to re-charge the battery,
one too many times.
Whatever the source of trouble (low battery internal resistance, low battery charge
or simply poor heat rejection) the PMAs cannot be run together and possibly
cannot be run at their "natural" current limit without the risk of self destruction.
I'll eventually have data on the internal temperature characteristics of the alternator
and [b]DO[/b] plan on upgrading the RR if needed to address the problem.
As my previous note mentions, I have to ask if putting a full wave rectifier (the
B&C design) will effectively put the PMA into a similar overheating condition?
I look forward to hearing how your RR change works out.
Dan Theis
--------
Scratch building Sonex #1362
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497595#497595
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Eckenroth <N509RV(at)eckenroth.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
Dan
According to Revmast, even the Odyssey may cause problems. They want you
to use the old lead anchor. lead acid. The difference in weight especially
considering lithium is dramatic.
Paul
On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 9:24 AM dj_theis wrote:
>
> [quote]Dan
>
> your schematic as depicted is exactly how my Onex is wired. I would
> caution you to use a lead acid battery if you can unless a good solution
> materializes that will keep the generator from developing full throttle. I
> think the B&C regulator is essential since it has adjustable voltage output.
>
>
> Paul.[/quote]
>
>
> Thanks Paul,
> I appreciate the advice and am doing exactly that (using the Oddesey PC680)
>
> I like the idea of the variable regulator, as noted by you and Bob,
> offered by B&C. It would take a little fanagling to wire two PMAs through
> a single regulator but certainly possible (i.e., I'm suggesting using a
> single B&C RR wired through relays so only one PMA is active at at time.
> All this to avoid the space, weight and cost of two regulators).
>
> I am planning (hoping) on adding temperature sensors to the stators on my
> engine, before I modify the circuit with a different regulator. My thought
> is that in many instances, (Glen Bradley's Thatcher, for example) the R2300
> has ran for many hours (again, 600 plus in Glen's case) without any issue.
> Again, in Bradley's case, he had an event where (I think likely) the stars
> aligned and his alternator went up in smoke. He had been running with both
> PMAs active up until then and I suspect the charging system worked hard to
> re-charge the battery, one too many times.
>
> Whatever the source of trouble (low battery internal resistance, low
> battery charge or simply poor heat rejection) the PMAs cannot be run
> together and possibly cannot be run at their "natural" current limit
> without the risk of self destruction.
>
> I'll eventually have data on the internal temperature characteristics of
> the alternator and [b]DO[/b] plan on upgrading the RR if needed to address
> the problem.
>
> As my previous note mentions, I have to ask if putting a full wave
> rectifier (the B&C design) will effectively put the PMA into a similar
> overheating condition?
>
> I look forward to hearing how your RR change works out.
>
> Dan Theis
>
> --------
> Scratch building Sonex #1362
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497595#497595
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
| From: | "dj_theis" <djtheis58(at)gmail.com> |
> According to Revmast, even the Odyssey may cause problems. They want you to
use the old lead anchor. lead acid. The difference in weight especially considering
lithium is dramatic.
Excellent point Paul, I had forgotten that but now recall that (anecdotal) warning
from Revmaster.
If the issue that Joe (Revmaster founder) is worried about is battery charge current
due to the low internal resistance, how about just adding an artificial
resistance to the charging circuit. From professor Nuckolls book, (chapter 2,
page 7). A comparison of the RG versus a wet lead acid battery internal resistance
is 11.5 vs 4 milliohms, respectively. Adding 6.5 milliohms (total of 11.5
milliohms) would bring the RG to a similar effective battery resistance and,
im assuming, similar charge current.
Coincidentally, two 100 milliohms shunt resistors rated at 20 amps continuously,
would add the 6.6 milliohms. Finally, a justification for adding shunt resistors!
You can monitor your charge current, not once but on redundant, in-line
circuits!!
https://shunts.com/collections/shunts/products/mka?variant=6973635067959
All kidding aside, what-ya think?
Dan Theis
--------
Scratch building Sonex #1362
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497598#497598
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
| From: | "dj_theis" <djtheis58(at)gmail.com> |
Oops,
> ...comparison of the RG versus a wet lead acid battery internal resistance is
11.5 vs 4 milliohms, respectively......
>
I reversed the comparison. The RG has (of course) the lower internal resistance
of 4 milliohms.
Dan Theis
--------
Scratch building Sonex #1362
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497599#497599
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
| From: | "dj_theis" <djtheis58(at)gmail.com> |
Double oops.
I meant to do my math correctly and hope Matt adds math-check to the spell-check
feature soon.
7.5 added to he RG battery's 4 milliohms would be 11.5.
Adding two 3.3 milliohm resistors would bring it to 10.6 milliohms.
Dan Theis
--------
Scratch building Sonex #1362
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497600#497600
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RG400 with RG58 |
| From: | "Dan Fritz" <Dfritzj(at)yahoo.com> |
Thanks very much for the help. Looks like I have a way forward.
Dan
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497601#497601
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Why not follow the battery manufacturer's recommendations?
https://earthxbatteries.com/dual-bus-lithium-battery-design
Based on extensive testing, the maximum charge rating will never be
exceeded using this simple and reliable diode isolation design.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497602#497602
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
Hello everyone. Ive taken my first stab at the wiring diagram. I based this off
of a Rotax 914 because that drawing has the turbo charger electrics depicted.
The one thing it doesnt show is the electronic ignition wiring so I had to go
it alone on that part...hopefully Ive done it correctly.
After looking at the system a bit more in depth, I realized they were a few things
I left off the initial list of Consumers. The most significant thing I had
forgotten was the cabin heater. That will put me over the edge for electrical
usage as far as a single alternator goes. There is a 15 amp external alternator
which will sufficiently handle the extra loads so I plan on wiring that for
constant use along with the internal generator. I have the essential bus in
the top left corner of the drawing but am unsure how/where to connect it. Also,
I would like to add the crowbar unit but dont completely understand how that
would work in this setup. As I understand it, it measures bus voltage and removes
the alternator from the bus if that voltage is too high. The way I have it
wired, how would it know which is the offending alternator since theyre both
in an always-connected-to-the-bus-state? would I need one for each alternator?
Will some of you be so kind as to take a gander and offer your input?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497604#497604
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/31a0fbad_a831_4f6a_81db_9858d7b83d6d_308.png
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Zemon <art(at)zemon.name> |
Do you remember my electric smoker, the one that was tripping the GFCI? The
one that I said was pretty new so I was sure that there couldn't be a
problem inside the smoker. Well it quit working the other night. I think I
found the problem in the heating element connector.
[image: IMG_20200809_140723.jpg]
My wife always teases me (baselessly, I might add) that I have no clue
about time. Maybe I've had this smoker longer than I realized.
-- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself, what
am I? If not now, when?*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
>BTW, I do like the current limiting idea, despite it's possible
>drawback with added complexity.
I've been pondering the current limiter idea. It wouldn't
have to dissipate much energy. We're only talking about
a 1 to 2 volt drop at what . . . 18 amps?
A SIMPLE limiter requires a current-sense resistor
that will drop 0.6 volts in the limit-mode . . .
(0.033 ohms) not a big deal since we're wanting to toss off
a volt or so anyhow. But that same resistor is
in series with the alternator's output 100% of
the time . . . so it will drop as much as
0.033 x 17 = 0.56 volts in the non-limit
mode.
Just might be 'tolerable'.
I did a little sharp pencil work on a concept.
Cartoon attached. I'll see if I can refine
it to the prototype fabrication stage.
This is FAR preferred to down-adjusting the
alternator. I'm finding that 4-cell stacks
of LiFePO4 cells are just barely charged
when floated across our legacy 14.4v bus.
A maximally charged LiFePO4 needs a 4.2
volt supply. Stack four cells in series and
you now need a 16.8v bus!
Take a peek at the capacity vs. charge voltage
plots. A 3.6 volt charge (14.4v bus) would
charge an LiFePO4 to about 25% of its
potential chemical potential capacity.
Reducing the bus voltage to mitigate battery
charge limitations on the alternator only
exacerbates the problem. Tailoring the
alternator system to the battery makes
more sense.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 3:48 PM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> BTW, I do like the current limiting idea, despite it's possible drawback
> with added complexity.
>
>
> I've been pondering the current limiter idea. It wouldn't
> have to dissipate much energy. We're only talking about
> a 1 to 2 volt drop at what . . . 18 amps?
>
> A SIMPLE limiter requires a current-sense resistor
> that will drop 0.6 volts in the limit-mode . . .
> (0.033 ohms) not a big deal since we're wanting to toss off
> a volt or so anyhow. But that same resistor is
> in series with the alternator's output 100% of
> the time . . . so it will drop as much as
> 0.033 x 17 = 0.56 volts in the non-limit
> mode.
>
> snipped
>
> Reducing the bus voltage to mitigate battery
> charge limitations on the alternator only
> exacerbates the problem. Tailoring the
> alternator system to the battery makes
> more sense.
>
> Bob . . .
>
What about active current management? More complicated from a total parts
count, but might be dirt simple to implement, for less than $20. Something
like:
current limited supply
Charging lithium tech batteries is right there in their product
description. This was the 1st one I hit on when I searched, and it's
limited to 15A continuous (20A peak), but the alt in question isn't
surviving at higher currents, anyway. Set its current limit for whatever
current the alternator can survive at, and the system can't draw more than
that from the alternator/regulator pair.
The questionable thing about some of these 'switchers' is that some have
functional limitations if input & output grounds are common in the
circuit, and those limitations are sometimes lost 'in translation' in the
sales documents. That issue would need to be explored, of course.
Incorporating something similar to this into the BMS is something that
companies like the big EX *should* have done from the outset. Boost between
alt and battery, to allow full charge of the lithium tech, and buck on the
output, to return battery voltage to a safe level. Then
their somewhat buried alternator size limit could go away, since the BMS
would *truly* manage the battery, instead of just pretending. Would require
a 3 terminal battery, of course.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
At 01:14 PM 8/9/2020, you wrote:
>
>Why not follow the battery manufacturer's recommendations?
>https://earthxbatteries.com/dual-bus-lithium-battery-design
>Based on extensive testing, the maximum charge rating will never be
>exceeded using this simple and reliable diode isolation design.
Are we talking about the same 'victim'? The
limiting hardware are the stator windings
in the PM alternator. The typical rectifier/regulator
for these systems has no electronic current
limiting . . . and unlike the inherent
limits set by the physics of a wound-field
alternator, the PM alternator CAN be
over-loaded.
In this case, the antagonist 'load' is not
made up of electro-whizzies but the battery
itself. In a low state of charge, battery
recharge loads combined with ship's loads
are too much for the alternator's stator
windings.
Reducing available charge voltage to the
battery will most certainly reduce its
demands during recharge but at a cost
of giving up capacity.
It seems a more reasoned approach to fix
the charging system as opposed to starving
the battery.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
But lithium batteries prefer to be stored at less than a full charge, so in
that regard not filling them up is a plus. Why not use the diode and use
whatever size battery provides required capacity? Battery will be happy,
generator will be happy, and weight will be controlled.
On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 5:30 PM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 01:14 PM 8/9/2020, you wrote:
>
>
> Why not follow the battery manufacturer's recommendations?
> https://earthxbatteries.com/dual-bus-lithium-battery-design
> Based on extensive testing, the maximum charge rating will never be
> exceeded using this simple and reliable diode isolation design.
>
>
> Are we talking about the same 'victim'? The
> limiting hardware are the stator windings
> in the PM alternator. The typical rectifier/regulator
> for these systems has no electronic current
> limiting . . . and unlike the inherent
> limits set by the physics of a wound-field
> alternator, the PM alternator CAN be
> over-loaded.
>
> In this case, the antagonist 'load' is not
> made up of electro-whizzies but the battery
> itself. In a low state of charge, battery
> recharge loads combined with ship's loads
> are too much for the alternator's stator
> windings.
>
> Reducing available charge voltage to the
> battery will most certainly reduce its
> demands during recharge but at a cost
> of giving up capacity.
>
> It seems a more reasoned approach to fix
> the charging system as opposed to starving
> the battery.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
At 09:15 PM 8/9/2020, you wrote:
>But lithium batteries prefer to be stored at
>less than a full charge,=C2 so in that regard not
>filling them up is a plus. Why not use the diode
>and use whatever size battery provides required
>capacity? Battery will be happy, generator will
>be happy, and weight will be controlled.
Apples and grapefruit . . .
Airplanes are not battery storage facilities . . .
Legacy design rules call for:
(1) battery to start engines and
(2) operate most useful electro-whizzies after
alternator failure in accordance with design
rules for endurance.
Look at the charge volts vs. capacity curves
again . . . dropping the bus to 13.4 (3.35 volts
per cell) or even 13.0 (3.25 volts per cell)
leaves you with a battery that is essentially
useless for (2) above.
The endurance bus grew out of a concern for
PLANNING and MAINTAINING alternator-out
performance. I've had readers craft airplanes
that capable of running out a full
tank of fuel during battery-only ops.
For years the FAA had a number pulled
from some dark place calling for 30 minutes
minimum endurance in battery-only ops . . .
Every try to get down from 41,000 feet
in a Beechjet in less than 30 minutes?
I can personally attest to the agonies
of meeting even the 30 minute rule without
adding 25 more pounds of lead to the airplane.
The point is that we need to keep a grip
on the fundamentals of our craft. All
engineering stands on the three-legged
stool of properties of materials, management
of energy, refinement of processes.
The folks at Revmaster are having problems
with their obviously tippy engineering stool.
Elegant system integration is refinement
of process to meet (1) and (2) above.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
>
>What about active current management? More complicated from a total
>parts count, but might be dirt simple to implement, for less than
>$20. Something like:
>5XCoqvy0pMpJO%2BuDcls>current limited supply
Man, if you don't scan the offerings every
week in that venue, you'll miss some new
gizmo! Thanks for the heads-up.
Your find reminds me of a bench study I
did on similarly 'upgraded' rectifier/
regulator philosophy for pm alternators
a couple years ago. Didn't find any
really attractive options . . . then.
But the item you've cited suggests a
further look is called for. It's getting
late . . . I'll sleep on it and do some
'asphalt engineering' on it tomorrow.
Need to drive into Wichita for remodeling
materials.
Re: my post of a few minutes ago.
I've got a stable of flashlights and tools
that use LiFePO4, 18650 cells. The chargers
for ALL of these cells tops off at 4.2 volts.
This doesn't seem to put the cell in any
manner of overcharge stress. The charging
currents fall to 1 milliamp or below at 4.2
volts.
I've got EarthX and AeroVoltz batteries on
the bench now that have been getting characterized.
Based on what's been gathered so far, both products
do indeed get your engine started . . . but when
charged at 14.2-14.4 volts, their discharge curves
look very similar to the plots I've been
getting on energy-starved, individual cells.
I'm thinking that BOTH products have untapped
chemical potential that is not available for
operating an airplane during alternator out
conditions. I think this shines a spot-light
on early lithium marketing claims for "lead
acid equivalency" and "engine starting battery".
Both terms sort of hat-dance around the capacity
issues forsaken in a quest for the holy-grail
of lighter weights.
To acquire the SAME capacity as a PC680 by
replacing it with THREE or FOUR AeroVoltz
AVAI-270 or TWO EarthX ETX36D.
Not a problem if your design goals for alternator
out endurance are approaching zero.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Whether the victim is the battery or the generator, the object is to reduce the
current. A diode will do that. If a regular diode limits the current too much,
perhaps a Schottky will work. It will not hurt to experiment. Once the battery
has been
recharged to a certain level, a relay could be automatically energized to short
out the diode.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497618#497618
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
At 07:31 AM 8/10/2020, you wrote:
>
>Whether the victim is the battery or the generator, the object is to
>reduce the
>current. A diode will do that. If a regular diode limits the
>current too much,
>perhaps a Schottky will work. It will not hurt to experiment. Once
>the battery has been
>recharged to a certain level, a relay could be automatically
>energized to short out the diode.
But we've established that the battery is
already in an energy-starved state for
charging posed by the LiFePO4 chemistry.
While 'reducing' the current may indeed
fix the burning alternator problem, it
will also reduce the already suppressed
energy content of the battery.
In all fairness, if design goals for this
installation are simply to get the engine
started . . . then perhaps an experiment
to add the suggested diode is worth
exploring. But if there are ANY goals for
battery only endurance, then adding the
diode will be counter-productive in an already
precariously compromised condition.
Discussions in other threads are suggesting mods
to the charging system to make it more robust.
Assuming time and costs are attractive,
improving robustness is never a bad thing.
Further, it may well go toward
RAISING the bus voltage to a more common
14.2 to 14.4 range thus greatly increasing
stored energy in the battery . . . a win-win,
no?
I've expanded the annotation on the charge volts
vs. energy stored plots I posted previously. These
further emphasize that when operated 'per
manufacturer's recommendations', the battery
will contain perhaps 25% of it's potential
storage for the LiFePO4 chemistry.
If anyone has information to the contrary, I'd
be pleased to know it! I'd really like to be
wrong about this . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christopher Cee Stone <rv8iator(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Smoker Problem |
Root cause determination is satisfying no matter the route taken to get
there!
.chris
On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 12:39 PM Art Zemon wrote:
> Do you remember my electric smoker, the one that was tripping the GFCI?
> The one that I said was pretty new so I was sure that there couldn't be a
> problem inside the smoker. Well it quit working the other night. I think I
> found the problem in the heating element connector.
>
> [image: IMG_20200809_140723.jpg]
>
> My wife always teases me (baselessly, I might add) that I have no clue
> about time. Maybe I've had this smoker longer than I realized.
>
> -- Art Z.
>
>
> --
> https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
> *If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself, what
> am I? If not now, when?*
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
I'm using a Scorpion LiFePO battery, and due to some carb tuning issues, h
ave had the chance to drain it a few times.=C2- It never seem to have a l
arge reserve capacity.=C2- The regulator for my 20A John Deere regulator
was set to 13.2V, so this makes sense.
I'm switching to Bill Clapps generator design, that uses a Harley-Davidson
32A generator, and the regulator is advertised at 14.7V.=C2- This email c
hain has me wondering if I should look for a regulator that goes to 16V, bu
t Scorpion advertises that the max should be 15.0V on their website.=C2-
Maybe Scorpion is just being overly conservative due to the LiFePO's sensit
ivity to overcharge?
SSTZ14S-FP Scorpion Stinger 12v 387 CCA LiFePo4 Extreme High Output Battery
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
| |
SSTZ14S-FP Scorpion Stinger 12v 387 CCA LiFePo4 Extreme High Output Battery
Lithium Batteries are discharged to 30% of capacity for shipping requiremen
ts. When you receive the battery it w...
|
|
|
ckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
What about active current management? More complicated from a totalparts co
unt, but might be dirt simple to implement, for less than $20.Something lik
e:
current limited supply
=C2- Man, if you don't scan the offerings every
=C2- week in that venue, you'll miss some new
=C2- gizmo! Thanks for the heads-up.
=C2- Your find reminds me of a bench study I
=C2- did on similarly 'upgraded' rectifier/
=C2- regulator philosophy for pm alternators
=C2- a couple years ago. Didn't find any
=C2- really attractive options . . . then.
=C2- But the item you've cited suggests a
=C2- further look is called for. It's getting
=C2- late . . . I'll sleep on it and do some
=C2- 'asphalt engineering' on it tomorrow.
=C2- Need to drive into Wichita for remodeling
=C2- materials.
=C2- Re: my post of a few minutes ago.
=C2- I've got a stable of flashlights and tools
=C2- that use LiFePO4, 18650 cells. The chargers
=C2- for ALL of these cells tops off at 4.2 volts.
=C2- This doesn't seem to put the cell in any
=C2- manner of overcharge stress. The charging
=C2- currents fall to 1 milliamp or below at 4.2
=C2- volts.
=C2- I've got EarthX and AeroVoltz batteries on
=C2- the bench now that have been getting characterized.
=C2- Based on what's been gathered so far, both products
=C2- do indeed get your engine started . . . but when
=C2- charged at 14.2-14.4 volts, their discharge curves
=C2- look very similar to the plots I've been
=C2- getting on energy-starved, individual cells.
=C2- I'm thinking that BOTH products have untapped
=C2- chemical potential that is not available for
=C2- operating an airplane during alternator out
=C2- conditions. I think this shines a spot-light
=C2- on early lithium marketing claims for "lead
=C2- acid equivalency" and "engine startingbattery".
=C2- Both terms sort of hat-dance around the capacity
=C2- issues forsaken in a quest for the holy-grail
=C2- of lighter weights.
=C2- To acquire the SAME capacity as a PC680 by
=C2- replacing it with THREE or FOUR AeroVoltz
=C2- AVAI-270 or TWO EarthX ETX36D.
=C2- Not a problem if your design goals for alternator
=C2- out endurance are approaching zero.
=C2-
=C2- Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
At 08:53 AM 8/10/2020, you wrote:
>I'm using a Scorpion LiFePO battery, and due to some carb tuning
>issues, have had the chance to drain it a few times. It never seem
>to have a large reserve capacity. The regulator for my 20A John
>Deere regulator was set to 13.2V, so this makes sense.
>
>I'm switching to Bill Clapps generator design, that uses a
>Harley-Davidson 32A generator, and the regulator is advertised at
>14.7V. This email chain has me wondering if I should look for a
>regulator that goes to 16V, but Scorpion advertises that the max
>should be 15.0V on their website.
Nope. Most suppliers cite the same number knowing
full well that contemporary systems would never
be purposefully adjusted so high. In fact, charging
plots I'm gathering suggest that charging voltages
at the upper end of recommended range DO NOT increase
stored energy.
Your legacy regulator adjusted 14.2 to 14.4 will
be just fine.
> Maybe Scorpion is just being overly conservative due to the
> LiFePO's sensitivity to overcharge?
>
>
>
>SSTZ14S-FP Scorpion Stinger 12v 387 CCA LiFePo4 Extreme High Output Battery
>
>
I presume that this battery is fitted with some form
of battery management system. Unfortunately, there is
no obvious consensus as to what constitutes the
optimum BMS nor are there published numbers as to
how they are set up.
In general, a BMS will manage one or more
of the following aspects of battery
operations:
Disconnect when overloaded
Disconnect when over charged (I guessing that
the 'unhook' happens at around 14 volts)
Disconnect when over dis-charged
Disconnect on over temperature
Cell balancing for recharge of a
deeply discharged battery -OR-
overcharge prevention for a
degraded cell.
Note that the BMS can only UNHOOK
a battery from the rest of the ship's
electrical system. It cannot boost
the effective charging potential for
enhancing energy stored.
So when the battery manufacturer speaks
to recommended bus voltage, the voltage
impressed on each layer of cells is
1/4th that value.
Going back to the plots I've gathered
in weeks past, the legacy bus voltages
for lead-acid based DC power systems
will be incapable of charging a LiFePO4
cell to its chemically limited energy
potential.
Unlike popular products in the OBAM aviation
market, lithium batteries for TC aircraft
are designed, tested, qualified and
maintained to exceedingly detailed
requirements. See:
https://tinyurl.com/y49tvwlz
Unlike our friends in the OBAM aviation
lithium market, the TC suppliers prominently
cite Ampere Hour ratings of their products.
This is because their target market is
FORM, FIT AND FUNCTION replacement for
legacy lead or nicad products. Therefore,
even tho they can start an engine with
a lighter/smaller battery, they are
required to keep stuffing cells into the
package until capacity requirements are met.
This makes for a SUPER cranking battery!
I'll have some more data plots to share
later today. I had to postpone my expedition
to Wichita.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
OK.=C2- I'm missing something major here.=C2- Earlier you stated:
=C2- Take a peek at the capacity vs. charge voltage=C2-=C2- plots. A
3.6 volt charge (14.4v bus) would
=C2-=C2- charge an LiFePO4 to about 25% of its
=C2-=C2- potential chemical potential capacity.
The chart you shared showed it clearly.=C2- To get to the 100% capacity o
n the charging plots you shared, I'd need to run a bus voltage of 16.8V (4.
2V/cell).
Below, you're saying that 14.4V will be fine.=C2- I'm thinking, "How coul
d 25% of capacity be 'fine'?"=C2- I've obviously lost the plot somewhere
in here.
BTW, I killed one of these by putting it right above the exhaust with no pr
otection.=C2- Don't do that.=C2- It's expensive.=C2-
However, due to that slight misfortune, I am able to confirm that it is mad
e of 12 "bags", wired so that current flows through 4 groups, with each gro
up having three bags.=C2- The external connectors are attached directly t
o each end of the string, with what I'm eyeballing to be 10 or 12AWG wire.
=C2- The only electronics in the case is a small circuit board that allow
s for a rudimentary check of the batteries charge.
ckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
At 08:53 AM 8/10/2020, you wrote:
I'm using a Scorpion LiFePObattery, and due to some carb tuning issues, hav
e had the chance to drainit a few times.=C2- It never seem to have a larg
e reservecapacity.=C2- The regulator for my 20A John Deere regulator was
set to13.2V, so this makes sense.
I'm switching to Bill Clapps generator design, that uses aHarley-Davidson 3
2A generator, and the regulator is advertised at14.7V.=C2- This email cha
in has me wondering if I should look for aregulator that goes to 16V, but S
corpion advertises that the max shouldbe 15.0V on their website.
=C2- Nope. Most suppliers cite the same number knowing
=C2- full well that contemporary systems would never
=C2- be purposefully adjusted so high. In fact, charging
=C2- plots I'm gathering suggest that charging voltages
=C2- at the upper end of recommended range DO NOT increase
=C2- stored energy.
=C2- Your legacy regulator adjusted 14.2 to 14.4 will
=C2- be just fine.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
Ditto what Ernest says. I too am lost. Seems like on the one hand 14.x
volts is just fine and on the other hand 14.x volts is terrible and will
never charge the battery. Clearly I am missing something important.
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 1:07 PM Ernest Christley wrote:
> OK. I'm missing something major here. Earlier you stated:
>
> Take a peek at the capacity vs. charge voltage
> plots. A 3.6 volt charge (14.4v bus) would
> charge an LiFePO4 to about 25% of its
> potential chemical potential capacity.
>
>
> The chart you shared showed it clearly. To get to the 100% capacity on
> the charging plots you shared, I'd need to run a bus voltage of 16.8V
> (4.2V/cell).
>
> Below, you're saying that 14.4V will be fine. I'm thinking, "How could
> 25% of capacity be 'fine'?" I've obviously lost the plot somewhere in here.
>
> BTW, I killed one of these by putting it right above the exhaust with no
> protection. Don't do that. It's expensive.
> However, due to that slight misfortune, I am able to confirm that it is
> made of 12 "bags", wired so that current flows through 4 groups, with each
> group having three bags. The external connectors are attached directly to
> each end of the string, with what I'm eyeballing to be 10 or 12AWG wire.
> The only electronics in the case is a small circuit board that allows for a
> rudimentary check of the batteries charge.
>
>
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
>
> At 08:53 AM 8/10/2020, you wrote:
>
> I'm using a Scorpion LiFePO battery, and due to some carb tuning issues,
> have had the chance to drain it a few times. It never seem to have a large
> reserve capacity. The regulator for my 20A John Deere regulator was set to
> 13.2V, so this makes sense.
>
> I'm switching to Bill Clapps generator design, that uses a Harley-Davidson
> 32A generator, and the regulator is advertised at 14.7V. This email chain
> has me wondering if I should look for a regulator that goes to 16V, but
> Scorpion advertises that the max should be 15.0V on their website.
>
>
> Nope. Most suppliers cite the same number knowing
> full well that contemporary systems would never
> be purposefully adjusted so high. In fact, charging
> plots I'm gathering suggest that charging voltages
> at the upper end of recommended range DO NOT increase
> stored energy.
>
> Your legacy regulator adjusted 14.2 to 14.4 will
> be just fine.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
At 03:57 PM 8/10/2020, you wrote:
>OK. I'm missing something major here. Earlier you stated:
>
> Take a peek at the capacity vs. charge voltage
> plots. A 3.6 volt charge (14.4v bus) would
> charge an LiFePO4 to about 25% of its
> potential chemical potential capacity.
>
>
>The chart you shared showed it clearly. To get to the 100% capacity
>on the charging plots you shared, I'd need to run a bus voltage of
>16.8V (4.2V/cell).
>
>Below, you're saying that 14.4V will be fine. I'm thinking, "How
>could 25% of capacity be 'fine'?" I've obviously lost the plot
>somewhere in here.
Yes, you missed the irony of my observations.
The plots I published so far show the voltage vs.
capacity characteristics of a single, 'barefoot'
cell. These are generally marketed as flashlight/
tool/electronics batteries. Almost without exception,
you cannot achieve the advertised capacity unless
the cell is charged to the maximum, 4.2 volts
rating . . . which translates to a bus equivalent
of 16.8 volts.
Now, vendors like AeroVoltz, EarthX, True Blue,
Shiorai, et. als. will take combinations of
individual cells and package them together
with a battery management system (BMS). The
BMS will implement certain protections as mentioned
in my previous post. One such protection is for
too high a charge voltage such that the device is
compatible with legacy vehicular DC power
systems. i.e. 14.2 volts or thereabouts.
The BMS is a significant piece of electronics.
1/4 to 1/3 the battery's internal volume can
be occupied by transistors and such.
Check out the attached plots on an EarthX
ETX36D battery I've had on hand for a few years.
There are three plots where the battery was charged
at 14.2, 14.4 and 15.0 volts. Note that unlike
the plots on individual cells, these all lay
practically right on top of each other . . . all
three show a battery capacity of 10.2 to 10.6 A.H.
This tells us that the BMS is in control of how
cells in this battery are charged INDEPENDENTLY
of the charging voltage. Stepping up your alternator
output voltage with some hope of exploiting latent
battery capacity would not be fruitful . . . and
possibly harmful to other electro-whizzies in the system.
The data I've gathered so far seems to say that
cells incorporated into batteries for lead-acid
replacement are DE-rated by design of the BMS.
This doesn't mean that the lithium batteries
offered do not deliver to their nameplate ratings . . .
it simply says these batteries contain chemical
capability that cannot be exploited in
a 14 VDC system.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
Aaah!=C2- Now I see the light.=C2- AeroVoltz and EarthX take care of m
aking sure that 14.2V is sufficient.
The Scorpion, being as close to raw cells as one can get, has left that tas
k to me.=C2- Driving this battery to 16.8V would be useful from the aspec
t of battery capacity.
Shoot!=C2- Just what I needed.=C2- Another distraction.=C2- Now I hav
e to take the old battery apart to play with the cells.=C2- :-)
ckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
At 03:57 PM 8/10/2020, you wrote:
OK.=C2- I'm missing somethingmajor here.=C2- Earlier you stated:
=C2- Take a peek at the capacity vs. charge voltage
=C2-=C2- plots. A 3.6 volt charge (14.4v bus) would
=C2-=C2- charge an LiFePO4 to about 25% of its
=C2-=C2- potential chemical potential capacity.
The chart you shared showed it clearly.=C2- To get to the 100% capacityon
the charging plots you shared, I'd need to run a bus voltage of 16.8V(4.2V
/cell).
Below, you're saying that 14.4V will be fine.=C2- I'm thinking,"How could
25% of capacity be 'fine'?"=C2- I've obviouslylost the plot somewhere in
here.
=C2- Yes, you missed the irony of my observations.
=C2- The plots I published so far show the voltage vs.
=C2- capacity characteristics of a single, 'barefoot'
=C2- cell.=C2- These are generally marketed as flashlight/
=C2- tool/electronics batteries. Almost without exception,
=C2- you cannot achieve the advertised capacity unless
=C2- the cell is charged to the maximum, 4.2 volts
=C2- rating . . . which translates to a bus equivalent
=C2- of 16.8 volts.
=C2- Now, vendors like AeroVoltz, EarthX, True Blue,
=C2- Shiorai, et. als. will take combinations of
=C2- individual cells and package them together
=C2- with a battery management system (BMS). The
=C2- BMS will implement certain protections as mentioned
=C2- in my previous post. One such protection is for
=C2- too high a charge voltage such that the device is
=C2- compatible with legacy vehicular DC power
=C2- systems. i.e. 14.2 volts or thereabouts.
=C2- The BMS is a significant piece of electronics.
=C2- 1/4 to 1/3 the battery's internal volume can
=C2- be occupied by transistors and such.
=C2- Check out the attached plots on an EarthX
=C2- ETX36D battery I've had on hand for a few years.
=C2- There are three plots where the battery was charged
=C2- at 14.2, 14.4 and 15.0 volts. Note that unlike
=C2- the plots on individual cells, these all lay
=C2- practically right on top of each other . . . all
=C2- three show a battery capacity of 10.2 to 10.6 A.H.
=C2- This tells us that the BMS is in control of how
=C2- cells in this battery are charged INDEPENDENTLY
=C2- of the charging voltage. Stepping up your alternator
=C2- output voltage with some hope of exploiting latent
=C2- battery capacity would not be fruitful . . . and
=C2- possibly harmful to other electro-whizzies in the system.
=C2- The data I've gathered so far seems to say that
=C2- cells incorporated into batteries for lead-acid
=C2- replacement are DE-rated by design of the BMS.
=C2- This doesn't mean that the lithium batteries
=C2- offered do not deliver to their nameplate ratings . . .
=C2- it simply says these batteries contain chemical
=C2- capability that cannot be exploited in
=C2- a 14 VDC system.
=C2- Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
Unfortunately, that presumption would be wrong.=C2- The Scorpion LiFePO
has cells soldered directly to the output.=C2- But, this gives us an oppo
rtunity!! (Excuse me while I make some lemonade.)
Extrapolating from the comments below, the TC manufacturers have to make th
e battery bigger, because the legacy system can only pump the cells up to 3
0% of their capacity.=C2- If we can move away from the legacy requirement
s, and not have a BMS shutting the charging down, the physics would suggest
that we could easily get double the battery capacity.=C2- The HUGE cavea
t, is that all other systems would have to be tolerant of 16V.
ckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
=C2- I presume that this battery is fitted with some form
=C2- of battery management system.
. . .
=C2- Note that the BMS can only UNHOOK
=C2- a battery from the rest of the ship's
=C2- electrical system. It cannot boost
=C2- the effective charging potential for
=C2- enhancing energy stored.
. . .
=C2- Therefore,=C2- even tho they can start an engine with
=C2- a lighter/smaller battery, they are
=C2- required to keep stuffing cells into the
=C2- package until capacity requirements are met.
=C2-=C2-
=C2- Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax install |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
user9253 wrote:
> There is more than one way to wire the alternators. You can use the
> 3 position OFF-Battery-Both switch or separate switches.
> Since you might eventually add a second alternator, to make it less confusing
> for you or future pilots, I would use 3 separate switches:
> Master battery contactor switch, alternator-1 switch, and alternator-2 switch.
Of course!! Next question is about the fuses. I want to use the fuse blocks instead
of breakers, but is there a hard and fast rule about which components should
have a panel circuit breaker instead of the fuse?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497640#497640
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Hey Ernest,
See my earlier post=2E
Charlie
=81=A3Sent from BlueMail
=8B
On Aug 11, 2020, 8:18 AM, at 8:18 AM, Ernest Christley wrote:
>Unfortunately, that presumption would be wrong=2E=C2-
The Scorpion LiFePO
>has cells soldered directly to the output=2E=C2- But
, this gives us an
>opportunity!! (Excuse me while I make some lemonade=2E)
>Extrapolating from the comments below, the TC manufacturers have to
>make
the battery bigger, because the legacy system can only pump the
>cells up
to 30% of their capacity=2E=C2- If we can move away from the legacy
>requ
irements, and not have a BMS shutting the charging down, the
>physics would
suggest that we could easily get double the battery
>capacity=2E=C2- The
HUGE caveat, is that all other systems would have to be
>tolerant of 16V
=2E
>
>
ls, III
> wrote:
>=C2- I presume that
this battery is fitted with some form
>=C2- of battery management system
=2E
>=2E =2E =2E
>=C2- Note that the BMS can only UNHOOK
>=C2- a batter
y from the rest of the ship's
>=C2- electrical system=2E It cannot boost
>=C2- the effective charging potential for
>=C2- enhancing energy store
d=2E
>
>=2E =2E =2E
>=C2- Therefore,=C2- even tho they can start an eng
ine with
>=C2- a lighter/smaller battery, they are
>=C2- required to ke
ep stuffing cells into the
>=C2- package until capacity requirements are
met=2E
>=C2-=C2-
>
> =C2- Bob =2E =2E =2E
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
OK. It seems like my "understanding" of battery charging is seriously
flawed. I thought, for example, that if a partially discharged battery was
connected to a higher voltage source, the battery would be charged to that
voltage level. Since the EarthX has a charged, resting voltage of 13.2 -
13.3 volts I thought that if it was connected to a 13.5 volt source, it
would eventually charge the battery. Apparently, none of this is true?
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 5:18 AM Ernest Christley wrote:
> Unfortunately, that presumption would be wrong. The Scorpion LiFePO has
> cells soldered directly to the output. But, this gives us an opportunity!!
> (Excuse me while I make some lemonade.)
>
> Extrapolating from the comments below, the TC manufacturers have to make
> the battery bigger, because the legacy system can only pump the cells up to
> 30% of their capacity. If we can move away from the legacy requirements,
> and not have a BMS shutting the charging down, the physics would suggest
> that we could easily get double the battery capacity. The HUGE caveat, is
> that all other systems would have to be tolerant of 16V.
>
>
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
> I presume that this battery is fitted with some form
> of battery management system.
>
> . . .
>
> Note that the BMS can only UNHOOK
> a battery from the rest of the ship's
> electrical system. It cannot boost
> the effective charging potential for
> enhancing energy stored.
>
> *. . .*
>
> Therefore,
> even tho they can start an engine with
> a lighter/smaller battery, they are
> required to keep stuffing cells into the
> package until capacity requirements are met.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | lithium testing, anyone? |
With all the talk about lithium, I just saw this, if anyone's interested.
https://www.electronicdesign.com/power-management/whitepaper/21137995/building-a-costeffective-multifunction-liion-battery-tester?utm_source=EG+ED+Today&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=CPS200807029&o_eid=0371F5910123I6U&rdx.ident%5Bpull%5D=omeda%7C0371F5910123I6U&oly_enc_id=0371F5910123I6U
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Valid test for voltage regulator |
I got a regulator off of Amazon that matches the generator I'm adding. Want
ed to test its exact set point to make sure I don't kill another LiFePO bat
tery.
I connected an adjustable power supply to the two-prong input, and tracked
the voltage between the single output lead and the aluminum case as I crank
ed up the supply.=C2- The output tracked the input all the way up and pas
t the 14.7V advertised regulation point.=C2- At 20.5V, the limit of my su
pplies capability, there was 19.8V between the output lead and the regulato
r case.=C2- I added a light as a small load, and got the same results.
Would I embarrass myself for leaving a review that this is a regulator that
doesn't regulate?=C2- Granted, the input expects an AC voltage, and I'm
giving it DC, but shouldn't it still regulate the output to something close
to the nominal voltage?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Valid test for voltage regulator |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 8/11/2020 3:09 PM, Ernest Christley wrote:
> I got a regulator off of Amazon that matches the generator I'm adding.
> Wanted to test its exact set point to make sure I don't kill another
> LiFePO battery.
>
> I connected an adjustable power supply to the two-prong input, and
> tracked the voltage between the single output lead and the aluminum
> case as I cranked up the supply. The output tracked the input all the
> way up and past the 14.7V advertised regulation point. At 20.5V, the
> limit of my supplies capability, there was 19.8V between the output
> lead and the regulator case. I added a light as a small load, and got
> the same results.
>
> Would I embarrass myself for leaving a review that this is a regulator
> that doesn't regulate? Granted, the input expects an AC voltage, and
> I'm giving it DC, but shouldn't it still regulate the output to
> something close to the nominal voltage?
Is it for a dynamo (PM alternator)? If yes, try hooking it up to
something that *is* AC. Quick & dirty source might be an old school door
bell transformer, or the transformer that powers older natural gas
furnaces. Both are usually 24V AC.
If you look at some of the diagrams that have been posted recently for
rectifier/regulators (ex: the Revmaster diagrams), some of them show
one end of the dynamo winding tied directly to the DC bus.
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Z-16 with a sprinkling of Z-12...help? |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
I've decided NOT to reinvent the wheel. In my previous thread I posted a wiring
diagram that I thought was a good first shot at the whole process. Everyone
here gave me sound advice which I thought I put into practice, however the more
I thought about it, the more I realized I was not using the advice I had told
my teenagers to heed many many times...work smarter, not harder.
SO....
I've decided to abandon my attempt at a diagram and build off the tried and true
Z diagrams that Bob offers in the Aeroelectric Connection. Of course, it can
never be easy because I've decided to go off the reservation and not use stock
Rotax "stuff". That said, it is basically going to be a stock 914, with stock
internal Generator but adding fuel injection and a second, 15A alternator
(externally regulated) on the back of the engine to supplement the electrical
system supply. I would like to use diagram Z-12 and Z-16 together since they have
all I need, but am not sure how to integrate one into the other. For instance,
I've decided I should have a dedicated Battery Bus for the dual electronic
ignition (both on that bus?) and an ECU wire that says should come directly
from the hot side of the battery.
There will be 2 fuel pumps, one rotax says has to be powered directly from the
Internal Generator, and the other from the bus. Both will have their own respective
switches.
My questions are thus:
1)Will both alternators have their own separate crowbar units or is that not possible?
How would over voltage be incorporated?
2)I've decided I should have a dedicated Battery Bus for the dual electronic ignition
and an ECU wire that says should come directly from the hot side of the
battery. Should both ignitions be on that bus together?
3) Suggestions for my mostly Z-16 diagram?
I really wish I new how to use a CAD program to make this look better!!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497663#497663
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Valid test for voltage regulator |
At 03:09 PM 8/11/2020, you wrote:
>I got a regulator off of Amazon that matches the generator I'm
>adding. Wanted to test its exact set point to make sure I don't kill
>another LiFePO battery.
What brand/model of battery?
>I connected an adjustable power supply to the two-prong input, and
>tracked the voltage between the single output lead and the aluminum
>case as I cranked up the supply. The output tracked the input all
>the way up and past the 14.7V advertised regulation point. At
>20.5V, the limit of my supplies capability, there was 19.8V between
>the output lead and the regulator case. I added a light as a small
>load, and got the same results.
>
>Would I embarrass myself for leaving a review that this is a
>regulator that doesn't regulate? Granted, the input expects an AC
>voltage, and I'm giving it DC, but shouldn't it still regulate the
>output to something close to the nominal voltage?
The RECTIFIER/regulator is an AC driven
device. It turns ON by triggering a silicon
controlled rectifier which STAYS on until
the AC wave form passes through zero volts
at the end of the half-cycle.
It's unlikely that you're going to 'kill'
a battery with a in-situ test of this
regulator. It may prove to regulate
a bit higher or lower than optimum . . .
but if your battery features a BMS,
then 'optimum' is about a barn-door
wide.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-16 with a sprinkling of Z-12...help? |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Going with one of Bob's proven wiring diagrams is a good decision.
Try ExpressPCB software for drawing wiring diagrams.
https://www.expresspcb.com/expresspcb-classic-pcb-layout-software/#wow-modal-id-1
It is just about the easiest CAD program to learn.
It is a two part program. Express.sch is for drawing a schematic.
Express.pcb is for designing printed circuit boards.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497667#497667
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: IS a COM ANTENNA GROUND PLANE NECESSARY |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
One would think that the Kitfox steel tube fuselage frame would make a
good ground plane, but it does not. With the antenna mounted to a flat
plate that is welded to the top of the fuselage, the SWR was 2.4 or worse.
I then connected a 22 inch long wire to one of the antenna mounting screws and
extended it horizontally and forward over the open baggage area. Surprise!
The SWR greatly improved. Below are the numbers. My friend might
experiment by adding additional ground plane radials.
.
FREQ _ SWR
118 _ 2.30
119 _ 1.78
120 _ 1.49
121 _ 1.24
122 _ 1.20
123 _ 1.30
124 _ 1.35
125 _ 1.39
126 _ 1.59
127 _ 1.82
128 _ 1.95
129 _ 1.99
130 _ 2.00
131 _ 1.99
132 _ 2.00
133 _ 2.10
134 _ 2.20
135 _ 2.50
136 _ 3.10
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497673#497673
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Valid test for voltage regulator |
I'm the one with the "Scorpion" battery.=C2- No BMS.Well, I may be overs
tating the case.=C2- It does look like it has a network of connections to
balance the cells.=C2- But there is no facility to remove the input volt
age.=C2-
I'll rig up a way to mount the generator in the lathe this evening, and put
the regulator in a more realistic test.
Charlie, I ohmed the leads out, and none of them seem to be tied directly t
o ground.
uckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
At 03:09 PM 8/11/2020, you wrote:
I got a regulator off of Amazonthat matches the generator I'm adding. Wante
d to test its exact set pointto make sure I don't kill another LiFePObatter
y.
=C2- What brand/model of battery?
I connected anadjustable power supply to the two-prong input, and tracked t
he voltagebetween the single output lead and the aluminum case as I cranked
up thesupply.=C2- The output tracked the input all the way up and past t
he14.7V advertised regulation point.=C2- At 20.5V, the limit of mysupplie
s capability, there was 19.8V between the output lead and theregulator case
.=C2- I added a light as a small load, and got the sameresults.
Would I embarrass myself for leaving a review that this is a regulatorthat
doesn't regulate?=C2- Granted, the input expects an AC voltage,and I'm gi
ving it DC, but shouldn't it still regulate the output tosomething close to
the nominal voltage?
=C2- The RECTIFIER/regulator is an AC driven
=C2- device. It turns ON by triggering a silicon
=C2- controlled rectifier which STAYS on until
=C2- the AC wave form passes through zero volts
=C2- at the end of the half-cycle.
=C2- It's unlikely that you're going to 'kill'
=C2- a battery with a in-situ test of this
=C2- regulator. It may prove to regulate
=C2- a bit higher or lower than optimum . . .
=C2- but if your battery features a BMS,
=C2- then 'optimum' is about a barn-door
=C2- wide.
=C2- Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IS a COM ANTENNA GROUND PLANE NECESSARY |
>Surprise! The SWR greatly improved.
Yup!
>Below are the numbers. My friend might
>experiment by adding additional ground plane radials.
Probably won't change much . . .
>
>.
>FREQ _ SWR
>118 _ 2.30
>119 _ 1.78
>120 _ 1.49
>121 _ 1.24
>122 _ 1.20
>123 _ 1.30
>124 _ 1.35
>125 _ 1.39
>126 _ 1.59
>127 _ 1.82
>128 _ 1.95
>129 _ 1.99
>130 _ 2.00
>131 _ 1.99
>132 _ 2.00
>133 _ 2.10
>134 _ 2.20
>135 _ 2.50
>136 _ 3.10
The feedpoint impedance of an un-compensated
1/4 wave vertical is on the order of 30 ohms
at resonance . . . so the BEST expected SWR
over the range of interest would be about what
you're seeing 1.20:1
We see that SWR minimizes at 122, not quite in
the center of the range of interest. If this
antenna can be 'trimmed', try shortening it
1/4" at a time until SWR minimizes at 127Mhz.
Then I suspect you'll be under 3:1 over full
range . . . a useful antenna.
118 to 136 is a pretty BIG bandwidth . . .
about 14% . . . those numbers are not all
that bad! I'd go with it as-is or if
you're feeling ambitious, trim it a bit.
Good work!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
At 09:05 AM 8/11/2020, you wrote:
>OK. It seems like my "understanding" of battery charging is
>seriously flawed. I thought, for example, that if a partially
>discharged battery was connected to a higher voltage source, the
>battery would be charged to that voltage level. Since the EarthX has
>a charged, resting voltage of 13.2 - 13.3 volts I thought that if it
>was connected to a 13.5 volt source, it would eventually charge the
>battery. Apparently, none of this is true?
As long as you DON'T put silicon 'smarts' between the
energy source and the battery to be charged.
Those plots I published for stepped increases in
charging voltage on a single LiFePO4 cell speaks
to the phenomenon you've cited. This is generally
true for all the SVLA, Flooded and Gel versions
of the Lead-Acid technology . . . because our
vehicular DC power systems EVOLVED around the
charge/discharge reactions of lead, sulphur, oxygen
and hydrogen. This convention is 160+ years old.
It also works for the new kids on the block that
use lithium, iron, phosphorous and oxygen but with
a big 'gotcha' . . . the differences in voltage
for these two chemistries keep them from being
form/fit/function interchangeable.
Our alternators, regulators, light bulbs, legacy
electronics, etc. etc. were optimized for function
by the chemistry of the battery-of-choice for
over a century.
But three LiFePO4 cells stacked gives us a charge
(bus voltage) of 12.6V and a discharge (alternator-out)
voltage of about 11.1V. Decidedly incompatible with
the legacy lead-acid world.
Okay, cells stacked gives us a bus voltage of 16.8 and a
14.8V alternator-out voltage. Again . . . not a drop-in
replacement.
Some folks have decided to offer 4-stack batteries
with no 'smarts' and which will be charged to
3.6 volts per layer . . . a potential that does
not charge the chemistry to its latent capabilities . . .
but 'good enough' if the target users are willing
to accept compromised performance in exchange for weight
savings.
Further, it turns out that this very energetic
chemistry comes with some risks. It will produce
extra-ordinary fault currents for it's size.
Prolonged deep discharge can seriously injure
an otherwise good battery. Charging at greater
than legacy lead-acid voltages will indeed
'stuff' more energy into the battery but allowing
or recommending operations above the legacy
levels poses system wide risks that may be
hazardous to hardware. The batteries are at
greater risk for catastrophic failure to
to over-charging or hard-charging.
So, BMS enter stage-right:
A judicious collection of transistors and things
can be hammered into a 'battery management system'
that will pound our square cornered lithium
product into a round, lead-acid hole.
Hence, products like EarthX and AeroVoltz
with BMS system will FUNCTION in the lead-
acid hole with minimized risks but performance
compromises.
'Barefoot' lithium products will also
function in the lead-acid world but safeguards
offered by BMS fitted products are the
user's responsibility.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | ETX36D Charge/Discharge studies at 13.0 to 15.0 Volts |
Okay, just finished the series of plots on the
ETX36D battery that EarthX donated to the cause
a few years back.
Did a series of charges at 13.0 to 15.0 volts with
constant current power supply. Note in the charge
plots, the voltage climbs slowly as the battery
charges but takes an upward 'jump' as the battery
achieves full charge and the BMS unhooks the battery
terminating the charge. Voltage rises to the power
supply's set point.
Note that ALL plots from 13.5 to 15.0 push enough
energy into the battery for the BMS to say "halt".
The 13.0 plot produces no such effect.
The discharge plots are similarly interesting.
Note that no matter what voltage of 13.5 or
greater, the battery acquires the same amount
of energy.
At 13.0V, energy imparted is about 1.8 AH,
a small fraction of the otherwise 11 AH full
charge.
From this experiment I deduce that the battery's
BMS considers 13.5 / 4 = 3.35 volts per cell to
be the full-charge target.
I further observed that the when connecting
the discharged battery to a 13.0 volt, 5A
supply . . . the initial charge current rose
to 5 amps! It just didn't stay there very
long. I need to get a multi-channel DAS
up and running so we can see voltage and
currents plotted together.
Nonetheless, I think it reasonable to assert
that fiddling with the voltage regulator on
the Revmaster engine with some hopes of
mitigating damage to a demonstrably FRAGILE
PM alternator is not useful. I have
further thoughts on that issue for a later
post.
Further, these experiments show that for
batteries fitted with an agile BMS, raising
the bus voltage will NOT offer the user
greater access to any un-exploited potential
for chemical energy storage.
Finally, fiddling with the voltage regulator
when substituting a BMS fitted battery into
an SVLA's system is of no benefit. The voltage
regulator can continue to supply ship's needs
while the battery takes care of itself.
I just received some new, A123 cells that I'll
survey for any variation in what we've seen
with the consumer product cells tested so far.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: IS a COM ANTENNA GROUND PLANE NECESSARY |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks for replying Bob. The antenna is a beautiful Rami antenna. I am sure
my friend does NOT want to cut it. He might experiment with additional
ground plane wires, but otherwise leave it as is, not perfect but good enough.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497682#497682
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Ryan <keninalaska(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Revmaster engine with EarthX battery |
Thanks Bob. That does help clear things up.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 7:42 AM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 09:05 AM 8/11/2020, you wrote:
>
> OK. It seems like my "understanding" of battery charging is seriously
> flawed. I thought, for example, that if a partially discharged battery was
> connected to a higher voltage source, the battery would be charged to that
> voltage level. Since the EarthX has a charged, resting voltage of 13.2 -
> 13.3 volts I thought that if it was connected to a 13.5 volt source, it
> would eventually charge the battery. Apparently, none of this is true?
>
>
> As long as you DON'T put silicon 'smarts' between the
> energy source and the battery to be charged.
>
> Those plots I published for stepped increases in
> charging voltage on a single LiFePO4 cell speaks
> to the phenomenon you've cited. This is generally
> true for all the SVLA, Flooded and Gel versions
> of the Lead-Acid technology . . . because our
> vehicular DC power systems EVOLVED around the
> charge/discharge reactions of lead, sulphur, oxygen
> and hydrogen. This convention is 160+ years old.
>
> It also works for the new kids on the block that
> use lithium, iron, phosphorous and oxygen but with
> a big 'gotcha' . . . the differences in voltage
> for these two chemistries keep them from being
> form/fit/function interchangeable.
>
> Our alternators, regulators, light bulbs, legacy
> electronics, etc. etc. were optimized for function
> by the chemistry of the battery-of-choice for
> over a century.
>
> But three LiFePO4 cells stacked gives us a charge
> (bus voltage) of 12.6V and a discharge (alternator-out)
> voltage of about 11.1V. Decidedly incompatible with
> the legacy lead-acid world.
>
> Okay, cells stacked gives us a bus voltage of 16.8 and a
> 14.8V alternator-out voltage. Again . . . not a drop-in
> replacement.
>
> Some folks have decided to offer 4-stack batteries
> with no 'smarts' and which will be charged to
> 3.6 volts per layer . . . a potential that does
> not charge the chemistry to its latent capabilities . . .
> but 'good enough' if the target users are willing
> to accept compromised performance in exchange for weight
> savings.
>
> Further, it turns out that this very energetic
> chemistry comes with some risks. It will produce
> extra-ordinary fault currents for it's size.
> Prolonged deep discharge can seriously injure
> an otherwise good battery. Charging at greater
> than legacy lead-acid voltages will indeed
> 'stuff' more energy into the battery but allowing
> or recommending operations above the legacy
> levels poses system wide risks that may be
> hazardous to hardware. The batteries are at
> greater risk for catastrophic failure to
> to over-charging or hard-charging.
>
> So, BMS enter stage-right:
>
> A judicious collection of transistors and things
> can be hammered into a 'battery management system'
> that will pound our square cornered lithium
> product into a round, lead-acid hole.
>
> Hence, products like EarthX and AeroVoltz
> with BMS system will FUNCTION in the lead-
> acid hole with minimized risks but performance
> compromises.
>
> 'Barefoot' lithium products will also
> function in the lead-acid world but safeguards
> offered by BMS fitted products are the
> user's responsibility.
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IS a COM ANTENNA GROUND PLANE NECESSARY |
At 11:45 AM 8/12/2020, you wrote:
>
>Thanks for replying Bob. The antenna is a beautiful Rami antenna. I am sure
>my friend does NOT want to cut it. He might experiment with additional
>ground plane wires,
Useful experiment . . . pls share observations
> but otherwise leave it as is, not perfect but good enough.
Right on . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Valid test for voltage regulator |
At 09:09 AM 8/12/2020, you wrote:
>I'm the one with the "Scorpion" battery. No BMS.
>Well, I may be overstating the case. It does look like it has a network of
>connections to balance the cells. But there is no facility to
>remove the input voltage.
That comports with other bare-foot lithium
offers I've seen. They bring out taps between
the stacks of cells to allow installation
of either (a) and external balance network
or (2) lithium specific battery chartger that
includes a balancing feature.
>
>
>I'll rig up a way to mount the generator in the lathe this evening,
>and put the regulator in a more realistic test.
Sounds like a plan.
Photo-document your setup and share results!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
Alex,
You need to move this conversation to the AeroElectric-List.
I see that you are presently subscribed.
What kind of engine and ignition system? (your excel spread sheet didn't
come through).
Your task is not difficult but there are a lot of questions
about hardware and manner in which the airplane will be
used.
I don't have the time to do consulting on individual projects
except when the subject matter sorts out details of physics
and practice of interest to the List as a whole.
But there's a bunch of folk on the List with more experience
than I in the fabrication and operation of owner built and
maintained airplanes who would be glad to join and help
move your project along.
This doesn't mean that I won't participate but with
all the irons I have in the fire, I need to tailor
my activities to those where I can help the most.
Tell us more about your project.
Bob . . .
At 01:49 PM 8/12/2020, you wrote:
>Dear Bob,=C2
>
>I am frustrated, feeling like I know nothing.
>The more I read - the more this feeling is inside=C2 me.=C2
>Commercial aviation=C2 experience=C2 now can't help (
>
>I have made load analyses, as you advised
>(attached excel doc) - could you, please, give
>the direction on the primary electrical system?=C2
>still thinking on how to integrate a small
>backup battery (what equipment=C2 should it power,
>as EFIS displays and standby display have their
>own backup batteries), how many buses to use and
>determine what equipment must be powered from exact bus...
>attached=C2 list has ELA, sources list and
>equipment list. ELA will be triple-checked, for sure -=C2
>it was not an easy task to determine load in
>different=C2 phases without experience, but
>exciting and, I believe, everything=C2 will be fine!=C2
>
>My main goal is to create a simple, but
>redundant and reliable system based on hardware
>which friend=C2 has already purchased=C2
>(frustrated regarding alternator=C2 with built-in
>voltage regulator- as read before in the Book it
>is not the best option, but will see ...)=C2 =C2
>=C2
>Could you, please, be so kind to help...?
>
>Kindest regards,
>Alex
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
At 04:03 PM 8/12/2020, you wrote:
>Bob,=C2
>
>thanks a lot for advice - i will create topic.=C2
>Great thanks for support!=C2
Alex,
Like I said . . . too many irons in the fire . . . it
slipped my mind that we'd already opened a List topic
and I published a suggested starting point for your
architecture:
See https://tinyurl.com/y6ku7lbh
List your ideas as to which accessories would
power from each bus in this drawing?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Valid test for voltage regulator |
| From: | "Devid47" <lynchris299(at)gmail.com> |
A voltage regulator is a device that takes in an input voltage and regulates it
down to the voltage that it is rated for.
Being that a voltage regulator passes out a regulated output voltage, the only
test we must do to check a voltage regulator is a voltage test.
We check the voltage input into the voltage regulator and the voltage output from
the regulator.
If we read at the input pin the voltage which we feed into the regulator and read
at the output pin the output voltage which the regulator is rated for, then
we know that the voltage regulator is good. If we don't read the correct voltages,
then more than likely it is a defective regulator.
So we'll now go through specifically how to test a voltage regulator.
Before we get into how to read the voltages with a multimeter, first we'll go over
the pinout of a voltage regulator, so that you'll know which pins to read
voltages from.
As an example, we'll use the popular voltage regulator, the LM7805. Below is the
pinout of the LM7805 voltage regulator:
--------
Complete guide about [url= https://eta-govt.com/sri-lanka-on-arrival-visa-fee-for-indian/]
sri lanka arrival visa fee for Indian[/url] is available.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497723#497723
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Valid test for voltage regulator |
At 04:31 AM 8/13/2020, you wrote:
>
>A voltage regulator is a device that takes in an input voltage and
>regulates it down to the voltage that it is rated for.
>
>Being that a voltage regulator passes out a regulated output
>voltage, the only test we must do to check a voltage regulator is a
>voltage test.
The 'voltage regulator' under discussion is
a rectifier/regulator assembly used in
conjunction with a permanent magnet
alternator. Exemplar schematic attached.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sebastien <cluros(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Valid test for voltage regulator |
Bob you've been had by a spammer. Ignore.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020, 07:36 Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 04:31 AM 8/13/2020, you wrote:
>
>
> A voltage regulator is a device that takes in an input voltage and
> regulates it down to the voltage that it is rated for.
>
> Being that a voltage regulator passes out a regulated output voltage, the
> only test we must do to check a voltage regulator is a voltage test.
>
>
> The 'voltage regulator' under discussion is
> a rectifier/regulator assembly used in
> conjunction with a permanent magnet
> alternator. Exemplar schematic attached.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Valid test for voltage regulator |
Hi Bob,
I'm pretty sure that guy is a spammer. I started to respond, then checked
my history & found only that one post from him, which has a link to who
knows what.
Charlie
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 8:36 AM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 04:31 AM 8/13/2020, you wrote:
>
>
> A voltage regulator is a device that takes in an input voltage and
> regulates it down to the voltage that it is rated for.
>
> Being that a voltage regulator passes out a regulated output voltage, the
> only test we must do to check a voltage regulator is a voltage test.
>
>
> The 'voltage regulator' under discussion is
> a rectifier/regulator assembly used in
> conjunction with a permanent magnet
> alternator. Exemplar schematic attached.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Valid test for voltage regulator |
The email is probably spam, but I still found the diagram useful.I got the
test rig set up last night and ran it with no more load than the meter on
it.=C2- My lathe has a VFD, so I can read the RPM from a digital readout.
=C2- What I got was:
457rpm -> 14.6V623rpm -> 14.64V897rpm -> 15.09V991rpm -> 15.7V
I'll hook a battery or a couple lights to it later today to see if the regu
lator needs a significant current flowing to regulate properly, but it does
n't look to me like this regulator is regulating very well.
d7(at)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Bob,
I'm pretty sure that guy is a spammer. I started to respond, then checked m
y history & found only that one post from him, which has a link to who know
s what.
Charlie
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 8:36 AM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroe
lectric.com> wrote:
At 04:31 AM 8/13/2020, you wrote:
--> AeroElectric-List messageposted by: "Devid47"
A voltage regulator is a device that takes in an input voltage andregulates
it down to the voltage that it is rated for.
Being that a voltage regulator passes out a regulated output voltage, theon
ly test we must do to check a voltage regulator is a voltagetest.
=C2- The 'voltage regulator' under discussion is
=C2- a rectifier/regulator assembly used in
=C2- conjunction with a permanent magnet
=C2- alternator. Exemplar schematic attached.=C2-
=C2- Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: IS a COM ANTENNA GROUND PLANE NECESSARY |
| From: | Finn Lassen <finn.usa(at)gmail.com> |
Using the nanoVNA, I played with an old homemade comm antenna, 1/4
sticking up, three "ground plane" wires 120 degrees apart and bent downward.
It was amazing to me how the impedance and thus SWR changed with bending
the ground plane wires up or down a tiny bit.
So, it's not just about adding ground plane wires, but also about how
they slope down.
Of course, I don't know what impedance-matching network may be hiding in
the RAMI antenna..
Finn
On 8/12/2020 11:14 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> The feedpoint impedance of an un-compensated
> 1/4 wave vertical is on the order of 30 ohms
> at resonance . . . so the BEST expected SWR
> over the range of interest would be about what
> you're seeing 1.20:1
---
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: IS a COM ANTENNA GROUND PLANE NECESSARY |
At 09:21 AM 8/13/2020, you wrote:
>
>Using the nanoVNA, I played with an old homemade comm antenna,
>1/4 sticking up, three "ground plane" wires 120 degrees apart and
>bent downward.
>
>It was amazing to me how the impedance and thus SWR changed with bending
>the ground plane wires up or down a tiny bit.
Yes!
>So, it's not just about adding ground plane wires, but also about
>how they slope down.
Uhhh . . . yeah . . . mostly about the slope.
Imagine if you will, a 1/4 wave vertical with ONE
ground plane 'radial' except instead of radiating
out from the base, it is oriented straight down.
It's easy you see that you now have a 1/2 wave
dipole with an expected center point impedance
on the order of 70 ohms . . . not exactly a 1:1
but not terribly off either.
Going to the other extreme, consider the 1/4 wave
radiator in the middle of an solid, 1/4 wave radius
ground plane. Now you've got a feed point impedance on the order
of 35 ohms. Again, not 1:1 for 50 ohm coax but
not 'bad'.
Now, begin to deform the ground plane down from
the center in a cone shape. The feed point impedance
begins to rise. If taken to the limit of
deformation (90 degrees), you're now back
to a 1/2 wave dipole.
It follows that you can 'tune' swr by picking
a droop angle that optimizes your goal of
achieving a 50 ohm feed point.
A good example for designing this antenna
can be found here:
https://tinyurl.com/ybxfxuup
Try plugging in various values for center
frequency and velocity factor. Did you know
that a radiator in free space has a velocity
factor? An antenna with zero diameter wire
has a velocity factor of 1.0
Obviously, zero diameter wire doesn't exist
so fine . . . we'll make it a stainless steel
rod of some structurally adequate size.
Figure 13-6 (attached) of the 'Connection speaks to
this phenomenon. The calculator linked above
takes this physics into account.
In practice, few folks concern themselves
with VF . . . they just trim for desired
results with an SWR/VNA meter.
Note also that the calculator adds a
'lengthening factor' of 0.28 to the
radials. This will have the effect of
making them slightly inductive at the
frequency of interest.
Bottom line is that with judicious tweaking
of the lengths and angles, one can handily
achieve a 1.0:1 match at the antenna feed
point.
Adding more radials up to and including
achievement of a solid conical plane will
have some effect but not nearly so profound
as observed with the first four radials plus some
judicious droop.
Unfortunately we don't have all
those options on airplanes . . . but in
the final analysis, pretty-good is good-enough.
Isn't that VNA a marvelous tool?
>Of course, I don't know what impedance-matching network may be
>hiding in the RAMI antenna..
Some years ago, a reader sent me a schematic
of a 2-component, LC network that was thought
to be included in the base of a contemporary
VHF Comm antenna . . . I think it was a RAMI.
Couldn't put eyes on it at the moment.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Valid test for voltage regulator |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Yes, Devid47 is a spammer.
The link at the bottom of his post indicates that he is from Sri Lanka.
His post was plagiarized from this website:
http://www.learningaboutelectronics.com/Articles/How-to-test-a-voltage-regulator
You can go there to read the whole article about testing the LM7805 if interested.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497732#497732
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Valid test for voltage regulator |
At 09:20 AM 8/13/2020, you wrote:
>The email is probably spam, but I still found the diagram useful.
>I got the test rig set up last night and ran it with no more load
>than the meter on it. My lathe has a VFD, so I can read the RPM
>from a digital readout. What I got was:
>
>457rpm -> 14.6V
>623rpm -> 14.64V
>897rpm -> 15.09V
>991rpm -> 15.7V
>
>I'll hook a battery or a couple lights to it later today to see if
>the regulator needs a significant current flowing to regulate
>properly, but it doesn't look to me like this regulator is
>regulating very well.
Contemporary PM R/R needs a load to be optimally accurate/stable.
How do the rpms in your test data relate to engine rpms in
operation?
It will settle down with a load.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Valid test for voltage regulator |
The engine idles around 650.=C2- Max RPM is 3,000.
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
At 09:20 AM 8/13/2020, you wrote:
The email is probably spam, butI still found the diagram useful.
I got the test rig set up last night and ran it with no more load thanthe m
eter on it.=C2- My lathe has a VFD, so I can read the RPM from adigital r
eadout.=C2- What I got was:
457rpm -> 14.6V
623rpm -> 14.64V
897rpm -> 15.09V
991rpm -> 15.7V
I'll hook a battery or a couple lights to it later today to see if theregul
ator needs a significant current flowing to regulate properly, butit doesn'
t look to me like this regulator is regulating verywell.
=C2- Contemporary PM R/R needs a load to be optimallyaccurate/stable.
=C2- How do the rpms in your test data relate to engine rpms in
=C2- operation?
=C2- It will settle down with a load.
=C2- Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Valid test for voltage regulator |
Is the alternator concentric on the crank (VW style), or belt driven? If
belt, what's the *alternator* rpm range?
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 1:55 PM Ernest Christley wrote:
> The engine idles around 650. Max RPM is 3,000.
>
> nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
>
> At 09:20 AM 8/13/2020, you wrote:
>
> The email is probably spam, but I still found the diagram useful.
> I got the test rig set up last night and ran it with no more load than the
> meter on it. My lathe has a VFD, so I can read the RPM from a digital
> readout. What I got was:
>
> 457rpm -> 14.6V
> 623rpm -> 14.64V
> 897rpm -> 15.09V
> 991rpm -> 15.7V
>
> I'll hook a battery or a couple lights to it later today to see if the
> regulator needs a significant current flowing to regulate properly, but it
> doesn't look to me like this regulator is regulating very well.
>
>
> Contemporary PM R/R needs a load to be optimally accurate/stable.
> How do the rpms in your test data relate to engine rpms in
> operation?
>
> It will settle down with a load.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Valid test for voltage regulator |
It's concentric. Bolts up in place of the harmonic dampener on a Corvair.
d7(at)gmail.com> wrote:
Is the alternator concentric on the crank (VW style), or belt driven? If b
elt, what's the *alternator* rpm range?
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 1:55 PM Ernest Christley wrote
:
The engine idles around 650.=C2- Max RPM is 3,000.
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
At 09:20 AM 8/13/2020, you wrote:
The email is probably spam, butI still found the diagram useful.
I got the test rig set up last night and ran it with no more load thanthe m
eter on it.=C2- My lathe has a VFD, so I can read the RPM from adigital r
eadout.=C2- What I got was:
457rpm -> 14.6V
623rpm -> 14.64V
897rpm -> 15.09V
991rpm -> 15.7V
I'll hook a battery or a couple lights to it later today to see if theregul
ator needs a significant current flowing to regulate properly, butit doesn'
t look to me like this regulator is regulating verywell.
=C2- Contemporary PM R/R needs a load to be optimallyaccurate/stable.
=C2- How do the rpms in your test data relate to engine rpms in
=C2- operation?
=C2- It will settle down with a load.
=C2- Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-16 with a sprinkling of Z-12...help? |
| From: | "meat_ball" <arjayefem(at)fastmail.net> |
user9253 wrote:
> Going with one of Bob's proven wiring diagrams is a good decision.
> Try ExpressPCB software for drawing wiring diagrams.
> https://www.expresspcb.com/expresspcb-classic-pcb-layout-software/#wow-modal-id-1
> It is just about the easiest CAD program to learn.
> It is a two part program. Express.sch is for drawing a schematic.
> Express.pcb is for designing printed circuit boards.
I've got it mostly figured out using ExpressPCB. Thanks for the suggestion, Joe!!
I have one question concerning the external alternator. It has the attached photo
in the manual and it says "any hot lead with key switched on." Since I won't
have a key, where should I attach this lead? By the way, i've updated my
first post with the electronically produced schematic so hopefully it will be
easier to read. You can see the black lead of the voltage regulator sitting in
nowhere land toward the bottom.
Thanks all.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497741#497741
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/532dce49_2ab2_4844_8aa9_c5b9f57bdaa4png_180.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | ACK E-01 ELT SDR (warning: Rant mode ON) |
During my Condition Inspection of my (purchased) RV-6, I prepared to check
the ELT batteries for date/operation. The builder had mounted the ELT
behind the passenger seat in the baggage compartment, with the antenna
directly above just inside the back glass. Not ideal for packing luggage,
but certainly easy access for service (I thought).
I leaned over the seats and flipped open the two latches, and picked up the
ELT to disconnect the coax & 'phone wire' that runs to the panel mounted
control. No issue with the coax. But the phone wire is *hard wired* into
the top of the ELT by the mfgr. To compound matters, the builder, in his
infinite wisdom, drilled a hole in the baggage floor & snaked the cable
through corrugated tubing that disappears into the inaccessible space under
the baggage compartment. So now the 'portable' ELT, complete with its
attached portable whip, is portable to a distance of about 2" above the
floor of the baggage compartment.
I get it that not all builders have good sense, and all of us have 'bad
decision days', but how could a mfgr do something this stupid, and I know
it's pointless to ask, but how could the FAA be so stupid as to certify the
thing?
Yes, I realize that the builder could have left a 2-foot service loop
hanging out with the splice in the baggage compartment, but IT'S AN
E(mergency)LT. In an actual emergency, finding a latch on the case would be
a lot simpler and quicker than finding the splice point in the cable.
Does filing a Service Difficulty Report on a 20 year old product make any
sense?
OK, rant mode off; back to your regularly scheduled programming.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hal Benjamin <halbenjamin101(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ACK E-01 ELT SDR (warning: Rant mode ON) |
Hi Charlie,
Sounds like it=99s time to cut the cord, buy a couple of crimp on phon
e connectors and be done with it. I too find things that could have been don
e differently to make maintenance easier, but then again again I built it.
Hal Benjamin
RV4, Flying
Sent from my iPad
> On Aug 13, 2020, at 4:20 PM, Charlie England wrote:
>
> =EF=BB
> During my Condition Inspection of my (purchased) RV-6, I prepared to check
the ELT batteries for date/operation. The builder had mounted the ELT behin
d the passenger seat in the baggage compartment, with the antenna directly a
bove just inside the back glass. Not ideal for packing luggage, but certainl
y easy access for service (I thought).
>
> I leaned over the seats and flipped open the two latches, and picked up th
e ELT to disconnect the coax & 'phone wire' that runs to the panel mounted c
ontrol. No issue with the coax. But the phone wire is *hard wired* into the t
op of the ELT by the mfgr. To compound matters, the builder, in his infinite
wisdom, drilled a hole in the baggage floor & snaked the cable through corr
ugated tubing that disappears into the inaccessible space under the baggage c
ompartment. So now the 'portable' ELT, complete with its attached portable w
hip, is portable to a distance of about 2" above the floor of the baggage co
mpartment.
>
> I get it that not all builders have good sense, and all of us have 'bad de
cision days', but how could a mfgr do something this stupid, and I know it's
pointless to ask, but how could the FAA be so stupid as to certify the thin
g?
>
> Yes, I realize that the builder could have left a 2-foot service loop hang
ing out with the splice in the baggage compartment, but IT'S AN E(mergency)L
T. In an actual emergency, finding a latch on the case would be a lot simple
r and quicker than finding the splice point in the cable.
>
> Does filing a Service Difficulty Report on a 20 year old product make any s
ense?
>
> OK, rant mode off; back to your regularly scheduled programming.
>
> Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: ACK E-01 ELT SDR (warning: Rant mode ON) |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
I hear you, but there is zero slack. I was able to pivot it out of its
holder, and rotate it enough to get to all 4 of the battery screws, but
I seriously doubt that I'd have enough left on each end of the cut to
strip & crimp both ends.
As the subject line says, this is more of a rant than a call for help.
:-) I'm impressed almost daily by 'aircraft quality'.
The next time I need to pull up the seat pans, I'll pull some slack down
from the panel and back to ELT location.
Charlie
On 8/13/2020 5:48 PM, Hal Benjamin wrote:
> Hi Charlie,
>
> Sounds like its time to cut the cord, buy a couple of crimp on phone
> connectors and be done with it. I too find things that could have been
> done differently to make maintenance easier, but then again again I
> built it.
>
> Hal Benjamin
> RV4, Flying
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Aug 13, 2020, at 4:20 PM, Charlie England
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> During my Condition Inspection of my (purchased) RV-6, I prepared to
>> check the ELT batteries for date/operation. The builder had mounted
>> the ELT behind the passenger seat in the baggage compartment, with
>> the antenna directlyabove just inside the back glass. Not ideal for
>> packing luggage, but certainly easy access for service (I thought).
>>
>> I leaned over the seats and flipped open the two latches, and picked
>> up the ELT to disconnect the coax & 'phone wire' that runs to the
>> panel mounted control. No issue with the coax. But the phone wire is
>> *hard wired* into the top of the ELT by the mfgr. To compound
>> matters, the builder, in his infinitewisdom, drilled a hole in the
>> baggage floor & snaked the cable through corrugatedtubing that
>> disappears into the inaccessible space under the baggage compartment.
>> So now the 'portable' ELT, complete with its attached portable whip,
>> is portable to a distance of about 2" above the floor of the baggage
>> compartment.
>>
>> I get it that not all builders have good sense, and all of us have
>> 'bad decision days', but how could a mfgr do something this stupid,
>> and I know it's pointless to ask, but how could the FAA be so stupid
>> as to certify the thing?
>>
>> Yes, I realize that the builder could have left a 2-foot service loop
>> hanging out with the splice in the baggage compartment, but IT'S AN
>> E(mergency)LT. In an actual emergency, finding a latch on the case
>> would be a lot simpler and quicker than finding the splice point in
>> the cable.
>>
>> Does filing a Service Difficulty Report on a 20 year old product make
>> any sense?
>>
>> OK, rant mode off; back to your regularly scheduled programming.
>>
>> Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-16 with a sprinkling of Z-12...help? |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
The black wire both enables the regulator output and provides voltage sensing.
Connect it to the main power bus through both a 3 amp fuse and a switch.
The switch is required to shut off the regulator in case of smoke or fire.
Shutting off the battery contactor will not shut down an alternator that is already
running.
Mount the regulator to an aluminum surface with heat conductive paste.
Provide forced air cooling if possible.
If the regulator ever fails, consider buying part number AM101406,or
MIA881279, or JDR1406 on eBay for as little as $17.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497749#497749
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-16 with a sprinkling of Z-12...help? |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Ground wires should be the same size as the positive wire. Use 12 AWG.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497750#497750
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Gurley" <rngurley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
Bob -
For an RV 10 with a rear battery, I would like a rear ground bus in addition
to a firewall ground bus. Is it OK to run a negative wire from the battery
to the rear ground bus and then forward to the firewall ground buss?
Thank you
Dick
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2020 9:54 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring
At 09:57 AM 7/23/2020, you wrote:
Good day Dear Mr.Nuckolls,
First, i really happy that i've met your book and web site with plenty of
extra useful information.I am aircraft maintenance engineer (mostly Boeing
type rated), have practical and theoretical skills. but realized that need
some more theoretical researches for better elec system knowledge.
Those fundamentals will serve you well in your
new aviation endeavors. Your sense of craftsmanship
and knowledge of 'how the other guys do it' will
be useful.
Recently friend of mine asked me to help with his RV-10 electrical and
avionics hookup. Most of works are done except all wiring work. I spent many
hours doing research and stuck...we have perhaps unusual config with one
regular battery(RG-25XC)with Batteryminder charging kit BM-AIK2A, just one
primary alternator Plane Power 99-1012 with built-in voltage regulator
(unfortunately) and small cmart backup battery TCW IBBA-12v-6AH. Ignition -
Champion slick magnetos (6393 and 6350) , lefthand one with SS1001 booster.
You don't mention how this airplane will be used.
Day VFR, Day/Nite VFR, 'hard' IFR, extended flight
over unfriendly terrain? What avionics are anticipated?
Which devices will exploit the back-up battery?
Despite I am professional avionic I am really stuck and frustrated in
myself...
You've come to the right place. I've taken the liberty
of signing you up as a participant on the AeroElectric-List.
We are a 'members only' consortium of aviation enthusiasts with
broad range of experience and skills. We strive for elegant
solutions based on good science.
When you receive the invitation to join us, just respond in
the affirmative and you'll be 'plugged in' to one of the
most comprehensive electrical/avionics communities on the
'net'.
Could you please, advise where can i find help with backbone elec system
architecture and etc...guys want to fly in couple of months))))
We're pleased to help. Tell us more about the project.
At firsts blush, your architecture requirements may
be exceedingly simple. Stand alone magnetos. Simple
one battery/one alternator configuration not unlike
hundreds of thousands of type certificated aircraft
that have flown successfully for a century. The
greatest difference will be the lack of an 'avionics
bus' and associated master switch. That concept was
hatched with poor understanding of then-brand-new
solid state avionics. The value of the avionics master
was limited from the beginning then and has no
value today.
Based on what we know now, your shared details may
prompt further suggestions. I've posted a 'first
pass on an architecture we're evolving here
on the AeroElectric-List. It shows an endurance
bus (common to single alternator designs), battery
bus and a brown-out booster. You may not need
any of these things we'll help you figure it out.
See: https://tinyurl.com/y6ku7lbh
Thank you again for your great work and support of aviation community!
You're most welcome my friend . . . it's what we do
here.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
At 01:13 PM 8/14/2020, you wrote:
>Bob '
>
>For an RV 10 with a rear battery, I would like a
>rear ground bus in addition to a firewall ground
>bus. Is it OK to run a negative wire from the
>battery to the rear ground bus and then forward to the firewall ground
buss?
>
>Thank you
>
>Dick
Not necessary. Ground batteries locally to structure
https://tinyurl.com/n9rgrg8
https://tinyurl.com/y5c8qejs
https://tinyurl.com/y3chtcmh
Add some ground studs to any fabricated
brackets utilized in grounding batteries
to accommodate aft grounds.
Install firewall ground bus normally.
Be sure to included crankcase to thru-
bolt braided strap or 2AWG welding
cable.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: ACK E-01 ELT SDR (warning: Rant mode ON) |
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
I mounted the my ACK unit behind the baggage bulkhead along with the
antenna. Didn't really consider the portable aspect. There is a
generous service loop in the phone wire (which I think was more than
long enough to reach the panel for the remote piece.
Bill "just sharing since I'm not flying today" Watson
On 8/13/2020 4:05 PM, Charlie England wrote:
> During my Condition Inspection of my (purchased) RV-6, I prepared to
> check the ELT batteries for date/operation. The builder had mounted
> the ELT behind the passenger seat in the baggage compartment, with the
> antenna directlyabove just inside the back glass. Not ideal for
> packing luggage, but certainly easy access for service (I thought).
>
> I leaned over the seats and flipped open the two latches, and picked
> up the ELT to disconnect the coax & 'phone wire' that runs to the
> panel mounted control. No issue with the coax. But the phone wire is
> *hard wired* into the top of the ELT by the mfgr. To compound matters,
> the builder, in his infinitewisdom, drilled a hole in the baggage
> floor & snaked the cable through corrugatedtubing that disappears
> into the inaccessible space under the baggage compartment. So now the
> 'portable' ELT, complete with its attached portable whip, is portable
> to a distance of about 2" above the floor of the baggage compartment.
>
> I get it that not all builders have good sense, and all of us have
> 'bad decision days', but how could a mfgr do something this stupid,
> and I know it's pointless to ask, but how could the FAA be so stupid
> as to certify the thing?
>
> Yes, I realize that the builder could have left a 2-foot service loop
> hanging out with the splice in the baggage compartment, but IT'S AN
> E(mergency)LT. In an actual emergency, finding a latch on the case
> would be a lot simpler and quicker than finding the splice point in
> the cable.
>
> Does filing a Service Difficulty Report on a 20 year old product make
> any sense?
>
> OK, rant mode off; back to your regularly scheduled programming.
>
> Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: ACK E-01 ELT SDR (warning: Rant mode ON) |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Yes, and that service loop got permanently installed, through a conduit in
the nonremoveable floor of the baggage compartment=2E The generous service
loop should have been a removable cable=2E
=81=A3Sent from BlueMail
=8B
On Aug 15, 2020, 9:22 PM, at 9:22 PM, Bill Watson wrote:
>I mounted the my ACK unit behind the baggage bulkhead
along with the
>antenna=2E Didn't really consider the portable aspect=2E
=C2- There is a
>generous service loop in the phone wire (which I think
was more than
>long enough to reach the panel for the remote piece=2E
>
>B
ill "just sharing since I'm not flying today" Watson
>
>On 8/13/2020 4:05 P
M, Charlie England wrote:
>> During my Condition Inspection of my (purchase
d) RV-6, I prepared to
>> check the ELT batteries for date/operation=2E Th
e builder had mounted
>> the ELT behind the passenger seat in the baggage
compartment, with
>the
>> antenna directly=C2-above just inside the back
glass=2E Not ideal for
>> packing luggage, but certainly easy access for
service (I thought)=2E
>>
>> I leaned over the seats and flipped open the t
wo latches, and picked
>> up the ELT to disconnect the coax & 'phone wire'
that runs to the
>> panel mounted control=2E No issue with the coax=2E Bu
t the phone wire is
>> *hard wired* into the top of the ELT by the mfgr=2E
To compound
>matters,
>> the builder, in his infinite=C2-wisdom, drille
d a hole in the baggage
>> floor & snaked the cable through corrugated=C2
-tubing that disappears
>> into the inaccessible space under the baggage
compartment=2E So now the
>
>> 'portable' ELT, complete with its attached
portable whip, is portable
>
>> to a distance of about 2" above the floor o
f the baggage compartment=2E
>>
>> I get it that not all builders have good
sense, and all of us have
>> 'bad decision days', but how could a mfgr do
something this stupid,
>> and I know it's pointless to ask, but how could
the FAA be so stupid
>> as to certify the thing?
>>
>> Yes, I realize tha
t the builder could have left a 2-foot service loop
>
>> hanging out with t
he splice in the baggage compartment, but IT'S AN
>> E(mergency)LT=2E In a
n actual emergency, finding a latch on the case
>> would be a lot simpler
and quicker than finding the splice point in
>> the cable=2E
>>
>> Does fi
ling a Service Difficulty Report on a 20 year old product make
>
>> any sen
se?
>>
>> OK, rant mode off; back to your regularly scheduled programming
=2E
>>
>> Charlie
>
>
>--
>This email has been checked for viruses by
Avast antivirus software=2E
>https://www=2Eavast=2Ecom/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Official AeroElectric-List Usage Guidelines |
| From: | "Gerald Cruz" <excellentdigitizing(at)yandex.com> |
Your article is extremely helpful exceptionally fascinating subject i am looking that sort of post thank for imparting to us keep it up. (https://www.ohmydt.com)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497782#497782
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Daniell <wdaniell.longport(at)gmail.com> |
I would be grateful for any ideas on the following:
I have a rotax with a Z16. It has 250 hours from new.
My dynon skyview has been completely RF silent up today when during the
flight i had quite a significant crackle that rose and fell with RPM. The
crackle was lower at lower rpm. Once back on the ground i discovered that
the crackle went when I switch off one mag. And when I switched off mag
the other the engine coughed as if with intermittent spark.
I have recently fitted a new prop and took the top plugs out to facilitate
rotation of the prop but otherwise i have not fiddled with the ignition
system.
I am assume that i have some kind of issue with the HT system.
I have been advised that rotax ignition modules rarely suffer intermittent
faults - is this correct?
I have also been advised to examine the Plug caps and "renew" the
connection between HT lead and plug cap cutting off 1/8 of the HT lead.
Does anyone have any other suggestions?
Thanks
Will
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Pengilly" <Peter(at)sportingaero.com> |
| Subject: | RE: headset crackle |
Check your headset sockets are tight and have the insulation washers fitted.
Peter
I would be grateful for any ideas on the following:
I have a rotax with a Z16. It has 250 hours from new.
My dynon skyview has been completely RF silent up today when during the
flight i had quite a significant crackle that rose and fell with RPM. The
crackle was lower at lower rpm. Once back on the ground i discovered that
the crackle went when I switch off one mag. And when I switched off mag the
other the engine coughed as if with intermittent spark.
I have recently fitted a new prop and took the top plugs out to facilitate
rotation of the prop but otherwise i have not fiddled with the ignition
system.
I am assume that i have some kind of issue with the HT system.
I have been advised that rotax ignition modules rarely suffer intermittent
faults - is this correct?
I have also been advised to examine the Plug caps and "renew" the connection
between HT lead and plug cap cutting off 1/8 of the HT lead.
Does anyone have any other suggestions?
Thanks
Will
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: headset crackle |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Try new spark plugs?
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497787#497787
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Daniell <wdaniell.longport(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: headset crackle |
Yes Joe thats a good idea
Thanks
William Daniell
+1 786 878 0246
On Sun, Aug 16, 2020, 20:07 user9253 wrote:
>
> Try new spark plugs?
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497787#497787
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "airknot" <airkbp(at)gmail.com> |
Dear Matronics Society!
First - I am extremely happy to meet all of you.
Guys, hope for your kind help in this complicated task.
GENERAL CONFIG: IFR flights
Power sources config:
1 - alternator 60 A with internal voltage regulator (Plane Power AL12-EI60 (99-1012))
2 main battery 24 Ah (Concorde RG-25XC)
3 backup smart battery (TCW IBBS-12V-6AH) max cont load 8 A, intermittent 12
A
Engine: Lycoming IO-540-D4A5
Ignition: standard Champion SLICK MAGNETOs 6393 (LH) and 6350(RH) plus SlickStart
module S1001 for one magneto(left) for better start. Keyed ignition switch
ACS A-510-2K.
Avionics Dynon SkyView HDX complex with 2 monitors (+2 backup batteries for displays)
and respective subsystems, except comm.
Communication Garmin GMA245 with GTR 225A
Backup navigation - Garmin G5 system (+ backup battery).
I am looking for reliable and simple enough system
Bob was extremely kind to me and helped with initial idea of Primary Electric system
for RV-10.
Wiring: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lbioIrf2NMAUnkgLyg7kzthyvVueMHyV/view?usp=sharing
I have done ELA but found that with 60A alternator i have load that exceeds alt
capacity (about 65 A total current draw in max config, that is practically unrealistic
situation, but ...). So, now i will double-check ELA, and then will
think what to do...
Here is ELA with power sources assessment and List of equipment:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lbioIrf2NMAUnkgLyg7kzthyvVueMHyV/view?usp=sharing
Regarding aux battery - we will use TCW IBBS-12V-6Ah, that can continuously supply
8 Amps when sensing main bus (or another bus, depending on Primary elec system
logic) voltage drop below 11 VDC.
My idea was to create Essential bus to power from this TCW backup battery in case
of emergency.
Quote from TCW Tech Support letter regarding backup battery:
The pass-thru pins are an input that you connect to the main bus. They bring power
into the IBBS which is automatically passed through to the outputs. During
normal operation, the power from the aircraft bus comes into pins 6,7,8 and is
passed out to pins 12-15, this allows the equipment connected to pins 12-15
operate normally. Then if there is a condition on the main bus where the voltage
falls below 11 volts, the IBBD internal battery is connected to pins 12-15
to run the essential equipment. No power is back fed to the main bus.
If someone has experience in such smart battery utilization - please, share, its
very interesting
I am kindly asking for help and any kind of assistance and guidance for Primary
Electrical System architecture calculations and building. Without you at this
stage I do not see the way to successfully build RV10..
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497797#497797
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Office 365 to Office 365/live Exchange server migration |
| From: | "Rwatt123" <rosewatt.work(at)gmail.com> |
Most of the users weren't able to find the right solution to perform Office
365 to Office 365/Live Exchange server. EdbMails Office 365 migration tool is
the one whic provides the smoothest experience to the end users. All your mailboxes
will be migrated to the target server without any hassle.
Few highlights of the software:
Secure and Safe migration
Security is the most complex thing during the migration process. EdbMails software
provides the full security for the data during migration and migrates the
complete data to the target server without any modification in the source data
by maintaining the original source folder structure intact. There is no size
limitation for the mailbox, you can migrate large mailboxes safely to your target
server.
Batch or Individual migration
Office 365 migration supports the individual as well as batch wise mailbox migration.
No need to migrate entire mailbox data. You can migrate specific data to
the target server using filters.
Easy handling of Office 365 throttling
EdbMails Office 365 migration easily handles the Office 365 throttling and connection
interruption during migration.
Incremental Office 365 Migration
EdbMails Office 365 migration supports incremental migration. With this feature
you can migrate only newly created items to the target server during consecutive
migrations on the same system and avoid duplicate items migration on the target
server.
Know More: https://www.edbmails.com/pages/office-365-migration-tool.html
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497803#497803
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris" <toaster73(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
There are some nice schematics for the RV-14 or RV-12 that certainly can help you
visualize what you may want for the RV-10. GO to this link:
https://www.vansaircraft.com/downloads/
-Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com <owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com>
On Behalf Of airknot
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2020 7:10 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring
Dear Matronics Society!
First - I am extremely happy to meet all of you.
Guys, hope for your kind help in this complicated task.
GENERAL CONFIG: IFR flights
Power sources config:
1 - alternator 60 A with internal voltage regulator (Plane Power AL12-EI60 (99-1012))
2 main battery 24 Ah (Concorde RG-25XC)
3 backup smart battery (TCW IBBS-12V-6AH) max cont load 8 A, intermittent 12
A
Engine: Lycoming IO-540-D4A5
Ignition: standard Champion SLICK MAGNETOs 6393 (LH) and 6350(RH) plus SlickStart
module S1001 for one magneto(left) for better start. Keyed ignition switch
ACS A-510-2K.
Avionics Dynon SkyView HDX complex with 2 monitors (+2 backup batteries for displays)
and respective subsystems, except comm.
Communication Garmin GMA245 with GTR 225A Backup navigation - Garmin G5 system
(+ backup battery).
I am looking for reliable and simple enough system
Bob was extremely kind to me and helped with initial idea of Primary Electric system
for RV-10.
Wiring: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lbioIrf2NMAUnkgLyg7kzthyvVueMHyV/view?usp=sharing
I have done ELA but found that with 60A alternator i have load that exceeds alt
capacity (about 65 A total current draw in max config, that is practically unrealistic
situation, but ...). So, now i will double-check ELA, and then will
think what to do...
Here is ELA with power sources assessment and List of equipment:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lbioIrf2NMAUnkgLyg7kzthyvVueMHyV/view?usp=sharing
Regarding aux battery - we will use TCW IBBS-12V-6Ah, that can continuously supply
8 Amps when sensing main bus (or another bus, depending on Primary elec system
logic) voltage drop below 11 VDC.
My idea was to create Essential bus to power from this TCW backup battery in case
of emergency.
Quote from TCW Tech Support letter regarding backup battery:
The pass-thru pins are an input that you connect to the main bus. They bring power
into the IBBS which is automatically passed through to the outputs. During
normal operation, the power from the aircraft bus comes into pins 6,7,8 and is
passed out to pins 12-15, this allows the equipment connected to pins 12-15
operate normally. Then if there is a condition on the main bus where the voltage
falls below 11 volts, the IBBD internal battery is connected to pins 12-15
to run the essential equipment. No power is back fed to the main bus.
If someone has experience in such smart battery utilization - please, share, its
very interesting
I am kindly asking for help and any kind of assistance and guidance for Primary
Electrical System architecture calculations and building. Without you at this
stage I do not see the way to successfully build RV10..
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497797#497797
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 6:17 AM airknot wrote:
>
> Dear Matronics Society!
>
> First - I am extremely happy to meet all of you.
> Guys, hope for your kind help in this complicated task.
> GENERAL CONFIG: IFR flights
> Power sources config:
> 1 - alternator 60 A with internal voltage regulator (Plane Power AL12-EI6
0
> (99-1012))
> 2 =93 main battery 24 Ah (Concorde RG-25XC)
> 3 =93 backup smart battery (TCW IBBS-12V-6AH) =93 max cont lo
ad 8 A,
> intermittent 12 A
> Engine: Lycoming IO-540-D4A5
> Ignition: standard Champion SLICK MAGNETOs 6393 (LH) and 6350(RH) plus
> SlickStart module S1001 for one magneto(left) for better start. Keyed
> ignition switch =93 ACS A-510-2K.
> Avionics =93 Dynon SkyView HDX complex with 2 monitors (+2 backup b
atteries
> for displays) and respective subsystems, except comm.
> Communication =93 Garmin GMA245 with GTR 225A
> Backup navigation - Garmin G5 system (+ backup battery).
> I am looking for reliable and simple enough system
>
> Bob was extremely kind to me and helped with initial idea of Primary
> Electric system for RV-10.
> Wiring:
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lbioIrf2NMAUnkgLyg7kzthyvVueMHyV/view?us
p=sharing
>
> I have done ELA but found that with 60A alternator i have load that
> exceeds alt capacity (about 65 A total current draw in max config, that i
s
> practically unrealistic situation, but ...). So, now i will double-check
> ELA, and then will think what to do...
>
> Here is ELA with power sources assessment and List of equipment:
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lbioIrf2NMAUnkgLyg7kzthyvVueMHyV/view?us
p=sharing
>
> Regarding aux battery - we will use TCW IBBS-12V-6Ah, that can
> continuously supply 8 Amps when sensing main bus (or another bus, dependi
ng
> on Primary elec system logic) voltage drop below 11 VDC.
> My idea was to create Essential bus to power from this TCW backup battery
> in case of emergency.
>
> Quote from TCW Tech Support letter regarding backup battery:
> The pass-thru pins are an input that you connect to the main bus. They
> bring power into the IBBS which is automatically passed through to the
> outputs. During normal operation, the power from the aircraft bus comes
> into pins 6,7,8 and is passed out to pins 12-15, this allows the equipmen
t
> connected to pins 12-15 operate normally. Then if there is a condition on
> the main bus where the voltage falls below 11 volts, the IBBD internal
> battery is connected to pins 12-15 to run the essential equipment. No pow
er
> is back fed to the main bus.
>
> If someone has experience in such smart battery utilization - please,
> share, it=99s very interesting
>
> I am kindly asking for help and any kind of assistance and guidance for
> Primary Electrical System architecture calculations and building. Without
> you at this stage I do not see the way to successfully build RV10..
>
>
> What's missing from your loads list above? I only see about 20A,
absolutely worst case, in that list (unless that Dynon stuff is hideously
inefficient). Have you done a spreadsheet, or even just a list, with every
load item with columns showing continuous and peak loads for each device,
and if applicable, an intermittent duty column? For example, the
Slickstart, and flaps, would be intermittent duty, & need not be part of
the continuous load calcs. Comm would have some very low consumption
(likely under an amp) except when transmitting. etc etc
Be aware that many (most?) devices spec a circuit protection device that's
a lot larger than continuous draw, and somewhat larger than even peak
inrush current. In some cases, you might need to actually power up the
device to determine its actual continuous & peak draw; some mfgrs don't
bother to include that data.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Daniell <wdaniell.longport(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: headset crackle |
Mmm not sure....before there was no crackle with the audio and the audio
system is unchanged.
The plane is composite and the jacks are isolated. But ill check that.
Its an easy task.
Thanks
William Daniell
+1 786 878 0246
On Sun, Aug 16, 2020, 18:06 Peter Pengilly wrote:
> Check your headset sockets are tight and have the insulation washers
> fitted.
>
>
> Peter
>
>
> I would be grateful for any ideas on the following:
>
>
> I have a rotax with a Z16. It has 250 hours from new.
>
>
> My dynon skyview has been completely RF silent up today when during the
> flight i had quite a significant crackle that rose and fell with RPM. The
> crackle was lower at lower rpm. Once back on the ground i discovered that
> the crackle went when I switch off one mag. And when I switched off mag
> the other the engine coughed as if with intermittent spark.
>
>
> I have recently fitted a new prop and took the top plugs out to facilitate
> rotation of the prop but otherwise i have not fiddled with the ignition
> system.
>
>
> I am assume that i have some kind of issue with the HT system.
>
>
> I have been advised that rotax ignition modules rarely suffer intermittent
> faults - is this correct?
>
>
> I have also been advised to examine the Plug caps and "renew" the
> connection between HT lead and plug cap cutting off 1/8 of the HT lead.
>
>
> Does anyone have any other suggestions?
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Will
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "airknot" <airkbp(at)gmail.com> |
toaster73(at)embarqmail.c wrote:
> There are some nice schematics for the RV-14 or RV-12 that certainly can help
you visualize what you may want for the RV-10. GO to this link:
> https://www.vansaircraft.com/downloads/
>
>
> -Chris
>
> --
Thank you, Chris, those wiring schemes are great, but unfortunately they use plenty
of some Power Circuit Boards (perheps supplied by VANS with kits).. but plan
to use some elemets in avionics hookup
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497807#497807
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "airknot" <airkbp(at)gmail.com> |
[/quote]What's missing from your loads list above?I only see about 20A, absolutely
worst case, in that list (unless that Dynon stuff is hideously inefficient).
Have you done a spreadsheet, or even just a list, with every load item with
columns showing continuous and peak loads for each device, and if applicable,
an intermittent duty column? For example, the Slickstart, and flaps, would
be intermittent duty, & need not be part of the continuous load calcs. Comm would
have some very low consumption (likely under an amp) except when transmitting.
etc etc
Be aware that many (most?) devices spec a circuit protection device that's a lot
larger than continuous draw, and somewhat larger than even peak inrush current.
In some cases, you might need to actually power up the device to determine
its actual continuous & peak draw; some mfgrs don't bother to include that data.
Charlie[/quote]
Charlie, I have made separate ELA doc, perheps it is some problems with viewing.
now it has 2 main columns - "Typical" and "Max" load. PLease, have a quick look:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/19XBHeM0oGqIDpQcepn1XrqFzVvEpWZq6/view?usp=sharing
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497808#497808
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 8/17/2020 2:58 PM, airknot wrote:
>
> [/quote]What's missing from your loads list above?I only see about 20A, absolutely
worst case, in that list (unless that Dynon stuff is hideously inefficient).
Have you done a spreadsheet, or even just a list, with every load item with
columns showing continuous and peak loads for each device, and if applicable,
an intermittent duty column? For example, the Slickstart, and flaps, would
be intermittent duty, & need not be part of the continuous load calcs. Comm
would have some very low consumption (likely under an amp) except when transmitting.
etc etc
>
>
> Be aware that many (most?) devices spec a circuit protection device that's a
lot larger than continuous draw, and somewhat larger than even peak inrush current.
In some cases, you might need to actually power up the device to determine
its actual continuous & peak draw; some mfgrs don't bother to include that
data.
>
>
> Charlie[/quote]
>
> Charlie, I have made separate ELA doc, perheps it is some problems with viewing.
now it has 2 main columns - "Typical" and "Max" load. PLease, have a quick
look:
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/19XBHeM0oGqIDpQcepn1XrqFzVvEpWZq6/view?usp=sharing
>
Google says we need permission to see it; sent the request.
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Nobody can access google drive documents without the owner's permission.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497810#497810
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
>
>My idea was to create Essential bus to power from this TCW backup
>battery in case of emergency.
Thoughtfully crafted electrical systems do not suffer
emergencies . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
>
>3 ' backup smart battery (TCW IBBS-12V-6AH) '
>max cont loadoad 8 A, intermittent 12 A
>Engine: Lycoming IO-540-D4A5
With that engine, why are you including a backup
battery? A 8-10A standby alternator on a vacuum
pump pad offers UNLIMITED endurance with about
a 4 pound penalty. I go out of my way to avoid
adding batteries to a design over and above
those normally expected to start engines and
back up the primary alternator.
Do you not PLAN to conduct periodic airworthiness
checks on the main battery?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "airknot" <airkbp(at)gmail.com> |
[/quote]
Google says we need permission to see it; sent the request.
Charlie
My apologies - i was sure it is accessable for averyone with the link.
I have double-checked and gave rights to edit:
ELA - https://drive.google.com/file/d/19XBHeM0oGqIDpQcepn1XrqFzVvEpWZq6/view?usp=sharing
Equipment list, source analisys
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KQJFOoFCRKHqWNgRtfG3JbY6XyPKGQ0d/view?usp=sharing
thank you
Alex
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497813#497813
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "airknot" <airkbp(at)gmail.com> |
[/quote]
Thoughtfully crafted electrical systems do not suffer
emergencies . . .
Bob . . .[/quote]
I mean loss of primary alternator
Alex
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497814#497814
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "airknot" <airkbp(at)gmail.com> |
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote:
>
> >
> > 3 backup smart battery (TCW IBBS-12V-6AH) max cont loadoad 8 A, intermittent
12 A
> > Engine: Lycoming IO-540-D4A5
>
> With that engine, why are you including a backup
> battery? A 8-10A standby alternator on a vacuum
> pump pad offers UNLIMITED endurance with about
> a 4 pound penalty. I go out of my way to avoid
> adding batteries to a design over and above
> those normally expected to start engines and
> back up the primary alternator.
>
> Do you not PLAN to conduct periodic airworthiness
> checks on the main battery?
>
>
> Bob . . .
I feel the same, even more - i prefer independent buses which a powered from different
power sources plus 2 batteries. as commercial airplanes constructed...
but, unfortunately, I was asked to help built Airplane with equipment already purchased...of
course I can ask for changes ..
Engine is electrically independent -
and my idea was 2 or 3 buses, to construct reliable, redundant but simple system
using all I have:
-Main bus powered from alternator
-Battery bus (so called switched hot battery bus - to avoid battery drain in case
of always hot battery bus), but it have to be powered not from battery under
normal conditions - so only main bus available
-Essential bus that might be normally powered from the Main bus (thru IBBS battery)
and in case of main bus power loss - power from IBBS baterry itself.
Initial idea was to power VHF transciver with its audio control panel.
Another point is to protect equipment during engine start:
For engine start we need 1 Skyview monitor with its periphery operating
Top important question - battery maintenance.
Scheduled servicing will be performed - we will install BatteryMInder charger for
Main battery and will charge IBBS with its charger (separate unit recommended
by TCW).
Due to lack of time - guys want fly asap :) - we will do not install Ground power
subsystem now, but for sure will schedule this upgrade in winter time.
Alex
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497815#497815
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: thermocouple calibration |
| From: | "Gerald Cruz" <excellentdigitizing(at)yandex.com> |
I truly welcome this superb post that you have accommodated us. I guarantee this
would be valuable for the vast majority of the general population. https://royalcbd.com/cbd-vs-thc/
(https://royalcbd.com/cbd-vs-thc/)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497816#497816
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
> Another point is to protect equipment during engine start
Absolutely NO equipment needs to be protected during engine start.
There is no such thing as voltage spikes during starting. That is an old wive's
tale.
Are you going to believe rumors based on 1950's technology or Bob N. who has written
the book on aircraft electrical systems?
Read the following:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=16757246&sid=74d855944e77ced507a5bb87d7f9a72f
Avionics Master Switches: Really Necessary?
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/avmaster.pdf
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497817#497817
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
> Essential bus that might be normally powered from the Main bus
> (thru IBBS battery) and in case of main bus power loss - power from IBBS baterry
itself.
I do not like the fact that the output of the IBBS battery is protected by one
10 amp fuse. If that fuse blows, everything down steam loses power.
I would not power an essential bus through that backup battery.
The cure is worse than the disease.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497819#497819
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "airknot" <airkbp(at)gmail.com> |
user9253 wrote:
>
> > Another point is to protect equipment during engine start
>
> Absolutely NO equipment needs to be protected during engine start.
> There is no such thing as voltage spikes during starting. That is an old wive's
tale.
> Are you going to believe rumors based on 1950's technology or Bob N. who has
written the book on aircraft electrical systems?
> Read the following:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=16757246&sid=74d855944e77ced507a5bb87d7f9a72f
>
> Avionics Master Switches: Really Necessary?
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/avmaster.pdf
Agree, thank you. i wrote silly thing. Bob told that Avionics switch is unnecessary
nowadays.
just think about the most wise and safest way of using equipment available.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497820#497820
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 8/18/2020 1:58 AM, airknot wrote:
>
> [/quote]
> Google says we need permission to see it; sent the request.
>
> Charlie
>
>
> My apologies - i was sure it is accessable for averyone with the link.
> I have double-checked and gave rights to edit:
> ELA - https://drive.google.com/file/d/19XBHeM0oGqIDpQcepn1XrqFzVvEpWZq6/view?usp=sharing
>
> Equipment list, source analisys
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KQJFOoFCRKHqWNgRtfG3JbY6XyPKGQ0d/view?usp=sharing
>
> thank you
> Alex
>
OK, got it. 1st thing I noticed is that you didn't totalize current for
the various phases of flight. Even without looking there, your 'typical'
consumption for everything is only 36 A. I'd look at cruise, with pitot
heat and boost pump included for worst case numbers. Re-examine what
you've included for each phase of flight. ex: Looks like you show 1 A
for the flap motor, for all phases of flight. Also, look carefully at
recommended circuit protection values for each device. ex: Even though
the flap motor may only consume 5 A, IIRC, the docs for it recommend
closer to 15 A for circuit protection due to startup surge.
I suspect that the number for the boost pump number is a bit low. The
automotive injection pumps typically used in a/c boost pumps typically
draw a *minimum* of around 4.5A; most will draw closer to 6A. That draw
doesn't really change with engine power, since they pump the same
quantity of fuel at the same pressure, regardless of flow to the engine
(excess is bypassed back to the inlet). The Walbro pumps (not the one
used by AFP) recommend a 20A circuit protection, due to startup surge
current.
I didn't do a line-by-line analysis, so you can probably find more power
savings.
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "airknot" <airkbp(at)gmail.com> |
OK, got it. 1st thing I noticed is that you didn't totalize current for
[/quote]
the various phases of flight. Even without looking there, your 'typical'
consumption for everything is only 36 A. I'd look at cruise, with pitot
heat and boost pump included for worst case numbers. Re-examine what
you've included for each phase of flight. ex: Looks like you show 1 A
for the flap motor, for all phases of flight. Also, look carefully at
recommended circuit protection values for each device. ex: Even though
the flap motor may only consume 5 A, IIRC, the docs for it recommend
closer to 15 A for circuit protection due to startup surge.
I suspect that the number for the boost pump number is a bit low. The
automotive injection pumps typically used in a/c boost pumps typically
draw a *minimum* of around 4.5A; most will draw closer to 6A. That draw
doesn't really change with engine power, since they pump the same
quantity of fuel at the same pressure, regardless of flow to the engine
(excess is bypassed back to the inlet). The Walbro pumps (not the one
used by AFP) recommend a 20A circuit protection, due to startup surge
current.
I didn't do a line-by-line analysis, so you can probably find more power
savings.
Charlie
[/quote]
thank you, Charlie. will try!
...without experience in Experimental Aviation field, especially systems design,
this task seems to be unrealistic. i can't aloow myself to rely just on my assumptions.
thinking how to figure out...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497836#497836
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
>
>I didn't do a line-by-line analysis, so you can probably find more power
>savings.
>
>Charlie
>[/quote]
>
>thank you, Charlie. will try!
>...without experience in Experimental Aviation field, especially
>systems design, this task seems to be unrealistic. i can't aloow
>myself to rely just on my assumptions. thinking how to figure out...
Value to be secured in conducting detailed
load analysis is 2-fold.
(1) legacy design goals for TC aircraft dictate
that under worst case running loads, the ship's
alternator is loaded to only 75 or 80% of nameplate
rating.
This design point makes sure that there is
ample headroom in available energy not just
to run the ship's electro-whizzies . . . but
with energy left over to RECHARGE the battery
within a reasonable interval after takeoff.
This goal correctly assumes that the battery
will be capable of supporting design goals
for battery only endurance within some
acceptable time after takeoff. Of course, this
dovetails with another design goal that
calculates/demonstrates battery only endurance
with a battery that is nearing end-of-life
at 80% of new capacity.
The second goal for doing a load analysis
is to establish loads for the various phases
of flight to be compared with a hopefully
KNOWN battery condition. This exercise is
analogous to KNOWING how much fuel is aboard
to reduce the risk of mission failure for
having exceeded what should have been
easily predictable limits.
Your customer has stacked a lot of hardware
on the project . . . big engine, fat alternator,
big battery, backup battery and perhaps
things like heated pitot tubes. Assuming
all things are working as installed, this
project has energy to burn.
But some of this stuff is for backup . . .
to save the day in the 'event
of failure'. But all the backup in the
world may be of poor or no value if it
is not SIZED AND MAINTAINED to step up
to certain calculated/demonstrated
tasks.
This is good practice for any aircraft . . .
TC or OBAM.
Given the cited selection of hardware
for this project, I'm exceedingly
disappointed that a second engine
driven power source was not included
even if it's just a 4-pound, SD-8
spline driven alternator.
I'd trade a dozen stand-by batteries
for a single second-source of engine
driven power. Batteries are like house
plants . . . they demand consistent
attention. Alternators are more like
hammers . . . they'll be there when you
need them.
But of course, all this is academic
and un-quantified until the homework
is done.
"Knowing is not understanding . . . you
can KNOW a great deal and still UNDERSTAND
nothing." --C.F. Kettering--
"Until you have measured something and can
talk about it in numbers, your understanding
has barely scratched the surface of science."
--Lord Kelvin--
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "airknot" <airkbp(at)gmail.com> |
(1) legacy design goals for TC aircraft dictate
that under worst case running loads, the ship's
alternator is loaded to only 75 or 80% of nameplate
rating.
This design point makes sure that there is
ample headroom in available energy not just
to run the ship's electro-whizzies . . . but
with energy left over to RECHARGE the battery
within a reasonable interval after takeoff.
[/quote]
Bob, thank you
I have read about this and hence affraid we should replace 60 Amps alternator with
at least 70 Amps, or I understand this incorrectly?
but anyway such huge load is strange.
regaring secondary alternator - perheps we will do an upgrade later, as I am 100%
feel the same as you
Alex
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497854#497854
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 2:11 AM airknot wrote:
>
> OK, got it. 1st thing I noticed is that you didn't totalize current for
> [/quote]
> the various phases of flight. Even without looking there, your 'typical'
> consumption for everything is only 36 A. I'd look at cruise, with pitot
> heat and boost pump included for worst case numbers. Re-examine what
> you've included for each phase of flight. ex: Looks like you show 1 A
> for the flap motor, for all phases of flight. Also, look carefully at
> recommended circuit protection values for each device. ex: Even though
> the flap motor may only consume 5 A, IIRC, the docs for it recommend
> closer to 15 A for circuit protection due to startup surge.
>
> I suspect that the number for the boost pump number is a bit low. The
> automotive injection pumps typically used in a/c boost pumps typically
> draw a *minimum* of around 4.5A; most will draw closer to 6A. That draw
> doesn't really change with engine power, since they pump the same
> quantity of fuel at the same pressure, regardless of flow to the engine
> (excess is bypassed back to the inlet). The Walbro pumps (not the one
> used by AFP) recommend a 20A circuit protection, due to startup surge
> current.
>
> I didn't do a line-by-line analysis, so you can probably find more power
> savings.
>
> Charlie
> [/quote]
>
> thank you, Charlie. will try!
> ...without experience in Experimental Aviation field, especially systems
> design, this task seems to be unrealistic. i can't aloow myself to rely
> just on my assumptions. thinking how to figure out...
>
> Naa... you can do it; you're just learning how right now. You've started
with the right techniques, and you're smart enough to ask if there's stuff
that you don't know that you don't know.
You have the basic analysis tool already, with the loads spreadsheet. Just
tweak it a line at a time. 'Fly' each component line, from startup to
shutdown, and update the spreadsheet to reflect that. Ex: Flaps would
(possibly) get activated for a few seconds prior to takeoff, and again for
a few seconds after liftoff. Negligible load on the alternator for those
actions, and then zero load until in the pattern for landing. And in most
light planes, not a requirement for landing, if conservation of electrical
energy was critical for other stuff, like landing lights at night. Plug
that into that line of the spreadsheet. Then move to the next line and go
through the same process. Slightly different for something like a Comm
radio; it will have very low but continuous energy demand, except when
transmitting. But transmit demand is 'reasonable' (unquantified, I know),
and will be in very short, infrequent 'blips'. So while you can't ignore
the demand when sizing circuit protection/wire size, you might be able to
ignore the peak transmission demand when looking at alternator capacity.
Those intermittent loads rarely all hit at the same time, so the alternator
would rarely (if ever) be tasked with supporting max consumption of every
device at the same time.
As I think I mentioned earlier, many mfgrs don't bother to give you
accurate current consumption numbers for their products in an 'idle' state
since they're focused on having you size circuits for worst case
consumption. I think you can already see that your 60A alternator has
plenty of capacity for your loads. If you're set on using a backup battery
for an 'E' bus, you could wait until you have all the hardware on hand to
measure each component's real world consumption, and size the battery to
handle total real world loads for your desired duration. (If you need help
with how to do that, just ask.)
But I must say that if I were planning on an IFR platform that's totally
dependent on electrons to keep the panel lit, I'd give serious thought to
Bob's recommendation of adding a 2nd alternator rather than a 2nd battery.
That 2nd battery is like a very heavy, very small tank of aux fuel, that
will have a relatively small capacity, and due to the aging process, a
shrinking capacity. An aux alternator, on the other hand, will cost a bit
more up front but will be lighter, and will supply energy until available
fuel is exhausted or the prop stops turning. If that happens, you're going
to be on the ground in less time than any decent primary battery will
last, anyway. With a primary alternator failure, it could be the difference
between knowing you have to be on the ground in 45 minutes (with everything
under you below minimums), to paying a bit more attention to bus voltage
while you continue your original flight plan to your destination.
Having fun yet?
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 8:58 AM airknot wrote:
>
> (1) legacy design goals for TC aircraft dictate
> that under worst case running loads, the ship's
> alternator is loaded to only 75 or 80% of nameplate
> rating.
>
> This design point makes sure that there is
> ample headroom in available energy not just
> to run the ship's electro-whizzies . . . but
> with energy left over to RECHARGE the battery
> within a reasonable interval after takeoff.
>
> [/quote]
>
> Bob, thank you
>
> I have read about this and hence affraid we should replace 60 Amps
> alternator with at least 70 Amps, or I understand this incorrectly?
> but anyway such huge load is strange.
>
> regaring secondary alternator - perheps we will do an upgrade later, as I
> am 100% feel the same as you
>
> Alex
>
Bob,
Should that 'worst case running loads' thing be a bit more... nuanced (for
lack of a more precise term), especially for new arrivals who are just
beginning to understand electrical loads? The current situation is a great
example. The literal worst case has flaps, landing lights, comm
transmitter(s), etc etc all running at the same time, and continuously.
This is obviously not going to happen. Hence the need for some..nuance...
in defining 'worst case'.
Or am I totally wrong?
Thanks,
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
A 60 amp alternator will be more than enough for your plane unless you can
show that more is actually needed. One item needs to be removed from your
list: the alternator field current. A rating of 60 amps means that the alternator
will put put at least 60 amps in addition to the field current. In other words,
the alternator will put out 64 amps. The rating of an alternator is a nominal
value that depends on cooling and RPM. If kept cool and turned fast enough,
an alternator will put out much more than its nominal rating.
I would be surprised if your RV-10 electrical system will draw more 30 amps continuously.
Like Charlie suggested, measure the actual current. That can be done without
starting the engine by powering the system with a battery or power supply.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497860#497860
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: thermocouple calibration |
| From: | "Gerald Cruz" <excellentdigitizing(at)yandex.com> |
789casino ONLINE, legal gambling website, online football betting good value ready to earn money from Get property link Baccarat online 789 casino online service excellent deposit and withdrawal system. That you must be impressed Stable system guarantees the safety of your credit. With various promotions that we have for you to choose from Support team to take care of you to make our games comfortable. (https://www.789betting.com/)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497863#497863
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
>
>
>Bob, thank you
>
>I have read about this and hence affraid we should replace 60 Amps
>alternator with at least 70 Amps, or I understand this incorrectly?
>but anyway such huge load is strange.
>
>regaring secondary alternator - perheps we will do an upgrade later,
>as I am 100% feel the same as you
Like others on the List, I am skeptical of your
load figures. 60A is generally more than adequate
for a single engine airplane unless you have electric
cabin heater, heated seats, etc.
In all candor sir, we should beg your forgiveness for
loading such a task in the midst of pressing
demands from your 'clients'.
The 100% best way to get load values is go MEASURE
them. Easily done as you start lighting up the panel
with shore-power support. In fact, I just this minute
ordered another power supply like this
https://tinyurl.com/y42yceb4
0-16v, 0-10A, accurate digital displays. EXCEEDINGLY
handy for precision recharging of lithium cells in
a constant voltage, constant current mode. Would
be similarly handy for surveying your project's
accessory loads. Just pull the breaker/fuse for
an appliance. Apply 14.2 Volts to its feeder.
READ the running load from the face of the power supply.
I doubt you'll have many devices, if any, that
draw more than 10A each.
The critical feature of this exercise right
now is to segregate various loads into their
respective flight functions. There are few
airplanes that are operated with everything
up and running at the same time. Do not include
transient loads like landing lights and transmitter
current draws. You're attempting deduce the
ENERGY budget for various phases of flight.
Surprisingly enough, engine starters, flap
motors and transmitters are all but insignificant
in this study. ENERGY is measured in watt-seconds,
etc. A starter demands lots of WATTS but for
only a few seconds and then only once per flight
cycle. A suite of legacy incandescent navigation
lights (3 bulbs at 2A each) takes 3 x 2 x 14 x
10800 about 900,000 watt-seconds over the course
of a 3-hour night flight! Nav lights used to
be the most energy hungry system on most light
aircraft. You DID NOT include nav lights in
your battery-only endurance calculations.
That's what all those columns are for in the
load analysis . . . we can be 99% confident that your 60A
machine will be plenty.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Speaking of alternators . . . |
At 09:50 PM 8/19/2020, you wrote:
>>Bob, thank you
>>
>>I have read about this and hence affraid we should replace 60 Amps
>>alternator with at least 70 Amps, or I understand this incorrectly?
>>but anyway such huge load is strange.
>>
>>regaring secondary alternator - perheps we will do an upgrade
>>later, as I am 100% feel the same as you
A requirement seldom if ever explored
in OBAM aviation is a demonstration of
suitability to task. I.e. will the machine
deliver design goal ratings to the system
under worst case conditions?
When seeking to validate a new install
a legacy 'stress' test calls for loading
the alternator to design limits (may not
be nameplate limits . . . some alternators
are purposely 'de rated'), climb the
airplane as best angle, monitor critical
temperatures in alternator (usually diodes
and one stator winding) until stabilized.
Adjust for standard hot-day and show that
the installation meets design goals without
overheating.
It's not possible to load an installed
alternator to design limits using ship's
accessories . . . we add current draw with an
adjustable load bank that lets us fully
challenge the alternator.
This is a load bank recently used to
validate a new STC on an alternator
installation.
This seems like an extreme measure given
that loading a qualified installation
to worst case for more than mere minutes
is practically impossible. But the test
proves that your properly functioning
alternator is meeting design goals.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | inexpensive (or possibly just cheap) solder sleeves |
Solder sleeves are cool tools, but I'm way too cheap to pay almost a dollar
a joint. So, I've always just soldered & then heat shrunk to insulate.
But, while prowling an Asian shopping site, I stumbled upon these:
https://www.tomtop.com/p-e12176.html?rc_token=null
I'm sorely tempted to roll $20 worth if dice to see if they're any good.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: inexpensive (or possibly just cheap) solder sleeves |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Don't do it Charlie. I do NOT think that they are solder sleeves. I get the
impression that they are crimp connectors. Nowhere does it mention solder.
Heat is used to shrink the tubing.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497884#497884
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: inexpensive (or possibly just cheap) solder |
sleeves
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 8/20/2020 6:33 PM, user9253 wrote:
>
> Don't do it Charlie. I do NOT think that they are solder sleeves. I get the
> impression that they are crimp connectors. Nowhere does it mention solder.
> Heat is used to shrink the tubing.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
Well, duhhh...
The first item I looked at really was a solder sleeve set, but the set
included a bunch of regular shrink tube segments. I carelessly clicked
on one of the other products displayed on the page (this one), without
looking carefully at it and thinking all the displayed items were solder
sleeves.
Thanks for the good catch; I'll try to go back and find the actual
solder sleeves.
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: inexpensive (or possibly just cheap) solder |
sleeves
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 8/20/2020 7:04 PM, Charlie England wrote:
> On 8/20/2020 6:33 PM, user9253 wrote:
>>
>> Don't do it Charlie. I do NOT think that they are solder sleeves. I
>> get the
>> impression that they are crimp connectors. Nowhere does it mention
>> solder.
>> Heat is used to shrink the tubing.
>>
>> --------
>> Joe Gores
>>
>>
> Well, duhhh...
>
> The first item I looked at really was a solder sleeve set, but the set
> included a bunch of regular shrink tube segments. I carelessly clicked
> on one of the other products displayed on the page (this one), without
> looking carefully at it and thinking all the displayed items were
> solder sleeves.
>
> Thanks for the good catch; I'll try to go back and find the actual
> solder sleeves.
>
> Charlie
I think this was the 1st one I saw. Still not a bad price if you ignore
the standard heat shrink; 100 pcs solder sleeve for $19.00. I'll dive
into their listings & try to find an assortment that really does contain
solder sleeves and doesn't contain generic heat shrink.
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christopher Cee Stone <rv8iator(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: inexpensive (or possibly just cheap) solder sleeves |
Charlie...et al.
I purchased a similar looking box from Amazon and was disappointed. The
shrink sleeves are extremely thin .008-.012 in wall. the solder sleeves
were also very thin wall. If using multi strand with fine strands there is
insufficient solder to fully wet out the strands.
Chris
On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 3:34 PM Charlie England
wrote:
> Solder sleeves are cool tools, but I'm way too cheap to pay almost a
> dollar a joint. So, I've always just soldered & then heat shrunk to
> insulate.
>
> But, while prowling an Asian shopping site, I stumbled upon these:
> https://www.tomtop.com/p-e12176.html?rc_token=null
>
> I'm sorely tempted to roll $20 worth if dice to see if they're any good.
>
> Charlie
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: inexpensive (or possibly just cheap) solder sleeves |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks Chris; good to know.
On 8/20/2020 8:27 PM, Christopher Cee Stone wrote:
> Charlie...et al.
>
> I purchased a similar looking box from Amazon and was disappointed.
> The shrink sleeves are extremelythin .008-.012 in wall. the solder
> sleeves were also very thin wall. If using multi strand with fine
> strands there is insufficient solder to fully wet out the strands.
>
> Chris
>
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 3:34 PM Charlie England > wrote:
>
> Solder sleeves are cool tools, but I'm way too cheap to pay almost
> a dollar a joint. So, I've always just soldered & then heat shrunk
> to insulate.
>
> But, while prowling an Asian shopping site, I stumbled upon these:
> https://www.tomtop.com/p-e12176.html?rc_token=null
>
> I'm sorely tempted to roll $20 worth if dice to see if they're any
> good.
>
> Charlie
>
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: inexpensive (or possibly just cheap) solder sleeves |
| From: | "John M Tipton" <johntiptonuk(at)hotmail.com> |
Interesting kit for out in the field use:
eBay item number:224116192288
John
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497896#497896
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: inexpensive (or possibly just cheap) solder |
sleeves
At 06:33 PM 8/20/2020, you wrote:
>
>Don't do it Charlie. I do NOT think that they are solder sleeves. I get the
>impression that they are crimp connectors. Nowhere does it mention solder.
>Heat is used to shrink the tubing.
I've evaluated a few of the offerings for
both solder sleeves and shrink-wrapped, butt-splices.
The solder sleeves are problematic. Most worked
well on clean, new wire in the smaller gages but
lacked an active flux for good flow onto vintage
strands . . . and a bit short on solder to effect
a good joint on larger wires.
To date, I've not keep any of the off-brand
solder sleeves on the bench.
The shrink-wrapped, butt-splices are a different
matter. Finding a tool/technique for effecting
a crimp is the hard part. My favorite tool
for getting a good mechanical connection on
the strands puts a rather ugly mash on the
shrink jacket . . . but much of the ugliness
abates when you shrink the jacket. Splices
with the internal melting wall of sealant are
particularly effective. I used three or four
of these under my truck last week to install
new pump/sender assemblies in the saddle tanks.
The finished splices looked quite adequate
to the task.
Play with them a bit until you arrive at your
own crimp-n-shrink process. I'll see if I
can locate some el-cheapo tools similar to
the one I've settled on.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bobby Paulk <bobbypaulk(at)comcast.net> |
Bob,
I have been monitoring this list for several years and have learned a lot.
I bought your book and I have built two homebuilt airplanes and wired them by your
recommended drawings.
I was hoping someone other than myself would ask what does OBAM stand for. I know
what TC is but not OBAM. I think it may have to do with amateur built but have
never seen it in print. Could you please enlighten me.
Analog guy in a digital world.
Bobby Paulk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 8/21/2020 2:52 PM, Bobby Paulk wrote:
>
> Bob,
> I have been monitoring this list for several years and have learned a lot.
> I bought your book and I have built two homebuilt airplanes and wired them by
your recommended drawings.
> I was hoping someone other than myself would ask what does OBAM stand for. I
know what TC is but not OBAM. I think it may have to do with amateur built but
have never seen it in print. Could you please enlighten me.
>
> Analog guy in a digital world.
> Bobby Paulk
Not Bob, but maybe I can save him some time.
Owner Built And Maintained
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Greenley <wgreenley(at)gmail.com> |
wonder built and maintained
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 4:04 PM Bobby Paulk wrote:
> bobbypaulk(at)comcast.net>
>
> Bob,
> I have been monitoring this list for several years and have learned a lot.
> I bought your book and I have built two homebuilt airplanes and wired them
> by your recommended drawings.
> I was hoping someone other than myself would ask what does OBAM stand for.
> I know what TC is but not OBAM. I think it may have to do with amateur
> built but have never seen it in print. Could you please enlighten me.
>
> Analog guy in a digital world.
> Bobby Paulk
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 02:52 PM 8/21/2020, you wrote:
>
>Bob,
>I have been monitoring this list for several years and have learned a lot.
>I bought your book and I have built two homebuilt airplanes and
>wired them by your recommended drawings.
>I was hoping someone other than myself would ask what does OBAM stand for.
>I know what TC is but not OBAM. I think it may have to do with amateur built
>but have never seen it in print. Could you please enlighten me.
Owner built and maintained.
After working with you guys about 10+ years
I cam to realize that MOST of what was being
practiced in this venue was anything but
'experimental'. Further, the term didn't
register well with individuals I was attempting
to introduce to the 'personal side' of aviation.
I began to test the term back in March of 2001 . . .
it's been over 20 years. Haven't had any push back yet
so who knows . . . maybe it will stick. In any case,
I think it more descriptive of what we do here.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "rparigoris" <rparigor(at)hotmail.com> |
Hi Bobby
I'm not proud of it, but there are times instead of:
Owner Built and Maintained
more appropriate would be:
Owner Butchered and Mutilated;-) Ron P.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497903#497903
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Daniell <wdaniell.longport(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | headset crackle part 2 |
I changed the plugs and one loose plug cap as advised by Joe.
To recap: I have a Rotax 912 turbo with stock ignition. It started with a
crackle in the deadset that rose and fell with engine power. This
occurred in mid flight after a normal mag check. Prior to this the Dynon
Skyview had been without abnormal noise.
On landing I found that the switching off the left mag silenced the crackle
and switching off the right mag made the engine run rough.
Trouble shooting today: The CDIs have two "in" connectors from the pick
ups and two "out" connectors to the coils. So I swapped the CDIs. Also I
tried to start the engine with only one CDI connected to one "out"
connector. Both CDI work with both "in"-connectors but both only work with
one "out" connector to the coils. I tried starting the engine with only
one CDI. It starts fine when the single CDI is connected to the right coil
and when "wrong" coil the engine wont start. This leads me to the
conclusion that I have a problem between the CDI and the plugs. In other
words I have a problem in the coil system or in the HT/plug area.
Agreed?
If so, what is my next step? How do I test the coils?
Will
William Daniell
LONGPORT
+1 786 878 0246
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
At 03:43 PM 8/21/2020, you wrote:
>
>Hi Bobby
>
>I'm not proud of it, but there are times instead of:
>Owner Built and Maintained
>more appropriate would be:
>Owner Butchered and Mutilated;-) Ron P.
Yup . . .
That goes for virtually every kind
of mechanism . . . we've all seen
boats, cars, t/c aircraft, ultra-
lights, etc. etc. that we'd rather
not ride in . . .
But yeah, airplanes are especially
dicey. Seeds of the 'Connection were
sown during my first trip to OSH when
I left the B&C booth to visit a customer's
Ez out on the flight line. I was going
to put a voltmeter on his alternator.
The wiring on this thing was really scary/
Lots of zip-cord, wire nuts and black
tape . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV10 primary elec sys wiring |
| From: | "airknot" <airkbp(at)gmail.com> |
thank you, Gentlemen, for all your advises!
working on ELA...
Alex
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497908#497908
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Verwey <bob.verwey(at)gmail.com> |
Obviously Big And Mean
Best Regards,
Bob Verwey
082 331 2727
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 at 22:35, William Greenley wrote:
> wonder built and maintained
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 4:04 PM Bobby Paulk
> wrote:
>
>> bobbypaulk(at)comcast.net>
>>
>> Bob,
>> I have been monitoring this list for several years and have learned a
>> lot.
>> I bought your book and I have built two homebuilt airplanes and wired
>> them by your recommended drawings.
>> I was hoping someone other than myself would ask what does OBAM stand
>> for. I know what TC is but not OBAM. I think it may have to do with amateur
>> built but have never seen it in print. Could you please enlighten me.
>>
>> Analog guy in a digital world.
>> Bobby Paulk
>> ==========
>> -
>> 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: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Creativair and/or Bill Dube' (Killacycle) contact info? |
Hi,
I know this is a longshot, but anyone have current contact info for
either the Creativair (landing lights) owner, or Bill Dube', of
Killacycle electric motorcycle (and LED nav lights) fame? The Creativair
site seems to be gone, and the Killacycle site is 'in transition' and
Bill's old email address bounces.
I've got a pair of the combo units with a few 'dim bulbs' in the green
LED array, and it would make my life simpler (and repairs faster) if I
had part numbers for the driver transistors & green LEDs that Bill used
in the nav light design.
Or, if you've had similar misfortune in the past & have already obtained
the service docs, could you share?
Thanks,
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Creativair and/or Bill Dube' (Killacycle) contact |
info?
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
A search turned up with his address:
Bill Dube
4680 Miller St
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
You could try snail mail.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497919#497919
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Creativair and/or Bill Dube' (Killacycle) |
contact info?
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 8/22/2020 6:39 PM, user9253 wrote:
>
> A search turned up with his address:
> Bill Dube
> 4680 Miller St
> Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
> You could try snail mail.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
Thanks Joe. Last resort, but at least it's a resort. :-) And my career
employer (USPS) could sure use the money right now.
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Daniell <wdaniell.longport(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | The culprit headset crackle |
This is the coil end of cyl 3 bottom plug lead
William Daniell
+1 786 878 0246
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: The culprit headset crackle |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
Good going finding the culprit.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497922#497922
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Daniell <wdaniell.longport(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: The culprit headset crackle |
First time that i know that anyone's seen this!
Thanks for your help
William Daniell
LONGPORT
+57 310 295 0744
On Sun, Aug 23, 2020, 08:29 user9253 wrote:
>
> Good going finding the culprit.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497922#497922
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Turk <matronics(at)rtist.nl> |
| Subject: | Two LiFePO4 batteries in parallel |
The AEC has a great section on dual battery use. One revelation to me is
that it's OK to run two batteries in parallel, and I have a question
about this.
A buddy of mine is building a plane with an engine that depends on
electric energy both for ignition and fuel injection. The fuel pumps,
ECU, dual ignition and injectors use about 13A under normal load. In
case of alternator failure this can be reduced to 10A by running on one
set of coils.
We are discussing failure modes and endurance. The plane is very light.
A regular 20-30Ah battery would be too heavy, so we're looking at
LiFePO4 options. For cranking, a 300CCA starter battery would be plenty,
weighing just 1.5kg. But it is rated for 8Ah, so after accounting for
aging and adding other essentials I expect no more than 30 minutes of
flight after the alternator fails.
The second option is a 20Ah LiFePO4 battery. About the same weight, but
not suitable for starting. This should give about an hour, and
considering the area and types of flight that should be enough to find a
safe place to land.
Both batteries have their own internal BMS circuitry, both are
advertized as drop-in replacements for gel batteries. No need to change
charging systems. Or so it says. Together they weight 3kg, which is
still considerably less than a regular battery.
The question is, what risks are there in using these two dis-similar
batteries in parallel?
Thanks!
Rob
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Two LiFePO4 batteries in parallel |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 8/23/2020 2:32 PM, Rob Turk wrote:
>
> The AEC has a great section on dual battery use. One revelation to me
> is that it's OK to run two batteries in parallel, and I have a
> question about this.
>
> A buddy of mine is building a plane with an engine that depends on
> electric energy both for ignition and fuel injection. The fuel pumps,
> ECU, dual ignition and injectors use about 13A under normal load. In
> case of alternator failure this can be reduced to 10A by running on
> one set of coils.
>
> We are discussing failure modes and endurance. The plane is very
> light. A regular 20-30Ah battery would be too heavy, so we're looking
> at LiFePO4 options. For cranking, a 300CCA starter battery would be
> plenty, weighing just 1.5kg. But it is rated for 8Ah, so after
> accounting for aging and adding other essentials I expect no more than
> 30 minutes of flight after the alternator fails.
>
> The second option is a 20Ah LiFePO4 battery. About the same weight,
> but not suitable for starting. This should give about an hour, and
> considering the area and types of flight that should be enough to find
> a safe place to land.
>
> Both batteries have their own internal BMS circuitry, both are
> advertized as drop-in replacements for gel batteries. No need to
> change charging systems. Or so it says. Together they weight 3kg,
> which is still considerably less than a regular battery.
>
> The question is, what risks are there in using these two dis-similar
> batteries in parallel?
>
> Thanks!
> Rob
I think that most of the lithium-iron batteries that are big enough for
starting duties will have a series-parallel configuration, so while
parallel isn't ideal, it shouldn't be a show stopper. Biggest danger
with radically different sized batteries in parallel is that a charging
system big enough for the larger one may try to push energy into the
smaller one at an excessive rate. The 'brand X' batteries, even though
they have a supposed BMS, spec a maximum size alternator for each
battery size.
Might be helpful to show the batteries you're considering. What makes
the 20AH version unsuitable for starting? Are the posts too small for
the current?
Charlie
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Two LiFePO4 batteries in parallel |
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
A better option is to have a backup alternator if possible.
Just to emphasize what Charlie wrote, the minimum size lithium battery is
determined by the capacity of the alternator.
Buy a different brand battery that will crank the engine.
Better yet, buy an AGM lead acid battery. Yes, it weighs more. But will not
disconnect itself from the electrical system under certain conditions like a
lithium battery will.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497926#497926
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Two LiFePO4 batteries in parallel |
At 02:32 PM 8/23/2020, you wrote:
>
>The AEC has a great section on dual battery use. One revelation to
>me is that it's OK to run two batteries in parallel, and I have a
>question about this.
>
>A buddy of mine is building a plane with an engine that depends on
>electric energy both for ignition and fuel injection. The fuel
>pumps, ECU, dual ignition and injectors use about 13A under normal
>load. In case of alternator failure this can be reduced to 10A by
>running on one set of coils.
What are your battery-only endurance goals?
>We are discussing failure modes and endurance. The plane is very
>light. A regular 20-30Ah battery would be too heavy, so we're
>looking at LiFePO4 options.
2+ hours?
>For cranking, a 300CCA starter battery would be plenty, weighing
>just 1.5kg. But it is rated for 8Ah, so after accounting for aging
>and adding other essentials I expect no more than 30 minutes of
>flight after the alternator fails.
What brand and model of battery is this?
>The second option is a 20Ah LiFePO4 battery. About the same weight,
>but not suitable for starting. This should give about an hour, and
>considering the area and types of flight that should be enough to
>find a safe place to land.
Again. . . what brand/model battery?
>Both batteries have their own internal BMS circuitry, both are
>advertized as drop-in replacements for gel batteries. No need to
>change charging systems. Or so it says. Together they weight 3kg,
>which is still considerably less than a regular battery.
Why not a single ETX680 at 1.86KG and 12.4AH (supports 10A
at 80% capacity)?
>The question is, what risks are there in using these two dis-similar
>batteries in parallel?
Not enough data . . .it might work. Virtually
ALL fat LiFePO4 batteries are ARRAYS of cells
in series/parallel configuration. The TrueBlue
series of TSO batteries are multiple arrays EACH
having it's own BMS.
So what you're suggesting may well be practical
from a electrical performance perspective. But
then you have TWO batteries to monitor. If one
services-out before the other, will you replace
BOTH or just one . . . and worry more about the
older battery.
Methinks it FAR better to install ONE battery
capable of doing the task.
Bob . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Parker <foghorn757(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Two LiFePO4 batteries in parallel |
I went through this thought process when designing my electrical system. In t
he end I decided two alternators and one battery (EXT-680) was the best cour
se of action. I have an electronically dependent engine that I will be flyin
g IFR. I used Z-13 with some modifications (it=99s posted on the list s
omeplace) because I wanted simple over complex.
I can load shed as necessary down to just the engine bus and both PFDs. If I
lose my primary (60a) or alternate (30a) alternator while IFR then I consid
er this an emergency and need to land ASAP or get to VFR condition. A failur
e VFR isn=99t as critical to me.
I=99d only have two batteries (that I could isolate from each other) i
f I was planning to fly my little plane to Europe and back. Otherwise Keep I
t Simple.
Jeff Parker
Sent from my iPad
> On Aug 23, 2020, at 21:28, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroelect
ric.com> wrote:
>
> =EF=BB At 02:32 PM 8/23/2020, you wrote:
>>
>> The AEC has a great section on dual battery use. One revelation to me is t
hat it's OK to run two batteries in parallel, and I have a question about th
is.
>>
>> A buddy of mine is building a plane with an engine that depends on electr
ic energy both for ignition and fuel injection. The fuel pumps, ECU, dual ig
nition and injectors use about 13A under normal load. In case of alternator f
ailure this can be reduced to 10A by running on one set of coils.
>
> What are your battery-only endurance goals?
>
>> We are discussing failure modes and endurance. The plane is very light. A
regular 20-30Ah battery would be too heavy, so we're looking at LiFePO4 opt
ions.
>
> 2+ hours?
>
>> For cranking, a 300CCA starter battery would be plenty, weighing just 1.5
kg. But it is rated for 8Ah, so after accounting for aging and adding other e
ssentials I expect no more than 30 minutes of flight after the alternator fa
ils.
>
> What brand and model of battery is this?
>
>> The second option is a 20Ah LiFePO4 battery. About the same weight, but n
ot suitable for starting. This should give about an hour, and considering th
e area and types of flight that should be enough to find a safe place to lan
d.
>
> Again. . . what brand/model battery?
>
>> Both batteries have their own internal BMS circuitry, both are advertized
as drop-in replacements for gel batteries. No need to change charging syste
ms. Or so it says. Together they weight 3kg, which is still considerably les
s than a regular battery.
>
> Why not a single ETX680 at 1.86KG and 12.4AH (supports 10A
> at 80% capacity)?
>
>> The question is, what risks are there in using these two dis-similar batt
eries in parallel?
>
> Not enough data . . .it might work. Virtually
> ALL fat LiFePO4 batteries are ARRAYS of cells
> in series/parallel configuration. The TrueBlue
> series of TSO batteries are multiple arrays EACH
> having it's own BMS.
>
> So what you're suggesting may well be practical
> from a electrical performance perspective. But
> then you have TWO batteries to monitor. If one
> services-out before the other, will you replace
> BOTH or just one . . . and worry more about the
> older battery.
>
> Methinks it FAR better to install ONE battery
> capable of doing the task.
>
> Bob . . .
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Fwd: MR16 halogen lamp LED replacement: sanity check |
While looking for a 'drop in' LED replacement for some 75W MR16 (2" dia)
landing light lamps, I've found 'more of the same' in actual LED lumens
ratings vs the lumens ratings for the incandescent or halogen bulbs they
are replacing. 75W halogens are typically around 2500 total candela (sp?)
and 1400 lumens, while the claimed replacements are closer to 500-600
lumens. When I asked one of the common vendors about that, well, see the
answer below.
It seems it's time to question someone's sanity. Who's?
Charlie
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: RV7 Builder <mcsophie(at)gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 10:33 AM
Subject: Fwd: MR16 halogen lamp LED replacement
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From:
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 9:35 AM
Subject: RE: MR16 halogen lamp LED replacement
Hello,
Thank you for contacting 1000Bulbs.com. Based on your emails below, it
looks like you are actually referencing two different companies website.
One is ours; 1000Bulbs.com. The other is a competitor of Bulbs.com. We
are two completely separate entities, and I am only the sales contact on
our website of 1000Bulbs.com.
When converting to an LED option, it is not uncommon for the lumens to be
lower than the original bulb it is replacing. As LED options are naturally
a brighter option, the lumen count will typically be less.
Thank you,
*Beth Garcia*
*Customer Care Advocate Manager *
1000Bulbs.com
2140 Merritt Dr. | Garland, TX 75041
972-535-0922 Fax
972-288-2277
[image: Description: Description: new_logo] [image:
Description: Description: TWITTER_color_32px] <http://twitter.com/1000bulbs>
[image: Description: Description: PINTEREST_color_32px]
[image: Description: Description:
FACEBOOK_color_32px] <http://facebook.com/1000bulbs> [image: Description:
Description: YOUTUBE_color_32px] <http://youtube.com/user/1000bulbs>
*From:* RV7 Builder
*Sent:* Sunday, August 23, 2020 11:29 AM
*To:* Beth Garcia
*Subject:* Fwd: MR16 halogen lamp LED replacement
Greetings,
What an amazing coincidence that a Beth Garcia is the sales specialist at
two different companies. Could it possibly be, that the two companies, and
the two Beths, are the same?
Here's the '75W equivalent' from the 1000bulbs site:
https://www.1000bulbs.com/category/led-mr16-75w-equal/
Obviously, none of these offerings come even close to replacing an original
75W halogen (or, I suspect, even a 50W halogen).
Wouldn't it be better to be honest with your listings, and avoid angry
customers?
Charlie
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: *RV7 Builder* <mcsophie(at)gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 11:03 AM
Subject: MR16 halogen lamp LED replacement
Greetings,
I'm looking for an LED replacement for a 12V, 75W MR16 halogen. The
original bas is GU5.3, but is non-critical; I can change the mating
connector. I can also accept (actually, prefer) a spot pattern to improve
lumens (and throw).
I note that the original Philips 75W lamp is rated at 2500 CP and (for a
flood style beam) 1410 lumens. All the LED 'replacements' you list are
roughly 1/2 the lumens of the original halogen lamp. Reference:
https://www.bulbs.com/product/75MR16-FL36-EYC-12V-4000-HRS
and
https://www.bulbs.com/Light_Bulbs/10V_--_19V/LED-Bulb_Technology/Reflector-BF_Category/MR/61W_--_75W/results.aspx?Ns=P_Wattage+Sort%7C0
Is there no LED direct replacement for the original light output from the
halogen?
Thank you,
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: MR16 halogen lamp LED replacement: sanity |
check
| From: | "user9253" <fransew(at)gmail.com> |
One statement caught my attention:
" As LED options are naturally a brighter option, the lumen count will typically
be less."
That does not make sense. Isn't a lumen a unit of brightness?
This website will help to convert from halogen to LED:
https://www.rapidtables.com/calc/light/how-lumen-to-watt.html
I agree Charlie, it will take 2 or 3 of those LEDs to replace 1 halogen.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497945#497945
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Two LiFePO4 batteries in parallel |
| From: | Rob Turk <matronics(at)rtist.nl> |
Hello Bob and all others who replied, thanks for your thoughts
> What are your battery-only endurance goals? 1 hour minimum @ 12A essential load.
> What brand and model of battery is this? Starter: Landport LFP30:
https://www.landportbv.com/nl/producten/accu-lfp30/ Endurance: Landport
LFP12-20: https://www.landportbv.com/nl/producten/accu-lfp-v12-020-t3/
Additional reason for this brand: Access to at-cost product as side
order from other project > Why not a single ETX680 at 1.86KG and 12.4AH
(supports 10A at 80% capacity)? The ETX680 would probably be close
enough, if it were available in Europe. Unfortunately shipping
Lithium-based batteries from USA is not an option. We need to work with
local resources. Thanks, Rob On 8/24/2020 1:54 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls,
III wrote:
>> >> The AEC has a great section on dual battery
use. One revelation to >> me is that it's OK to run two batteries in
parallel, and I have a >> question about this. >> >> A buddy of mine is
building a plane with an engine that depends on >> electric energy both
for ignition and fuel injection. The fuel >> pumps, ECU, dual ignition
and injectors use about 13A under normal >> load. In case of alternator
failure this can be reduced to 10A by >> running on one set of coils. >
> What are your battery-only endurance goals? > >> We are discussing
failure modes and endurance. The plane is very >> light. A regular
20-30Ah battery would be too heavy, so we're >> looking at LiFePO4
options. > > 2+ hours? > >> For cranking, a 300CCA starter battery would
be plenty, weighing >> just 1.5kg. But it is rated for 8Ah, so after
accounting for aging >> and adding other essentials I expect no more
than 30 minutes of >> flight after the alternator fails. > > What brand
and model of battery is this? > >> The second option is a 20Ah LiFePO4
battery. About the same weight, >> but not suitable for starting. This
should give about an hour, and >> considering the area and types of
flight that should be enough to >> find a safe place to land. > > Again.
. . what brand/model battery? > >> Both batteries have their own
internal BMS circuitry, both are >> advertized as drop-in replacements
for gel batteries. No need to >> change charging systems. Or so it says.
Together they weight 3kg, >> which is still considerably less than a
regular battery. > > Why not a single ETX680 at 1.86KG and 12.4AH
(supports 10A at 80% > capacity)? > >> The question is, what risks are
there in using these two >> dis-similar batteries in parallel? > > Not
enough data . . .it might work. Virtually ALL fat LiFePO4 > batteries
are ARRAYS of cells in series/parallel configuration. The > TrueBlue
series of TSO batteries are multiple arrays EACH having it's > own BMS.
> > So what you're suggesting may well be practical from a electrical >
performance perspective. But then you have TWO batteries to monitor. >
If one services-out before the other, will you replace BOTH or just >
one . . . and worry more about the older battery. > > Methinks it FAR
better to install ONE battery capable of doing the > task. > > Bob . . .
> > Bob . . . >
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: MR16 halogen lamp LED replacement: sanity |
check
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
On 8/24/2020 11:59 AM, user9253 wrote:
>
> One statement caught my attention:
> " As LED options are naturally a brighter option, the lumen count will typically
be less."
> That does not make sense. Isn't a lumen a unit of brightness?
> This website will help to convert from halogen to LED:
> https://www.rapidtables.com/calc/light/how-lumen-to-watt.html
> I agree Charlie, it will take 2 or 3 of those LEDs to replace 1 halogen.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
Yeah; that was what prompted my 'somebody's crazy' comment. Her
statement was the 1st time I've ever heard that LEDs can be brighter and
have lower lumens at the same time. :-)
Charlie
--
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: Fwd: MR16 halogen lamp LED replacement: sanity |
check
At 10:38 AM 8/24/2020, you wrote:
>While looking for a 'drop in' LED replacement
>for some 75W MR16 (2" dia) landing light lamps,
>I've found 'more of the same' in actual LED
>lumens ratings vs the lumens ratings for the
>incandescent=C2 or halogen bulbs they are
>replacing. 75W halogens are typically around
>2500 total candela (sp?) and 1400 lumens, while
>the claimed replacements are closer to 500-600
>lumens. When I asked one of the common vendors
>about that, well, see the answer below.=C2
>
>It seems it's time to question someone's sanity. Who's?
>
>Charlie
Illumination for night landings is
a topic that will get you a constellation
of opinions . . . but not much in the
way of practical experience combined
with good physical definitions.
Those Lumens numbers are pretty much
meaningless without knowing exactly how
they e distributed. Lenses and
reflectors have an understandably profound
effect on where the light goes. There are
hand held flashlights with 2W leds that
produce a 6000 Lumen BEAM . . . the
multi-led headlight arrays on my truck's
headlights consume about 30 watts but
wont have anywhere near that kind of
output center-beam . . . but probably
something on that order of light output
SPREAD OUT over a large area of illumination.
I recall reading the FAA requirements for
landing and taxi light functionality
while working at GatesLJ on the GP180
project.
It called for verifying, by measurement,
incident illumination over the illuminated
surfaces with defined H, V, and D values.
NOT something we wanted to do in house . . .
we bought Grimes fixtures already qualified
to those requirements.
Needless to say, those were flame-throwing
fixtures!
On the other side of the coin, I recall
a 'demonstration' I used to conduct at
my seminars. I'd light up a 6 volt sports
lantern and shine it around my audience
with pretty much everyone ducking for
cover.
Question: "Could you land an airplane at
night by simply holding this light out the
window?" 6 volts at 0.75A = 4.5 watt
bulb. Obviously intense beam power but a
good deal of peripheral emission as well.
The answer was: "You betcha . . . no sweat."
When considering a shift of technology in
your lighting selections, the BEST thing
to do is go fly it yourself. I can tell
you from personal experience that ANY
light thrown out the front when on short
final to a black hole is of HUGE benefit.
The human eye is a logarithmic sensor. A
2x increase in illumination will be noticed
but not perceived as a 'big' change. A
10:1 reduction in illumination will be
startling . . . but will probably not
make your task of greasing the landing
more difficult.
I made an interesting discovery during
night ops instruction at KICT. The
instructor directed me to the much wider
runways to figure out how to land with
NO lights. The 4x wider runway really
changed your perception of height looking out
the windshield!
After the first few clumsy arrivals with
the concrete, I discovered that the strobe
flashes illuminated the surface under the
wing tips. I noticed that the first flash I
could perceive texture in the peripheral
view of the pavement, I was but a couple
feet off the ground.
The point is that you don't really need
to see possums creeping across the runway
2000' ahead. Getting a good situational
awareness of immediate environs will get
you on the ground quite comfortably . . .
and it doesn't take much light to do that.
But everyone's goals, skill-sets and
perceptions are different. When in doubt,
go fly it. Last time I looked, we're still
allowed to do that.
I'd bet that your proposed substitution
for a lamp will be perceived as 'different'.
Question: "Is it adequate?"
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christopher Cee Stone <rv8iator(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: MR16 halogen lamp LED replacement: sanity |
check
Light ratings need explicit definition as they involve a number of
variables as white light is defined in five dimensions. The old watts
rating along with is it a "bare bulb", a "flood" or a "spot" used to be
good enough as these are all white black body radiators.
The link you provided has a conversion of radiant flux to luminous flux.
The wattage on filament bulb ratings is the input power, no direct relation
to radiant flux.
Lumens describe luminous flux, Simply how bright the source appears to the
human eye.
Lux is unit of how much of that brightness will appear on a surface at a
defined distance. One lux = 1 lumen per square meter at one meter distan
t
from the source. 1 footcandle = one lumen per square foot at one foot
distant from the source.
1 candela = one lumen per steradian. (see below)
[image: image.png][image: image.png]
White LEDs are typically rated in CD (candela) or Lm (lumens) for
radiant output.. They are also specified by CCT, (correlated color
temperature). Roughly 5000=C2=B0K = daylight, 2500=C2=B0K= candle lig
ht
(yellow/orange). As CCT is a one dimensional characteristic which works
well for a filament source it can produce very different results for an LED
which is a cold light source. The applicable color characteristic for LEDs
is "chromaticity".
If all this is confusing it is because light is electromagnetic radiation
and as such is multidimensional.
If anyone is interested I will provide my slide deck to my course "Intro to
Illumination" course. Contact me at chris dot stone@a-dec dot com.
(replace the "dot" with a .) to elude spammers.
.chris stone
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 10:16 AM user9253 wrote:
>
> One statement caught my attention:
> " As LED options are naturally a brighter option, the lumen count will
> typically be less."
> That does not make sense. Isn't a lumen a unit of brightness?
> This website will help to convert from halogen to LED:
> https://www.rapidtables.com/calc/light/how-lumen-to-watt.html
> I agree Charlie, it will take 2 or 3 of those LEDs to replace 1 halogen.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497945#497945
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: MR16 halogen lamp LED replacement: |
sanity check
>If anyone is interested I will provide my slide
>deck to my course "Intro to Illumination"
>course.=C2 Contact me at chris dot stone@a-dec
>dot com.=C2 (replace the "dot" with a .) to elude spammers.
>
>.chris stone
Are you interested/willing to have this document
added to the technical library on aeroelectric.com?
If so, I'd be pleased to receive a copy. Thanks
for sharing!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Two LiFePO4 batteries in parallel |
| From: | C&K <yellowduckduo(at)gmail.com> |
While not as easy as mounting another battery I've never regretted
fitting a little Permanent Magnet alternator as a second electron
source. Gives me much more confidence than a second battery for keeping
the engine running. Others have suggested similar but definitely worth
considering. Total maintenance in 16 years and 900 hrs. has been
replacing a $5. bearing once when it was off the engine anyway for
another reason. OK I did splurge for a new $10. v-belt for it at the
same time.
Ken
On 24/08/2020 2:03 PM, Rob Turk wrote:
> Hello Bob and all others who replied, thanks for your thoughts
>
> > What are your battery-only endurance goals? 1 hour minimum @ 12A essential
load.
> > What brand and model of battery is this? Starter: Landport LFP30:
> https://www.landportbv.com/nl/producten/accu-lfp30/ Endurance:
> Landport LFP12-20:
> https://www.landportbv.com/nl/producten/accu-lfp-v12-020-t3/
> Additional reason for this brand: Access to at-cost product as side
> order from other project > Why not a single ETX680 at 1.86KG and
> 12.4AH (supports 10A at 80% capacity)? The ETX680 would probably be
> close enough, if it were available in Europe. Unfortunately shipping
> Lithium-based batteries from USA is not an option. We need to work
> with local resources. Thanks, Rob On 8/24/2020 1:54 AM, Robert L.
> Nuckolls, III wrote:
> >> >> The AEC has a great section on dual battery
> use. One revelation to >> me is that it's OK to run two batteries in
> parallel, and I have a >> question about this. >> >> A buddy of mine
> is building a plane with an engine that depends on >> electric energy
> both for ignition and fuel injection. The fuel >> pumps, ECU, dual
> ignition and injectors use about 13A under normal >> load. In case of
> alternator failure this can be reduced to 10A by >> running on one set
> of coils. > > What are your battery-only endurance goals? > >> We are
> discussing failure modes and endurance. The plane is very >> light. A
> regular 20-30Ah battery would be too heavy, so we're >> looking at
> LiFePO4 options. > > 2+ hours? > >> For cranking, a 300CCA starter
> battery would be plenty, weighing >> just 1.5kg. But it is rated for
> 8Ah, so after accounting for aging >> and adding other essentials I
> expect no more than 30 minutes of >> flight after the alternator
> fails. > > What brand and model of battery is this? > >> The second
> option is a 20Ah LiFePO4 battery. About the same weight, >> but not
> suitable for starting. This should give about an hour, and >>
> considering the area and types of flight that should be enough to >>
> find a safe place to land. > > Again. . . what brand/model battery? >
> >> Both batteries have their own internal BMS circuitry, both are >>
> advertized as drop-in replacements for gel batteries. No need to >>
> change charging systems. Or so it says. Together they weight 3kg, >>
> which is still considerably less than a regular battery. > > Why not a
> single ETX680 at 1.86KG and 12.4AH (supports 10A at 80% > capacity)? >
> >> The question is, what risks are there in using these two >>
> dis-similar batteries in parallel? > > Not enough data . . .it might
> work. Virtually ALL fat LiFePO4 > batteries are ARRAYS of cells in
> series/parallel configuration. The > TrueBlue series of TSO batteries
> are multiple arrays EACH having it's > own BMS. > > So what you're
> suggesting may well be practical from a electrical > performance
> perspective. But then you have TWO batteries to monitor. > If one
> services-out before the other, will you replace BOTH or just > one . .
> . and worry more about the older battery. > > Methinks it FAR better
> to install ONE battery capable of doing the > task. > > Bob . . . > >
> Bob . . . >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Some interesting observations |
I've been gathering test data on some lithium products
in anticipation of doing an article on the quest for
an elegant integration of lithium cells into OBAM
light aircraft.
The two attached plots are interesting. The test article
is an EarthX ETX26D graciously donated to our 'cause' about
6 years ago. The plots illustrate battery behavior when
subjected to an array of charge/discharge profiles.
In the charge plots we see the battery response to
being charged in 0.5 volt steps over the range of 13.0
to 15.0 volts.
The 15.0 and 14.5 volt curves show a marked inflection
of charge current approx 2 hours after starting the
test. As the charge voltage is lowered, the inflections
(achievement of full charge) move outward in time and
are less pronounced. The interesting plot is at 13.0
volts . . no inflection . . . i.e. the battery doesn't
take on any charge.
The discharge plots are equally interesting. Note that
13.0v charge pumped no appreciable energy into the
battery chemistry. However, charging at 13.5 to 15.0
volts fully charges the battery. i.e. the battery
performance (except perhaps for charging time)
is unaffected by bus voltage. Note: the red plot
is what the battery delivered 'off the shelf' after
having been used/stored/maintained at intervals
over the past 5 or so years.
I not that the battery's demonstrated capacity is
on the order of 10.3 AH . . . down slightly from
demonstrated 11.6 AH when received as new.
These data are consistent with an article I
found on powerstream.com
https://tinyurl.com/yakthgt6
Where the author demonstrates the profound difference
in performance between Lithium Iron versus the
Lithium Polymer products. The article shows how the popular
and quite common Lithium Polymer cells fully charge at
4.2 volts with stored energy profoundly affected by
the top-off voltage. Same goes for Lithium Ion cells
widely offered as rechargeable power for a constellation
of consumer products.
Touchstone of note: No matter what claims are made
for the capacity of these cells, the real capability
of an 18650 Li-Ion cell is on the order of 2800 mAH. This
is easily confirmed by studies of published engineering data
sheets for name brand cells like Panasonic, A123,
Sanyo, etc.
https://tinyurl.com/y32rh8ym
Those ads on eBay touting 4000-10,000 mAH are blowing
smoke up your pant leg. Now, I not implying that
these cells are not serviceable products . . . price/
performance can be quite good but unless verified
by published performance data sheets, be skeptical
of stellar capacity claims.
That leaves us with the lowly Lithium Iron Phosphate
cell. It has the poorest capacity for unit volume of
all the popular products . . . but they are relatively
immune to catastrophic failure. Hence, the chemistry
of choice for the 'big guys' in TSO batteries for
CT aircraft. Typical energy ratings for the 18650
LiFePO4 are on the order of 1000-1500 mAH.
A noteworthy fallout of my studies suggests there
is no value in running the bus at any higher
than 14.0 volts for the LiFePO4 products.
Just thought I'd share some of the the bucket
of data point's I've gathered so far . . .
I'm still pondering the burned alternator
coils on the Revmaster engine . . . got some
ideas I want to massage on the test bench . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: MR16 halogen lamp LED replacement: sanity |
check
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Hi Chris,
As testament to my weak grasp of lighting specs, I have to 're-learn'
about them every time I deal with lighting issues.
However, that salesperson's contention that LEDs are brighter, and
therefor have lower lumen ratings for the same light level, makes no
sense whatsoever to me. According to the interwebs, the definition of
'lumen' is:
the central cavity of a tubular or other hollow structure in an organism
or cell.
"the stomach empties food into the lumen of the small intestine"
No, wait...Let's try this one:
the SI unit of luminous flux, equal to the amount of light emitted per
second in a unit solid angle of one steradian from a uniform source of
one candela.
So when is a lumen not a lumen? Unless that company is selling small
intestines, they are feeding us the output of small intestines.
*That* was the reason for my post. They are certainly not alone in
misleading claims; early on it was very rare to find a home LED bulb
that truly had light output equal to its 'equivalent' incandescent or
halogen version. Things are a bit better now, but too often, still not
truly equivalent.
I obviously want to use LEDs; I just want honesty in their ratings just
like I want honesty in ratings for any other product.
I'd love to have your presentation on lighting; it would be nice to have
a reference document when I need to 're-learn' lighting from time to
time. If you're going to send it to Bob, I can download it from the AEC
site, so you won't have to send to multiple destinations.
Thanks!
Charlie
On 8/24/2020 1:22 PM, Christopher Cee Stone wrote:
> Light ratings need explicit definitionas theyinvolve a number of
> variables as white light is defined in five dimensions. The old watts
> rating along with is it a "bare bulb", a "flood" or a "spot" used to
> be good enough as these are all white black body radiators.
> The link you provided has a conversion of radiantflux to luminous
> flux. The wattage on filamentbulb ratings is the input power, no
> direct relation to radiantflux.
>
> Lumensdescribe luminous flux, Simply how bright the source
> appearsto the human eye.
> Lux is unit of how much of that brightness will appear on a surface at
> a defined distance. One lux = 1 lumen per square meter at one meter
> distant from the source. 1 footcandle = one lumen per squarefoot at
> one foot distant from the source.
> 1 candela = one lumen per steradian. (see below)
> image.pngimage.png
> White LEDs are typically rated in CD (candela) or Lm (lumens) for
> radiantoutput.. They are also specified by CCT, (correlatedcolor
> temperature). Roughly5000K = daylight, 2500K= candle light
> (yellow/orange). As CCT is a one dimensional characteristic which
> works well for a filament source it can produce very different results
> for an LED which is a cold light source. The applicable color
> characteristic for LEDs is "chromaticity".
>
> If all this is confusing it is because light is
> electromagneticradiation and as such is multidimensional.
>
> If anyone is interested I will provide my slide deck to my course
> "Intro to Illumination" course. Contact me at chris dot stone@a-dec
> dot com. (replace the "dot" with a .) to elude spammers.
>
> .chris stone
>
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 10:16 AM user9253 > wrote:
>
> >
>
> One statement caught my attention:
> " As LED options are naturally a brighter option, the lumen count
> will typically be less."
> That does not make sense. Isn't a lumen a unit of brightness?
> This website will help to convert from halogen to LED:
> https://www.rapidtables.com/calc/light/how-lumen-to-watt.html
> I agree Charlie, it will take 2 or 3 of those LEDs to replace 1
> halogen.
>
> --------
> Joe Gores
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497945#497945
>
>
> ==========
> -
> 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
> ==========
>
>
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christopher Cee Stone <rv8iator(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: MR16 halogen lamp LED replacement: sanity |
check
Charlie et al...
I did see the magical art of illumination put forth by the inhabitant of
1000bulbs.com, or was it bulbs.com. I have had similar discussions with
the sales associate at superbrightleds.com In fairness it's a subject that
is a bit more complex than meets the eye. (no pun intended)
.chris
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 3:21 PM Charlie England
wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> As testament to my weak grasp of lighting specs, I have to 're-learn'
> about them every time I deal with lighting issues.
>
> However, that salesperson's contention that LEDs are brighter, and
> therefor have lower lumen ratings for the same light level, makes no sens
e
> whatsoever to me. According to the interwebs, the definition of 'lumen' i
s:
>
> the central cavity of a tubular or other hollow structure in an organism
> or cell.
> "the stomach empties food into the lumen of the small intestine"
>
> No, wait...Let's try this one:
>
> the SI unit of luminous flux, equal to the amount of light emitted per
> second in a unit solid angle of one steradian from a uniform source of on
e
> candela.
>
> So when is a lumen not a lumen? Unless that company is selling small
> intestines, they are feeding us the output of small intestines.
>
> *That* was the reason for my post. They are certainly not alone in
> misleading claims; early on it was very rare to find a home LED bulb that
> truly had light output equal to its 'equivalent' incandescent or halogen
> version. Things are a bit better now, but too often, still not truly
> equivalent.
>
> I obviously want to use LEDs; I just want honesty in their ratings just
> like I want honesty in ratings for any other product.
>
> I'd love to have your presentation on lighting; it would be nice to have
a
> reference document when I need to 're-learn' lighting from time to time.
If
> you're going to send it to Bob, I can download it from the AEC site, so y
ou
> won't have to send to multiple destinations.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Charlie
>
> On 8/24/2020 1:22 PM, Christopher Cee Stone wrote:
>
> Light ratings need explicit definition as they involve a number of
> variables as white light is defined in five dimensions. The old watts
> rating along with is it a "bare bulb", a "flood" or a "spot" used to be
> good enough as these are all white black body radiators.
> The link you provided has a conversion of radiant flux to luminous flux.
> The wattage on filament bulb ratings is the input power, no direct relati
on
> to radiant flux.
>
> Lumens describe luminous flux, Simply how bright the source appears to
> the human eye.
> Lux is unit of how much of that brightness will appear on a surface at a
> defined distance. One lux = 1 lumen per square meter at one meter dist
ant
> from the source. 1 footcandle = one lumen per square foot at one foot
> distant from the source.
> 1 candela = one lumen per steradian. (see below)
> [image: image.png][image: image.png]
> White LEDs are typically rated in CD (candela) or Lm (lumens) for
> radiant output.. They are also specified by CCT, (correlated color
> temperature). Roughly 5000=C2=B0K = daylight, 2500=C2=B0K= candle l
ight
> (yellow/orange). As CCT is a one dimensional characteristic which works
> well for a filament source it can produce very different results for an L
ED
> which is a cold light source. The applicable color characteristic for LE
Ds
> is "chromaticity".
>
> If all this is confusing it is because light is electromagnetic radiation
> and as such is multidimensional.
>
> If anyone is interested I will provide my slide deck to my course "Intro
> to Illumination" course. Contact me at chris dot stone@a-dec dot com.
> (replace the "dot" with a .) to elude spammers.
>
> .chris stone
>
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 10:16 AM user9253 wrote:
>
>>
>> One statement caught my attention:
>> " As LED options are naturally a brighter option, the lumen count will
>> typically be less."
>> That does not make sense. Isn't a lumen a unit of brightness?
>> This website will help to convert from halogen to LED:
>> https://www.rapidtables.com/calc/light/how-lumen-to-watt.html
>> I agree Charlie, it will take 2 or 3 of those LEDs to replace 1 halogen
.
>>
>> --------
>> Joe Gores
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497945#497945
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> -
>> 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/contributi
on
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Virus-free
.
> www.avast.com
>
> <#m_7679790524993816268_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Two LiFePO4 batteries in parallel |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
I took a quick look at the 20AH version, and noticed that its max rated
charge current is 20A.
Now, if it's never depleted in the a/c, that might be ok, but what if it
is? None of the applications listed on the data sheet are likely to have
a 60A-capable alternator pushing electrons. That begs the question: Is
it really suitable for a/c use?
That's one of my 'gripes' with the current (pardon the pun) crop of
lithium batteries. They talk a good game on battery management, but....
As others have pointed out, a 2nd alternator would probably weigh about
the same as the battery, and since you're talking lithium, cost might
even be less. Then you have electrons to the point of fuel exhaustion.
I'm not IFR rated, but I'm enough of a wimp that if the regs require 45
minutes of reserve fuel, I'd want at least an hour and a half, and I
wouldn't want to have to even think about anything else in the plane
being exhaustible. :-)
Charlie
On 8/24/2020 1:03 PM, Rob Turk wrote:
> Hello Bob and all others who replied, thanks for your thoughts
>
> > What are your battery-only endurance goals? 1 hour minimum @ 12A essential
load.
> > What brand and model of battery is this? Starter: Landport LFP30:
> https://www.landportbv.com/nl/producten/accu-lfp30/ Endurance:
> Landport LFP12-20:
> https://www.landportbv.com/nl/producten/accu-lfp-v12-020-t3/
> Additional reason for this brand: Access to at-cost product as side
> order from other project > Why not a single ETX680 at 1.86KG and
> 12.4AH (supports 10A at 80% capacity)? The ETX680 would probably be
> close enough, if it were available in Europe. Unfortunately shipping
> Lithium-based batteries from USA is not an option. We need to work
> with local resources. Thanks, Rob On 8/24/2020 1:54 AM, Robert L.
> Nuckolls, III wrote:
> >> >> The AEC has a great section on dual battery
> use. One revelation to >> me is that it's OK to run two batteries in
> parallel, and I have a >> question about this. >> >> A buddy of mine
> is building a plane with an engine that depends on >> electric energy
> both for ignition and fuel injection. The fuel >> pumps, ECU, dual
> ignition and injectors use about 13A under normal >> load. In case of
> alternator failure this can be reduced to 10A by >> running on one set
> of coils. > > What are your battery-only endurance goals? > >> We are
> discussing failure modes and endurance. The plane is very >> light. A
> regular 20-30Ah battery would be too heavy, so we're >> looking at
> LiFePO4 options. > > 2+ hours? > >> For cranking, a 300CCA starter
> battery would be plenty, weighing >> just 1.5kg. But it is rated for
> 8Ah, so after accounting for aging >> and adding other essentials I
> expect no more than 30 minutes of >> flight after the alternator
> fails. > > What brand and model of battery is this? > >> The second
> option is a 20Ah LiFePO4 battery. About the same weight, >> but not
> suitable for starting. This should give about an hour, and >>
> considering the area and types of flight that should be enough to >>
> find a safe place to land. > > Again. . . what brand/model battery? >
> >> Both batteries have their own internal BMS circuitry, both are >>
> advertized as drop-in replacements for gel batteries. No need to >>
> change charging systems. Or so it says. Together they weight 3kg, >>
> which is still considerably less than a regular battery. > > Why not a
> single ETX680 at 1.86KG and 12.4AH (supports 10A at 80% > capacity)? >
> >> The question is, what risks are there in using these two >>
> dis-similar batteries in parallel? > > Not enough data . . .it might
> work. Virtually ALL fat LiFePO4 > batteries are ARRAYS of cells in
> series/parallel configuration. The > TrueBlue series of TSO batteries
> are multiple arrays EACH having it's > own BMS. > > So what you're
> suggesting may well be practical from a electrical > performance
> perspective. But then you have TWO batteries to monitor. > If one
> services-out before the other, will you replace BOTH or just > one . .
> . and worry more about the older battery. > > Methinks it FAR better
> to install ONE battery capable of doing the > task. > > Bob . . . > >
> Bob . . . >
>
--
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: Fwd: MR16 halogen lamp LED replacement: |
sanity check
At 05:09 PM 8/24/2020, you wrote:
>Hi Chris,
>
>
>I'd love to have your presentation on lighting; it would be nice to
>have a reference document when I need to 're-learn' lighting from
>time to time. If you're going to send it to Bob, I can download it
>from the AEC site, so you won't have to send to multiple destinations.
Chris has graciously supplied these
PP files for addition to our technical
library.
https://tinyurl.com/yyar99qu
Thank you sir! I owe you a six-pack!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | The best place for players to add POE Currency |
| From: | "CSCCA" <ccs2799149739(at)gmail.com> |
POEs Harvest League has been in progress for two months. Some players are obsessed with the unique mechanism in Harvest and have gained a lot of POE Currency (https://www.poecurrency.com) and also have a wealth of game experience. It is of great help to their next game journey. For the POE development team and players, next month will be very busy. They all need to face the POE tenth anniversary celebration and the Mac version of POE and the arrival of the next POE new league. From the players' perspective, it is very necessary for them to prepare some necessary supplies.
POECurrency can help them achieve this goal quickly. As the best POE agent in the industry, it has sufficient inventory, absolutely safe transaction system, the most professional service team and super fast delivery speed. The most important thing is that more than 90% of the POE Items are cheaper than the market price and players can enjoy a 5% discount after becoming VIPs. Players will find that they save a lot of money after Buy Path of Exile Currency (https://www.poecurrency.com). 99% of orders can be completed within 10 minutes and if players have any questions to the customer service, they will generally receive a response within 20 seconds. A sound refund policy can also guarantee the freedom of transactions for players. It is the wisest choice to come here to supplement POE Currency.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497965#497965
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Very cheap MUT 21 Coins are on sale |
| From: | "CSCCA" <ccs2799149739(at)gmail.com> |
EA allows players to enter Madden 21 in advance to enjoy it. Those who have pre-ordered Madden 21 can receive many rewards such as player cards and MUT 21 Coins (https://www.gamems.com/madden-21-coins) after entering the game. Many players are ready to enter the game to experience new features and start fierce competitions. The basis of all this requires players to have sufficient coin reserves. Where can they go to get what they want?
Cheap Madden 21 Coins (https://www.gamems.com/madden-21-coins) sold by GameMS are currently on hot sale. Every player who came here got the best experience and the highest quality Madden 21 Coins. When Madden 20 was popular, this was the best place for players to replenish supplies, and it is the same now. It has an absolutely secure trading system and the most professional customer service team to protect the interests of each player's orders from damage. Players can Buy MUT 21 Coins here without hesitation. At the same time, sufficient inventory and high work efficiency also ensure that they can process 98% of orders in just 20 minutes. Here is a paradise for players to meet all their needs. Go ahead.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497967#497967
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Here is the most core competitive POE Currency |
| From: | "CSCCA" <ccs2799149739(at)gmail.com> |
The Harvest League has one month left to end. The game team has already started the development of the next league which is much earlier than before. Many smart players use Harvests unique mechanism to not only have an amazing amount of POE Currency (https://www.iggm.com/poe-currency) but also sell many processed handicrafts. In September, POE will hold a lot of activities which require players who dont have enough supplies to prepare.
As the best POE agent among many players, IGGM can provide help to every player who has an urgent need for items. It has a 100% secure transaction system and the most professional customer service team that can completely shut out any risks. This means that players will not have any problems with Buy POE Currency (https://www.iggm.com/poe-currency) under the double protection. Sufficient inventory and professional service capabilities have also given them great confidence that they can complete 99% of their orders in just 10 minutes. There are so many cheap POE Orbs and POE Trade that players love. It also supports POE Currency sales on multiple platforms. Players on each platform can come here to enjoy the most cost-effective items. Come on!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497966#497966
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Come get the cheapest and safest NBA 2K21 MT |
| From: | "CSCCA" <ccs2799149739(at)gmail.com> |
Players on the 4th next month will see the brand new NBA 2K21. Although the 2K team has increased the price of the game, it cannot stop the enthusiasm of the players. Since the developers have said that this generation of NBA 2K games have taken more energy and time to develop than before, there must be many interesting new models and powerful players in 2K21. Players had better prepare enough NBA 2K21 MT (https://www.gamems.com/nba-2k21-mt) to be the first to experience it after entering the game.
2K fans can come to GameMS to get a lot of Cheap NBA 2K21 MT. Many players know that it is famous for its safe trading system, cheap MT and good service attitude. 98% of orders can be processed in just 20 minutes, which also makes everyone have to admit that their efficiency is really high. If players are satisfied after Buy NBA 2K21 MT For Sale (https://www.gamems.com/nba-2k21-mt), they can also recommend to their friends. After the recommendation is successful, the players themselves will get a better discount. If players have any questions, they can always contact the 24/7 online customer service. Come and quickly replenish MT reserves.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=497968#497968
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Two LiFePO4 batteries in parallel |
| From: | Rob Turk <matronics(at)rtist.nl> |
Thanks Charlie,
In this case the 20A max charge is no problem. The standard alternator
on this engine (ULPower UL260) is rated at 30A max, and at least 10A of
those go to the engine when running single ignition.
https://ulpower.com/en/engines/ul260/ul260is
I'll discuss the second alternator option, that might be a better way to
go if there's some way to fit one.
Rob
On 8/25/2020 12:46 AM, Charlie England wrote:
> I took a quick look at the 20AH version, and noticed that its max
> rated charge current is 20A.
>
> Now, if it's never depleted in the a/c, that might be ok, but what if
> it is? None of the applications listed on the data sheet are likely to
> have a 60A-capable alternator pushing electrons. That begs the
> question: Is it really suitable for a/c use?
>
> That's one of my 'gripes' with the current (pardon the pun) crop of
> lithium batteries. They talk a good game on battery management, but....
>
> As others have pointed out, a 2nd alternator would probably weigh
> about the same as the battery, and since you're talking lithium, cost
> might even be less. Then you have electrons to the point of fuel
> exhaustion. I'm not IFR rated, but I'm enough of a wimp that if the
> regs require 45 minutes of reserve fuel, I'd want at least an hour and
> a half, and I wouldn't want to have to even think about anything else
> in the plane being exhaustible. :-)
>
> Charlie
>
> On 8/24/2020 1:03 PM, Rob Turk wrote:
>> Hello Bob and all others who replied, thanks for your thoughts
>>
>> > What are your battery-only endurance goals? 1 hour minimum @ 12A essential
load.
>> > What brand and model of battery is this? Starter: Landport LFP30:
>> https://www.landportbv.com/nl/producten/accu-lfp30/ Endurance:
>> Landport LFP12-20:
>> https://www.landportbv.com/nl/producten/accu-lfp-v12-020-t3/
>> Additional reason for this brand: Access to at-cost product as side
>> order from other project > Why not a single ETX680 at 1.86KG and
>> 12.4AH (supports 10A at 80% capacity)? The ETX680 would probably be
>> close enough, if it were available in Europe. Unfortunately shipping
>> Lithium-based batteries from USA is not an option. We need to work
>> with local resources. Thanks, Rob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Verwey <bob.verwey(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Some interesting observations |
Bob I am often in awe of your energy in serving the OBAM community..thank
you for your missives, they inspire neophytes like me to get "electron
savvy"
Best Regards,
Bob Verwey
082 331 2727
On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 22:56, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> I've been gathering test data on some lithium products
> in anticipation of doing an article on the quest for
> an elegant integration of lithium cells into OBAM
> light aircraft.
>
> The two attached plots are interesting. The test article
> is an EarthX ETX26D graciously donated to our 'cause' about
> 6 years ago. The plots illustrate battery behavior when
> subjected to an array of charge/discharge profiles.
>
> In the charge plots we see the battery response to
> being charged in 0.5 volt steps over the range of 13.0
> to 15.0 volts.
>
> The 15.0 and 14.5 volt curves show a marked inflection
> of charge current approx 2 hours after starting the
> test. As the charge voltage is lowered, the inflections
> (achievement of full charge) move outward in time and
> are less pronounced. The interesting plot is at 13.0
> volts . . no inflection . . . i.e. the battery doesn't
> take on any charge.
>
> The discharge plots are equally interesting. Note that
> 13.0v charge pumped no appreciable energy into the
> battery chemistry. However, charging at 13.5 to 15.0
> volts fully charges the battery. i.e. the battery
July 27, 2020 - August 25, 2020
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-pn